Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece: Studies on ancient Greek death and burial 9781789694420, 9781789694437

Citation preview

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece Studies on ancient Greek death and burial edited by

Nikolas Dimakis and Tamara M. Dijkstra

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece Studies on ancient Greek death and burial

edited by

Nikolas Dimakis and Tamara M. Dijkstra

Archaeopress Archaeology

Archaeopress Publishing Ltd Summertown Pavilion 18-24 Middle Way Summertown Oxford OX2 7LG www.archaeopress.com

ISBN 978-1-78969-442-0 ISBN 978-1-78969-443-7 (e-Pdf)

© the individual authors and Archaeopress 2020 Cover: Shoulder-handled amphora used as cremation urn in Gr. 5., Marathon, Skorpio Potami (© V. Vlachou). Lebes gamikos, Argos, Kostakis plot, grave 33 (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of Argolid/Archaeological Receipts Fund). Grave 17, Pousi Ledi I (© P. Galiatsatou). Monumental funerary building with marble sarcophagi, National Road Leuctro-Sparta, Sites ST 3, 4, 5, X.Th. 41+860, Ekklesies of Voutianoi (© Photographic Archive of the Ephorate of Antiquities of Laconia).

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owners. Printed in England by Severn, Gloucester This book is available direct from Archaeopress or from our website www.archaeopress.com

Οὐδὲν ἔφη τὸν θάνατον διαφέρειν τοῦ ζῆν. Σὺ οὖν, ἔφη τις, διὰ τί οὐκ ἀποθνήσκεις; Ὅτι, ἔφη, οὐδὲν διαφέρει. (Diog. Laertius, I, 35)

Contents

Contact Details of Contributors��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� ii Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece: A Prologue����������������������������������������������������������������1 Nikolas Dimakis and Tamara M. Dijkstra

Death Practices and Social Change Protogeometric Thessaly: An Integrated Study of Burial Practices and Isotope Analysis of Human Remains�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������7 Eleni Panagiotopoulou Liminal Spaces, Burial Contexts and Funerary Practices in the pre-Classical Marathon (Attica)��������������������14 Vicky Vlachou Funerary Variability in Late Geometric Attica and its Implications: A Closer Look at the Neglected Late 8th-century Cremations������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������32 Alexandra Alexandridou Mortuary Practices in the Ancient Rural Demoi of Southeastern Attica under the Light of Recent Evidence from Five Cemeteries in Mesogaia��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������50 Panagiota Galiatsatou Urbanism and its Impact on Human Health and Diet: A Preliminary Study of the Human Remains from Hellenistic to Late Antique Knossos, Crete�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������63 Anna Moles

Social Identity and Treatment in Death Defining Social Identities at Cemeteries of Late Classical Argos: Age- and Gender-Groups on the Basis of Distinctive Funerary Gifts��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������75 Georgia Ivou Pot Burials in Ancient Thera: The Presence of Infants in the Cemeteries of the Ancient City from 8th to 6th Century BC��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������88 Olga Kaklamani Premature Death and Burial in Classical and Hellenistic Attica�������������������������������������������������������������������������������102 Nikolas Dimakis

Monumental Commemoration and Identity The Creation of a Deathscape: The Monumental Tomb at Agios Milianos in Lindos�����������������������������������������119 Vasiliki Brouma Building for the mos Romanus in the Peloponnese: The Columbaria Monuments�����������������������������������������������126 Georgios Doulfis Mortuary Practices at Roman Sparta��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������142 Maria Tsouli Burial Monumentality and Funerary Associations in Roman Kos����������������������������������������������������������������������������162 Nikolas Dimakis and Vassiliki Christopoulou Grave Markers (Semata) of the Koan Necropoleis (3rd century BC-3rd century AD)�����������������������������������������176 Chrysanthi Tsouli

i

Contact Details of Contributors ALEXANDRA ALEXANDRIDOU, University of Ioannina, [email protected] VASILIKI BROUMA, Greek Archaeological Committee U.K., [email protected] VASSILIKI CHRISTOPOULOU, Senior archaelogist, Ephorate of Antiquities of Dodecanese, [email protected] TAMARA M. DIJKSTRA, University of Groningen, [email protected] NIKOLAS DIMAKIS, University of Athens, [email protected] GEORGIOS DOULFIS, University of Athens, [email protected] PANAGIOTA GALIATSATOU, Ephorate of Underwater Antiquities, [email protected] GEORGIA IVOU, Directorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities, [email protected] OLGA KAKLAMANI, University of Athens/KIKPE Numismatic Collection, [email protected] ANNA MOLES, University College London, [email protected] ELENI PANAGIOTOPOULOU, University of Groningen, [email protected] CHRYSANTHI TSOULI, National Archaeological Museum of Athens, [email protected] MARIA TSOULI, Ephorate of Antiquities of Laconia, [email protected] VICKY VLACHOU, École Française d’Athènes, [email protected]

ii

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece: A Prologue Nikolas Dimakis and Tamara M. Dijkstra This volume is born out of the international workshop for early career scholars entitled ‘Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece’ that was held at the Netherlands Institute at Athens, Greece on December 1-2, 2016. The idea for this workshop stemmed from our mutual interest in ancient Greek death practices, and in understanding how the political, economic, and social realities that characterized Greek history related to funerary ideology and informed the ways in which the Greeks dealt with their dead. Two main questions are central to this problem: 1) how were local social structure and social roles – for example those the elderly or children, men or women, locals or migrants, or the poor or the wealthy – reflected in and motivated the way people were treated in death, and 2) how did large-scale developments such as political change and processes of ‘globalization’ influence death practice on the level of the individual, the social group, the local community, and the region.

of scholarly attention, but most work has focused on the documentation and publication of specific sites,1 tombs2 or specific types of material, including tombs,3 tombstones,4 and certain categories of grave goods.5 Thorough analyses of funerary remains have also been employed in reconstructions of local burial customs and local social and cultural histories of specific sites,6 and in assessments of broader social issues.7 Thus far, only few extensive regional studies exist that attempt a synthetic interpretation of the evidence for mortuary ritual,8 and more such studies should be undertaken in the future. Despite the wide variety and dispersed nature of these studies, it is by now widely recognized that evidence from burials has enormous value in studies of collective and individual identities, social structure and organization, symbolism, as well as social and cultural practices.

The mortuary record of Early Iron Age to Roman Greece, with its regional variability and differing historical trajectories, offers a particularly rich set of data on funerary customs that allows us to explore these questions from multiple and interdisciplinary angles. Much of the relevant archaeological data have been excavated by the Greek Archaeological Service. In order to stimulate the dialogue and the sharing of knowledge and insights between funerary archaeologists in the academic world and those working in the field, we specifically attempted to bring together early career scholars from these two complementary worlds. The workshop had three main aims. The first was to encourage the reappraisal of burial evidence through current theoretical, methodological and interdisciplinary approaches. The second was to discuss how the unique strengths of burial evidence can be employed in understanding social structure and organization. And the third aim was to highlight the multiple ways in which funerary archaeology can contribute to a nuanced understanding of past societies.

The volume brings together case studies on Greek mortuary practices from the Early Iron Age to the Roman period, with a geographic spread that covers the southern Greek mainland, the Aegean islands, and Crete. We regret the absence of contributions on sites in the central and northern regions of Greece, even though important research in these regions is being done; a future workshop on mortuary variability and social diversity that includes or even focuses on these regions is highly desirable. As was the case during the workshop, the contributions in this volume are organized in a thematic manner in an attempt to transcend divides between traditional research traditions, be they temporal, regional, or methodological. A thematic approach, in our view, is a good way to better highlight how different sets of burial evidence can contribute to our knowledge about the relation between social diversity and the mortuary record.

Outline and Content of the Volume

e.g. Blegen et al. 1964; Rife 2012; Warner Slane 2017. e.g. Kleiner 1983. 3 e.g. Flämig 2007. 4 e.g. Walters 1988; Papapostolou 1993. 5 e.g. Papapostolou 1990; Graf and Johnston 2007; Andrianou 2012. 6 e.g. Dimakis 2009; Petersen 2010; Dijkstra 2015; 2017; Christensen 2018; Dijkstra 2019. 7 e.g. De la Genière 1990; Morris 1992; Shepherd 2013. 8 e.g. Dimakis 2016. 1

Ancient Greece, with its great regional and social diversity, provides a unique context for exploring how the expression of social, cultural, and political complexities were expressed or reflected in death. Archaeological remains of funerals from Early Iron Age to Roman Greece have received significant amounts

2

1

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece Death Practices and Social Change

status, age and sex. Moles’ contribution is useful in that it clearly demonstrates how fragmentary, poorly preserved skeletal assemblages that have come from rescue excavations can still be used to address a wide variety research questions.

In the first paper Eleni Panagiotopoulou uses skeletal and mortuary evidence to examine how communities in Thessaly handled the changes that occurred during the Protogeometric period. She uses isotope analysis of bone collagen and tooth enamel from human remains to reconstruct dietary practices and population movements, and she contextualizes these date with a consideration of variations in mortuary practices. She shows that while there was intense diversity in burial practices, the variation in dietary practices was limited and indicates only slight changes in the use of resources. The evidence for population movements indicate that contacts and interaction occurred between regions within as well as outside Thessaly.

Social Identity and Treatment in Death Georgia Ivou studies grave goods from Classical Argos and uses them to identify social status, age and gender of the deceased. She focuses on two specific types of offerings – terracotta figurines and a vase with plastic decoration – and argues that these can be associated with two distinct social groups of the Argive society. The selection of these particular types of offerings to accompany the dead is not only indicative of the deceased’s social status, but also of the socio-political circumstances that characterized Argos in the mid-4th century BC.

Vicky Vlachou also examines social change in the Early Iron Age, but takes a different approach. Taking northeastern Attica as her case study, she takes a holistic approach to burials in the Marathonian plain, in which she considers the placement of burials in the natural landscape and their relation to the main routes leading to Marathon, the spatial arrangement of the burials, their types, the funerary practices used, and the material assemblages recovered from the graves. Based on her analysis, she argues that the Marathonian plain was progressively occupied by certain oikoi that exploited the arable land, and that the social structure of the four poleis of the Marathonian Tetrapolis were founded on matters of wealth and kinship.

Olga Kaklamani focuses on burials of infants. She investigates the way in which deceased infants were treated in the ancient city of Thera in the 8th-6th centuries BC. She takes a contextual approach, in which the spatial distribution of infant burials is studied in correlation with the grave types and the grave goods that were provided. In contrast to other Greek contexts, infants in Thera were included in the cemeteries of the city and formal funerary rituals were carried out. Infants were invariably interred inside a pot (enchytrismos) and they were buried either isolated or in groups. Exceptions to this general rule, it is argued, should probably be interpreted as a reflection of special circumstances of death or the status and perceptions of the family.

Alexandra Alexandridou attempts to come closer to understanding the reasons for choosing cremation as a burial rite. She focuses on the meaning and purpose of cremation in Late Geometric funerary plots of Attica, where the evidence points to burial inclusivity. This burial inclusivity is explained as a new strategy that was used by Attic kinship groups in order to strengthen their identity by means of a wider, more inclusive representation of their members in death.

Nikolas Dimakis studies child death in Classical and Hellenistic Attica. He reconstructs the funeral ritual associated with child death, investigates the impact of child loss to Classical and Hellenistic society, examines the association between emotion and the child’s identity and status, and explores how this association might have changed in time in Attica.

Panagiota Galiatsatou studies mortuary practices in the ancient rural demes of southeastern Attica by analysing recent evidence from five adjacent cemeteries in Mesogaia. She identified demotic and family cemeteries, where she observes a common burial language. In striking contrast to the urban cemeteries, only minimal mortuary variation is noted.

Monumental Commemoration and Identity Vassiliki Brouma examines the monumental Hellenistic tomb at Agios Milianos in Lindos, Rhodes, and its connection to the surrounding landscape. She proposes an alternative function of the tomb as a cenotaph and its transformation into a deathscape, a place of memory and commemoration in the bay of Lindos.

Anna Moles examines evidence from Knossos in Crete dating to the Hellenistic, Roman and Late Antique periods. She investigates how the changing urban status of the site and the associated social and environmental factors impacted on age-at-death, skeletal and dental health, and human activity. She takes a diachronic approach, and studies differences within the population that are related to social

Georgios Doulfis offers a survey of the Roman columbaria that have thus far been found in Laconia in the Peloponnese. He argues that the Laconian columbaria were situted in places of strong Roman interest, and shows that they varied in structure, forms 2

Nikolas Dimakis and Tamara M. Dijkstra: Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

and features, and that they represent late examples of the type.

increasingly strongly personalised life had become and how personal relations really mattered over and above all constitutional structural considerations.

Maria Tsouli discusses the relation between mortuary practices and identity in Roman Sparta. She focuses primarily on a recently excavated set of burial monuments at the periphery of Sparta and shows that these structures give clear evidence for differentiation in terms of social, economic, and even political status.

Thus, one may say that the general picture emerging out of the current volume is one of a progressive narrowing of the burial ritual from the ‘communal’ level to that of the ‘individual’. In other words the tendency noted by the burial evidence of the periods under study seems to resemble, to a degree, that of everyday life where people had gradually moved on from the political, social, economic and religious life of the developing Early Iron Age communities, to their consolidation in the Classical poleis, and then to societies of increased mobility and growing diversity in the Hellenistic and Roman periods.

Nikolas Dimakis and Vassiliki Christopoulou present the preliminary results of an interdisciplinary research project on a peculiar burial monument with multiple burials from Roman Kos. They tentatively identify the tomb as belonging to a local cultic community (thiasos), of which they explore the identity and characteristics. Chrysanthi Tsouli, finally, offers a survey of the iconography, form and chronology of the rich group of Koan grave markers that date from the 3rd century BC to the 3rd century AD. She explores the contribution of the Koan workshop to funerary art and shows how this changed from the Hellenistic to the Roman period.

Acknowledgements The workshop ‘Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece’ provided specialists from the academic world and the Greek Archaeological Service, as well as a wider group of interested scholars and students the opportunity to come together and reflect on ancient Greek societies through systematic and interdisciplinary analyses and discussions about mortuary customs. We would like to thank all the speakers (including Melanie Spiegelhalter, Despoina Tsardaka, Michalis Anetakis and Eirene Poupaki who were unable to contribute to this volume) and all the participants for their contribution to the workshop. We express our sincere gratitude to Professor Panos Valavanis, who provided useful advice during the organization of the workshop and to Professor Sofia Voutsaki for giving the opening lecture and for offering constructive comments during the various discussions. We are very grateful to the Research Centre for the Humanities and the Netherlands Institute at Athens for funding the event, and to the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens and the Necropoleis Research Network for sponsoring us. Of course, our gratitude also goes to the staff of the Netherlands Institute at Athens for all their kind assistance before and during the workshop. Finally, as editors, we have been fortunate to benefit from the kind advice of a number of people: Foteini Balla, Merkouris Georgiadis, Eurydice Kefalidou, Georgia Kokkorou-Alevras, Konstantinos Kopanias, Evangelia Pappi, Gina Salapata, Despoina Valatsou.

Despite the focus of classical archaeologists on particular aspects, funerary locales or preconceived ideas and stereotypes within and about Greek cemeteries, the current volume has sought to explicate the major dimensions of social diversity as this is represented through the mortuary record of ancient Greece from the Early Iron Age to the Roman period. The close engagement with burial evidence from these periods has contributed to our understanding of social structure, display and relative possession of wealth and land, and the degree of flexibility in the apportionment of power, providing us with a more intimate access to society of the periods under study. In addition, spatial variations and temporal change in the material commemoration of death has also revealed differences in the relationship between the living and the dead, as well as among the living themselves. In the former instance ‘the distance’ between living and dead seems to have grown smaller from the Early Iron Age to the Roman period as death and the dead gradually became ‘objects’ of greater concern precisely because social variations were introduced leading to a growing social divide as time moved on. The passage from life into death and beyond was not regarded as an abrupt transition between two states, alive and dead. Death on the other hand was never seen as in direct opposition to life; instead it was considered as a stage of some sort of continuation of (social) existence. But, it appears that the more socially complex society had become the less likely it was for kinship to have been the only structural principle through which cohesion/distinction in death was achieved; e.g. dietary habits, religious affinities, sociopolitical endeavours, wealth display, show how

Last but not least, we are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their careful reading of the papers and their insightful comments and suggestions. Bibliography Andrianou, D. 2012. Eternal comfort: funerary textiles in late Classical and Hellenistic Greece, in M. Carroll

3

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

and J.P. Wild (eds) Dressing the Dead in Classical Antiquity: 42-61. Stroud: Amberley Publishing. Blegen, C.W., H. Palmer and S. Rodney 1964. Corinth XIII: The North Cemetery. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Christensen, P. 2018. The typology and topography of Spartan burials from the Protogeometric to the Hellenistic period: rethinking Spartan exceptionalism and the ostensible cessation of adult intramural burials in the Greek world. ABSA: 1-57. De la Genière, J. 1990. Les sociétés antiques à travers leurs necropolis. MEFRA 102: 83-91. Dijkstra, T.M. 2015. Burial and commemoration in the Roman Colony of Patras, in S.T. Roselaar (ed.) Processes of Cultural Change and Integration in the Roman World: 154-74. Leiden: Brill. Dijkstra, T.M. 2017. Strategies of remembering in the creation of a colonial society in Patras, in T.M. Dijkstra, I.N.I. Kuin, M. Moser and D. Weidgenannt (eds) Strategies of Remembering in Greece under Rome (100 BC – AD 100): 37-48. Leiden: Sidestone Press. Dijkstra, T.M. 2019. From Polis to Colonia. Death, Burial, and Society in Hellenistic and Roman Patras. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Groningen. Dimakis, N. 2009. The display of individual status in the burials of Classical and Hellenistic Argos, in H. Cavanagh, W.G. Cavanagh, and J. Roy (eds) Honouring the Dead in the Peloponnese. Nottingham: CSPS Online Publication 2 (http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/csps/ open-source/hounouring-the-dead.aspx) Dimakis, N. 2016. Social Identity and Status in the Classical and Hellenistic Northern Peloponnese: The Evidence from Burials. Oxford: Archaeopress.

Flämig, C. 2007. Grabarchitektur der römischen Kaiserzeit in Griechenland. Rahden: Marie Leidorf GmbH. Graf, F. and S.I. Johnston 2007. Ritual Texts for the Afterlife: Orpheus and the Bacchic Gold Tablets. Cambridge: Routledge. Morris, I. 1992. Death-Ritual and Social Structure in Classical Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Papapostolou, I.A. 1993. Achaean Grave Stelai. Athens: Archaiologike Etairia. Papapostolou, I.A. 1990. Κοσμήματα Πατρών και Δύμης: παρατηρήσεις σε τύπους κοσμημάτων του 4ου αι. π.Χ. και της Ελληνιστικής εποχής. ArchEph 129: 83140. Petersen, J.H. 2010. Cultural Interactions and Social Strategies on the Pontic Shores. Burial Customs in the Northern Black Sea Area c. 550-270 BC. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. Rife, J. 2012. Isthmia IX: The Roman and Byzantine Graves and Human Remains. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Shepherd, G. 2013. Ancient identities: age, gender, and ethnicity in ancient Greek burials, in L.N. Stutz and S. Tarlow (eds) The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Death and Burial: 543-57. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Walters, E.J. 1988. Attic Grave Reliefs that Represent Women in the Dress of Isis. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Warner Slane, K. 2017. Corinth XXI: Tombs, Burials, and Commemoration in Corinth’s Northern Cemetery. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens.

4

Death Practices and Social Change

5

6

Protogeometric Thessaly: An Integrated Study of Burial Practices and Isotope Analysis of Human Remains Eleni Panagiotopoulou Abstract: This study examines how communities handled the changes that occurred during the Protogeometric period (11th-9th centuries BC) by focusing on dietary practices and population movements. Focus is given to the region of Thessaly, because as the northern region of the Mycenaean civilization, it saw many changes taking place. Most evidence comes from burial grounds because of the well-preserved material they provide. The integration of the isotope analysis of bone collagen and tooth enamel from human remains with the contextual analysis of mortuary data, a method that is traditionally used to study mortuary assemblages, has enriched our knowledge on the period and helped to refine the conclusions. The analyses have shown that there was intense diversity in burial practices but limited variation in dietary practices which indicates slight changes in the use of resources. Furthermore, population movements indicate that contacts and interaction occurred between regions within as well as outside Thessaly.

Keywords: Early Iron Age, Thessaly, diet reconstruction, population mobility, isotope analysis, contextual analysis of mortuary practices

Introduction

and social reconstruction) and Panagiotopoulou et al. 2018a (population mobility).

The Early Iron Age (1100-900 BC), a period that followed the collapse of the Mycenaean palatial system (12th century BC)1 was traditionally referred to as the Dark Ages because of the evident decline as well as insufficient archaeological evidence. During that period the stratified Mycenaean system disintegrated and communities had to adapt to new social and cultural conditions.2 Material culture, technology, living conditions, and mortuary practices were all affected in this process of regression.3 At the same time population mobility occurred, perhaps as a result of these fluid and unstable conditions.4

The region of focus is Thessaly, which is situated in the central Greek mainland (Figure 1). Thessaly constituted the northern margin of the old Mycenaean world and was, therefore, affected by the decline and disintegration of the Mycenaean civilization.6 In particular, the cemeteries of Pharsala have been selected because they show high degree of diversity in the mortuary practices. Therefore, the site constitutes asuitable case study in order to examine and understand the process of social formation and social structure through an integrated approach. The detailed contextual analysis of mortuary variation provides the basis for an informed sampling strategy for the isotope analysis of the skeletal material. The results from the isotope analysis are compared with the results from the contextual analysis of mortuary practices and the osteological analysis of the skeletal assemblage for a better understanding of the social structure.

The main aim of this paper is to examine social relations and make an effort to reconstruct social structure in Early Iron Age Greece through the study of burial practices, dietary variation, and population movements. This will be accomplished by integrating three different methods: a) carbon, nitrogen, and strontium isotope analysis of human skeletal material for the reconstruction of diet and population movements, b) the contextual analysis of mortuary practices, and c) osteological analysis of the skeletal assemblage.

The questions examined in this paper are a) could dietary variation correlate with social divisions and enhance them, and b) were there any foreigners initiating the diversity by introducing their own burial customs?

This research constitutes a part of the author’s PhD thesis.5 The data are extensively analysed and discussed in the publications Panagiotopoulou et al. 2018b (diet

Archaeological Data Rescue excavations from 2004 to 2008 in the modern town and surrounding area of Pharsala revealed two

Wright 2008: 248-9. Deger-Jalkotzy 2008: 287-415. Dickinson 2006: 242-55. 4 Snodgrass 2000; Lemos 2002; Coldstream 2003; Morris 2007; Georganas 2009. 5 Panagiotopoulou 2018. 1 2 3

6

7

Papadimitriou 2008; Eder 2009; Crielaard 2011.

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 1. Map of Thessaly (created by R. Bronkhorst).

Osteological Analysis

burial grounds with 6 km distance between them, dating to the Protogeometric period (1100-850 BC). From this point onwards, these two burial grounds will be referred to as Site 1 and Site 2. Site 1 is located at the western side of the modern town. It includes a tumulus, which will be called Site 1-tumulus and an open area to the east of this tumulus with 35 more graves, which will be called Site 1-cemetery. Site 2 is located to the northeast of Site 1 and includes only two tombs.7

The osteological analysis showed that the Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) in the cemeteries of Pharsala is 54,9 of whom eight are subadults and 46 are adults. Of the adults present in the sample 11 males or probable males, 10 females or probable females, and 24 indeterminate individuals were recorded. The ageat-death for the subadults ranges from neonate to 16+ years old and for the adults from 20 to 50 years old. Adults predominate in both burial grounds, while the subadults are underrepresented. The two sexes do not show significant representation differences, but the large number of indeterminate individuals prevents us from reaching certain conclusions.

Various tomb types have been discovered at Site 1-cemetery: 29 cists, five burial jars, one tholos and two burial enclosures. Site 1-tumulus contained one pit, five cists and two tholoi. At Site 2 only two tholoi were discovered. All grave types contained inhumations, except the vases, which contained cremations. The grave goods are pottery for drinking and pouring (oinochoai and cups), iron and bronze ornaments (fibulae, rings, bracelets), and iron tools and weapons (knives).8 7 8

Sampling Design The careful sampling procedure conducted for this research, took into account a) the patterns and correlations detected by means of the contextual

Katakouta 2012. Katakouta 2012.

9

8

Panagiotopoulou et al. 2018b.

Eleni Panagiotopoulou: Protogeometric Thessaly

analysis described above, b) the research questions arising from our contextual observations, and c) the preservation and sample quality of the osteological material.

individual), poor (two or less grave goods ascribed to each individual), and empty (no grave goods were found in the grave with the individual). The presence of wealthy, poor and empty graves did not vary significantly between the different burial grounds nor did it correlate with specific tomb type; wealth divisions (which may be seen as an indication of social status) were not rigid.

The Contextual Analysis of Mortuary Practices The contextual analysis of the mortuary practices of the cemeteries of Pharsala showed that Site 1-cemetery was the most diverse in terms of tomb types and body treatment. Cist graves dominate the funerary record (n=29), but one tholos, two burial enclosures, and five burial vases were also present. In this study tholoi and similar types are considered as traditional tomb types, while cists are considered as new burial forms for two main reasons: a) the construction of tholoi in the Protogeometric period followed the Mycenaean plan retaining the basic structure features – dromos, entrance, and tholos – though the size was much smaller, and b) the cist is a grave with a sudden widespread use during the Early Iron Age. The type, however, was already known from the Mycenaean period.10 Therefore, the diversity in grave types emphasizes the parallel use of simpler and more complex types, as well as of traditional and new types. Inhumation has been the main treatment of the body, but five cremations underlined the diversity. The Site 1-tumulus was less diverse because it covered fewer grave types – a pit, cists (n=5) and tholoi (n=2) – with inhumations. The most homogeneous burial ground is Site 2 with 2 tholoi with inhumations.11

The comparison between grave goods from different age groups revealed that age differentiation occurred in grave goods provision as well. Adults were accompanied by a varied assemblage including pottery, iron and bronze ornaments, tools and weapons. Subadults (neonates to 16+), however, were only offered bronze ornaments and sometimes pottery, while iron objects, tools and weapons were absent. This shows the significant difference in grave goods between adults and subadults. Further differences were observed between males and females, but only between the individuals of whom the sex was determined. Females were only offered bronze ornaments, while male individuals were buried with pottery, iron ornaments, tools, and weapons. The commingled secondary depositions and double or multiple burials resulted in a large number of indeterminate individuals and therefore in underrepresented skeletal material in terms of anatomically diagnostic skeletal elements that are essential to sex estimation. Therefore sex differentiation should be treated with caution. In the contextual analysis of the mortuary practices a great degree of diversity was observed. Age and – to a small degree – gender differentiation were observed in grave goods, while status and wealth differentiation, as detected through the grave goods, were not rigid but rather subtle divisions are seen.

Age differentiation is attested as young subadults were excluded from certain burial forms.12 Individuals under 10 years old were buried exclusively in cist graves at the Site 1-cemetery. Two subadults from the tumulus were older (11-16+ years old). Subadults were excluded from Site 2. The analysis showed that the group of young subadults was underrepresented considering the high infant mortality in pre-industrial societies,13 a practice that was also attested in the Mycenaean period.14

Diet Reconstruction Methodology

The grave goods in Pharsala included typical types and materials for the period – pottery, iron and bronze ornaments, and iron tools and weapons.15 Exceptional objects such as gold or imports were absent. The analysis of diversity and quality of the objects showed that significant differences did not occur between the graves.16 Therefore, wealth classification of the graves was based on differences in the number of grave goods: wealthy (three or more grave goods ascribed to each

The stable carbon and nitrogen isotope analysis is an established method to reconstruct the diet of past societies. Human and animal bodies incorporate the elements of carbon and nitrogen through diet. During this process different proportions of the isotopes of these two elements are assimilated by the body and depend on the diet we follow and the foods we consume. Bone is the best-preserved tissue of a body. Therefore, the diet can be reconstructed by analysing bone collagen.

Dickinson 2006. Panagiotopoulou et al. 2018b. 12 Panagiotopoulou et al. 2018b. 13 Masset 1973; Bocquet-Appel and Masset 1977. 14 Lewartowski 2000; Papathanasiou et al. 2012. 15 Katakouta 2012. 16 Voutsaki 1995.

This method may identify groups of foods based on a) carbon assimilation and photosynthetic pathways and b) nitrogen assimilation and the trophic levels in the food web. There are three photosynthetic pathways to assimilate carbon: 1. C3 pathway is used by plants such

10 11

9

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 2. δ13C and δ15N isotope values from Pharsala: a) comparison of the diet of individuals between different burial locations, b) comparison of the diet of individuals between different tomb types, c) comparison of the diet of individuals between different wealth categories (after Panagiotopoulou et al. 2018b).

as fruits, grains, and vegetables; 2. C4 pathway is used by plants such as millet and maize; 3. CAM (Crassulacean acid metabolism) is the photosynthetic pathway used by mainly cacti and similar plants. Nitrogen isotopes may identify the different trophic levels of the food web. Between the levels (plants / herbivores / omnivores / carnivores) there is a difference of approximately 3‰ enrichment of nitrogen isotopes. Therefore, plant protein intake (when a diet is based purely on plant consumption) may be distinguished from animal protein intake (when a diet is based on both plant and animal protein consumption or purely on animal protein consumption). In a similar way, consumption of legumes can be distinguished from non-leguminous plants. Last but not least, terrestrial versus aquatic (either marine or freshwater) diet may be detected by the combination of carbon and nitrogen isotopes.

a male and a female, might have been related in some way. They were buried in the same burial enclosure with poor grave goods. Despite the fact that more individuals were buried in this burial enclosure, only the two aforementioned individuals are likely to have consumed a plant – millet – that might not have been grown locally during that period.18 The comparison between the diet of individuals from different burial locations and different grave types showed that there is great overlap with high animal protein (Figure 2a,b). The diet seems homogeneous, and there is no significant variation either between burial locations or between grave types. There is some variation between wealthy, poor and empty graves but no significant clustering is observed. The four samples with the higher nitrogen values, more than 10‰, are those with the largest consumption of animal protein. It has been suggested that high animal protein consumption in the Mycenaean period was associated with individuals of higher status. The examination of the archaeological data of the aforementioned four samples indicates that they did not share common mortuary practices (buried in cists or tholoi, both rich and poor grave goods were found, and both males and females were buried at the same premises), suggesting that they did not belong to the same social group.19

Results Collagen extraction was conducted on 43 human and one animal bone samples. Based on the collagen quality criteria (C/N ratio, carbon content (%) and/or nitrogen content (%)), 18 human out of 43 and one animal samples were accepted for the paleodietary study.17 The stable carbon and nitrogen isotope analysis showed that the diet of this group largely comprised C3 plant and animal protein, i.e. vegetables, fruits and a significant amount of meat and/or dairy products. Pulses were attested in minor proportions and seafood seems to have no contribution. The diet of two individuals that cluster separately from the majority of the individuals seems to have relied more on fruits and vegetables and less on animal protein; millet in this case seems to have some contribution (Figure 2a). These two individuals, 17

The comparison between males and females indicated a greater range of animal protein in males than females (Figure 2c); females do not show extreme values of very high or very low animal protein intake, but lie between the male values.

18

De Niro 1985.

19

10

Valamoti 2013. Panagiotopoulou et al. 2018b.

Eleni Panagiotopoulou: Protogeometric Thessaly

Figure 3. 87Sr/86Sr ratios of human enamel and environmental samples from Pharsala plotted against the Sr concentration of the samples. The black thick line indicates the seawater 87Sr/86Sr value. The local 87Sr/86Sr ratios are indicated by the environmental end-members (dashed black line). The black arrow shows the enamel and the dentine of the same sample. The letters F, M, and I indicate the sex of the individuals from which these samples were taken (F: female, M: male, and I: indeterminate sex). The codes beside the environmental samples are the sample names. The error for Sr isotopes at 2sd is within the symbol (after Panagiotopoulou et al. 2018).

Local v. Non-Local Individuals

pathologies. The environmental samples represent the geological formations that could have contributed to the strontium intake by humans and animals through plant farming and animal breeding, as well as water sources. This sampling provided information on the range of bioavailable strontium that characterizes the local soil and water end-members (and for regions of comparable geology).

Methodology Strontium isotope analysis is a method used to identify non-local individuals buried in a cemetery. The element of strontium is associated with the environment that the food grew in. During childhood, when teeth are formed, the element of strontium is captured into the enamel through our diet. Therefore, if someone dies at a place different from the one s/he was born and raised in, then this method can show that s/he is not local, and can potentially indicate the place where s/ he came from. That is because the environment of one region can be very different from another, therefore the strontium values recorded in human teeth representing the birthplace might be distinguishable from the environmental values of the place of death.20

Results Four groups have different strontium isotope ratios (Figure 3). Group A is considered to consist of local individuals because all values fall within the local environmental range (between dashed lines). All three other groups consist of possible non-local individuals. Group A and Group B are also distinguished by burial location: group A was buried at Site 1 and group B was buried in the distant tholoi (Site 2). However, other aspects of burial treatment (grave types and grave goods) are similar for both burial groups, suggesting that although Group B consisted of non-locals, they came possibly from a region culturally comparable.21

Thirteen human tooth enamel and environmental samples (snail shells and water samples) were collected and analysed. The teeth were preferably loose, but associated with specific individuals and had no 20

Price et al. 2002; Montgomery 2010; Stallo et al. 2010.

21

11

Panagiotopoulou et al. 2018a.

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Groups C and D consist of two females and an indeterminate individual. They were buried among the local individuals at Site 1 and could provide evidence for exogamy.22 The female discussed earlier23 that might have consumed millet is represented by the higher sample of group C. Combining these data we may hypothesize that millet could be a plant known to her from her birthplace, but unknown to the local group of Pharsala.

Dickinson, O. 2006. The Aegean from Bronze Age to Iron Age. London: Routledge. Eder, B. 2009. The northern frontier of Mycenaean Greece, in A. Mazarakis-Ainian (ed.) 2nd Archaeological Meeting of Thessaly and Central Greece, 16-19.3.2006: 11331. Volos. Georganas, I. 2009. Dying in Early Iron Age Thessaly, in Archaeological Meeting of Thessaly and Central Greece: 195-231. Volos. Katakouta, S. 2012. Τα Φάρσαλα στην πρώιμη Εποχή του Σιδήρου, in A. Mazarakis-Ainian (ed.) 3rd Archaeological Meeting of Thessaly and Central Greece 2006-2008: 241-50. Volos. Lemos, I.S. 2002. The Protogeometric Aegean: The Archaeology of the Eleventh and Tenth Centuries BC. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lewartowski, K. 2000. Late Helladic Simple Graves: A Study of Mycenaean Burial Customs (British Archaeological Reports IS 878). Oxford: Archaeopress. Masset, C. 1973. La Démographie des populations inhumées. Essai de paléodémographie. L’ Homme 13(4): 95-131. Montgomery, J. 2010. Passports from the past: Investigating human dispersals using strontium isotope analysis of tooth enamel. Annals of Human Biology 37(3): 325-46. Morris, I. 2007. Early Iron Age Greece, in W. Scheidel, I. Morris and R.P. Saller (eds) Cambridge Histories Online: The Cambridge Economic History of the Greco-Roman World: 211-41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Panagiotopoulou, E. 2018. Reconstructing diet, tracing mobility: Isotopic approach to social change during the transition from the Bronze to the Early Iron Age in Thessaly, Greece. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Groningen. Panagiotopoulou, E., J. Montgomery, G. Nowell, J. Peterkin, A. Doulgeri-Intzesiloglou, P. Arachoviti, S. Katakouta and F. Tsiouka 2018a. Detecting mobility in Early Iron Age Thessaly by strontium isotope analysis. EJA, published online. Panagiotopoulou, E., J. van der Plicht, A. Papathanasiou, S. Voutsaki, S. Katakouta, A. Doulgeri-Intzesiloglou and P. Arachoviti 2018b. Diet and social divisions in protohistoric Greece: integrating analyses of stable isotopes and mortuary practices. JGA 3, 95-114. Panagiotopoulou, E., J. van der Plicht, A. Papathanasiou, S. Voutsaki, E. Nikolaou and F. Tsiouka 2016. Isotopic (13C, 15N) investigation of diet and social structure in Early Iron Age Halos, Greece. JAS 10: 212-20. Papadimitriou, N. 2008. Both centre and periphery? Thessaly in the Mycenaean period, in 1st International Congress on the History and Culture of Thessaly, 9-11 November 2006: 98-113. Athens. Papathanasiou, A., L.A. Schepartz, M.P. Richards and E. Malapani 2012. Bioarchaeological evidence for social differentiation in the health and diet of

Conclusions The integration of the contextual analysis with the bioarchaeological study of human remains showed that the group from Early Iron Age Pharsala exhibited possible emerging social differentiation at a very initial stage. Foreigners were living with the locals, either fully integrated or coming from a culturally similar community, as is suggested by the material culture found in the graves. It is significant that the foreigners practiced traditional Mycenaean burial customs (the tholoi) while the locals preferred simpler forms, which are considered new in this period. Finally, the integration of these methods uncovered potential evidence for the practice of intermarriage between communities during the Early Iron Age. A female that has been identified as a non-local, was using a food plant possibly unknown to the local group. This could suggest that she might have been familiar with the plant from her birthplace. Bibliography Bocquet-Appel, J.P. and C. Masset 1977. Estimateurs en paléodémographie. L’Homme 17(4): 65-90. Coldstream, N.J. 2003. Geometric Greece 900-700 BC. London: Routledge. Crielaard, J.P. 2011. The ‘Wanax to Basileus model’ reconsidered: authority and ideology after the collapse of the Mycenaean palaces, in A. MazarakisAinian (ed.) The ‘Dark Ages’ Revisited, Acts of an International Symposium in Memory of William D.E. Coulson, Volos, 14-17 June 2007: 83-111. University of Thessaly Press. Deger-Jalkotzy, S. 2008. Decline, destruction, aftermath, in C.W. Shelmerdine (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to the Aegean Bronze Age: 387-416. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DeNiro, M.J. 1985. Postmortem preservation and alteration of in vivo bone collagen isotope ratios in relation to palaeodietary reconstruction. Nature 317 (6040): 806-9. Exogamy is the practice of marriage between two individuals from different groups/communities. Here, this practice can be suggested when two geological locations (place of birth and place of death) are different based on strontium isotope analysis. 23 Ιn the first paragraph of ‘Results’ of Diet Reconstruction. 22

12

Eleni Panagiotopoulou: Protogeometric Thessaly

Mycenaean Pylos, in N. Zaharias (ed.) 2nd ARCH_RNT Archaeological Research and New Technologies: 143-51. Kalamata. Price, T.D., J.H. Burton and A.R. Bentley 2002. The characterization of biologically available Sr isotope ratios for the study of prehistoric migration. Archaeometry 44: 117-35. Snodgrass, A.M. 2000. The Dark Age of Greece: An Archaeological Survey of the Eleventh to the Tenth Centuries BC (2nd ed). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Stallo, J.R., L.A. Schepartz, V. Grimes and M.P. Richards 2010. Strontium isotope ratios and mobility reconstruction, in M.G. Amore (ed.) The Complex of Tumuli 9, 10 and 11 in the Necropolis of Apollonia

(Albania) (International Centre for Albanian Archaeology Monograph Series 2): 78-84. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Valamoti, S.M. 2013. Millet, the late comer: on the tracks of Panicummiliaceum in prehistoric Greece. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 8(1): 51-63. Voutsaki, S. 1995. Social and political processes in Mycenaean Argolid: the evidence from the mortuary practices, in Proceedings of the 5th International Aegean Conference: Polities, Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age: 55-66. Wright, J.C. 2008. Early Mycenaean Greece, in C. W. Shelmerdine (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to the Aegean Bronze Age: 230-57. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

13

Liminal Spaces, Burial Contexts and Funerary Practices in the pre-Classical Marathon (Attica) Vicky Vlachou Abstract: The momentous social changes that followed the Late Bronze Age transformed the cultural landscape and human geography in the Aegean. The ensuing Early Iron Age represents an important phase of social change, marked by firm regional variations. Focusing on Attica and namely on its northeastern limits, this paper offers a comprehensive synthesis of the data in the wider context of Attica and the Aegean in the Early Iron Age. Several factors are discussed, such as, the placement of burials in the physical landscape, the relation of burial grounds to the main routes leading to Marathon, the internal organization of the burial grounds, the type of the burials, the funerary practices and the material assemblages. It is argued that the Marathonian plain was progressively occupied by certain oikoi that exploited considerable extent of the arable land. It is then deducible that the formation of the four poleis of the Marathonian Tetrapolis was mainly based on matters of wealth and kinship. Keywords: Attica, Marathon, marker vases, burials with weapons, oikos

Introduction

areas of the earlier Bronze Age activity, that served as points of reference for the communities now installed in the area. It is argued that the evidence provided by the burial grounds at Marathon demonstrates the existence of specific funerary expressions that served the interests of the local oikoi in exhibiting their wealth, property and lineage.

Despite the unbroken continuity in the funerary record of Athens from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age, the Attic countryside was only gradually reoccupied from around the late 10th century BC. The early history of Marathon seems to largely be in accord with this main line of development. Within a period of approximately two centuries, to the late 8th century BC, the Attic regions were marked by reviving prosperity and rapidly growing populations, the evidence for which is mostly demonstrated in the funerary record. One basic concern in interpreting the archaeological analysis has been the variability of the funerary record, apparently determined by the acts and duties of the living. Mortuary variability is evident in the disposal treatments of the physical remains, the presence and distribution of the various material accompaniments, the differential treatment of individuals in terms of social hierarchy, age and gender: all have fuelled discussions concerning the cultural and social standing of the deceased.1

The term liminal used in this paper utilizes the concept as formulated in the 1960s by Turner, drawing on the influential work of van Gennep regarding the rites de passage.2 Liminality as a state of being within a sequence of events may equally refer to people, time or space; it has been thus considerably influential in anthropological studies of funerary rituals and of the commemoration of the dead. Burial grounds are conceived as points of transition midway between the world of the living and that of the dead. Ritual acts and ceremonies performed in liminal spaces, such as cemeteries, were thus engaged in to mark this transition, to enable individuals or social groups to experience a liminal state, by first losing and then redefining their individual and/or collective identity. By determining the archaeological manifestations of such behaviour, it is possible to discuss how the care for the deceased is made compatible with choices aimed at maximizing the display of the family and kin.

Against this background, this paper will discuss certain regularities and irregularities regarding the mortuary expressions as presented by the Early Iron Age burial grounds at Marathon. Predominant features relating to formality and performance provide a way to interpret the archaeological expression of funerary practices. At Marathon, these practices may be summarized as the deposition of certain old vessels in later contexts, the use of enclosures and burial markers to delimit and mark certain groups of tombs, and the re-use of

The Early Iron Age Funerary Landscape at Marathon: Tombs, Burial Gifts and the Burying Population Following the Late Bronze Age, the re-occupation of the Marathon plain does not seem to have been achieved 2 Van Gennep 1960 (1909): 10-11; Turner 1967. On a discussion on the clash of opinion between van Gennep and Durkheim on the role of rites at individual and collective levels, see Thomassen 2015: especially 42-6.

O’Shea 1984: 32-49; Gibbs 1987; Sørensen 2007; Arnold 2007. For the Athenian burials of the Early Iron Age, see Morris 1987; Whitley 1991; 1996; Langdon 2005; De Polignac 2007. 1

14

Vicky Vlachou: Liminal Spaces, Burial Contexts and Funerary Practices

Figure 1. Plan of the Marathon plain with the burial grounds of the Protogeometric and Geometric periods: A. Vrana and Skorpio Potami, B. Marathonos Avenue, C. Valaria, D. Plasi, E. Northern area (Trikorythos), F. Oinoe (plan after Travlos 1988: 223, fig. 271).

simultaneously throughout.3 Lacking all remains of habitation areas, burial grounds serve as the main source of archaeological evidence to reconstruct human activity at Marathon. Three such seem to have gradually developed on the three main roads leading to the Marathon plain:4 the burial ground at Vrana was located on the road linking Athens and Marathon through the north pass of Mt. Penteli. The remaining two burial grounds were located at the two main entrances to the Marathon plain: at the narrow passage to the East of Agrieliki and at the inland passage through the Oinoe ravine (Figure 1).

Vrana and Skorpio Potami A vast burial ground, dated from the late 10th century BC down to the Classical period, was investigated in the area of Vrana, close to the visible remains of the prehistoric activity, the large Mycenaean tholos tomb and the Middle Helladic tumuli. Georgios Soteriades, who excavated the area on behalf of the Athens Archaeological Society in 1934 and again in 1939, reported a total of 63 graves, of which at least 24 cover most of the Geometric period, from around the late 10th to the late 8th centuries BC.5 Even though the exact location of these burials is not now clear, it is possible that Soteriades investigated a large area close to the modern Argitheas Avenue that runs from Mt. Agrieliki towards Marathonos Avenue. At least two

3 For a short discussion of some Late Bronze Age remains, see Banou 2010. For the area of Plasi, see recently Polychronakou-Sgouritsa et al. 2016. 4 Already in the 17th century, Jacob Spon arrived in Marathon by passing through the north pass of Mount Penteli to the modern village of Stamata and then to Vranas, not far from the location of the Archaeological Museum. In the 18th century, Edward Clarke arrived at Marathon with Giovanni Battista Luisieri via the passage of Oinoe. For a discussion of travellers from the 16th to the 19th centuries at Marathon, see discussion by Kreeb 2010. Also Steinhauer 2009: 25-7.

5 Soteriades 1932: 28-34; 1934: 29-38; 1939: 27-39. The first reference to a Geometric necropolis is in 1934 (29-38), where three Geometric vases are illustrated. Unfortunately, no further documentation of these excavations exists.

15

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

more burials were excavated in 1974 by the Ephorate of Eastern Attica further to the southeast, along the north slope of Mt. Agrieliki, in proximity to the modern Panagopoulou Street.6 Some more burials of the Classical period were identified further to the north of this area, demonstrating that clusters of burials of all periods were implemented in the wider area of Vrana and Skorpio Potami. The archaeological documentation of the above works is unfortunately extremely poor: out of around 26 burials dated to the Protogeometric and Geometric periods, there is enough evidence to fully reconstruct the material assemblages of only eleven, while at least two graves from the 1939 excavations had no offerings. Cremation was largely practised from the late 10th century BC onwards, while during the later years of the 8th century BC inhumation prevailed, following similar practices in Athens and Attica. According to Soteriades’ report from 1934, the burials of young children and infants (inhumations in small cist tombs and pot enchytrismoi) were grouped together and placed at the periphery of the burial ground.7 Although he goes on to suggest an epidemic as the cause for their premature death, it has become progressively evident that young children were frequently placed within the confines of larger burial grounds, either dispersed among the burials of the adults or clustered together.8 In addition, the few vases that can be associated with these burials seem to cover the 9th and 8th centuries BC: they thus do not seem to represent a single incident. Nonetheless, the exact number of these burials is not mentioned and it is not clear if Soteriades included them in the total number of the excavated tombs in his 1939 report.

Figure 2. Marathon, Skorpio Potami. Hydria (K845) used as cremation urn in Gr. 2.

all contained a number of burial gifts, none of which bore any traces of fire. An amphora, a hydria and a shoulder-handled amphora served respectively as the cremation urns (Figures 2-3). All three burials follow a well-established Attic funerary tradition, the choice of the cremation urn and the accompanying offerings, as convincingly discussed, are decided on the criteria of the age, gender and wealth of the deceased.10 These are the only burials of this type so far known at Marathon, dated to the 9th century BC, and thus sometime earlier than those found along Marathonos Avenue and Oinoe.

There are significant difficulties in the study of this burial ground when estimating the age or gender structure of the buried population here, or even in making comparisons on burial customs. In the complete absence of osteological data, of topographical plans of the burial ground or even sketches of the excavated tombs, let alone any detailed descriptions of the tomb types and the remains inside them, it is the burial gifts that remain the only indicators of the funerary ritual, as well as serving as symbolic metaphors for social values and beliefs. Among the best preserved assemblages are three secondary cremations, placed in cists of almost square dimensions c. 0.80 x 0.90 m.9 Graves 1, 2 and 5

Marathonos Avenue A second burial ground has been partly investigated to the east of Mount Agrieliki, sited at the south entrance to the Marathon plain where today the modern Marathonos Avenue runs. A total of 27 graves of the Geometric, Archaic and Classical periods were

Excavation journal, Ephorate of Eastern Attica, Agrieliki 1973: 9-11. Unfortunately, no other information is available on the exact location and number of excavation trenches, or the name of the archaeologist in charge. 7 Soteriades 1934: 37-8. The same information is reproduced in AA 50 (1935): 182. 8 This seems like a common practice in most areas: Athens (HoubyNielsen 1995; 2000; Stroszeck 2012), Corinth (Blegen et al. 1964: 68-71; Scilabra 2014), Eleusis (Mylonas 1975: 279-81; Papangele 1997), Mende in Chalcidice (Moschonissioti 2010), among others. 9 Soteriades 1939: 29-35. Grave 2 is the earliest, being dated to the 6

Early Geometric II, followed by graves 1 and 5 dated to the Middle Geometric I period. 10 Boardman 1988; Whitley 1991: 110-14, 132-5; Strömberg 1993; Kalaitzoglou 2010; Kourou 2011.

16

Vicky Vlachou: Liminal Spaces, Burial Contexts and Funerary Practices

least 13 burials can be dated, mainly to the latter half of the 8th and the early 7th centuries BC, consisting of cist and shaft inhumation burials, secondary cremation depositions and child enchytrismoi. The earliest inhumation burials can be dated to the transition between the Middle Geometric II and the Late Geometric I periods, late in the first quarter of the 8th century BC. Infant enchytrismoi recovered in this burial ground demonstrate an interesting degree of variety in the funerary container used and in the gifts deposited with the burial. In the case of tomb 7, a medium-sized coarse jug, holding the dead body, was deposited on its side in the shallow pit; the grave was sealed with few schist slabs. A small handmade terracotta figurine of possibly a horse accompanied the burial. In one of the latest tombs excavated in 2004, a nicely decorated neckhandled amphora served as the burial container. The amphora was decorated with processions of stylized horses in at least two rows, in a well-known decorative manner used by the contemporary Athenian workshops. Both the small size of the burial containers and the few bone fragments collected point to the young age of the inhumed, most probably infants. The small part of the burial ground excavated notwithstanding, it seems that the burials of the infants were clustered together, as believed too in the case at Vrana.13 Oinoe Excavations by the former Second Ephorate under the supervision of Xeni Arapogianni brought to light 32 graves in an area of around 214 m2, located some 700 m to the southeast of the Medieval tower of Oinoe: 19 primary cremations, two pithos inhumations of young children and at least two inhumation burials have all been dated to the 8th century BC.14 The earliest Grave VIII of this burial ground belonged to a woman of 35 to 40 years old, according to the osteological analysis. The cist grave was enclosed by a stone square structure, filled with small stones (Figure 4). Although the offerings placed with the burial were rather modest, consisting of an oinochoe, two drinking cups and a pyxis, there were a number of smashed and incomplete vessels among the stones that covered the tomb, thus providing a strong evidence for the collective rituals performed at the tomb at the time of the burial.

Figure 3. Marathon, Skorpio Potami. Shoulder-handled amphora used as cremation urn in Gr. 5.

discovered during rescue excavations in three periods – in 1985 under the supervision of Klairi Efstratiou, ten years later by Prof. Alexandros Mazarakis Ainian and more recently in 2004 by Mary Oikonomakou.11 The excavated area seems but a small part of a larger burial ground, presumably extending into the area of the former American Base occupying the coastal area. A number of Geometric fragments have been reported in the fill layers of Brexiza, where the Sanctuary of Roman Deities was founded in the Roman period.12 At

The special care taken in the construction of the tomb, the presence of the stone enclosure and the broken

Part of the necropolis was discovered in 1985 by the late K. Efstratiou (1985: 72-3) during a rescue excavation for the water supply of the modern Municipality of Nea Makri. A total of seven graves were investigated (four of them of the Geometric period). In 1995 another part of the same cemetery was found during a rescue excavation for the sewage system of Nea Makri, by Professor A. Mazarakis Ainian. For a report of the excavations and a first synthesis of the finds, see Mazarakis Ainian 2011. The excavation revealed 17 graves (eight of them belonging the Geometric period). Lastly, two child enchytrismoi were investigated by M. Oikonomakou (2001-2004: 388). 12 Parts of Classical funerary stelae from the same area demonstrate the existence of at least part of a Classical necropolis to the south 11

of the small dump, while two earth tumuli that were visible in the area in the 1960s were considered as dating in the 6th century BC. For a discussion of the evidence and further bibliography, see Themelis 1974: 240-1. 13 Burials 5-7 were identified as child burials. For a plan of the tombs, see Mazarakis Ainian 2011: 712, fig. 13a. In the same area should be placed the two child enchytrismoi excavated by M. Oikonomakou. 14 Arapogianni 1985: 207-28; 1987: 99-100; Mersch 1994: 149-51.

17

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 4. Marathon, Oinoe. Gr. VIII (after Arapogianni 1985: pl. 96a).

involving patterns of inclusion and exclusion in the burial grounds, as this seems to have been the case for most areas of the Greek world during most part of the antiquity.18 Isolated burials within the plain are rare.19 Yet, due to the rescue character of the excavations so far conducted, one cannot be certain whether these actually represent isolated burials, or were associated with some residence, or even part of a wider burial cluster.

pottery and remains of the funerary rituals performed at the tomb find close parallels in the cemeteries of Anavyssos. Certain of the tombs excavated in 1965 and others again in 1973 seem to have had a similar form of stone enclosure that defined the space of the burial.15 Unlike Grave VIII at Marathon, most of the Anavyssos tombs were cremation burials, richly furnished and thus considered as the burying places of the wealthy landowners of the region, individuals of prestige and authority within the local community.16

Lastly, a few child enchytrismoi of Late Geometric date have been reported from the area of Kato Souli, at the northern margins of the large marsh, where is

When contemplating the above burial grounds together, it becomes quickly evident that comparable modes of funerary expression were in use. However, none of the excavated graves to now can compare, so far as the material accompaniments go, to the wealthiest contemporary burials from Eastern Attica, namely at Anavyssos, Merenta or Spata.17 From around the late 10th to the late 8th centuries BC, only small numbers of burials have been recovered. Yet, it is quite possible that different means of burial then existed,

Papadopoulos 2000. C. Bourbou (2013: 340-3) has discussed a case of a burial ground at Chania (Crete) that seems to have included both adults and non-adults, who shared similar low social status. The disposal of c. 40 amphorae in a pit of more than 4 m deep, at the Academy of Plato (Athens) has been considered by A. Mazarakis Ainian (2010: 70-1) to represent the informal disposal of babies, following presumably an epidemic; they date to the second half of the 8th and the early 7th century BC. Informal burials of children in wells have been argued, mainly for the Hellenistic period, on the basis of archeological evidence from Athens (Rottroff et al. 1999; Papadopoulos 2000: 104-13) and Messene (Bourbou and Themelis 2010; Bourbou 2013: 335-9). 19 A single cist tomb was excavated in the area of the so-called Valaria (S. Kakari plot) in early October 1992. Rescue excavations preceding the construction of a greenhouse were started by A. Onasoglou and continued by M. Pologiorgi. The burial can be dated to the late 9th/early 8th centuries BC and possibly belong to a young person. Pologiorgi 1992: 57, pl. 23e. 18

Verdelis and Davaras 1966: 97, pl. 93e (tomb XXII); Themelis 19731974: 108-9, pl. 82a (tomb III). For a plan of the necropolis, see Skilardi 2011: 702, fig. 22. 16 Themelis 1973-1974: 108. The discussion is also taken up by D. Skilardi (2011: 690-1) in the context of the Geometric burials at Kifissia. 17 Anavyssos: Verdelis and Davaras 1966; Themelis 1973-1974; Merenta: Vavritsas 1970; Spata: Philadelfeus 1920-1921. 15

18

Vicky Vlachou: Liminal Spaces, Burial Contexts and Funerary Practices

located the modern Marathon Rowing centre.20 A larger necropolis was investigated in this area, dating to the Archaic and Classical periods. The absence so far of any earlier material from this area argues that after the Early Helladic-Middle Helladic occupation, activity was resumed only late in the 8th century BC.21 A comparable situation may be observed in the area of Skaleza, on the southern limit of modern village of Marathon, where two Late Geometric tombs were identified.22 In this area, a larger necropolis developed progressively, consisting mainly of child enchytrismoi of the Archaic and Classical periods. Visual Markers of Memory, Property and Status One of the essential problems in trying to understand a burial ground is its spatial organization and burial groupings. A repeated feature in the burial grounds at Marathon is the presence of enclosure walls and the existence of clusters of burials, placed at some distance from each other. At Vrana, parts of curved walls seemingly defining the area of certain Geometric burials were investigated by Soteriades, and again sometime later a curvilinear wall was found further east. There is only a hasty sketch in the excavation journals of the latter, showing a curved wall measuring 2.30 m wide and 26.50 m long (Figure 5).23 The wall looks to enclose the nearby burials: perhaps it served as an enclosure for this part of the burial ground. A short part of a presumed rectilinear wall dated to the Geometric period was investigated at the burial ground along the Marathonos Avenue. Although its interpretation as an enclosure wall is rather dubious, it would seem that the graves excavated along Marathonos Avenue were divided in two clearly defined burial clusters set 80-90 m apart.24 The more densely occupied northern part of the excavated area contained at least five adult inhumation burials, and four or five child burials placed close to those of the adults. The latter group consisted of only three inhumation and cremation burials, dated to the late 8th and early 7th centuries BC.25 Interestingly, a similar organisation in well-defined burial groups seems to have been equally preserved in later years.

Figure 5. Marathon, Skorpio Potami. Plan of the excavations at Kafetzopoulos plot (1974) (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Eastern Attica, Archive).

kin. At Nea Ionia, four urn cremations of adults, one assumes, and two cist inhumations of possibly young children were discussed by E. Lord Smithson.26 The burials were enclosed by a curved wall; a large krater was found, broken and resting over the burnt deposit of pyre A. It seems to have facilitated the funerary rituals, presumably serving as the receptacle for liquid libations and possibly also as a sema (marker) for this group of tombs.27 Smithson identified this well-defined cluster of burials as a family group dated to first half of the 10th century BC. Within Athens, a few of the excavated burial plots dated to the Geometric period have been considered as those for members of a family, a kin-grouping or even the members of a certain genos.28

Both features recall common practices from the Early Iron Age burial grounds, and were presumably used to define the spaces of different families or Oikonomakou 2001-2004: 376. Themelis 1974: 230; Oikonomakou 2001-2004: 380, fig. 104; 2007; Banou 2010: 37-8. 22 Theocharaki 1980: 84-8; Efstratiou 1985: 73-4. 23 Marathon, Agrieliki 1973: Ioannis Kafetzopoulos plot, 9-13. 24 Mazarakis Ainian 2011: 702-3, 712, fig. 13. 25 Burial 14 was much disturbed and no information may be retrieved. Burial 15 contained, among other offerings, an extraordinary pitcher of large dimensions and decorated with figured compositions all over its surface. Burial 16 was a cremation burial in a krater-pyxis with high pedestal. For the excavation, see Mazarakis Ainian 2011: 704. For the large pitcher, see Vlachou 2016a; 2016b. 20

According to Smithson (1961), a female, three males and two young children represent the buried population. Conclusions on gender for the adults were drawn mainly on the basis of the cinerary urn and the accompanying gifts. 27 Smithson 1961: 150-5; Lemos 2002: 154. 28 For the Late Geometric burial ground to the south of the Classical Tholos in the Agora of Athens, see Young 1939; Brann 1960: 402-16; 1962: 125-31. For discussion of the results of the osteological analysis conducted by Angel, see Whitley 1991: 65. At the burial ground known as the ‘Plattenbau’ on the south bank of Eridanos at Kerameikos, 14 burials of infants and young children and 13 adult burials have been

21

26

19

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 6. Marathon, Marathonos Avenue. Deposit-pit 1. Neck (K2206) of belly-handled amphora of the circle style.

past. Two such vessels were found together in a depositpit (apothetis) that was investigated in the northern part of the burial ground along Marathonos Avenue. Deposit-pit 1 contained the remains of two oversized amphorae and a part of a large flat-based pyxis.29 The earliest amphora (Figure 6a-b), of which only the neck survived, can be dated on stylistic grounds to the early 8th century BC or to the Middle Geometric II period: it belongs to a specific Athenian class of belly-handled amphorae used since already the Sub-Mycenaean period as the cremation urn in female graves.30 Although the use of those vessels cannot be considered as socially exclusive, some of the latest specimens in this category served as containers for the cremated remains in some richly furnished tombs in Athens, from the area of Areiopagos and Kerameikos, and in Attica, from the wealthy cemetery at Anavyssos.31 The second

The presence of children, adolescents and adults among the buried population in most cases, as equally at Marathon, seems consistent with an identification of family units. Nonetheless, in all cases, the identification remains hypothetical. An additional feature at Marathon is the extra care and attention given to ritually charged vessels from the considered as a family cluster for about three generations of burials. Kübler 1954: 4, 13, 17-19, 21, 30 (Graves G 51-63); Humphreys 1980: 105; Morris 1987: 82 (a single type B plot); Coldstream 2003: 98. For a presumed family plot on the Hill of the Muses, see Poulou 2013. For a discussion on family groupings in the burial grounds of Athens and Attica, see Humphreys 1980: 106-8; Houby-Nielsen 1995: 1323 and 142-6. E. Lord Smithson and sometime later N. J. Coldstream both considered the ‘small exclusive cemetery of the North slopes of Areiopagos’ as the burial ground of an Athenian aristocratic genos of the mid-9th century BC. The identification with the Medontid genos came from Coldstream, while Lord Smithson saw in the richest female burial of all, that of the so-called Rich Athenian Lady, the wife of king Arriphron, who came from the royal genos of the Medontids and been thought as ruling largely during this period. Coldstream further speculated on an identification of the aristocratic burial ground close to the later Dipylon Gate, linking it to the genos of the Neleids, almost a century later. Smithson 1968: 83; Coldstream 1995: 393. Most recently the attribution of certain Athenian tombs to specific individuals or genoi is again tackled by Bohen (2017: 32-101).

For a detailed description of the vessels from pit 1 and their archaeological context, see Vlachou 2011. 30 Boardman 1988; Kourou and Stampolidis 1996; Kourou 1997. 31 Areopagus Grave H16:6 (Early Geometric II/Middle Geometric I): Smithson 1968; Coldstream 1995; Liston and Papadopoulos 2004. Kerameikos Gr. 41 (Middle Geometric I): Kübler 1954: 235-6. Anavyssos Grave II (Middle Geometric II): Verdelis and Davaras 1966: 97-8, pl. 29

20

Vicky Vlachou: Liminal Spaces, Burial Contexts and Funerary Practices

amphora is of monumental size, once reaching almost 1.60 m high (Figure 7). It is decorated on one side with a large prothesis scene, demonstrating again a strong link to the conspicuous production and use of such vessels as burial markers in Athens and Attica during the Late Geometric period. The huge amphora can be dated on stylistic grounds to late in the third quarter of the 8th century or the Late Geometric IIa period; it seems contemporary to the fragmentary flat-based pyxis. The production and use of the largest and most imposing vase markers for almost a century, up until the late 8th century BC, is interwoven with a specific funerary behaviour of post mortem rituals. This distinctive practice has been traced in Athens, namely at the Kerameikos and the burial ground under the Classical Eriai Gates, at Marathon, Merenta, Anavyssos, Koropi, Thorikos, Trachones and even Megara, marking thus the large areas of landownership, and revealing routes connecting the centre to the periphery (and vice versa).32 There are two points of interest apropos the two amphorae from Marathon. The first is their placement together in a single pit, despite the chronological disparity of the vessels of more than half a century. Although the actual function of the Middle Geometric amphora cannot be securely established, as such vessels seem to have served as cinerary urns and burial markers alike, the prothesis amphora should be regarded as a burial marker (sema), once placed above ground in order to serve the funerary rituals. The second point relates to the actual meaning of this find within the wider context of the burial ground. The pit seems to have served for the deposition of older material from the burial ground, displaying thus a degree of extra care for certain symbolically charged vessels. Both vessels relate to an apparent funerary custom of the elites whereby after a certain time or even upon their destruction such vases were ritually deposited within the area of the burial ground. The finding of the fragmentary pyxis within the same pit (and remembering the incomplete investigation of pit 1 that extended beyond the limits of the excavated area) may indicate that more material from possibly earlier tombs was also deposited there. Yet, in most cases from Attica the large funerary markers were found within the fill layers of the tombs, while the exact location of certain fragmentary specimens is not reported at all.33

Figure 7. Marathon, Marathonos Avenue. Deposit-pit 1. Fragmentary belly-handled amphora decorated with a prothesis scene (K2207).

was found in a deposit-pit under ‘Maison IV’ at the area of the West Quarter at Eretria.34 K. Reber argues for a rapid destruction of such vessels that were placed at the open within the burial grounds and for their eventual disposal. A second huge amphora from the coastal burial ground in the area known as Hygeionomeion seems to have served as the burial container for a child enchytrismos, although its original function as burial marker has been argued by B. Blandin.35 Still, if we take into account the difficulties of survival facing such gigantic vessels placed out in the open, then their presumed reuse should be regarded as a quite rare phenomenon, compared to their removal and discard. For the case of Marathon, if we accept that the two

Even so, the surviving evidence for similar cases elsewhere remains uneven. A fragmentary monumental amphora, probably originally used as a burial marker, 94a-b; Coldstream 2003: 80. For a short discussion of these graves, see Vlachou 2017: 196-7. 32 For a discussion, see Vlachou 2015; 2017: 192-6. 33 For a recent discussion and further bibliography, see Vlachou 2017: 192-6.

Reber 1999. Kourouniotis 1903: 14, fig. 7.15-24; Coldstream 1968: 55; Blandin 2007: 71 and pl. 120.7. A similar case has been argued for the elaborately decorated and huge vessels from the burial ground at Paroikia on Paros: Zapheiropoulou 2002: 283; 2010: 244.

34 35

21

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

clusters of burials could represent family units, then it would seem that a special care was taken by the members of the families in reorganizing the area of the burials and in finally disposing of older material with ritual connotations.

what is considered local clay, thus being assigned to local pottery workshops. As for the hydria, both shape and decoration point to a date at the transition from the Late Protogeometric to the Early Geometric period; the neck is quite high, dark painted with groups of languettes placed around its base, the vertical handle is attached to lip, the surface of the vessel is light-ground. The central motif on the shoulder represents an unusual choice, compared to the very common groups of concentric circles and semi-circles.38 Based on stylistic analysis it seems that the funerary urn should have been produced at least 50 years before the earliest possible date for the tomb, and was probably in the possession of the earliest inhabitants of this area after the Mycenaean occupation. The second point of interest relates to the choice of the hydria as the funerary urn, a vessel rarely used in this way in Attica or elsewhere.39

Two more monumental kraters, nicely decorated with funerary scenes of prothesis and lament, were found at Oinoe. Most of the surviving parts of the two large vessels, including the almost entire high pedestal, were found in the area delimited by a Π-shaped wall (Γ) that enclosed two pyres, an inhumation burial and an enchytrismos burial of a young child.36 Although the use of enclosure walls at Oinoe could be again taken as an example of the common practice in defining the space of family units, yet the fact that much later burials were frequently placed in areas of earlier activity complicates the situation there. The use of elaborate markers at the two burial grounds, Marathonos Avenue and Oinoe, finds significant similarities in the social norms that structured the burial practices during the second half of the 8th century BC. Nonetheless, unlike the care taken at the burial ground along Marathonos Avenue for older ritually charged vases, at Oinoe there is no evidence of a similar funerary behaviour.

The deposition of earlier vessels in later burials occurs occasionally in the context of the Early Iron Age. When vessels of apparently technical elaboration and/ or of a presumed symbolic value are encountered, they may offer an occasion to further explore the relation between objects and people within the framework proposed by post-processual interpretative approaches. Susan Langdon has shown how biography as a methodological approach to Early Iron Age pottery may reveal new ways of understanding material culture and consequently critical stages in the life and death of an individual.40 In her discussion of Argos tomb 23, she argues on the symbolic connotations encountered by the use of the large finely decorated pyxis (C.209) as the funerary container of a 35-year old female burial. The large pyxis seems to have been made some 25 years prior to the earliest date for the grave, as provided by the fragmentary krater (C.210) used to seal the opening of the pyxis. Considering both vessels from this burial, it would seem that their final use and deposition was motivated by different considerations, related to significant transitions in the life of a woman, such as marriage and the social status provided by her age at death.

Depositional Practices: Early Vessels in Later Contexts Among the best preserved funerary assemblages at the Vrana cemetery was that from Grave 2, a cist of almost square dimensions (65 x 52 cm) covered by a stone slab.37 A hydria was deposited in the interior of the cist (Figure 2), containing the cremated remains along with a pin, badly preserved and burnt. A one-handled coarse pitcher, two cups, a skyphos with a pedestal and an almost globular pyxis with flat base accompanied the burial (Figure 8a-d). A bronze finger ring was found inside the pyxis. There are two points of interest in this otherwise quite typical burial of the Early Geometric period. The first is the obvious chronological disparity between the hydria and the rest of the offerings. The two one-handled cups may be dated to the Early Geometric II period or the second quarter of the 9th century BC, and find their exact parallels at Athens and specifically at the Kerameikos. Of similar date are the skyphos with the pedestal and the pyxis. Both demonstrate the typical technical characteristics of

Yet, other instances of the deposition of earlier vessels in later tombs do not offer an opportunity to go this far. Such a case is that of a Late Geometric inhumation For the motif, see a mug from T. 43 at Kerameikos (Early Geometric I/II), Kerameikos V1, pl. 112, inv. 1252; a krater from Skoubris burial ground at Lefkandi (T.5, SPG): Popham et al. 1980: pl. 93. For a pyxis from Toumba (SPG IIIa): Popham and Lemos 1996: pl. 93.41. For the shape, see a hydria from Peristeri (Athens), Lemos 2002: pl. 90.1. 39 The hydria was found on the modern Lycourgou Str. The burial seems to belong to the burial ground excavated in the area of the modern Kotzia square, outside the Classical gate leading to Acharnes: ArchDelt 18 (1963), Chronika B1: 35-6 and pl. 38a. For a discussion of Protogeometric hydriai in the Aegean, see Lemos 2002: 65-7. 40 Langdon 2001: especially 584-92. 38

Arapogianni 1985: 209 pyres 3 and 4, 214 enchytrismos a, 225 tomb III (possibly of the 4th century BC). For the parts of the kraters, see Arapogianni 1985: 226-7, pl. 100b and pl. 87a. The high pedestal has been erroneously published as the neck of a pithos. There is a joining fragment that was found outside the enclosure wall Γ, see Arapogianni 1985: 209 (area of pyre 6). With the permission of the Ephorate of Eastern Attica, it was possible to re-examine the published material and excavation journals from Oinoe. The material of the Geometric period is currently in preparation for publication. 37 Soteriades 1939: 29-33, figs 2-3. 36

22

Vicky Vlachou: Liminal Spaces, Burial Contexts and Funerary Practices

Figure 8a-d. Marathon, Skorpio Potami. One-handled coarse pitcher (K129), one-handled cup (K840), skyphos with pedestal (K838) and pyxis (K839) from Gr. 2.

burial from the burial ground at Kifissia where a Middle Geometric skyphos keeps company with Late Geometric vessels.41 Whether this particular vessel had a specific meaning for the deceased or served a symbolic function during the funerary rituals is impossible to say. It would seem however that the usage of such objects intensified the active role played by the family in the treatment of the dead body and the material display at the tomb. In

certain cases, the visual power of such objects could have been powerfully deployed to display and/or establish ancestry within liminal contexts. A characteristic case is provided by the use of a Late Helladic IIIC hydria as the burial marker of the Middle Protogeometric grave II/1985 at Grotta on Naxos. The tomb was placed over the remains of the Mycenaean occupation and the hydria is considered there as an heirloom, the intentional reuse of which would have been associated with some kind of ancestral cult.42 Objects of the past that were highly appreciated by virtue of the intrinsic value of their materials and the skills displayed by the craftsmen have been widely explored by scholars

Platonos 2001-2004: 404-5. The burial is considered as female inhumation only on the basis of the offerings that were placed in the tomb: two flat-based pyxides with horse lids, five mugs, an aryballos, a plate and three skyphoi, of which the one illustrated should be dated to the Middle Geometric period. The remaining vessels are of the Late Geometric Ib/IIa period that is at least 50 years later. For a comparable Middle Geometric I skyphos from Kerameikos T. 13, see Kübler 1954: pl. 89 inv. 887.

41

42

23

Lambrinoudakis 1988: 239, fig. 9; Kourou 2015: 85-7.

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

in relation to status and social rank of their owners and the active networks that allowed their circulation within the wider Mediterranean.43 On the other hand, old pots reflect more on regional developments and reveal elements of family history. In this way vessels originally made for domestic or other daily use end up serving the funerary rituals in the burial grounds. That the hydria from Marathon was not originally intended as a burial offering where it ended up is best supported by the fact that it was made at least 50 years prior to the earliest possible date for the grave. Although no analysis of the cremated remains exists, some considerations on the sex and age of the deceased may be attempted on the basis of the material accompaniments and the choice of the funerary urn. The conspicuous use of the hydria, the coarse ware and the pyxides in contemporary funerary assemblages from Athens have been discussed regarding the life and activity of females.44 Leaving aside any objections to the suggestion that the occupant of Grave 2 at Marathon was actually a female, the fact that the person must have been among the earliest occupants of the area during the late 10th/early 9th centuries BC cannot be contested. There are some more Late Protogeometric vessels from Vrana, unfortunately with no secure context. It is possible that some were originally placed with child burials, some of which excavated by Soteriades in 1934. These vessels, along with the hydria in tomb 2 represent the earliest material remains at Marathon dating from the late 10th century BC. Two more cremation burials slightly later than tomb 2 may be dated to the Middle Geometric I or the middle of the 9th century BC.45 Both these burials make strong references to the burial practices of Athens during this period: and ought to be those of a male and a young female. The cremated remains were placed in a neckhandled amphora and a shoulder-handled amphora respectively; fragments of an iron sword were found in relation to the male burial, while funerary gifts placed with the second burial seem consistent with the burials of young females and girls in Attica.46

Figure 9. Marathon, Skorpio Potami, Kafetzopoulos plot. Belly-handled amphora of the Circle style (K775).

as may be seen in the hasty sketch from the notebooks of the excavation. The large vase belongs to a specific class of Attic amphorae in the circle style that are rarely attested from the Attic countryside. Nonetheless, two specimens are known from Marathon, the latter from the deposit-pit 1 along Marathonos Avenue (see above). The amphora was placed directly on the ground along with the remains of an inhumation burial. Some more vessels dating from the Middle Geometric and the Late Geometric period were nicely arranged around the large amphora (Figure 5), showing that this was an intentional and secondary deposition of the vessel. No further information is available. However, the chronological disparity of the vessels speaks soundly in favour of two successive deposition episodes and probably two burials.

Very much contemporary with these burials is a cremation in a large belly-handled amphora (Figure 9).47 The vessel was found close to the eastern limits of the burial ground, in proximity to the curved enclosure wall Antonaccio 1995b; Whitley 2002; Crielaard 2003; Whitley 2013. For Athens, see Whitley 1991: 158-9; Strömberg 1993: 102; Whitley 1996; Langdon 2005. For a comparable use of pyxides in Argos, see Courbin 1974: 127. 45 Soteriades 1939: 30-5. 46 For a discussion, see Langdon 2005. For the use of the shoulder handled-amphora, see Kourou 2011. 47 The area is located on the foot of Mt. Agrieliki, close to the modern Salaminomachon Str. Excavations took place in the Kafetzopoulos plot in 1974. Unfortunately, the documentation from them is extremely poor: all the finds of the Geometric period were unearthed in one of the four test trenches. 43 44

This last is not a simple case of the placing of older material in later tombs, but actually the incorporation of an earlier burial in later one. This is a highly unusual phenomenon for Geometric Attica, and especially for Marathon. Soteriades explicitly notes that among the characteristic features of the burial ground at Vrana is the placement of the later graves so as not 24

Vicky Vlachou: Liminal Spaces, Burial Contexts and Funerary Practices

to overlap with earlier burials. Considering thus the organization of the Geometric graves, it would seem that the positioning of the large amphora with the later burial was fully intended, possibly a choice made by the family of the deceased. Among the five vessels that accompanied the large amphora, only one can be dated from the Late Geometric IIa period – this seems to have been the burial offering for the later inhumation burial. The partly preserved pitcher belongs to a specific Attic category of burial vessels employed during the Late Geometric Ib/IIa period for both males and females. The remaining four vessels are contemporary to the large amphora and probably accompanied the earlier cremation burial in the Middle Geometric I period.

however, a group of five small vessels, four lekythoi and a cup that could represent the burial gifts, perhaps of a child burial dated to Early Protogeometric. Although there is not much information available regarding the exact location of the presumed tomb, it seems that this was found further to the south of the excavated area, close to the prehistoric remains.52 It is possible that the burial is related to the latest occupation of the area after the Late Bronze Age. In the same area an intact skyphos was found during the most recent excavations at the site by the University of Athens, dated to the Late Helladic IIIC/SM. Material evidence for most of the 10th century BC remains almost completely absent: activity here seems to have resumed only late during this time. In addition to the quantities of the Late Protogeometric and Geometric pottery identified among the prehistoric remains, mainly to the east of the area excavated in 1969 and 1970, an undisturbed grave (Grave III) was also investigated (Figure 10).53 The cist grave measured 1.56 x 0.75 m and was paved with pebbles, an element frequently met with the inhumation burials at Marathon. It was placed over one of the walls of the prehistoric settlement (wall 15), making use of the available material. Grave III contained the inhumation burial of possibly a young male accompanied by his weapons, a short iron sword (dagger) and an iron knife that were placed over his pelvis area. A bronze fibula was found on his left shoulder, probably once the fastening device for the burial garment, and two bronze finger rings, one on each hand. Two lekythoi, placed close to his head and pelvis, provide a date in the late 10th century BC or the Late Protogeometric period for the burial.

A last point should be made concerning the use of the large circle amphora as a funerary container. The amphora shows traces of repair all over its body, and could have possibly served a function other than funerary before being deposited in the grave. Broadly though, this specific class of amphorae has been firmly linked to Attic funerary practices; one wonders therefore whether the repair could not have taken place at the time of its secondary deposition. The Appropriation of the Past: The Burials from Plasi The low hill of Plasi overlooks the coastal area of Marathon that is spread between two marshes: the larger to the north and the smaller to the south. The area was investigated in a joint mission by E. Mastrokostas and S. Marinatos in the late 1960’s. Short excavation reports have appeared in 1970 and 1971 in the Archaiologika Analekta: they remain our main source of information for the large-scale excavations in this area.48 Further, a topographical plan of the excavated area was prepared and published by Travlos in the 1980’s.49 The prehistoric remains on the top of the hill reveal that a prosperous settlement was established already by the Middle Helladic II period; the later phases of the Late Bronze Age are better represented further to the east, where the habitation area seems to have progressively expanded.50 Evidence of re-occupation of this area dates mainly from the late 10th century BC onwards. A group of burials was investigated in 1970 in the area of the north entrance of the Early Helladic fortification wall. The burials were said to have been dug into, over and on both sides of the prehistoric wall, which they partly destroyed.51 However, there is no documentation of these early tombs and no related material exists in the storerooms of the Marathon museum. There is,

One more burial from Marathon was said to have contained an iron sword. Soteriades notes that fragments of one such were found on the covering stone of cremation tomb 1 at the burial ground of Vrana. Yet the only material available at Marathon Museum from grave 1 is the ceramic assemblage, that provides a date

For the excavation of the assemblage, 23/1/1970, Koukoulakis plot, trench 4. 53 For a short report, see ArchDelt 34 (1979), Chronika B1: 90-1. The excavation of Grave III took place on 18/1/1979 during the rescue excavations in the property of Sotiris Kollias, a few meters to the east of the excavations held by Mastrokostas and Marinatos in 1968-1970. For the excavation, see excavations diary no. 187 by D. Kyriakou in the archives of the Ephorate of Eastern Attica, pp. 88-93. The grave has been erroneously reported (AR 1984-1985, 11) as made in a Protogeometric house and reproduced in recent articles discussing burials with weapons. As can be confirmed by the excavation journals, the grave was dug in the prehistoric remains in this area. The burial is mentioned twice in the catalogues of burials with weapons provided by D’ Onofrio (2011: 662, nos 2, 3). It remains the only burial of this type excavated at Plasi up to this day. 52

For a short description of the remains of the Geometric to the Classical period, see Mastrokostas 1970; Marinatos 1970: 153-4. Travlos 1988: 224, pl. 272. Also see Petrakos 1995: 55-9. 50 For a recent comprehensive discussion of the remains at Plasi, see Sgouritsa et al. 2016 (with further bibliography). 51 Mastrokostas 1970: 17. 48 49

25

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 10. Marathon, Plasi. S. Kollia plot. Interior view of Gr. III during excavation. (Photo by E. Kyriakou. © Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Eastern Attica, Archive, no. 14211).

in the Middle Geometric I period.54 The individual buried at Plasi seems to have been of a young age, on the basis of the height of the skeleton at less than 1.40 m. The short sword, the blade of which measured only 29 cm long, seems to have been suited to its young owner, something that has been already suggested for certain similar cases.55 This funerary tradition of sealing weapons with the burial, irrespective of whether it is a cremation or inhumation burial has been associated with the self-definition of the elite members of local communities, revealing strongly the prevailing male ideals.

Likewise, the finding at Plasi of this type of burial, rarely attested from other Attic regions outside Athens, should be linked to the conspicuous funerary behaviour of the early inhabitants at Marathon, and regarded as a strong affirmation of their elite status and property. The intentional burial within the visible remains of the preceding period at Plasi creates a clear link between the past inhabitants of the area and the newly established communities. Yet, despite these few early burials from Plasi, the area never developed into a burial ground during the succeeding years, at least according to the archaeological evidence so far. On the contrary, the burial ground at Vrana, some 3 km to the south-west of Plasi, started receiving burials around the same time, the late 10th century BC, and continued throughout the Geometric, Archaic and Classical periods. It would seem thus logical to search for the habitation unit or units within the vast extent of plain occupying the area

Unfortunately, it seems that nothing survives from the weapon, neither in the storerooms of the Marathon Museum nor in the Archaeological Museum at Athens. It is possible that due to their bad preservation, the fragments were not collected. Soteriades 1939: 29, 31-3. 55 Lemos 2002: 278. For a discussion, see also D’ Onofrio 2011: 654-7. 54

26

Vicky Vlachou: Liminal Spaces, Burial Contexts and Funerary Practices

between these two zones, where the earliest material remains have been identified.56

largest and most important among the four poleis, in the coastal plain between the two marshes. Probalinthos has been located at the southern entrance to the plain, on the road leading to Eastern Attica, connecting Spata, Merenta (ancient Myrrinous) and Brauron. Oinoe is the only mountainous deme, to the west of the modern village of Marathon, on the road leading to Athens through the passage between Parnes and Mount Pentelikon. Lastly, Trikorynthos occupied the northeast of the plain, between the coast and Kato Souli.

Funerary expressions at Early Iron Age Marathon were part of the same complex process of selfdefinition of local communities that fuelled continuous transformations in the progressive formation of the polis. If we review the evidence for habitation during the same period, this is extremely scarce. It is most probable that small habitation units were to be found close to the burial grounds, at least until the early Archaic period, and even afterwards, rather than there existed a single larger and more densely occupied habitation area. If we accept the idea that the Marathon plain was progressively occupied from around the 10th century BC onwards by certain oikoi that exploited the considerable extent of arable land, it is then arguable that the progressive formation of the Marathon Tetrapolis as this is attested from the Archaic period onwards was mainly based on matters of kinship and lineage.57 Although the Tetrapolis of Marathon has been generally considered as prehistoric in origin, there is no archaeological evidence to support such suggestion.58 For approximately a century or so, the remote area of Marathon seems to have been unoccupied.59 By the late 10th century BC, occupation resumed little by little, as not all areas were simultaneously occupied. It would seem, however, that the remains of the prehistoric occupation attracted the interest of the newly settled inhabitants, and even as late as the 8th century BC, according to the evidence from the area of Kato Souli.60

Within the Tetrapolis, Marathon remained the largest and most important polis that seems to have occupied the largest part of the arable plain. Archaeological evidence proves that this was one of the earliest areas occupied in the late 10th century BC, along with the area of Plasi. I would like to suggest that there were more compelling reasons for this than simply the geomorphology of the area that provided ample flat space facing the sea. The choice of the burial ground at Vrana, with the visible remains of the prehistoric inhabitants, the Middle Helladic tumuli and the Mycenaean tholos, should have provided visual and direct links with the earlier occupants of this area. The importance of prehistoric remains and their transformation into markers in the landscape during the succeeding Early Iron Age has been convincingly discussed and demonstrated for a number of cases in recent scholarship.62 At Marathon, the intention seems to have been the incorporation of the visible remains into the settled zone, probably in an attempt to claim direct associations with them.

The limits of the territory occupied by the four poleis cannot be safely defined due to the paucity of material remains.61 Nonetheless, scholars place Marathon, the

Such an intentional act of appropriation of the remains of the past by the newly established landowners at Marathon is clearly shown by the Late Protogeometric inhumation of a youth accompanied by his weapons at Plasi. The act of burying an individual with his weapons has been persuasively discussed as a metaphor of the masculine identity, ideals and high social status, regardless if this status was earned at the battlefield or was achieved by birth within the oikos or the kingroup.63 The location of the burial that is to be found within the remains of past occupation should be considered as the visible marker for the new inhabitants of the plain. Although the area of Plasi does not seems to have developed into a burial ground, as happened at the site of Vrana, both areas delimit the vast and fertile plain: from the entrance to the plain at Vrana to the low coastal hill at Plasi.

This is largely the area identified with Marathon, the most important among the four demes that later occupied the area. See, Pritchett 1960; Themelis 1974: 233 (with bibliography). 57 The Tetrapolis of Marathon is considered as a social and at the same time a religious unit, with cults and festivals of its own through the Classical period and beyond. W. Wrede in RE (1934) s.v. Tetrapolis; Parker 1996: 331-2. In the late 4th/early 3rd centuries BC, the Athenian Philochoros devoted one of his 17 Books to the Tetrapolis (FGH 328 Philochoros F 73-75; Strabo 9.1.20). From around the same period, the second quarter of the 4th century BC, comes the most important Tetrapolis document, its sacrificial calendar (IG ii2 1358). The text provides valuable information on the sacrifices and their financing, the prices of the sacrificed animals, but also topographical indications as to the placement of the largest cult places. For the text, see Lambert 2000 (with further bibliography). For a discussion of the area occupied by each deme of the Tetrapolis, see Soteriades 1933; 1935; Pritchett 1960; Vanderpool 1966; Themelis 1974; Petrakos 1995: 50-96. 58 Suggestions on the prehistoric origin of the Tetrapolis are mainly based on linguistic criteria and the supposed pre-Hellenic origin of two among the Marathon poleis, those of Provalinthos and Trikorynthos. In both areas remains of flourishing prehistoric settlements have been excavated. See Themelis 1974: 228. 59 The considerable distance between Athens and Marathon is commented by ancient writers, see Pausanias 1.32.3; Plato, Menexenus 240c. For a discussion, see Missiou 2010: 152-3. 60 Oikonomakou 2001-2004: 379-81. 61 For a discussion of the material remains of the Archaic and Classical periods from all areas, see Themelis 1974; Petrakos 1995. 56

For the role of Bronze Age remains in the development of cult areas and sanctuaries, see Antonaccio 1994; Morgan 1994 and 1996; Niemeier 2013; Maran 2016. For ancestors and burials, see the cases discussed in Antonaccio 1995a; Mazarakis Ainian 2004; Kourou 2015. 63 For a discussion, see Whitley 2002; Bouvier 2002; Marini 2003; D’ Onofrio 2011. However, at Marathon, as in a number of cases of burials with weapons from Athens, neither the objects nor the body were intentionally destroyed during the funerals. 62

27

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

By the late 8th century BC, activity in the area of Kato Souli, broadly identified with the later deme of Trikorynthos, is once more to be found set within the remains of the prehistoric stone foundations. During the most recent excavations in this area, a large quantity of Late Geometric pottery has been reported, demonstrating a quite homogenous pattern of installation in the areas of past activity. Although this action could equally have been due to the convenience of reusing the stone foundations of constructions built in a marshy area, they constitute at the same time deliberate acts of entanglement with the past.

Research Fund (2012-2015) and continued with the generous support of F.R.S.-FNRS (Belgium, chargée de recherches). The final publication of the material is forthcoming. I would like to express my gratitude to the Ephorate of Eastern Attica for all necessary permissions during my research, to the archaeologists P. Fotiadi, L. Siskou, E. Charitaki and the conservator S. Kavaleka for providing valuable information about the earlier excavations and facilitating my work at the archaeological museum at Marathon in any possible way. For the restoration of the giant burial markers from the necropolis along Marathonos Avenue, I would like to warmly thank Th. Mavridis and E. Vamvakari. Photos and drawings are by the author, unless otherwise stated.

Concluding Remarks Observations derived from more regionally-focused approaches may serve as the basis for discussion on the social significance of burial spaces and how this articulates with other avenues pursued by the living, such as land-use strategies. Mortuary expressions, as presented by the Early Iron Age burial grounds at Marathon, constitute an exceptionally powerful venue for ideological self-representation of the oikoi. Larger burial grounds and small clusters of burials marked the occupied area at Marathon that by the end of the 8th century BC covered the coastal plain, as well as the mountainous passages. Shared burial practices and ritual performance at the tomb involved the use of enclosures and burial markers to delimit and mark certain groups of tombs, the deposition of certain old vessels in later contexts. Such practices developed progressively since the late 10th century BC creating a shared formal framework of mortuary expression.

Bibliography Antonaccio, C.M. 1994. Placing the past: the Bronze Age in the cultic topography of early Greece, in S.E. Alcock and R. Osborne (eds) Placing the Gods. Sanctuaries and Sacred Space in Ancient Greece: 79-104. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Antonaccio, C.M. 1995a. An Archaeology of Ancestors: Tomb Cult and Hero Cult in Early Greece. London: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. Antonaccio, C.M. 1995b. Lefkandi and Homer, in Ø. Andersen and M. Dickie (eds) Homer’s World: Fiction, Tradition, Reality (Papers from the Norwegian Institute at Athens 3): 5-27. Bergen: Paul Åströms Förlag. Arapogianni, X. 1985. Νεκροταφείο του 7ου και 6ου αι. π.Χ. στην Οινόη Μαραθώνος. ArchDelt 40, Meletes: 207-28. Arapogianni, X. 1987. Μαραθώνας-Οινόη. Έργα ΕΥΔΑΠ. ArchDelt 42, Chronika B1: 99-100. Arnold, B. 2007. Gender and archaeological mortuary analysis, in S.M. Nelson (ed.): 107-40. Banou, E. 2010. Η πεδιάδα του Μαραθώνα κατά τους προϊστορικούς χρόνους, in K. Buraselis and K. Meidani (eds): 33-49. Blandin, B. 2007. Eretria XVII: Les Pratiques Funéraires d’Epoque Géométrique à Erétrie. Espace des Vivants, Demeures des Morts. Gollion: Ecole Suisse d’Archéologie en Grèce. Blegen, C.W., H. Palmer and R.S. Young 1964. Corinth XIII: The North Cemetery. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Boardman, J. 1988. Sex differentiation in grave vases, in B. d’Agostino (ed.) La Parola, l’Immagine, la Tomba. Atti del Colloquio Internazionale di Capri, Napoli (Annali dell’ Istituto universitario orientali di Napoli 10): 171-8. Naples. Bohen, B. 2017. Kratos and Krater: Reconstructing an Athenian Protohistory. Oxford: Archaeopress. Bourbou, Ch. 2013. The imprint of emotions surrounding the death of children in Antiquity, in A. Chaniotis and P. Ducrey (eds) Unveiling Emotions II. Emotions in

In addition, the re-use of areas of the earlier Bronze Age activity seems to have served as points of reference for the oikoi installed in the area for exhibiting and claiming land property and lineage. It would thus seem that the areas of Bronze Age activity acted as key points in the landscape for the early settlers at Marathon emphasizing their longstanding attachment to the territory and their privileged access to the same. Lastly, one should point to the strong ties between Athens and Marathon. Despite the poor material remains from Early Iron Age installation at Marathon, pottery production and its use in the funerary context demonstrate the close links that the wealthy landowners of Marathon maintained with the Athenian elites within a shared network involving ritual expressions and craftsmanship. Acknowledgements My warmest thanks are to Nikolas Dimakis and Tamara M. Dijkstra for their invitation to participate in the conference at the Netherlands Institute in Athens and for including my paper in the present volume. The study of the material from the Early Iron Age burial grounds at Marathon began in the framework of a European 28

Vicky Vlachou: Liminal Spaces, Burial Contexts and Funerary Practices

Greece and Rome. Texts, Images, Material Culture: 33150. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Bourbou, Ch. and P. Themelis 2010. Child burials at ancient Messene, in A. M. Guimier-Sorbets and Y. Morizot (eds) L’Enfant et la Mort dans l’Antiquité I. Nouvelles Recherches dans les Nécropoles Grecques. Le Signalement des Tombes d’Enfants (Travaux de la Maison René-Ginouvès 12): 111-28. Paris: de Boccard. Bouvier, D. 2002. Présence ou absence d’armes dans les tombes héroïques, in F. Montanari and P. Ascheri (eds) Omero Tremila Anni Dopo. Atti del Congresso di Genova, 6-8 Luglio 2000: 535-45. Rome. Brann, E.T.H. 1960. Late Geometric grave groups from the Athenian Agora. Hesperia 29: 402-16. Brann, E.T.H. 1962. The Athenian Agora VIII: Late Geometric and Protoattic Pottery: Mid 8th to Late 7th Century BC. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Buraselis, K. and K. Meidani (eds) 2010. Marathon: the Battle and the Ancient Deme. Athens: Kardamitsa. Coldsteam, J.N. 1968. Greek Geometric Pottery. A Survey of Ten Local Styles and Their Chronology. London: Methuen. Coldstream, J.N. 1995. The Rich Lady of the Areiopagos and her contemporaries. A tribute in memory of Evelyn Lord Smithson. Hesperia 64: 391-403. Coldstream, J.N. 2003. Geometric Greece, 900-700 BC (Etudes Péloponnésiennes 7). London. Courbin, P. 1974. Tombes Géométriques d’Argos. Paris. Crielaard, J. 2003. The cultural biography of material goods in Homer’s epics. GAIA: Revue Interdisciplinaire sur la Grèce Archaïque 7: 49-62. D’ Onofrio, A.M. 2011. Athenian burials with weapons: the Athenian warrior graves revisited, in A. Mazarakis Ainian (ed.) The ‘Dark Ages’ Revisited. Acts of an International Symposium in Memory of William D. E. Coulson, University of Thessaly, Volos, 14-17 June 2007: 645-73. Volos. Efstratiou, K. 1985. Νέα Μάκρη. ArchDelt 40, Chronika B1: 71-2. Efstratiou, K. 1985. Μαραθώνας. Σκάλεζα. ArchDelt 40, Chronika B1: 73-4. Gibbs, L. 1987. Identifying gender representation in the archaeological record: a contextual study, in I. Hodder (ed.) The Archaeology of Contextual Meanings: 79-89. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Guimier-Sorbets, A.-M. and Y. Morizot (eds) 2010.  L’ Enfant et la Mort dans l’ Antiquité I: Νouvelles Recherches dans les Νécropoles Grecques; Le Signalement des Tombes d’ Enfants (Travaux de la Maison René-Ginouvès 12). Paris: de Boccard. Houby-Nielsen, S. 1995. Burial language in Archaic and Classical Kerameikos. Proceedings of the Danish Institute at Athens I: 129-91. Aarhus. Houby-Nielsen, S. 2000. Child burials in ancient Athens, in J. Sofaer-Derevenski (ed.) Children and Material Culture: 151-66. London: Routledge.

Humphreys, S.C. 1980. Family tombs and tomb cult in ancient Athens. Tradition or traditionalism? JHS 100: 96-126. Kalaitzoglou, G. 2010. Adelsgräber des 9. Jhs. V. Chr. In Athen und Attika, in H. Lohmann and T. Mattern (eds) Attika. Archäologie einer ‘zentraler‘ Kulturlandschaft (Philippika 37): 47-72. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Kourou, N. 1997. A new Geometric amphora in the Benaki Museum: the internal dynamics of an Attic style, in O. Palagia (ed.) Greek Offerings. Essays on Greek Art in Honour of John Boardman (Oxbow Monograph 89): 43-53. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Kourou, N. 2011. Αττικά τεφροδόχα νεαρών κοριτσιών: γύρω από έναν αμφορέα και ένα ορυκτοποιημένο ύφασμα της Πρώιμης Γεωμετρικής εποχής, in A. Delivorrias, G. Despinis and A. Zarkadas (eds) Έπαινος Luigi Beschi (Mouseio Benaki 7): 189-200. Athens: Mouseio Benaki. Kourou, N. 2015. Early Iron Age mortuary contexts in the Cyclades. Pots, function and symbolism, in V. Vlachou (ed.): 83-105. Kourou, N. and N. Stampolidis 1996. A propos d’une amphore géométrique pansue du type à trois métopes de cercles concentriques. BCH 120/II, Études: 705-19. Kourouniotis, K. 1903. Αγγεία Ερέτριας. ArchEph: 1-38. Kreeb, M. 2010. Travellers-antiquarians-archaeologists: visits to Marathon from the 17th c. up to our epoch, in K. Buraselis and K. Meidani (eds): 135-50. Kübler, K. 1954. Kerameikos: Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen V. Die Nekropolen des 10. Bis 8. Jahrhunderts. Berlin. Lambert, S. 2000. The sacrificial calendar of the Marathonian Tetrapolis: a revised text. ZPE 130: 4370. Lambrinoudakis, V. 1988. Veneration of ancestors in Geometric Naxos, in R. Hägg, N. Marinatos and G. G. Nordquist (eds) Early Greek Cult Practice, Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 26-29 June 1986: 235-45. Stockholm: Svenska Institutet i Athen. Langdon, S. 2001. Beyond the grave: biographies from Early Greece. AJA 105: 579-606. Langdon, S. 2005. Views of wealth, a wealth of views: grave goods in Iron Age Attica, in D. Lyons and R. Westbrook (eds) Women and Property. Conference Organized in 2003 at the Center for Hellenic Studies: 1-27. Harvard (http://zeus.chsdc.org/chs/files/women_ property_langdon.pdf). Lemos, I.S. 2002. The Protogeometric Aegean. The Archaeology of the Late Eleventh and Tenth Centuries BC. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Liston, M.A. and J.K. Papadopoulos 2004. The ‘Rich Athenian Lady’ was pregnant: the anthropology of a Geometric tomb reconsidered. Hesperia 73: 7-38. Maran, J. 2016. The persistence of place and memory: the case of the Early Helladic Rundbau and the Mycenaean palatial megara of Tiryns, in M. Bartelheim, B. Horejsand and R. Krauss (eds) Von 29

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Baden bis Troia. Ressourcennutzung, Metallurgie und Wissenstransfer. Eine Jubiläums schrift für Ernst Pernicka: 153-74. Rahden: Verlag Marie Leidorf. Marinatos, S. 1970. Further news from Marathon. AAA 3: 153-66. Marini, A. 2003. ‘…e lo fece bruciare con le sue armi belle’. Status del guerriero e ritual funerario nella Grecia della Prima Età del Ferro: tombe con armi nelle necropoli di Atene e Lefkandi. RdA 27: 21-56. Mastrokostas, E. 1970. Προϊστορική νεκρόπολις εν Μαραθώνι. AAA 3: 15-24. Mazarakis Ainian, A. 2004. From the beginnings to the Archaic age. Hero cults of Homeric society, Thesaurus Cultus et Rituum Antiquorum (ThesCRA) II, 3.d. Heroisierung und Apotheose: 131-40. Mazarakis Ainian, A. 2010. Tombes d’enfants à l’intérieur d’habitats au début de l’Âge du Fer dans le Monde Grec, in A.M. Guimier-Sorbets and Y. Morizot (eds): 67-95. Mazarakis Ainian, A. 2011. A necropolis of the Geometric period at Marathon: the context, in A. Mazarakis Ainian (ed.): 703-16. Mazarakis Ainian, A. (ed.) 2011. The ‘Dark Ages’ Revisited. Acts of an International Symposium in Memory of William D. E. Coulson, University of Thessaly, Volos, 14-17 June 2007. Volos: University of Thessaly Press. Mersch, A. 1994. Studien zur Siedlungsgeschichte Attikas von 950 bis 400 v. Chr. Frankfurt am Main: Lang. Missiou, A. 2010. Επικοινωνία κέντρου και περιφέρειας πριν από και μετά τις μεταρρυθμίσεις του Κλεισθένη: η περίπτωση του Μαραθώνα, in K. Buraselis and K. Meidani (eds): 151-65. Morgan, C. 1994. The evolution of a sacral ‘landscape’: Isthmia, Perachora and the early Corinthian state, in R. Osborne and S. Alcock (eds) Placing the Gods: Sanctuaries and Sacred Space in Ancient Greece: 105-42. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Morgan, C. 1996. From palace to polis? Religious developments on the greek mainland during the Bronze Age/Iron Age transition, in P. Hellström and B. Alroth (eds) Religion and Power in the Ancient Greek World: 27-57. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Morris, I. 1987. Burial and Ancient Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Moschonissioti, S. 2010. Child burials at the seaside cemetery of Ancient Mende, in A.M. GuimierSorbets and Y. Morizot (eds): 207-25. Mylonas, G.E. 1975. Το Δυτικόν Νεκροταφείον της Ελευσίνος. Athens. Nelson, S.M. (ed.) 2007. Women in Antiquity: Theoretical Approaches to Gender and Archaeology. Lanham: AltaMira Press. Niemeier, W.-D. 2013. Kultkontinuität von der Bronzezeit bis zur römischen Kaiserzeit im OrakelHeiligtum des Apollon von Abai (Kalapodi), in I. Gerlach and D. Raue (eds) Sanktuar und Ritual: Heilige Plätze im archäologischen Befund, Menschen – Kulturen -Traditionen (Studien aus den Forschungsclustern

des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts 10): 33-42. Rahden: Marie Leidorf. O’Shea, J. 1984. Mortuary Variability. An Archaeological Investigation. Orlando: Academic Press. Oikonomakou, M. 2001-2004. Μαραθώνας. ArchDelt 5659, Chronika B1: 372-88. Oikonomakou, M. 2007. Νέα ευρήματα από το Μαραθώνα και τη Νέα Μάκρη. ArchEph 143: 81-177. Papadopoulos, J. K. 2000. Skeletons in wells: towards an archaeology of social exclusion in the ancient Greek World, in J. Hubert (ed.) Madness, Disability and Social Exclusion. The Archaeology and Anthropology of ‘Difference’ (One World Archaeology 40): 96-118. London: Routledge. Papangele, K. 1997. Οδός Μουρίκη, Οδός Α. Βελουχιώτη. ArchDelt 52, Chronika B1: 61-3. Parker, R. 1996. Athenian Religion: A History. Oxford. Petrakos, V. 1995. Ο Μαραθών (Vivliotheke tes en Athenais Archaiologikis Etaireias 146). Athens. Philadelpheus, A. 1920-1921. Ανασκαφή παρα το χωρίο Σπάτα. ArchDelt 6: 131-38. Platonos, M. 2001-2004. Οδός Θηβαΐδος. ArchDelt 56-59, Chronika B1: 401-7. Polignac, F. de. 2007. Sexe et genre dans les rites funéraires grecs: quelques aperçus, in L. Baray, P. Brun and A. Testart (eds) Pratiques Funéraires et Sociétés:  Nouvelles Approches en Archéologie et en Anthropologie Sociale: 351-8. Dijon: Université de Dijon. Pologiorgi, M. 1992. Μαραθώνας. Βαλαρία. ArchDelt 47, Chronika B1: 57. Polychronakou-Sgouritsa, N., Y. Papadatos, A. Balitsari and E. Prevedorou 2016. Marathon in the Middle and Late Bronze Age: new evidence from an old excavation. Preliminary results from the excavation of the University of Athens at Plasi, in J. Driessen (ed.) RA-PI-NE-U: Studies on the Mycenaean World offered to Robert Laffineur for his 70th Birthday. Aegis. Actes de colloques 10: 305-16. Louvain-La-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain. Popham, M.R. and I.S. Lemos (eds) 1996. Lefkandi III. The Early Iron Age Cemetery at Toumba. The Excavations of 1981 to 1994 (British School at Athens Suppl. 29). London: British School at Athens. Popham, M.R., L.H. Sackett and P.G. Themelis (eds) 1980. Lefkandi I: The Iron Age: The Settlement, The Cemeteries (British School at Athens Suppl. 11). London: British School at Athens. Poulou, T. 2013. Οι Γεωμετρικοί Τάφοι του λόφου Μουσών (Φιλοπάππου), in S. Oikonomou and M. Dogka-Toli (eds) Αρχαιολογικές Συμβολές, vol. Β’, Αττική: 231-46. Athens. Pritchett, W.K. 1960. Marathon (University of California Publications in Classical Archaeology IV. 2). Berkeley and Los Angeles. Reber, K. 1999. Apobaten auf einem geometrischen Amphorenhals. AntK 42: 126-41. 30

Vicky Vlachou: Liminal Spaces, Burial Contexts and Funerary Practices

Rottroff, S.I., L.M. Little and L.M. Snyder 1999. The reanalysis of a well deposit from the 2nd c. BC in the Athenian Agora: animal sacrifice and infanticide in Late Hellenistic Athens? AJA 103: 284-5. Scilabra, C. 2014. Paides ed aoroi nella città sull’istmo. Individui preadulti nella Corinto di età greca. Orizzonti. Rassegna di archeologia XV: 11-20. Skilardi, D. 2011. Νεκρόπολη γεωμετρικής περιόδου στην Κηφισιά, in A. Mazarakis Ainian (ed.): 675-702. Smithson, E.L. 1961. The Protogeometric cemetery at Nea Ionia, 1949. Hesperia 30: 147-78. Smithson, E.L. 1968. The tomb of a rich Athenian lady, ca. 850 BC. Hesperia 37: 77-116. Sørensen, M.L.S. 2007. Gender, things, and material culture, in S.M. Nelson (ed.): 75-105. Soteriades, G. 1932. Ανασκαφαί Μαραθώνος. Prakt: 2843. Soteriades, G. 1933. Ανασκαφή Μαραθώνος. Prakt: 31-46. Soteriades, G. 1934. Ανασκαφή Μαραθώνος. Prakt: 29-38. Soteriades, G. 1939. Ανασκαφή Μαραθώνος. Prakt: 27-39. Steinhauer, G. 2009. Marathon and the Archaeological Museum. Athens: John S. Latsis Public Benefit Foundation. Strömberg, A. 1993. Male or Female? A Methodological Study of Grave Gifts as Sex Indicators in Iron Age Burials from Athens. Jonsered: Paul Ȧströms Förlag Stroszeck, J. 2012. Grave gifts in child burials in the Athenian Kerameikos: the evidence of sea shells, in A. Hermary and C. Dubois (eds) L’Enfant et la Mort dans l’Antiquité III: Le Matériel Associé aux Tombes d’ Enfants (BiAMA 12): 57-75. Arles: éditions Errance. Themelis, P. 1973-1974. Ανάβυσσος. ArchDelt 29, Chronika B1: 108-10. Themelis, P. 1974. Μαραθών. Τα πρόσφατα αρχαιολογικά ευρήματα σε σχέση με τη μάχη. ArchDelt 29, Meletes: 226-44. Theocharaki, E. 1980. Μαραθώνας. Σκάλεζα. ArchDelt 35, Chronika B1: 84-8. Thomassen, B. 2015. Thinking with liminality: to the boundaries of an anthropological concept, in A. Horvath, B. Thomassen and H. Wydra (eds) Breaking Boundaries. Varieties of Liminality: 39-58. New York: Berghahn Books. Travlos, J. 1988. Bildlexicon zur Topographie des antiken Attika. Tübingen. Turner, V. 1967. Betwixt and between: the liminal period in the Rites de Passage, in The Forest of Symbols. Aspects of Ndembu Ritual. London: Cornell University Press. Van Gennep, A. 1960 (1909). The Rites of Passage. London. Vanderpool, E. 1966. The Deme of Marathon and the Herakleion. AJA 70: 313-17. Vavritsas, A. 1970. Ανασκαφή γεωμετρικού νεκροταφείου Μερέντας. ArchDelt 25, Chronika B1: 127-9.

Verdelis, N. and K. Davaras 1966. Ανασκαφή Αναβύσσου. ArchDelt 21, Chronika B1: 97-8. Vlachou, V. 2011. A group of Geometric vases from Marathon: Attic style and local originality, in A. Mazarakis Ainian (ed.): 809-29. Vlachou, V. 2015. From pots to workshops. The Hirschfeld Painter and the Late Geometric I context of the Attic pottery production, in V. Vlachou (ed.): 49-74. Vlachou, V. 2016a. Image and story in Late Geometric Attica: interpreting a giant pitcher from Marathon, in T. Carpenter, E. Langridge-Noti and M.D. Stansbury-O’Donnell (eds) The Consumer’s Choice: Uses of Greek Figure-Decorated Pottery, AIA Monographs Series, Selected Papers in Ancient Art and Archaeology: 125-51. Boston: Archaeological Institute of America. Vlachou, V. 2016b. Nuptial vases in female tombs? Aspects of funerary behaviour during the Late Geometric period in Attica, in M. Mina, S. Triantaphyllou and Y. Papadatos (eds) An Archaeology of Prehistoric Bodies and Embodied Identities in the Eastern Mediterranean: 96-103. Oxford: Oxbow. Vlachou, V. 2017. Pottery made to impress: oversized vessels for funerary rituals. A view from Geometric Attica and beyond, in V. Vlachou and A. Gadolou (eds) Τέρψις. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology in Honour of Nota Kourou (Etudes d’Archéologie 10): 191-207. Brussels: CReA-Patrimoine. Vlachou, V. (ed.) 2015. Pots, Workshops and Early Iron Age Society: Function and Role of Ceramics in Early Greece (Etudes d’Archéologie 8). Brussels: CReAPatrimoine. Whitley, J. 1991. Style and Society in Dark Age Greece: The Changing Face of a Pre-literate Society 1100-700 BC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Whitley, J. 1996. Gender and hierarchy in Early Athens: the strange case of the disappearance of the rich female grave. Mètis 11: 209-32. Whitley, J. 2002. Objects with attitude: biographical facts and fallacies in the study of Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age warrior Graves. CAJ 12: 217-32. Whitley, J. 2013. Homer’s entangled objects: narrative, agency and personhood in and out of Iron Age texts. CAJ 23: 395-416. Young, R.S. 1939. Late Geometric Graves and a Seventh Century Well in the Agora (Hesperia Suppl. 2). Athens: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Zapheiropoulou, Ph. 2002. Recent finds from Paros, in M. Stamatopoulou and M. Yeroulanou (eds) Excavating Classical Culture. Recent Archaeological Discoveries in Greece (British Archaeological Reports IS 1031): 284. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Zapheiropoulou, Ph. 2010. Tombes d’enfants dans les Cyclades: les cas de Naxos et de Paros, in A.M. Guimier-Sorbets and Y. Morizot (eds): 243-50.

31

Funerary Variability in Late Geometric Attica and its Implications: A Closer Look at the Neglected Late 8th-century Cremations Alexandra Alexandridou Abstract: Burial variability and inclusivity are the two main characteristics of the Attic mortuary practices of the second half of the 8th century BC. Despite the reintroduction of inhumation, cremation continued to be more or less exclusively applied on adults at particular funerary plots or to be combined with inhumation in others. This paper focuses on the meaning and purpose of cremation in the Attic Late Geometric funerary plots. Moving away from its possible symbolic or religious connotations, otherwise invisible archaeologically, it attempts to reveal the effect of the age and very possibly of the death conditions of the deceased on this choice. Furthermore, the burial inclusivity observed in the large necropoleis is examined within the confines of the Attic kinship groups, seeking for strengthening their identity via a wider representation of their members in the necropoleis. Keywords: Attica, Late Geometric, necropolis, cremation, funerary variability, kinship Introduction

with which they coexisted in the same necropolis or burial plot. It should be, moreover, noted that, since bones acquire stability after cremation, resisting decay, cremated skeletons can provide more anthropological information than the inhumed ones.5

A high degree of variability, unparalleled in earlier periods, has been rightly recognized as the main characteristic of Attic funerary rites in the last third of the 8th century BC. This diversity in combination with the rise in the number of graves has been treated as a reflection of the emergence of the polis by Ian Morris in his ‘Burial and Ancient Society: the rise of the Greek city-state’,1 a milestone for Greek funerary archaeology, still retaining its influence in modern scholarship.2 A recent reconsideration of the entire corpus of available funerary data of the second half of the 8th century, which incorporated the results of the rescue excavations of the last decades both in Athens and Attica, showed that the various strategies of mortuary display largely depended on the age of the deceased, and they were indicative of the emphasis put by the burial groups on their own oikos identity. Unlike Morris’ model, it has been suggested that a shift of focus from the vertical to the horizontal dimension of the funerary rites could allow a deeper understanding of the kin’s importance as a basic social unit in 8th-century Attica.3 Moreover, it has been shown that both inhumation and cremation were used for adult deceased, interestingly, coexisting in the same burial plot.4

The after-death body treatment is an action with rich implications, dictated by various reasons subject to the belief systems and the social ‘fabric’ represented by the deceased and the burying group. On this basis, the insistence of particular burying groups on cremation, despite the general application of inhumation, is puzzling in the Attic Late Geometric context and it has been mostly set on ideological grounds.6 Although the assumption that “the ‘correct’ form of burial was highly disputed” in late 8th-century Athens might hold some truth in it,7 it rather applies on burial sites, where, all or at least almost all, the adult deceased have been either inhumed or cremated. Otherwise, the parallel application of inhumation and cremation – often both secondary and primary – within the same burial site needs to be explained. Cremations in Late Geometric II Attica The cremation of the dead remains an attractive issue for funerary scholarship, since its meaning and purpose cannot be easily interpreted.8 Cremation has been approached through symbolic, religious or social

Largely building on this study, the present contribution aims at further exploring the implications of the enduring forms of cremation. In particular, my attention centres upon the cremation burials, since they have been rather neglected in favour of the inhumations

Liston 2017: 510-11. See in particular Morris 2000: 296. On the basis of the evidence from the Lefkandi cemeteries, Papadopoulos (2017: 680) has rightly pointed out that the parallel application of the two rites should be rather associated with social or age differentiation, social or personal preference rather than any religious beliefs. The distinction between inhumation and cremation might be a chronological one, as in the case of Torone in Chalkidike: Papadopoulos 2005: 395. 7 Morris 2000: 304. 8 See e.g. Stampolidis 2001; Lochner and Ruppenstein 2013; Thompson 2015. 5 6

Morris 1987. However, Morris’ ideas received serious criticism: see e.g. Garland 1989; Humphreys 1990; Bintliff 1992; D’ Onofrio and D’Agostino 1993; Papadopoulos 1993. 3 Alexandridou 2016. 4 Cavanagh 1977: 343; Morris 1987: 5, 64-65; Morris 2000: 295-6; Laughy 2010; Vlachou 2012: 367. 1 2

32

Alexandra Alexandridou: Funerary Variability in Late Geometric Attica and its Implications

angles.9 As far as the Aegean world is concerned,10 the origin of the rite is still one of the main questions to be treated.11 Although it has been long supported that cremation reached the Greek mainland and Crete from Anatolia, either directly or via the Dodecanese or the Cyclades,12 constantly increasing new evidence of prehistoric cremations in Greece seems to contradict it.13 Moving away from the issue of the origin, it is only in the case of Athens that the custom of cremation has been treated in detail.14

various factors, ranging from personal or family taste,24 to deeper ideological or religious connotations.25 It has been assumed that the buriers of the kin group of the Dipylon plot played a crucial role in the adoption of this funerary rite around the middle of the 8th century.26 On the contrary, a more careful look at the funerary evidence reveals that both cremation and inhumation were practiced throughout the Early Iron Age in Athens, and a variety of types and forms of burial were used. The evidence from the Early Iron Age cemeteries of the Agora is characteristic of this reality,27 which becomes much more apparent during the second half of the 8th century BC, a period characterized by a large variation in the types of the applied burial customs. 28

The burning of a corpse is a multifaceted event, preceded and followed by a number of acts. The collection of wood, the construction of the pyre, the cremation of the corpse, as well as the funerary feast, are long processes, characterized by theatricality that involved the active participation of the mourning community with all their senses.15 These stages are well described by ancient authors, including Homer.16 Unlike inhumation, where the body decays in the ground far from anyone’s sight, the transformation of the body through cremation is witnessed.17 And if it was indeed taking place at night, as indicated by the description of Patroklos’ burial,18 then it must have been changed to a spectacle.19 Although cremation burials are occasionally mentioned as poor due to the lack of rich or numerous grave offerings,20 the rite is expensive in terms of the time, fuel, and manpower required with the effect it provoked adding to its wealth. A ton of dry wood and at least eight hours are required for the full cremation of a human body.21

During that time, when inhumation was chosen, the corpse was placed either in shaft or simpler pit graves, often with ledges supporting the slabs. During the Late Geometric II period, the pits could have been of large dimensions with their length exceeding 3 m.29 Cist graves were favoured at particular sites. By the last third of the century, inhumation seems to have been almost exclusively adopted for the adult deceased of the burial groups in the northern part of Athens (Figure 1). The same situation is observed in the large organized necropoleis of Anavyssos, Merenda, Thorikos, Kifissia and Eleusis of the Attic countryside, as well as in plots excavated at Kallithea, Glyphada, Vari, the Mesogeia plain and Palaia Kokkinia (Figure 2).30 At the same time, adults continued to be cremated both in Athens and in several sites in wider Attica. The custom of cremation could have been chosen for all adults of particular plots (e.g. Kavalotti Str.), while cremations could co-exist with inhumations in the same funerary space. Both secondary and primary cremations were still attested. In the former case, the cremains were placed in clay vessels, mostly neck-handled amphorae. Bronze cauldrons could have been chosen as urns, but they are very few, mostly concentrated in Athens (Kerameikos, Kriezi Str., Dimitrakopoulou Str.) with the examples from the rest of Attica being limited to four, all coming from large necropoleis (Vari, Anavyssos, Merenda, Kifissia). The urns were placed in shafts of varying length. Otherwise, the corpse might have been fully cremated inside shaft graves, often particularly long.31

In Attica, according to the long-held view, adults have been cremated since the beginning of the 10th century and for the subsequent three centuries until c. the middle of the 8th century.22 The transition from Middle Geometric II to Late Geometric I marked the shift from cremation to inhumation.23 Nevertheless, even if cremations might have prevailed during particular periods, inhumation was never abandoned. The presumed return to inhumation could not be explained without difficulty, since it could have depended on Thompson 2015 for an overview. For the sporadic cremations in Bronze Age Greece: Jung 2007. For Neolithic cremations, see Gallis 1982; Asouchidou 2001. 11 See most recently Rutherford 2007; 2013. 12 Desborough 1952: 306-7; Audin 1960: 312-22, 518-32; Desborough 1964: 32-40; Iakovidis 1969-1970: 43-7; Snodgrass 1971: 157-8, 187-90; Desborough 1972: 266-77; Vermeule 1972: 301-2, 349-50, n. 12; Melas 1984: 2001. 13 Papadopoulos 2017: 679 with all the relevant evidence. 14 Morris 1987; Woolfitt 1993; Morris 1995; 2000. 15 Rebay-Salisbury 2015: 19. 16 For the relevant sources and in particular Homeric descriptions: Andronikos 1968; Stampolidis 1995: 302-6. 17 McKinley 2006: 84. 18 Il. 23.162, 212-18. 19 Parker Pearson 1999: 6; McKinley 2006: 84. 20 See characteristically Pologiorgi 2003-2009: 208. 21 Downes 1999; Mckinley 2006: 81, 87. 22 For the introduction of inurned cremation and the subsequent changes: Morris 1987: 18-20; Whitley 1991: 101-2. 23 Kübler 1954: 8; Cavanagh 1977: 343, 345; Morris 1987: 122-3. 9

10

McHugh 1999: 54-5. Morris 2000: 296 Morris 1995: 66-8; 2000: 297. 27 Liston 2017: 509-10 and Fig. 3.1. 28 Morris 2000: 293-4; Alexandridou 2016: 334-5. 29 Cavanagh 1977: 347; Morris 1995: 66; 2000: 296. 30 Alexandridou 2016: 335-43. 31 For example the shaft grave that contained a primary cremation in the area of Kynosarges (23-25 Aristonikou and Charvouri Str.) was 3.50m. long, while that of the plot at Chalandri was 2.85 m. long. 24 25 26

33

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 1. List of Late Geometric II burials in Athens (C. Apostolou).

34

Alexandra Alexandridou: Funerary Variability in Late Geometric Attica and its Implications

Figure 2. List of Late Geometric II burials in Attica (C. Apostolou).

35

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Grave offerings are mostly limited to a few vases burnt together with the deceased inside the grave. In a single case (Chalandri), the grave with the remains of the primary cremation inside a long shaft with multiple air channels has been combined with an offering trench and possibly a sacrificial pyre.32 In Athens, a few secondary and primary cremations are attested in the Late Geometric II Kerameikos, as well as the Agora and the Areopagos. The secondary cremations detected in Kriezi Street, formed part of the extended necropolis over Dipylon and Eleutherias Square.33 An isolated secondary cremation was excavated at Dimophontos Street.34 A number of adult secondary cremations have been reported from the adjacent space of the so-called ‘Sacred House’ at the Academy,35 as well as its wider area.36 More adult secondary cremations have been excavated in southern Athens: Kavalloti,37 Erechteiou,38 Garivaldi – Sofroniskou – Phainaretis,39 Parthenonos,40 and Dimitrakopoulou Streets.41 A richly furnished secondary cremation was discovered at 12-14 Meidani Street.42 Only a limited number of primary cremations are known from Athens.43 Some are reported from the Kerameikos, even though their type has not been clearly determined in all cases. An isolated primary cremation came to light below a later Archaic burial at Sapphous Street.44 On the other hand, the rite seems to have been more extensively applied in the area of Kynosarges. A number of burials of this type belong to the necropolis, partly excavated in Theophilopoulou Street.45 Additional cases are reported from the wider area of Kynosarges.46

Makri,51 and Palaia Kokkinia.52 Isolated primary cremations, often not securely identified as such, are reported from the Southeast Necropolis of Vari,53 Anavyssos,54 and Nea Makri. At Chalandri the late 8th-century primary cremation was contemporary with five child enchytrismoi and two unfurnished adult inhumations.55 Primary cremation seems to have been more widely used at other sites of the Attic countryside. They were numerous in the necropoleis of Palaio Phaleron,56 Kalyvia in the Mesogeia plain,57 and Oinoe of Marathon.58 The deceased of the necropolis of Trachones in the area of modern Alimos, a few kilometres south of Athens, have been exclusively cremated.59 In all cases, the cremation took place outside the graves. The remains have been either placed inside urns or inside the graves in an attempt to reconstruct the form of the dead body. According to the excavator, these remains had not been fully cremated, while their arms and legs were missing. Except for a single deceased, mentioned as adult,60 no information is provided on the age of the cremated deceased, though the inurned cremations are reminiscent of child enchytrismoi.61 Why Choose Cremation in Late 8th-Century Attica? Too old to be burnt, too young to rot The different funerary treatment of the deceased, namely the use of cremation and inhumation, used side by side even in the same burial site during the second half of the 8th century inescapably requires explanations. The identification of the deceased in terms of age and gender, though precious in this direction,62 is prohibited, since the vast majority of the Late Geometric II burials from Attica have not been osteologically treated. Despite this limitation, the contextual analysis of the funerary evidence, combined with the available bioarchaeological data, showed that

Cremations are well attested in the Attic countryside too, though the published data might often be unclear. Secondary cremations were excavated in Kifissia,47 Argyroupoli,48 Elliniko,49 as well as Mesogeia,50 Nea Pologiorgi 2003-2009 : 186-90. Alexandri 1968c; 1968d. Alexandri 1969: 39. 35 Stavropoullos 1958: 9; 1959: 9-10. 36 Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1978: 24. 37 Stavropoullos 1965a; Vizyinou 2010: 186-92. 38 Alexandri 1968a. Grave Θ2 together with another Late Geometric disturbed burial, should belong to the same necropolis. 39 Alexandri 1968b. 40 Alexandri 1967. 41 Alexandri 1970a; Nikopoulou 1970. 42 Grave 11: Stavropoullos 1964: 24; Xagorari 1996: 86, 92-3. 43 Primary cremations can be also termed ‘simple cremations’ or pyres. For the use of this term see: Smithson 1974; Papadopoulos 2017: 609. 44 Alexandri 1977: 26-8. 45 Alexandri 1972b. 46 Grave VI at Vouliagmenis-Trivonianou-Eupompou Str.: Alexandri 1972a, or a grave at 23-25 Aristonikou and Charvouri Str.: Alexandri 1973-1974. 47 Schilardi 2011. 48 Tsirivakos 1968: 112, pl. 58α. 49 Whitley 2003-2004: 8. 50 Merenda: Lazaridis 1968; Vavritsas 1970; Vivliodetis 2007; SouthEast cemetery of Merenda: Argyropoulos and Sklavos 2003; Merenda, West of the lake of the equestrian games: Petrou and Pitsikoulis 2003. 32 33 34

Oikonomakou 2001-2004: 388. Y. Sykka, ‘Το αρχαίο νεκροταφείο Πειραιά αποκαλύπτεται’, Kathimerini, 13 January 2012, www.kathimerini.gr/447737/article/politismos/arxeio-politismoy/ to-arxaio-nekrotafeio-peiraia-apokalyptetai. 53 Callipolitis-Feytmans 1984: 30. 54 Themelis 1973-1974. 55 Pologiorgi 2003-2009: 182-92. 56 Kourouniotis 1911: 246-8; Pelekidis 1916: 17-18. Numerous are the funerary pyres which have been excavated since 2012 at the Phaleron Delta. For the preliminary results of the excavation: http://www. snfcc.org/construction/archaeological-findings/?lang=el 57 Tsaravopoulos 2001-2004; Tsaravopoulos and Papathanasiou 2009, 2013. 58 Arapogianni 1985; 1987. 59 Geroulanos 1973. 60 Grave Ξ10: Geroulanos 1973: 7-9. 61 Cavanagh 1977: 383; Alexandridou 2012: 47. 62 On the issue of the use of the term identity in funerary archaeology, see most recently: Dimakis 2016: 7. 51 52

36

Alexandra Alexandridou: Funerary Variability in Late Geometric Attica and its Implications

the age of the deceased largely dictated the chosen burial treatment. An age criterion seems to have been lying behind particular cremation burials.63 This is indicated by the secondary cremation inside a pyxis-krater found at the medium-sized Geometric necropolis at Nea Makri along Marathon Avenue.64 The burial, the latest of the plot, belonged to an adolescent, 10-20 years old and it was the only cremation among the inhumations, which spanned the 8th century BC. Age seems to have led towards the same choice in the case of the secondarily cremated deceased, found together with two inhumations at 12-14 Meidani Street in central Athens.65 Despite the lack of an anthropological study, the burial’s furnishing points to an old child or an adolescent (Figure 3). The extensive necropoleis of Anavyssos and Trachones seem to provide further evidence for subadults, who received a burial treatment that combined elements of child and adult rites. In particular, a few secondary cremations, reported from the large necropolis of Ag. Panteleimon at Anavyssos, could have contained subadults.66 The placement of the urns suggests child enchytrismoi, but the chosen rite distances them from this age group. The inurned cremations of the necropolis, furnished with shapes typical for child enchytrismoi of Trachones seem to point to young individuals at the transition from childhood to adulthood. This could have been also the case for the secondary cremations explored at the necropolis, which extends west of the modern lake of equestrian games in Merenda.67

Figure 3. Clay finds from the secondary cremation at Meidani Street (after Stavropoullos 1964: pl. 55).

In this frame, it is important to re-examine the evidence from Oinoe of Marathon (Figure 4).68 Although it has been classified among the burial sites where primary cremation has been exclusively applied in late 8th century,69 a closer look at the details of the preliminary publication reveals a different reality. A Middle Geometric inhumation of a female adult of 3540 in a cist grave is mentioned as the earliest and the richest of the necropolis (Grave VIII).70 The excavator reported 19 pyres, providing a detailed catalogue of their contents. Nevertheless, six of them are composed of a thin layer of ashes on which lied an urn, often revealing small animal bones. Thus, they cannot have been primary cremations, but rather the remains of some funerary ritual, which preceded the placement of

the vessel. From the rest, pyres 4 and 5 can be placed to the middle of the 8th century BC. According to the excavator’s description, they were composed of large amounts of charcoal, while the former revealed the long neck of a belly-handled amphora. Except for charcoal, pyre 6 contained burnt sherds, among which was a krater of the middle of the 8th century. Two urn burials of the 7th and the early 6th century (δ and γ) have been placed on the top of the pyre.71 Although the krater of pyre 6 might have served as a grave marker, the belly-handled amphora could have been used as the container of a secondary cremation placed on a layer of ashes, which represents a fire ritual. This is not the only example from the area of Marathon. Three more bellyhandled amphorae dating from the middle of the 9th to the third quarter of the 8th century BC came to light there, though almost all outside their original context.72 The Middle Geometric belly-handled amphora, found northeast of Mount Agrieliki, contained the remains

On the importance of the age factor in funerary evidence and as part of one’s social identity: Gowland 2006. 64 Mazarakis Ainian 2011. 65 Stavropoullos 1964. 66 These are the cases of the secondary burials IIIα and IXα with the cremains placed inside an amphora and a pitcher respectively. Themelis 1973-1974. 67 Petrou and Pitsikoulas 2003. 68 Arapogianni 1985. 69 Alexandridou 2016: 352. 70 Arapogianni 1985: 221-3. 63

Arapogianni 1985: 209. Vlachou 2015: 57. The amphorae come from the funerary plots at Skorpio Potami, Agrieliki and Marathonos Avenue.

71 72

37

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 4. Plan of the excavated part of the necropolis at Oinoe of Marathon (after Arapogianni 1985: 210-11, plan 2).

Although all pyres of the Oinoe necropolis have been dated to the transition from the 8th to the 7th century, some can be placed in the late 7th century on the basis of their contents (Pyres 9 and 3). This is also the case for those marked by the enchytrismoi, if indeed contemporary with the urns. Grave VI is the latest Geometric burial of the plot. It is a late 8th-century inhumation of a male of 45 to 55 years old.

of a secondary cremation, and it seems to have been integrated in the later inhumation burial of the Late Geometric I period.73 A possible use of the Oinoe bellyhandled amphora as an urn rather than a marker is further indicated by the monumental shoulderhandled amphora from Marathon, which contained the cremains most possibly of a young female, as presumed on the basis of the burial’s furnishing.74 Both the bellyand the shoulder-handled amphorae are considered as gender indicators consistently used as receptacles of the cremains of female deceased already since the Submycenaean period; the former for older women and the latter for young maidens.75

In conclusion, the rite of the inhumation seems to have been reserved for both male and female adults of old age at Oinoe. If the pyres represented secondary cremations, as assumed on the basis of the belly-handled amphora, these might have belonged to younger individuals,76 adult females between 18 and 30 years old, though the

Vlachou 2016: 185, fig. 8. Soteriadis 1939; Vlachou 2015: 69, fig.12a-b. 75 Kourou 1997; 2011; Vlachou 2016: 184. 73 74

76

38

Kourou 2011: 193.

Alexandra Alexandridou: Funerary Variability in Late Geometric Attica and its Implications

evidence connecting this vase shape solely with older women is rather poor.77

assumptions that the Academy and Trachones urns contained adults are correct, then they might have been young women, who died during or slightly after childbirth, and they had therefore to be buried together with children. Whether the partly cremations inside the shaft graves of the Trachones necropolis could belong to young females who did not survive childbirth too, remains unknown. An early 6th-century grave at the North Necropolis of Vari, which contained the remains of a partially cremated adult and a child urn, ascribed to a mother and child, could be used as an additional argument for recognizing the partly cremated individuals of Trachones as mothers.81 This funerary treatment where only parts of the partly cremated bodies ending up in the shaft is very peculiar and does not find any parallels in Attica. It could have been dictated by the age or the death conditions. Only an osteological analysis could shed some light on these cases.

From birth to death Although the application of secondary cremation for subadults has been osteologically confirmed only in the case of the individual from Nea Makri, it seems to be further strengthened by the assumption that the rite of cremation in Early Iron Age Attica was meant to distinguish individuals of different ages, rather than of different gender or social class.78 If age truly determined the choice of the funerary rite, then this could be one of the reasons behind the variability observed within the same burial plot (e.g. Kerameikos, Anavyssos, Kifissia). On the other hand, the age factor cannot explain why cremation has been chosen in other cases. The evidence from the Academy in Athens, Trachones, and Chalandri in Attica suggests that the rite could have been dictated by other reasons too.

The funerary peculiarities, seeking for a particular interpretation, are not only limited in the case of these two burials from the Academy and Trachones, but they are shared by two more cases in the wider area of the Academy. In particular, a fragmentary krater with cremains placed together with an urn pithos inside a shaft in Mitrodorou and Geminou Streets.82 The bottom of the pithos was covered with a pyxis and its mouth was sealed with a louterion whose handles and spout have been intentionally removed. If the pithos represents an infant urn burial, then the krater may have held the woman, who lost her life during delivery. The presence of the louterion could be considered as an additional hint towards special death conditions, which sought for purification, as is well illustrated in the case of the early 6th-century BC double burial of the Vari necropolis furnished with four louteria.83

Six urns were detected over the remains of an Early Helladic edifice, in close distance to the so-called ‘Sacred House’ at the Academy, c. 2 km north of Dipylon. According to the excavator, all urns contained the cremains of children except for one, which belonged to an adult.79 Although the excavator’s criteria for the identification of the age of the deceased remain unknown, certainly this enchytrismos differs in its characteristics from the rest. Only in this case, a SOS amphora has been chosen as an urn, whose body has been broken for facilitating the insertion of the remains of the deceased in its interior. A fragment of a household lekane covered the hole. More importantly, the handmade cooking pot placed at an upright position next to the other urns is missing in this case. Very interestingly, the Academy burial finds an exact counterpart in the necropolis of Trachones (Figure 5). According to the excavator, burial Ξ10 was a secondary cremation of an adult. The urn contained the partly cremated remains of the deceased, including the skull and ashes.80 The same type of amphora has been used for both urn burials at Academy and Trachones, whose broken bodies were both covered by a lekane. The common features of the two burials are striking, and if Geroulanos’ account is to be accepted, then Stavropoullos’ assumption that the urn did not belong to a child might be correct, as further suggested by the characteristics of the burial. These two urns could have contained cremated subadults, as suggested for the above-analysed cases from Nea Makri, Meidani Street and Anavyssos. Nevertheless, if the excavators’

One of the four urn burials excavated at Kastorias Street in the wider area of the Academy needs special attention. A fragmentary hydria, containing bone remains, was found together with a large amphora furnished with seven drinking forms, and a third vessel representing a child’s urn burial. A basin covered the lower part of the hydria.84 The hydria could have held the mother buried together with an infant placed inside the other vessel. The amphora remains a mystery, but it could have held an older child. Examples of double burials of this type might be limited in Attica, but the recently published evidence from the Early Iron Age Agora shows that they were not inexistent and hopefully it will be enriched by new

The assumption that the belly-handled amphorae contained the remains of older females has been solely based on the evidence of the ‘Rich Athenian Lady’. 78 De Polignac 2005: 175, 179; Etienne 2005: 188. 79 Stavropoullos 1956: 50-1. 80 Geroulanos 1973: 7-9. 77

Alexandridou 2012: 48-9. Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1978. 83 Alexandridou 2012: 48-9. 84 Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1987. 81 82

39

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 5. Trachones Necropolis, Section Ξ (after Geroulanos 1973: fig. 3).

40

Alexandra Alexandridou: Funerary Variability in Late Geometric Attica and its Implications

finds too. A Late Helladic IIIC/SM pit from the cemetery on the north bank of the Eridanos contained the inhumation of a female, 15-17 years old, together with the remains of an early-stage foetus,85 while the urn of the secondary cremation of the ‘Rich Athenian Lady’ from the Areopagos contained the remains of both a female aged 30-35 years old together with her unborn or stillborn child.86

stratigraphic information does not allow a conclusion on whether the bodies have been deposited at the same time or whether the tomb has been reused.97 The pithos must have contained an infant, but no other information is provided on the other two deceased. Although the presence of an adult cannot be excluded, the burial could have well been a multiple child grave, a number of which are known from Athens,98 and in particular the area of the later Athenian Agora.99

Burials occupied by an adult and a child are known from a number of sites outside Attica. The adult’s skeleton found together with inurned cremains in an Early Geometric burial from the area of Tsami on Salamis, have been assigned to a mother and a child.87 Examples of cremated foetuses and neonates in connection with inhumations of young women were found at Late Geometric Vronda, near Kavousi in Crete.88 Double cremations are known from Lefkandi89 and Knossos,90 where a tomb on the Lower Gypsades Hill contained the remains of a young mother and her baby. Moreover, the Early Iron Age cemetery of Torone preserved three cases of double cremations with urns containing the cremated bone of an adult together with bone fragments of an infant or a child.91 Tomb 123 constitutes the clearest case of a mother who died in pregnancy or childbirth.92 The later double burial from Vari seems to represent a deceased couple of mother and child.93 Double burials of adults and children are also known from the prehistoric era. In a number of cases, the adult has been identified as a male, possibly the father, who followed his child in death after a short period of time. The majority, however, concerns inhumations of a young woman with her child.94

Fire makes the difference...Too special to be cremated? Even though age or conditional criteria might have also played a role, cremation seems to have been chosen as means for differentiation too. The evidence from the recently excavated plot at Chalandri, a few kilometers north of Athens, might be indicative of this assumption (Figure 6). A long deep shaft, furnished with air channels, contained the remains of a primary cremation of the end of the 8th century. An offering trench and a sacrificial pyre accompanied the burial (Figure 7). This grave is contemporary with five out of the 10 child enchytrismoi, as well as with two unfurnished adult inhumations of older adults, both over 40 years old, one of whom has been identified as a male.100

A multiple burial reported from Anavyssos, with the grave containing three deceased, one of whom was placed inside a pithos, should be also brought in this discussion.96 Unfortunately, the lack of the precise

In the 7th-century Kerameikos, the adults, buried in clusters reserved for children, have been thought of as belonging to a low social rank.101 The lack of rich grave offerings has comparably led the excavator to assume a poor burial plot.102 Nevertheless, the closer examination of all the Late Geometric burials of the cemetery leads us in a different direction. If the evidence from Oinoe is juxtaposed, then it seems that the applied funerary customs at the necropolis of Chalandri were relevant to the age and/or possibly the status of the deceased. Comparably to the Oinoe inhumed deceased, the inhumations of Chalandri seem to belong to old adults.103 The primary cremation could represent either an adolescent/young adult, whose loss must have seriously affected the family lifecycle or an individual of special status. The size of the grave, the choice of primary cremation and the social funerary ceremonies operated in association with the offering

Tomb 81. 86 Liston and Papadopoulos 2004; Papadopoulos 2017: 124-80, 664-6. For the anthropological analysis: Liston 2017: 534-6. 87 Grave 3: Dekoulakou 1991. 88 Liston 1993: 137-40; Liston and Papadopoulos 2004: 27. 89 Musgrave 1980: 431, pyre 17. The cremated bones belonged to an adult and a child, not a baby. 90 Musgrave 1981: 163. 91 Tombs 83, 84, 123: Papadopoulos 2005: 156-7, fig. 53A, pl. 190, 157-8, fig. 53A, pl. 191, 227-8, fig. 23B, pl. 242, 377-80, with tables 4.2, 4.3. 92 Papadopoulos 2005: 227-8, fig. 23B, pl. 242, 392-3. For the anthropological analysis: Musgrave 2005: 304-5. 93 Alexandridou 2012: 47-9. 94 Pomadère 2009: 200-2 and Table 1. 95 Liston and Papadopoulos 2004. 96 Grave IX/73: Themelis 1973/1974: 109.

There is evidence from the early cemeteries of the Agora not only of multiple burials (Tomb 30: Papadopoulos 2017: 281-3; Tomb 44: Papadopoulos 2017: 314-21), but of reused too (Tomb 18: Papadopoulos 2017: 185-99; Tomb 3: Papadopoulos 2017: 52-3, Tomb 64: Papadopoulos 2017: 428-31). 98 Kerameikos: Grave N 114, dated to the Late Helladic IIIC/EPG (Willemsen 1963: 148-53), Odeion: Tomb XL (Charitonidis 1973: 33-4); Alexandri 1970b: 70-1. 99 Grave VI (A 18:4) dated to the Late Helladic IIIC Middle (Immerwahr 1971: 181, pls. 38, 82), the Protogeometric Tombs 30 and 44 on Kolonos Agoraios: Papadopoulos 2017: Tomb 30: (Papadopoulos 2017: 281-3, 314-21). 100 Pologiorgi 2003-2009: 179-81. 101 Houby-Nielsen 1995: 132-3. 102 Pologiorgi 2003-2009: 208. 103 Interestingly, inhumation has been selected for the older adults of the necropolis of Plithos on Naxos. Reber 2016.

Even though only the anthropological study could verify the above-discussed cases in late 8th-century Attica, on the basis of the available evidence the burials from the Academy area and Trachones can be probably added to the list of this type of double burials.95

97

85

41

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 6. Plan of the excavated burial plot at Chalandri showing the grave with the remains of primary cremation (ΠΥΡ Ε) (after Pologiorgi 2003-2009: 146, plan 2).

trench and the sacrificial pyre seem to reflect a strong will for differentiating this individual. Its link with the enchytrismoi might point to a young person.

phenomena.107 The cremated adults, whose burials have been linked to offering trenches in the 7th-century Kerameikos, have been identified as males,108 as part of a wider ‘masculinisation’ of the Attic mortuary practices at that time,109 though it is possible that both male and female elite members were treated comparably.110 The new evidence from Chalandri adds the age parameter to the application of this rite, leading far from the gender implications, while underlying the importance of the deceased.

The primary cremation of the late 8th century from Chalandri seems to prelude the scheme that would prevail in 7th-century Kerameikos with an almost exclusive shift from inhumation to primary cremation and the introduction of offering trenches.104 It is interesting that the two earliest trenches in the Kerameikos, which are contemporary to the one at Chalandri, were found attached to an inhumation,105 and a secondary cremation with the cremains placed in a bronze lebes respectively,106 indicating that primary cremation and offering trenches were not two parallel

The choice of a bronze cauldron for the remains of the deceased more clearly points to differentiation, due to the value of such an object, holding heroic connotations too.111 The limited number of the examples from Athens Doronzio forthcoming. Houby-Nielsen 1992: 357-9; D’Onofrio 1993: 150-1. 109 De Polignac 1996: 202-4. 110 De Polignac 2005: 178-9. 111 Valenza Mele 1982; Blandin 2007: 49-51.

104 For the offering trenches: Alexandridou 2013 with all the relevant bibliography. 105 Offering trench I attached to Gr 47: Ker V.1: 240-2. 106 For the attribution of this offering trench to Gr 58: see Kistler 1998: 183-4 with further references.

107 108

42

Alexandra Alexandridou: Funerary Variability in Late Geometric Attica and its Implications

Figure 7. The primary cremation E I 1 with the offering trench and the pyre at Chalandri (after Pologiorgi 2003-2009: 182, fig. 57).

and wider Attica, dating to the late 8th century, further underline the particularity of this rite, which could have been reserved for adults of a particular age, old individuals, who must have been treated specially.112

occupants of important burial sites, like the Eridanos north bank, which seem to have been embedded with strong symbolic heroic notions leading to the past.116 Death and the Oikos

If the above scenarios are in any way plausible, then cremation was not a random choice, but it seems to have been dictated by specific parameters, namely the age, though the death conditions could have played a role too. Nevertheless, this conclusion applies to the cremation burials found together with inhumations in the same burial plot. On the other hand, this rite seems to have been the main choice for the deceased at particular sites. The burial plot at Kavalloti Street in Athens is a characteristic case (Figure 8).113 Here, the dominant secondary cremations continue the Early and Middle Geometric tradition, though they are not of the trench-and-hole type. Instead, the amphorae were placed inside long shafts.114 We may lack the necessary evidence for tracing the reasons behind this insistence, but it is possible that particular funerary groups wished to remain faithful both to the past and to a rite, which linked its members with the age of the heroes.115 This assumption might be further supported by the reintroduction of primary cremation at c. 700 BC for the

On the basis of the above discussion, it can be assumed that in late 8th-century Attica cremation was chosen for a number of individuals, namely the adolescents and possibly females who did not survive motherhood. Whether fire was chosen for reasons of purification in the latter case, cannot be archaeologically traced, though it is possible. The almost exclusive use of cremation for the adult deceased by the early 7th century might have been examined through its contemporary social reality, while being assigned symbolic or religious connotations too,117 but the variability of the funerary record during the second half of the 8th century does not seem to have been exclusively dependent on reasons of social ranking. Although it is plausible that some group of buriers (see e.g. those of Kavalotti Street) remained faithful to the practice of cremation,118 the simultaneous use of inhumation with cremation – often both primary and secondary – in the same necropolis asks for attention. And if the record has been rightly

Alexandridou 2016. Stavropoullos 1965; Vizyinou 2010: 186-92; Alexandridou 2016: 1718. 114 Stavropoullos 1965. 115 Morris 2000: 302.

Morris 2000: 304. Morris 1995: 55-71; 2000: 304. 118 Morris 1995: 65. Nevertheless, whether this insistence on cremation was due to the religious implications of inhumation cannot be archaeologically sustained.

112

116

113

117

43

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 8. Plan of the necropolis at Kavalotti Street (after Stavropoullos 1965: 77, fig. 25).

44

Alexandra Alexandridou: Funerary Variability in Late Geometric Attica and its Implications

interpreted, and hopefully one day anthropologically tested too, then it reveals the importance of the age factor for the choice of the applied funerary treatment.

In Attica, the extremely poor Late Geometric domestic remains do not allow us to trace the organization of the kinship groups through a household prism. On the other hand, the mortuary evidence provided by the Attic Late Geometric burial sites reveals that it was important for all members of late 8th-century households to receive formal burial, including not only adults but also subadults, children, and neonates. The large necropoleis in Athens and Attica reflect the high importance paid on the identity and cohesion of the kinship groups. Each individual must have been thought of as crucial for the maintenance of his or her kin. At the same time, the increased visibility of burials in Attica could conceal the will of the kinship groups to secure their continuation within the new social reality dictated by the birth of the polis.124

The inclusion of prematurely lost young individuals in the funerary record together with the adults reveals an interest for the mortuary visibility of all members of the community in the Attic Late Geometric II necropoleis. The reappearance of children in the mortuary record by that time points to the same direction.119 According to Morris, the rise in the number of Late Geometric II burials and the inclusion of deceased of all age groups and of both genders in the burial grounds, combined with the increase in mortuary complexity, are suggestive of the birth of the Athenian polis. The extra deceased of the Late Geometric period have been seen as members of the lower classes who received archaeologically visible burial too.120 On the contrary, I have claimed that the mortuary evidence of the Attic late 8th-century necropoleis better reflects the impact of horizontal divisions on the burial rites; thus a wide representation of the members of the kinship groups in the necropoleis by that time.121

The burial evidence from other areas seems to provide comparable conclusions. The case of Thera is characteristic. The age of the individuals rather than their gender or social status must have defined the application of cremation on the island. More importantly the use of the same grave for multiple burials over long periods of time might indicate its use by members of the same kin.125 The Spercheios Valley and the area of the Mallian Gulf in Central Greece provides additional evidence of this. Double and triple burials in cist graves at Stylida (Kyprou and Ag. Dimitriou Street) should be linked to kinship ties. This funerary record reflects a model of social organisation composed of small kinship units, broadly adopted by the majority of the Early Iron Age communities of Central Greece.126 Similar to Attica, the relevant evidence from Thera and Central Greece cannot have been irrelevant from the contemporaneous social transformations.

As the main social unit, kin is of immense importance for the study of early societies, since it influenced all aspects of life. Issues of kinship in ancient Greece hold a prominent place in recent research. Such studies remain, however, very few, mostly restricted to Athens and the Classical era due to the potential of the available written sources.122 The available evidence suggests that the Athenian oikos comprised of numerous kin and nonkin members with fluid relationships to each other. The existence of a network of elite households of a rather large and complicated form has been assumed from the 8th century BC onwards on the basis of Homeric and Hesiodic narrations.

Epilogue

Though not material in nature, the kinship’s essence can be archaeologically approached through the necropoleis’ structure and domestic architecture. Early Iron Age kinship-corporate groups have been studied via a household perspective in regions other than Attica. The detailed study of a number of settlements on Crete showed that domestic structures did not serve as residences of a nuclear family, but of larger lineage groups, which formed the basic social units of Early Iron Age Cretan society, which developed into the ruling classes of the 7th century.123

The number of Geometric burials, constantly enriched by excavation work both in Attica and the rest of the Aegean world, do not cease to nourish relevant research with new ideas, allowing the adoption of new approaches, aiming at a profound analysis of ancient Greek societies. Focusing on the Attic Late Geometric mortuary record and, in particular, the implications of the use of cremation, I attempted here to show that if we step back for a while from the issue of how the social status in particular of the elite had been reflected in death, and we instead focus on the horizontal dimension of mortuary practices, an insight into the role and importance of kinship in early Greek societies is possible. The evidence from Attica, which finds parallels elsewhere, offers good grounds for studying the anatomy of the kinships groups, for

119 Haentjens 1999: 183; Papadopoulos and Smithson 2002: 184-5; Pomadère 2005; Liston and Papadopoulos 2004: 27. 120 Morris 1987. 121 Alexandridou 2016. 122 e.g. Foxhall 1989; Cox 1998; Roy 1999; Closterman 2007. 123 Wallace 2010: 271-8. See e.g. Azoria: Haggis and Mook 2011; Haggis 2014.

Alexandridou 2016: 354-55. Kaklamani 2017 and in this volume. 126 Papadopoulou 2017. 124 125

45

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

tracing them archaeologically, and most importantly for using them as means to reconstruct human ties and relationships, before approaching the relevant, wider social conditions.

Σιδήρου. Πρακτικά του Συμποσίου, Ρόδος, 29 Απριλίου – 2 Μαΐου 1999: 31-46. Athens: University of Crete. Baziotopoulou-Valavani, E. 1987. Οδός Καστοριάς 55 (Βοτανικός). ΑrchDelt 42: 21-3. Bintliff, J.L. 1992. Review of Burial and Ancient Society: The Rise of the Greek City-State, by I. Morris. JMA 2: 286-9. Blandin, B. 2007. Eretria XVII: Les Pratiques Funéraires d’Epoque Géométrique à Érétrie: Espace des Vivants, Demeures des Morts. Lausanne, Switzerland: Gollion. Callipolitis-Feytmans, D. 1984. Céramique de la petite nécropole de Vari. BCH 108: 27-36. Cavanagh, W.G. 1977. Attic Burial Customs ca. 2000-700 BC. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of London. Closterman, W.E. 2007. Family ideology and family history: the function of funerary markers in classical Attic peribolos tombs. AJA 111: 633-52. Cox, C.A. 1998. Household Interests: Property, Marriage Strategies, and Family Dynamics in Ancient Athens. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Dekoulakou, I. 1991. Περιοχή Τσάμη. ArchDelt 46: 71. De Polignac, F. 2005. Perspectives et limites de l’analyse de l’incinération dans le monde grec. Ktema 30: 17381. De Polignac, F. 1996. Rites funéraires, marriage et communauté politique: Archéologie des rites et anthropologie historique. Métis 11: 197-207. Desborough, V.R.d’A. 1952. Protogeometric Pottery. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Desborough, V.R.d’A. 1964. The Last Mycenaeans and Their Successors: An Archaeological Survey c. 1200-c. 1000 BC. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Desborough, V.R.d’A. 1972. The Greek Dark Ages. London: Benn. Dimakis, N. 2016. Social Identity and Status in the Classical and Hellenistic Northern Peloponnese: the Evidence from Burials. Oxford: Archaeopress. D’Onofrio, A.M. 1993. Le trasformazioni del costume funerario ateniese nella necropoli pre-soloniana del Kerameikos. AnnArchStorAnt 15: 143-71. D’Onofrio, A.M. and B.D’Agostino 1993. Review of burial and ancient society: the rise of the Greek city-state, by I. Morris. Gnomon 65: 41-51. Doronzio, A. forthcoming. A fresh look at the Kerameikos necropolis: social complexity and funerary variability in 7th century BC Athens, in Rethinking Athens. The Polis before the Persian Wars:  Interdisciplinary Approaches. International Workshop  for Junior Researchers 23rd-24th February 2017, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. Downes, J. 1999. Cremation: a spectacle and a journey, in J. Downes and T. Pollard (eds) The Loved Body’s Corruption: Archaeological Contributions to the Study of Human Mortality: 19-29. Glasgow: Cruithne Press. Etienne, R. 2005. L’incinération: L’exemple athénien. Ktema 30: 183-8. Foxhall, L. 1989. Household, gender and property in Classical Athens. CQ 39: 22-44.

Acknowledgements I would like to sincerely thank Dr Nikolas Dimakis and Dr Tamara M. Dijkstra for their kind invitation to participate at this thought-provoking conference. Olga Kaklamani should be acknowledged for discussing with me the funerary evidence from Thera. Bibliography Alexandri, O. 1967. Παρθενώνος 12. ArchDelt 22: 106-7. Alexandri, Ο. 1968a. Ερεχθείου 20. ArchDelt 23: 55-6. Alexandri, Ο. 1968b. Γαριβάλδη-ΣωφρονίσκουΦαιναρέτης. ArchDelt 23: 48. Alexandri, Ο. 1968c. Κριεζή 23-24. ArchDelt 23: 67. Alexandri, Ο. 1968d. Μακρυγιάννη 17-Πωρίνου και Διάκου. ArchDelt 23: 73. Alexandri, Ο. 1969. Δημοφώντος 5. ArchDelt 24: 39. Alexandri, Ο. 1970a. Δημητρακοπούλου 110. ArchDelt 25: 55-7. Alexandri, Ο. 1970b. Ἀθῆναι-Ἀττική. ArchDelt 25: 40-91. Alexandri, O. 1972a. Βουλιαγμενης-ΤριβωνιανούΕυπόμπου. ArchDelt 23: 93-6. Alexandri, Ο. 1972b. Γεωμετρικοί Τάφοι εις περιοχήν Κυνοσάργους. AAA 5: 165-176. Alexandri, O. 1973-1974. Οδός Αριστονίκου 4. ArchDelt 23: 85. Alexandri, Ο. 1977. Σαπφούς 10. ArchDelt 23: 26-8. Alexandridou, A. 2012. The North Necropolis of Vari Revisited. ΑrchEph 151: 1-90. Alexandridou, A. 2013. Destructions at the grave: ritual burning and breaking in 7th century BC Attika, in J. Driessen (ed.) Destruction: Archaeological, Philological and Historical Perspectives: 271-86. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain. Alexandridou, A. 2016. Funerary Variability in Late Eighth-Century B.C.E. Attica (Late Geometric II). AJA 120: 333-60. Andronikos, M. 1968. Totenkult. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht. Arapogianni, X. 1985. Νεκροταφείο του 7ου και 6ου αι. π.Χ. στην Οινόη Μαραθώνα. ΑrchDelt 40: 207-27. Arapogianni, X. 1987. Μαραθώνας-Οινόη, Έργα ΕΥΔΑΠ. ΑrchDelt 42: 99-100. Argyropoulos, V. and M. Sklavos 2003. The South- East Cemetery, in O. Kakavogianni (ed.) Aρχαιολογικές Έρευνες στη Μερέντα Μαρκοπούλου στο χώρο κατασκευής του Νέου Ιπποδρόμου και του Ολυμπιακού Ιππικού κέντρου 32. Athens: 2nd Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities. Asouchidou, S. 2001. Καύσεις της εποχής του Χαλκού στη Μακεδονία, in N. Chr. Stampolidis (ed.) Καύσεις στην Εποχή του Χαλκού και την Πρώιμη Εποχή του 46

Alexandra Alexandridou: Funerary Variability in Late Geometric Attica and its Implications

Kaklamani, O. 2017. Early Iron Age Cyclades through the Funerary Evidence, in A. Mazarakis Ainian, A. Alexandridou and X. Charalambidou (eds) Regional Stories towards a New Perception of the Early Greek World. Acts of an International Symposium in honour of Professor Jan Bouzek, Volos 18-21 June 2015: 249-82. Volos: University of Thessaly Press. Kalaitzoglou, G. 2010. Adelsgräber des 9. Jhs. v. Chr. in Athen und Attika, in H. Lohmann and T. Mattern (eds) Attika: Archäologie einer zentralen Kulturlandschaft, Akten des Kolloquiums vom 18.05-20.05.2007 in Marburg, Philipps-Universität: 51-72. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou, T. 1978. Οδός Μητροδώρου και Γεμίνου. ArchDelt 33: 24. Kistler, E. 1998. Die ‘Opferrinne-Zeremonie’: Bankettideologie am Grab, Orientalisierung und Formierung einer Adelsgesellschaft in Athen. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner. Kourouniotis, K. 1911. Eξ Αττικής: Ανασκαφαί Παλαιού Φαλήρου. ArchEph 50: 246-56. Kourou, N. 1997. A new Geometric amphora in the Benaki Museum: the internal dynamics of an Attic style, in O. Palagia (ed.) Greek Offerings. Essays on Greek Art in Honour of John Boardman: 43-53. Oxford: Oxbow. Kourou, N. 2011. Αττικά τεφροδόχα νεαρών κοριτσιών: γύρω από έναν αμφορέα και ένα ορυκτοποιημένο ύφασμα της Πρώιμης Γεωμετρικής εποχής, in A. Delivorrias, G. Despinis and A. Zarkadas (eds) Έπαινος Luigi Beschi: 189-200. Athens: Benaki Museum. Kübler, K. 1954. Die Nekropole des 10. bis 8. Jahrhunderts. Kerameikos 5. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Laughy, M. 2010. Ritual and Authority in Early Athens. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Berkeley. Langdon, S. 2008. Art and Identity in Dark Age Greece, 1100700 BCE. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lazaridis, D. 1968. Μυρρινούς (Μερέντα). ΑΑΑ 1: 31-5. Liston, M.A. 1993. The Human Skeletal Remains from Kavousi, Crete: A Bioarchaeological Analysis. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Tennessee. Liston, M.A. and J.K. Papadopoulos 2004. The ‘Rich Athenian Lady’ was pregnant: the anthropology of a geometric tomb reconsidered. Hesperia 73: 7-38. Lochner, M. and F. Ruppenstein (eds) 2013. Brandbestattungen von der mittleren Donau bis zur Ägäis zwischen 1300 und 750 v. Chr.: Akten des internationalen Symposiums an der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, 11-12. Februar 2010/ Cremation burials in the region between the Middle Danube and the Aegean, 1300-750 BC: proceedings of the international symposium held at the Austrian Academy of Sciences at Vienna, February 11th-12th, 2010. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Mazarakis Ainian, A. 2011. A Necropolis of the Geometric period at Marathon, in A. Mazarakis Ainian (ed.) The

Gallis, K.I. 1982. Καύσεις Νεκρών από τη Νεολιθική εποχή στη Θεσσαλία. Athens: Tameio Archaiologikōn Porōn kai Apallotriōseōn. Garland, R. 1989. Review of burial and ancient society: the rise of the Greek city-state, by I. Morris. CR 39: 66-7. Geroulanos, J. 1973. Grabsitten des ausgehenden geometrischen Stils im Bereich des Gutes Trachones bei Athen. AM 88: 1-54. Gowland, R. 2006. Ageing the past: examining age identity from funerary evidence, in R. Gowland and Chr. Knüsel (eds) Social Archaeology of Funerary Remains: 141-54. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Haentjens, A.M.E. 1999. Attic Geometric childgraves: more than bones in pots, in R.F. Docter and E.M. Moormann (eds) Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of Classical Archaeology, Amsterdam, July 12-17, 1998: Classical Archaeology Towards the Third Millennium. Reflections and Perspectives: 182-3. Amsterdam: Allard Pierson Museum. Haggis, D.C. and M.S. Mook 2011. The Early Iron AgeArchaic transition in Crete: the evidence from recent excavations at Azoria, eastern Crete, in A. Mazarakis Ainian (ed.) Τhe Dark Ages Revisited. An International Conference in Memory of William D.E. Coulson, Volos, 1417 June 2007: 515-27. Volos: University of Thessaly Press. Haggis, D.C. 2014. Excavations at Azoria and stratigraphic evidence for the restructuring of Cretan landscapes ca. 600 BC, in O. Pilz and G. Seelentag (eds) Ein neues Bild Kretas in archaischer und klassischer Zeit: Kulturelle Praktiken und materielle Kultur im 6. und 5. Jh. v. Chr.: 11-39. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Houby-Nielsen, S. 1992. Interaction between chieftains and citizens? 7th century BC burial customs in Athens. Acta Hyperborea 4: 343-74. Houby-Nielsen, S. 1995. Burial language in Archaic and Classical Kerameikos. Proceedings of the Danish Institute at Athens 1: 129-92. Humphreys, S.C. 1990. Review of burial and ancient society: the rise of the Greek city-state, by I. Morris. Helios 17: 263-268. Iakovidis, S. 1969-1970. Περατή: Τὸ Νεκροταφείον. Athens: Athens Archaeological Society. Immerwahr, S.A. 1971. The Athenian Agora ΧΙΙΙ: The Neolithic and Bronze Ages. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Jung, R. 2007. Δώς μου φωτιά: Woher kamen die Brandbestattungsriten der spätbronzezeitlichen Ägäis, in I. Galanaki, H. Tomas, Y. Galanakis, and R. Laffineur (eds) Between the Aegean and Baltic Seas: Prehistory Across Borders. Proceedings of the International Conference Bronze and Early Iron Age Interconnections and Contemporary Developments between the Aegean and the Regions of the Balkan Peninsula, Central and Northern Europe, University of Zagreb, 11-14 April 2005 (Aegaeum 27): 133-41. Liège: Universite de Liège. 47

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

‘Dark Ages’ Revisited: Acts of an International Symposium in Memory of William D.E. Coulson, University of Thessaly, Volos 14-17 June 2007: 703-16. Volos: University of Thessaly Press. McHugh, F. 1999. Theoretical and Quantitative Approaches to the Study of Mortuary Practice (British Archaeological Reports IS 785). Oxford: Archaeopress. McKinley, J.I. 2006. Cremation.... the cheap option?, in R. Gowland and Chr. Knüsel (eds) Social Archaeology of Funerary Remains: 81-8. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Melas, E.M. 1984. The origins of Aegean cremation. Anthropologika 5: 21-36. Melas, E.M. 2001. Καύσεις νεκρῶν: προς μιὰ αρχαιολογία του φόβου, in Ν. Chr. Stampolidis (ed.) Καύσεις στην Εποχή του Χαλκού και την πρώιμη Εποχή του Σιδήρου. Πρακτικά του Συμποσίου Ρόδος 29 Απριλίου – 2 Μαΐου 1999: 15-29. Athens: University of Crete. Morris, I. 1987. Burial and Ancient Society: The Rise of the Greek City-State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Morris, I. 1995. Burning the dead in archaic Athens. Animal, men and heroes, in A. Verbanck-Piérard and D. Viviers (eds) Culture et Cité. L’Avènement d’Athènes à l’Epoque Archaïque: Actes du Colloque International Organisé à l’Université Libre de Bruxelles du 25 au 27 Avril 1991 par l’Institut des Hautes Études de Belgique et la Fondation Archéologique de l’U.L.B.: 45-74. Brussels: De Boccard. Morris, I. 2000. Archaeology as Cultural History: Words and Things in Iron Age Greece. Oxford: Blackwell. Musgrave, J.H. 1980. The human remains from the cemeteries, in M.R. Popham, L.H. Sackett and P.G. Themelis (eds) Lefkandi Ι: The Iron Age. The Settlement, The Cemeteries (BSA Suppl. 11): 429-46. London: Thames and Hudson. Musgrave, J.H. 1981. The cremated bones. Knossos: an early Greek tomb on Lower Gypsadhes Hill. BSA 76: 162-65. Musgrave, J.H. 2005. An anthropological assessment of the inhumations and cremations from the Early Iron Age cemetery at Torone, in Papadopoulos 2005: 243-315. Nikopoulou, Y. 1970. Νεκροταφείον παρά την προς Φάληρον Οδόν. AAA: 171-9. Oikonomakou, M. 2001-2004. Μαραθώνια Διαδρομή. ArchDelt 56-59: 387-8. Papadopoulos, J.K. 1993. To kill a cemetery: the Athenian Kerameikos and the early Iron Age in the Aegean. JMA 6: 175-206. Papadopoulos, J.K. 2005. The Early Iron Age Cemetery at Torone (Monumenta Archaeologica 24). Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA. Papadopoulos, J.K. and E.L. Smithson 2002. The cultural biography of a cycladic geometric amphora: islanders in Athens and the pre-history of metics. Hesperia 71: 149-99. Papadopoulos, J.K. and E.L. Smithson. 2017. The Athenia Agora XXXVI: The Early Iron Age. Pt. 1, The Cemeteries.

Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Papadopoulou, Z. 2017. The Funerary and Habitation Evidence of Central Greece: A Discussion on the Early Iron Age Social Organisation, in A. Mazarakis Ainian, A. Alexandridou and X. Charalambidou (eds) Regional Stories Towards a New Perception of the Early Greek World: Acts of an International Symposium in Honour of Professor Jan Bouzek, Volos 18-21 June 2015: 347-76. Volos: University of Thessaly Press. Parker Pearson, M. 1999. The Archaeology of Death and Burial. Stroud: Sutton Publishing Limited. Pelekidis, S. 1916. Ανασκαφή Φαλήρου. ΑrchDelt 2: 13-64. Petrou, A. and A. Pitsikoulis 2003. Tο γεωμετρικό νεκροταφείο, in O. Kakavogianni (ed.) Aρχαιολογικές Έρευνες στη Μερέντα Μαρκοπούλου στον Χώρο Κατασκευής του Νέου Ιπποδρόμου και του Ολυμπιακού Ιππικού Κέντρου: 30-1. Athens: 2nd Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities. Pologiorgi, M.I. 2003-2009. Ανασκαφή Νεκροταφείου στο Χαλάνδρι. ArchDelt 58-64: 143-210. Pomadère, M. 2005. L’attitude face à la mort des enfants dans les communautés égéennes pratiquant l’incinération (XIIIe-VIIIe s.), in L. Bachelot, A. Tenu, and I. le Goff (eds) Entre Mondes Orientaux et Classiques: La Place de la Crémation. Colloque International de Nanterre 26-28 Février 2004: 153-60. Strasbourg: Université des Sciences Humaines de Strasbourg. Pomadère, M. 2009. Où sont les mères? Représentations et realités de la maternité dans le monde égéen protohistgorique, in K. Kopaka (ed.) Fylo: Engendering Prehistoric ‘Stratigraphies’ in the Aegean and the Mediterranean: Proceedings of an International Conference, University of Crete, Rethymno, 2-5 June 2005: 197-206. Liège: Peeters Publishers. Rebay-Salisbury, K. 2015. Neither fish nor fowl: burial practices between inhumation and cremation, in Z.L. Devlin and E.J. Graham (eds) Death Embodied: Archaeological Approaches to the Treatment of the Corpse: 18-40. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Reber, K. 2016. Social outcasts in early Iron Age Naxos?, in V. Vlachou and A. Gadolou (eds) Τέρψις: Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology in honour of Nota Kourou: 465-71. Brussels: CReA-Patrimoine. Roy, J. 1999. Polis and oikos in Classical Athens. GaR 46: 1-18. Ruppenstein, F. 2013. Cremation burials in Greece from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age: continuity or change?, in M. Lochner and F. Ruppenstein (eds): 185-96. Rutherford, I. 2007. Achilles and the Sallis Wastais ritual: performing death in Greece and Anatolia, in N. Laneri (ed.) Performing Death: Social Analyses of Funerary Traditions in the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean (Oriental Institute Seminars 3): 22336. Chicago: The University of Chicago. Schlörb-Vierneisel, B. 1966. Eridanos-Nekropole I: Gräber und Opferstellen hS 1-204. AM 81-82: 4-111. 48

Alexandra Alexandridou: Funerary Variability in Late Geometric Attica and its Implications

Skilardi, D. 2011. Αριστοκρατικές ταφές από το γεωμετρικό νεκροταφείο Κηφισιάς, in A. Mazarakis Ainian (ed.) Τhe ‘Dark Ages’ Revisited: An International Conference in Memory of William D.E. Coulson, Volos, 1417 June 2007: 675-702. Volos: University of Thessaly Press. Smithson, E.L. 1974. A geometric cemetery on the Areopagus: 1897, 1932, 1947, with appendices on the geometric graves found in the Dörpfeld Excavations on the Acropolis West Slope in 1895 and on Hadrian Street (‘Phinopoulos’ Lot’) in 1898. Hesperia 43: 32590. Snodgrass, A.M. 1971. The Dark Age of Greece: An Archaeological Survey of the Elevetnh to the Eighth Centuries BC. Edinburgh: University Press. Soteriadis, G. 1939. Ανασκαφή Μαραθώνος. Prakt 94: 2739. Stampolidis, N.Chr. 1995. Homer and the Cremation Burials of Eleutherna, in J. P. Crielaard (ed.) Homeric Questions: Essays in Philology, Ancient History, and Archaeology, including Papers of a Conference Organized by the Netherlands Institute at Athens, 15 May 1993: 289308. Amsterdam: J. C. Gieben. Stampolidis, N.Chr. (ed.) 2001. Καύσεις στην Εποχή του Χαλκού και την πρώιμη Εποχή του Σιδήρου. Πρακτικά του Συμποσίου Ρόδος 29 Απριλίου – 2 Μαîου 1999. Athens: University of Crete. Stavropoullos, Ph. 1956. Aνασκαφή Αρχαίας Ακαδημείας. Prakt 111: 45-54. Stavropoullos, Ph. 1958. Ανασκαφή Αρχαίας Ακαδημείας. Prakt 113: 8-9. Stavropoullos, Ph. 1959. Ανασκαφή Αρχαίας Ακαδημείας. Prakt 114: 8-11. Stavropoullos, Ph. 1964. Μεϊντάνη 12-14. ArchDelt 19: 58-60. Stavropoullos, Ph. 1965a. Οδού Καβαλόττι. ArchDelt 20: 75-80. Themelis, P. 1973-1974. Aνάβυσσος, γεωμετρικό νεκροταφείο. ArchDelt 29: 108-10. Thompson, H.A. 1948. The Excavation of the Athenian Agora Twelfth Season: 1947. Hesperia 17: 149-96. Thompson, T. (ed.) 2015. The Archaeology of Cremation: Burned Human Remains in Funerary Studies. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Tsaravopoulos, A. 2001-2004. Καλύβια Θορικού: Θέση Φοινικιά (αγροκτήματα Μελισσουργού-Κουρούπη και οικόπεδα Παπαγγέλου, Χατζηγεωργίιου, Ξέστερνου, Γκιουλή). ArchDelt 56-59: 370-1. Tsaravopoulos, A. and K. Papathanasiou 2009. Το Έργο της Β΄ Εφορείας Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων στα διοικητικά όρια των Καλυβίων Θορικού, 1994- 2003, in V. Vasilopoulou and S. Katsarou-Tzeveleki (eds) Από τα Μεσόγεια στον Αργοσαρωνικό: Β’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων. Το Έργο μιας Δεκαετίας, 1994-2003,

Πρακτικά Συνεδρίου, Aθήνα, 18-20 Δεκεμβρίου 2003: 205-12. Markopoulo: Municipality of Markopoulo. Tsaravopoulos, A. and K. Papathanasiou 2013. Συνήθειες και έθιμα ταφής στο αρχαίο νεκροταφείο της ‘Φοινικιάς’, Δήμου Σαρωνικού, in A. Stefanis (ed.) Πρακτικά ΙΔ’ Επιστημονικής Συνάντησης ΝΑ Αττικής: 37-48. Kalyvia: Etairia Meletōn Notioanatolikēs Attikēs. Tsirivakos, I. 1968. Αργυρούπολις. ΑrchDelt 23: 112-13. Valenza Mele, N. 1982. Da Micene ad Omero: Dalla phiale al lebete. AION 4: 97-133. Vavritsas, A. 1970. Ανασκαφή γεωμετρικού νεκροταφείου Μερέντας. ArchDelt 25: 127-29. Vermeule, E.T. 1972. Greece in the Bronze Age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Vivliodetis, E. 2007. Ο Δήμος του Μυρρινούντος. Η Οργάνωση και η Ιστορία του. Αthens: Archaeological Society at Athens. Vizyinou, O. 2010. Ταφικά Έθιμα στην Αττική και την Εύβοια, 1200-700 π.Χ. Τα Κτερίσματα ως Τεκμήριο Διάκρισης του Φύλου και της Ηλικίας των Νεκρών. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Ioannina. Vlachou, V. 2012. Death and Burial, in A. Hermary (ed.) Thesaurus Cultus et Rituum Antiquorum. Vol. 8, Private Space and Public Space, Polarities in Religious Life, Religious Interrelations Between the Classical World and Neighbouring Civilizations and Ad-dendum to Vol. VI, Death and Burial. Supplementum Animals and Plants: 363-84. Los Angeles: Getty Publications. Vlachou, V. 2015. The Early Iron Age Pottery from Marathon in Context. Brussels: CReA-Patrimoine. Vlachou, V. 2016. Gendered vessels for funerary rituals? A view from Geometric Attica and beyond, in V. Vlachou and A. Gadolou (eds) Τέρψις. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology in honour of Nota Kourou: 177-97. Brussels: CReA-Patrimoine. Whitley, J. 1991. Style and Society in Dark Age Greece: The Changing Face of a Pre-Literate Society 1100-700 BC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Whitley, J. 2003-2004. Archaeology in Greece 2003-2004: Attica and the Megarid. AR: 8. Willemsen, F. 1963. Das protogeometrische Grab N 114 unter der südlich Torwand des Dipylon. AM 78: 14853. Woolfitt, C. 1993. The Custom of Cremation in Early Iron Age Greece: A Study of the Cremation Burials at the Sites of Perati, Lefkandi and Athens. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Ottawa: National Library of Canada. Xagorari, M. 1996. Untersuchungen zu frühgriechischen Grab-sitten: Figürliche plastische Beigaben aus geschlossenen Grab-funden Attikas und Euböas des 10. bis 7. Jhs. v. Chr. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.

49

Mortuary Practices in the Ancient Rural Demoi of Southeastern Attica under the Light of Recent Evidence from Five Cemeteries in Mesogaia Panagiota Galiatsatou Abstract: Through the study of the excavation and bibliographical data concerning five neighbouring cemeteries in Mesogaia and their integration in the broader frame of Eastern Attica, there are no features that differentiate these cemeteries from the broader picture of the ancient burial customs that are so far known in the area. In contrast, an impression of a ‘common language’ is attested. One can observe, however, elements that are differentiated in the countryside customs compared to the urban customs, due to the different circumstances that prevailed in these regions. Finally, it is interesting to detect the differences, as well as the similarities between the so-called demotic cemeteries on the one hand, and family cemeteries on the other. Keywords: rural demoi, southeastern Attica, Mesogaia, cemeteries, mortuary practices, periboloi

Introduction In the present paper are presented five cemeteries in Koropi and Paiania in the Mesogaia area in Attica (Figure 1), which came to light in excavations of the Ephorate of Antiquities of Eastern Attica between 1994 and 2001 under the supervision of the honorary curator of antiquities Olga Kakavogianni. Of these cemeteries, it is possible that four are related to the ancient demos of Oe,1 while the Pousi Ledi periboloi can be connected to the ancient demos of Paiania.2 First, excavation results are briefly presented and then an attempt is made to view funerary and burial practices within the wider frame of Eastern Attica. Konstantinos Toulas plot, Koropi The excavation in Konstantinos Toulas plot in Koropi was a real surprise for the region (Figure 2).3 The graves were found at a low depth and for this reason had been largely destroyed by plowing and smuggling. It is characteristic that of the 113 graves that were located only ten were undisturbed. The use of the cemetery must have started in the 8th century BC, with the majority of the graves dating to the 5th century. In a pit grave a fragment of a white lekythos by Achilles Painter was found, dating to 450-445 BC (Figure 3).4 From the 4th century onwards the number of grave goods dramatically reduced, but their deposition did not cease, and scarcely continued in the 2nd and 1st century BC.

Figure 1. Map of the Mesogeia area in Attica with the five cemeteries.

Patima, Koropi In the excavation that took place prior to the construction of the natural gas line in Patima, Koropi5 three stone sarcophagi and seven pit graves with pot burials were uncovered. Also, part of a peribolos was

Dow 1963: 166; Kakavogianni 1998: 70-3; Doumas et al. 2001: 14-15; Kakavogianni 2005: 181; Traill 2004: 247, 259. 2 Curtius and Kaupert 1883: 31ff; Milchhöfer 1881-1903: 2.4; Traill 1986: 129; Travlos 1988: 192; Mersch 1996: 161; Kakavogianni 2000: 137; Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 409; 3 Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 401-4. 4 Kurtz 1975: 33, fig. 6, 41-2, 44; Oakley 1997; 2004; 2005. 1

5 Kakavogianni et al. 2001: 582; Lionis et al. 2005b: 211-12, fig. 13-14; Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 410.

50

Panagiota Galiatsatou: Mortuary Practices in the Ancient Rural Demoi

Figure 2. Toulas cemetery.

Figure 3. White lekythos, 450-445 BC. Toulas cemetery.

Agios Andreas, Koropi

excavated, the wall of which was preserved to the height of one row of stones. The cemetery has been related to the country house which came to light in the neighbouring site called Liotribi,6 where the grave stele of Ampharete was found. It is certain that the excavated site was part of a wider cemetery as the excavation was limited to the area of the gas line. Its dating, therefore, from the early 5th to the middle of the 4th century BC and a reuse in the Roman period, remains uncertain. 6

On the west side of Paiania – Markopoulo Avenue, in Agios Andreas Koropi,7 part of an ancient road and two periboloi, situated at a distance of about 150 m from each other, were discovered. Near the periboloi a number of votive offerings with abundant pottery and an erotic inscription8 were uncovered, obviously relating to the cemetery. Peribolos I was smaller than 7

Kakavogianni et al. 2001: 577 ff; Lionis et al. 2005a: 190-5.

8

51

Lionis et al. 2005b: 206; Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 41. Themos 2004-09; Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 411, pl. 15.

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

with ribbons, from the left while holding the customary circular basket (kaneon or kanistron). Pousi Ledi, Paiania In the area called Pousi Ledi in Paiania,10 two periboloi came to light alongside the intersection of two large ancient roads, each of which was more than 6 m wide. The peribolos in Pousi Ledi I (Figure 5) was considered of special importance for the Mesogaia area, and for this reason the seven pedestals in its interior were reconstructed.11 Under the pedestals were located eight of the 19 graves, which were stone sarcophagi containing the remains of the deceased, and tile-covered graves as well as burial pyres. Due to the compact construction of the pedestals, the interior of the graves was found intact. The pedestals were probably used as bases for the placement of grave stelai to mark the graves and sculptures. An observation which should be mentioned is the scarcity of pedestals in coexistence with graves beneath them in cemeteries of Eastern Attica. The peribolos in Pousi Ledi I is preserved to the height of two rows of stones and consists of two walls that form a slightly acute angle. In the angle a semi-circular podium had been erected similar to the podium of Dexileos monument in Kerameikos cemetery.12 Grave 17 (Figure 6) was a sarcophagus with a saddle monolith covering. It contained the body of a young woman under 20 years old. Upon the bones there was a layer of organic material, possibly a wooden coffin, in which the body of the woman must have been enclosed. The grave gifts in the sarcophagus were two alabasters13 of the 4th century BC, a bronze mirror, and two agricultural tools, of iron and bronze, respectively. Agricultural tools as grave gifts are an indication for the participation of women in the productive procedure, which probably began during the Peloponnesian War, when men had to be recruited for long periods.14 Another important find was the finial of a marble funeral naiskos with the inscription ‘ΦΙΛΙΠΠΗ Λ[ΥΣΙ] ΜΑΧΟ’,15 which probably belonged to an imposing funerary monument that was originally placed on the semi-circular podium.

Figure 4. White lekythos, 2nd quarter of 5th century BC. Agios Andreas, Koropi.

Peribolos II, and two disintegrated skeletons in stone sarcophagi were found inside. In the bottom of the one were 4 small cavities for the feet of the funeral bed of the deceased. In Peribolos II simple rectangular pits and funeral pyres were found. The finds in the cemetery date from the 2nd quarter of the 5th century to the end of the 4th century BC (Figure 4). A lekythos from the cemetery of the 2nd quarter of the 5th century BC has been attributed near the Tymbos Painter.9 It depicts the usual theme on white lekythoi of visiting the grave: a woman is approaching the grave, decorated

10

9.

Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 406-9; Kakavogianni 2010: 178-

Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 407, n. 35. Knigge 1990. 13 Lionis et al. 2005b: 202, fig. 4; for alabasters see further: Zaphiropoulou 1973: 615, fig. 18, no. 22-29, 616, fig. 19, no. 30-31, 633; Kanowski 1984: 16-7, fig. 1-4; Archaia Macedonia 1988: 313, no. 269; Lilimpaki-Akamati 1989-91: 87; Themelis and Touratsoglou 1997: 43; Parlama and Stampolidis 2000: 244, no. 228; Steinhauer 2005: 71, fig. 13. 14 Scheidel 1995. 15 Conze 1893: pl. 355 ff; Vedder 1985: fig. 43, 46, 49-55; Despinis 2002: 220-1; Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 408. 11 12

9 Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 411, pl. 14; cf. Beazley 1963: 753 ff, 1668 ff, 1702; Beazley 1971: 414 ff; Kurtz 1975: 205, no. 22.2, 83, n. 4.

52

Panagiota Galiatsatou: Mortuary Practices in the Ancient Rural Demoi

Figure 5. Pousi Ledi I.

The peribolos in Pousi Ledi II (Figure 7), smaller than Peribolos I, was uncovered 65 m away from the latter. Its shape was simple, and in the interior, in contact with the façade wall, there was a small rectangular pedestal that probably served as a base for funeral memorials that marked the graves, in the same way as the pedestals in Peribolos I. Within the peribolos there were four simple, rectangular pits and two tile-covered graves of small dimensions. The deceased had been buried in a supine position. As for dating, the cemeteries started in the end of the 5th century BC and were frequently used until the 3rd quarter of the 4th century BC. In the centuries that followed, their use continued, though rather scarce. Peristeropoulos factory, Paiania On the east side of Paiania-Markopoulo Avenue, opposite the Peristeropoulos factory,16 three periboloi were excavated on both sides of an ancient road that led there from Pousi Ledi. The periboloi contained 12 graves and cremations in total. In Peribolos B, six primary cremations were found inside pit-graves. They date to the 5th century BC, but the peribolos post-dates them. Peribolos A, dating to the 1st quarter of the 4th century BC, touched the north part of Peribolos B. Inside it were two disturbed sarcophagi made of poros limestone containing the remains of the deceased, and Kakavogianni 2005: 181; Lionis et al. 2005b: 199-201; Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 409-10.

16

Figure 6. Pousi Ledi I. Grave 17.

53

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 7. Pousi Ledi II.

were placed in rectangular pits covered with poros limestone slabs. Peribolos C was the largest of the three and covered a wider period of use, from the end of the 5th century BC to Roman times.

this period the inhabitants of Eastern Attica started to turn to the sea once again.20 On the other hand, it has been suggested that this region remained independent from Athens.

Historical Frame

In the 5th century BC, there was an increase in burials that have been documented through excavation so far and this has been interpreted either by an increase of population, or as a result of better preservation conditions of Classical graves, or as an increase of groups who could afford costly graves.21 In Toulas plot it is obvious that graves containing pottery of relatively high quality date to the period between the 1st and 3rd quarter of the 5th century BC. We could infer, therefore, that the inhabitants of the ancient demos of Oe, who the cemetery belonged to, enjoyed a relative prosperity compared to the preceding and antedating periods, following the rise of the city in the years of Athenian democracy. Like the other demoi of Mesogaia, it must have played an important role in the provision of the city with commodities from the countryside.22

Examining the wider historical frame in the area, it seems that in the Archaic period in Mesogaia, human presence is basically represented by these cemeteries.17 However, in Toulas plot the absence of significant finds from the 7th century BC is noteworthy. This leads to the belief that if there was not an interruption in use, in this period an area outside the excavated part was used for funeral purposes, maybe to the south. As is widely accepted, there was a decline in funeral memorials from the end of the 6th century BC onwards, but the wealthy areas in rural Attica18 seem to have remained unaffected by the developments that took place in the city of Athens and which have been connected with changes in legislation.19 Many of the sites that yielded funeral finds of the Archaic period were near the sea, an element which suggests that in

Indicative of the wealth in Toulas cemetery during this period was an underground chamber found nearby,23 that contained fragments of grave stelai with extensive

And the demotic cemetery of Paiania Ypenerthen: Themelis 1970: 126-7. 18 Morris 1997: 164; Alexandridou 2008: 65; Valavanis 2008: 132. 19 Ruschenbusch 1966; Martina 1968; Stupperich 1977; Kurtz 1984; Alexandridou 2008. 17

Doumas et al. 2001: 14. Mersch 1996: 36. 22 Doumas et al. 2001: 14. 23 Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 404. 20 21

54

Panagiota Galiatsatou: Mortuary Practices in the Ancient Rural Demoi

Figure 9. Marble sphinx, late 5th century BC. Peristeropoulos cemetery.

unprecedented welfare for many generations due to the fortification of their borders, as is attested by archaeological evidence, inscriptions, and judicial speeches.28 Another impressive find from Pousi Ledi is the statue of a Siren,29 product of an Attic workshop of the 3rd quarter of the 4th century BC, which is indicative of the preference for this sculptural type as a funeral monument in the 4th century BC.30

Figure 8. Gravestone of Menon. Toulas cemetery.

Also, in the Peristeropoulos cemetery part of a big double bodied sphinx (Figure 9) was found, which was probably the upper part of a wide marble stele. The sphinx was of archaic form, following a tendency of the late 5th century BC when archaic features reappear in funeral sculptures. The case of a sphinx in the round is very rare.31

traces of burning. The names of the deceased appeared on them, such as Lysistrati of Lysistratos from Oe, Menon of Menios from Oe (Figure 8), etc.24 A similar chamber was found in Agios Andreas of Koropi. At the outburst of the Peloponnesian War many inhabitants of rural demoi had to move to the city with their families and their household, because the Peloponnesians repeatedly looted Attica. These farmers found it difficult to change their lifestyle as Thucydides describes.25 An apparent reduction in finds in the Toulas cemetery during the last quarter of the 5th century BC can be connected to the war and the changes it brought about.

Mortuary Practices With regard to mortuary practices, in all cemeteries in question interment is common along with cremation. Particularly in Agios Andreas and Peristeropoulos, it is obvious that they follow the tendency of an increase of cremations in Athenian cemeteries at the end of the 5th and over the course of the 4th century BC.32

However, after 425 BC monumental graves in Attica seem to make their reappearance until their abolishment by Demetrius of Phaleron.26 As is known, in the 4th century BC it was common for people to show their wealth through luxurious grave monuments27 due to the collapse of the institution of the city-state. The wealth of the pedestals in Pousi Ledi corresponds to the conditions in the demoi of Attica after the Peloponnesian war: it seems that they enjoyed an

Ventilation grooves at the bottom of rectangular pits for the facilitation of burning were found in several graves of the Toulas plot. It is confirmed that ventilation Steinhauer 2001: 141. Conze 1893: pl. 355 ff; Collignon 1911: 216-25; Diepolder 1931: 29-30; Cook 1969: 65 ff, pl. 40-5; Woysh-Meautis 1982: 91-9; Vedder 1985: 65-73, fig. 46, 49; Hofstetter 1990: 152, A213, fig. 34; Biers 1999: 13544; Rolley 1999: 91; Parlama and Stampolidis 2000: 385, no. 445; Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 408. 30 Collignon 1911: 216 ff; Bieber 1961: 29; Pollard 1965: 137 ff, 141 ff. 31 Conze 1900: 183, no 860; Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 409-10, fig. 11; LIMC VIII: 1149-1165, s.v. ‘Sphinx’ (N. Kourou); Luschey 1954: 243-5, for the reappearance of archaic features in funeral sculpture of the end of the 5th century BC. 32 Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 91; Morris 1997: 178, fig. 32. 28 29

Traill 2004: 259, 247; Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 404, fig. 8. Thucydides 2,16; Matthaiou 2008. 26 Süsserott 1938: 120, n. 36; Wehrli 1949; Garland 1985: 107; Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 100-1; Simantoni-Bournia 1998: 13. 27 Bergemann 1997: 23; Valavanis 2008: 142-3. 24 25

55

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

each side; this could be interpreted an erotic scene, as such scenes were common on this shape.36 In the Toulas plot, the offering of grave gifts on the remains of the deceased was common,37 but in the 5th century BC gifts were usually found in the filling of the grave rather than on the cremation.38 The use of urns containing ashes appeared at the end of the Geometric or the beginning of Archaic times in Attica.39 The only cemetery where urns came to light was Toulas. Bronze urns were often placed in pits and stone cases, mainly rectangular and fewer circular, that bore a stone cover for the protection of the fragile nature of bronze. Grave 13 was a big eightshaped pit that contained two bronze and one ceramic urn of the last quarter of the 5th century BC. The urns were preserved to the middle of their height and they contained child bodies. Another ceramic urn was found in situ and near it was its cover (Figure 11).40 Though of no special artistic interest, it is an important find as it was the only vase of the excavation that mentioned the demos of provenance of the deceased, whose name was Aristos who came from Oe,41 thus leading to the secure identification of the cemetery. Inside it was found a small red-figure squat lekythion42 depicting an Eros in front of an altar (2nd half of the 5th century BC).

Figure 10. Black-figure Deianeira lekythos c. 580-570 BC. Toulas cemetery.

In Athenian cemeteries, interment of the body in simple pits is the most common practice for the first three quarters of the 5th century BC.43 In all our cemeteries the most widespread grave type was the pit. In the Toulas cemetery, in addition to rectangular pits, there were also pits of different contours, such as ellipsoid, circular, eight-shaped etc. Pits in our cemeteries were used for the interment of cremated remains and urns in the 6th and 5th centuries BC, and for the interment of the body, especially in the 4th century BC, as was the case in Agios Andreas and Pousi Ledi, and in Roman times in Patima. The existence of pits, even scarce, of the 6th century BC at Toulas plot makes them important due to the rare evidence of such graves in rural Attica,44 whereas they often make their appearance in the Kerameikos in the same century.45

grooves tend to disappear as time goes by, since the other cemeteries, all of which lack such grooves, date from the 5th century onwards, in contrast to Toulas which involves earlier phases. 33

In rare cases primary cremation pits have been located, as was maybe one case in the Toulas plot, where the fire traces were very intense reaching the walls of the grave. In the Peristeropoulos cemetery, one grave in peribolos B bore traces of burning and wood, two ventilation grooves, and particularly large dimensions, elements which indicate that in its interior more than one cremation took place.34 In one case in the Toulas plot, it is possible that the ashes of the cremation were transferred to a grave from another spot (secondary cremation): on its floor lay a light grey-coloured layer while no remains of fire were found in the grave. This might be a good reason to explain why an early lekythos of 580-570 BC (Figure 10) was found in the fill of a grave, while all adjacent ones date to the 5th century BC. The lekythos belongs to the Protodeianeira type35 and depicts two naked men on

cf. Karouzou 1931: pl. 2; Gropengiesser 1970: 55, pl. 169. Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 68. 38 Garland 1985: 36. 39 Pelekidou 1916: 16; Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 71; Kakavogianni 2001: 69. 40 cf. Diehl 1964; Kanowski 1984: 39-42; Sparkes and Talcott 1970: 32, 195-6, no. 1555, 345-6. 41 SEG 48: 101, no. 295-297; Dow 1963: 166-81; Traill 1995: s.v. ‘Ἂριστος’; Kakavogianni 1998: 72-3; Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 404. 42 cf. Rudolph 1971: 29-30, 88-90 (type VI D), 106, pl. 13, 2; Moore 1997: 47-8, 243, no. 705, pl. 75; LIMC III, 1986: s.v. ‘Eros’, 886; Parlama and Stampolidis 2000: 237, no. 219; Valavanis 2001: 66, pl. 37.1-2, fig. 47. 43 Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 67, 71, 96-7; Morris 1997: 178, fig. 32. 44 e.g. Merenta, Grave 13, cat. no. 40.2: Mersch 1996: 18. 45 Kübler 1954: 95 ff; 1976: 16 ff, 176 ff. 36 37

Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 92-3; Simantoni-Bournia 1998: 24-5. Kübler 1959: 83 ff; Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 69-71. 35 cf. Payne 1931: 190-1; Richter and Milne 1935: 14-17; Haspels 1936: 4-5, 30; Hopper 1949: 247; Boulter 1953: 59-115; Blegen et al. 1964: 115; Kleinbauer 1964: 359, n. 29. 33 34

56

Panagiota Galiatsatou: Mortuary Practices in the Ancient Rural Demoi

Figure 11. Clay urn, last quarter of 5th century BC. On the body: ΑΡΙΣΤ[ΟΣ] ΗΟΕΘΕΝ. On the lid: ΑΡΙΣΤΟΣ ΗΟΕ. Toulas cemetery.

On the other hand, tile-covered graves,46 which made their appearance in Archaic times, were widespread in the Classical period and even more in the 4th century BC, at least in the city area (Figure 12).47 There are some graves of these types in our cemeteries, following the general picture. Regarding stone sarcophagi in Attica, they became common mainly after 450 BC48 and have been related to deceased of higher social ranks. This practice appears in all cemeteries, except in Toulas’, and is mostly dated to the 4th century BC, in contrast to Toulas which mostly dates to the 5th century. The practice of constructing periboloi became once again popular in Attica from the last decades of the 5th century BC onwards, with the greatest number appearing in the 4th century BC,49 a fact that appears in Mesogaia as well. These periboloi are associated with family bonds and, though created as an expression of respect towards the dead, at the same time they were probably an attempt of the families to display their wealth and status,50 although it has been suggested that their construction was not always a very costly procedure.51 In all cemeteries, except for Toulas, there were periboloi organized in groups and, although at a short distance, they do not touch each other, with the exception of Periboloi A and B at the Peristeropoulos

Figure 12. Pousi Ledi II. Grave 3.

Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 91-2. Morris 1997: 178, fig. 32; Kaltsas 1998; Dimakis 2016: 18. Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 92; Mersch 1996: 36; Morris 1997: 177, fig. 32. 49 Wrede 1933: nos 40, 56, 100, 101, 102, 103; Wrede 1934: 20 ff, 30 ff; Garland 1982: 106, 125 ff; Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 46-7 100-1; Mersch 1996: 36; Bergemann 1997: 7-9, 20, 183 ff, 202 ff, pl. 1-3; Breeder 2013: 30; Closterman 2013: 45, 52. 50 Morris 1992: 103-27; Bergemann 1997: 131 ff; Breder 2013: 31-41. 51 Bergemann 1997: 102-5, 133-6; Closterman 1999: 95 ff. 46 47 48

57

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 13. Pousi Ledi I. Part of ancient road.

site. In general, they are neat structures made of limestone, the simplest being the peribolos in Pousi Ledi I.

loutrophoroi came to light. On a marble lekythos from PL I (1st half of the 4th century BC) the characteristic farewell scene between the deceased and her family is depicted.57

Already in the Geometric period, the co-existence of roads with cemeteries became popular and dictated the arrangement of the graves and circular periboloi (Figure 13).52 Four of our cemeteries were connected with intersections of the Steiriaki Road with the central street that traversed Mesogaia from North to South, whereas the Toulas cemetery was connected with a branch of Sfittia Road. It is obvious that this positioning of periboloi boosted the prestige of families who could cover the expenses for these monuments.53

Οffering pits for graveside rituals were common in our cemeteries.58 Traces of burning were present in them along with large numbers of domestic and ritual or libation vases.59 A deep rectangular pit in Agios Andreas contained traces of fire and many small libation vases of the mid and second half of the 4th century BC, such as black-glazed lekythia, a miniature chytra, a great number of miniature plates of the pyre type, a miniature lopas etc.

From the end of the 5th century BC, it seems that it was common to mark graves with free-standing vases after the decline of white lekythoi.54 These were often bigger or smaller stone lekythoi and loutrophoroi.55 The latter were often related to graves of young persons who had not had the chance to get married.56 However, we should maybe prioritize the role of bathing as a purifying means both before the wedding and the burial. In Toulas and Pousi Ledi few black and red figure

Also in Agios Andreas a small structure made of brick was probably intended to mark the grave, but at the same time was used for offering grave goods to the dead. Inside the structure parts of a bronze mirror were found, as well as pottery of the end of the 5th and the 1st quarter of the 4th century BC. Under it there was a grave which contained a thick fire layer, few bones and four lekythoi. In Pousi Ledi an offering pit that contained a large quantity of pottery dates to the 3rd quarter of the 4th

Travlos 1971: 300; Garland 1985: 106; Closterman 1999: 140 ff. 53 Garland 1982: 125-76; Bergemann 1997: 24-5; Closterman 1999: 140; Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 406. 54 Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 119 ff. 55 Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 141-2. 56 Travlos 1971: 361; Kanowski 1984: 101-3; Garland 1985: 72; Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 142-3; Closterman 1999: 194-7. 52

Kakavogianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 408. Kübler 1959: 87 ff; Sparkes and Talcott 1970: 198-9, pl. 69; Knigge 1990: 124, fig. 121; Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 71-2. 59 Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 93-4. 57 58

58

Panagiota Galiatsatou: Mortuary Practices in the Ancient Rural Demoi

century BC. In the same cemetery, many graves had no grave gifts, but close to them were found a large number of vases that can be related to the usual offerings to the dead.

the practices in rural Attica from the ones in the city, on account of different circumstances prevailing in these regions. One of these cases is, for example, the offering of agricultural tools in two graves in Pousi Ledi, one of which belonged to a woman. The graves date to the middle of the 4th century BC. Possibly this is an indication for the participation of women in the productive procedure67 which led to the sufficiency in basic goods in every house.68 It can be assumed that this practice started in the difficult period of the Peloponnesian War and continued thereafter as men were recruited.69 A similar case was the adorning of another female grave in Patima with a tool, which was probably used as a pruner. The latter dates to the last quarter of the 5th century BC.

It is not easy to find out whether libations60 atop the body or the ashes of the dead took place, but a relevant observation was made in one case in the Toulas plot. As regards grave gifts, lekythoi61 are the most common find in the graves of the Toulas plot, but not in the other cemeteries, probably due to their different dating. In Classical times, it was a common practice to open new pits in cemeteries with a long period of use, which had as a result the destruction of older ones.62 In the cases when the same grave was reused, the remains of the earlier deceased were roughly set aside and the body of the recently deceased was placed. This practice was common in the Toulas cemetery, and it can be proposed that subsequent burials belonged to people who were family related.

Acknowledgements I would like to heartedly thank Olga Kakavogianni for the permission to study the pottery from these sites. The results of this study along with the examination of burial customs in Eastern Attica are presented in my recently submitted PhD thesis ‘Κεραμική και Ταφικά Έθιμα από Δημοτικά και Οικογενειακά Νεκροταφεία στη Μεσογαία. Συμβολή στη Μελέτη των Νεκροταφείων της Ανατολικής Αττικής’ (Galiatsatou 2015). I would also like to express my thanks to the supervisor of my PhD, Professor A.A. Lemos.

In our cemeteries it seems that the orientation of the graves did not follow a certain scheme,63 something that is in general observed in Eastern Attica,64 with few exceptions, such as graves in tumuli.65 In some cases, as were three graves in Toulas cemetery, the graves were parallel to each other and had been opened at the same depth. It seems that small groups of graves of the 6th century BC probably belonged to different families.66 These groups lead to the suggestion that in demotic cemeteries of the 6th and 5th century BC there was a practice for the differentiation of families, similar to erecting family periboloi in later cemeteries.

Bibliography Archaia Macedonia 1988: Αρχαία Μακεδονία. Οδηγός της Έκθεσης στην Αυστραλία. Athens: Ministry of Culture. Alexandridou, A.F. 2008. Athens versus Attika: local variations in funerary practices during the late seventh and early sixth century BC, in D. Kurtz (ed.) Essays in Classical Archaeology for Eleni Hatzivassiliou 1977-2007 (British Archaeological Reports IS 1796): 65-72. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Andronikos, M. 1968. Ανασκαφή Ανακτόρου Βεργίνας κατά το 1964. ArchDelt 20, Chronika: 441. Beazley, J.D. 1956. Attic Black-Figure Vase-Painters. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Beazley, J.D. 1963. Attic Red-Figure Vase-Painters. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Beazley, J.D. 1971. Paralipomena. Additions to Attic BlackFigure Vase-Painters and to Attic Red-Figure VasePainters. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Bergemann, J. 1997. Demos und Thanatos. Untersuchungen zum Wertsystem der Polis im Spiegel der attischen Grabreliefs des 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. und zur Funktion der gleichzeitigen Grabbauten. Μunich: Biering and Brinkmann.

Conclusions To sum up, through the study of five neighbouring cemeteries it can be deduced that there are no surprises in relation to ancient mortuary practices of Attica, though there are few patterns that differentiate Kübler 1954: 29 ff, 222 ff, 228 ff., 236, 267 ff; Andronikos 1968: 89 ff, 92, 94; Kurtz and Boardman 1994: 39, 136. 61 Vickers 1984: 95; Gill 1988: 737-8; Hoffmann 1988: 152; Morris 1997: 141 ff. 62 Simantoni-Bournia 1988: 24. 63 Chrysostomou 2000. 64 e.g. Mussche 1998: 28; Papathanasiou and Tsaravopoulos 2013: 38. 65 Milchhöfer 1881-1903: 15; Stais 1891: 15 ff, no. 96-104, 28 ff; Karo 1936: 123 ff; Blegen 1937: 144, pl. 8; Lemerle 1937: 450 ff, fig. 12-13, pl. 33-35; Riemann 1937: 121 ff, fig. 8-12; Lemerle 1938: 443 ff, pl. 45-47; Brommer 1939: 224 ff, 227 ff, fig. 1-2; Walter 1940: 126 ff, fig. 5-9, 175 ff, fig. 34; Beazley 1956: 2,1-2; 3,4; 5,6-9; 6; 7; 9,16; 13,47; 14,11; 18,1-5; 19,3; 20,1; 21,4; 28,4; 40,19; 78,12; 154,5; Papaspyridi-Karouzou 1963; Beazley 1971: 3,10.12-13; 4,17-244; 10,3-4; 11,1-10; 12,11-20; 13,1-3; 15; 17; 19,26; 20; 22,1-10bis; 71; 209; 211; 238; 240; 246 ff; 249 ff; 252; 257; 273; 275; 277 ff; 365; 403; 406 ff; 409, 9bis; 412, 60bis; 60ter; 424, 73bis; 428, 176bis; Petropoulakou and Pentazos 1973: 21, 105 no. 22; Morris 1987: 227 no. 46a; Travlos 1988: 446, pl. 564-74; Mersch 1996: 212-14. 66 Μorris 1987: 80, 91, 151; Mersch 1996: 26. 60

Lionis et al. 2005b: 204. Kakavogianni 2005: 180-1. 69 Scheidel 1995: 211 ff; Kakavgianni and Galiatsatou 2009: 408, n. 39. 67 68

59

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Bieber, M. 1961. The Sculpture of the Hellenistic Age. New York: Columbia University Press. Biers, W. 1999. Plastic Seirenes from Corinth. Hesperia 68: 135-46. Blegen, E.P. 1937. New items from Athens. AJA 41: 13745. Blegen, C.W., H. Palmer and R.S. Young 1964. Corinth XIII: North Cemetery. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Boulter, C. 1953. Pottery of the mid-fifth century from a well in the Athenian Agora. Hesperia 22: 59-115. Breder, J. 2013. Attische Grabbezirke klassischer Zeit, in Sporn (ed.): 29-44. Brommer, F. 1939. Archäologische Funde von Herbst 1938 bis Frühjahr 1939: Griechenland. AA: 223-68. Chrysostomou, A. and P. Chrysostomou 2000. Το νεκροταφείο του Αρχοντικού Γιαννιτσών, in AEMTh 14: 473-89. Closterman, W. 1999. The Self-presentation of the Family. Τhe Function of Classical Attic Peribolos Tombs. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Johns Hopkins University. Closterman, W. 2013. Family groupings in classical attic peribolos tombs, in Sporn (ed.): 45-53. Collignon, M. 1911. Les Statues Funéraires dans l’Art Grec. Paris: Ernest Leroux. Conze, A. 1893. Die attischen Grabreliefs I. Berlin: von W. Spemann. Conze, A. 1900. Die attischen Grabreliefs II. Berlin: von W. Spemann. Cook, B.F. 1969. An Attic Grave Stele in New York. AntP 9: 65-72. Curtius, E. and J.A. Kaupert 1883. Karten von Attika, Heft II Erläuternder Text. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer. Despinis, G. 2002. Αττικοί επιτύμβιοι ναΐσκοι του 4ου αι. π.Χ. με αγάλματα. Μια πρώτη προσέγγιση, in Μουσείο Μπενάκη, 1ο Παράρτημα: Αφιέρωμα στη Μνήμη του Γλύπτη Στέλιου Τριάντη: 209-31. Athens. Diehl, E. 1964. Die Hydria: Formgeschichte und Verwendung im Kult des Altertums. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. Diepolder, H. 1931. Die attischen Grabreliefs des 5. und 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. Berlin: H. Keller. Dimakis, N. 2016. Social Identity and Status in the Classical and Hellenistic Northern Peloponnese: the Evidence from Burials. Oxford: Archaeopress. Doumas, C., K. Tsouni and G.N. Aikaterinidis (eds) 2001. Mesogaia: History and Culture of Mesogeia in Attica. Athens: Athens International Airport. Dow, S. 1963. The Attic Demes Oa and Oe. AJP 84: 166-81. Galiatsatou, P. 2015. Κεραμική και Ταφικά Έθιμα από Δημοτικά και Οικογενειακά Νεκροταφεία στη Μεσογαία. Συμβολή στη Μελέτη των Νεκροταφείων της Ανατολικής Αττικής. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Athens. Garland, W.E. 1982. A First Catalogue of Attic Peribolos Tombs. ABSA 77: 125-76. Garland, R. 1985. The Greek Way of Death. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Gill, D.W.J. 1988. Expressions of wealth: Greek art and society. Antiquity 2: 735-43. Gropengiesser, H. 1970. Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum Deutschland 31, Heidelberg, Universität 4. München. Haspels, C.H.E. 1936. Attic Black-Figured Lekythoi (Travaux et Mémoires, fasc. 4). Paris: E. de Boccard. Hoffmann, G. 1988. La jeune fille et la mort: quelques steles à épigramme. Annali dell’Istituto universitario orientale (Naple, Italie). Dipartimento di studi del mondo classic e del mediterraneo antico 10: 73-82. Hofstetter, E. 1990. Sirenen im archaischen und klassischen Griechenland. Würzburg. Hölscher, F. 1981. Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum Deutschland 46. Würzburg. Martin von Wagner Museum 2. Μünchen Hopper, R.J. 1949. Addenda to Necrocorinthia. ABSA 44: 162-258. Kakavogianni, O. 1998. Πρόσφατα ευρήματα από την περιοχή του Κορωπίου. Εντοπισμός του αρχαίου δήμου Ώας, in Πρακτικά Ζ΄ Επιστημονικής Συνάντησης ΝΑ Αττικής: 69-77. Koropi: Municipality of Koropi. Kakavogianni, O. 2000. Παιανία. ArchDelt 55, Chronika: 137-9. Kakavogianni, O. 2001. Η Μεσογαία κατά τους Γεωμετρικούς χρόνους, in Doumas et al. (eds): 68-73. Kakavogianni, O. 2005. Αναδρομή στην ιστορία των αρχαίων δήμων της δυτικής Μεσογαίας, in Steinhauer (ed.): 175-87. Kakavogianni, O. 2010. Αττική. Ιστορικό και αρχαιολογικό περίγραμμα. Προϊστορικοί χρόνοι, in A.G. Vlachopoulos (ed.) Αρχαία Αθήνα και Αττική. Ιστορική Τοπογραφία του Άστεως και της Χώρας: 6-15. Athens: Melissa. Kakavogianni, O. and P. Galiatsatou 2009. Ο Αρχαίος Δήμος της Όης. Αττική κεραμική από το νεκροταφείο της Όης στο Κορωπί: οικόπ. Κ. Τούλα, in V. Vasilopoulou (ed.) Από τα Μεσόγεια στον Αργοσαρωνικό. Β΄ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων. Το Έργο μιας Δεκαετίας, 1994 – 2003. Πρακτικά Συνεδρίου Αθήνα, 1820 Δεκεμβρίου 2003: 399-422. Athens: Kentro Demou Markopoulou. Kakavogianni, O., L. Dedes, F. Nezeri and M. Kontogianni Stathi 2000. Αρχαίοι δρόμοι και ταφικοί περίβολοι στην πεδιάδα των Μεσογείων,  in Πρακτικά Θ’ Επιστημονικής Συνάντησης ΝΑ Αττικής: 171-8. Kalyvia Thorikou: Etairia Meleton Notioanatolikes Attikes. Kaltsas, Ν. 1998. Άκανθος Ι. Η Ανασκαφή στο Νεκροταφείο κατά το 1979. Athens: Ministry of Culture. Kanowski, M.G. 1984. Containers of Classical Greece: A Handbook of Shapes. Queensland: University of Queensland Press. Karo, G. 1936. Archäologische Funde von Sommer 1935 bis Sommer 1936. AA: 123-5. Karouzou, S. 1931. Λήκυθος του Άμασι στο Εθνικό Μουσείο. AM 56: 98-111. Kleinbauer, W.E. 1964. The Dionysios Painter and the ‘Corinthio-Attic’ Problem. AJA 68: 355-70. Knigge, U. 1990. Ο Κεραμεικός της Αθήνας. Ιστορία, Μνημεία, Ανασκαφές (μετ. Α. Σεϊρλή). Athens: Krene. 60

Panagiota Galiatsatou: Mortuary Practices in the Ancient Rural Demoi

Kübler, K. 1954. Kerameikos. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen V, 1. Die Nekropole des 10. bis 8. Jahrhunderts. Berlin: De Gruyter. Kübler, K. 1959. Kerameikos. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen VI. Die Nekropole des späten 8. bis frühen 6. Jahrhunderts. VI 1. Berlin: De Gruyter. Kübler, K. 1976. Kerameikos. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen VII. Die Nekropole der Mitte des 6. Bis Ende des 5. Jahrhunderts. Berlin: De Gruyter. Kurtz, D.C. 1975. Athenian White Lekythoi. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Kurtz, D.C. 1984. Vases for the dead, an attic selection 750-400 BC, in H.A.G. Brijder (ed.) Ancient Greek and Related Pottery. Proceedings of the International Vase Symposium in Amsterdam, 12-15 April 1984: 314-28. Amsterdam: Allard Pierson Museum. Kurtz, D.C. and J. Boardman 1994. Έθιμα Ταφής στον Αρχαίο Ελληνικό Κόσμο (μτφ. Ο. Βιζυηνού). Athens: Kardamitsa. Lemerle, P. 1937. Chronique des fouilles et découvertes archéologiques en Grèce. BCH 61: 441-76. Lemerle, P. 1938. Chronique des fouilles et découvertes archéologiques en Grèce en 1938. BCH 62: 443-83. Lilimbaki-Akamati, M. 1989-91. Ανατολικό Νεκροταφείο της Πέλλας. ArchDelt 44 – 46, Meletes: 73-152. Lionis, D., F. Nezeri, M. Stathi and E. Mavromati 2005a. Αρχαίες Αγροικίες στα Μεσόγεια, in Steinhauer (ed.): 191-8. Lionis, D., F. Nezeri, M. Stathi and E. Mavromati 2005b. Αρχαία νεκροταφεία στα Μεσόγεια, in Steinhauer (ed.): 199-213. Luschey, H. 1954. Zur Wiederkehr archaischer Bildgedanken in der attischen Grabmalkunst des 4 Jhs, in R. Lullies, B. Schweitzer (eds) Neue Beiträge zur Klassischen Altertumswissenschaft. Festschrift zum 60. Geburtstag von Bernhard Schweitzer: 243-5. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Martina, A. 1968. Solon. Rome. Matthaiou, A.P. 2008. Ιστορικοί χρόνοι, in A.G. Vlachopoulos (ed.) Αρχαιολογία, Εύβοια και Στερεά Ελλάδα: 104-27. Athens: Melissa. Mersch, A. 1996. Studien zur Siedlungsgeschichte Attikas von 950 bis 400 v. Chr. (Europäische Hochschulschriften 38. Archäologie 58). Frankfurt am Main: Lang. Milchhöfer, A. 1881-1903. Karten von Attika III-VI. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer. Moore, M.B. 1997. The Athenian Agora XXX: Attic Red-Figured and White-Ground Pottery. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Morris, I. 1987. Burial and Ancient Society: The Rise of the Greek City-State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Morris, I. 1997. Ταφικά Τελετουργικά Έθιμα και Κοινωνική Δομή στην Κλασική Αρχαιότητα (μτφ. Κ. Μαντέλη). Heraklion: Crete University Press. Mussche, H.F. 1998. Thorikos. A Mining Town in Αncient Attika. Ghent: Peeters Publishers.

Oakley, J.H. 1997. The Achilles Painter. Mainz. Oakley, J.H. 2004. New vases by the Achilles Painter and some further thoughts on the role of attribution, in S. Keay and S. Moser (eds) Greek Art in View. Essays in Honour of Brian Sparkes: 63-77. Oxford: Oxbow. Oakley, J.H. 2005. Neue Vasen des Achilleus-Malers und des Philae-Malers, in: V.M. Strocka (ed.) Meisterwereke, Internationales Symposium anlässlich des 150. Geburtstages von Adolf Furtwängler, Freiburg im Breisgau 30 Juni-3 Juli 2003: 285-98. Munich: Hirmer. Papaspyridi-Karouzou, S. 1963. Αγγεία του Αναγυρούντος. Athens. Papathanasiou, N. and A. Tsaravopoulos 2013. Συνήθειες και έθιμα ταφής στο αρχαίο νεκροταφείο της «Φοινικιάς», Δήμου Σαρωνικού, in Πρακτικά ΙΔ΄ Επιστημονικής Συνάντησης ΝΑ Αττικής, Παλλήνη 30 Νοεμβρίου – 3 Δεκεμβρίου 2006: 413-34. Kalyvia Thorikou: Etairia Meleton Notioanatolikes Attikes. Parlama, L. and N.Chr. Stambolidis 2000. Η Πόλη κάτω από την Πόλη: Ευρήματα από τις Ανασκαφές του Μητροπολιτικού Σιδηροδρόμου των Αθηνών. Athens. Payne, H.G.G. 1931. Necrocorinthia: A Study of Corinthian Art in the Archaic Period. Oxford. Pelekidou, S. 1916. Ανασκαφή Φαλήρου. ArchDelt 16, Chronika: 13-64. Petropoulakou, Μ. and Α. Pentazos 1973. Αττική, Οικιστικά Στοιχεία – Αρχαίες Ελληνικές Πόλεις 21. Athens. Pollard, J. 1965. Seers, Shrines and Sirens. London. Richter, G.M.A. and M.J. Milne. 1935. Shapes and Names of Athenian Vases. New York. Riemann, H. 1937. Archäologische Funde vom Sommer 1936 bis Sommer 1937. AA: 121-4. Rolley, Cl. 1999. La Sculpture Grecque. Paris: Picard. Rudolph, W.W. 1971. Die Bauchlekythos: ein Beitrag zur Formgeschichte der attischen Keramik des 5. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. Bloomington: Eget forlag. Ruschenbusch, E. 1966. Solonos Nomoi. Die Fragmente des solonischen Gesetzeswerkes mi teiner Text- und Überlieferungsgeschichte (Historia, Einzelschriften 9). Wiesbaden: F. Steiner. Scheidel, W. 1995. The most silent women of Greece. Rural labour and women’s life in the ancient world I. GaR 42: 202-17. Simantoni-Bournia, Ε. 1988. Αττικά Κλασικά Επιτύμβια Ανάγλυφα. Σημειώσεις για τους Φοιτητές του ΙστορικούΑρχαιολογικού Τμήματος. Athens: Kardamitsa. Sparkes, B.A. and L. Talcott 1970. Agora XII: Black and Plain Pottery of the 6th, 5th and 4th Centuries BC. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Sporn, K. (ed.) 2013. Griechische Grabbezirke klassischer Zeit: Normen und Regionalismen. Akten des internationalen Kolloquiums am Deutschen Archäologischen Institut, Abt. Athen, 20.-21. November 2009 (Athenaia 6). München: Hirmer Verlag. Stais, V. 1891. Ανασκαφαί εν Μαραθώνι. ArchDelt 7, Chronika: 34, 67, 69-70, 97. 61

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Steinhauer, G. 2001. The road-network and settlement pattern in the Mesogaia in the area of the Spata Airport, in Doumas et al. (eds): 95-105. Steinhauer, G. (ed.) 2005. Αττικής Οδού Περιήγηση. Athens. Stupperich, R. 1977. Staatsbegräbnis und Privatgrabmal im klassischen Athen. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Münster Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität. Süsserott, H.K. 1938. Griechische Plastik des 4. Jahrhunderts. Frankfurt am Main. Themelis, P. 1970. Αρχαιότητες και μνημεία Αττικής και Νήσων Σαρωνικού. Γλυφάδα. ArchDelt 25, Chronika: 123-7. Themelis, P. and Ι. Touratsoglou 1997. Οι Τάφοι του Δερβενίου. Athens. Themos, A.A. 2004-09. Βοτακίων Καταπύγων. Horos 1721: 675-8. Traill, J. 1986. Demos and Trittys. Epigraphical and Topographical Studies in the Organization of Attica. Toronto: Athenians, Victoria College. Traill, J.S. 1995. Persons of Ancient Athens 3. Toronto: Athenians. Traill, J.S. 2004. Persons of Ancient Athens 13. Toronto: Athenians. Travlos, I.N. 1971. Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Athens. New York: Praeger. Travlos, J. 1988. Bildlexicon zur Topographie des antiken Attika. Tübingen: Wasmuth. Valavanis, P. 2001. Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum, Ελλάδα 7. Μουσείο Μαραθώνος. Athens.

Valavanis, P. 2008. Αθήνα, in A.G. Vlachopoulos (ed.) Αρχαιολογία, Εύβοια και Στερεά Ελλάδα: 128-49. Athens: Melissa. Vickers, M. 1984. The influence of exotic materials on attic white-ground pottery, in H.A.G. Brijder (ed.) Ancient Greek and Related Pottery. Proceedings of the International Vase Symposium in Amsterdam, April 1984: 12-15. Amsterdam. Vedder, U. 1985. Untersuchungen zur plastischen Ausstattung attischer Grabanlagen des 4.Jhs.v.Chr. (Europäische Hochschulschriften). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Walter, O. 1940. Archäologische Funde vom Frühjahr 1939 bis Frühjahr 1940. AA: 175-8. Wehrli, F. 1968. Die Schule des Aristoteles, Texte und Kommentar, IV: Demetrios von Phaleron. Stuttgart: Schwabe and Co. Woysh-Meautis, D. 1982. La Représentation des Animaux et des Etres Fabuleux sur Les Monuments Funéraires Grecs (Cahiers d’archéologie romande de la Bibliothèque historique vaudoise 21). Lausanne: Bibliothèque historique vaudoise. Wrede, W. 1933. Attische Mauern. Athen. Wrede, W. 1934. Attika: Vortrag in der Deutschen Arbeitsgemeinschaft zu Athen. Athen. Zaphiropoulou, F. 1973. Vases et autres objets de marbre de Rhenée. BCH Suppl. I: 601-36.

62

Urbanism and its Impact on Human Health and Diet: A Preliminary Study of the Human Remains from Hellenistic to Late Antique Knossos, Crete Anna Moles Abstract: Knossos was a significant centre in Crete and within Aegean and Mediterranean networks during the Hellenistic, Roman and Late Antique periods. This paper investigates how the changing urban status, and the associated social and environmental factors, impacted on age-at-death, skeletal and dental health, and human activity over time and within the population by social status, age and sex. It also demonstrates the types of research questions that can be addressed by fragmentary skeletal assemblages which have come from rescue excavations. As a site of long-term significance and having been intensively investigated and extensively excavated, Knossos offers an excellent setting for studying how demographic and economic growth (Hellenistic and Early Roman) and decline (Late Antique) can impact the lifeways of individuals. This presents some preliminary results from the skeletal analysis from Hellenistic to Late Antique contexts, and to demonstrate the value of such a study for the interpretation of society from this aspect of the mortuary record. Keywords: osteology, health, disease, demography, urban Introduction

childhood development. Activity patterns can also be observed from a variety of features and lesions in the skeleton, including joint diseases and bony changes at muscle attachment site, which have been used in this project, as well as cross-sectional geometry and morphometrics of bones and some non-metric traits. The observation and interpretation of demographic attributes, disruptions in development, disease prevalence, and dietary characteristics enable a profile of human lifeways and well-being to be established for a population, which can in turn play an important role in the understanding of historical developments and social change.

Knossos, in central Crete, is generally known for being the earliest urban centre in Europe and a major palatial centre of Minoan civilisation, which collapsed at the end of the Bronze Age. However, it has a long and complex history of urban development and decline, and it is its later cycle of urban development in the Hellenistic period, transition to a Roman colony, and decline during the Late Antique period which this paper investigates through a study of the health, diet and lifeways of individuals at Knossos. The material presented in this paper represents part of the assemblage of skeletal remains from past British School at Athens excavations at Knossos from the 1930s to 1970s, which is stored at the BSA Stratigraphical Museum at Knossos. A substantial sample of the preserved skeletal assemblage will be fully analysed for the author’s PhD thesis.

Background According to the results of the recent Knossos Urban Landscape Project (KULP), an intensive surface survey of the archaeological site, during the Classical and early Hellenistic period Knossos grew to be nearly as large in terms of settlement and population size as it was at its Bronze Age Neopalatial peak.1 It was a large enough demographic aggregation that it would have suffered from the density of population and poor hygiene that would have led to the rapid spread of infectious disease. This is also a fascinating time period to consider what impacts the Roman invasion and the subsequent establishment of a colony would have had on the lives of individuals at Knossos. Knossos was embedded in Mediterranean trading networks, and there would have been increased contacts and new people who may have brought new diseases with them. Equally, they could have widened the gene pool, allowing for

The observation of pathological lesions and the collection of demographic information from skeletal remains enablethe documentation of various characteristics of human health, or more correctly of ill-health and disease. There are also many diseases which never manifest themselves in the skeleton, particularly many of the aggressive infectious diseases, which would have caused the majority of deaths in ancient populations. Therefore, the recording of ages-at-death is an important measure for understanding life expectancies and mortality rates of a population. A combination of dental disease, lesions of interrupted development during childhood, and chemical analyses can indicate aspects of ancient diets and their nutritional adequacy. Occasionally, specific nutritional deficiencies will cause diseases which can also manifest lesions in the skeletal material, in addition to the general interruptions in

1

63

Whitelaw et al. 2012; Trainor and Whitelaw 2016.

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

greater resistance to some diseases. This demonstrates potential alternative outcomes to a single – admittedly complex – event, and the study of the human remains can help to clarify the nature of the impact of such processes on the population. Additionally, there may have been changes in diet due to newly introduced food technologies, new cultural traditions surrounding food (for example, fasting rules would have been introduceddue to Christianity), or the adoption of new food types themselves, such as a new crop being introduced. Although a study of the human remains can be a very direct way of seeing how diet, disease, activity and other aspects of life, as well as congenital factors, impact the skeleton, it also has its limitations. Cause of death is rarely determinable as individuals who die from infectious diseases are dead long before the disease has the opportunity to leave any mark on the skeleton. Additionally, most of the skeletal material studied was commingled and fragmentary, due to a series of factors from the burial rites and taphonomic processes to the excavation, retrieval and storage.

‘stress’ to the system. These methods can be used to consider how diet, disease and developmentvaried over timealongside the changes in population and settlement size and in the urban economic and social environment in terms of political administration, and economic and demographic connectivity. The data produced by this research can give us insights into the impact of urbanism on individual lives and across the population. It is also important to look at these impacts across different subgroups of the population, between males and females, and the individuals being subject to different burial treatment, which may represent groups of different social status. As research is ongoing, this preliminary paper provides results and interpretation of the data analysed to date. Burial Environment Tombs from all time periods, datingfrom c. 2000 BC-AD 700, are known from a variety of locations throughout the Knossos valley. Most burials known from the Hellenistic period (323-66 BC) come from the North Cemetery, situated along the main road towards Heraklion, the port of Knossos. Smaller numbers of burials have been excavated from small plots elsewhere around the valley, which have not retained human skeletal remains and many of which were never closely dated. The area of the North Cemetery remained in use into the Roman period (66 BC-AD 330) and this is where most of the monumental tombs were found, but it was no longer the sole primary cemetery. There were burials surrounding the settlement on all sides, other than on the steepest slopes on the east of the valley, with cemeteries at Topana to the north-east of the Roman civic centre, on the slopes of the Monasteriako Kephali and Baïria hills to the west and south-west, and at Spilia to the south. Though the Roman period appears to have the greatest diversity in burial locations, this may be due to excavation bias. If they are generally using pit graves in Hellenistic times, as seems to be the case judging from all recognised examples, these are less likely to be discovered by excavation, which has concentrated within the ancient city. In contrast, while simple pit graves continue, some Roman tombs, particularly to the west and south, are highly visible as exposed rockcut chambers, and stone built and concrete tombs also attract attention. The only reason the North Cemetery graves were discovered was because of the major rescue excavations in 1978 for the construction of the medical faculty of the university, in which Early Iron Age chamber tombs, Roman built tombs and tile graves, Late Antique built osteothekes and a basilica church were also discovered.2 The Roman period also appears to have the greatest diversity in tomb architecture with pit graves, tile graves, cist graves, rock-cut chamber tombs and various forms of monumental built tombs

Methods By working out minimum numbers of individuals and age-at-death profiles, patterns can be identified across an assemblage relating to the demographic make up of the society and individual life expectancy. Therefore, while infectious diseases may not always leave their mark on the skeleton, greater numbers of individuals dying at earlier stages of life can indicate more frequent or more severe disease epidemics in association with the changes in the urban environment. Other methods can be used to determine various other aspects of life. Entheseal changes at muscle attachment sites and joint disease can be used to document activity levels and injuries during life, though it is important to consider the other factors, such as genetics, that can result in increased occurrences of and more prominent bone growth. Stature achieved during life can be used at a population level to infer whether there are interruptions during development; i.e. those that are able to develop under ideal nutritional conditions with a lack of disease or other detrimental impacts to developmental health should be able to attain optimal height within their genetic range. Dental disease can help to define different types of diet, though oral health and genetic factors can also play a role in the manifestation of caries, calculus and, consequently, ante mortem tooth loss. Two further methods that will be used for the final study are stable carbon and nitrogen isotope analysis for the determination of gross characteristics of diet, and microscopic analysis of dental enamel hypoplasia, which shows interruptions in growth during the development of the teeth throughout childhood caused by periods of infectious disease, starvation, malnutrition or some

2

64

Coldstream and Catling 1996.

Anna Moles: Urbanism and its Impact on Human Health and Diet

all represented. The larger and grander tombs for communal burials, including the rock-cut chamber tombs, which are known from elsewhere in Crete in the Hellenistic period, and monumental built tombs, which seem to be a Roman innovation, appear during the 1st and early 2nd centuries AD. This could be due to social competition between sub-groups of the population, increased investment in monumental architecture, or a show of culture, wealth or control by the colonists.3 Additionally, if any variation in diet or physical activity could be identified between individuals buried in different tomb types, this could be indicative of varied roles and positions in society, confirming the assumption that burial types represent individuals of diverse social status.

are single inhumations, whereas the later Roman and Late Antique tombs are largely multiple burials or ossuaries. Both sexes are represented in all time periods, suggesting there was no segregation in burial in terms of sex in any time period and no segregation by age for either the Roman or Late Antique periods, with all ages being buried together in large family or group tombs. Table 1. Minimum numbers of individuals (MNI) for each age category for the sampled assemblage. AGE CATEGORY

For the Late Antique period (AD 330-700), though tombs have been reported at a variety of locations, the majority of those with human skeletal remains available for study came from the area of the North Cemetery. As KULP has demonstrated, there is a significant decrease in population size during the Late Antique period, until the city is eventually abandoned around AD 700, though the evidence of three Late Antique basilica churches demonstrates it was still a settlement of significant proportions.4 After this time there is no evidence to indicate a settlement larger than a small village. Most of the Late Antique tombs are located next to the North Cemetery Basilica. These are largely built or stone-lined osteothekes, which seem to contain a mixture of primary and secondary burials. Some of the latest burials in the area of the Sanatorium Basilica, just to the east of the North Cemetery, are dated to the 4th century and therefore represent the earliest known burials from this time period; there is a single Late Antique burial from south of the settlement.5 The North Cemetery is the only location where all three time periods are represented and it accounts for the largest proportion of the tombs used for this study.

MNI

Neonate (Birth)

8

Infant (0-3 years)

25

Child (4-11 years)

65

Adolescent (12-17 years)

22

Adult (Young Adult 18-29 years) (Middle adult 30-44 years) (Old Adult 45+ years)

248

A key feature of the demographic make-up of a tomb is the age-at-death of its inhabitants. The pie charts in Figure 1 demonstrate the age-at-death by individual or by individual skeletal element, which often has to be the case for recording commingled remains. Unfortunately, this recording method makes it difficult to directly compare the largely single inhumations of the Hellenistic period with the generally commingled, multiple burials of the later periods, as commingled remains will always have many unageable elements. This demonstrates the difficulty of comparing material from different burial types and of different levels of preservation. The Figure 2 pie charts show minimum numbers of individuals by age category per time period, calculated from the highest bone count by diagnostic zones of the bones. Because ‘like’ is compared with ‘like’ in this case, these produce a clearer view of the demographic make-up of the tombs and make it easier to compare across the time periods. All age categories are represented in all time periods, but no neonates were identified for the Hellenistic period. However, this could be an excavation bias due to poor retrieval, combined with taphonomic factors, as the Hellenistic skeletal remains were generally in a poorer state of preservation.

Demography For this preliminary study, in terms of the material analysed so far, there are 92 tombs (57 Hellenistic, 17 Roman, 19 Late Antique) with a combined Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) of 368. The MNI by age group and the age ranges for each age category are outlined in Table 1. Due to the high numbers of individuals that could not be aged any more closely than ‘Adult’ (18+ years), a breakdown of adult age groups for MNI has not been presented at this stage. Although there are more Hellenistic tombs than for the other periods, there is the smallest number of individuals in this time period because most of the Hellenistic graves

The Hellenistic period generally displays a smaller proportion of sub-adult deaths. There are no individual sub-adult graves, other than a single adolescent grave, though it is possible that this individual could have been considered socially to be an adult at this stage of maturity, even if not fully grown biologically. All sub-adult skeletal remains came from graves that also contained adult burials. There are too few sub-adult deaths in the studied sample to be a realistic death profile of an ancient population. It cannot, therefore,

Dijkstra and Moles 2017. Whitelaw et al. 2012; Trainor and Whitelaw 2016. 5 Frend and Johnston 1962; Sweetman and Grigoropoulos 2010: 370. 3 4

65

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 1. Proportion of recorded skeletal elements per age-at-death category for each time period.

Figure 2. Proportion of minimum numbers of individuals (MNI) per age-at-death category for each time period.

Adult category is the largest adult category represented in all time periods, this is an indicator that despite the body having matured beyond infancy and weaning when it should have developed a strong immune system, infectious diseases were able to frequently attack the population. This is the same for all ancient societies; infectious diseases were the major killers, but they were more common in unhygienic urban environments and also spread more easily in dense living conditions, as is likely to have been the case during both the Hellenistic and Roman periods at Knossos. In contrast, potentially less dense living conditions in the contracting city during the Late Antique period may be represented in the higher proportions of individuals in the Middle and Old Adult age categories, which are particularly low for the Roman period.

be said that fewer individuals were dying prior to reaching adulthood in the Hellenistic period. This death profile may suggest that subadults were often buried elsewhere and perhaps the only occasion where sub-adults are included in the adult burials was if death occurred at the same time. This makes the demographic profile of the Hellenistic period difficult to compare to that of the later periods, which appear to have a more representative demographic cross-section of the population in the burial record. There is a slightly larger proportion of deaths in the neonate and infant categories in the Late Antique period and a slightly larger proportion of deaths in the child and adolescent categories in the Roman period. It is normal to have a high infant mortality rate in ancient populations due to the dangers surrounding childbirth, weaning, and building the immune system. Therefore, the numbers of neonate and infant deaths in the Late Antique sample are unsurprising and simply demonstrate that they afforded the respect of a proper burial to all age groups. However, when a higher proportion of deaths in the child and adolescent categories is observed, alongside the fact that the Young

Dental Disease Most dental diseases are caused by a build-up of plaque in the mouth, and whether through caries, abscesses or periodontal disease, this eventually leads to tooth loss. The nature of this bacterial environment depends largely on the diet, though there may be genetic and 66

Anna Moles: Urbanism and its Impact on Human Health and Diet

Figure 3. Prevalence of caries, calculus and antemortem tooth loss (AMTL) by time period.

other environmental factors affecting the conditions in the mouth. Caries can be particularly indicative of the level of carbohydrate intake.

in an overall underscoring. Similarly, calculus is easily chipped off as a result of both taphonomic processes and in storage, though this is likely to have affected all the material in the same way. Ante mortem tooth loss is very similar for the Hellenistic (4.7% of teeth or tooth sockets) and Roman (4.8%) periods, only a fraction higher in the Roman period. All these diseases are age-progressive and therefore the slightly longer life span in the Late Antique period may account for the marginally higher degree of ante mortem tooth loss in this period (6.5%) caused by quite high levels of both caries and calculus.

Caries, recorded by tooth rather than by individual, occurred in 15.3% (71/463) of teeth in the Hellenistic period, 33.6% (158/470) in the Roman period and 28.8% (275/956) in the Late Antique period. Calculus occurred in 20.8% (95/457) of Hellenistic teeth, 27.6% (127/460) of Roman teeth and 42.5% (391/921) of Late Antique teeth. Rates of caries, calculus and ante mortem tooth loss by time period are displayed in Figure 3. There is a peak in caries in the Roman period, suggesting that in this period, more than the others, more people would have had a predominately carbohydrate diet. This could indicate a pressure on resources, with protein sources, such as meat, being reserved for the very wealthy and special occasions, as is generally the case in ancient populations. However, the higher levels of calculus in the Late Antique period, alongside lower levels of caries, may indicate a more balanced and varied diet with a slightly larger protein component. This may represent a return to a more personal or family level of food production, with the reduction in population, rather than a state administered food distribution system which may have been more necessary for the population size during the Hellenistic and Roman periods.

These results show much higher caries prevalences than for other skeletal assemblages which have been analysed from these time periods in Crete, though published comparative material is limited. First century AD Sfakaki, 6th-7th centuries Gortyn and 6th-7th centuries Eleutherna appear to have remarkably low levels of all sorts of dental disease.6 This could in part be due to the scoring system used, as many researchers simply record caries as present or absent and only once a cavity has formed, whereas the Hillson 8-point system employed for this study has two phases prior to a cavity forming (opacity and then roughening of the enamel).7 Nevertheless, the Knossos assemblage appears to display quite a high prevalence of caries compared to other contemporary Cretan populations, which would be typical of a large, dense urban environment where most people’s staples will be simple cereal based foods like bread, but it could also indicate the inclusion of sweet foods like honey and fruit which might be part of a more elite diet. However, calculus also commonly

Caries and calculus are both lowest in the Hellenistic period, which may suggest a more mixed diet. This could also be a consequence of preservation, as generally the Hellenistic bones had the worst state of preservation and many of the teeth had a degree of surface degradation which may have made the early manifestations of caries impossible to see, resulting

6 7

67

Bourbou 2005: 92; 2010: 47. Hillson 2001.

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 4. Prevalence of caries, calculus and antemortem tooth loss (AMTL) by sex.

occurs and so it is difficult to know whether to interpret this as indicative of social differentiation with some people having a carbohydrate-heavy diet and others having a more mixed diet, or whether this is a product of how calculus manifests itself in different individuals. The aetiology of calculus remains difficult to interpret and it can occur in both diets that are high in carbohydrates or proteins. The stable isotope analysis will aid this interpretation by indicating aspects of diet such as how much animal protein was being consumed.

high carbohydrate diets causing an acidic environment in the mouth, conducive to caries, and diets that lead to an alkaline oral environment, which allows for the formation of calculus. This explanation of greater differentiation rather than a significantly different diet between males and females is supported by there being no significant difference in ante mortem tooth loss, with the female result slightly higher at 9.2% (63/687), compared to the male 8.9% (43/484). The overall picture is one of a mixed diet featuring both carbohydrates and protein and with some level of differentiation between individuals, which stable carbon and nitrogen isotope analyses will help to clarify.

Comparing caries and calculus between the sexes does seem to indicate some difference in diet between males and females (Figure 4). Male prevalence for caries was 25.6% (84/328 teeth), with female caries in 15.1% (69/458) of teeth, and the occurrence of calculus in teeth was 49.2% (160/325) for males and 30.8% (140/454) for females. However, this can again be difficult to interpret, and it is also important to bear in mind that the majority of the teeth belonged to individuals of unknown sex (those with no morphological characteristics from which to determine sex) and a smaller number of indeterminate sex (those who have morphological traits for determining sex which are intermediate between male and female). The occurrence of dental pathology in the teeth of unknown sexwas 32.6% (335/1029) for caries, 27.8% (281/1010) for calculus and 3% (38/1290) for ante mortem tooth loss. Often males have higher levels of calculus, as is the case here, commonly interpreted as indicatinga superior diet amongst males, featuring more meat; a somewhat erroneous inference due to complex aetiology of calculus. In this case, higher levels of caries are also observed in the males, which indicates that there was a wider spread of different diets among males, both

Bone Lengths Rather than using regression equations to estimate stature, the raw measurements of the long bones, metacarpals and metatarsals were taken. Although stature equations might make different bones more comparable, this method avoids the errors that these equations can have for different populations, other than those for which the equations were designed. When a larger sample is obtained the validity of these equations will be tested. Figures 5 and 6 show the average bone lengths for each time period. Unfortunately, due to the level of fragmentation in the assemblage, there were sometimes few or no measurable bones of some types for a certain time period. There are no clear or consistent patterns emerging in the results so far, but what might be expected from looking at bone metrics are larger bone lengths when a population has improved access to adequate nutrition. However, the dental evidence indicates that there were no substantial differences in diet between the time periods. A very 68

Anna Moles: Urbanism and its Impact on Human Health and Diet

Figure 5. Average long bone lengths for each time period.

Figure 6. Average metacarpal (MC) and metatarsal (MT) lengths for each time period.

large assemblage is necessary to clearly see trends, and preferably it would be possible to assess males and females separately, which was not the case in any accurate way for this largely commingled assemblage. When the final sample has been studied, sexing by metric methods could be employed, though this has the inherent problem of not allowing for any crossover in stature or bone lengths between the sexes, which there will naturally be in any assemblage.

is important to consider the age profile of the group of individuals that is being analysed. Individuals in the Hellenistic period display the highest levels of both osteoarthritis (23.2%) and entheseal changes (41.1%) as shown in Figure 7, which may indicate a more heavy-labouring population, in comparison with osteoarthritis and entheseal changes in the Roman (7.7% and 38.2% respectively) and Late Antique (13% and 28.7% respectively) periods. However, incidences of intervertebral disc disease (38.5%) are relatively low in the early time period, compared to the Roman (49.9%) and Late Antique (54.7%) periods. Though this could be interpreted as demonstrating that the population did not live long enough to develop these spinal lesions, it may also be due to the fact that there were relatively few vertebrae from the Hellenistic sample and that this may be an unrepresentative

Joint Disease and Entheseal Changes Osteoarthritis, intervertebral disc disease and entheseal changes (at muscle attachment sites) have been recorded to identify broad differences in activity levels or types of activity over time or within sub-groups of the population. Joint disease is also age progressive and this is the main factor in its manifestation, therefore it 69

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 7. Prevalence of osteoarthritis, intervertebral disc disease and Entheseal changes by time period.

result. This idea of a more active, heavy-labouring Hellenistic population fits well with the burial type which might indicate individuals of lower social status. The Hellenistic graves were simple pit graves with one or two simple pots, compared to a possibly more elite class of less manual-labouring Roman and Late Antique populations being buried in the more elaborate built tombs of these later periods. However, there is no evidence that any other tomb types were being used in the Hellenistic period, therefore it is only for the Roman period that such a comparison will be possible, when there is a complete data set. The progressively higher prevalence of disc disease may demonstrate an increasing life span, particularly for the Late Antique period where other analyses have indicated a higher life expectancy.

reduction in the size of the settlement and population may have eased pressure on resources and allowed for better sanitary conditions within the city, thus allowing for increased life expectancies. The Roman period had the highest caries prevalence, indicating a higher carbohydrate component to the diet than in the preceding or succeeding periods. This could be due to either pressure on resources and an administrated food distribution system where cheap staples, such as bread or porridge, make up a substantial proportion of many people’s diets, or could also be caused by increased sugars, from honey or fruits, in a more elite diet. Higher rates of both caries and calculus amongst males mayindicate a more varied diet compared to females. Though the nature of the differences in diet can be difficult to interpret, it is clear that there was a significant difference in diets between the sexes, demonstrating a level of social segregation or differentiation. The bone lengths do not indicate any trend or significant changes in stature over time. This may be due to the fact that there was no substantial change, but it could also be due to the small numbers of measurable long bones and combining the data for both sexes due to the lack of sex determination for many of these commingled remains.

Conclusions Though this is a work in progress, with other analyses to be carried out in their entirety, some tentative interpretations can be made. Regarding the further work to be conducted, both the stable isotope analysis and the microscopic enamel hypoplasia analysis will complement the presented analyses and allow patterns which seem to be emerging from one data set to be backed up or explored further through another complementary data set. Additionally, all interpretations are preliminary and may change when the remainder of the assemblage is included in the analysis. All interpretations will also be easier to pursue once the dataset is complete,as it will cover more locations and tomb types.

The Hellenistic assemblage appears to represent individuals with a more heavy-labouring lifestyle as indicated by the higher prevalence of osteoarthritis and entheseal changes compared to the later time periods. This could also be a result of only a certain subset of the population being represented in the pit graves of the North Cemetery, if the excavation record has not sampled the same diversity in the population as it may have done for the later time periods.

The greatest proportion of higher ages-at-death occurred in the Late Antique period, indicating that the 70

Anna Moles: Urbanism and its Impact on Human Health and Diet

Though further conclusions drawing together all the analyses will be reserved until after the full analysis of the complete dataset, there does seem to be some indication of increased pressure on resources which resultedin a decreased quality of life, in terms of increased disease and lower life expectancy, in the Roman period, compared to the Late Antique and possibly also the Hellenistic period. However, the different burial type (single inhumations compared to communal burial, i.e. individual skeletons versus commingled remains) in the Hellenistic period makes some comparisons difficult. Additionally, some analytical variation may correlate more strongly with age progression than with diet and activity, such as the ante mortem tooth loss and intervertebral disc disease; therefore, it is always important to bear in mind the limitations of the data when making interpretations.

Athens Supplementary Volume 28). London: The British School at Athens. Dijkstra, T. and A. Moles 2017. When colonists die: assessing the impact of migration on burial practices in Roman Greece. Presented at EAA 2017 Maastricht Building Bridges 30 August-3 September 2017. Frend, W.H.C. and D.E. Johnston 1962. The Byzantine Basilica church at Knossos. ABSA 57: 186-238. Hillson, S.W. 2001. Recording dental caries in archaeological human remains. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 11(4): 249-89. Sweetman, R. and D. Grigoropoulos 2010. Roman Knossos: discovering the city through the evidence of rescue excavations. ABSA 105: 339-79. Trainor, C. and T. Whitelaw 2016. A city in flux: Hellenistic and Roman Knossos. Presented at The Enigma of Late Hellenistic and Roman Crete: Unanswered Questions. The 1st International Conference of the Colloquium on Roman Crete. University of Nottingham, 18-19 November 2016. Whitelaw, T., A. Vasilakis and M. Bredaki 2012. Knossos through nine millennia: preliminary perspectives from the Knossos urban landscape project (20052011). Presented at The Annual Open Meeting of the British School at Athens. Athens; Thessaloniki.

Bibliography Bourbou, C. 2005. Biological status in Hellenistic and Roman elites in western Crete (Greece). Eres 13: 87110. Bourbou, C. 2010. Health and Disease in Byzantine Crete (7th-12th Centuries AD). Farnham: Ashgate Publishing. Coldstream, J.N. and H.W. Catling 1996. Knossos North Cemetery: Early Greek Tombs (The British School at

71

72

Social Identity and Treatment in Death

73

74

Defining Social Identities at Cemeteries of Late Classical Argos: Age- and Gender-Groups on the Basis of Distinctive Funerary Gifts Georgia Ivou Abstract: Burial practices in Argos during the classical period seem to be almost entirely homogenous: inhumation was the only burial practice for adults, and usually occurred in cist graves made of poros slabs. Pit graves were not that common. Most graves shared a common orientation and were grouped in clusters. In terms of grave gifts, vessels were preferred. Within this burial environment, would it be possible to identify features of the deceased’s social persona, such as the age or gender, through the grave gifts? The placement of two distinct types of offerings, i.e. a terracotta figurine and a vase with plastic decoration, into the 4th-century BC graves under study, may to do with the burial practices of two different social groups. The selection of these particular types of offerings to accompany the dead is indicative of their social status and of the socio-political circumstances in mid-4th century BC Argos. Keywords: Argos, Classical, grave offerings, individuality, social status Introduction

In this frame, concerns arise regarding the methodology by which the burial should be tackled.3 Although skeletal remains are the only traces of the deceased, lack of osteological analyses for Classical and Hellenistic burials substantially restricts deduction of secure results for their identity.4 Recording of tangible evidence of the burial procedure, its examination as a whole, and its comparison to contemporary, previous, and subsequent practices in the same area, are the basic stages of research. Interesting conclusions may be deduced by comparing practices adopted in neighbouring sites, as well as their association with written sources regarding the settlement and the historical events that took place in the area.

The study of burials is an attempt to record and interpret symbolic actions through material remains of just one event of a whole procedure, as a burial is considered to be a small part of a range of actions that start right after a person has been announced dead and are completed with the memorial ceremonies. The underlying question that has troubled archaeologists the last decades is if, and to what extent, such a study can define the identity and the social status of the deceased, and consequently outline the structure of the societies that they once belonged to.1 Handling death is a task for the deceased’s beloved ones, who follow rules, intentionally or not, that are defined by certain religious, social and customary values which are rarely recognizable. Regarding the material side of the procedure, the data have to do mainly with the location and the shape of the tomb, the type of burial (i.e. inhumation or cremation, body positioning, attire), the kind of grave goods and their quantity and quality, and in general with any material remains that are associated with the burial ritual and may yield information about the interpretation of each choice. The abovementioned rules and their material expression are diversified from one place to another, and from one period to the other, depending on the prevailing social, political, historical, financial conditions, etc.2

In any case, the burial setting that comes into light after the excavation process may be associated with acts that are not easily interpreted, or others that have left no traces and burials that remain invisible,5 rendering the research for their identity a procedure with incomplete results. The Burial Setting in Argos during the 4th century BC Taking the above into consideration, two graves from Argos dated to the 4th century BC will be examined in this paper. These tombs stand out from the usual burial practice attested at the city, due to the offerings they contained.6 Since the grave goods, either personal 3 Snodgrass (2009: 99-100) argues that regarding Classical, Hellenistic and Roman times, engagement with burial practices is in inverse proportion to the complexity of the society in which these are applied to. 4 For the advantages of osteological analysis, see Strutz and Tarlow 2013: 2-5. For osteological research in Classical archaeology, see MacKinnon 2007. 5 Morris (1987: 101-9) discusses ‘invisible burials’ in regard to burials in Athens during the Proto- to Mid-Geometric, and Archaic times. 6 The grave goods come from two cemeteries, excavated by the

1 Morris 1987: 29-43; Morris 1992; McHugh 1999: 1-18. Recently, Chapman 2013; Dimakis 2016a: 7-8. 2 A considerable number of factors can affect burial customs: soil morphology, the location and organization of a settlement, the existence of a legal or moral frame, family traditions, ambitions, etc.

75

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

possessions of the dead or offerings by their family, are visible during the burial ceremony, it is reasonable to assume that at least some of them symbolize and indicate part of their identity that was considered important at the given time and place. The question to be answered is under which circumstances the symbolic character of the objects selected was formed.7 In the case study of Argos, is it possible to connect the deceased who received special offerings with certain qualities? Consequently, how is the choice of the distinctive marking in a seemingly homogenous burial environment interpreted, taking into consideration the social-political situation in the city of the 4th century?8

white ground lebetes gamikoi may belong to the same category. In general, white ground vases comprise a distinctive group that seems to have a special place in burial pottery production.12 The presence of terracotta figurines increases at the end of the 5th century BC. Female standing and seated figures are the largest group,13 while less common are the standing young men, temple boys, and other types of the classical repertoire. Jewellery (earrings, rings, pins, etc.), other metal objects, and coins were rare until the late 4th century BC. During the Hellenistic period, things change:14 grave forms vary, the proportion between cist and tile graves is reversed, and burial monuments coexist with plain graves that are placed without specific order.15 Regarding the grave offerings, vases that are connected with grooming and rituals replace the drinking vases, while the number of jewellery and metal objects in general is increased.

In Argos during the 4th century BC, inhumation was the only practice used for adult burials. Adults were buried mainly in cist graves, made of poros slabs. Tile graves and simple pits covered by stones were less common. Children were often found in the same graves with adults. Infants were placed in clay tubs-larnakes.9 The graves were grouped in clusters, arranged usually in parallel rows, with the same orientation. This arrangement probably reflects some sort of connection between the deceased of the same cluster, more or less tight.10

The graves under study from Argos dating to the 4th century do not differ from the above described general typological and spatial rules. However, two terracotta objects found among the otherwise common offerings of the graves are both characterized by elements that mark them out from the ordinary types of the coroplastic and pottery production. Furthermore, they are rather rare. These facts necessitate their special treatment.

In terms of grave offerings during the Classical period, vases, especially drinking vases, such as kotylai, kylikes, skyphoi, and bolsals, were preferred. At the first decades of the 4th century BC, following the tradition of the previous century, Corinthian type pyxides and lekanides are also found, vases that are conventionally connected with the world of women.11 Black glazed and

White Ground Lebes Gamikos with Plastic Decoration of Female Busts on the Shoulder

Ephorate of Antiquities of the Argolid at G. Kostakis and M. Katsanos plots, during the period 2006-2012. These cemeteries were briefly presented at the 1st International Conference ‘The Archaeological Work in Peloponnese’, held at Tripolis, November 7-11, 2012 (Ivou 2018). 7 For the meaning of grave goods, see Ekengren 2013 and Dimakis 2016a: 53-4, 61-2. On identity, see Fowler 2013: 512-13; Dimakis 2016a: 7. 8 The general presentation of the features of the Classical and Hellenistic cemeteries in the Argolid, with special references for Argos in Dimakis 2016a: 18-22. For the planning of the city during these periods, see Barakari-Gléni and Pariente 1998. For the historical and social-political data of the period, see Mitsos 1945 and Tomlinson 1972: 126-51. 9 The age of infants, children and adolescents is usually concluded by the size of the grave or the type of the offerings. For the special treatment of infants/young children, who were placed into clay tubs-larnakes, see Dimakis 2016a: 23-4. Clay tubs-larnakes have also been found inside graves of adults, e.g. at G. Papadopoulos plot (Alexandropoulou 2016) and the grave no. 16 at Katsanos plot (Ivou 2018: 286-7). The presence of clay tubs-larnakes with a fair number of grave offerings during the Classical period is briefly mentioned at Barakari-Gleni 1996-1997: 518-19. 10 For the internal planning of Classical cemeteries at Argos, see Dimakis 2009: 34-9, where it is proposed that the intra muros clusters function also as territorial markers; Dimakis (2016a: 17) supposes that the placing of groups of graves outside the inhabited area is an indication of social differentiation. For intramural adult burials, see Snodgrass 2009: 100. 11 Risser 2001: 43-8, for the pyxis and Blegen et al. 1964: 146-8 and McPhee and Pemberton 2012: 217-19, for the lekanis. For the local

A cemetery of 81 graves, dating from Classical to Roman times, was excavated at Kostakis plot in the northeast sector of Argos. The cemetery was used more intensively during the 5th and 4th century BC. From this cemetery, grave 33 is selected for this study,16 because of a special grave offering found in it: a white ground lebes gamikos production of unglazed lekanides, see Alexandropoulou 2016: 215, and the relative references there. Apart from the grave that was studied by Alexandropoulou (2016: 214-26), three lekanides were found inside a clay larnax and two more were placed outside of another clay larnax at Kostakis plot (Ivou 2018: 289-90). For the association between certain types of offerings and female burials, see Carter 1998: 5826 and Hoffmann 2002: 86-110. For the definition of the gender in general, see Shepherd 2013: esp. 546-9. 12 For the production of white ground vessels at Argos, see Alexandropoulou 2016: 194-6, 199-200. Lebes gamikos, kylix, kotyle, Boeotian-type kantharos, lekythos and oinochoe are covered with white slip. 13 The type is described by Sarri (2013: 184-5); for their reading as amulets, see Dimakis 2016a: 72. 14 Dimakis 2009: 40-2, 43-4. 15 For the construction of burial monuments in the cemeteries of the north Peloponnese during the Hellenistic period and their interpretation, see Dimakis 2016a: 43-4. 16 The numbering follows the excavation diary. The grave was oriented at the E-W axis, as was the case for the most of the graves of this cemetery. Its dimensions were 2.30 x 1.10 m.

76

Georgia Ivou: Defining Social Identities at Cemeteries of Late Classical Argos

Figure 1. Kostakis plot, grave 33. Vases from the grave (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/ Ephorate of Antiquities of Argolid/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

with plastic decoration of two female busts (protomes) on the shoulder. This type of vase has been connected with females of certain status and age.

(Figure 1). Two bronze earrings were retrieved from inside the lebes during the pottery conservation.20 The vase with plastic decoration is characterized by a flaring ring-foot, ovoid body, almost horizontal shoulders and a thick, vertical rim (Figures 2, 3).21 Its vertical handles of round section have a small knob at the top. The plain type lid bears a conical knob. Two female busts have been attached to the shoulder, between the handles of the vase.22

Grave 33 is a tile-covered pit grave. More than two individuals were buried in the original pit: two skeletons, with opposite orientation, were uncovered in extended position, while two small skulls with some tiny bones, belonging to children, were found between the legs of the earlier deceased.17 After the last burial, the pit was covered with tiles. At a later stage, two more individuals were buried above the covering tiles. During the last burial, the bones of the earlier deceased were piled together in the east part of the grave. The grave was again covered by parts of tiles and stone slabs.

The front side of the female protomes of the lebes was made by the use of a mould. The women wear an Argive peplos that covers their hands, forming triangular folds above the chest. Their rich hair is parted in the middle and it surrounds the face. The peplophoroi wear

The small white ground lebes gamikos with plastic decoration under study, its lid,18 and a small white ground kotyle of the 2nd quarter of the 4th century BC19 were found together with the two deceased that were last buried on top of the tiles of the original pit

Inv. no. ΒΕ08/108. Only one is preserved intact. It consists of two twisted bronze wires that form a hoop, with an ivy leaf-shaped ending. 21 The term ‘white ground lebes gamikos with plastic decoration of female busts (protomes) on the shoulder’ is used in this paper, based on the shape of the vessel and not because of its usage or decoration. For relative discussion, see Alexandropoulou 2016: 189-90. Vases of similar type from Argos, without the protomes, have been described as ‘ovoid pyxis’ and ‘pyxis with an ovoid body of the Argive workshop’ (Sarri 2013: 185, no. 4 and Alexandri 1963: 62, fig. 75c). In her recent study, Tzachou-Alexandri (2013: esp. 145-7) uses the term ‘lebes gamikos with plastic protomes’. For the red-figure lebes gamikos, see Cassimatis 1993 and Sgourou 1994; the shape is common in the cemeteries of South Italy and Sicily, see Graepler 1997: 92, type 411/1 and Hoffmann 2002: 40, type 411/1, 411/2. 22 For the development of the shape and its variants, see Alexandropoulou 2016: 190-3. Dissimilarities at various features of the vase have been recorded. It seems that the shape gradually becomes more slender, with a taller base and a more angular conjunction between the shoulder and the neck. 20

At the area where the children burials were, three bronze pinheads in the shape of a pomegranate and parts of two bronze pyramidshaped earrings were found. Similar pins have been discovered in 5th century BC graves at Argos and at the nearby Heraion (KilianDirlmeier 1984: 276-7, type FIIb). For the shape of the earrings, see Papaspyridi-Karouzou 1933-1935: 40, fig. 22. 18 Inv. no. at the Museum of Argos ΒΕ07/2844 and ΒΕ07/2845. The lebes is 12.7 cm high (with the handles), its foot diam. is 4.2 cm and its max. diam. is 8.00 cm. The protomes are 3.2 cm high. 19 Inv. no. ΒΕ07/2846. Dimensions: height 6 cm, foot diam. 3.2 cm, rim diam. 6.3 cm. cf. Sparkes and Talcott 1970: 258, no 324 (375-360 BC). 17

77

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 2. Kostakis plot, grave 33. Lebes gamikos, side A (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of Argolid/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

Figure 3. Kostakis plot, grave 33. Lebes gamikos, side B (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of Argolid/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

a low and broad polos on the head, decorated with tiny incised lines.23

white ground lebetes gamikoi that are commonly found in cemeteries at Argos from the end of the 5th century BC and during the first half of the 4th century BC,25 mainly because of two female protomes between the handles.26 The presence of a small hole at the bottom of the vessel, made before firing, is another distinctive feature of the type, attested also at some plain white ground lebetes gamikoi.

The white ground lebes gamikos with plastic decoration of peplophoros protomes on the shoulder is not rare in the Argive funerary pottery production.24 The small size vase is distinguished from the plain black glazed and Traces of red colour on the white slip that once covered the whole surface of the vessel are visible on its body and on the garment of a protome. Black colour is preserved on the eyes of a peplophoros. For colour traces, see Alexandropoulou 2016: 196 and 220-1, where the hypothesis of depicting a painted frontal female face on the body of the vessel has been also elaborated. The simple, white ground lebes gamikos from Argos was also painted. See Kyriakou 2008: 172-6, for the white ground vessels with polychrome decoration. 24 Tzachou-Alexandri 2013: 147, n. 33 and Alexandropoulou 2016: 194. Apart from the recently published examples, a number of single peplophoros protomes from the cemeteries of the city, which now can be attributed to the plastic decoration of such vases, indicates that this type of pottery constituted a distinctive category of grave offerings, during the first half of the 4th century BC. The different workshops and moulds create variations of the peplophoros figure, traced mainly in the shape of the face, the sub-features and the coiffure. The polos on the head is sometimes replaced by a sakkos. 23

The first published example of a lebes gamikos with plastic decoration was found in a cist grave excavated in the 1960s at Corinthou Str., not far from Kostakis plot.27 The lebes gamikos led Tzachou-Alexandri to the assumption that the deceased was a woman, maybe cf. Sarri 2013: 185, 197 fig. 10 and Tzachou-Alexandri 2013: 146. For the distinctiveness of the decoration on the Argive vases, see Alexandropoulou 2016: esp. 196-7. 27 Alexandri 1962: 93, fig. 70 and Tzachou-Alexandri 2013 (Vigos plot). The lebes gamikos, three black glazed kotylai, a skyphos, a white ground stemless kylix, a peplophoros figurine and three pins were the offerings for the only dead of the grave. 25 26

78

Georgia Ivou: Defining Social Identities at Cemeteries of Late Classical Argos

a priestess of a deity, possibly Persephone. TzachouAlexandri seeks the inspiration of the Argive workshop in the scenes of Ascent of Persephone in the Attic vase painting and in the terracotta female peplophoros protomes. The white slip and the piercing at the bottom further supported the burial character of the vase with a special ritual use, appropriated for a priestess.28

an ahoros kore, a woman who died prematurely.33 According to her hypothesis, the white ground lebetes gamikoi with plastic decoration were chosen as special grave offerings for young girls who belonged to a group with a potentially important social role. The distinctive treatment for these unlucky girls is also confirmed by the relatively wealthy offerings, a case repeated in the burial of Vigos plot.

Seven more published vases come from a single cist grave in the region of Charadros River, in the northeast sector of Argos.29 According to the recent detailed study of the grave, 19 vessels (seven white ground lebetes gamikoi with plastic decoration, seven white ground kotylai, two black-glazed kotylai, a stemless kylix and two Corinthian-type pyxides) were grave gifts for a young girl.30 Alexandropoulou concludes that the young girl, who was buried at the beginning of the 4th century BC, was later treated, after almost 50 years from her death, with respect. At that time, her bones were carefully gathered and placed inside a clay larnax, which was then put into a pit in the bottom of the cist. Two infants were already buried in the larnax.31

Getting married and giving birth was of great importance for ancient Greeks, who thought that women’s role was fulfilled only through marriage and childbearing. An early death was certainly a tragic event for family and friends. Moreover, a premature death overbalances the physical order with major consequences not only for the oikos but also for the polis, since its function is based at the prosperity of its structural units, the oikoi.34 Furthermore, the main role of the institution of marriage is the maintenance of the oikos, through the birth of legitimate children. The polis expects also to find its future citizens and soldiers in the oikoi. Under this frame, an ahoros kore, who was not given the chance to get married or to have children, belongs to a certain social group that has a distinctive status and receives a special treatment in death.35

The treatment of the first burial as well as the time gap between the burials of the young girl and the infants that excludes any close relationship among the dead, may indicate that the young woman was of a specific social status, and she was treated accordingly, even nearly half a century later from her death. But how was she recognized as an individual of specific social standing after all these years? Was the presence of a lebes gamikos with plastic and colour decoration a status indicator? If this was the case, then the identity of the dead must have had the same significance as 50 years earlier, thus justifying her special treatment.

Could this theory be used for the grave under study in Kostakis plot too? And consequently for all the cases of white ground lebetes gamikoi with plastic decoration in graves of the 4th century BC at Argos? The identification of one of the two last buried individuals of grave 33 with a woman is further supported by the two bronze earrings. The same combination of vases (lebes gamikos and white ground kotyle) was also attested in multiple proportions in the Charadros grave, where the deceased was definitely a woman.

Alexandropoulou does not find any connection between the lebes gamikos with plastic decoration with the world of Persephone.32 She further remarks that the head of the female protomes is not covered by a veil, a convention that identifies married women, but by polos, a symbol possibly related to wedding garments. Taking into consideration the young age of the deceased, she identifies the young female as

However, neither the construction of grave 33 at Kostakis plot, nor the number of offerings indicate special treatment of the dead, as the previous examples at Vigos plot and the Charadros grave. In the first case, the grave contained only one deceased with rich offerings. In the second grave, the young girl, who had received a fair number of clay objects, was treated with

Tzachou-Alexandri 2013: 148-50. Alexandropoulou 2016. The grave was found on Kritis Str. (G. Papadopoulos plot). 30 The sex and age of the dead were determined by osteological analysis. 31 The vases that accompanied the dead were pushed aside during the placement of the larnax and their sherds were found around, under, and inside the larnax. Sometime during the 50 years that separate the burials of the young girl and the infants, three more adults were buried into the same cist. 32 Alexandropoulou (2016: 197) expresses the opinion that the large terracotta female protomes do not depict deities but mortal women. Recently, Sabetai (2015) suggested that the presence of terracotta peplophoros protomes into graves was the material expression of the status of the deceased, pointing to him/her as a premature dead. In the cases of the elderly women, maybe the protomes reminded the fulfillment of their biological and social role. 28

33 Ahorai were the young women who died before getting married, during the childbirth, or even the mothers of young children. 34 For the ahoros death of unmarried girls, their age specification, the impact of their loss for the ancient social structure and the references at the ancient Greek literature, see Margariti 2017: i-ii, 2-6, 201-2 (mainly for Athens). Regarding the structure and the function of an oikos in a city-state and the place of women into it, see Lacey 1968 (gen.); Demand 1994: 1-4; Pomeroy 1997 (gen.); Humphreys 1998 (gen.) and Foxhall 2013: 24-6 and 32-6. 35 On examples of Classical and Hellenistic graves that have been interpreted as ahoroi young women: cf. Sabetai 2012; Sabetai 2015: esp. 158-60; Bonanno-Aravantinos 2015; Petropoulos 2005 and Papaikonomou 2007: esp. 243-9; according to Margariti (2017: 290-5 and 378-9), in Classical Attica the death of an ahoros kore was pointed out mainly through the epigrams and the iconography on the grave reliefs.

29

79

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

respect during the reuse of the cist, almost 50 years after her death. Reversely at Kostakis plot grave, two individuals shared the limited space above the tile cover of a plain pit, received only two small vases and two bronze earrings, and then the grave was covered by terracotta tiles and stone slabs. The grave stands out just because of the presence of the lebes gamikos.

premature death for the wellbeing of the oikos and the prosperity of a democratic polis.38 This hypothesis in no case doubts the impact of an ahoros death to the non-democratically structured societies. Besides, the category of ahoros has been identified several times in the burial landscape of democratic and non-democratic cities, both before and after the Classical period.39 However, it is believed that the differentiation of this specific group of individuals, through the choice of placing a special type of offerings, in a city like Argos, where only limited departure from the norm has been recorded so far, shows that the Argive society treats the ahores kores with great respect, because of their decisive role to the proper function of the city. Similar principles maybe have led to the characteristic treatment of infants in Classical Argos, who were buried inside clay tubs-larnakes. As it has been proposed, this practice was used for infants who were recognized as future citizens, promoting their social status in its earliest stage.40

The modesty of grave 33 and the absence of rich offerings do not preclude the connection of the white ground lebes gamikos with plastic decoration with women of a specific social status. The symbolic character of the vase, as it is pointed out by the female protomes and the polychrome decoration in white ground, even without the pierced bottom, is too strong and one can speculate that their presence is not random. Undoubtedly, the distinctive shape and the decoration attribute symbolisms to the vase, that would have referred to specific elements of the deceased’s identity that her family wished to demonstrate during her burial. Other rules, possibly related to the relationship between the individuals who shared the same grave, could determine the way the dead were buried. The small number and the quality of the offerings could indicate the wealth of the family, a status that was not connected with a certain social role of the deceased. Maybe, this was not even an issue.36 The hypothesis of a burial of an ahoros kore, accompanied by the small white ground lebes gamikos with plastic decoration, is plausible also for the individual in grave 33 at Kostakis plot.

Figurines of Seated Old Men The second type of offering under study from the 4th century BC cemeteries at Argos is a terracotta figurine of a bearded man of old age, seated in an impressive chair (klismos). Parts of two such figurines were found in grave 36, excavated at Katsanos plot in the north cemetery of Argos.41 The group of Classical graves, In Athens, the role of the citizens’ wives and of the oikos institution in general, as a fundamental link of the city-state, was further strengthened by a 451 BC law. According to it, citizens were those men of whom both parents were Athenians. Into this frame, the role of women in the social institution of a marriage was crucial, especially regarding the maintenance of the legitimacy of the descendants. This new social context is considered to be reflected in the increased number of scenes depicting women on Attic grave reliefs, white ground lekythoi, and in vase painting, where subjects from the women’s world were now more preferable, see Osborne 2004; Houby-Nielsen 1995: esp. 150-2 and Sabetai 1993: 144-5. On the same wavelength, Closterman believes that the markers of the Classical Attic peribolos tombs reflect the anxiety about family lines dying out (Closterman 2007: 647-9). Especially though for the ahoroi, Sabetai (2009: 301, n. 66), in her study on Attic loutrophoroi, mentions that they should be considered as a ‘cultural category’ that expands beyond the Classical period, from the 7th century BC to the Late Antiquity. 39 See above n. 35, and Liston and Papadopoulos 2004, for a rich burial of an ahoros girl at Athens of the Geometric period. 40 See above n. 9. Dimakis (2016a: 23-4) compares the practice to a similar one at Athens; it seems that the two poleis share common political, cultural, and financial matters at the period. Houby-Nielsen (1995: 151-2), starting by the sudden presence of child burials at Kerameikos from 500 BC onwards, believes that every child and female burial corresponds to a respected oikos and consequently to a good male citizen, completing the image of the men of the oikos. She further points out (2000) that the emphasis given at the child burials is also connected to the importance of the legitimacy of the descendants (see above n. 38). Besides, ‘in the Greek Classical citystate, the fulfilment of civic virtues became the prime thing to be demonstrated at death and ritual’ (Houby-Nielsen 1996: 41). 41 Forty six graves, dated from the 7th century BC to Late Antiquity have been excavated at Katsanos plot (Ivou 2018: 285-9). The broader area was used for burials throughout the ages. For the north cemetery, 38

Dimakis noticed recently that the female burials in Classical Argos are more often represented than those in neighbouring Corinth. He wonders if this is an indication of women’s different treatment and of their role in the social-political structure of democratic Argos, compared to aristocratic Corinth.37 Moving a little further, we believe that the diversification of this special group of young women by the placement of certain grave offerings with specific symbolism underline indirectly that their loss was crucial also for the polis. Through this simple but definite treatment, the family of the dead, representing the beliefs of the Argive society, indicates the consequences of the

In Argos of the Classical period, death was probably not the proper occasion for the expression of personal wealth; this was expressed through public services (liturgies), evergetism, and offerings to the sanctuaries, see Dimakis 2016a: 24-5. cf. Carter 1998: 587-90. 37 Dimakis in his analysis of female burials has included both these burials confirmed as of females by osteological analysis, and those which had received pyxides and jewellery as grave offerings (Dimakis 2016a: 54-6, n. 73 and Dimakis 2016b). The myth of Telesilla, the Argive poet who armed the women of the city to fight against the Spartans after the devastating defeat at Sipeia at 494 BC, may reflect the social changes regarding the place of the women, imposed by the defeat. Besides, the battle’s result led also to broader social-political changes in the city. 36

80

Georgia Ivou: Defining Social Identities at Cemeteries of Late Classical Argos

Figure 4. Katsanos plot, grave 36. Black – glazed vases from the grave (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/ Ephorate of Antiquities of Argolid/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

dated from the second half of the 5th century to the 4th century BC, consisted of 11 graves (six poros cist graves, four pit graves with tile cover, and a cist grave made from tiles, placed at upright position), was arranged in two parallels rows. The grave offerings of the Classical burials belonged to the common pottery types. A small number of terracotta figurines of seated and standing female figures were also found.

figurines of seated men of old age, dressed in a chiton and a himation that covers the left shoulder and enfolds the left arm. The men are seated on a klismos, a chair with tall back and horizontal broad. Although the two figurines depict the same type, they differ from each other, mainly in the features of the faces. The best preserved one is 31 cm high, although a big part of the chair and the lower body is missing (Figures 5-6).45 The man’s body is depicted in a frontal position while his head turns to its left. The left hand of the figure leans on the left thigh. His right hand is missing, but it seems that it was probably extended forward at a small distance from the body, as the traces on the right side of the body suggest. The man wears a belted chiton with multiple V-shaped folds at the chest. The semibald man of old age has a moustache and a short beard, which is formed by thick, wavy locks (Figure 7). Locks cover the temples and they surround the back of the head. He has an oval face with a straight nose, while the eyes are depicted deeply at the eye sockets. A cloth of rough fabric, with incised wavy lines, covers part of the chair at the sitting surface and the back.

Grave 36 was a poros cist grave.42 The observations during the excavation support the case of a single burial. Six vessels and two terracotta figurines were put into the cist.43 The pottery belongs to the common types of the black-glazed pottery dated to the middle of the 4th century BC or not long afterwards: three skyphoi, two kotylai and a lebes gamikos with its lid (Figure 4).44 However, there is no other published example for the two mould-made terracotta figurines of the grave (Figures 5-8). These are two partially preserved see Barakari-Gléni and Pariente 1998: 174-5 and Banaka-Dimaki et al. 1998: 332-3. 42 Dimensions 2.20 x 1.15 m. 43 Part of a terracotta female figurine that was found at the upper layer of the grave is not considered as a grave offering. 44 For the skyphoi, cf. Sparkes and Talcott 1970: 260, nos 350, 351 and pl. 16-17 (375-340 BC) and Rotroff 1997: 257 no. 150 and pl. 14 (350-325 BC). For the kotylai, cf. Sparkes and Talcott 1970: 258 no. 324 and pl. 15 (375-360 BC). The black glazed lebes gamikos has an ovoid slender profile, with a sloping shoulder. The dating cannot be more precise than the first half of the 4th century BC, since the development of the shape has not been fully studied.

Inv. no. ΒΕ06/289. The right hand and the bigger part of the lower body of the figure are missing. The right side of the chair, from the lower part of the back to the base of the figurine, is not preserved. The side of the base of the klismos is 15.5 cm wide. The maximum width of the figurine at the horizontal broad is 17.5 cm. A rectangular vent hole, measuring 8 x 14 cm, was made at the lower back side of the figurine.

45

81

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 6. Katsanos plot, grave 36. Terracotta figurine BE06/289, side view (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/ Ephorate of Antiquities of Argolid/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

Figure 5. Katsanos plot, grave 36. Terracotta figurine BE06/289, front view (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/ Ephorate of Antiquities of Argolid/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

The white slip of the original painted decoration of the figurine is preserved on some parts of the surface.46 The head, the upper body of the figure, and the broad of the chair are the only preserved parts of the second terracotta figurine (Figure 8).47 The head, which turns slightly to the right, is different from the first figure. It is elongated, the beard is triangular and long with slight, wavy lines and the nose is thin and sharp. The main difference is seen in the way the man’s hair is

Figure 7. Katsanos plot, grave 36. Terracotta figurine BE06/289, detail (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of Argolid/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

For the painted decoration of clay figurines, see Tzanavari 2017 (gen.). 47 Inv. no. ΒΕ06/290. Max. height 12 cm, width 15 cm (at the horizontal broad of the chair). 46

82

Georgia Ivou: Defining Social Identities at Cemeteries of Late Classical Argos

Figure 8. Katsanos plot, grave 36. Terracotta figurine BE06/290 (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of Argolid/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

depicted. In this case, a thick roll of hair surrounds the face.48

an impressive chair, in Argos. The absence of other large terracotta figurines of seated old men from the cemeteries of Argos during the second half of the 4th century BC is perhaps a matter of coincidence.

The size, the quality, and the features of each figurine from grave 36 of Katsanos plot attest that it was not the first time that the Argive workshop produced such figurines. The figurines under study bear even more similarities with two unpublished figurines from a grave excavated in the centre of Argos.49 The right hand of these figurines has been restored as if it was raised up, forming a right angle. The figurines from Lavdas plot have more features in common with the second figurine from Katsanos plot, mainly in the way the head is depicted and at the chair’s dimensions. The stylistic comparison however, especially with the best preserved figurine from Katsanos plot, possibly lead to a later dating of the Lavdas figurines, which also corresponds with the dating of the grave to the early Hellenistic period.

In an attempt to interpret the presence of the two male figurines in grave 36 at Katsanos plot and due to the lack of similar large terracotta figurines, our focus turns to the Attic sculpture of the 4th century BC, following the commonly accepted view that coroplastic art imitates sculpture. In any case, the limitations imposed by the incompatibility of the material between the comparable objects and the different production centres should be taken into consideration. A considerable number of seated, bearded, older men, that resemble the Argive figurines, is represented on the Attic grave reliefs of the 4th century BC.51 The older men are usually part of iconographic multi-faced compositions that are enriched by younger family members. Sometimes they rest their hand on a staff and they extend the other towards the person standing opposite them in a farewell gesture. The presence of a pillow or a fabric at the chair places the scene indoors. Chairs of this type are part of the usual furniture of a household, as is confirmed by the vase painting.52 The female figures of the grave reliefs are also seated on such chairs, indicating that the action takes place inside a house. The seated men of the Attic grave reliefs usually wear a himation, the citizen’s common dress. However,

A terracotta figurine of a female seated figure on a similar klismos from a mid-4th century BC cist grave50 confirms the hypothesis of the production of the large terracotta figurines, depicting seated figures on The figurines were made by different moulds, as various details and measurements show. Clays of different composition were also used. 49 Banaka-Dimaki 1994, Lavdas plot, grave ΙΙΙ. The figurines come from a disturbed grave with scanty skeletal remains, dated to the early Hellenistic period. Common types of pottery and a large number of terracotta figurines, usually associated with the women’s world were found into the grave. I kindly thank Dr. Anna Banaka-Dimaki for the information, the photos, and the useful conversation. 50 Alexandri 1963: 62, fig. 75a, Kouros plot, grave 7. The grave contained multiple burials and various types of offerings. If the connection of the figurine with the black-glazed skyphos is valid, the group should be dated after the middle of the 4th century BC. 48

See Meyer 1989; Scholl 1996: 97-100. For the depiction of older men on grave reliefs of the 5th and the 4th century BC, also see Dillon 2006: 70-3 (focusing especially on their facial features). 52 Richter 1966: 33-7, with the relevant iconography. 51

83

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

on a small number of reliefs and marble lekythoi the older men wear an inner chiton and a himation.53

ancient sources, would probably have represented them as good citizens, a type that is common on the contemporary grave stelae and it is repeated later on the philosophers’ portraits of the Roman period.59 It has been proposed that during the 4th century BC the main division of the portrait types is that between the men of action and the men of thought.60 Many years later, at the second quarter of the 3rd century BC, the portraits of the Epicureans attempt to communicate the sense of the good citizen again, even though their body pose is totally different.61 Besides, it is the peak of the Hellenistic style, where the spiritual labour is shown clearly either through the body posture or face expression, as is the case at the portraits of the Stoics.62

The ‘crowded’ Attic grave reliefs of the 4th century BC give the impression that a personal moment between the deceased and their relatives unfolds before the eyes of the audience.54 At a first glance, the seated posture of older men surrounded by family demonstrates the physical weakness of the man. In the cases where the dead is a younger member of the family, as is stated on the inscription of the relief, the presence of the older man further stresses the tragic nature of a premature death. However, the frequent depiction of older men on reliefs during the 4th century BC perhaps indicates also their connection to the oikos, underlying their status and their authority within the family, because of their wisdom and insight.55 These features, that separate the old age from the youth, are also fundamental for the proper function of a polis. Besides, in a democratic polis, the oikos is the core for the proper function of a democratic society. Here, an important and self-evident duty of an ideal citizen is the care of his old parents.56

In the figurines from the grave at Katsanos plot there is no hint of intellectual activity on their faces, posture or attributes, for their safe identification as ‘men of spirit’. Furthermore, the traces at the right side of the body of the best-preserved figurine and the turn of the head do not support an upright hand, as is the case for the unpublished early Hellenistic examples from Lavdas plot.

The general features of the faces of the two figures, the beard, the old age, the baldness in one of them, and the seated posture may bring to mind some of the conventions that are used by the sculptors of the Hellenistic period in order to depict the quality of a ‘man of spirit’. Could the figurines from Argos represent a ‘man of spirit’? This question is closely related to the debate about the existence, during the 4th century BC, of a distinctive sculpture type that can be attributed with certainty to a philosopher, a poet, a ‘man of spirit’ in general.57 The statues of the generals, which were the first ones to be placed in public, were recognized by their dress or military attribute (shield, spear, helmet, etc.) Orators on the other hand are represented in a standing position with an attitude of strength and confidence, wearing the common citizen’s dress.

Conclusively, it can be argued that the two terracotta figurines from Katsanos plot depict the general but distinctive type of the older man-citizen, following the tendency of the great sculpture of the 4th century BC. The figure of an older man, who according to the ancient beliefs is appreciated for his experience, good judgment, and prudence is represented in an iconographic motif common to the burial setting, which in any case includes the qualities of wisdom and spirituality. The type incorporates perhaps both the social status and the intellectual gifts of the depicted man.63 At the same time, through this, the family and It seems that philosophers rarely received public honorary statues. See Dillon 2006: 104, for the rare cases of Socrates and Zenon. Also, it is not easy to determine the posture, standing or sitting, of the philosophers, since there is a lack of philosophers’ statues from the 4th century BC. In the same period, the sitting posture is preferred for poets, see Von den Hoff 1994: 27-33. For a terracotta statue of a seated poet (Orpheus?) holding a musical instrument from Taranto region, see Ferruzza 2016: 9-11, 17-24. During the Hellenistic period, the sitting posture is common both for philosophers and poets, contemporary and earlier, see Dillon 2006: 119-26. 60 The possibility of overlapping for these categories cannot be excluded, since the difference between an intellectually engaged citizen from a philosopher actively involved in civic affairs is not always obvious, see Dillon 2006: 125-6. 61 Zanker 1995: 113-29. 62 Dillon 2006: 113-15; Zanker 1995: 92-113. The type is represented on a small number of terracotta figurines of young men, dated to the end of the 4th century BC, where the spiritual effort is intense (Hamdorf 2014: 208-9, D166). The figurines imitate perhaps a statue of a thinker, see Zanker 1995: 90-3, figs 51-52. Similarly, the seated older men on Hellenistic grave stelae from Smyrna, resting their head on one hand, are also characterized as thinkers, see Zanker 1993: 219-220. 63 The assumption that the sitting posture is an indication of an honorary position, and hence the deceased have another social identity cannot be excluded. Future finds from Argos could perhaps lead to various readings of the type, since the presence of an attribute (e.g. a papyrus scroll as that of the small male figurine in Munich, 59

What about the ‘men of spirit’? Zanker believes that there was not a distinctive sculpture type for the ‘spiritual men’ during the 4th century BC.58 The statues of Aristotle, Plato and Socrates, as these are cited in For the sitting male figures with himation and chiton on grave reliefs, see Meyer 1989: 66, n. 98 (the examples on the lekythoi) and Clairmont 1993: 2.159. Clairmont suggests with scepticism the association of the uncommon dress of the male figures with a certain professional status (priests?). 54 Bergemann 1997: 86. 55 Bergemann 1997: 93, 106-16; Bergemann 2007: 42-4 and WagnerHasel 2012 (gen.) According to Zanker (1995: 53-6), these features attribute special benefits inside their family and city. Referring to the stele of the seated Tynnias, Leader points out that the role of an older man is a domestic one with some sort of participation in public life too, as his duty in the ideology of a democratic polis (1997: 691-2). 56 Bergemann 1997: 93-4. 57 During the 4th century BC, the production of the sculptured portraits, public and private, increases, especially in Athens. See Dillon 2006: 99-126. 58 Zanker 1995: 40-89. 53

84

Georgia Ivou: Defining Social Identities at Cemeteries of Late Classical Argos

the role of the deceased in it as the head of oikos are also promoted.

of studying the material from G. Kostakis and M. Katsanos plots, and for her support. The conversations about burial practices in Argos with Drs Anna BanakaDimaki, Evaggelia Pappi, and Nikolas Dimakis were extremely constructive. I also thank the guards of the Archaeological Museum at Argos and V. Giannopoulos responsible for the Museum’s storerooms. Additions, footnotes and bibliography have differentiated this paper from the oral presentation.

Conclusions The grave offerings that were examined in this study could lead to some remarks about the meaning of the diversity among grave offerings in the cemeteries of Argos around the middle of the 4th century BC, and consequently about the circumstances under which these choices were made. In the frame of homogeneity and simplicity that characterize the Classical cemeteries of Argos, the shift from the regularity of our examples is plain, ‘modest’ and internal. The graves did not differ from the others in the way they were made, or from their marking. Family and friends placed a special type of offering into a whatsoever common grave. Their decision did not aim at demonstrating their wealth or expressing some sort of personal ambition.64 In no case, the way the dead of the two graves were diversified was contrary to the principles that still ruled the burial process in Argos and had created almost a pattern.

Bibliography Alexandri, O. 1962. Α’ ΑΡΓΟΣ. ArchDelt 16, Chronika, B: 93. Alexandri, O. 1963. Ανασκαφή εις οικόπεδον Νικ. Π. Κούρου. ArchDelt 18, Chronika, B1: 60-3. Alexandropoulou, A. 2016. A fourth-century tomb at Argos: a contribution to the study of local pottery and burial customs. BSA 111: 1-43. Banaka-Dimaki, A. 1994. Επέκταση οδού Χατζή (οικόπεδο Νικολάου Λάβδα). ArchDelt 49, Chronika, Β1: 139-40. Banaka-Dimaki, A., A. Panagiotopoulou and A. Oikonomou-Laniado 1998. Το Άργος κατά τη ρωμαϊκή και την παλαιοχριστιανική περίοδο: σύνθεση των αρχαιολογικών δεδομένων, in Pariente and Touchais (eds): 327-36. Barakari-Gleni, K. 1996-7. Οι νεκροπόλεις των αρχαϊκών και κλασικών χρόνων στην αρχαία πόλη του Άργους, in T.A. Gritsopoulos and K.L. Kotsonis (eds) Πρακτικά του Ε’ Διεθνούς Συνεδρίου Πελοποννησιακών Σπουδών, Άργος – Ναύπλιον 6-10/9/1995. Vol. B’: 509-33. Athens. Barakari-Gléni, K. and A. Pariente 1998. Argos du VIIe au IIe siècle av. J.-C.: synthèse de données archéologiques, in Pariente and Touchais (eds): 165178. Bergemann, J. 1997. Demos und Thanatos – Untersuchungen zum Wertsystem der Polis im Spiegel der attischen Grabreliefs des 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. und zur Funktion der gleichzeitigen Grabbauten. Munich: Biering und Brinkmann. Bergemann, J. 2007. Attic grave reliefs and portrait sculpture in fourth-century Athens, in P. Schultz and R. von Den Hoff (eds) Early Hellenistic Portraiture. Image, Style, Context: 34-46. New York: Cambridge University Press. Blegen, C.W., H. Palmer and R.S. Young 1964. Corinth XIII: The North Cemetery. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Bonanno – Aravantinos, M. 2015. La tomba 404 della necropolis nord-orientale de Tebe (Boezia), in Muller et al. (eds): 333-48. Carter, J.C. 1998. The Chora of Metaponto: The Necropoleis. Austin: University of Texas Press. Cassimatis, H. 1993. Le Lébès à Anses Dresses Italiote. À Travers la Collection du Louvre. Naples: Centre J. Bérard. Chapman, R. 2013. Death, burial, and social representation, in Tarlow and Stutz (eds): 47-57.

The individuals who received the special offerings belonged to two totally different social groups, without any apparent connection: the young girls who died prematurely and the respectable and wise older men. Nevertheless, it can be argued that the choice by the family to accompany two distinctive social groups with special grave offerings reflects the same social and political environment, without contrasting with its values. In any case, the emphasis is always on the community. What is implied by their use, is the social status of the deceased and the burden of their loss not just for the family but also their polis. Under this frame, the two uncommon grave offerings demonstrate the individuality of the dead through their social role inside the oikos, considering them an important gear for the polis’ proper function. Furthermore, the maintenance of the values and structure of the dominant system were always essential for Argos, especially in the political and financial uncertainty around the middle of the 4th century BC. Future, more detailed comparative studies may reveal individual identities of the deceased with special importance to the Classical society of Argos, well hidden in the homogeneous landscape of the city’s cemeteries. Acknowledgements I would like to warmly thank the organizers of the workshop, Dr Nikolas Dimakis and Dr Tamara Dijkstra. I am grateful to Dr Alkistis Papadimitriou, Director of the Ephorate of Antiquities of Argolid, for the courtesy Hamdorf 2014: 209, D167) would make its interpretation easier. 64 See above n. 36, for the way the wealth is expressed in Argos.

85

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Clairmont, C.W. 1993. Classical Attic Tombstones, Vol. II. Switzerland. Closterman, W.E. 2007. Family ideology and family history: the function of funerary markers in classical Attic peribolos tombs. AJA 111: 633-52. Demand, N.H. 1994. Birth, Death, and Motherhood in Classical Greece. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Dillon, S. 2006. Ancient Greek Portrait Sculpture: Contexts, Subjects and Styles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dimakis, N. 2009. The display of individual status in the burials of Classical and Hellenistic Argos, in H. Cavanagh, W.G. Cavanagh and J. Roy (eds) Honouring the Dead, Proceedings of the Conference held in Sparta 23-25/4/2009 (http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/csps/ documents/honoringthedead/dimakis.pdf) Dimakis, N. 2016a. Social Identity and Status in the Classical and Hellenistic Northern Peloponnese: the Evidence from Burials. Oxford: Archaeopress. Dimakis, N. 2016b. Women’s share in status display. Some observations on female burials, in R. Berg (ed.) The Material Sides of Marriage. Women and Domestic Economies in Antiquity (Acta Instituti Romani Finlandiae 4): 87-92. Roma. Ekengren, F. 2013. Contextualizing grave goods. Theoretical perspectives and methodological implications, in Tarlow and Stutz (eds): 173-92. Ferruzza, M.L. 2016. Ancient Terracottas from South Italy and Sicily in the J. Paul Getty Museum. Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum. Fowler, C. 2013. Identities in transformation. Identities, funerary rites, and the mortuary process, in Tarlow and Stutz (eds): 511-26. Foxhall, L. 2013. Studying Gender in Classical Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Graepler D. 1997. Tonfiguren im Grab: Fundkontexte hellenistischer Terrakotten aus der Nekropolis von Tarent. Munich: Biering and Brinkmann. Hamdorf, F.W. 2014. Die figürlichen Terrakotten der Staatliche Antikensammlungen München. Munich. Hoffmann, A. 2002. Grabritual und Gesellschaft: Gefässformen, Bildthemen und Funkionen unteritalischrotfiguriger Keramik aus der Nekropole von Tarent. Rahden. Houby-Nielsen, S. 1995. ‘Burial language’ in Archaic and Classical Kerameikos, in S. Dietz (ed.) Proceedings of the Danish Institute at Athens I: 129-91. Athens: The Danish Institute at Athens. Houby-Nielsen, S. 1996. The archaeology of ideology in the Kerameikos: new interpretations of the ‘Opferrinnen’, in R. Hägg (ed.) The Role of Religion in the Early Greek Polis. Proceedings of the Third International Seminar on Ancient Greek Cult, organized by the Swedish Institute at Athens, 16-18/10/1992: 41-54. Stockholm.

Houby-Nielsen, S. 2000. Child burials in ancient Athens, in J. Sofaer Derevenski (ed.) Children and the Material Culture: 151-66. London: Routledge. Humphreys, S.C. 1993. The Family, Women and Death: Comparative Studies. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Ivou, G. 2018. Ταφικά σύνολα ιστορικών χρόνων στον βόρειο και βορειοανατολικό τομέα της πόλης του Άργους, in E. Zymi, A.-V. Karapanagiotou and M. Xanthopoulou (eds) Το Αρχαιολογικό Έργο στην Πελοπόννησο (ΑΕΠΕΛ1), Πρακτικά του Διεθνούς Συνεδρίου, Τρίπολη 7-11/11/2012: 285-98. Kalamata: University of Peloponnese. Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. 1984. Nadeln der frühhelladischen bis archaischen Zeit von der Peloponnes (Prähistorische Bronzefunde 13.8). Munich. Kyriakou, A. 2008. Η Στενόμακρη Τούμπα της Βεργίνας, Ταφικές Πρακτικές στη Μακεδονία του 4ου αι. π.Χ. Thessaloniki: Kornilia Sfakianaki. Lacey, W.K. 1968. The Family in Classical Greece. London. Leader, R.E. 1997. In death not divided: gender, family and state on classical Athenian grave stelae. AJA 101: 683-99. Liston, Μ.Α. and J.K. Papadopoulos 2004. The ‘Rich Athenian Lady’ was pregnant. Hesperia 73: 7-38. Lohmann, H. 1992. Das Motiv der mors immatura in der griechischen Grabkunst, in H. Froning, T. Hölscher and H. Mielsch (eds) Kotinos. Festschrift für Erika Simon: 103-13. Mainz am Rhein. McHugh, F. 1999. Theoretical and Quantitative Approaches to the Study of Mortuary Practice (British Archaeological Reports IS 785). Oxford: Archaeopress. MacKinnon, M. 2007. Osteological research in classical archaeology. AJA 111: 473-504. McPhee, I. and E.G. Pemberton 2012. Corinth VII.6: Late Classical Pottery from Ancient Corinth: Drain 1971-1 in the Forum Southwest. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Margariti, K. 2017. The Death of the Maiden in Classical Athens. Oxford: Archaeopress. Meyer, M. 1989. Alte Männer auf attischen Grabdenkmalern. AM 104: 49-82. Mitsos, M. 1945. Πολιτική Ιστορία του Άργους. Athens. Morris, I. 1987. Burial and Ancient Society. The Rise of the Greek City-State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Morris, I. 1992. Death-Ritual and Social Structure in Classical Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Muller, A., E. Lafli and S. Huysecom-Haxhi (eds) 2015. Figurines de Terre cuite en Méditerranée Grecque et Romaine, Vol. 2, Iconographie et Contexts. Villeneuve-D’ Ascq de Septentrion. Mulliez, D. and A. Banaka-Dimaki (eds) 2013. Sur Les Pas de Wilhelm Vollgraff. Cent Ans de Activités Archéogiques à Argos. Actes du Colloque International Organisé à l’École Francaise d’Athènes. 25-28/9/2003. Athens: EFA.

86

Georgia Ivou: Defining Social Identities at Cemeteries of Late Classical Argos

Nilsson Stutz L. and S. Tarlow 2013. Beautiful things and bones of desire. Emerging issues in the archaeology of death and burial, in Tarlow and Stutz (eds): 1-14. Osborne, R. 2004. Law, the democratic citizen and the representation of women in classical Athens, in R. Osborne (ed.) Studies in Ancient Greek and Roman Society: 38-60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Papaikonomou, I.-D. 2008. Recherche sur les liens entre pratiques rituelles funéraires et religieuses: Le cas d’Abdère (Thrace), in A.-M. Guimier-Sorbets (ed.) L’Eau. Enjeux, Usages et Représentations: 239-50. Paris. Papaspyridi-Karouzou, A. 1933-1935. Ανασκαφή τάφων του Άργους. ArchDelt 15: 16-53. Pariente, A. and G. Touchais (eds) 1998. Argos et l’Argolide: Topographie et Urbanisme. Actes de la Table Ronde internationale. Athènes-Argos 28/4-1/5/1990. Paris. Petropoulos, M. 2005. Το βόρειο νεκροταφείο των αρχαίων Πατρών: οικόπεδο οδού Πουκεβίλ 25-27, in L. Kypraiou (ed.) Ελληνιστική Κεραμική από την Πελοπόννησο: 59-72. Athens. Pomeroy, S.B. 1997. Families in Classical and Hellenistic Greece: Representations and Realities. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Richter, G.M.A. 1966. The Furniture of the Greeks, Etruscans and Romans. London. Risser, M. 2001. Corinth VII.5: Corinthian Conventionalizing Pottery. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Rotroff, S. 1997. The Athenian Agora XXIX: Hellenistic Pottery. Athenian and Imported Wheelmade Table Ware and Related Material. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Sabetai, V. 1993. The Washing Painter. A Contribution to the Wedding and Genre Iconography in the Second Half of the Fifth Century BC. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Cincinnaty. Sabetai, V. 2009. The Attic clay loutrophoros: markervase or burnt offering?, in Α. Tsingarida (ed.) Shapes and Uses of Greek Vases (7th-4th centuries BC): Proceedings of the Symposium held at the Université libre de Bruxelles, 27-29/4/2006: 291-306. Bruxelles: Centre de Recherches en Archéologie et Patrimoine. Sabetai, V. 2012. Ταφή νέας γυναίκας από την Ακραιφία: μια άωρη νεκρή του 4ου αι. π.Χ., in P. Adam-Veleni and K. Tzanavari (eds) Δινήεσσα: Τιμητικός Τόμος για την Κατερίνα Ρωμιοπούλου: 304-14. Thessaloniki. Sabetai, V. 2015. Female protomes from Chaeroneia (Boeotia), in Muller et al. (eds): 149-63.

Sarri, E. 2013. Ανασκαφή τμήματος νεκροταφείου των κλασικών και ελληνιστικών χρόνων στην οδό Εμ. Ρούσσου στο Άργος, in Mulliez and Banaka-Dimaki (eds): 175-99. Scholl, A. 1996. Die attischen Bildfeldstelen des 4. Jhs. V. Chr.: Untersuchungen zu den kleinformatigen Grabreliefs im spätklassischen Athen (AM Beih 17). Berlin. Sgourou, M. 1994. Attic Lebetes Gamikoi. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Cincinnati. Shepherd, G. 2013. Ancient identities: age, gender and ethnicity in ancient Greek burials, in Tarlow and Stutz (eds): 543-57. Snodgrass, A. 2009. The classical Greek cemetery: a barometer of citizenship?, in S. Owen and L. Preston (eds) Inside the City in the Greek World: Studies of Urbanism from the Bronze Age to the Hellenistic Period: 99-107. Oxford. Sparkes, B.A. and L. Talcott 1970. The Athenian Agora XII: Black and Plain Pottery of the 6th, 5th, 4th Centuries BC. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Tarlow, S. and L.N. Stutz (eds) 2013. The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Death and Burials. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tomlinson, R.A. 1972. Argos and the Argolid. From the End of the Bronze Age to the Roman Occupation. London: Routledge and K. Paul. Tzachou-Alexandri, O. 2013. Γαμικός λέβης με πλαστικές προτομές από το βόρειο νεκροταφείο του Άργους, in Mulliez and Banaka-Dimaki (eds): 141-56. Tzanavari, K. 2017. Polychromy, a decorative technique of coroplastic art, in P. Adam-Veleni, A. Koukouvou, O. Palli, E. Stefani, E. Zografou (eds) Figurines, a Microcosmos of Clay, Exhibition Catalogue 3.4.2017-30-42018: 53-5. Thessaloniki: Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki. Von den Hoff, R. 1994. Philosophenporträts des Früh- und Hochhellenismus. Munich. Wagner-Hasel, B. 2012. Alter in der Antike: eine Kulturgeschichte. Köln: Böhlau. Zanker, P. 1993. The hellenistic grave stelai from Smyrna: identity and self-image in the polis, in A. Bulloch, E.S. Gruen, A.A. Long and A. Stewart (eds) Images and Ideologies: Self-Definition in the Hellenistic World: 21230. Berkeley: University of California Press. Zanker, P. 1995. The Mask of Socrates. The Image of the Intellectual in Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press.

87

Pot Burials in Ancient Thera: The Presence of Infants in the Cemeteries of the Ancient City from 8th to 6th Century BC Olga Kaklamani Abstract: This paper focuses on the funerary treatment of infants of the ancient city of Thera, including burial types, placement within the common cemeteries, and grave offerings. Infants were included in the cemeteries of the city and provided with the formal rituals. They were invariably interred inside a pot (enchytrismos) instead of being cremated and were buried either isolated or in groups. Exceptions to this could be interpreted in terms of special circumstances of death or status and perceptions of the family. Family coherence and continuation is signalled through their inclusion by the members of a newly founded colony, perhaps in the manner of the metropolis, Sparta. Keywords: infants, Thera, Early Iron Age, inclusion, pot burial, offering pits Introduction

of infant deaths occurred before the end of the first week of life.4 The risks of pregnancy and childbirth have been widely reported among the ancient medical writers.5

‘It is rather in our ancestral and ancient usages and laws that the truth of these matters is to be seen; for our people do not bring libations to those of their children who die in infancy, nor do they observe in their case any of the other rites that the living are expected to perform for the dead, as such children have no part in earth or earthly things’ Plutarch, Moralia VII, Consolatio ad Uxorem, 612A1

In light of the absence of literary and iconographic sources from the Geometric and Archaic periods, only archaeological evidence offers the chance to explore the funerary rites for infants and children, as well as to discern whether their burial treatment is differentiated from that of other age groups. Relevant studies demonstrate that infants and young children were regularly inhumed inside pots (enchytrismoi) in the cemeteries of many areas of the Greek world that shared common burial rites, though exceptions are occasionally found.6 Moreover, infants are often treated differently from adults in terms of burial location, placement within the cemetery, and grave goods. However, mortuary variability is also observed in these burials, making the formulation of any general rule on their burial treatment moot. In an attempt to investigate aspects of this subject, the funerary treatment of infants in Thera from the late 8th to the mid-6th century BC on the basis of the burial types, the placement of their tombs in the adult necropoleis, and the chosen furnishing is treated here. I begin with a brief and general overview of the burial customs of the cemeteries of Early Iron Age Thera, in order to understand the general framework within which the pot burials belonged.

The Consolatio ad Uxorem is the letter written by Plutarch, around AD 90, to his wife on receiving news of the death of their daughter Timoxena, who died at the age of two. It states that according to the ‘ancestral and ancient usages and laws’ the normal funeral rites are absent for infants, as ‘they have no part in earth or earthly things’. This text belongs to the Roman era and, unfortunately, we do not know anything about the precise content or age of the ancient laws referred.2 The ancient literary sources rarely inform us about burial ceremonies concerning children. The absence of pictorial representation of a deceased child is also noted for the Geometric and Archaic periods.3 The high infant mortality, however, is clearly stated among ancient writers. Aristotle mentions that the majority Translated by De Lacy and Einarson 1959. Bremmer 1983: 98; Claassen 2004; Caroll 2011. 3 Siurla-Theodoridou 1989: 59-60, 175. A unique stele of about 530 BC from Anavyssos preserves part of a group of a woman and an infant boy. It is not clear who the stele commemorates, but the possibility cannot be excluded that it was erected in honour of a mother who died in childbirth (Beaumont 2003: 63, fig. 3). Children are not represented often in Greek art before the Classical period. When they do so, they are mainly depicted in mythological and ritual scenes, including mourning scenes, and in terracotta’s of the kourotrophos-type until around the middle of the 6th century when they are included in a wide variety of scenes of everyday life (Beaumont 2003: 59-65; Oakley 2013: 148-56; Bobou 2015: 42-6). 1 2

Aristotle, Historia Animalium, VII.12. e.g. the Corpus Hippocraticum with treatises such as the Nature of Women, Diseases of Women, Epidemics, or Soranus’ Gynaecology. For the causes of high infant mortality, see Demand 1994: 71-86; Halcrow and Tayles 2011: 339-40. 6 Garland 1985: 78-86; Papadopoulos and Smithson 2002: 184; Lagia 2007: 298-99; Papadopoulos 2017: 597-602. 4 5

88

Olga Kaklamani: Pot Burials in Ancient Thera

Figure 1. Location of the cemeteries of the ancient city of Thera.

The Necropoleis of the Ancient City of Thera

The chamber graves contained multiple burials, used for successive periods, while the pit graves contained individual pot burials. Cremation burials constitute almost one-half of the burials (47% of the total),11 while 30% of the total were enchytrismoi (Figure 2).12 Offerings were found in the majority of the graves. Drinking vessels, used for libations, were by far the most common, often accompanied by pouring vessels. Artefacts other than pottery, such as jewellery and armour, are found in very few cases. Some of the graves contained unburnt animal bones, interpreted as remains of food offerings to the deceased. Certain stone structures, linked with some of the graves, contained pyres with animal bones and pottery in fragmentary condition. Finally, pyres have also been traced inside some chamber graves and are associated with enagismoi/sacrificial pyres.

The ancient city of Thera lies on the hill of Mesa Vouno to the southeast of the island. It was continuously inhabited from the 8th century BC, when Dorian colonists from Sparta settled there under the leadership of Theras,7 to whom it owes its name, until the 8th century AD.8 Three burial sites are known, two associated with the ancient city and another with Kamari (ancient Oia), one of the ports of the city (Figure 1). The first of the two cemeteries of the ancient city of Thera was uncovered on the southeast slope of Mesa Vouno and published by Ernst Pfuhl in the early 20th century.9 Its use extends from the 8th century until the middle of the 6th century BC. The graves were arranged in rows against previously constructed terrace walls and they extended on five plateaus on the slope of the mountain. Out of the 94 excavated graves, more than half (55) are rock-cut or stone-built chamber graves and a significant number are simple pit graves (20).10

The graves of the second necropolis have been discovered isolated or in groups along the southwestern, western and north-eastern slopes of Sellada, the saddle which links Mesa Vouno with the hill of Prophetes graves constitute a sort of variation of the chamber type, as they were simply laid on a terrace wall or were rock-cut, while a small front wall was built in order to retain the stones that covered the pots inside (Pfuhl 1903: 61-5, 70, 75, 84, 87-91, 94, 245-6). Finally, nine graves are of unidentified type because of their bad state of preservation (Pfuhl 1903: 241). 11 The remains of the cremation were placed in clay vessels and more rarely in bronze cauldrons or larnakes. Possibly secondary cremation was applied, as indicated by the two cremation areas identified by Pfuhl in the central plateau of the cemetery (Pfuhl 1903: 47-50, 52-3). 12 For the remainder of the burials it is not possible to identify the burial method, as the graves were found either totally destroyed or contained only a few sherds, including parts of big vessels, which might have served as burial containers (either of cremated or inhumed individuals).

Herodotus 4.147-48. Theras was a distant relative of the Phoenician Cadmus. According to Herodotus, Cadmus landed on Thera during his travels and left behind some of his followers, whose descendants had been living on the island, when Theras arrived. These inhabitants gave him willingly the royal power due to his direct descent from Cadmus. The existence though of habitation on Thera before the Dorian colonization has not been confirmed archaeologically, as the only finds on the island after the Thera eruption in c. 1630 BC, are confined to Late Helladic IIIC surface pottery from Monolithos (Vlachopoulos 2007). 8 Sperling 1973; Hoepfner 1997. 9 Pfuhl 1903. 10 One tholos tomb occupied a central location in the cemetery, but it was found empty, except for a few sherds (Pfuhl 1903: 45-6). Nine 7

89

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 2. Burial practice and grave type in the cemetery of Mesa Vouno.

Figure 3. Burial practice and grave type in the cemetery of Sellada.

Elias.13 On the basis of the available evidence, the southwestern and western slopes have been used as burial grounds from the 8th century until the middle 6th century BC and reused during the Hellenistic and Roman periods. During the second half of the 6th century and throughout the Classical period, the main burial ground was the north-eastern slope of Sellada, although scattered pottery of the 7th century has been traced around the graves. Because of the reuse of the area in the southwestern and western slopes, a great number of disturbed, plundered and often destroyed graves were noted, as well as many offerings or stone markers no longer in situ. In contrast to the cemetery of Mesa Vouno, the majority of the graves are pit graves with individual burials (68%), while a small number (16%) are stone-built or rock-cut chambers, similar to those found on Mesa Vouno. Burial vessels, simply lying on the hillside, have also been discovered (10%). Cremation is the normal burial custom, while the few inhumation burials have been attributed by the excavators to children or to later burials (Figure 3).14 All the different types of grave furnishings that occur on Mesa Vouno have also been found here, except for the gold ornaments and the weapons. This, however, could be due to the great extent of the disruption (and robbing), observed mainly in the cemetery of Sellada. Although enagismoi are mentioned in association with some of the graves, stone structures for the deposition of offerings, such as those identified on Mesa Vouno do not occur in Sellada.15

The existence of multiple-family graves (used often for successive periods), suggests that the genos,16 as an extended kinship group, played an important role in the socio-political structure of the community. Indeed, some literary sources mention the importance of hereditary kinship in early Theran society.17 The finds imply no great differences in the wealth exhibited, between the two cemeteries. However, important differentiation in the number of the family graves between the two cemeteries may suggest that the existence of the two cemeteries on ancient Thera could be seen as a reflection of comparable distinction among two separate social groups within the structure of the Archaic polis.18 At coastal Kamari (ancient Oia), the port of ancient Thera, a cemetery dating to two different periods, that is, from the middle of the 8th to the middle of the 5th century BC, and from the 2nd to the 3rd century AD, has been uncovered. Since the publication of the excavation is at a very early stage, only a few and general details are available.19 Concerning the first period of use, the cemetery contained cremation burials and pot burials. The enchytrismoi have been dated from the middle of the 6th century BC onwards, with one exception of the 7th century.20 They were uncovered among the cremation burials, except for the southwestern part of the cemetery, where they constituted the vast majority of 1991: 104, 183), served as a recipient of about 103 miniature pots, two figurines (woman and cat), a silver aryballos, rings, and other offerings. This offering container was associated with a cremation burial of a deceased female, as the inscription on the house-model informs us (Zapheiropoulos 1982: 268-71). Remains of such housemodels have been found elsewhere in the cemetery of Sellada (Sigalas 1996), as well as in the cemetery of Kamari (Efstathiou 2001: 314-15). The suggestion that they represent house models was first made by Zapheiropoulos and supported by Sigalas and Efstathiou. Yet, the possibility cannot be excluded that they are temple (Papadopoulos and Strack 2017: 855, n. 1005) or even grave models. 16 Donlan 1985; Cavanagh 1991: 99-107; Jones 1996. 17 Herodotus 4.145-205; Pindar, Pythian Odes 4 and 5, IG XII, 3, 762; Malkin 1993: 371. 18 Damigos and Kaklamani in print. 19 Efstathiou 2001; Sigalas 1988. 20 Sigalas 1988: 505.

The necropolis is not entirely published. Some of the graves on the southwestern and western slopes have been excavated and fully published in the late 19th and earlier 20th century by Hans Dragendorff (Dragendorff 1903). Nikolaos Zapheiropoulos excavated the graves along the north-eastern slope, as well as a few on the southwestern and western slopes, from the early 1960s through the early 1980s. His work is known only from preliminary excavation reports (Zapheiropoulos 1961; 1963; 1965-66; 1968-71; 1973-78; 198182). 14 Nevertheless, an anthropological study of a very small sample of the skeletal material revealed a female adult inhumation dated to the 8th century BC (Sotiris et al. 2013). This study has not been linked with any of the published burials, but it makes us sceptical on the universal use of the cremation practice for adults in this cemetery. 15 A clay house-model of the second quarter of the 6th century (Lemos 13

90

Olga Kaklamani: Pot Burials in Ancient Thera

the burials. Unfortunately, the published information is very limited, and since the chronological range of these burials extends beyond that of the current study, the pot burials of the two cemeteries of the ancient city of Thera are the focus of this paper. Methodology The definition of the pot inhumations under study as child burials is based on the assessments of the excavators in the field, as an anthropological study of the osteological material has not yet been carried out. Skeletal remains, however, were not always recorded inside pots. The poor preservation or total absence of the skeletal remains of infants under three years old has been stated by several anthropologists.21 Their bones are less dense than those of older individuals, therefore more susceptible to decay, ease of dispersion and loss, a process further influenced by specific environmental factors (e.g. acid soils).22 A difficulty then arises, when studying these ‘empty’ pots, in distinguishing them from pots that did not serve as burial containers, but were deposited instead as offerings for other burials, a practise observed in other cemeteries.23 The attribution of some of these pots to burials has been made on grounds of their location, their placement as burials, as well as the presence of associated offerings.24

Figure 4. Shapes of the burial pots in the cemetery of Mesa Vouno.

Τhe height of the amphorai varies from 0.20 to 0.75 cm. Cooking pots range from 0.24 to 0.43 cm in height, pithoi-amphorai from 0.43 to 0.59 cm in height and pithoi from 0.40 to 1.10 cm. The burial containers were either lying on their sides or in an upright position and in most cases they were surrounded by small stones which set them in place and protected them. In a few cases the vessels were completely covered by small stones.28 The mouth was usually closed with a slab or the broken foot of a vessel. Sherds or intact vessels were rarely used. Occasionally, in order to receive the burial, an opening was created on the upper part of the vessel and the hole was closed with the broken fragment. The opening was made with a knife in two cases.29

The term ‘infant’ is used here for those from birth to three years old.25 There is no consensus as to the terminology with regard to age categories of children. The term ‘infant’ is defined by some anthropologists as an individual between birth and one year of life,26 while others define ‘infant’ as an individual from birth to three years of age.27

In the cemetery of Sellada, the vast majority of the pot burials were amphora burials, while the rest constitute cooking pots and one unidentified vessel (Figure 5). Of the 23 burials, the height was reported only for five examples and varies from 0.25 to 0.82 cm. The pots were usually placed in a pit, surrounded by small stones. In a few cases, they were simply set on the ground and were occasionally covered with stones (Figure 6). The mouth was usually closed with stones or a slab, but occasionally intact vessels or sherds were also used. In one case the vessel was not sealed, but was found upside-down, standing on its mouth.30 The vessel was occasionally cut off in order to receive the burial. Some of these containers may have not been originally made for a funeral purpose, as several were mended in antiquity.31 A few of the children, in both cemeteries, were commemorated either with a graffito on the burial pot32 or with a gravestone.33

Burial Type In the cemetery of Mesa Vouno, the majority of the pot inhumations were amphora burials, while the rest were deposited in cooking pots and pithoi. One hydria was also used as burial container (Figure 4). Of the 67 pot burials, the height was reported for 43 examples. e.g. Guy et al. 1997: 224-6; Manifold 2013: 24-7. Poor preservation or total absence of the bones might influence the degree of representation of infants and young children in cemeteries, but both the burial practises related to children and excavation techniques and protocols are of great importance in determining the representation of subadults (Lagia 2007). 23 For Corinth, see Dickey 1992: 37; for Astypalaia, see Michalaki-Kollia 2010: 169; for Plithos at Chora of Naxos, see Zapheiropoulou 2011: 734. 24 Pfuhl 1903: 260. 11 pits were found that contained only sherds of pottery, some of which might have served as burial containers (graves 16, 49, 57, 80-81, 86, 88, 94-95, 100, 110, Pfuhl 1903: 30, 53, 58, 67-68, 7172, 77, 81, 86). It is very likely that at least some of these pits contained enchytrismos burials, instead of cremated remains. Nevertheless, in the absence of the combination of all the traits associated with the rest of the infant burials, these graves are not included in this study. 25 For a full discussion about this, see Papadopoulos 2017: 657-60. 26 Scheuer and Black 2000: 468-9. 27 Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994: 9. 21 22

e.g. grave 63, Pfuhl 1903: 60, 263. Burials 71.2 and 113.3, Pfuhl 1903: 64-5, 89, 261. 30 Grave 83, Dragendorff 1903: 58. 31 Dragendorff 1903: 91. 32 e.g. grave 27, Dragendorff 1903: 37-38; Jeffery 1961: 318, 323.2. 33 e.g. grave 113, Pfuhl 1903: 87-88; Jeffery 1961: 318, 323.8. The site of Sellada contained many engraved gravestones, either lying uprooted 28 29

91

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

reflect differentiation in the age of the deceased. In these terms, neonates could be buried in the smallest pots, while infants up to three years old could be buried in bigger pots.37 However, the possibility of the existence of older children, especially in the two cases of the big pithoi of 1.10 m height cannot be excluded.38 Neither can we be certain that there were no adolescents or even adults inhumed inside some of the vessels, especially in the cases where the bones were not found. The rite of adult inhumations inside vessels, however, was applied systematically in certain regions, namely eastern Lokris, Aitoloakarnania and western Peloponnese,39 but it has been occasionally practised in other places too (e.g. in Naxos).40

Figure 5. Shapes of the burial pots in the cemetery of Sellada.

The interment of the body in a pot, the small size of the burial pot, and the presence of the associated feeding bottles and miniature vessels, as we will see further, indicate that the burials more likely belonged to infants up to three years old, although young children or even older juveniles may have been inhumed inside these pots. As has already been noted, it is difficult to determine with certainty the age range of these individuals due to the lack of the skeletal analysis. The ancient vocabulary does not clearly delineate stages in the child’s development, except for Plato and Aristotle who give characteristics of infants on specific ages,41 but certain rites of passages marked important phases of an infant’s life. In Classical Athens, the infant was accepted by the father in the family on fifth or seventh day after birth during the ritual of Amphidromia. Those who could bear the expense of the ritual named the child on the tenth day, at the Dekate.42 The transition from infancy to early childhood seems to have been celebrated in the child’s third year by its participation in the Anthesteria festival.43 On the second day, the day of Choes, children were given presents in the form of

Figure 6. Pot burial in Sellada (from Zapheiropoulos 1975: fig. 214a).

Did the pot burials belong to new-borns and infants or were they also used for toddlers or even older deceased children? In the absence of the osteological analysis, it is not possible to define the age limit in the choice of cremation, instead of the internment in a pot. Only a few observations can be made on this matter.

Torone/Chalkidiki see Musgrave 2005: 251; for Abdera see Kallintzi and Papaoikonomou 2010; for the Athenian Agora see Liston 2017: 518; for Attica see Papadopoulos and Liston 2004: 26-7; for a general discussion on the topic with further references see Pomadère 2005. 37 Based on examination by a surgeon, the skeleton of an almost twoyear old girl was buried in a pithos of 71 cm height (Pfuhl 1903: 25). Yet unfortunately, there is no reliable way to determine sex from the bones of an infant (Liston and Papadopoulos 2004: 19). For further discussion of the size of the pots in relation to the size of the infants see Papadopoulos 2017: 597-600. 38 Pfuhl 1903: 33, 90. 39 Selekou 2014: 277-9. 40 Zapheiropoulou 2011: 734; Agelarakis 2016: 54. 41 Golden 1990: 12-22. Swaddling is recommended by Plato for two years after birth, and then carried about by its nurses until the age of three (Plato, Laws 7.789e). In the same work he mentions that during the first three years, the child communicates only through crying (7.792a). In Politics, Aristotle defines the ages of two, five, seven and fourteen as critical for the development and education of the child. Among others he mentions that up to the age of two, children should drink a lot of milk, but little wine (Aristotle, Politics 7.1336a2-7). 42 Golden 1990: 23; Dasen 2011: 303; Beaumont 2012: 67-8; Papadopoulos 2017: 657-60. 43 Garland 1985: 82; Golden 1990: 41-43; Hamilton 1992; Dasen 2011: 312; Beaumont 2012: 20.

Pliny the Elder34 clearly stated that a child should be buried, as cremation could not be used before the development of the first teeth (at the age of six or seven months).35 Bearing in mind that very few burials have been anthropologically aged, it seems that the majority of infants and young children during the Early Iron Age were inhumed, although occasionally they were cremated.36 Variation in height of the burial pots could on the ground or rebuilt into much later graves, but none of them were found in association with a grave (Dragendorff 1903: 66-7). The possibility cannot be excluded that some of these belonged to child graves. 34 Historia Naturalis VII.72. 35 Dasen 2011: 292. 36 For Naxos/Cyclades see Agelarakis 2016: 19; for Elateia-Alonaki/ Phokis see Deger-Jalkotzy 2013: 227; for Halos/Thessaly see Lagia et al. 2013: 213; for Vronda/Crete see Liston 1993: 99-104, table 5/5; for

92

Olga Kaklamani: Pot Burials in Ancient Thera

Figure 7. Spatial distribution of infant graves in the cemetery of Mesa Vouno (after Pfuhl 1903).

miniature oinochoes (choes) and were allowed to drink wine for the first time. By the child’s participation in this festival its formal recognition as a member of the society was signalled.

of the infants were buried in graves, which contained exclusively infant burials, varying from two to seven in number per grave. Almost one-quarter of these were buried isolated. The chamber type was mainly used for the multiple burials, while the pit was preferred for the single burials. Very few were found in chamber graves together with cremation burials (Figure 7). Of these, three out of five were buried with one more individual,47 possibly the mother, without excluding the possibility that it might be the father, since such cases are known from the Geometric cemetery at Plithos on Naxos.48 The remainder were found in big chamber graves, which contained multiple generations and belong to the richest graves of the cemetery in terms of wealth display.49

Placement of Pot Burials in the Funeral Space Regarding the location of infant burials, it is usually noted that their incidence in common cemeteries is comparatively rare. On the contrary, their presence is observed in other places, such as in reserved areas of the necropolis,44 in a separate collective location outside cemeteries45 or even within the limits of the settlements.46 These variations as to the placement of infant burials make any general rule for the reasons behind the choice of the location difficult to establish. On Thera, although infant burials are found in the common cemeteries, they are rarely placed together with cremation burials, but instead are found isolated or else grouped together.

A different picture emerges from the cemetery of Sellada, where the majority of the infants were buried isolated in pits and only one (chamber) grave that contained exclusively infant burials.50 One enchytrismos accompanied three cremation burials inside a chamber grave.51 This grave was part of a grave group that comprised three chambers in total and offering pyres.52 A second enchytrismos was also associated with this group.53 From the excavation reports, we can assume

On Mesa Vouno, half of the graves were located at the highest terrace of the cemetery. One-third were placed on the terrace immediately below, while the remainder were distributed in the two lowest terraces of the cemetery. In fact, infant burials were absent only from the middle terrace, where the tholos tomb and the two cremation areas were found. The majority

Burials 21.1, 53.1 and 102.4, Pfuhl 1903: 33, 55, 83. The infant burial of grave 102 constitutes, along with a cremation burial, later additions to a chamber with two or three cremations. 48 Agelarakis 2016: 5, 19. 49 Burials 10.11, 29.3, Pfuhl 1903: 25, 36-7. 50 Zapheiropoulos 1971: 229. 51 Zapheiropoulos 1970: 207. 52 Zapheiropoulos 1970: 206-7. 53 Zapheiropoulos 1975: 231. 47

e.g. in Eleusis, Papangeli 1989: 31. e.g. in wells, Papadopoulos 2000. 46 Mazarakis 2007-2008. 44 45

93

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 8. Comparative analysis of the number of infants per burial and per cemetery.

that the enchytrismoi were dispersed among the rest of the graves. Nevertheless, we should bear in mind that neither the excavation nor the publication of the cemetery in Sellada have been completed, thus only assumptions can be made as for the exact number or the placement of the enchytrismoi.

seen in terms of the comparable distinction among two separate social groups within the structure of the polis. But what differentiated infants that were buried in chamber graves along with cremation burials? These can be grouped into two categories, both leading to different interpretations. The first includes infants buried with an older individual, possibly a relative. It may be the mother who died in childbirth or slightly later, but unfortunately there is nothing in the publication of these graves to signal clearly this or any other interpretation. As for the second group, it includes infants that were buried along with the rest members of their kin, in graves that are included in the richest of the cemetery in terms of the quantity and the quality of the grave goods. The integration of the infants in these graves is considered to reflect the prominent social status of their family and an effort to attribute such status to the deceased infant, who thus acquires an important social persona as member of this family.56 The infant, possibly a girl (see n. 15), of grave 10 constitutes the oldest burial of the grave (Middle Geometric II) and one of the oldest and richest of the whole cemetery. Its burial might represent the burial of an offspring who had a particularly significant position within the household unit, perhaps as the first descendant able to provide the society with future members, in a time when this society had just been founded. The signalling of continuation might have been an important factor in determining the nature of child burials, especially amongst the more prominent families.57 Furthermore, if the deceased infant was actually a girl, who died before marriage, then the richness of its burial could be seen from a different perspective. As not having attained a critical rite of

Based on the surviving evidence, the choice to integrate the burials of infants with those of the older members of the society is common to both cemeteries. Burial in a community cemetery ratifies incorporation in this community, at least with regard to funeral practices. Full membership of the infants in the community though does not seem to have been attained, as they were mostly buried isolated or grouped together in separate graves, and not in the family chamber graves.54 Although the infant was not fully entered in the society, it seems that its public burial was important for the community. Bearing in mind that the ancient city of Thera was founded by colonists, it can be assumed that the formal burial of the youngest individuals may reflect the will of the settlers to assert and maintain their position in the new land, through the cohesion of their kinship groups. The spatial segregation of infants is more clearly seen in the cemetery of Mesa Vouno, where the number of the chamber graves is significantly larger. Groupings of infants within the cemetery space seems to happen to a much greater extent on Mesa Vouno (Figure 8). The infant may not yet have been a full-grown member of the society, but it is a member of the family. As the individuality of the child is subsumed into that of family status,55 this differentiation between the two cemeteries could be A similar pattern is mentioned for the enchytrismoi of the cemetery of coastal Kamari, although these tombs date from the middle of the 6th century BC and onwards (Efstathiou 2001: 301). 55 Crawford 1991: 18. 54

56 57

94

Cannon and Cook 2015: 402; Sourvinou-Inwood 1983: 45. Shepherd 2007.

Olga Kaklamani: Pot Burials in Ancient Thera

passage, that of marriage, the infant girl was furnished as a bride.58 Alternatively, typically adult mortuary treatment of infants can be explained as individual efforts to express their own perception of the deceased and satisfy a personal need for loss-oriented grieving despite prevailing social standards.59

one of a pig, another of a pigeon and two of tortoises, nine human protomai and three of indistinct figures), and a clay pierced bobble which may have been part of a toy.64 Almost every burial was associated with an offering pyre, found either in an offering pit or within the grave. The offering pits were stone structures which contained pyres with animal bones and the aforementioned pottery in fragmentary condition.65 In some cases, ash from the pit was found covering the burial pots, but it is not clear whether the pyre took place before or after the deposition of the burial.66 In other cases, it is clear that the pyre preceded the burial, as it was found under the burial pots.67 Two burials contained unburnt animal and fish bones: a cooked lamb thigh associated with sherds of a cooking pot68 and one tuna vertebra.69

Infant and children inclusivity in common cemeteries is observed in other regions too, as in Late Geometric Attica, where the formal burial of sub-adults was thought crucial for the maintenance and further development of their kinship groups within the new social reality dictated by the birth of the polis.60 Deposition of Grave Offerings On Mesa Vouno, almost every infant was buried with one or two drinking vessels, usually of small dimensions. In three cases, a cup was accompanied by a feeding bottle. About one-sixth of the burials were furnished with pouring vessels (jugs/oenochoai), ointment containers (mostly aryballoi), and storage/ transport vessels (amphorai, stamnoi), as well as with cooking pots. Among the aryballoi, the amphorai, and the cooking pots, a few were miniature vessels. Pithoi, plates, pyxides, craters and kothones were rarely found. It is worth adding that many burials were accompanied with a foot of a vase, which has been interpreted as a toy, since it was found only with enchytrismoi.61 Other kinds of gifts were exceedingly rare. Two necklaces made of glass and amber beads accompanied the girl of chamber grave 10. A bronze fibula was found inside the burial pot of an infant, which preserved part of its clothing as a pseudomorph.62 One of the two burials of a grave was furnished with a limestone aryballos, miniature vessels, numerous figurines (three of Bes,63

Offerings of food, drink, oils and perfumes is indicated by the presence of certain pottery shapes, as well as the burnt and unburnt animal bones. Based on the literary evidence, offerings were made during the funeral, and on certain days and rituals related to the dead after the burial,70 but archaeologically the distinction among the post-funeral ceremonies is usually difficult to determine. Nevertheless, the assemblages of the pyres were perhaps not remains of the funeral meal (nekrodeipnon), as the composition of vase-shapes in each offering pyre is too uneven and the number of each shape too small to form a complete service-set for a meal.71 Furthermore, the presence of burnt animals is an indication that a sacrifice or a ritual killing of the animal has been taken place72 to feed the living performing the funeral or to appease the souls of the dead and the chthonian gods.73 Lastly, three burials were accompanied with sea shells of the following species: blue mussels, with both shells intact,74 cockle and triton mollusks,75 and many, unpierced triton mollusks of small size.76 Blue shells of

Papadopoulos 2010. In his article, Papadopoulos argues that the richest burials in Early Iron Age Athens, together with the richest burials at the tumulus at Lofkënd in Albania, both anthropologically studied, were those of young girls or women who died before they were married. They thus went into the grave as if they were ‘married to death’. 59 Cannon and Cook 2015: 402, 412. Cannon and Cook, in their study on the interpretation of the absence, segregation or simplicity of infant burials in archaeological contexts, include Bowlby’s attachment theory and Stroebe and Schut’s dual process model of bereavement, which illustrates the importance of psychology-based perspectives in order to identify the factors that could influence individual and cultural attitudes regarding effective ways to cope with death and grief. 60 Morris 1987: 57-69; Houby-Nielsen 2000: 155-62; Alexandridou in this volume. 61 Pfuhl 1903: 266. 62 Grave 85, Pfuhl 1903: 71, 232. The infant was buried isolated in a pit and was accompanied with sherds of one krater (used as a cover for the pot) and three vessels of small dimensions: one cooking pot, one cup and one aryballos. 63 The Egyptian god Bes was the guardian of intrauterine life as well as of early childhood and was represented in gems, used to protect the embryo (Dasen 2013: 32). Moreover, Bes amulets and figurines were offered in kourotrophic deities and in burial contexts, including Thera, where we find them in the sanctuary of Aphrodite (Hölbl 2006: 80-82, 91) and in the aforementioned infant burials. 58

Burial 70.1, Pfuhl 1903: 62-3, 217-8, 220, 225. The bones were mainly of calf, sheep, goat, pig, and rabbit. In two cases, they belonged to young goats (offering pits 70 and 114, Pfuhl 1903: 62, 90, 273). 66 Burials 6.2-3, graves 18, 19, burial 71.2, Pfuhl 1903: 20-1, 31-2, 64-5, 275. 67 e.g. in graves 53, 55, Pfuhl 1903: 56-7. 68 Grave 18, Pfuhl 1903: 31, 269. 69 Burial 10.11, Pfuhl 1903: 25, 268. 70 Garland 1985: 34-41; Alexiou 2002: 7-10. 71 The same conclusion is reached for the offering trenches of the Kerameikos, Houby-Nielsen 1996: 46 and 44, n. 16, where the offering pits of Thera are mentioned as the closest parallels to the rituals of Athenian offering trenches. 72 Pfuhl 1903: 276-9. 73 Alexiou 2002: 8-9; Ekroth 2002: 279. 74 Inside a cup from burial 115.1, Pfuhl 1903: 90. 75 Grave 119, Pfuhl 1903: 93. The sea shells were found inside a cooking pot. The burial was further furnished with two small cups and one aryballos. 76 Burial 5.1, Pfuhl 1903: 19. The shells were found inside the chytra, which was the burial pot. Outside the vessel were sherds of a cooking 64 65

95

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

burial 115.1 should be associated with a funeral meal,77 but in the absence of a faunal study, we do not know whether the shells contained meat, and that they were thus food offered to the dead or consumed by the mourners.78 The sea shells of graves 5 and 119 have been regarded as toys,79 as the rest of the molluscs, which were found in three cremation burials.80 Marine shells were encountered mostly in infant and child graves from many prehistoric and historic sites of the Aegean, but are found in adult graves as well. Based on the few similarities observed in their deposition, their use can be interpreted in many different ways (e.g. as jewellery, dose of medicine or cosmetics).81

of children: miniature vessels,90 unmodified objects, such as the clay pierced bobble, or objects which in their original function became useless, such as the foot vessels or some of the sea shells. The miniature cups and skyphoi (which predominate among the miniature vases), as substitutes for their full sized counterparts,91 could have been used as drinking or eating pots for older infants (or young children). Certain miniature vessels from the Agora and the Kerameikos of Athens seem to have been made by children, and may thus represent the offerings of child mourners or perhaps the handiwork of the deceased.92 This could be the case for some of the miniatures from Thera, but without a close examination of these vessels it is not possible to come to a firm conclusion. Nevertheless, miniature vessels should not be associated only with the world of children, since they are encountered in adult burials.93 They are also found in cremation burials from Sellada,94 but, as previously noted for the case of the feeding bottle, it is unknown whether these cremations were of adults or of children.

In Sellada, as opposed to Mesa Vouno, almost half of the pot burials were provided with no gifts. When offerings do occur they are usually one drinking pot and, in two cases, one feeding bottle.82 There is no clear association of the infant burials with any offering pyres, apart from the case of the chamber grave with the five enchytrismoi, where two were placed on pyres.83 Offerings of artefacts other than pottery are rare in this cemetery too, with the exception of two burials. The burial pot of the first tomb contained a faience figurine of Bes.84 The second infant was interred with many figurines, bronze bracelets, beads of various types (no further published information) and fragments of two bone fibulae.85

As with miniature vessels, figurines should not be linked only to children burials, due to their presence in adult burials as well (usually female); they need to be interpreted on a case-by-case basis, which includes analysis of the full assemblage. Looking closer at the funeral assemblage of burial 70.1, a few observations can be made. The pig, dove and tortoise figurines are associated with fertility and kourotrophic cults,95 which were celebrated in Thera.96 Regardless if these figurines were children’s playthings or not, their presence in their graves has apotropaic significance, along with the figurines of Bes, which were deposited in order to protect the deceased in the other world. Furthermore, as symbols of fertility, these figurines were thrown in the enagismos pyre of the infant, individuals that would never reach adulthood to have descendants, marking everything that was lost.97

Concerning the use of feeding bottles, they could have served for feeding an infant under six months but most of are associated with the weaning process, which can take place between six months and three years of age.86 Nevertheless, their presence is not always indicative of the identification of the age of the deceased, since it is moot whether these bottles were actually used, and if so what they might have contained.87 Moreover, feeding bottles have been also found in adult graves,88 as one such accompanied a cremation burial from Sellada,89 but it is not possible to identify in this case whether the burial belonged to an adult or a sub-adult. With the exception of feeding bottles, no other types of grave goods can be distinguished that may be considered to have been characteristic of infants. Several types of objects, however, could have served as toys in the hands

Gender-specific objects are generally absent. The presence of the two necklaces in the burial of the girl in grave 10 does not constitute an exception to this rule, since the deceased represents an exceptional case, as the traits of its burial indicate that the social

pot and of an amphora. 77 Pfuhl 1903: 268; Stroszeck 2012: 70. 78 Ruscillo 2005: 332-3. 79 Pfuhl 1903: 239-40. 80 Numerous conus shells were found along with many astragaloi inside the urn of grave 89 and were regarded as gaming pieces (Pfuhl 1903: 74, 240). 81 Stroszeck 2012. 82 Grave 21, Dragendorf 1903: 36; Zapheiropoulos 1971: 229. 83 Zapheiropoulos 1971: 229. 84 Zapheiropoulos 1971: 229. 85 Zapheiropoulos 1976: 330. 86 Fulminate 2015. 87 Dasen 2011: 312; Dubois 2012: 338; Parkin 2013: 53. 88 Dubois 2012: 337; Centlivres Challet 2016: 174. 89 Dragendorff 1903: 37.

Pfuhl 1903: 115. Pilz 2011. 92 Langdon 2015: 227-8. 93 Dubois 2012: 335. 94 Dragendorrf 1903: 115-16. 95 Hadzisteliou-Price 1978: 154; Bevan 1986: 50-2, 71-3, 160-2; Philimonos-Tsopotou 2014: 185-6. 96 Hadzisteliou-Price 1978: 148-9. A sanctuary dedicated to AphroditeEileithyia was located northwest of the city-gate (Dragendorff 1903: 291-322; Sigalas 2000). The sanctuary of (possibly) Hera was found near the entrance of the cemetery of Sellada (Efstathiou 1998; 2011). 97 Huysecom 2003: 100. Unfortunately, the rest of the figurines that accompanied the burial are neither described nor illustrated, with the exception of a bearded face (Pfuhl 1903: 220, T11, Beil.XL) and one unidentified seated figure (Pfuhl 1903: 220, T10, Beil.XL). 90 91

96

Olga Kaklamani: Pot Burials in Ancient Thera

status of the kin group was manifested in this burial. Absence of gender-specific offerings is observed in Athens for infants under the age of three years,98 indicating that Athenian society perceived the infant stage as essentially gender neutral. These items, however, are rarely found in the cemeteries of Thera, thus their presence/absence is not a criterion for the determination of age.99

of their exclusion from family graves indicated that they were not seen as full members of their society. In any case, via their incorporation in public cemeteries, they were intrinsic to social expression and their burials could be used to signal the perspectives of their kin groups. Family coherence and continuation is signalled through this inclusion by the members of a newly founded colony, possibly in the manner of its metropolis. Furthermore, in the cases of the prominent (and oldest) families of the society, which bury their premature lost descendants inside their family chamber graves, these infant burials might be used to exaggerate the claim of a particular family group as belonging to a particular place.103

The grave offerings are indications of a formal burial, with the exception of the feeders and possibly the miniature vessels, at least when compared to the other burials of the cemetery. No significant differentiation in the offerings deposited or in the placement of the infant burials was observed in the case of the mother city of Thera, Sparta,100 as well as in other regions, such as Corinth and Argos.101

In 1903, when ‘Kindergräbern’ of the cemeteries of Thera were carefully studied and published by Pfuhl and Dragendorrf, the archaeology of infancy did not exist as a field of study. If the evidence has been correctly interpreted, and hopefully one day can be anthropologically tested, the re-evaluation and re-presentation of these two old excavations, in addition with the available information of the work of Zapheiropoulos, testifies the variability observed in the funerary treatment of infants. This variability reflects differentiation in the conception of infancy from the adults (who performed the funerary rituals) within different cultural and historical contexts, rather than differentiation of the status of infants themselves.

Conclusions The study of the cemeteries of the ancient city of Thera from the 8th to 6th century BC enriches our knowledge on the funerary treatment of infants in the Greek world during the Late Geometric and Archaic periods. Infants were integrated in the common necropoleis along with older children and adults and furnished with the same kind of grave goods, with the exception of the feeding bottles and likely the miniature vessels. Enagismos rituals were performed for them with no sign of differentiation in comparison with the rest of the deceased, questioning the universality of Plutarch’s claim with regards to the plain character of infant burials.

Acknowledgements My warmest thanks to both Nikolas Dimakis and Tamara Dijkstra for their kind invitation. I am grateful to John K. Papadopoulos for his valuable comments on earlier drafts. I would also like to thank Katerina Koronaiou for proofreading and Georgios Chiotis for his assistance in practical matters.

Nevertheless, age clearly determined the burial practice, and the placement of the deceased infants in separate graves, whether isolated or grouped together. Cremation was chosen by Theran society as the formal burial practice, the rite of passage for the soul from the world of the living to the afterlife, for adults. Deceased children were given a non-normal status, as they were not full members of the society, and consequently their souls were not given full funeral rites and were not thought to enter fully into the world of the dead.102 The inclusion of infants in the common cemetery presupposes that they were welcomed and accepted by their families, while the spatial segregation in terms

Bibliography Agelarakis, A.P. 2016. Geometric Period Plithos Burial Ground at Chora of Naxos Island, Greece: Anthropology Report. Oxford: Archaeopress. Alexiou, M. 2002. The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition (revisited by D. Yatromanolakis and P. Roilos). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield. Beaumont, L. 2003. The changing face of childhood, in J. Neils and J. Oakley (eds) Coming of Age in Ancient Greece: Images of Childhood from Classical Past: 59-83. New Haven: Yale University Press. Beaumont, L. 2012. Childhood in Ancient Athens. London: Routledge. Bevan, E. 1986. Representations of Animals in Sanctuaries of Artemis and Other Olympian Deities. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.

Strömberg 1993: catalog C; Houby-Nielsen 2000: 153-5; Beaumont 2012: 89, 103; Langdon 2015: 227. 99 Moreover, the shape of the burial amphora does not necessarily serve as an indication of the gender of the deceased (as it is often considered to do in the Attic manner of burying), because the majority of the amphorae from both inhumation and cremation burials on Thera were shoulder-handled. In any case, the definition of gender-laden objects and their age relation would only be possibly after the burials were anthropologically analysed. 100 Themos-Zavvou 2010: 233. 101 Dubois 2016. 102 Bremmer 1983: 73, 89, 108; Garland 1985: 80. 98

103

97

Scott 1999: 108.

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Bobou, O. 2015. Children in the Hellenistic World: Statues and Representation. New York: Oxford University Press. Bremmer, J.N. 1983. The Early Greek Concept of the Soul. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Buikstra, L.E. and D.E. Ubelaker 1994. Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains: Proceedings of a Seminar at the Field Museum of Natural History. Fayetteville: Arkansas Archaeological Survey. Cannon, A. and K. Cook 2015. Infant death and the archaeology of grief. CAJ 25.2: 399-416. Carroll, M. 2011. Infant death and burial in Roman Italy. JRA 24: 99-120. Cavanagh, G.W. 1991. Surveys, Cities and Synoecism, in J. Rich and A. Wallace-Hadrill (eds) City and Country in the Ancient World: 97-118. London: Routledge. Centlivres Challet, Cl.E. 2016. Tire-lait ou biberons romains? Fonctions, fonctionnalités et affectivité. AntCl 85: 157-80. Claassen, J.M. 2004. Plutarch’s little girl. ActaCl 47: 27-50. Crawford, S. 1991. When do Anglo-Saxon Children Count?. Journal of Theoretical Archaeology 2: 17-24. Damigos, S. and O. Kaklamani in print. From Thera to Cyrene: early society and complex networking in the Age of Colonization, in A. Roncaglia and S. Ranieri (eds) Ricerche a Confronto. Dialoghi di Antichità Classiche e del Vicino Oriente. Zermeghedo: Edizioni Saecula. Dasen, V. 2011. Childbirth and infancy in Greek and Roman antiquity, in B. Rawson (ed.) A Companion to Families in the Greek and Roman Worlds: 291-314. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. Dasen, V. 2013. Becoming human: from the embryo to the newborn child, in J.E. Grubbs, T. Parkin and R. Bell (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Childhood and Education in the Classical World: 17-39. New York: Oxford University Press. Deger-Jalkotzy, S. 2013. Cremation burials in the Mycenaean cemetery of Elateia-Alonaki, in Central Greece, in M. Lochner and F. Ruppenstein (eds) Brandbestattungen von der mittleren Donau bis zur Ägäis zwischen 1300 und 750 v. Chr.: Akten des internationalen Symposiums an der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, 11.-12. Februar 2010: 221-9. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. De Lacy, Ph. H. and B. Einarson (eds) 1959. Plutarch, Moralia VII (The Loeb Classical Library). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Demand, N. 1994. Birth, Death, and Motherhood in Classical Greece. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Dickey, E. 1992. Corinthian Burial customs, c. 1100 to 550 BC. Ann Arbor: U.M.I. Donlan, W. 1985. The Social Groups of Dark Age Greece. CP 80: 293-308. Dragendorff, H. (ed.) 1903. Thera II: Untersuchungen, Vermessungen und Ausgrabungen in den Jahren 1895-

1902. Theräische Gräber. Berlin: Herlag von Georg Reimer. Dubois, C. 2012. Des objets pour les bébés? Le dépôt de mobilier dans les sépultures d’enfants en bas âge du monde grec archaïque et classique, in A. Hermary and C. Dubois (eds) L’Enfant et la Mort dans l’Antiquité. III Le Matériel Associé aux Tombes d’Enfants: Actes de la Table Ronde Internationale Organisée à la Maison Méditerranéenne des Sciences de l’Homme (MMSH) d’Aixen-Provence: 329-42. Paris, Aix-en-Provence: Errance, Centre Camille Jullian. Dubois, C. 2016. Τά βρέφη au cimetière: les pratiques funéraires autour de la mort des «tout-petits» à Corinthe et Argos du VIIIè au Vè s. av. J.-C., in É. Portat, M. Detante, C. Buquet-Marcon and M. Guillon (eds) Rencontre Autour de la Mort des Tout-Petits. Mortalité Foetale et Infantile. Actes de la IIe Rencontre du Gaaf à Saint-Germain-en-Laye les 3 et 4 Décembre 2009, Saint-Germain-en-Laye, Gaaf: 55-65. Saint-Germainen-Laye: Groupe d’anthropologie et d’archéologie. Efstathiou, M. 1998. Θήρα. Αρχαία Θήρα. Κτήριο Σελλάδας. ArchDelt 53, Chronika, B2: 805-8. Efstathiou, M. 2001. Το νεκροταφείο της αρχαίας Οίας στη Θήρα. Ταφές καύσης, in Chr. Stampolidis (ed.) Καύσεις στην Εποχή του Χαλκού και την Πρώιμη Εποχή του Σιδήρου: Πρακτικά του Συμποσίου Ρόδος 29 Απριλίου – 2 Μαΐου 1999: 301-320. Athens: University of Crete/ΚΒ’ ΕPCA. Efstathiou, M. 2011. Αρχαία Θήρα/Ancient Thera (brochure). Athens: Bibliosynergatiki S.A. Ekroth, G. 2002. The Sacrificial Rituals of Greek Hero-Cults in the Archaic to the Early Hellenistic Periods. Liège: Centre International d’Etude de la Religion Grecque Antique. Fulminante, F. 2015. Infant feeding practices in Europe and the Mediterranean from Prehistory to the Middle Ages: a comparison between the historical sources and bioarchaeology. Childhood in the Past 8.1: 24-47. Garland, R. 1985. The Greek Way of Death. New York: Cornell University Press. Golden, M. 1990. Children and Childhood in Classical Athens. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Guy, H., Cl. Masset and Ch-A. Baud 1997. Infant Taphonomy. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 7: 221-9. Kallintzi, K and I.D. Papaoikonomou 2010. La présence des enfants dans les nécropoles d’ Abdère, in A.M. Guimier-Sorbets and Y. Morizot (eds) L’ Enfant et la Mort Dans les Nécropoles Grecques. Actes de la Table Ronde Internationale Organisée à Athènes, École Française d’Athènes, 29-30 mai 2008: 129-59. Paris: De Boccard. Hadzisteliou-Price, Th 1978. Kourotrophos: Cults and Representations of the Greek Nursing Deities. Leiden: Brill.

98

Olga Kaklamani: Pot Burials in Ancient Thera

Halcrow, S.E. and N. Tayles 2011. The bioarchaeology of children and childhood, in S. Agarwal and B. Glencross (eds) Social Bioarchaeology: 333-60. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Hamilton, R. 1992. Choes and Anthesteria. Athenian Iconography and Ritual. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. Hillson, S. 2009. The world’s largest infant cemetery and its potential for studying growth and development: the Notia Kylindra site on the island of Astypalaia in the Dodecanese, in L. A. Schepartz, Sh. C. Fox, and Chr. Bourbou (eds) New Directions in the Skeletal Biology of Greece (Hesperia Supplement 43): 137-54. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Hoepfner, W. 1997. Das Dorische Thera V: Stadtgesichte und Kultstaetten am noerdlichen Stadtrand. Berlin: Gebr. Mann. Hölbl, M. 2006. Die Aegyptiaca vom Aphroditetempel auf Thera. AM 121: 73-103. Houby-Nielsen, S. 1996. The Archaeology of Ideology in the Kerameikos: New Interpretations of the Opferrinnen, in R. Hägg (ed.) The Role of Religion in the Early Greek Polis: Proceedings from the Third International Seminar on Ancient Greek Cult, organized by the Swedish Institute at Athens, 16-18 October 1992: 41-54. Stockholm: Paul Åströms Förlag. Houby-Nielsen, S. 2000. Child burials in ancient Athens, in S. Derevenski (ed.) Children and Material Culture: 151-66. London/New York: Routledge. Huysecom, S. 2003. Terres cuites animales dans les nécropoles grecques archaïques et classiques du bassin méditerranéen, in B. Gratien, A. Muller and D. Parayre (eds) Figurines Animales des Mondes Anciens, Lille 3, Villeneuve d’Ascq, 8 Juin 2002: 91-103. Paris: L’Homme et l’Animal, Société de Recherche Interdisciplinaire. Jeffery, L.H. 1961. The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jones, C.P. 1996. ἒθνος and γένος in Herodotus. CQ 46.2: 315-20. Lagia, A. 2007. Notions of childhood in the classical polis: evidence from the bioarchaeological record, in A. Cohen and J.B. Rutter (eds) Constructions of Childhood in Ancient Greece and Italy (Hesperia Supplement 41): 293-306. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Lagia, A., A. Papathanasiou, Z. Malakasioti and F. Tsiouka 2013. Cremations of the Early Iron Age from mound 36 at Voulokalyva (ancient Halos) in Thessaly, in M. Lochner and F. Ruppenstein (eds) Brandbestattungen von der mittleren Donau bis zur Ägäis zwischen 1300 und 750 v. Chr.: Akten des internationalen Symposiums an der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, 11.-12. Februar 2010: 197-219. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Langdon, S. 2015. Ends and means of childhood, in G. Coskunsu (ed.) The Archaeology of Childhood.

Interdisciplinary Perspectives on an Archaeological Enigma: 217-33. New York: State University of New York Press. Liston, M.A. 1993. The Human Skeletal Remains from Kavousi, Crete: A Bioarchaeological Analysis. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Tennessee. Liston, M.A. and J.K. Papadopoulos 2004. The ‘Rich Athenian Lady’ was pregnant: the anthropology of a geometric tomb reconsidered. Hesperia 73: 7-38. Liston, M.A. 2017. Human skeletal remains, in J.K. Papadopoulos and E.L. Smithson (eds) Athenian Agora XXXV: The Early Iron Age: The Cemeteries: 50360. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Malkin, I. 1993. Colonisation spartiate dans la mer Egée: tradition et archéologie. RÉA 95.3-4: 365-81. Manifold, B.M. 2013. Differential preservation of children’s bones and teeth recovered from early medieval cemeteries: possible influences for the forensic recovery of non-adult skeletal remains. Anthropological Review 76.1: 23-49. Mazarakis, Ainian A. 2007-2008. Buried among the Living in Early Iron Age Greece: Some Thoughts, in G. Bartoloni and M.G. Benedettini (eds) Sepolti tra i vivi. Atti del convegno internazionale, Roma, 26-29 Aprile 2006: 365-98. Rome: Quasar. Michalaki-Kollia, M. 2010. Un ensemble exceptionnel d’enchytrismes de nouveau-nés, de fœtus et de nourrissons découverts dans l’île d’Astypalée, en Grèce: cimetière de bébés ou sanctuaire ? (Première approche), in A-M. Guimier-Sorbets and Y. Morizot (eds) L’Enfant et la Mort dans l’Antiquité I. Nouvelles Recherches dans les Nécropoles Grecques. Le Signalement des Tombes d’Enfants. Actes de la Table Ronde Internationale Organisée à Athènes, École Française d’Athènes, 29-30 mai 2008: 161-205. Paris: De Boccard. Morris, I. 1987. Burial and Ancient Society: The Rise of the Greek City-State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Musgrave, J.H. 2005. An Anthropological assessment of the inhumations and cremations from the Early Iron Age Cemetery at Torone, in J.K. Papadopoulos, The Early Iron Age Cemetery at Torone: Excavations Conducted by the Australian Archaeological Institute at Athens in Collaboration with the Athens Archaeological Society: 243-315. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology. Neils, J. and J.H. Oakley (eds) 2003. Coming of Age in Ancient Greece. New Haven: Yale University Press. Oakley, H.J. 2013. Children in Archaic and Classical Greek art: a survey, in J.E. Grubbs, T. Parkin and R. Bell (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Childhood and Education in the Classical World: 148-70. New York: Oxford University Press. Papadopoulos, J. K. 2000. Skeletons in wells: towards an archaeology of social exclusion in the ancient 99

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Greek world, in J. Hubert (ed.) Madness, Disability and Social Exclusion: The Archaeology and Anthropology of ‘Difference’: 96-118. London: Routledge. Papadopoulos, J.K. 2005. The Early Iron Age Cemetery at Torone (Monumenta Archaeologica 24). Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA. Papadopoulos, J.K. 2010. The bronze headbands of Prehistoric Lofkënd and their Aegean and Balkan connections. OpAthRom 3: 33-54. Papadopoulos, J.K. 2017. Burial customs and funerary rites, in J.K. Papadopoulos and E.L. Smithson (eds) Athenian Agora XXXV: The Early Iron Age: The Cemeteries: 575-688. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Papadopoulos, J.K. and E.L. Smithson 2002. The cultural biography of a Cycladic Geometric amphora. Islanders in Athens and the prehistory of metics. Hesperia 71: 149-99. Papadopoulos, J.K. and M.A. Liston 2004. The ‘Rich Athenian Lady’ was pregnant: the anthropology of a geometric tomb reconsidered. Hesperia 78: 7-38. Papadopoulos, J.K. and S. Strack 2017. Pottery, in J.K. Papadopoulos and E.L. Smithson (eds) Athenian Agora XXXV: The Early Iron Age: The Cemeteries: 689897. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Papangeli, K. 1989. Οδός Εθνικής Αντιστάσεως (O.T. 179, οικόπεδο Χ. Θάνου). ArchDelt 44, Chronika, B1: 31-2. Parkin, T. 2013. The demography of infancy and early childhood in the ancient world, in J.E. Grubbs, T. Parkin and R. Bell (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Childhood and Education in the Classical World: 40-61. New York: Oxford University Press. Pfuhl, E. 1903. Der archaische Friedhof am Stadtberge von Thera. AM 28: 1-290. Philimonos-Tsopotou, M. 2014. Eιδώλια από παιδικές ταφές στη Νίσυρο, in A. Giannikouri (ed.) Κοροπλαστική και Μικροτεχνία στον Αιγαιακό Χώρο από τους Γεωμετρικούς Χρόνους έως και τη Ρωμαϊκή Περίοδο: Διεθνές Συνέδριο στη Μνήμη της Ηούς Ζερβουδάκη: Ρόδος, 26-29 Νοεμβρίου 2009: 177-90. Athens: Tameio Archaiologikōn Porōn kai Apallotriōseōn. Pilz, O. 2011. The uses of small things and the semiotics of Greek miniature objects, in A.C. Smith and M.E. Bergeron (eds) The Gods of Small Things: 15-30. Toulouse: Presses Universitaires du Mirail. Pomadère, M. 2005. L’attitude face à la mort des enfants dans les communautés égéennes pratiquant l’incinération (XIIIe -VIIIe siècles). Ktèma 30: 153-60. Ruscillo, D. 2005. Appendix C. Marine remains and land mollusks from Terrace V, in Papadopoulos 2005: 321-38. Scheuer, L. and S. Black 2000. Developmental Juvenile Osteology. San Diego: Academic Press. Scott, E. 1999. The Archaeology of Infancy and Infant Death (British Archaeological Reports IS 819). Oxford: Archaeopress.

Selekou, M. 2014. Το Νεκροταφείο στη Θέση Τριανταφυλλιά Λιβανάτων (6ος - 2ος αι. π.Χ.): Συμβολή στη Μελέτη της Αρχαίας Λοκρίδας. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Ioannina. Shepherd, G. 2007. Poor little rich kids. Status and selection in Archaic Western Greece, in S. Crawford and G. Shepherd (eds) Children, Childhood and Society (British Archaeological Reports IS 1696): 93-106. Oxford: Archaeopress. Sigalas, Ch. 1988. Θήρα. Ανασκαφικές εργασίες: Καμάρι. Αρχαϊκό νεκροταφείο (οικόπεδα Π. Αναπλιώτη – Ζ. Μάινα – Ε. Φώτη). ArchDelt 43, Chronika, B2: 504-10. Sigalas, Ch. 1996. Πήλινος αρχαϊκός οικίσκος από τη Θήρα. Epeteris Etaireias Kykladikon Meleton IE’ (1994): 119-33. Sigalas, Ch. 2000. Un sanctuaire d’Aphrodite a Théra. Kernos 13: 241-5. Siurla-Theodoridou, V. 1989. Die Familie in der griechischen Kunst und Literatur des 8. bis 6. Jahrunderts v. Chr. München: Tuduv. Sotiris, M., Michail D.E., Mountrakis K. and M. Chavalopoulou 2013. Βιοαρχαιολογική μελέτη του σκελετικού υλικού από τις ανασκαφές της Σαντορίνης (Αρχαία Θήρα και Καμάρι), in M. Alvanou (ed.) Island Identities: the Contribution of the Secretariat General for the Aegean and Island Policy to the Research and Promotion of the Culture of the Aegean Archipelago: 128-9. Mytilene: Secretariat General for the Aegean and Island Policy. Sourvinou-Inwood, Ch. 1983. A trauma in flux: death in the 8th century and after, in R. Hägg (ed.) The Greek Renaissance of the Eighth Century BC: Tradition and Innovation. Proceedings of the Second International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 1-5 June 1981: 33-49. Stockholm: Svenska Institutet in Athen. Sperling, J.W. 1973. Thera and Therasia (Ancient Greek Cities 22). Athens: Athens Center of Ekistics. Strömberg, A. 1998. Male or Female? A Methodological Study of Grave Gifts as Sex-Indicators in Iron Age Burials from Athens. Jonsered: Paul Åströms Förlag. Stroszeck, J. 2012. Grave gifts in child burials in the Athenian Kerameikos: the evidence of sea shells, in A. Hermary and C. Dubois (eds) L’ Enfant et la Mort dans l’ Antiquité III. Le Matériel Associé aux Tombes d’Enfants: Actes de la Table Ronde Internationale Organisée à la Maison Méditerranéenne des Sciences de l’Homme, MMSH d’Aix-en-Provence, 20-22 Janvier 2011: 57-75. Aix-en-Provence: Centre Camille-Jullian. Themos, A. and E. Zavvou 2010. Recent finds of child burials in the area of ancient Sparta, from Protogeometric to Roman times, in A-M. GuimierSorbets and Y. Morizot (eds) L’ Enfant et la Mort dans l’Antiquité I. Nouvelles Recherches dans les Nécropoles Grecques. Le Signalement des Tombes d’Enfants. Actes de la Table Ronde Internationale Organisée à Athènes, École Française d’Athènes, 29-30 mai 2008: 227-241. Paris: De Boccard. 100

Olga Kaklamani: Pot Burials in Ancient Thera

Vlachopoulos, A. 2007. Monolithos. A Mycenaean Installation on Thera. Als 5: 105-11. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1961. Ανασκαφή Θήρας. Prakt: 200-6. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1963. Ανασκαφή Θήρας. Prakt: 156-7. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1965. Ανασκαφή Θήρας. Prakt: 183-6. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1966. Ανασκαφή Θήρας. Prakt: 135-8. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1968. Ανασκαφή Θήρας. Prakt: 12832. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1969. Ανασκαφή Θήρας. Prakt: 193-6. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1970. Ανασκαφή Θήρας. Prakt: 205-7. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1971. Ανασκαφή Θήρας. Prakt: 22630. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1973. Ανασκαφή Σελλάδας Θήρας. Prakt: 121-6. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1974. Ανασκαφή Θήρας. Prakt: 194200. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1975. Ανασκαφή Σελλάδας Θήρας. Prakt: 230-4.

Zapheiropoulos, N. 1976. Ανασκαφή Σελλάδας Θήρας. Prakt: 330-3. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1977. Ανασκαφή εις Σελλάδα Θήρας. Prakt: 400-2. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1978. Aνασκαφή εις Σελλάδα Θήρας. Prakt: 229-31. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1981. Ανασκαφή Σελλάδας Θήρας. Prakt: 329-30. Zapheiropoulos, N. 1982. Ανασκαφή Σελλάδας Θήρας. Prakt: 267-71. Zapheiropoulou, Ph. 2011. Νέα στοιχεία από τη γεωμετρική Νάξο. Το νεκροταφείο στη θέση Πλίθος της Χώρας, in A. Mazarakis Ainian (ed.) The ‘Dark Ages’ Revisited, Acts of an International Symposium in Memory of William D.E. Coulson, University of Thessaly, Volos, 14-17 June 2007: 733-43. Volos: University of Thessaly Press.

101

Premature Death and Burial in Classical and Hellenistic Attica Nikolas Dimakis Abstract: Burial evidence from Attica suggests that society was not untouched when a child died, while a few child burials stand out indicating that some children would receive particular care in death. Traditional archaeological approaches to child burials have tended to interpret the treatment of children in death as being particularly revealing for their social and economic role in society. More recent studies focused on more symbolic issues such as memory, emotion, movement, and the degree of parental involvement. Indeed, the death of a child is rather dramatic as it is surrounded by emotions evolved from early loss. In this paper these models are brought together on the basis of burial evidence from Attica in order to reconstruct as far as possible the funeral ritual associated with child death, investigate the impact of child loss to Classical and Hellenistic society, examine the association, if there was any, between emotion and the child’s identity and status, and explore how this association might have changed in time within Attica. Keywords: Attica, Classical, Hellenistic, child death and burial, emotions

Introduction

400 child burials are deemed as ‘instructive’ in terms of the information provided for them by the excavators, and are here considered.2

Children in the archaeological record constitute the most exciting and controversial area in presentday research on childhood in the classical world.In particular, the study of funerary practices produces and promises the most new information, but is roiled by disagreements on how to interpret it. Most archaeological approaches to child burials of historic times tendto interpret the treatment of children in death as being particularly revealing for their social and economic role in society.1 But symbolic issues such as memory, emotion, movement and the degree of parental involvement in child death and burial have been largely neglected. Indeed, the death of a child is rather dramatic as it is surrounded by emotions evolved from early loss.

However, such a study has to overcome major obstacles such as the fragmentary information provided by dispersed sources, the chronological and geographical imbalance of the evidence, the fact that most assessments of child burials are results of observations made by archaeologists in the field, and the incomplete knowledge of non-adult populations in Classical and Hellenistic Attica which is limited to a number of sitespecific bioarchaeological studies.3 Nonetheless, in the latter case some crude generalisation is possible. Child burials rose dramatically from the 8th to the 5th centuries BC. The 6th and 5th centuries BC in particular were characterized by a high frequency of infant and child burials. In the 4th century BC, the overall number of infant and child burials dropped. The number remained low in the Hellenistic period, while during the 2nd and 1st centuries BC the total proportion of children represented in cemeteries decreased even more.

In the current study these models are brought together on the basis of burial evidence from Attica in order to investigate the impact of child loss to Classical and Hellenistic society and to examine the association, if there was any, between emotion and the child’s identity and status, and to explore how this association might have changed over time and in space. The main aim of this paper is to raise questions, note some general trends, mark tendencies (and not firmly separated categories) and contribute to our understanding of the role of children in Classical and Hellenistic period Attica through the burial evidence. In addition, it seeks to situate infant and child burials within the world of the adults, while at the same time grounding them within the special sphere of childhood. Approximately

Locating the Children People place their burials in meticulous ways, indicative of their belief about death and illuminative of relations between the living and the dead. The choice of burial location can in theory have been dictated by continuity of use from an earlier period, or rather the continued consecration of burial grounds, by practical 2 The child burials have been located mainly through a survey of the preliminary reports of rescue excavations published in the Archaeologikon Deltion and the Archaeologika Analekta eks Athninon, and the catalogues provided in Houby-Nielsen 1995, 1997 and 2000. 3 Lagia 2007; cf. Fox 2012.

1 e.g. Houby-Nielsen 1995; 1997; 2000; Sofaer Derevenski 2000; Guimier-Sorbets and Morizot 2010; Hermary and Dubois 2012; Nenna 2012.

102

Nikolas Dimakis: Premature Death and Burial in Classical and Hellenistic Attica

Figure 1. Section of Heriai Pylai Cemetery, Athens, 22 Kriezi and Psaromiliggou (after Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1987: 23-4, plan 6; © Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of the City of Athens/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

considerations such as the suitability of the land for grave construction, by convenience because earlier graves were already available, by proximity to natural, sacred or urban features, or location on land holdings. However, the changing distribution of child graves from the Classical to the Hellenistic period cannot be wholly explained by these factors; there is an additional element of selection and evidently conscious placement of a child burial which often implies social peculiarities at temporal and regional level.

same grave with or next to the grave of an adult (in the Kerameikos these adults have been largely identified as being of female sex),5 c) in proper child cemeteries, 1988: 28-31; Vassilopoulou 1988: 36-7; Pachigiani-Kaloudi 1989: 289; Lygkouri-Tolia 1990: 31; Tsirigoti-Drakotou 1993; Zachariadou and Kyriakou 1993: 23-7; Lygkouri-Tolia 1995a; Lygkouri-Tolia 1995b; Zachariadou 1998; Kokkoliou 2000; Kyriakou-Zapheiropoulou 2004; Baziotopoulou-Valavani 2010; Eliopoulos 2010: 205-6, 208-14; Stoupa 2014; Acharnai: Platonos 1992: 64-7; Platonos 2010a; Ano Patisia: Lygkouri-Tolia 1992: 21; Daphne: Alexandri 1984: 50-2 (Ano Daphne); Eleusis: Papaggeli 1993: 46; Papaggeli 1996; Papaggeli 2002: 62; Glyka Nera: Chatzidimitriou and Papafloratou 2013; Glyphada: Petritaki 1987: 72-6; Kallithea: Kranioti and Rozaki 1987: 67-8; Papastavrou 1992: 61; Marathon: ArchDelt 33 (1978), B1, Chronika: 546; Theocharaki 1988: 84-8; Efstratiou 1990; Oropos: Kranioti 1988: 5964; Salamina: Dekoulakou 1990a; 1990b; Dekoulakou 1993; Pologiorgi 2010: 481-5; Votanikos: Tsirigoti-Drakotou 1992; Voula: Petritaki 1987: 76 (Ano Voula); Onasoglou 1992: 87-8; Patrianakou-Iliaki 1992: 84-5; Andreou 1995. 5 Athens: Alexandri 1983: 23; Stoupa 2004; Eliopoulos 2010: 208-14; also Houby-Nielsen 1995; 1997, on Kerameikos; Acharnai: Platonos

In the Classical period in Athens, infants and young child burials are found in urban, semi-urban or rural cemeteries, a) dispersed among adult burials,4 b) in the 4 Athens: Alexandri 1983: 22-3, 28-9; Alexandri 1984: 32, 34-5; Alexandri 1984b: 22-4, 26-8; Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1985: 24-5; Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1987: 17-8, 19-20, 25-6, 33; Stavropoulou

103

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

in other words in cemeteries devoted primarily to infants and young children,which extended close to city gates and roads leading to important sanctuaries of deities with chthonic and female elements, and which played a significant role in the commercial life of Athens,6 and d) in roadside periboloi, next to adults, that increased steadily during the period along major urban roads (Figure 1). Infant and young child burials are therefore situated at key places in the daily traffic to and from Athens, and at locations which must have been regarded as acceptable for child burial. The variables attested for the spatial arrangement of child burialsseem to be common throughout Attica in the Classical period, while in other regions the distribution of child burials changes just like the distribution of adult burials does in a more or less elaborate way.7 Individual burial among adults, and sharing the same grave with adults both highlight the ideological/ psychological autonomy of children in the face of their subordination to the community, i.e. the polis, as stressed by the proper child cemeteries. It needs to be appreciated, however, that these interpretations are neither definitive nor mutually exclusive; in some cases, multiple contrasting messages may be read in the mortuary record. Yet, children were not grouped together in burial on the basis of biological relatedness, but rather for practical sociopolitical purposes that would help forge inter-group alliances and contribute to population stability indicating the importance of citizen or, to be more precise, of citizen-to-be status in Classical Attica.8 Perhaps this is further emphasized by the resemblance of the clustered-child-burials variable with the pattern attested for the Athenian hopliteswho died in service; the latterwere buried together,9 while although the public burials took place annually, not every dead soldier was buried in the Demosion Sema.10

spatially from those for adult/adolescent burials in the same cemetery.11 Instead these are a) normally dispersed in small numbers among adult burials,12 b) in multiple burials with adults/adolescents, a pattern that seems to increase by the Late Hellenistic period,13 c) in periboloi,14 and rarely in d1) peri-urban15 and d2) urban space.16 To these groups one could possibly add a number of isolated child burials,which are found seemingly disassociated from any other (burial) structure.17 Although for groups (a) to (c) the patterns continue in a more or less elaborate form from the Classical period, for group (d) further explanation is required. Indeed, in Athens child burials are not always placed extramuros; a number of individual child burials have been found in peri-urban as well as in urban space that may often be intramuros resembling patterns that are partly reminiscent of earlier and protohistoric burial practices.18 Child burials in peri-urban space, that is in the periphery of proper urban space, have been located near sections of Athens’ fortification walls for instance at Neo Phaleron and at Theseion (Figures 2 and 3).19 According to the excavators, these seem to have belonged to older children (not infants). Although burials in these liminal places, in proximity to or within city walls, might indicate that the latter or their adjacent area had fallen into disuse, or, symbolically speaking, that the fortification wall did not stand as a clear mental barrier for child burials, it is the spatial distinction of some of them from any other burial located nearby (Figure 2), that underlines the significance of these children. But young child burials have also been recovered from proper urban space. A well, the so-called ‘Bone Well’, on the north side of the Kolonos Agoraios in the area of the Athenian Agora that was closed sometime around 150 BC contained the human remains of 1 adult male, 1 child aged about 11 years at death, some 450 foetuses, neonates or infants, and the faunal remains of more

However, evidence suggests that the traditional formal infant and young-child cemeteries as attested in the 6th and 5th centuries BC gradually went out of use by the 4th century BC and into the Hellenistic period as part of a major change in the spatial re-distribution of burials. Indeed, what is not common in Hellenistic Attica is the tendency to reserve specific burial locations for infants and small children segregated

Kaza-Papageorgiou 2009; Petritaki 2014. Athens: Alexandri 1983: 28-9; Alexandri 1984: 39-41; PachigianiKaloudi 1989: 27-9; Lygkouri-Tolia 1992: 19; Zachariadou and Kyriakou 1993: 23-7; Chatzipouliou 1995; Stoupa 2000; 2010; Egaleo: Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1987: 33-7; Eleusis: Papaggeli 2002: 62; Kaminia: Petritaki 2013; Moschato: Steinhower 1995: 55; Oropos: Onasoglou 1995; Agallopoulou 1999; Agallopoulou 2005; Salamina: Pologiorgi 2010: 483-5; Kattoula 2013; Ano Voula: Petritaki 1987: 76; Andreou 1995. 13 Lagia 2007. 14 Papaggeli 2002: 62. 15 e.g. Lygkouri-Tolia 2004; Petritaki 2014. 16 On the evidence see n. 20 and 25. 17 e.g. Lygkouri-Tolia 2004 (Athens); Platonos 2005 (Gerakas); Zachariadou et al. 2013 (Athens); however their further examination is required as none of the burial plots these burials were found is fully or extensively explored. 18 e.g. Morris 1987: 82-6. 19 On the evidence see n. 15. 11 12

1992: 64; in Alimos: Tsaravopoulos 1995; Egaleo: Platonos 2002; Kaminia: Papastavrou 1992: 57; Nea Liosia: Kyriazopoulou 1990; Salamina: Rozaki 1988: 88; Patrianakou-Iliaki 1989: 60; Dekoulakou 1990b; Dekoulakou 1997. 6 Athens: Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1987: 23-4; Lygkouri-Tolia 2009; Eliopoulos 2010: 208-14; Kallithea: Petritaki 2009; Kaminia: Petritaki 2010; Voula: Onasoglou 1992: 88-9; Patrianakou-Iliaki 1992: 76-7; Patrianakou-Iliaki 1992: 82-3; Kattoula 2004; Kouragios and Giamalidi 2014. 7 e.g. Dimakis 2016a, on the evidence from the Northern Peloponnese. 8 We know that living children were used as political actors in many past societies (e.g. see Murphy 2015: 107-8), and it would seem that death was not perceived to be a barrier to such strategies. 9 Loreaux 1986: 117-24. 10 Shapiro 1991: esp. 646, n. 113.

104

Nikolas Dimakis: Premature Death and Burial in Classical and Hellenistic Attica

Figure 2. Child burials in peri-urban space: child burials by a section of the Long Walls at Neo Plaleron, A.Papandreou Str. (after Petritaki 2014; © Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of West Attica, Piraeus and Islands/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

than 130 dogs (Figure 4).20 Epidemic or famine was at first suggested as possible causes of this large number of infants,21 but it has been demonstrated that these were accumulated through normal demographic growth during the well’s period of use.22 Wells as non-funerary contexts can be seen as proxies for economic growth, recession, and consumption, as indicators of population size, but as liminal places they can also be seen as proxies for death and purity.23 They can be interpreted as the equivalent of modern-day designated resting places for stillborn, unbaptized children and other members of society who are considered unsuitable for burial in communal burial ground.24 That is not to say that the abandonment of infants and young children dying prematurely in terms that could possibly indicate the expedient of exposing undesired new-born infants,

was not practiced in Hellenistic Attica.25 But rather that infants who died before reaching the age of formal recognition would not receive a formal burial service and would consequently be buried in other, less accessible, yet meticulously specified places as part of a practice that meets the cultural or other traditions of Hellenistic society. At the junction of Tsokri square and 29 Chatzichristou Street in Athens, that is a well-intramuros residential area in Hellenistic Athens, a primary cremation burial of what is thought to be a young child was found below Hellenistic architectural remains of what seems to have been a house (Figure 5).26 The cremation was performed in a shallow shaft delimited (at a later stage?) by a 0.45m x 0.46 m tile-made chest. Black-painted sherds, a bronze nail and a bronze coin of Eleusis (229-30 BC) imply that the full package of proper burial was performed. The practice of intradomus young child burials is not widely attested in Hellenistic Greece, but burial evidence in Eretria, Atalante and possibly also Sparta indicates that it was not unkown or uncommon.27 Although such

e.g. Little 1999; Rotroff 1999. Angel 1945: 330. 22 Liston and Rotroff 2013; epidemic or famine was initially thought of as a possible cause for this large disposal of infants Angel (1945: 330). Also see Liston et al. 2018. 23 In the area of the Agora of ancient Messene, a well contained a number of bones of infants, along with the burial amphoras (the upper part of which was missing in most cases) and a number of bones of dogs (Bourbou and Themelis 2010: 116). A well at Eretria contained 1100 dog bones and at least 19 infants as well as a hoard of silver and bronze coins dating to the 1st half of the 3rd century BC (Schmid 1997; Chenal-Velarde 2006). 24 Papadopoulos 2000: 111. 20 21

Liston and Rotroff 2013: 74. Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1985: 15. Kalligas 1983: 115, where he also marks (115, n. 1) that it is not uncommon to bury infants and young children under floors, courtyards of roads in 5th and 4th century BC Eretria; on the practice cf. Scott 1999: 115-17.

25 26 27

105

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

must have belonged to a ‘family’ of the elite. Such a child burial apart from receiving additional care, time, effort and overall burial expenditure in a time, the Hellenistic, characterized by ideals of ‘luxury’, ‘leisure’ and display, concepts that clearly had pervaded burial practices,33 it also represents a profound form of commemoration in which the dead child continues to share the living space and experiences of its family. The burial of children in (peri-)urban space within proper, non- or partly funeral contexts is certainly not the result of random behavior; they represent varying codes of ritual practice operating within particular social, religious and cultural constraints structured on age distinction. It can be said that these constraints dictate that children of certain age (as indicated by the fact that they have all been skeletally identified or at least characterized as infants to young children), and status (as implied by the ranging burial expenditure spent on them), should be buried closer to the living community, possibly with the youngest of them even closer. Although, at first, the terms of their multiple or individual disposal might indicate aninsensitive expression of bereavement, they are brought closer to the space of the living by being disposed off in various, yet always focal, locations; in peri- or proper urban space, intramuros, and intradomus. In Athens, formal acceptance into the household took place 5 or 7 days after birth in the ceremonial feast of the Amphidromia (after their birth).34 Although we do not have detailed accounts of the ceremony, we can reconstruct its outline. The primary event was the father’s carrying of the new-born around the hearth, the household’s ritual centre. Around the same time, the birth of a child was announced publicly by decorating the door with wreaths and branches adorned with wool. Female children and those of lower-status families were sometimes named during the Amphidromia, while wealthier families named their male offspring on the dekate (the 10th day after birth), accompanied by an animal sacrifice performed by the father in a public sanctuary. Children were acknowledged as full members of the Athenian society at the Anthesteria festival in their 3rd year, where according to custom, the child’s presentation was marked by a gift of choes.35 It is possible then that the young child burials found in peri- or proper urban space belong to children already acknowledged by their family, thus they did not need to be separated from the domestic space, but as not being yet fully social beings they were not awarded burial in communal burial grounds.

Figure 3. Child burial in peri-urban space: Hellenistic (?) child burial by a section of Athens’ fortification wall at Theseion, 37 Poulopoulou Str. (after Lygkouri-Tolia 2004: 72, plan 6; © Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of the City of Athens/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

burials have been interpreted as foundation deposits;28 a representation of the fact that infants were not full members of society;29 related to sympathetic magic to attract fertility to a household;30 a reflection of the fact that infant death only had an impact at household rather than community level,31 or even as burials of very young children within domestic spaces that had been devoted to child-rearing activities,32 a child receiving cremation burial within a domestic context e.g. Moses 2008. Wells 1990: 139. 30 Morris 1987: 63-5; Golden 1990: 85. 31 Lebegyev 2009: 28. 32 Hodder 1990: 29.

Davies 1984: 268. Hamilton 1984; Dasen 2011: 297, 303; Parker (1983: 5), proposed that the Amphidromia also served to purify the child from the pollution of birth. 35 e.g. Garland 1985; Hamilton 1992; Golden 2003; Wise 2005.

28

33

29

34

106

Nikolas Dimakis: Premature Death and Burial in Classical and Hellenistic Attica

Figure 4. Child burial in urban space: intramural well (‘Bone Well’) with infant remains in the Athenian Agora (from Liston et al. 2018: fig. 1; © Reproduction is courtesy of the Trustees of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens).

Seen like that, the disposal of infants and young children in formal funeral or non-funeral contexts receives a whole different meaning. While in the Classical period the inclusion of children in formal burial sites may be taken as sign of inclusion in the greater community, and of formal familial,36 in the Hellenistic period, the pattern attested may even more so testify to close family ties, but enhanced by status. In either period 36

society was not untouched by a child’s loss; but the manifestation of this response varied significantly in the way child burials were distributed in space. The Mortuary Record As said at the beginning of this paper our knowledge of non-adult populations in Classical and Hellenistic Attica is limited to a number of site-specific bioarchaeological studies. Yet these indicate a high frequency of infant

Houby-Nielsen 1995; Crelier 2008.

107

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 5. Child burial in urban space: intra domus (map after Google Earth).

and child burials in the 6th and 5th centuries BC; dropping numbers in the 4th century BC; low numbers in the Hellenistic period, while during the 2nd and 1st centuries BC in particular the total proportion of children represented in cemeteries decreased even more. This decrease has been interpreted from gradually increasing mortality rates to the increasing burial of children in non-funeral contexts. But there may be more than simply that. Inhumation is the norm for children in both the Classical and Hellenistic periods. Inhumation in stone- and tile-lined cists, sarcophagi, and tile-covered pits seems to have been commoner for older children, likewise for adults, in both the Classical and Hellenistic periods. The grave type used may often be indicative of age groups.37 However, the burials of younger children and infants demonstrate a greater temporal diversity; a marked tendency for burial in vases (chytrai, hydriai, amphoras, clay-pipes) and clay tubs is noted in the Classical period (Figure 6).38 The choice of a closed vase or, as a matter of fact, of a closed shape burial container such as a claypipe or a clay-tub for infants has been associated with the conception of the uterus as a protecting recipient.39

Figure 6. Child burials: the mortuary record.

This argument is perhaps strengthened by the solid manufacturing of these containers that increases their durability. In the Hellenistic period however the burial of infants and young children in vases drops and is almost rivaled by their disposal in simple pits or tile-covered pits.40 Even though this is not a firm distinction from the Classical mortuary record, rather a marked tendency, the deposition of some infants and young children in

e.g. Lagia 2007; in a Classical cemetery at Glyphada pit graves are problably destined specifically for subadults, and vases and clay tubs for ‘children’, Petritaki 1987: 72-6; cf. Sabetai 2000: 506-7. 38 e.g. Charitonides 1961, 6, grave XCIV, 10, grave LXXXI, 28, grave CXII; Alexandri 1983: 22-3, 28-9; 1984: 32, 34-5, 50-2; Alexandri 1984b: 22-3, 23-4, 26-8; Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1985: 24-5; 1987: 17-18, 19-20, 23-4, 25-6, 33; Petritaki 1987: 72-6; Kranioti 1988: 5964; Rozaki 1988: 88; Stavropoulou 1988: 28-31; Theocharaki 1988: 84-88; Patrianakou-Iliaki 1989: 60; Platonos and Chatzipouliou 1989; Efstratiou 1990; Lygkouri-Tolia 1990: 14, 31; Papaggeli 1990; Eliopoulos 2010: 208-14. 39 cf. Michalaki-Kollia 2010: 164. 37

e.g. Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1987: 20, 33-7; Petritaki 1987: 76; Pachigiani-Kaloudi 1989: 27-9; Papaggeli 1990; Lygkouri-Tolia 1992: 19 Papaggeli 1993, 46; Zachariadou and Kyriakou 1993: 23-7; Chatzipouliou 1995; Onassoglou 1995; Papaggeli 1995; Steinhower 1995: 55; Papaggeli 1996; Lanara 1997; Papaggeli 1997; Agallopoulou 1999; Stoupa 2000; Papaggeli 2001; Papaggeli 2002: 58, 62; LygkouriTolia 2004; Zachariadou and Kavvadias 2004; Agallopoulou 2005; Platonos-Giota 2005; Kaza-Papageorgiou 2009; Pologiorgi 2010: 4835; Stoupa 2010; Kattoula 2013; Petritaki 2013; Zachariadou et al. 2013; Petritaki 2014.

40

108

Nikolas Dimakis: Premature Death and Burial in Classical and Hellenistic Attica

less robust types in the Hellenistic period than those destined for the same age-groups in the Classical era, indicates that the preservation of child bones in perpetuity is not so much of a concern, whilst making them harder to be archaeologically identified.41 Less concern for the child’s body per se may have partly to do with the growing mortuary divide (many modest burials next to a few rather elaborate ones)42 noted in a period, the Hellenistic, of increased status and wealth display, and partly to do with another thing: the dualistic concept of Hellenistic religion; people strove to regain their place in the world beyond this one where they truly belonged, and to awaken that part of themselves (i.e. their souls or spirits) that had descended from the heavenly realm by stripping off their bodies, which belonged to the earthly world.

types of vase offerings in child burials in Classical Attica are pyxides, lekythoi, skyphoi, small or miniature vases such as kotylai, olpai, phialai, rarely supplemented by baby-feeders and choes.46 Metal items are frequently found associated with child burials, while koroplastic artefacts are found extensively, often in large groups. The older the person, the fewer the special child vases, toys and small bowls with lid, while koroplastic artefacts increase with age.47 In the Hellenistic period the picture radically changed; unguentaria, alabastra, lekanides, and pyxides constitute the items found more frequently in child burials. Deposition of metal objects seems to drop, likewise that of koroplastic artefacts. However, the presence of all these items in both ‘life’ and ‘death’ contexts warrants a discussion of the relationship between grave goods and artefacts potentially used by children in life. There is an ongoing issue in archaeology, even beyond the classical world, as to what constitutes children’s material culture (beyond toys and infant feeders) and the difficulty in determining it, but such a discussion would take us too far from the purpose of the current study.

This double interpretation gains further weight if cremation burials are also considered. Cremation in Attica is rarely used for children, mainly in Athens rather than in the rest of Attica.43 In the Hellenistic period cremation is more frequent, yet always to a limited regional and quantitative extent.44 It even appears that children could be cremated and buried in fine ash urns as indicated by a gilded stucco bowl at Kerameikos which appears to have contained the ashes of a child – a burial also covered by a tumulus.45 This ostentatious burial rite underlines the concern of some (wealthy?) parents to usher their child’s departed soul to the Otherworld, while at the same time it helps them in healing and recovering from their child’s untimely loss because, unlike slow decomposition after inhumation burial, cremation reduces the body to its component elements quickly, thereby encouraging acceptance of death. Despite their limited number, the fact that child cremation burials increase in the Hellenistic period alongside adult cremation burials, fits rather well in the display of wealth-status-and-religious-affinities pattern discussed above. The choice of burial mode for children obviously did not take place merely by chance, rather it was undertaken with regard to the age, status and identity of the child, all mediated by its social value in the contemporary Athenian society.

Be that as it may, the quantitative and qualitative analysis of these offerings in the ‘longue durée’in Attica did not prove to be rewarding at the current state of research. And this is for three major, and several minor, reasons: a) the number of burial offerings recorded in child burials of the Classical period rise to thousands; b) the offerings from Hellenistic child burials seem to be too low to get a decent sample of data; Houby-Nielsen in her analysis of the frequency of categories of grave goods in relation to children’s age in Athens from 1100 to 300 BC notes that, ‘Hellenistic grave goods are not included (to her analysis) since the number of grave goods from this period is too low to be statistically meaningful’.48 c) The difficulties in precise dating and in differentiating early Hellenistic graves from those of the subsequent Late Hellenistic phase. The objects found associated with child burials may have been personal objects of the deceased child or funerary gifts deposited into the grave by the family and relatives. However, none of these types of offerings can be considered as an exclusive child offering or age-indicator; for instance, the jewellery found in child graves is often too large in size to have been used by them in life, or objects frequently attributed by scholars to child burials are often found in adult burials too. If particular items are found to be buried only (or never) with infants or children, this could possibly form an important part of our reconstruction of the

Depositional Patterns of Offerings Because the topic of grave goods in child burials has often been discussed – always on the basis of evidence related to Athens, I shall only offer a sketch here which is important for later arguments. The most common Lagia 2007; cf. Sabetai 2000: 506-7. Morris 1992: 144-5; Dimakis 2016a. 43 See the evidence from Eridanos (Schlörb-Vierneisel 1966: 23/hS 181, 54/hS 170, 79/hS 151, 104/hS 156, 158/hS 87) and Kerameikos cemeteries (Kübler 1976: nos 106, 141). Also, see Efstratiou 1990, on two ‘child pyrai’ at Marathon. 44 Kovacsovics 1990: enclosure VIII grave 40; Kübler 1976: nos 154, 231, 233, 500, 568). 45 Kovacsovics 1990: 65/eck.34. 41 42

These do not appear everywhere in the same tendency; for instance at Eridanos cemetery only 4 out 30 child burials had a chous (Hamilton 1992: 66). 47 Houby-Nielsen 1995: 138. 48 2000: Figure 12.1. Also, see Platonos 2004: 130-31; Houby-Nielsen 1995: 163-4. 46

109

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

profile of infancy or childhood in Hellenistic society that may or may not mirror regional particularities. What is made clear by the quality and quantity of grave goods deposited in child burials is that these are inextricably linked with the social status of the child’s family, the importance of children in their community, the formation of their own identities, and the rupture caused by their death.49

and of all-inclusive ‘concepts’ (as for instance the Classical polis), but rather of a limited group of people. Since the quantity and quality of offerings in most child burials in Attica drops, it can be further assumed that the concept of furnishing child burials in the region did not entail solely or great financial outlay. Rather it was the funerary significance of the offerings deposited in child burials that was of importance. In this case, these objects may have well to do with wealth, but also with the mourners over-compensating for an untimely death with often exaggerating expressions of grief and loss. Emotion is an instinctive reaction, but to the extent that inequality existed in the Hellenistic world, the quantity and quality of offerings deposited into child graves depended upon what the mourners could afford.

In view of the above, a contextual analysis of the evidence from urban, sub-urban and rural cemeteries,50 has allowed ample room for the following observations, that often cross-cut space and time, to emerge: child burials in the Classical period are better furnished than in the Hellenistic possibly as an indication of the children’s role, status and importance to the contemporary society, as also pointed out by the robust grave types they were usually placed in. Infants and small children are provided with many more small and miniature vases than older children and adults. Thus, it seems that artefacts in child graves were selected with a view to their appropriateness for particular age groups of children. Apparently, those who buried the children found it necessary to express through burial customs, the fact that a child (as opposed to an adult) had died. It is likely that female relatives were responsible for preparing the body of an infant and young child as highlighted by the multiple burials of adult females and young children as well as by contemporary funerary reliefs. Infants do not seem to receive extensively gender specific items such as male‐associated athletic equipment or female-related toilet items, but their number gradually increases with the age of the child. As a matter of fact especially in the latter case, burial offerings often display a female bridal,51 or a male nonbridal status. This indicates that Classical Athenian society perceived the infant stage as essentially gender neutral, but also that emotive forces were influencing the differential treatment of diverse age groups in death. Children by growing older were more socially, and thus, emotionally attached to the Athenian society something also confirmed by literary sources.

Interestingly, the relative number of drinking, pouring and eating vases deposited in child burials decreases by the early Classical period (c. 500 BC) and drops even more in the Hellenistic.54 As far as the Classical period is concerned this is not in line with the overall pottery repertoire. Instead it represents conscious selection of pottery types offered to children in death. Apparently, the dead and the living did not ‘interact’ commonly and extensively in the form of actualor symbolic gatherings involving the social act of drinking at the child grave. Rather the limited number of suchlike types of vases in a child’s grave may representthe limited number of mourners (nuclear family?) that expressed bereavement through the consumption of drink.55 This is further supported by the fact that in funeral reliefs and epigrams commemorating the untimely loss of a child, this is largely made by either or both of its parents, and rarely by larger groups of people. Of course, one of the oft-repeated, if less than popular, maxims of archaeological research is that negative evidence – the absence of material traces of human activity – is just as valuable as the richest and most copious finds. Thus particular elements of the overall picture created by the presence/absence of objects in child burials invite further debate while the list can grow longer when taking into account more parameters that scholarly ingenuity can only reconcile at the current stage of research, namely: the differentiation noted in the depositional patterns of offerings between younger and older child burials, the significant lack of specific types of artefacts (e.g. lamps, coins) in child burials, the variation noted in the orderly arrangement of offerings in child burials (mostly around the head, whereas for adults around the lower limbs), the scarcity of child burial-and-pyra complexes, or even consider

In the Hellenistic period the many ‘poor’ burials of children probably next to very few ‘rich’ ones as indicated by burial evidence in other regions,52 and the concurring increasing deposition of children in less robust grave types, suggest partly the children’s vertical classification, where the degree of age/sex differentiation by special burial modes could indicate horizontal differentiations,53 and partly that children are not regarded as necessary for the survival of society Dasen 2010. On the evidence see n. 4-6 and 11-17. 51 Dasen 2010. 52 Dimakis 2016a. 53 e.g. expression of status, symbolisms and various beliefs relating to the afterlife etc.

The evidence provided by Houby-Nielsen (1995: table 7) for child burials in Kerameikos is rather instructive. cf. from Roman epigraphical evidence, it may be inferred that the nuclear, rather than an extended, kin group took the leading role in the deposition of typical grave offerings such as Charon’s obol, ceramic vessels, and food and drink (Toynbee 1971: 50-4).

49

54

50

55

110

Nikolas Dimakis: Premature Death and Burial in Classical and Hellenistic Attica

the fact that child burials might have been furnished with perishable organic goods,56 indicative of their age groupsuch as with the olive wreaths or bits of wool that the Athenian tradition had them to signal the birth of newborns. However, it is not necessary for an ideology to exist or be hidden under symbolisms in a grave; it may simply not be there.

not untouched when a child died, no matter the period. A funeral was undoubtedly a public ritual, at least the procession part. It was aimed at an audience that in child burials, and notably in the Hellenistic period, may not always have been extended, but rather limited to the household if not to specified family members. This might have already started from the stage of the body’s preparation for burial as this was arguably performed by women – the pollution associated with menstruation and childbearing may have made them more suitable for handling a polluted corpse,60 but at the same time, their role in the beginning of life may have made them most appropriate custodians of the final rites for children.

Display of Emotions, Status and Identity The study of emotions in archaeology presents challenges of both methodology and definition. That emotional response to archaeological evidence is person-specific may seem to be stating the blindingly obvious. But when dealing with ancient cultures for which the notion of identity within a community was regulated by very different means such as ritual practices, and political systems, an awareness of the subjectivity of emotions in antiquity should not be taken for granted. Thankfully, we have a number of textual references which can confirm that emotions were thought to vary according to the identity of the individual.57

The burial space selected for placing (some) children might have or have not facilitated the engagement of the viewer in sympathetic emotions, making them able to reinvigorate their emotional proximity with the deceased, and combat their being forgotten. Indeed, such may have been the case for the Hellenistic child burials in peri-urban and urban space, intramuros and intradomus.61 Indeed, regular ‘refreshing’ of emotions is an essential part of the maintenance of memory and is a process incorporated into many objects and spaces which regulate interpersonal identities.

But, can any effort to identify emotions in the burial record be considered fruitful? It was, perhaps, a peculiarly monolithic perception of past societies or merely a simple projection of modern conceptions and moral standards into the past that obstructed a multidisciplinary approach to the cultural context in which specific emotions have stimulated specific actions. Phillippe Ariès, for example, has strongly emphasised the fact that love and affection should not be expected in pre-industrial populations, since any emotional commitment was too perilous for individuals and intolerable for society because of the frequent loss of children.58 This view is undoubtedly wrong as regards to Greek antiquity, as grave epigrams and grave reliefs clearly demonstrate.59 Even in modern times we often take an action triggered by our emotions, and there is no reason to believe otherwise for people who lived in the past.

Material culture provided in death, a child’s death in our case, might manifest emotional sensitivity; the overall burial expenditure in child burials i.e. artefacts, receptacles, ritual, involves gestures, beliefs and technologies aiming not only to facilitate the selective remembering (or even forgetting) of the dead person per se, but also to provide insights into the pathos invested in a child burial context.62 An overall modest mortuary record does not necessarily imply limited parental involvement, or that children faced neglect as a consequence of the mortality rate. The occasional discovery of child burials next to an adult, or in the same grave with them, the great emphasis placed on the grief at the unfairness of the child’s death in several epigrams, or on the closeness of mother and infant by usually discussing the death of an infant at childbirth together with the death of its mother,63 or even the fact that in death children share significantly more attributes with adult females than either do with adult males,64 suggest the exact opposite. In all of these instances, emotion can serve as an element of cohesion within a group or as a means of excluding outsiders. As

Through the consideration of burial evidence from Classical and Hellenistic Attica, it has been argued that contemporary child burials are not solely concerned with the brief symbolic display of the deceased’s idealized group or individual identity, and status through the choice of the location of burial, burial rite, offerings and grave form. While a few child burials may indeed stand out, indicating that some children of certain age, sex, status or identity, would receive particular care in death evidence suggests that the Athenian society was

Shapiro 1991: 634-6; though for instance in Euripides’s Medea (103235) the mother laments that her children will not dress her for burial ‘with their hands’, implying that children might have also had some agency in the funerary ceremonies associated with their dead siblings (of any age?). 61 For an overview of Hellenistic child burials in Greece, see Dimakis 2019. 62 On pathos in child death, see Golden 1997. 63 Grief of the parents Verilhac 1978: nos 147, 156, 165, 168, 180. 64 Dimakis 2016b. 60

Kübler 1976: nos 574, 607, 607a, 611. Masséglia 2012: 140-1. 58 Ariès 1960: esp. 39. 59 On grave epigrams e.g. Verilhac 1978 and 1982; Chaniotis 2012: 10712 (with further bibliography); on grave reliefs e.g. Bobou 2015. 56 57

111

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece Acknowledgements

such, it can be understood to be a crucial instrument in the construction of collective identity.

This paper is an overview of my postdoctoral research at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens on ‘The Archaeology of Child Death: child burials in Classical and Hellenistic Attica’ funded by the Research Centre for the Humanities (RCH) for the year 2016, with the support of the John S. Latsis Public Benefit Foundation. I am immensely indebted to my postdoctoral mentor Prof. Panos Valavanis for his constant guidance and our fruitful meetings, and to Mark Golden for his valuable comments on earlier drafts. My sincere gratitude goes to the Ephorate of Antiquities of the City of Athens, the Ephorate of Antiquities of West Attica, Pireus and Islands, and to the Archaeological Receipts Fund of the Ministry of Culture and Sports, as well as to the Trustees of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, for granting me permission to reproduce images and plans.

Although the intensity and duration of emotional responses to a child’s death and burial cannot be firmly measured, perhaps the child’s chances of being buried and commemorated may have been affected by the degree of consideration and changing value measured in terms of gender, age and status placed on children. Since emotions are socially relevant, subject to scrutiny, judgment, and normative intervention, it is expected for their manifestation, perception and treatment to fluctuate according to cultural and social variables. Thus the changing socio-political structures from the Classical to the Hellenistic period that largely affected gender and age roles even in death may have had an impact on the degree of emotional sensitivity invested in child death and burial that demonstrates a gradual increase of the desire to keep private emotional displays of sorrow for an untimely loss, rather than exposing it to the populace. This is further emphasized by the gradual fainting of interactive, mentally or psychologically, family scenes in grave reliefs from the Classical to the Hellenistic period,65 a pattern though not attested in freestanding sculpture that were destined for larger public display.66 Moreover, these developments for children occur at the same time as the individual depiction, description and mention of children become refined in art and literature.67

Bibliography Agallopoulou, P. 2005. Ωρωπός, Σκάλα Ωρωπού, υδρευτικό σκάμμα (οικόπεδο Σ. Σύλλη). ArchDelt 54 (1999), B1, Chronika: 99-104. Agallopoulou, P. 1999. Ωρωπός-Νέα Παλάτια, οδός Κορυτσάς 24, Ο.Τ. 45 (οικόπεδο Γεωργίου Καλαμπάκα και Φωτεινής Καλαμπόκα-Μπαχά). ArchDelt 49 (1994), B1, Chronika: 75-80. Agallopoulou-Kalliontzi, P. 1989. Περιστέρι, οδός Μιλτιάδου 4 (σκάμμα). ArchDelt 39 (1984), Chronika: 32. Alexandri, O. 1983. Εφορεία Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων Αττικής-Αθήνα-Πειραιάς-Αιγάλεω (Αγ. Γεώργιος)Άνω Λιόσια (θέση Ζωφριά)-Ηλιούπολη-ΚαπανδρίτιΛαύριο-Λούτσα-Μοσχάτο-Παγαί-Πεντέλη-Πλάκες Σουνίου-Πόρτο Ράφτη-Σκάλα Ωρωπού-ΤαύροςΤζιτζιφιές-Ελευσίνα-Μέγαρα. ArchDelt 30 (1975), B1, Chronika: 15-48. Alexandri, O. 1984. Γ’ Εφορεία Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων - Αθήνα - Πειραιάς - Νέο Ψυχικό - Άνω Δάφνη - Καλλιθέα - Μοσχάτο - Νίκαια (Άσπρα Χώματα) Λούτσα - Ελευσίνα - Μέγαρα. ArchDelt 31 (1976), B1, Chronika: 24-61. Alexandri, O. 1984b. Γ’ Εφορεία Κλασικών ΑρχαιοτήτωνΑθήνα-Κάτω Πετράλωνα-Σκαραμαγκάς-ΕλευσίναΜέγαρα. ArchDelt 32 (1977), B1, Chronika: 16-35. Andreou, E. 1995. Βούλα, οδός Σολωμού 7 (Ο.Τ. 17, οικόπεδο Μαργαρίτη). ArchDelt 44 (1989), Β1, Chronika: 60-1. Angel, J.L. 1945. Skeletal Material from Attica. Hesperia 14: 279-363. Ariès, P. 1960. Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life (trans. R. Baldick). London. Ariès, P. 1974. Western Attitudes toward Death, from the Middle Ages to the Present (trans. P. M. Ranum). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

In any case, burial archaeologists cannot become ‘paleo-emotionists’, in other words to accurately and extensively reconstruct emotionality in ancient times. What they can do, is to approach the variables involved in the manifestation of emotional sensitivity during the funeral ritual without over-interpreting the data and making assumptions based on contemporary ideas or sweeping generalizations about the past. A glimpse into past emotions is possible especially if supported by other relevant material that is, biological, historical, and iconographic data.68 But this glimpse should be based on solid observations about how a society set its regulations, and how these regulations affected important aspects of life and death, as this study has attempted to show on a specific type of evidence: child burials in Attica. e.g. compare the funerary stele of Ampharete NAM R695/I221 (430420 BC), the Attic funerary relief for Philonoe NAM 3790 (c. 390-360 BC), the naiskos NAM 819 (360-330 BC) with a much later grave stele such as that of a man and his wife with a boy and girl in Grossman 2001: 120, no. 44 (c. 125 BC). 66 e.g. the grave monument from Kallithea MΠ 2413-MΠ 2529 (c. 330 BC). 67 e.g. Rühfel 1984. 68 cf. Dettwyler 1991: 382; Tilley and Oxenham (2011) have outlined the framework for a potentially fruitful new field, the ‘bioarchaeology of care’, which synthesises archaeological, anthropological, paleopathological, and modern clinical data in order to explore evidence of social implications of care provision towards disabled individuals in the past. 65

112

Nikolas Dimakis: Premature Death and Burial in Classical and Hellenistic Attica

Baziotopoulou-Valavani, E. 2010. Αθήνα-2003Ανασκαφικές εργασίες, οδός Λιοσίων 132, οδός Πειραιώς 85-87 («Ιδρυμα Γ. Παπανδρέου»). ArchDelt 56-59 (2001-2004), B1, Chronika: 251-4. Bobou, O. 2015. Children in the Hellenistic World: Statues and Representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bourbou, Ch. and P. Themelis 2010. Child burials at ancient Messene, in A.-M. Guimier-Sorbets and Y. Morizot (eds): 111-28. Chaniotis, A. (ed.) 2012. Unveiling Emotions: Sources and Methods for the Study of Emotions in the Greek World (Habes 52). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Chaniotis, A. and P. Ducrey (eds) 2013. Unveiling Emotions II. Emotions in Greece and Rome: Texts, Images, Material Culture (Habes 55). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Chatzidimitriou, A. and E. Papafloratou 2013. Γλυκά Νερά, οδός Κυκλάδων και Σίφνου (Ο.Τ. 129, Οικ. 08Β, οικόπεδο Αφών Παπανικόλα). ArchDelt 60 (2005), B1, Chronika: 171-4. Chatzipouliou, E. 1995. Αθήνα, οδός Σπινθάρου 15. ArchDelt 45 (1990), B1, Chronika: 48. Chatzipouliou, E. 2001. Γ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων – Ανασκαφικές εργασίες – Αθήνα – Ανασκαφές Μητροπολιτικού Σιδηροδρόμου Αθηνών (ΜΣΑ), Φρέαρ οδού Αμερικής. ArchDelt 51 (1996), B1, Chronika: 44. Charitonides, S.I. 1961. Ανασκαφή κλασσικών τάφων παρά την πλατείαν Συντάγματος. ΑrchΕph 1958: 1-152. Chenal-Velarde, I. 2006. Food, rituals? The exploitation of dogs from Eretria (Greece) during the Helladic and Hellenistic periods, in L. Snyder and E.A. Moore (eds) Dogs and People in Social, Working, Economic or Symbolic Interaction: 24-31. Oxford: Oxbow. Crawford, S. and G. Shepherd (eds) 2007. Children, Childhood and Society (British Archaeological Reports IS 1696). Oxford: Archaeopress. Crelier, M.C. 2008. Kinder in Athen im gesellschaftlichen Wandel des 5. Jahrhunderts v. Chr.: Eine archaeologische Annaherung. Remshalden: Greiner. Dasen, V. 2010. Archéologie funéraire et histoire de l’enfance dans l’antiquité, in A.-M. Guimier-Sorbets and Y. Morizot (eds): 19-44. Dasen, V. 2011. Childbirth and infancy in Greek and Roman Antiquity, in B. Rawson (ed.) A Companion to Families in the Greek and Roman Worlds. Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World: 291-314. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. Dekoulakou, I. 1989. Σαλαμίνα, Αμπελάκια, οδός Κουντουριώτου 4 (οικόπεδο Γ. Αδριανού). ArchDelt 38 (1983), B1, Chronika: 63. Dekoulakou, I. 1990a. Σαλαμίνα, Αμπελάκια, οδός Ματρόζου, Διασταύρωση οδών Εισοδίων και Θηβών, οδός Κουντουριώτου. ArchDelt 40 (1985), Chronika: 53-4. Dekoulakou, I. 1990b. Σαλαμίνα, Αμπελάκια, οικόπεδα Σκλαβούνου και Τσούτσουρα. ArchDelt 41 (1986), Chronika: 16-8.

Dekoulakou, I. 1993. Σαλαμίνα, Αμπελάκια, Οικόπεδο Ν. Γκίκα – Ν. Κιαβουράκη. ArchDelt 43 (1988), B1, Chronika: 79. Dekoulakou, I. 1997. Σαλαμίνα, Αμπελάκια. ArchDelt 47 (1992), B1, Chronika: 57-61. Dettwyler, K.A. 1991. Can Paleopathology provide evidence for ‘compassion’? American Journal of Physical Anthropology 84: 375-84. Dimakis, N. 2016a. Social Identity and Status in the Classical and Hellenistic Northern Peloponnese: the Evidence from Burials. Oxford: Archaeopress. Dimakis, N. 2016b. Women’s share in status display: some observations on female burials, in R. Berg (ed.) The Material Sides of Marriage (Acta Instituti Romani Finlandiae 43): 87-92. Roma: Institutum Romanum Finlandiae. Dimakis, N. 2019. Burial and commemoration of children in Hellenistic Greece, in H. Frielinghaus, J. Stroszeck and P. Valavanis (eds) Griechishe Nekropolen. Neue Forschugen und Funde (Beiträge zur Archäologie Griechenlands 5): 287-306. Bibliopolis: Möhnesee. Efstratiou, K. 1990. Μαραθώνας, Σκάλιζα. ArchDelt 40 (1985), Chronika: 73-4. Eliopoulos, Th. 2010. Αθήνα-2001-Ανασκαφικές εργασίες, συμβολή των οδών Μυλλέρου 24 και Κεραμεικού, συμβολή των οδών Κεραμεικού 58 και Μαραθώνος 13, οδός Αγίας Ελεούσης 3 (Ψυρρή), οδός Διαμαντοπούλου 1 («Αδριάνειο Γυμνάσιο»), οδός Διαμαντοπούλου 10 (οικόπεδο Ντινόπουλου), Συμβολή των οδών Καλλισπέρη 19 και Παρθενώνος, οδός Ηρακλειδών 40 (Θησείο) (οικόπεδο X. Νικολουτσόπουλου), οδός Μιρτσιέφσκυ 15 (Πετράλωνα), οδός Αιολέων 38 (Πετράλωνα), οδός Φράττι, σκάμμα αποχέτευσης Δήμου Αθηναίων, οδός Περικλεούς, σκάμμα αποχέτευσης Δήμου Αθηναίων, οδός Ιάκχου, σκάμμα αποχέτευσης Δήμου Αθηναίων. ArchDelt 56-59 (2001-2004), B1, Chronika: 205-17. Fox, S. 2012. The bioarchaeology of children in GraecoRoman Greece, in M.-D. Nenna (ed.): 409-27. Garland, R. 1985. The Greek Way of Death. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Golden, M. 1990. Children and Childhood in Classical Athens. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Golden, M. 1997. Change or continuity? Children and childhood in Hellenistic historiography, in M. Golden and P. Toohey (eds) Inventing Ancient Culture: 176-91. London: Routledge. Golden, M. 2003. Childhood in ancient Greece, in J. Neils and J.H. Oakley (eds) Coming of Age in Ancient Greece: 13-29. New Haven: Yale University Press. Grossman, J.B. 2001. Greek Funerary Sculpture: Catalogue of the Collections at the Getty Villa. Los Angeles: Getty Publications. Guimier-Sorbets, A.-M. and Y. Morizot (eds) 2010.  L’ Enfant et la Mort dans l’ Antiquité I: Νouvelles Recherches dans les Νécropoles Grecques; Le Signalement des Tombes d’ Enfants (Travaux de la Maison RenéGinouvès 12). Paris: de Boccard. 113

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Hamilton, R. 1984. Sources for the Athenian Amphidromia. GRBS 25: 243-51. Hamilton, R. 1992. Choes and Anthesteria: Athenian Iconography and Ritual. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Hermary, A. and C. Dubois (eds) 2012. L’Enfant et la Mort dans l’Antiquité III: Le Matériel Associé aux Tombes d’ Enfants (BiAMA 12). Arles: éditions Errance. Hodder, I. 1990. The Domestication of Europe. Structure and Contingency in Neolithic Societies. Oxford: Blackwell. Houby-Nielsen, S. 1995. Burial language in Archaic and Classical Kerameikos. Proceedings of the Danish Institute at Athens 1: 129-91. Houby-Nielsen, S. 1997. Grave gifts, women, and conventional values, in P. Bilde, T. Engberg-Pedersen, L. Hannestad and J. Zahle (eds) Conventional Values of the Hellenistic Greeks (Studies in Hellenistic Civilization 8): 220-62. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. Houby-Nielsen, S. 2000. Child burials in Athens, in Sofaer Derevenski (ed.): 151-66. Humphreys, S.  1983. The Family, Women and Death: Comparative Studies. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou, Th. 1985. Γ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων. ArchDelt 33 (1978), B1, Chronika: 10-42. Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou, Th. 1987. Γ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων-Αθήνα. ArchDelt 34 (1979), B1, Chronika: 11-26, 31-7. Kattoula, T. 2004. Βούλα, οδός Θεσσαλονίκης και Ηγουμενίτσας (Ο.Τ. 291, οικόπεδο Σταχτέα). ArchDelt 53 (1998), B1, Chronika: 86. Kattoula, T. 2013. Σαλαμίνα, θέση Αμπελάκια, συμβολή των οδών Κύπρου και Ελ. Βενιζέλου (Ο.Τ. 59, οικόπεδο Δ. Κοντοθανάση). ArchDelt 60 (2005), B1, Chronika: 254. Kaza-Papageorgiou, K. 2009. Παλαιό Φάληρο, Αμφιθέα, συμβολή των οδών Πέλοπος και Μυκηνών (Ο.Τ. 290, οικόπεδο Κ. Κεραμάρη). ArchDelt 55 (2000), B1, Chronika: 102. Kokkoliou, T. 2000. Γ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων – Ανασκαφικές εργασίες – Αθήνα – Ανασκαφικές εργασίες Μητροπολιτικού Σιδηρόδρομου Αθηνών (ΜΣΑ), οδός Κωνσταντινουπόλεως 93 (οικόπεδο I. Δούκα). ArchDelt 50 (1995), B1, Chronika: 39-40. Kouragios, G. and M. Giamalidi 2014. Βούλα, Πηγαδάκια, οδός Γ. Ρίτσου 9 (Ο.Τ. 306, οικόπεδο Κ. Φωτοπούλου). ArchDelt 61 (2006), B1, Chronika: 220. Kovacsovics, W.K. 1990. Kerameikos XIV. Die Eckterrasse an der Graberstrasse des Kerameikos. Berlin. Kranioti, L. 1988. Ωρωπός-Νέα Παλάτια. ArchDelt 36 (1981), B1, Chronika: 59-64. Kranioti, L. and V. Rozaki 1987. Καλλιθέα, οδός Δημοσθένους 266. ArchDelt 34 (1979), B1, Chronika: 67-8.

Kurtz, D. and J. Boardman 1971. Greek Burial Customs. New York: Cornell University Press. Kübler, K. 1976. Kerameikos VII: Die Nekropole der Mitte des 6. bis Ende des 5. Jhs. T. 1. Berlin. Kyriakou-Zapheiropoulou, Th. 2004. Αθήνα, Αμερικής 3. ArchDelt 53 (1998), B1, Chronika: 61-5. Kyriazopoulou, Aik. 1990. Νέα Λιόσια, οδός Αγίου Γεωργίου (τάφρος αποχέτευσης). ArchDelt 40 (1985), Chronika: 50. Lagia, A. 2007. Notions of childhood in the classical polis, in A. Cohen and J.B. Rutter (eds) Constructions of Childhood in Ancient Greece and Italy (Hesperia Suppl. 41): 293-306. Lanara, Ch.A. 1999. Ελευσίνα, οδός Ηρώων Πολυτεχνείου (Ο.Τ. 143, οικόπεδο Καμπόλη). ArchDelt 49 (1994), B1, Chronika: 48-9. Lebegyev, J. 2009. Phases of childhood in early Mycenaean Greece. Childhood in the Past 2: 15-32. Liston, M.A. and S.I. Rotroff 2013. Babies in the well: archaeological evidence for newborn disposal in Hellenistic Greece, in J.E. Grubbs, T. Parkin and R. Bell (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Childhood and Education in the Classical World: 62-82. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Liston, M.A., S.I. Rotroff and L.M. Snyder 2018. The Agora Bone Well (Hesperia Suppl. 50). Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Loreaux, N. 1986. The Invention of Athens: the Funeral Oration in the Classical City (trans. A. Sheridan). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Lygkouri-Tolia, E. 1990. Αθήνα, οδός Τσάμη Καρατάσου 35-37, οδός Σιατίστης 16-18 (σκάμμα αποχέτευσης Δήμου Αθηναίων). ArchDelt 40 (1985), Chronika: 14, 31. Lygkouri-Tolia, E. 1992. Γ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων – Ανασκαφικές Εργασίες – Αθήνα – Oδός Μοναστηρίου 31 και Ναυπλίου, οδός Προμπονά 8 (Άνω Πατήσια). ArchDelt 42 (1987), B1, Chronika: 19-20, 21. Lygkouri-Tolia, E. 1995a. Αθήνα, οδός Πλάτωνος 20 και Πυθοδώρου 29 (οικόπεδο Κωνστ. Καραδήμου). ArchDelt 44 (1989), B1, Chronika: 24. Lygkouri-Tolia, E. 1995b. Γ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων – Ανασκαφικές Εργασίες – Αθήνα – οδός Προπυλαίων 34. ArchDelt 45 (1990), B1, Chronika: 29-33. Lygkouri-Tolia, E. 2004. Αθήνα, οδός Πουλοπούλου (σκάμμα αποχέτευσης). ArchDelt 53 (1998), B1, Chronika: 72-3. Lygkouri-Tolia, E. 2009. Αθήνα, Φρέαρ ΜΣΑ στη συμβολή των οδών Πετμεζά και Φαλήρου. ArchDelt 55 (2000), B1, Chronika: 81-3. Masséglia, J. 2012. Emotion and archaeological sources. A methodological introduction, in A. Chaniotis (ed.): 131-50. Michalaki-Kolia, M. 2010. Un ensemble exceptionnel d’enchytrismes de nouveau-nes, de foetus et de nourrissons découvert dans l’ile d’Astypalee en 114

Nikolas Dimakis: Premature Death and Burial in Classical and Hellenistic Attica

Grèce: cimetière de bébés ou sanctuaire?, in A.-M. Guimier-Sorbets and Y. Morizot (eds): 161-205. Morris, I. 1987. Burial and Ancient Society. The Rise of the Greek City-State. Cambridge: Cambridge Univerisity Press. Morris, I. 1992. Death-Ritual and Social Structure in Classical Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge Univerisity Press. Moses, S. 2008. Catalhöyük’s foundation burials: ritual child sacrifice or convenient deaths?, in Κ. Bacvarov (ed.) Babies Reborn: Infant/Child burials in Pre- and Protohistory (British Archaeological Reports IS 1832): 45-52. Oxford: Archaeopress. Murphy, E.M. 2015. Lives cut short – insights from the osteological and palaeopathological analysis of the Ballyhanna juveniles, in C.J. McKenzie, E.M. Murphy, and C.J. Donnelly (eds) The Science of a Lost Medieval Gaelic Graveyard-The Ballyhanna Research Project (TII Heritage 2): 103-20. Dublin: Transport Infrastructure Ireland. Nenna, M.-D. (ed.) 2012. L’ Enfant et la Mort dans l’Antiquité II: Types de Tombes et Traitements du Corps des Enfantsd ans l’Antiquité Gréco-Romaine. Alexandria: Centre d’ Études Alexandrines. Onasoglou, A. 1992. Βούλα, Βάρη, Λαθούριζα Βάρης, Βάρκιζα. ArchDelt 42 (1987), B1, Chronika: 87-96. Onasoglou, A. 1995. Σκάλα Ωρωπού, οδός 28ης Οκτωβρίου 7 (οικόπεδο Ελ. Καλογεράκη-Αργ. Στρίφα). ArchDelt 44 (1989), B1, Chronika: 76-8. Orphanou, V. 2004. Αθήνα, Πλατεία Κοτζιά-επεκτάσεις παλιάς ανασκαφής. ArchDelt 53 (1998), B1, Chronika: 65-8. Pachigiani-Kaloudi, F. 1989. Αθήνα, Ιερά Οδός 25-29, οικόπεδο Εθνικής Τράπεζας – οδός Ευρυμέδοντος 4 (οικόπεδο Α. και Κ. Κουτούζογλου). ArchDelt 37 (1982), Β1, Chronika: 25-9. Papadopoulos, J.K. 2000. Skeletons in wells: towards an archaeology of social exclusion in the ancient Greek World, in J. Hubert (ed.) Madness, Disability and Social Exclusion. The Archaeology and Anthropology of Difference: 96-118. London: Routledge. Papaggeli, K. 1990. Ελευσίνα, οδός Κουγιουμτζόγλου (Ο.Τ. 185, οικόπεδο Μανωλιάδη). ArchDelt 40 (1985), Chronika: 36-7. Papaggeli, K. 1993. Ελευσίνα, οδός Κουγιουμτζόγλου και Άρη Βελουχιώτη (Ο.Τ. 185). ArchDelt 43 (1988), B1, Chronika: 43-6. Papaggeli, K. 1995. Ελευσίνα, οδός Εθνικής Αντιστάσεως (Ο.Τ. 179, οικόπεδο X. Θάνου). ArchDelt 44 (1989), B1, Chronika: 31-2. Papaggeli, K. 1996. Ελευσίνα, οδός Εθνικής Αντιστάσεως 85 (Ο.Τ. 195, οικόπεδο Παν. Ρόκκα). ArchDelt 46 (1991), B1, Chronika: 35-7. Papaggeli, K. 1997. Ελευσίνα, οδός Κουγιουμτζόγλου 85 (Ο.Τ. 178, οικόπεδο Ιωάννη Δάλλιου). ArchDelt 47 (1992), B1, Chronika: 35-6. Papaggeli, K. 2001. Ελευσίνα, οδός Πλούτωνος 12 (Ο.Τ. 132). ArchDelt 51 (1996), B1, Chronika: 57.

Papaggeli, K. 2002. Ελευσίνα. ArchDelt 52 (1997), B1, Chronika: 58-65. Papastavrou, E. 1992. Ακτή Μιαούλη-ΚαστέλλαΚαμίνια-Μοσχάτο-Καλλιθέα, οδός Θησέως 191 (οικόπεδο Δ. Φιραρίδη). ArchDelt 42 (1987), B1, Chronika: 56-61. Parker, R. 1983. Miasma: Pollution and Purification in Early Greek Religion. Oxford: Clarendon. Patrianakou-Iliaki, A. 1989. Αγία Παρασκευή, οδός Νικίου-Τσιμισκή (Ο.Τ. 204). ArchDelt 38 (1983), B1, Chronika: 60-1. Patrianakou-Iliaki, A. 1992. Βούλα, οδός Κολοκοτρώνη (Ο.Τ. 116α, οικόπεδο Αλ. Μεταξά), οδός Σπετσών (Ο.Τ. 150, οικόπεδο Παρ. Πωλοπετράκη), Λεωφόρος Καλύμνου (Ο.Τ. 271, οικόπεδο Σωτ. Χριστοδουλόπουλου). ArchDelt 42 (1987), B1, Chronika: 76-7, 82-5. Petrakos, V. 1984. Β’ Εφορεία Κλασικών και Προϊστορικών Αρχαιοτήτων - Πειραιάς - Καλλιθέα - Νέα Σμύρνη - Μεγάλο Καβούρι - Άνω Βούλα - Αγία Μαρίνα Ηλιουπόλεως - Τρεις Γέφυρες Μεταμόρφωση - Μαρούσι - Σταυρός - Σκάλα Ωρωπού - Θορικός - Λαύριο - Αίγινα. ArchDelt 32 (1977), B1, Chronika: 35-43. Petritaki, M. 1987. Γλυφάδα-Άνω Βούλα. ArchDelt 34 (1979), B1, Chronika: 72-6. Petritaki, M. 1989. Πεύκη, οδός Κολοκοτρώνη και Βιτσίου. ArchDelt 38 (1983), B1, Chronika: 58. Petritaki, M. 2009. Καλλιθέα, Συμβολή των οδών Σαλαμίνος 42 και ανωνύμου (οικόπεδο Κολοκοτρώνη). ArchDelt 55 (2009), B1, Chronika: 103-5. Petritaki, M. 2010. Καμίνια-Νίκαια, οδός Δηλαβέρη, Δίκτυο ΔΕΠΑ. ArchDelt 56-59 (2001-2004), B1, Chronika: 446-7. Petritaki, M. 2013. Καμίνια, συμβολή των οδών Χίου και Θήρας 94 (ιδιοκτησία Η. Δαλμυράς και ΣΙΑ ΟΕ). ArchDelt 60 (2005), B1, Chronika: 193-4. Petritaki, M. 2014. Νέο Φάληρο, διάνοιξη Λεωφόρου Ανδρέα Παπανδρέου (πρώην Μικράς Ασίας), τμήμα μεταξύ εργοστασίων Αιγαίου και Βελλής. ArchDelt 61 (2006), B1, Chronika: 201-2. Platonos, M. 1992. Περιστέρι (Λόφος αξιωματικών) – Νέα Λιόσια – Αχαρναί. ArchDelt 42 (1987), B1, Chronika: 61-7. Platonos, M. 1995. Αχαρναί, Άγιος Πέτρος Γ (οδός Θεμιστοκλέους 4, Ο.Τ. 332, οικόπεδο Χρ. Κουσίδη). ArchDelt 44 (1989), Β1, Chronika: 75-6. Platonos, M. 2002. Αιγάλεω, οδός Αποστόλου Παύλου και Κ. Βάρναλη (οικόπεδο Α. Καλλίλα). ArchDelt 52 (1997), B1, Chronika: 92-3. Platonos, G.M. 2004. Αχαρναί: Ιστορική και Τοπογραφική Επισκόπηση των Αρχαίων Αχαρνών, των Γειτονικών Δήμων και των Οχυρώσεων της Πάρνηθας. Acharnai: Municipality of Acharnai. Platonos, M. 2005. Γέρακας, Πηγή, οδός Γέρακα 5-7 (ιδιοκτησία Α. Γαβαλά). ArchDelt 54 (1999), B1, Chronika: 107-9. 115

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Platonos, M. 2010a. Αχαρνές-Χαραυγή. Συμβολή των οδών Ηρακλέους και Ζαΐμη. Ε.Λ.Ε.Σ.Σ. ArchDelt 56-59 (2001-2004), B1, Chronika: 399-401. Platonos, M. 2010b. Αχαρνές-Χαραυγή, οδός Μπόσδα, Σιδηροδρομικό Κέντρο Αχαρνών (Σ.Κ.Α.). ArchDelt 56-59 (2001-2004), B1, Chronika: 417. Platonos, Μ. and E. Chatzipouliou 1989. Αθήνα, Ιερά Οδός. ArchDelt 39 (1984), Chronika: 11-14. Pologiorgi, M. 2010. 2004-Ανασκαφικές εργασίεςΣαλαμίνα-Αμπελάκια, Λεωφόρος Ελ. Βενιζέλου 90 (οικόπεδο Ευ. Γκίκα, Ο.Τ. 81), Συμβολή Λεωφόρου Ελ. Βενιζέλου και οδού Κύπρου (οικόπεδο ιδιοκτησίας Λ. Κοντοθανάση, Ο.Τ. 59). ArchDelt 56-59 (2001-2004), B1, Chronika: 481-5. Rozaki, V. 1988. Σαλαμίνα, οδός Μπουμπουλίνας 18 και Κύπρου (Αμπελάκια). ArchDelt 35 (1980), B1, Chronika: 88. Rühfel, H. 1984. Das Kind in der griechischen Kunst. Mainz. Sabetai, V. 2000. Παιδικές ταφές Ακραιφίας, in V. Aravantinos (ed.) Επετηρίς της Εταιρίας Βοιωτικών Μελετών, Vol. Γ’: 495-535. Athens. Schlörb-Vierneisel, B. 1966. Eridanos-Nekropole I. Graber und Opferstellen hs 1-204. AM 81-82: 4-111. Schmid S.G. 1997. Vorbericht über die Grabung in E/600 NW. AntK 40: 104-7. Scott, E. 1999. The Archaeology of Infancy and Infant Death (British Archaeological Reports IS 819). Oxford: Archaeopress. Shapiro, H.A. 1991. The Iconography of Mourning in Athenia Art. AJA 95: 629-56. Sofaer Derevenski, J. (ed.) 2000. Children and Material Culture. London: Routledge. Stavropoulou, M. 1988. Ανασκαφικές εργασίες-Αθήνα. ArchDelt 35 (1980), B1, Chronika: 24-31. Steinhower, G. 1995. Μοσχάτο, οδός Πειραιώς 75, οδός Κύπρου και Ύδρας. ArchDelt 44 (1989), Β1, Chronika: 54-5. Stoupa, Ch. 2000. Αθήνα-Ανασκαφικές εργασίες Μητροπολιτικού Σιδηρόδρομου Αθηνών (ΜΣΑ), οδός Χαλκιδικής 56-58 και Ιερά Οδός. ArchDelt 50 (1995), B1, Chronika: 40-2. Stoupa, Ch. 2004. Αθήνα, οδός Μάρκου Μπότσαρη 35. ArchDelt 53 (1998), B1, Chronika: 73-5. Stoupa, Ch. 2010. Αθήνα-2002-Ανασκαφικές εργασίες, οδός Πειραιώς 78. ArchDelt 56-59 (2001-2004), B1, Chronika: 234-5. Stoupa, Ch. 2014. Αθήνα-Παρά την Ιερά Οδό. Συμβολή των οδών Μεγάλου Αλεξάνδρου 127-129 και

Ευρυμέδοντος. ArchDelt 61 (2006), B1, Chronika: 10611. Theocharaki, E. 1988. Μαραθώνας, θέση Σκάλεζα. ArchDelt 35 (1980), B1, Chronika: 84-8. Tilley, L. and M.F. Oxenham 2011. Survival against the odds: modeling the social implications of care provision to seriously disabled individuals. International Journal of Paleopathology 1: 35-42. Toynbee, J.M.C. 1971. Death and Burial in the Roman World. New York: Cornell University Press. Tsaravopoulos, A. 1995. Άλιμος, οδός Χρυσανθέμων 21 (Ο.Τ. 263, οικόπεδο Σβέρκα). ArchDelt 45 (1990), B1, Chronika: 74-5. Tsirigoti-Drakotou, I. 1992. Γ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων – Ανασκαφικές Εργασίες – Αθήνα – οδός Καστοριάς 55 (Βοτανικός). ArchDelt 42 (1987), B1, Chronika: 21-4. Tsirigoti-Drakotou, I. 1993. Οδός Κεραμεικού 44 και Γιατράκου. ArchDelt 43 (1988), B1, Chronika: 33-4. Vassilopoulou, P. 1988. Ανασκαφικές εργασίες-Αθήναοδός Αλικαρνασσού 94. ArchDelt 35 (1980), B1, Chronika: 36-7. Verilhac, A.-M. 1978. Παῖδες ἄωροι. Poesie funeraire. Tome premier. Textes. Athens. Verilhac, A.-M. 1982. Παῖδες ἄωροι. Poesie funeraire. Tomesecond. Commentaire. Athens. Wells, B. 1990. Death at Dendra. On mortuary practices in a Mycenaean community, in R. Hägg and G.C. Nordquist (eds) Celebrations of Death and Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid: 125-40. Stockholm: Paul Åströms Förlag. Wise, S. 2005. Childbirth Votives and Rituals in Ancient Greece. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Cincinnati. Zachariadou, O. 1998. Γ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων – Αθήνα – Σταθμός Κοραή. ArchDelt 48 (1993), B1, Chronika: 32-3. Zachariadou, Ο. and G. Kavvadias 2004. Γ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών ΑρχαιοτήτωνΑνασκαφικές Εργασίες-Αθήνα, Βουλή των Ελλήνων. ArchDelt 53 (1998), B1, Chronika: 54-8. Zachariadou, O. and D. Kyriakou 1993. Γ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων – Αθήνα, Πλατεία Κοτζιά. ArchDelt 43 (1988), B1, Chronika: 229. Zachariadou, O., E. Giatroulaki and K. Papagiannakis 2013. Αθήνα, οδός Ξενοφώντος 4. ArchDelt 60 (2005), B1, Chronika: 94-6.

116

Monumental Commemoration and Identity

117

118

The Creation of a Deathscape: The Monumental Tomb at Agios Milianos in Lindos Vasiliki Brouma Abstract: The visible remains of monumental tombs in Rhodes have been described and outlined by travellers and antiquarians in various parts of the island already from the late 1800s. Between 1900 and 1914 the Carlsberg Institute of Denmark excavated two monumental tombs in the area of Lindos at southern Rhodes as part of their wider excavation project and survey in the Lindian acropolis – one of them was the tomb at Agios Milianos, erroneously presumed to be the tomb of Kleovoulos, a local hero. The aim of this paper is to assess the architectural and ritual significance of the tomb at Agios Milianos in relation to its surrounding landscape as well as its contribution towards the creation and consolidation of a distinct deathscape. The better understanding of the function of the tomb will allow us to understand how Hellenistic monumental tombs eventually shaped the social and cultural dynamics of the Lindos in the Hellenistic period. Keywords: Lindos, funerary landscapes, deathscapes, cenotaphs, Agios Milianos Introduction

political circumstances, they are important for our understanding of the role of the individual in relation to death and memorialisation. In this context, they can offer an additional dimension to the archaeology of mortuary landscapes, one that encompasses the material and cognitive dimensions of spatiality and death.

This paper on the monumental tomb at Agios Milianos in Lindos and its connection to the surrounding landscape springs from my doctoral thesis from 2017.1 This contribution proposes an alternative function of the tomb as a cenotaph and its transformation into a deathscape, a place of memory and commemoration in the bay of Lindos.

Deathscapes may overlap and interrelate with various topographies (whether physical or symbolic), the most obvious of which is the natural landscape.6 Essentially, deathscapes incorporate the landscapes, tombs, as well as the identities of the living and deceased. The funerary landscape of the South-Eastern Aegean in Hellenistic times is characterised by numerous rockcut tombs that can be divided into many categories by their typological characteristics.7 The diversity of the burials is demonstrative of the wide-ranging funerary architecture both on a regional and on an interregional level. In Rhodes, cemeteries of non-monumental graves and monumental graves were predominantly located in the polis. As was the norm with ancient Greek cities, the necropoleis were located outside the fortifications along major roads leading to and from the city.8 Excavations have revealed that the planning of the cemeteries outside the city walls had started already in the 5th – 4th century BC, while special precautions were taken for the subsequent expansion of the population.9 By the 1st century BC, cemeteries of rockcut pit and cist graves expanded to the south within the Makry Steno and the Rhodini ravines, which divided the

Deathscapes The term ‘deathscape’ is a concept first used in geography in relation to informal memorials for roadside accidents.2 It belongs to a wider category of a variety of ‘scapes’, as a means for understanding contemporary social processes.3 Deathscapes primarily refer to the physical spaces of death and commemoration (i.e. cemeteries, memorials, monuments), including their fluctuating, ephemeral or long-lived characteristics manipulated by the living over time. In archaeology, the term was first introduced by Rainville in her study of mortuary variability in New Hampshire from 1770 to 1920.4 Ever since it has been employed in various archaeological contexts in order to describe the places associated with death and the individuals involved – whether living or dead – and how these two can be linked to provide meaning and context at different levels (i.e. tombs as means for the legitimisation of power, funerary landscapes as arenas of social and political opposition).5 Although deathscapes are heavily formed and influenced by various socioBrouma 2017. Hartig and Dunn 1998. 3 Maddrell and Sidaway 2010: 4. 4 Rainville 1999. 5 Parker-Pearson 1999; Rakita et al. 2005; Dakouri-Hild and Boyd 2016. Also see Dimakis 2015 on discussion of evidence from ancient Greece.

Maddrell and Sidaway 2010: 4-5. Brouma 2017: 61-107. For an extensive discussion of the topography of the cemeteries of ancient Rhodes see also Fraser 1977: 2-5; Fabricius 1999, and more recently Patsiada 2013: 3ff. 9 Filimonos 1989; Patsiada 2013: 34, especially n. 63.

1

6

2

7 8

119

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

urban necropoleis geographically into three sections: western, central and eastern.10

The circular building, with a diameter of approximately 9 m, lies on a stone pedestal of irregular height due to the unevenness of the ground. The preserved height of the entrance from the threshold to the cornice is up to 1.6 m. The construction of the tomb was completed in several stages. While it is not possible to determine when it was initially built, it was certainly re-used in the late Hellenistic period, when some of the original, horizontal joints were replaced. The simple façade of the tomb above the main entrance ends up to a cornice, the lower surface of which is oblique. The entrance is located on the east corner and is made of a solid doorway up to 1.7 m wide. Its poros lintel was decorated by three palmettes in relief. While in early bibliography the archaic style of the palmettes has led scholars to date them no later than the 7th century BC, it is now accepted that the tomb is of Hellenistic origin (probably mid-2nd century – 1st century BC) on the basis of its rubble masonry.17

Of particular topographical interest is the relationship between monumental tombs and the landscape. Most of the Rhodian monumental tombs of the Hellenistic period are located in the urban cemeteries. However, two of them – perhaps the most prominent ones in terms of size and position in the landscape – are located in Lindos in southern Rhodes. The first one is the tomb at Agios Milianos, which we shall examine in detail below. The second one is the family sepulchre of Archokrates, as attributed by the funerary inscriptions incised on the cylindrical altars, which formed the frontal upper storey decoration of the monument.11 The tomb is dated to the last quarter of the 3rd century BC and is situated in the locality of Kampana at Krana on a hill west of the Lindian acropolis. It is built on the easternmost edge of an extended plateau and is enclosed by the hilly extensions of the Lindian acropolis. Unlike the tomb at Agios Milianos, the tomb of Archokrates is not visible from the acropolis despite being located at a lower height, but is in very close proximity to the modern city of Lindos.

The interior walls of the rotunda are lined with poros rubble that was once plastered, as evidenced by faint traces of stucco. The dimensions of the inner chamber are once more irregular, on average from 2.1 m wide to 4.16 m long near the entrance. A kline-sarcophagus was placed on the east wall of the chamber with its long side executed in rubble stone. The scattered remains of stones in the interior of the sarcophagus, suggest that the sepulchre was part of the initial planning of the building, though it was found completely empty along with the rest of the tomb. The vaulted roof was built with protruding, bevelled stones in two rows intertwined in the middle. Finally, just below the centre of the vault, there is a horizontal circular moulding. Overall, the degree of architectural elaboration in the exterior and the interior of the tomb is remarkable. The plan of the architecturally intricate vault is unique in the islands of the Dodecanese and attests to a high level of local craftsmanship.

The Tomb at Agios Milianos At the northern headland of Lindos bay, on a conspicuous promontory near the islet of Phanos, lays a circular tumulus made of local limestone rubble masonry (Figure 1).12 The edifice is known in bibliography either as the tomb of Kleovoulos, a poet, tyrant, and native of Lindos, as well as one of the seven Sages of Greece,13 or as the Agios Milianos rotunda due to its transformation into a Christian church in the 19th century.14 The tomb was first recorded by A. Billiotti and A. Cottret in the 1870s,15 and was subsequently investigated by K.F. Kinch and C. Blinkenberg of the Carlsberg Institute of Denmark. Their observations on the tomb and the Lindian necropoleis in general have been gathered, edited, and enriched by E. Dyggve and V. Poulsen as part of the third volume of the Lindos excavations series.16

Honouring the Absent Dead The tomb at Agios Milianos has not been excavated properly, however, we can suggest that it was used as a sepulchre due to the presence of the funerary bed in the form of a sarcophagus within the burial chamber. The confusion between names and attributes in terms of its occupant (or occupants) is only indicative of the fact that we possess very little information on the monument itself, and subsequently we cannot link it with a family or a clan as is the case with the tomb of Archokrates.18 Moreover, the tomb has not produced any burial furnishings. The presence of a single hollow

Maiuri 1925: 59; Fraser 1977: 2-5; Patsiada 2013: 32, n. 60. Dyggve and Poulsen 1960: 491-504, pl. XII, B, G, fig. XIII; Fedak 1990: 83-5, fig. 106; Hellmann 2006: 304, fig.424; Winter 2006: 84-5, fig. 21213; Patsiada 2013: 88-91, fig. 67-9. 12 Dyggve and Poulsen 1960: 487-9. 13 Kleovoulos is the most famous local hero, who lived and died in Lindos in the 6th century BC (Diogenes Laertius, I, 89; Strabo, xiv). The erroneous assumption that the tomb is associated with him is based on the noticeable position and size of the edifice. Even today, the sign that leads to the tomb reads ‘The Tomb of Kleovoulos’. 14 The tomb was converted into a chapel in honour of Agios Milianos and one can see traces of Christian frescoes in the chamber as well as a carved cross above the doorway. Dyggve and Poulsen 1960: 488, especially n. 46. 15 Billiotti and Cottret 1881: 380-22. 16 Dyggve and Poulsen 1960: 479-504. The same volume features the publication of the tomb of Archokrates. 10 11

Brouma 2017: 93. Inscriptions found in situ inform us that the tomb was commissioned by Archokrates, a priest of Athena, as a burial place for himself and his immediate family. Dyggve and Poulsen 1960: 491-504.

17 18

120

Vasiliki Brouma: The Creation of a Deathscape

Figure 1. Plan and section of the circular tomb at Agios Milianos in Lindos (after Dyggve and Poulsen 1960: pl. XIII, A).

121

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 2. Plan of the tomb of Menecrates at Corfu (after Crome 1964: pl. 18a).

kline that once probably contained a stone sarcophagus is even more puzzling. It is perhaps unintelligible that someone would choose to build his individual tomb in such a remote and inaccessible location on the narrow summit of a rocky and steep hillock, where the performance of funerary ritual would be hindered or seriously compromised.

replaced the absent dead, and the tomb itself was a cenotaph.24 The earliest cenotaph known from the Classical period is that of Menecrates near the seashore of Kastrades, a harbour of ancient Kerkyra (Corfu). The tomb is conveniently located about 100 m from the shore at a site well below the ancient port cemetery, which is on a hill farther inland. The tumulus is dated tentatively to 625600 BC, and is very important because morphologically it is very similar to the Aghios Milianos rotunda (albeit much earlier in date).25 Just like the rotunda at Agios Milianos, the tomb of Menecrates lies on a stone pedestal with a preserved height up to 1.20 m (Figure 2). Just like the tomb at Agios Milianos, the vaulted roof of the tomb at Corfu was built with protruding, oblique stones that intertwined in the middle.26 Contemporary, comparable cenotaphs are also documented in Thassos and Rheneia.27

In this context, a more plausible explanation of the tomb of Aghios Milianos would be that of its use as a cenotaph in honour of a person or a group of people whose death marked a significant loss in the Lindian community. The custom of erecting cenotaphs in the Greek world, defined as symbolic residences for the veneration of the souls of those perished away from their homeland or at sea,19 traces back to the Homeric tradition. In rhapsody α of the Odyssey, Athena urges Telemachus to erect a monument for his father,20 who is presumed dead but his body has not been retrieved, while in rhapsody δ Menelaus erects a cenotaph for his brother in Egypt, though Agamemnon is buried elsewhere.21

An inscription found near the tomb of Menecrates informs us that he was a Corcyrean proxenos who lost his life at sea.28 More specifically, Menecrates drowned in a journey he made to defend the interests of the Corcyrean merchants from the greed of his compatriots at Oianthea (Locris) in the Corinthian Gulf. From the inscription we learn that the demos honoured Menecrates with a ‘public funeral’ and a ‘marble monument’.29 We also learn that his brother, Praximenes, who was probably travelling along with him but survived the storm, was present in paying

Cenotaphs for mythical figures and war heroes are common from the Archaic period onwards.22 However, cenotaphs were also erected for common citizens. An interesting example is pit grave 230 at the Kerameikos, dated to the late 6th century BC. The tomb did not contain any skeletal remains. Instead, it contained an elongated limestone slab and a limited amount of pottery.23 Initially the excavators believed that the slab was simply a displaced architectural member, however, it was eventually suggested that the slab actually

Kübler 1936: 186-8. Meiggs and Lewis 1969: 4-5, no 4; Tribulato 2017: 45. Crome 1964: 52, fig. 6. 27 For Thassos see Vermeule 1979: 250, n. 10; for a catalogue of Rheneian stelai and cenotaphs of persons lost at sea see Couilloud 1974: 294-99, nos 327-348. 28 Meiggs and Lewis 1969: 4-5, no 4; Mataranga 1994; Tribulato 2017: 45-51. 29 Meiggs and Lewis 1969: 4-5, no 4; Mataranga 1994: 112; Tribulato 2017: 46. 24 25 26

Kurtz and Boardman 1971: 94, 236-7; Garland 1985: 102. Odyssey α 289-292. Odyssey δ 584. 22 For an overview of cenotaphs erected for war heroes in Athens and elsewhere, see Oikonomou 2012: 159ff. 23 Oikonomou 2012: 161. 19 20 21

122

Vasiliki Brouma: The Creation of a Deathscape

Figure 3. The position of the Aghios Milianos rotunda in the Lindian bay (left) in reference to the acropolis and the modern settlement (right). Photograph taken from the middle of the modern pathway leading to the tomb (photo: V. Brouma).

the last honours to his brother.30 The inscription is remarkable, not only because it informs us about the cenotaph and the posthumous honours to Menecrates, but also because it suggests a strong awareness for the assembly of the people, promoting their independence and authority on the matter.31 It was probably also the will of the people of Lindos to erect a funerary monument at such a prominent site in order to honour a local citizen or citizens, who lost their lives abroad or at sea.

Dodecanese, the so-called Lycian tomb at Kastellorizo.34 The tomb at Kastellorizo is entirely rock-cut and its façade takes the form of a temple with a pedimental crown with akroteria, an epistyle with dentils and an Ionic moulding above pilasters with Ionic bases and capitals. The interior of the tomb, which is inherent to the bedrock, possibly contained six sarcophagi placed on six pedestals arranged on two levels along the three sides of the tomb. The tomb at Kastellorizo is situated east of the port on a sloping terrace under the castle, almost 30 m above sea level and is visible upon entering and leaving the main harbour of the small island.35

As expected, in the absence of any epigraphical data, these parallels do not necessarily confirm the function of the Agios Milianos rotunda as a cenotaph, but it is plausible to suggest that the monument was somehow linked with untimely death at the sea given its position in the landscape and the maritime status of Lindos in the Hellenistic period.32

Both tombs are visible from the sea: the Agios Milianos rotunda is clearly visible upon entering and leaving the Lindian bay, as well as from the temple of Athena on the acropolis (Figure 3), whilst the tomb at Kastellorizo is visible upon entering and leaving the harbour. Both tombs have their entrance built facing east, yet it is significantly more difficult to approach the Agios Milianos rotunda due to the rocky (and at places dangerous) pathway that leads from the modern central square at Lindos to the wider area above Phanos. There has been an antithetic association between the rocky terrain and the settlement at Lindos already from antiquity, the point of reference being always the sea.36

The Creation of a Deathscape Of all the monumental tombs in Rhodes dated to the Hellenistic period, the rotunda at Agios Milianos has the most prominent position in the landscape. The monumental tombs of the urban necropoleis of Rhodes do not always stand out within the landscape of the necropoleis due to their subterranean or semisubterranean architectural design, while the tomb of Archokrates at Lindos is at significantly lower height from the acropolis.

Another notable feature of these two tombs is the absence of an antechamber. The presence of an antechamber in a funerary context can contribute towards the creation (whether symbolic or practical) of enclosed or privatised spaces within the tombs with a direct impact on funerary ritual. The architectural structuring of ritualised action has been explored by Pearson and Richards who observe that ‘walls, gateways and entrances serve to mark transitions between domains such as inside/outside, sacred/ profane, male/female, public/private, enemy/friend,

The tomb at Agios Milianos dominates the wider landscape. On a clear day, all visitors can see the tomb at the end of the point across the inlet from the acropolis. The tomb is also visible upon entering and leaving the bay of Lindos.33 Its position in the landscape is only comparable to one other monumental tomb in the Meiggs and Lewis 1969: 4-5, no 4; Mataranga 1994: 112; Tribulato 2017: 46. Robinson 2011: 125. 32 Gabrielsen 2007. 33 These practical observations were made upon different visits to the site between 2012 and 2015. 30

Ashton 1995: 94 dated the monument to the 4th century BC but it is likely dated closer to the Hellenistic period. Zervaki 2011: 70. 35 Asthon 1995: 95. 36 Manousou-Della 2008.

31

34

123

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

elite/commoner or initiate/uninitiated’.37 Portals and thresholds especially provide means of traversing classificatory boundaries and thus act as liminal spaces between different conceptual domains or even states of being.38 However, their absence does not necessarily exclude other qualities that can transform places into hubs of ritual action. Sensations of transcendence in this context may be stimulated through material forms and properties that surpass ordinary human frames of reference in space and time and the use of materials and/or symbols. More importantly, funerary architecture can also routinely correlate places in the constructed landscape with natural features and phenomena.39

commemoration in the physical and cultural landscape of Lindos. Acknowledgements This paper is an updated version of the first part of my presentation at the ‘Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece’ workshop held at the Netherlands Institute of Athens from the 1st to the 2nd of December 2016. I would like to thank the organisers, Dr Nikolas Dimakis and Dr Tamara Dijkstra, for inviting me to present my research. I am indebted to several people for their help: in particular my PhD supervisors Dr Chrysanthi Gallou and Dr William Bowden for their support throughout my doctoral studies as well as Professor Mark Pearce (Nottingham) and Dr Jane Rempel (Sheffield), my PhD examiners, for their critical comments. I am also indebted to Mrs Eleonora Aspridou-Edwards for proofreading the text on several occasions. Last but not least, I warmly thank the Board of the Greek Archaeological Committee (UK) in particular Mrs Matti Egon, Dr Zetta TheorodoropoulouPolychroniadis and Professor Panagiotis Arvanitakis for their constant support, encouragement and generosity throughout my academic career. The responsibility for all views and any mistakes of fact or judgement in this paper remains entirely mine.

The tomb at Agios Milianos is a combination between an open and a closed space simultaneously: its openness is accentuated by its grandiose position and possible public or communal character, whereas difficulty of access prevents many from encountering, engaging with, and perceiving the tomb at a close distance. At one level, of course, this (almost dramatic) ambiguity emphasises what is seen to be ‘otherworldly’ in contradistinction to what is perceived to be ‘normal’, the nature of both being socially constructed and culture-relative.40 The reason why we should see this monument as a place for the culmination of ritual action is not related solely to its use as a tomb and/or a cenotaph, although if we agree that it was a monument ‘open’ to visitors, then the absence of an antechamber might make sense.

Bibliography Ashton, N. 1995. Ancient Megiste: the Forgotten Kastellorizo. Nedlands, W.A.: University of Western Australia Press. Billiotti, E. and A. Cottret 1881. L’île de Rhodes. Rhodes. Bloch, M. 1986. From Blessing to Violence: History and Ideology in the Circumcision Ritual of the Merina of Madagascar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brouma, V. 2017. Understanding Hellenistic Thanatos. Death, Ritual and Identity in the South-Eastern Aegean in the late 4th-1st century BC. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Nottingham. Couilloud, M.T. 1974. Délos XXX: Les Monuments Funéraires de Rhénée. Paris: École française d’ Athènes. Crome, J.F. 1938. Löwenbilder des siebenten Jahrhunderts, in Mnemosyne Theodor Wiegand: 47-53. Munich. Dakouri‐Hild, A. and M.J. Boyd (eds) 2016. Staging Death: Funerary Performance, Architecture and Landscape in the Aegean. Berlin: de Gruyter. Dimakis, N. 2015. Ancient Greek Deathscapes. JEMAHS 3 (1): 27-41. Dyggve, E. and V. Poulsen 1960. Lindos. Fouilles de l’Acropole 1902‐1914 et 1952, III.I, III, II. Le Sanctuaire d’Athena Lindia et l’Architecture Lindienne. Copenhagen and Berlin.

The theatrical use of the landscape, proximity to the sea,41 the use of rubble masonry that conveys a sense of timelessness,42 and the reference to unchanged natural features such as hill peaks43 transcend the human life course, and lapse under ritual time distinguished by Bloch ‘between mundane conceptions of time which govern the conduct of everyday affairs […] and ritual time which involves the merging of the past in the present’.44 In this context, it is possible to understand the Agios Milianos tomb as a steady geographical and symbolic point of reference through time for the people of Lindos: it may have been built initially for the interment of an individual, a family or a clan, but over the course of time it went through a series of transformations similar to the rites of passage, resulting in its possible subsequent use as a cenotaph and a place for remembrance and

Parker-Pearson and Richards 1994: 24. Parker-Pearson and Richards 1994: 25. 39 Tilley 1994: 183-6. 40 Shanks and Tilley 1987: 128ff. 41 Georgiadis 2003: 29-31. 42 Parker-Pearson and Ramilisonina 1998: 308-26. 43 Tilley 1994: 54-8. 44 Bloch 1986: 211. 37 38

124

Vasiliki Brouma: The Creation of a Deathscape

Fabricius, J. 1999. Die Hellenistischen Totenmahlreliefs: Grabrepräsentation und Wertvorstellungen in ostgriechischen Städten. Munich: F. Pfeil. Fedak, J. 1990. Monumental Tombs of the Hellenistic Age: A Study of Selected Tombs from the Pre‐Classical to the Early Imperial Era. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Filimonos, M. 1989. Ένα νέο γυμνάσιο στη Ρόδο και η μαρτυρία του Διοδώρου ΧΧ, 100, 3‐4. AntCl 58: 153-4. Fraser, P.M. 1977. Rhodian Funerary Monuments. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gabrielsen, V. 1997. The Naval Aristocracy of Hellenistic Rhodes. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. Garland, R. 1985. The Greek Way of Death. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Georgiadis, M. 2003. The South-eastern Aegean in the Mycenaean Period: Islands, Landscape, Death and Ancestors. Archaeopress: Oxford. Hartig, K. and K.M. Dunn 1998. Roadside memorials: interpreting new deathscapes in Newcastle, New South Wales. Geographical Research 36, 1: 5-20. Hellmann, M.‐C. 2006. L’Architecture Grecque. Architecture Religieuse et Funeraire. Paris: Picard. Kübler, K. 1936. Ausgrabungen im Kerameikos. AA: 181208. Kurtz, D.C. and J. Boardman 1971. Greek Burial Customs. London: Thames and Hudson. Maddrell, A. and J.D. Sidaway 2010. Deathscapes: Spaces for Death, Dying, Mourning and Remembrance. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company. Maiuri, A. 1925. Nuova silloge epigrafica di Rodi e Cos. Firenze. Manousou‐Della, K. 2008. Lindos: The cultural landscape of an ancient city‐state. Proposals for the protection and contemporary emergence. The Dodecanese Annals V: 537-51. Mataranga, K. 1994. Un étranger ‘proxène’ a Corcyre. RA 1: 111-18. Meiggs, R. and D.M. Lewis 1969. A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions to the End of the Fifth Century BC. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Oikonomou, S. 2012. Ταφές Πεσόντων, Πολυάνδρεια,

Κενοτάφια και Ηρώα από την Ύστερη Εποχή του Χαλκού ως και τους Κλασικούς χρόνους στον Ελλαδικό Χώρο. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Crete. Parker Pearson, M.P. 1999. The Archaeology of Death and Burial. Texas: Texas A. and M. University Press. Parker Pearson, M.P. and Ramilisonina 1998. Stonehenge for the ancestors: the stones pass on the message. Antiquity 72: 308-26. Parker Pearson, M.P. and C. Richards 1994. Architecture and Order: Approaches to Social Space. London: Routledge. Patsiada, V. 2013. Μνημειώδες Ταφικό Συγκρότημα στη Νεκρόπολη της Ρόδου: Συμβολή στη Μελέτη της Ελληνιστικής Ταφικής Αρχιτεκτονικής (Ρόδος ΙΙΙ). Athens: Archaiologiko Institouto Aigaiakōn Spoudon. Rainville, R. 1999. Hanover deathscapes: mortuary variability in New Hampshire, 1770‐1920. Ethnohistory 46, 3: 541-97. Rakita, G.F.M., J.E. Buikstra, L. Beck and S.R. Williams (eds) 2005. Interacting with the Dead: Perspectives on Mortuary Archaeology for the New Millennium. Florida: Florida University Press. Robinson, E.W. 2011. Democracy Beyond Athens. Popular Government in the Greek Classical Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Shanks, M. and C. Tilley 1987.  Social Theory and Archaeology. Cambridge: Polity. Tilley, C. 1994. A Phenomenology of Landscape: Places, Paths and Monuments. Oxford: Berg. Tribulato, O. 2017. Cenotafio di un prosseno corcirese. Axon 1, 1: 45-51. Vermeule, E. 1979. Aspects of Death in Early Greek Art and Poetry. London: University of California Press. Winter, F.E. 2006. Studies in Hellenistic Architecture. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Zervaki, F. 2011. Kastellorizo, in N. Stampolidis, G. Tassoulas and M. Filimonos-Tsopotou (eds) Islands off the Beaten Track: An Archaeological Journey to the Greek Islands of Kastellorizo, Symi, Halki, Tilos and Nisyros: 24-70. Athens: Museum of Cycladic Art.

125

Building for the mos Romanus in the Peloponnese: The Columbaria Monuments Georgios Doulfis Abstract: The columbaria belong to a purely Roman type of funerary architecture. As they bear niches for the ash urns of the deceased, they are related to the cremation, which is called by Tacitus the mos Romanus. More than thirty columbaria have been identified so far in the Peloponnese, in colonies, in port and coastal towns, and in a few other locations, representing a very high percentage of the known monuments outside the Italian peninsula. The fourteen Laconian columbaria remain so far mostly unexcavated and unknown to research. The results of a preliminary survey are presented here. After a short description of the Laconian monuments, the topographical, typological and chronological observations show that they were located in places of strong Roman interest, that they varied in structure, forms and features, and that they are rather late examples of the type. Keywords: columbaria, cremation, Peloponnese, Laconia, Asopos

Introduction

the 2nd century AD.5 Tacitus has written that this is the mos Romanus, the Roman burial custom par excellence.6

The aim of this article is to preliminarily present the columbarium-type burial monuments identified in the Peloponnese and to provide an interpretation of their topographical distribution. Laconian columbaria will be more thoroughly presented as they remain largely unknown to the research, and new evidence concerning them, obtained by autopsy, will be introduced, although the monuments are still mostly unexcavated.

Thus, the first major feature of the columbarium-type monuments is the deposition of urns. The second one is the collectivity that is presupposed for the construction and maintenance of such a burial monument, based on either common family ties or associations of professional or other interest.7 Several columbaria have been found around the Empire (Figure 1). In Rome, tens of columbaria have been identified,8 usually of very large capacity, mainly for the freedmen of the imperial family.9 Equally many columbaria, but of much smaller capacity, have been identified at the ports of Rome, Ostia10 and Portus,11 as well as at the more remote port of Puteoli.12 In the rest

The columbaria are so named because of their similarity to dovecotes,1 as they bear niches on their inner walls for the deposition of cinerary urns two by two, usually in holes.2 Thus, in the broadest meaning of the term, the columbarium is the burial monument on the interior walls of which cinerary urns are deposited in niches.3 It is the architectural type which predominantly served the large increase in cremation of the dead,4 which is observed from the 1st century AD up to the middle of

5 That is until the sarcophagi get in use again, see Flämig 2007a: 89-92; Bodel 2008: 196. 6 Tacitus Annales: 16.6. Of course, despite the general impression, the burning of the dead was not uncommon in the Hellenistic world, see Sven 2015. 7 The issue is extremely complex and the available information limited. Consequently, the interpretation of the use of columbarium monuments has led to many discussions. See more recently Heinzelmann 2001; Borbonus 2014: 5-6, 12-14, 135ff., mainly 13642. cf. Hope 1997; Bodel 2008: mainly 179-81 and 210-19, with earlier bibliography; Rice 2010: 46-8; Bodel 2014. For the erection of columbarium monuments by professionals for the sale of burial places, see Heinzelmann 2000: 66; Bodel 2008: 232. About the columbaria in relation to their contemporary monuments, see Borg 2011: 54, with earlier bibliography. 8 For the most known see Toynbee 1971: 113-15; especially the Augustan ones in Borbonus 2014. A monograph about the later, aboveground columbaria has not yet been published. For the decoration of the columbaria monuments near Villa Doria Pamphili see Fröhlich and Haps 2014. 9 Borbonus 2014: 19, pl. 1. 10 Toynbee 1971: 115-16; Borbonus 2014: 147 and 149; mainly Heinzelmann 2000: especially 65-6, 90-1 and 92-3 (comparative conclusions). 11 See for example Tomb 75 in Toynbee 1971: 78, with bibliography. 12 Borbonus 2014: 150-1 n. 50 (with earlier bibliography), fig. 54.

1 For a Hellenistic dovecote bearing the characteristic architectural form which was the precursor of the Roman burial monuments, see Zissu 1999; about the Roman and Byzantine dovecotes, see Germanidou 2015. For the prevailing definitions of the columbarium-type burial monuments, see Toynbee 1971: 113; Ginouvès and Martin 1998: 63; Borbonus 2014: 18-20 (thanks to whom the functional definition of the columbaria is now preferred than the old, descriptive one). 2 Altar-shaped, temple-shaped or other ossuaries are used rarely and complementary to the cinerary urns. For cinerary urns in Greece see Flämig 2007a: 80-1; Kalavria and Xanthopoulos forthcoming. 3 Borbonus 2014: 20; cf. Heinzelmann 2000: 63. Borbonus distinguishes the underground from the aboveground columbaria of Rome. He examines only the first, which date to the 1st half of the 1st century AD, while the second date to the 2nd half of the 1st century AD. 4 Cremations were of course placed not only in columbaria but in other monument types as well, often in common with inhumations. However, the columbaria were the only architectural form which was de novo designed for cremations.

126

Georgios Doulfis: Building for the mos Romanus in the Peloponnese

Figure 1. Map with mentioned sites where columbaria have been found (map: G. Doulfis).

of the Italian peninsula,13 and in Sicily14 columbaria are few and scattered.

Minor:26 two in Pergamon,27 two in Elaiusa Sebaste,28 and two in Miletus.29

Columbarium-type monuments are also known in the rest of the Empire, although the numbers reported from individual regions/ provinces are small. In particular, an adequate number of them have been identified in North Africa,15 the best known of which are in Mauretania Caesariensis.16 Several have been identified in Spain,17 mainly in Carmo,18 in Emerita Augusta19 and in Malaca.20 Some more have been identified in various places in Palestine and Judea.21 There is also one in Buthrotum in Dalmatia,22 two in Nicopolis in Epirus,23 one in Gortyn on Crete,24 one on Kos,25 and some in Asia

Columbaria in the Peloponnese

In Patras eleven monuments of various forms of the columbarium-type have been identified. Three of them are not independent but they are the underground chamber of temple-like mausoleums (now lost;31 Ermou Str.;32 133 Kanakari Str.).33 One more is the underground

Mainly in Cosa, Aquileia and Sutri, see Borbonus 2014: 151 n. 52-4 (with earlier bibliography). 14 See for example a columbarium in Halaesa, cf. Malfitana et al. 2013, 429; Pfuntner 2013: 171, pl. 6.10a; Tigano 2013. 15 Chien Clerkin 2013, with earlier bibliography. 16 Leveau 1987; Heinzelmann 2000: 69 n. 291; Borbonus 2014: 146, n. 42 (with earlier bibliography). 17 Egea Vivancos 1999, with earlier bibliography. 18 Borbonus 2014: 146-7, n. 44 (with earlier bibliography), fig. 52. 19 Bendala Galán 1972; Márquez Pérez 2006; Silva 2015. 20 Romero Pérez 1993-1994. 21 Built or carved into the natural rock, see Kuhnen 1987: 54, pl. 59-60 and 63, with earlier bibliography. 22 Butrint Foundation, Field Projects 2009: Summary Report, pdf accessible in http://www.butrintfoundation.co.uk (27-7-2015): 35-36 with figure (‘roman’); Drakoulis 2009: 221 (‘early Christian’). 23 Mausolea 1 and 4, at the North Necropolis, see Zachos and Georgiou 1997: 581-4, plan 16; Zachos 2001-2004: 24-30, plans 17 and 19; Georgiou 2007: 317-20 mainly, plans 5, 6Α, 6Β and 10, fig. 24-33; Georgiou 2017. They are dated in the 1st century AD. For more monument in Nicopolis which was planned for keeping cinerary urns but which is not a columbarium, see Flämig 2007b: 328, fig. 8, with bibliography. See also Papadimitriou and Karouta 2003: 75-6; Riginos and Katerini 2009: 131-9 with figures; Katsadima and Angeli 2001; Bowden 2011: 113. 24 Xanthoudidis 1920-1921. 25 Bruskari 2008: 286-7, fig. 9; Tsouli 2013: 24, pl. 28-9. Although it

looks like a columbarium in the published pictures, it is not published as such and I have not been able to visit it. 26 See Sven 2015: 191 with bibliography. Monuments of different form with niches for placing cinerary urns can be also found Asia Minor, and in particular in Ephesos (Wood 1877: 122), Caunos (Diler 2002: 70-1), Halikarnassos (Diler 2002: 71-2), Sagalassos (Köse 2006: 1467), Anemourion (Alföldi-Rosenbaum 1971: 94-5, 122, no. A.VI.15 and A.VI.21, fig. 2, pl. 8.1-2) and Nikaia (Anthologia Palatina: 15.4-7). 27 Radt 1988: 303 fig. 153 (=2011, fig. 216); Wulf 1994: 162, plan 3, inserted pl. 6, pl. 30.2-3; Heinzelmann 2000: 69 n. 291. 28 Columbarium: Machatschek 1967: 56, 112-13, pl. 37b, fig. 72. Underground chamber of a temple-like burial monument: Machatschek 1967: 85 ff., no. Τ 11, pl. 52-54, fig. 68-69; Equini Schneider 2003: 405-11, 509-10 no. 180, fig. 364 and 373-8, pl. 8. 29 Forbeck 1998: 45 no. K6, pl. 12.4, plan I and 165 no. HS links, pl. 72, plan I; Forbeck 2005: 58-9. 30 This happened either because the excavator did not notice that the burial building was a columbarium or because the monument was misunderstood, as happened in the case of Zarax, where the columbarium is reported as medieval chapel (see below). 31 Lolos 2016. Although known from the 19th century, today the location of the monument cannot be identified and it is only generally placed in the northern cemetery of the city. 32 Dekoulakou 1980; Dekoulakou 2009: 191-6, fig. 21-23; Flämig 2003: 566-8, fig. 5-6; Flämig 2007a: 190-3, fig. 107. About the burial monuments of Roman Patras in general, see Dijkstra 2013; Dijkstra 2015. 33 Stavropoulou-Gatsi 1988: 155-7, plans 10-13, pl. 90α-β; Flämig 2007a:

There are several columbarium-type burial monuments in the Peloponnese, although not all of them are recognized as such by previous scholars (Figure 2).30

13

127

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 2. The distribution of the columbaria in the Peloponnese (map: G. Doulfis).

chamber of a vaulted funerary building (84-86 Kanakari Str.).34 Three more constitute an aboveground columbarium complex (Tampachana35). The remaining three are independent buildings (Ch. Trikoupi Str.;36

133 Kanakari Str.;37 Vassilopoulos plot, Figure 338). The Patras monuments in general are small. As they are intended as columbaria and based on their finds or the elements of their architectural decoration, they have been dated by the excavators from the 1st century to the first half of the 2nd century AD, except for one more in the northern necropolis, featuring a luxurious facade (6 Parodos Mycenon Str.39), which has been dated to the late 2nd century AD.

196 no. 118 (included in the category of the multi-storied burial monuments ‘Mehrstöckige Grabbauten’, in 51-5). 34 Papapostolou 1980: 185-8, pl. 83δ; Dekoulakou 2009: 188, fig. 19-20; Flämig 2007a: 203 no. 139 (characterized as ‘gemauerte Kammergaber’, see pp. 31-6). Accessible after communication with the Ephorate. 35 Dekoulakou 1976: 105; Dekoulakou 1980: 565, plan 7, pl. 259α; Rizakis 1998: 49 n. 3; Flämig 2007a: 211-12 no. 174 (characterized as ‘gemauerte Kammergaber’, see pp. 31-6); Dekoulakou 2009: 166. Accessible. 36 Dekoulakou 1976: 103-5, plan 4 (no. 12), pl. 82; Dekoulakou 1980: 563, fig. 6, pl. 258α-β; Flämig 2007a: 210 no. 170 (where the chamber is characterized as ‘Hypogeum’, see pp. 28-31); Dekoulakou 2009: 186, fig. 16-18. For a similar, adjacent monument, in which however the cinerary urns were not placed in niches but in holes opened for this purpose on the floor, see Dekoulakou 1976: 103, plan 4 (no. 7), pl. 82δ; Flämig 2007a: 210 no. 168 (only referred as ‘kleinen Raum’); Dekoulakou 2009: 188, fig. 16.

In Corinth, ten columbarium-type monuments have been revealed, of which nine are located north of the Stavropoulou-Gatsi 1988: 153-5, plan 9; Flämig 2007a: 196-7 no. 119 (characterized as ‘gemauerte Kammergaber’, see pp. 31-6). 38 Alexopoulou 1995: 215, plan 15-16, pl. 82α; Stavropoulou-Gatsi et al. 2006: 94; Dekoulakou 2009: 190; Flämig 2007a: 209 no. 166 (where its typological classification is considered problematic due to the state of its preservation and its particularity of the existence of a krepidoma). Accessible after communication with the Ephorate. 39 Kotsaki 1984: 92, plan 8, pl. 30δ; Dekoulakou 2009: 190. 37

128

Georgios Doulfis: Building for the mos Romanus in the Peloponnese

Figure 3. The columbarium at Vassilopoulos’ plot, Patras (after Alexopoulou 1995: pl. 82α).

ancient city (Figure 4)40 and the tenth in Examilia.41 They are small to medium in size and they are usually completely or partly carved into the bedrock. An underground funerary complex stands out, as it consists of two columbarium-type chambers and a vaulted chamber with inhumation between them.

The complex bears frescoes, which are dated after the beginning of the 3rd century AD, according to Orlandos.42 In the eastern port of Corinth, Kenchreai, more than twenty burial chambers have been identified so far, which, although they are not really columbaria, as they combine niches and loculi, they bear many of their structural elements.43 They are primarily rectangular chambers, carved partially into the bedrock and organized into a cemetery along a road. They are internally divided into two vertical zones. In the lower one, they usually bear two loculi per side. In the upper one, they bear four niches for cinerary urns (ollae), also per side apart from the entrance side. In some cases there are also arcosolia or cist graves in the ground, always in coexistence with niches for cinerary urns. The monuments are richly decorated, mainly by frescoes. They have been dated to the 1st century AD and they were still in use as late as the 3rd century.

1 and 2. ‘Columbaria I and II’ at Cheliotomylos: Shear 1930: 428, with a general statement that roman graves were found; plans and notes in the Corinth Notebook no. 552 (3/3-3/6/1930), accessible in American School of Classical Studies at Athens’s website; Broneer 1932: 139, n. 1, notes that the one monument can be dated in the 1st century AD after its finds. For a lamp with a depiction of Tyche and signature ΟΚΤΑΒΕΙΟΥ (2nd century AD), which was found in ‘Columbarium I’, see Edwards 1990: 534 n. 25. 3. ‘Morgan Tomb’: Morgan 1936: 484, fig. 25; Flämig 2007a: 164-5, no. 51, pl. 71.1 (characterized as ‘gemauerte Kammergaber’, in pp. 31-6; for a possible connection with a roman villa, see p. 17). 4. ‘Cremation Tomb’: Walbank 2005: 256, fig. 9.5c; Slane 2012: 450, fig. 7; Slane 2017: 113-19, plan 19, pl. 35. 5. Excavation by Charitonidis and Pallas in 1965: Charitonidis 1966: 122, pl. 121α; Pallas 1969; Orlandos 1969: 203-7, fig. 244-248; Flämig 2007a: 162-3, no. 47 (characterized as Hypogeum, see pp. 28-31); Vavlekas 2013: 260-1, 400-1 cat. no. 107, pl. 54α-ε and 89στ. 6. Papachristodoulou 1967: 166-9, plans 4-5, pl. 125ζ. 7. ‘Tomb QQ’: Daux 1963: 722; Robinson 1963: 77; Walbank 2005: 255-6, fig. 9.5b and 9.13; Slane 2017: 106-13, plans 17-18, pl. 31-34. 8. Protonotariou-Deilaki 1971: 71-2, plans 3-6, pl. 62. 9. Krystalli-Votsi 1975: 59, pl. 39α; Flämig 2007a: 165, no. 54 (characterized as ‘gemauerte Kammergaber’, see pp. 31-36). cf. Flämig 2003: 564 (with earlier bibliography). 41 Morgan 1938: 370, fig. 12; Wiseman 1978: 69; Flämig 2007a: 158-9, no. 41, pl. 64-65 (characterized as ‘gemauerte Kammergaber’, see pp. 31-6; for a possible connection with a Roman villa, see p. 17); Slane 2017: 245-7, plan 20, pl. 87-90. 40

See above, n. 40, no. 5. Rife et al. 2007 (see mainly pp. 153 and 158 for the typological classification according to the excavators – not as columbaria, however – and p. 162 about the date, fig. 3, 7-8 and 13); Ubelaker and Rife 2007; Flämig 2007a: 161-2, nos 45-46, pl. 69.1-3 (characterized as ‘Hypogeum’, see pp. 28-31); Rife and Morison 2017. For their classification as columbaria cf. also Hood 1957: 6, who notes that Pallas reports two vaulted burial buildings, columbaria, in Kenchreai, and Borbonus 2014: 146. About the paintings see Vavlekas 2013: 260, 336-9 cat. nos. 6-8, pl. 21α-δ.

42 43

129

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 4. The columbarium at Cheliotomylos, Corinth (© American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Archives, Dorothy Burr Thompson Photographic Collection, #2450).

The Laconian Columbaria

In ancient Zarax, within the citadel and near the northern limb of the walls, a columbarium is still standing, bearing later interventions (Figure 5).49 It measures approximately 5.65 x 3.70 m and it is 3.25 m high. It was vaulted and built in opus mixtum, namely in pseudo-cloisonné reticulated masonry,50 with limited use of tiles. Large ancient stone plinths were reused as cornerstones. The walls were plastered inside and out with mortar. The monument is divided into two rooms. The vestibule, although roofed, was probably open in front, while at the back it has a door to the main room, where thirteen niches were opened, of which four in each one of the side walls, three in the wall opposite the entrance and two, partially damaged today, at the entrance wall. The central niche on the wall opposite the entrance is larger (0.44 x 0.85 m) than the others (0.31 x 0.51 m).

Fourteen columbarium-type buildings have been identified in Laconia so far. A columbarium was found by Themos and Zavvou, at Karavas Tripis, 2.5 km north of Sparta, during a survey conducted as they were supervising public works.44 The columbarium is actually located on the ancient road from Sparta to Megalοpolis, where the northern cemetery of Roman Sparta lies, but, due to the great distance from it, it is more likely that the monument belongs to a rural villa or village near Sparta.45 Such ruins are scattered and visible throughout the region. Only the west wall of the monument is preserved in full length, which bears six niches. At Molaoi, which stand just west of the ancient city Leukai,46 a wall 6.5 m long, belonging to an aboveground columbarium, has been found by Themos and Zavvou, at the location Loutro, near the modern cemetery.47 Intensive survey of the area may confirm the existence of more columbaria, as buildings with niches can be seen in nearby Chalasmata.48

In Akriai, nowadays Kokkinia, two columbaria have been identified. One was excavated and may form part of an organized cluster of funerary monuments, as they stand close in distance. The excavated monument had two floors, one underground and the other aboveground cloisonné reticulated masonry, could perhaps be recognized as a columbarium, now known to the research as a possible Byzantine chapel, about which see Etzeoglou 1974: 254, no. 3. 49 It is reported in Zavvou 2007: 427-8, n. 59. The monument is considered to be a church in Wace and Hasluck 1908-1909: 167-73 as well as in the relevant map (Figure 4), where it is depicted upside down. Measurements are my own. 50 About the pseudo-cloisonné reticulated masonry, and in particular as a variant of opus mixtum and not of opus reticulatum, see Papathanasiou and Athanasoulis 2006: 139-41.

Themos and Zavvou 2001-2004a: 200, pl. 49ε; Zavvou 2013: 364, no. 7. Zavvou 2013: 364, no. 7, 383 and 387. For some more Roman burials at the site see Themos 1994. 46 Strabo: 8.5.2; Polybius: 4.36.5; Titus Livius: 35.27.3. For the identification of the site see Etzeoglou 1974: 254-6 (with bibliography) and Diamanti 2006. 47 Themos and Zavvou 1998: 182; Karapanagiotou 2009: 279, n. 5; Zavvou 2013: 379, no. 80. 48 One more building at the site Chalasmata, with niches and pseudo44 45

130

Georgios Doulfis: Building for the mos Romanus in the Peloponnese

Figure 5. The columbarium at Zarax, Laconia (photo: G. Doulfis).

(Figure 6).51 It is built in opus mixtum, namely in pseudocloisonné reticulated masonry, but in opus testaceum as well, coated externally and internally with mortar. The underground floor bears a colonnade of two columns with bases and schematic capitals on which an architrave stands to better support the floor of the aboveground part. The thirty-seven niches (dim. 0.40 x 0.41 m, h. 0.62 m) of the underground floor are arranged in a perimeter in two rows. Blue color is retained in the depth of the niches. In one of them a lead urn was found. The aboveground part is heavily destroyed. However, three niches, two of semicircular plan on both sides of the central one of rectangular plan, can be identified on the wall opposite the hypothetically reconstructed entrance. Traces of niches can be found on the other sides as well. Two brick graves were constructed at the bottom of the underground part, probably much later than the construction of the monument, occupying the corner diametrically opposite the stairs leading downward. A large numismatic treasure of approximately 2000 coins was found just in front of the two graves, dating from the Trajan era to the Military emperors.52 The second columbarium at Akriai, still not excavated, could not be found in our autopsy. There remains only the information by J. de La Geniere,53 that it is smaller than the first one.

In Gytheion, three columbaria have been identified. The first one is located at the north exit of the city while the other two were found at the south one, near Agadaiika at Mavrovouni, on a hill where prehistoric graves have been excavated. Unfortunately, we do not have enough evidence about any of them and our recent efforts to find them were fruitless. The first one was reported by El. Zavvou in 2006, who writes that it was investigated on Alexandri’s property, on the road from Gytheion to Skala, at the northern exit of the city, in the early 1980s by Z. Bonias.54 Thanks to Mr. G. Gavakis, the Gytheion antiquities guard, we were able to contact the former mayor of the city, Mr. S. Hatzicharalambous. He drew us a sketch of the monument and described to us what he remembered of it, as he essentially excavated it, along with his classmates and some soldiers, under the instructions of the curator of Antiquities, theologian and school subdirector, K. Kantis, at the end of the 1950s. The masonry was of brick, the ceiling was vaulted, and two small niches on either side of a central larger one, which reached to the floor (?), were opened in the narrow back wall. A sarcophagus, now in the Town Hall, and a small ossuary, now in the Gytheion collection, were found in the monument. The latter was being used as a container to feed hens! The sarcophagus is undecorated, while the ossuary belongs to an Asia Minor type, bearing schematic bucrania and garlands. Then, the affable owner, brother of another former mayor, Kalkandis, informed the curator Kantis,

Geniere 1988: 114, pl. 79α-β; Catling 1988: 31 fig. 30; Pikoulas 2002: 232; Flämig 2007a: 173 no. 71 pl. 81.1-2 (characterized as ‘Hypogeum’, see pp. 28-31); Zavvou 2013: 393 n. 60. 52 Rozaki et al. 2017. 53 Op. cit. 51

Zavvou 2007: 427-8 n. 59; cf. a possible reference to this monument in Christou 1961-1962: 84.

54

131

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 6. The columbarium at Akriai, Laconia (photo: G. Doulfis).

that in the ’20s a boat was loaded with finds from the monument, namely ‘two chairs and a table, all pink’ – obviously made of Tainarian marble, rosso antico. The boat sank a few dozen meters from the shore, because of the weight…

have identified five.58 Two of them have been revealed, the first one at an unknown time, and the second one during a rescue excavation in 2002. The other three have been only identified on the surface. The first revealed columbarium, near the pier of the harbor, is the most prominent landmark of Plytra (Figure 8). However, we could not find any evidence about its excavation, despite the efforts of the archaeologists of the relevant Ephorate.59 It is a twostorey building with external dimensions 5.4 x 6.7 m. It has an underground and an aboveground part with an open vestibule. The masonry of the underground parts seems to be opus testaceum, at least on the inner face, while the aboveground masonry is opus mixtum, namely pseudo-cloisonné reticulated masonry (Figure 9). Large stone plinths used to stand in the four outer corners of the monument, as their vacant places reveal. The interior walls are plastered with pale reddish mortar, while the niches are plastered with white mortar. Mortar is also laid on the floor of the aboveground part, or rather its substrate floor. A staircase provides access to the underground floor. Although only a single row of a total of 14 niches (l. 0.38 m, d. 0.40 m, h. 0.52 m) is visible today, the current low height of the basement

The other two columbaria at Gytheion were found on the surface by the British archaeologists Waterhouse and Hope-Simpson, during their survey in the late 1950s.55 Although they merely mentioned their existence in their article on prehistoric Laconia, thanks to the willing assistance of Mrs Kakisis, the Archivist of the British School at Athens, we were able to find unpublished photos of the monuments and the related notes taken by the British scholars.56 We can surely assume that they are rectangular monuments with one entrance and they are at least partly carved in the bedrock, where niches are opened (Figure 7). Their dimensions are approximately 3.7 x 2.5 m and 5.5 x 3 m, respectively. Ancient Asopos,57 modern Plytra, is the site where the most columbaria have been found. Themos and Zavvou Waterhouse and Hope-Simpson 1961: 118 no. 87; Zavvou 2013: 382 no. 96, where only one monument is mentioned as an aboveground burial building in the columbarium type at the top of a hill that overlooks the entire valley of Bardounias and the region of Mavrovouni to the south of Gytheion. 56 The British School at Athens Archive, Hope-Simpson and Waterhouse Folder, no. BSA_HS_LAKII.Temp.32-34 and BSA_HS_ LAKII_Notes.Temp.1.5. 57 See generally Pikoulas 1984; Zavvou 2007. 55

See the notes below. Perhaps these are the so-called ‘Roman tombs’ that were revealed by Chr. Christos in Plytra in 1956 and are reported by Hood 1957: 12 and Daux 1957: 551. The monument is also reported by Themos and Zavvou 2001-2004b: 231-2; Zavvou 2007: 427-8 (with bibliography), map 2 no. 1, fig. 23-24.

58 59

132

Georgios Doulfis: Building for the mos Romanus in the Peloponnese

Figure 7. Columbarium at Mavrovouni near Gytheion, Laconia, at ’50s (© British School at Athens, Archive, no. BSA_HS_LAKII.Temp.34).

Figure 8. Columbarium near the modern mole of Plytra, ancient Asopos, Laconia (photo: G. Doulfis).

133

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 9. Detail of the columbarium near the modern mole of Plytra, ancient Asopos, Laconia (photo: G. Doulfis).

and the gaps that can be detected under the niches and in correspondence to them, suggest that there probably is a second, lower series of niches, the total number of which should be estimated at about 28. A brick pier, of yet undistinguished function, is still preserved at the east side. The aboveground part is not well preserved. However, the tenons of the door and remnants of the niches that its walls bore can be traced.

AD. A Laconian coin, dated to the Hadrianic period, inscribed lamps of the north Italian workshop of Neri (first half of the 2nd century AD), a glass vial bearing a double incised line of the 4th century AD (ΜΣ 15754), a large number of clay and glass vessels, two cinerary urns and a marble ossuary, of Asia Minor influence, bearing incised decoration and garland bucrania (ΜΣ 15771), were found inside the columbarium.

Two more, non-excavated, columbaria, in the immediate vicinity of the aforementioned, seem to have similar dimensions and form.60 Their orientation suggests the existence of a road, at both sides of which a necropolis had been organized. Another columbarium, also not excavated, has been found at a short distance from the above, shows the path of the road to the east.61

Conclusions In conclusion, after this preliminary study of the available material, we can say that most Peloponnesian columbaria are similar in size to the first, simple type of early columbaria in Ostia. Consequently, as happens in Ostia, the founders of the columbaria in the Peloponnese probably are Roman families or freedmen,63 and even likely members of a collegium funeraticum, perhaps of the often attested negotiatores,64 since the monuments are usually characterized by uniformity in the niches, an aspect which indicates that the dead were equal and not members of an identifiable hierarchy of a familiae.65

The columbarium on Venetsanaki’s-Vraimaki’s property was investigated during a rescue excavation in 2002 (Figure 10), but it is inaccessible today.62 It belongs to a totally different type. It is an underground monument, built of tiles, very small in dimensions (1.72 x 0.64 m, according to the excavators). Semi-circular and rectangular niches are opened in its walls. It was used for multiple burials from the 2nd to the 4th century

Heinzelmann 2000: 69; Borbonus 2014: 151. About the character of the synoecized town/colony of Nicopolis, see Bowden 2011: 103-4, with the earlier bibliography; cf. some interesting thoughts about the complex burial monument in Patrai, Ermou Str., in Flämig 2003: 567-8. 64 About the negotiatores in Peloponnese in general, see Zoumbaki 1998-1999, and in Laconia in particular Zavvou 2013: 384 and 388. 65 cf. Borbonus 2014: 143. 63

Themos and Zavvou 2001-2004b: 232; Zavvou 2007: 428. 61 Themos and Zavvou 2001-2004b: 232; Zavvou 2007: 428, map 2 no. 2, fig. 25. 62 Cavanagh et al. 1996: 310; Themos and Zavvou 2001-2004b: 231-2, pl. 56γ; Zavvou 2007: 428-9, map 2, no. 3, fig. 26; Kokkorou-Alevras et al. 2009: 175, with picture of the larnax; Zavvou and Maltezou 2010: 7701, fig. 10-12. 60

134

Georgios Doulfis: Building for the mos Romanus in the Peloponnese

mentioned at Patras. The columbarium at Zarax seems to be unique and different from any other. The location of the monument, the small number of niches and the larger dimensions of the central one, might indicate that this is the family tomb of the family that operated the area nearly deserted in Roman times. These considerations are reinforced by the inscriptions of a funerary monument, perhaps from the columbarium itself, which have been found nearby and refer to Tiberius Claudius Menekleidas’ family members, dated to the 2nd or 3rd century AD.68

Table 1. Capacity of columbarium-type monuments per site. Only monuments with relatively securely surviving data are included. It is rarely specified whether the number given in publications concerns the niches or the urns. SITE

NICHES

Rome

Hundreds

Akriai

37

Ostia

Asopos

Pergamon Patrai Zarax

Corinth

Examilia

Nicopolis

14-30 avg., and more 24-28 18-21 6-14

A very interesting issue is the dating of the Laconian columbaria. The aboveground part is characteristic of the late Italian columbaria, mostly from the 2nd century AD onward.69 This fact, in conjunction with the pseudo-cloisonné reticulated masonry which most of the monuments feature,70 in a somewhat negligent even version, and the ratio at around 2 of the brick thickness to the thickness of the intermediate mortar layer,71 allows a somewhat late dating for the Laconian columbaria from AD 100 onward. The columbarium in Zarax is probably even later, considering that it is an entirely aboveground monument and it shows more careless workmanship in masonry, the construction of which, as already mentioned, within the earlier fortification walls, using stone plinths in second use as cornerstones, was probably dictated at a time when the settlement had already declined significantly. However, according to the finds, the Laconian monuments still seem to be used in the 4th century AD.

13

6-11 11 10

There is still a remarkable difference between the metropolitan columbaria and the Peloponnesian ones. The most of the latter were used for the deposition of both cremated remains and for inhumations. Sarcophagi are also reported in Peloponnesian columbaria, as in Gytheion. It is not yet clear if these inhumations are contemporary or later to the use of the buildings for cremation burials. However, if they are, they maybe indicate a local preference or usage or the adaptation of an imported burial monument to serve local needs, or perhaps influences could have come not directly from Italy but from other provinces, such as Asia Minor or Crete,66 where inhumation was the predominant rite.

The columbarium-type monuments show an extremely high density in the Peloponnese and represent a very large proportion of the known provincial monuments of this type (without including the monuments of Kenchreai), although the custom of cremation is regarded as Roman/Italian, foreign to the Greek populations of the early imperial period,72 and the type of the monument has already been recognized by previous scholars as imported from Rome and Italy.73 From a topographical point of view, the Peloponnesian columbaria are located in colonies (Patras and Corinth),

The Laconian columbaria in particular are small to medium in size, but they absolutely are not smaller than the most monuments known outside Rome. In most cases, they are two-storied monuments, featuring an underground and an aboveground part, the latter sometimes forming an open vestibule. They are spatially varied. The monuments at Karavas and perhaps at Molaoi are independent, possibly connected to a villa rustica or a rural settlement,67 while those in Akriai and in Asopos form clusters or funeral routes, according to the standards of the west Empire already

Jameson 1953: 168-70 no. 17, pl. 51. cf. Cartledge and Spawforth 2002: 174; Zavvou 2013: 381 no. 90, 389. Borbonus 2014: 142-6. 70 Zavvou has already pointed out that the west-originated pseudocloisonné reticulated masonry is common in Laconia, Zavvou 2013: 393 n. 60. 71 Aupert 1990; although further research is needed to compare the data from Argos that Aupert uses with those from Laconia. cf. Dodge 1987: 107, where the follow rates are given for the 2nd century AD: Hadrian: brick thickness 3.0-4.5 and joint thickness 1.2-2.5; Antonine: brick thickness 3.0-4.0 and joint thickness 2.0-3.0. 72 Walbank 2005: 270; Flämig 2007b: 328; Bowden 2011: 113. 73 Together with two more monument types that occur in Greece: ‘römische Tumulus, die Altargräber sowie gemauerte Kammergräber mit columbariumartigen Grabkammern’ (Flämig 2007a: 111; cf. Stefanidou-Tiveriou 2011: 354). Roman monument type due to its origin from Rome and to collective character, see Borbonus 2014: 24, with several precursors though, ibid: 55-66. 68 69

I would like to thank Dr D. Grigoropoulos for discussing with me this ‘reflection theory’. The late-in-date columbarium-type monuments in Laconia were perhaps imported not directly from Rome or the colonies, but from Asia Minor, where the habit of cremations seems to remain strong until late, maybe because it was being practiced by negotiatores who used to live away from the developments of the burial customs in Italy. This is not, of course, the only possible influence from Asia Minor to Laconia during the imperial times, see, for example, Woodward 1953, about the epigraphic and numismatic material that prove close ties between Sparta and some Asia Minor cities; Kokkorou-Alevras et al. 2009: 175, about an Asia Minor type of ossuaries which is common in Laconia; Doulfis (forthcoming), about ionic capitals that follow the Asia Minor style of the 2nd and 3rd century AD. 67 Zavvou 2013: 364 no. 7 and 379 no. 80, as well as 383, 387 and 389. 66

135

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 10. Columbarium in Venetsanaki’s-Vraimaki’s property in Plytra, ancient Asopos, Laconia (© Archive of the Ephorate of Antiquities at Laconia, photograph by the excavators A. Themos and E. Zavvou).

which are certainly commercial hubs as well,74 and in cities with a strong commercial interest, mainly ports (Laconian sites).75

the Eleutherolakones. The Italian presence in the city is prominent, through the inscriptions and their donations to the city. Augustus was also interested in Asopos, in which he gathered the populations of the neighbouring cities through a synoecism.79 Besides, Asopos is located on the road mentioned in the Tabula Peutingeriana, as of course Sparta – and the place where Karavas now stands, since the road comes from Megalopolis. We can maybe explain the place name of Karavas if we accept that the neighbouring Eurotas River was then partly sailable or we can connect the place to a later trading station.80 Moreover, in Asopos, traces of roads frequented by wagons and identified by Yannis Pikoulas, characterize the lively and longlived, sophisticated road network, designating Asopos as a prosperous and populous city, while the composite road system on the outskirts of the settlement in combination to at least the two main roads which were leading to the city consist a rare instance for the whole of Greece.81 Besides, Gytheion, Asopos and Akriai seem to have been ports on the dangerous but usual sea route from Rome to Asia Minor, probably through Crete, as one can conclude from Pliny’s testimony among other.82

In particular, Laconian columbaria represent a surprisingly large percentage of the Peloponnesian ones, 41% (14 of a total of 34 monuments, not including the monuments at Kenchreai).76 They are scattered in Laconia, in places with strong commercial and imperial interest. More specifically, the commercial interest of the Romans for Laconian products is known. White, grey and coloured marbles, purple, sponges, olives, figs and hunting dogs, all are attested in Latin writers and sometimes they were protected as imperial monopolies.77 Moreover, negotiatores are mentioned in many Laconian inscriptions, Latin and Greek. Augustus relieved Gytheion from Spartan control,78 making it the largest city of the newly established Koinon of About Corinth as a roman trade center, see Williams II 1993, with bibliography. Borbonus 2014: 151-2, has already noticed that one can watch the spread of the type, as the earliest columbaria can be found in Rome, a little later in Ostia and then in Potioli and in the rest of the empire, mainly in port cities. 76 Zavvou 2013: 394, has already noticed the large number of columbaria in Laconia. 77 See Cartledge and Spawforth 2002: 169-75; Zavvou 2013: 383-5 and 394-7, with sources and bibliography. 78 The significance of Gytheion for the trade and the economy of the empire, as well as the subsequent Italian and Roman presence have already been noticed, see more recently Harter-Uibopuu 2004: 2-3; Kanellopoulos and Zavvou 2014: 357-8, with sources and bibliography. 74 75

Zavvou 2007: 425-6 with bibliography. Either from karavi (ship) or from karavani (caravan). In any case, Karavas seems to be an early name for the settlement, see Pikoulas 2001: 186-7. cf. four more sites named Karavas, in Laconia again (at seaside Oitylon), at Peiraieus, on Cyprus and on Kythera (the latter was founded by Cypriots); all of them ware named after karavi. 81 Pikoulas 1984: 185-6. 82 Pliny, Epistulae 10.15; cf. Kanellopoulos and Zavvou 2014: 357 n. 4. 79 80

136

Georgios Doulfis: Building for the mos Romanus in the Peloponnese

Zarax, on the east coast of Malea, is identified by Pausanias as eulimenon chorion, a settlement possessing a good harbour. Leukai, about which we do not really know much, probably was an inland commercial center, which operated both the plain and the nearby mines.83

An earlier version of this paper was delivered in Greek at the 9th International Congress of Peloponnesian Studies, Nafplion 30 October-2 November 2015.

Columbaria built for freed dependents of Roman familiae, for collegia, or for individuals buried together without apparent kinship or professional ties, probably are the most characteristic collective burial monuments, signifying aspects as group identity and membership. As has been stated, ‘space [is…] determined by two kinds of relations, rather than one: the relations among the occupants and the relations between occupants and outsiders.’84 The enclosed form of the columbarium differentiates and defines occupants (the dead and their mourners) together as opposed to those without access to the tomb.

Alexopoulou, G. 1995. Ν.Ε.Ο. Πατρών-Αθηνών. Οδός Αμερικής και Θερμοπυλών (οικόπεδο Α.Β. Βασιλόπουλος ΑΕ). ArchDelt 50, Chronika, Β1: 213-15. Alföldi-Rosenbaum, E. 1971. Anamur nekropolü. The Necropolis of Anemurium. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu. Aupert, P. 1990. L’évolution des appareils en Grèce à l’époque impériale. BCH 114: 593-637. Bendala Galán, M. 1972. Los llamados ‘columbarios’ de Mérida. Habis 3: 223-53. Bodel, J. 2008. From columbaria to catacombs: collective burial in pagan and christian Rome, in L. Brink and D. Green (eds) Commemorating the Dead. Texts and Artifacts in Context: 177-242. Berlin: De Gruyter. Bodel, J. 2014. The life and death of ancient Roman cemeteries: living with the dead in imperial Rome, in C. Häuber, F. Schütz and G. Winter (eds) Reconstruction and the Historic City: Rome and Abroad – An Interdisciplinary Approach (Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsgeographie München 6): 177-95. München: Selbstverlag. Borbonus, D. 2014. Columbarium Tombs and Collective Identity in Augustan Rome. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Borg, B. 2011. What’s in a tomb? Roman death public and private, in J. Andreu, D. Espinosa and S. Pastor (eds) Mors omnibus instat. Aspectos Arqueológicos, Epigráficos y Rituales de la Muerte en el Occidente Romano: 51-78. Madrid: Liceus. Bowden, W. 2011. ‘Alien settlers consisting of Romans’: identity and built environment in the Julio-Claudian foundations of Epirus in the century after Actium, in R. Sweetman (ed.) Roman Colonies in the First Century of their Foundation: 101-16. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Broneer, O. 1932. Corinth X: The Odeum. Cambridge (MA): Publications for the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Harvard University Press. Bruskari, E. 2008. Examples of successive religious cults on Cos (ancient funerary monuments and Christian worship), in E. Hadjitryphonos (ed.) Routes of Faith in the Medieval Mediterranean. History, Monuments, People, Pilgrimage Perspectives. Proceedings of an International Symposium, Thessalonike 7-10/11/2007: 281-9. Thessalonike: European Centre of Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Monuments. Cartledge, P. and A.J.S. Spawforth 2002 (1989). Hellenistic and Roman Sparta: A Tale of Two Cities. London: Routledge. Catling, H. 1988. Archaeology in Greece 1988-89. AR 35: 3-116. Cavanagh, W., J. Crouwel, R.W.V. Catling, G. Shipley, P. Armstrong, T. Carter, D. Hibler, R. Jones, J. O. Lawson, M. Overbeek, A. Sarris, H. Visscher and M. Ydo 1996.

Bibliography

The concentration of columbarium-type monuments in the Peloponnese and their absence, at least so far, from sites like Thessalonike or Philippi, will remain largely enigmatic for a long time. In any case, columbaria as are monuments in which you can still stand and from which you can see the sea, through which their occupants arrived at the place where they would eventually die, will always remain nostalgic monuments. Acknowledgements I was able to carry out this preliminary research and to present its results thanks to the willing response of the Director of the Ephorate of Laconia Mrs E. Pantou, as well as the former and current archaeologists of the Ephorate, E. Zavvou, A. Themos, M. Tsouli, A. Maltezou, L. Souchleris and G. Tsiaggouris. I would like to thank all of them for the relevant permissions and the assistance of any kind. I am really thankful to the British School at Athens and to its archivist, A. Kakissis, for the permission to study and publish material from the BSA Archive; to the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Archives and Dr N. Vogeikoff-Brogan for the permission to publish Figure 4; and to the Ephorate of Antiquities of Achaia and the excavator Dr G. Alexopoulou for the permission to republish Figure 3. I would also like to thank G. Alexopoulou, E. Partida and A. Maniaki for guiding me around the columbaria at Patrai; Chr. Tsouli, L. Portalios and R. Poupaki for information on columbaria on Kos, Crete and Sicily, respectively; N. Dimakis and T. M. Dijkstra for inviting me to this conference; J. Fouquet, F. Balla, E. Kalavria, D. Grigoropoulos and N. Dimakis again for discussing several issues that challenged me; the anonymous reviewers for their insightful and valuable comments. Pausanias 3.24.1; Zavvou 2013: 388, where the possible connection of the area with the economic activities of G.I. Eurycles is mentioned. 84 Hillier and Hanson 1984: 15. 83

137

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Continuity and Change in a Greek Rural Landscape: The Laconia Survey. Volume II: Archaeological Data (The British School at Athens Supplementary Volumes 27). London: The British School at Athens. Cavanagh, W., C. Gallou and M. Georgiadis (eds) 2009. Sparta and Laconia: from Prehistory to Pre-Modern: Proceedings of the Conference Held in Sparta, Organised by the British School at Athens, the University of Nottingham, the 5th Ephoreia of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities and the 5th Ephoreia of Byzantine Antiquities 17-20 March 2005 (The British School at Athens Studies 16). London: The British School at Athens. Charitonidis, S. 1966. Ἀνασκαφαί Ἐθνικῆς ὁδοῦ. ArchDelt 21, Chronika, Β1: 121-3. Chien Clerkin, C. 2013. The Mini-Columbarium in Carthage’s Yasmina Cemetery. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Georgia. Christou, Chr. 1961-1962. Ἀρχαιότητες ΛακωνίαςἈρκαδίας. ArchDelt 17, Chronika, Β: 83-5. Daux, G. 1957. Chronique des fouilles et découvertes archéologiques en Grèce en 1956. BCH 81: 496-713. Daux, G. 1963. Chronique des fouilles et découvertes archéologiques en Grèce en 1962. BCH 87: 689-878. Dekoulakou, I. 1976. Ὁδός Ἁγίας Παρασκευῆς καί 3ου Ὀρειβατικοῦ. ArchDelt 31, Chronika, Β1: 105. Dekoulakou, I. 1980. Ρωμαϊκό μαυσωλείο στην Πάτρα, in Στήλη. Τόμος εις μνήμην Νικολάου Κοντολέοντος: 55675. Athens. Dekoulakou, I. 2009. Monumenti delle necropoli di Patrasso durante il dominio romano, in Patrasso colonia di Augusto e le trasformazioni culturali, politiche ed economiche della Provincia di Acaia agli inizi dell’età imperiale romana: atti del convegno internazionale, Patrasso 23-24 marzo 2006 (Tripodes 8): 163-210. Athens: Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene. Diamanti, K. 2006. Θέση Χαλάσματα. ArchDelt 61, Chronika: 310-11. Dijkstra, T. 2013. Colonia Augusta Achaica Patrensis: Grafveld en identiteit in een Romeinse kolonie in Griekenland. Tijdschrift voor Mediterrane Archeologie 50: 53-9. Dijkstra, T. 2015. Burial and commemoration in the Roman Colony of Patras, in S. Roselaar (ed.) Processes of Cultural Change and Integration in the Roman World: 154-74. Leiden: Brill. Diler, A. 2002. The Northern Rock Necropolis of Caunus, in H. Wiegartz (ed.) Studien zum antiken Kleinasien, V (Asia Minor Studien 44): 63-95. Bon: Rudolf Habelt. Dodge, H. 1987. Brick construction in Roman Greece and Asia Minor, in S. Macready and F.H. Thompson (eds) Roman Architecture in the Greek World (Occasional Papers – New Series 10): 106-16. London: Society of Antiquaries of London. Doulfis, G. (forthcoming). Ιωνικά κιονόκρανα από τη ρωμαϊκή και υστερορωμαϊκή Λακωνία: τυπολογία, τεχνοτροπία, τεχνολογία, in Πρακτικά τής Β΄ Επιστημονικής Συνάντησης για το Αρχαιολογικό Έργο στην Πελοπόννησο, Καλαμάτα, 1-4 Νοεμβρίου 2017.

Drakoulis, D. 2009. Το δίκτυο οικισμών τής επαρχίας Παλαιάς Ηπείρου στην πρώιμη βυζαντινή περίοδο. Βυζαντινά 29: 199-229. Edwards, C. 1990. Tyche at Corinth. Hesperia 59: 529-42. Egea Vivancos, A. 1999. El punto de partida: Los columbarios clásicos, in A. Gonzalez Blanco (ed.) Los Columbarios de la Rioja (Antigüedad y cristianismo 16): 25-42. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, Area de Historia Antigua. Equini Schneider, E. 2003. La necropoli nord-orientale, in E. Equini Schneider (ed.)  Elaiussa Sebaste IΙ.  Un porto tra Oriente ed Occidente: 383-524. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Etzeoglou, R. 1974. Παλαιοχριστιανική βασιλική παρά τούς Μολάους Λακωνίας. ArchEph 1974: 244-57. Flämig, C. 2003. Grabarchitektur als Spiegel der historischen Prozesse und der Bevölkerungsstruktur im kaiserzeitlichen Griechenland, in P. Noelke, F. Naumann-Steckner and B. Schneide (eds) Romanisation und Resistenz in Plastik, Architektur und Inschriften der Provinzen des Imperium Romanum: neue Funde und Forschungen: Akten des VII. Internationalen Colloquiums über Probleme des provinzialrömischen Kunstschaffens, Köln 2. bis 6. Mai 2001: 563-75. Mainz: P. von Zabern. Flämig, C. 2007a. Grabarchitektur der römischen Kaiserzeit in Griechenland (Internationale Archäologie 97). Rahden – Westf.: Leidorf. Flämig, C. 2007b. Nicopolis and the grave architecture in Epirus in Imperial times, in K. Zachos (ed.) Νικόπολις Β΄. Πρακτικά τού Δεύτερου Διεθνούς Συμποσίου για τη Νικόπολη (11-15 Σεπτεμβρίου 2002): 325-31. Preveza: Actia Nikopolis Foundation. Forbeck, E. 1998. Die Nekropolen von Milet. Die Grabungen 1901 bis 1909 und die Arbeiten der Jahre 1993 bis 1996. Unpublished PhD dissertation, RuhrUniversität Bochum. Forbeck, E. 2005. Die Nekropolen von Milet, in H. İşkan and F. Işık (eds) Grabtypen und Totenkult im südwestlichen Kleinasien. Internationales Kolloquium, Antalya 4.-8. Ekim/Oktober 1999 (Lykia 6): 55-64. Antalya: Akdeniz Üniversitesi. Fröhlich, T. and S. Haps 2014. Architektur und Dekoration der Columbarien an der Villa Doria Pamphilj, Rom, in J.M. Álvarez Martinez, T. Nogales Basarrate and I. Rodà de Llanza (eds) Proceedings of the XVIIIth International Congress of Classical Archaeology: Centre and Periphery in the Ancient World 2: 1187-92. Mérida: Museo Nacional de Arte Romano. Geniere de la, J. 1988. Γαλλική Αρχαιολογική Σχολή: Λακωνία. ArchDelt 43, Chronika, Β1: 113-15. Georgiou, A. 2007. Βόρεια Νεκρόπολη της Νικόπολης. Οργάνωση και ταφική αρχιτεκτονική, in K. Zachos (ed.) Νικόπολις Β΄. Πρακτικά τού Δεύτερου Διεθνούς Συμποσίου για τη Νικόπολη (11-15 Σεπτεμβρίου 2002): 307-23. Preveza: Actia Nikopolis Foundation. Georgiou, A. 2017. Βόρεια νεκρόπολη Νικόπολης: Ταφικό σύνολο από ένα μαυσωλείο, in Σπείρα. Επιστημονική 138

Georgios Doulfis: Building for the mos Romanus in the Peloponnese

συνάντηση προς τιμήν της Αγγέλικας Ντούζουγλη και του Κωνσταντίνου Ζάχου. Πρακτικά: 575-96. Athens: Tameio Archaiologikōn Porōn kai Apallotriōseōn. Germanidou, S. 2015. Dovecotes from the Roman and Byzantine Periods. HEROM 4.1: 33-51. Ginouvès, R. and R. Martin (eds) 1998. Dictionnaire Méthodique de l’ Architecture Grecque et Romaine. Tome III. Espaces Architecturaux, Bâtiments et Ensembles. Paris and Rome: Écoles française d’Athènes et de Rome. Harter-Uibopuu, K. 2004. The Trust Fund of Phaenia Aromation (IG V.1 1208) and Imperial Gytheion. Studia Humaniora Tartuensia 5: 1-17. Heinzelmann, M. 2000. Die Nekropolen von Ostia. Untersuchungen zu den Gräberstraßen vor der Porta Romana und an der Via Laurentina (Studien zur antiken Stadt 6). München: Friedrich Pfeil. Heinzelmann, M. 2001. Grabarchitektur, Bestattungsbrauch und Sozialstruktur: Zur Rolle der familia, in M. Heinzelmann, J. Ortalli, P. Fasold and M. Witteyer (eds) Römischer Bestattungsbrauch und Beigabensitten in Rom, Norditalien und den Nordwestprovinzen von der späten Republik bis in die Kaiserzeit. Internationales Kolloquium, Rom 1.-3. April 1998 (Palilia 8): 179-91. Wiesbaden: Reichert. Hillier, B. and J. Hanson 1984. The Social Logic of Space. New York: Cambridge University Press. Hood, S. 1957. Archaeology in Greece, 1956. AR 1956: 3-23. Hope, V. 1997. A roof over the dead: communal tombs and family structure, in R. Laurence and A. WallaceHadrill (eds) Domestic Space in the Roman World: Pompeii and Beyond (Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series 22): 69-88. Portsmouth: Journal of Roman Archaeology. Jameson, M. 1953. Inscriptions of the Peloponnesos. Hesperia 22: 148-71. Kalavria, Ε. and K. Xanthopoulos forthcoming. Μολύβδινη τεφροδόχος κάλπη από τα Βραχνέικα Αχαΐας: αρχαιολογικές και ανθρωπολογικές παρατηρήσεις, in A. Gadolou and E. Kountouri (eds) Collective Volume by the Directorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities. Kanellopoulos, C. and E. Zavvou 2014. The Agora of Gytheum. ABSA 109: 357-78. Karapanagiotou, V. 2009. New fragment of an Amazon sarcophagus from Laconia, in Cavanagh et al. 2009: 279-84. Katsadima, I. and A. Angeli 2001. Riza and Agia Pelagia: two architectural assemblages of the Roman era along the coast of southern Epirus, in J. Isager (ed.) Foundation and Destruction. Nikopolis and Northwestern Greece (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 3): 91-107. Athens: The Danish Institute at Athens – Aarhus University Press. Kokkorou-Alevras, G., E. Zavvou, A. Themos, A. Efstathopoulos, K. Kopanias, E. Poupaki, and A.

Chatzikonstantinou 2009. Ancient Quarries in Laconia, in Cavanagh et al. 2009: 169-79. Köse, V. 2006. Nekropolen und Grabdenkmäler von Sagalassos in Pisidien in hellenistischer und römischer Zeit (Studies in Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology 7). Turnhout: Brepols. Kotsaki, Μ. 1984. Πάροδος Μυκηνών 6. ArchDelt 39, Chronika, Β1: 92. Krystalli-Votsi, Κ. 1975. Οἰκόπεδο Φ. Μαρινοῦ. ArchDelt 30, Chronika, Β1: 59. Kuhnen, H.-P. 1987. Nordwest-Palästina in hellenistischrömischer Zeit: Bauten und Gräber im Karmelgebiet (Quellen und Forschungen zur prähistorischen und provinzialrömischen Archäologie 1). Weinheim: VCH, Acta Humaniora. Leveau, P. 1987. Nécropoles et monuments funéraires à Caesarea de Maurétanie, in H. Von Hesberg and P. Zanker (eds) Römische Gräberstraßen: Selbstdarstellung, Status, Standard. Kolloquium in München vom 28. bis 30. Oktober 1985: 281-90. München: Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Kommission bei der C.H. Beck’schen Verlagsbuchhandlung. Lolos, Y. 2016. On the Trail of a Large Burial Monument of Patras, in D. Katsonopoulou and E. Partida (eds) Φιλέλλην. Essays Presented to Stephen G. Miller: 351-60. Athens: The Helike Society. Machatschek, A. 1967. Die Nekropolen und Grabmäler im Gebiet von Elaiussa Sebaste und Korykos im Rauhen Kilikien (Tituli Asiae Minoris, Supplementa 2). Wien: H. Bohlaus Nachf. Malfitana, D., C. Franco and A. Di Mauro 2013. Economy and trade of Sicily during Severan period: highlights between archaeology and history, in E. De Sena (ed.) The Roman Empire during the Severan Dynasty: Case Studies in History, Art, Architecture, Economy and Literature: 415-62. Piscataway: Gorgias Press. Márquez Pérez, J. 2006. Los Columbarios: arquitectura y paisaje funerario en Augusta Emerita. Mérida: Consorcio Ciudad Monumental Historico-Artistica y Arqueológica. Mérida: Asamblea de Extremadura. Morgan, C.H. 1936. Excavations at Corinth, 1935-1936. AJA 40: 466-84. Morgan, C.H. 1938. Excavations at Corinth, Autumn 1937. AJA 42: 362-70. Orlandos, Α. 1969. Ἐν Άρχαίᾳ Κορίνθῳ. Ergon: 203-7. Pallas, D. 1969. Νεκρικόν ὑπόγειον ἐν Κορίνθῳ. Prakt: 121-34. Papachristodoulou, Ι. 1967. Ἀνασκαφή Ἐθνικῆς ὁδοῦ Κορίνθου-Πατρῶν. ArchDelt 22, Chronika, Β1: 166-9. Papadimitriou, Α. and O. Karouta 2003. Ο Αρχαιολογικός Χώρος της Νικόπολης. Preveza: Municipality of Preveza. Papapostolou, Ι. 1980. Βόρειο Νεκροταφείο: οδός Κανακάρη 84-86. ArchDelt 35, Chronika, Β1: 185-8. Papathanasiou, Ε. and D. Athanasoulis 2006. Άγιος Στέφανος Περιστέρας/Θεριανού (στα Κατσουλαίικα) Πατρών, in Πρακτικά τής Α’ Αρχαιολογικής Συνόδου 139

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Νότιας και Δυτικής Ελλάδος, Πάτρα 9-12 Ιουνίου 1996: 131-55. Athens: Tameio Archaiologikōn Porōn kai Apallotriōseōn. Pfuntner, L.E. 2013. The Changing Urban Landscape of Roman Sicily. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. Pikoulas, Y. 1984. Ἡ Tabula Peutingeriana καὶ ἡ χερσόνησος τοῦ Μαλέα. Horos 2: 175-88. Pikoulas, Y. 2001. Λεξικό τῶν Οἰκισμῶν τῆς Πελοποννήσου. Παλαιά καί Νέα Τοπωνύμια. Athens: Horos. Pikoulas, Y. 2002. Ἡ Χερσόνησος τοῦ Μαλέα: Ἀπολογισμός καὶ προοπτικές. Σχεδίασμα ἔρευνας. Αρέσκουσα 2: 229-46. Protonotariou-Deilaki, Ε. 1971. Κρητικά. ArchDelt 26, Chronika, Β1: 71-4. Radt, W. 1988. Pergamon: Geschichte und Bauten, Funde und Erforschung einer antiken Metropole. Köln: DuMont. Rice, K. 2010. Commemorative Spaces in Early Imperial Rome. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Rife, J. and M. Morison 2017. Space, object, and process in the Koutsongila Cemetery at Roman Kenchreai, in J. Pearce and J. Weekes (eds) Death as a Process (Studies in Funerary Archaeology 12): 27-59. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Rife, J., R. Dunn, M. Morison, D. Ubelaker, A. Barbet and F. Monier 2007. Life and death at a port in Roman Greece. The Kenchreai Cemetery Project, 2002-2006. Hesperia 76: 143-81. Riginos, G. and E. Katerini. 2009. Νικόπολη. Οδηγός Αρχαιολογικού Μουσείου. Athens: Ministry of Culture, ΛΓ EPCA Preveza-Arta. Rizakis, A. 1998. Achaie II. La Cite de Patras: Epigraphie et Histoire (Meletemata 25). Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation. Robinson, H.S. 1963. Excavations at Corinth. ArchDelt 18, Chronika, Β1: 76-80. Romero Pérez, M. 1993-1994. La Necrópolis romana de las Maravillas. Bobadilla. Málaga. Mainake 15-16: 195-222. Rozaki, S., Α. Maltezou, Α. Themos and Ε. Zavvou 2017. Νομισματικός θησαυρός από ταφικό μνημείο των αρχαίων Ακρειών (Κοκκινιά Γλυκόβρυσης Λακωνίας): Μια πρώτη παρουσίαση, in E. Apostolou and C. Doyen (eds) Οβολός 10. Το νόμισμα στην Πελοπόννησο. Πρακτικά Συνεδρίου της Στ΄ Επιστημονικής Συνάντησης των Φίλων του Νομισματικού Μουσείου. Άργος, 26-29 Μαΐου 2011 (BCH Suppl. 57): 489-502. Paris: École française d’ Athènes. Shear, T.L. 1930. Excavations in the North Cemetery at Corinth in 1930. AJA 34: 403-31. Silva, F.C. 2015. The funerary practice of cremation at Augusta Emerita (Mérida, Spain) during High Empire: contributions from the anthropological analysis of burned human bone, in T. Thompson (ed.) The Archaeology of Cremation: Burned Human Remains in Funerary Studies (Studies in Funerary Archaeology 8): 123-50. Oxford: Oxbow Books.

Slane, K. 2012. Remaining Roman in Death at en Eastern Colony. JRA 25: 441-55. Slane, K. 2017. Corinth XXI: Tombs, Burials, and Commemoration in Corinth’s Northern Cemetery. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Stavropoulou-Gatsi, Μ. 1988. Βόρειο Νεκροταφείο: Οδός Κανακάρη 133. ArchDelt 43, Chronika, Β1: 153-7. Stavropoulou-Gatsi, Μ., G. Alexopoulou, G. Georgopoulou and Α. Gadolou 2006. Το έργο των σωστικών ανασκαφών στην πόλη των Πατρών και την ευρύτερη περιοχή της. Νεότερα πολεοδομικά και τοπογραφικά στοιχεία, in A’ Αρχαιολογική Σύνοδος Νότιας και Δυτικής Ελλάδος. Πάτρα, 9-12 Ιουνίου 1996. Πρακτικά: 81-100. Athens: Tameio Archaiologikōn Porōn kai Apallotriōseōn. Stefanidou-Tiveriou, T. 2011. Catharina Flämig: Grabarchitektur der römischen Kaiserzeit in Griechenland. Gnomon 83: 348-54. Sven, A. 2015. ‘Whether by Decay or Fire Consumed…’: cremation in Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor, in J.R. Brandt, M. Prusac and H. Roland (eds) Death and Changing Rituals: Function and Meaning in Ancient Funerary Practices (Studies in Funerary Archaeology 7): 185-222. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Themos, Α. 1994. Περιοχή Καραβά Σπάρτης. ArchDelt 49, Chronika, B1: 185-6. Themos, Α. and Ε. Zavvou 1998. Μολάοι Λακωνίας. ArchDelt 53, Chronika, B1: 182. Themos, Α. and Ε. Zavvou 2001-2004a. Οδός ΣπάρτηςΚαστορίου (έργα κατασκευής νέας οδού) (2001). ArchDelt 56-59, Chronika, Β4: 199-200. Themos, Α. and Ε. Zavvou 2001-2004b. Πλύτρα: Οικόπεδο Γ. Βενετσανάκη – Α. Βραϊμάκη (2002). ArchDelt 56-59, Chronika, Β4: 231-2. Tigano, G. 2009. La Necropoli Urbana Meridionale: Dati archeologici e prime considerazioni, in G. Scibona and G. Tigano (eds) Alaisa-Halaesa. Scavi e ricerche (1970 – 2007): 114-32. Messina: Sicania. Toynbee, J.M.C. 1971. Death and Burial in the Roman World. London: Thames and Hudson. Tsouli, C. 2013. Ταφικά και Επιτάφια Μνημεία της Κω. Συμβολή στη Μελέτη της Τυπολογίας και της Εικονογραφίας των Επιτάφιων Μνημείων των Ελληνιστικών και Ρωμαϊκών χρόνων. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Athens. Ubelaker, D. and J. Rife 2007. The practice of cremation in the Roman-era cemetery at Kenchreai, Greece. Bioarchaeology of the Near East 1: 35-57. Vavlekas, N. 2013. Τοιχογραφίες Ρωμαϊκών Χρόνων στην Ελλάδα: Από την εποχή τού Αυγούστου έως την εποχή τού Μ. Κωνσταντίνου. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Athens. Wace, A. and F. Hasluck 1908-1909. Laconia, II. Topography: East-Central Laconia. ABSA 15: 158-76. Walbank, M.E.H. 2005. Unquiet Graves: Burial Practices of the Roman Corinthians, in D. Schowalter and S.J. Friesen (eds) Urban Religion in Roman Corinth. 140

Georgios Doulfis: Building for the mos Romanus in the Peloponnese

Interdisciplinary Approaches (Harvard Theological Studies 53): 249-80. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Waterhouse, H. and R. Hope-Simpson 1961. Prehistoric Laconia: Part II. ABSA 56: 114-75. Williams II, C.K. 1993. Roman Corinth as a commercial center, in T. Gregory (ed.) The Corinthia in the Roman Period. Including the Papers Given at a Symposium Held at the Ohio State University on 7-9 March, 1991 (Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series 8): 3146. Ann Arbor (MI): Journal of Roman Archaeology. Wiseman, J. 1978. The Land of the Ancient Corinthians (Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 50). Göteborg: Paul Åströms Förlag. Wood, J.T. 1877. Discoveries at Ephesus Including the Site and Remains of the Great Temple of Diana. London: Longmans, Green. Woodward, A.M. 1953. Sparta and Asia Minor under the Roman Empire, in G. Mylonas and D. Raymond (eds) Studies Presented to David Moore Robinson On His Seventieth Birthday 2: 868-83. Saint Louis: Washington University. Wulf, U. 1994. Der Stadtplan von Pergamon: zu Entwicklung und Stadtstruktur von der Neugründung unter Philetairos bis in spätantike Zeit. IstMitt 44: 135-75. Xanthoudidis, S. 1920-1921. Ρωμαϊκόν οἰκογενειακόν κοινοτάφιον Γόρτυνος. ArchDelt 6: 165. Zachos, Κ. 2001-2004. Βόρεια Νεκρόπολη. ArchDelt 5659, Chronika, Β5: 24-30. Zachos, Κ. and Α. Georgiou 1997. Βόρεια Νεκρόπολη – Θέση Μάντζαρι, αγροτεμάχια αριθ. 65-71 και 77-81

(διανομής Μύτικα 1930). ArchDelt 52, Chronika, Β2: 581-8. Zavvou, E. 2007. Νέα στοιχεῖα γιὰ τὶς λακωνικὲς πόλεις τῆς δυτικῆς ἀκτῆς τῆς Χερσονήσου τοῦ Μαλέα, in T. Gritsopoulos, K. Kotsonis, I. Giannaropoulou (eds) Πρακτικὰ τοῦ Ζ΄ Διεθοῦς Συνεδρίου Πελοποννησιακῶν Σπουδῶν. Πῦργος-ΓαστούνηἉμαλιάδα 11-17 Σεπτεμβρίου 2005. Vol. Β΄. Αρχαιότης 27 (Πελοποννησιακά – Παράρτημα): 413-51. Athens: Etairia Peloponnesiakōn Spoudōn. Zavvou, Ε. 2013. Αγροικίες και εργαστηριακές εγκαταστάσεις στη Λακωνία των ρωμαϊκών χρόνων (1ος αι. π.Χ.-6ος αι. μ.Χ.), in A.D. Rizakis and I.P. Touratsoglou (eds) Villae Rusticae. Family and MarketOriented Farms in Greece under Roman Rule. Proceedings of an International Congress Held at Patrai, 23-24 April 2010 (Meletemata 68): 362-97. Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation. Zavvou, Ε. and Α. Maltezou 2010. Ρωμαϊκή κεραμική από τις λακωνικές πόλεις Γύθειο, Ασωπό και Βοιές, in D. Papanikola-Bakirtzi and N. Kousoulakou (eds) Κεραμική τής Ύστερης Αρχαιότητας από τον Ελλαδικό χώρο (3ος-7ος αι. μ.Χ.): Επιστημονική Συνάντηση, Θεσσαλονίκη, 12-16 Νοεμβρίου 2006: 76381. Thessaloniki: Ministry of Culture – University of Thessaloniki. Zissu, B. 1999. A hellenistic columbarium at Ziqim. Atiqot 38: 65-73. Zoumbaki, S. 1998-1999. Die Niederlassung römischer Geschäftsleute in der Peloponnes. Tekmeria 4: 11259.

141

Mortuary Practices at Roman Sparta Maria Tsouli Abstract: On the occasion of a recently excavated complex of monumental funerary buildings at the periphery of Sparta, by the villages of Voutianoi and Kladas, the issue of mortuary practices in Roman Sparta is discussed. An overview of topographical data concerning the major cemeteries of the Roman city is attempted, focusing mainly on new finds from the southern part of Sparta, namely the Southwest and the Southeast Roman Cemetery, as well as monumental funerary buildings excavated at the southern part of the city. This paper also discusses the presence of monumental funerary buildings in the Spartan countryside, which have been recently excavated, as the monuments of Kladas, within the framework of the construction of the major Public Railway of Leuktro-Sparta (sites ‘Psychraiika’ of Pellana and ‘Kalamakia’ of Kokinorachi village). Last but not least, the marble sarcophagi erected in the major funerary monument of Kladas, both of Attic and Laconian origin, are presented. This paper discusses the issue of workshops which created these sarcophagi and tries to throw some light, on the basis of recently discovered works of art of Spartan origin, to the extent of Attic imports in Sparta as well as to the activity of the Laconian workshop. Keywords: Laconia, Sparta, Roman, mortuary practices, cemeteries Monumental Funerary Buildings at the Periphery of Sparta

all monumental in form and materials, as well as the presence of three exceptional marble sarcophagi of Attic provenance or Attic style in the larger monument, constituting the first Roman funerary monument with sarcophagi being excavated in Laconia since the last 35 years, brought to light the issue of territoriality being indicated by funerary monuments, as well as the issue of monumentality and individuality being expressed in mortuary practices in Roman Sparta.

Within the framework of the important technical construction work of the National Road CorinthTripolis-Kalamata and Leuktro-Sparta, about 145 ancient sites, dated from the Neolithic to the Late Roman Periods, were discovered and excavated in Northern Laconia.1 Among them, quite exceptional is the discovery of three monumental funerary buildings,2 dated to the late 2nd-early 3rd century AD, erected by the modern villages of Kladas and Voutianoi, 3 km Northwest of Sparta, and by the ancient main road leading from Sparta to Megali Polis, Megalopolis, as well from Sparta to Tegea (Figure 1).3 Both earlier survey and recent archaeological evidence confirm the identification of this area with the ancient Thornax, referred to by ancient authors within the broader area of Sparta.4 The funerary buildings themselves,

The southern funerary building (Figure 1) is oriented NE-SW and measures 18.50 x 7.50/7.70 m.5 It is built of rubble with mortar and single layers of brick on all sides except for the entrances, east and west, where several layers of brick in the mixed technique are attested. The main façade is the west one and marble lintels are used for all the openings. The building is composed of two chambers, corresponding to two building phases, of which the east one is the earlier. Four built cist graves (Gr. 3, 4, 5, 6) were found at the east chamber, two built cist graves (Gr. 3, 5) and two rectangular pits covered with clay slabs (Gr. 2, 4) at the west one, dated by their finds to the 3rd century AD.

1 An overview of the antiquities of the Roman period, excavated within the framework of this important public work can be found at Tsouli 2015; Tsouli et al. 2018. For the antiquities of the Geometric to the Roman Periods see Papademetriou et al. 2015; Tsouli et al. 2017. For the Roman funerary monuments see also Tsouli 2016. 2 Sites ST 3, 4, 5, X.Th. 41+860 and Site ST 2/X.Th. 41+960-western sector. See Eleftheriou and Skagkos 2014; Tsouli 2013a; Tsouli 2014a; Tsouli 2014b; Tsouli 2014c; Tsouli 2015; Papademetriou et al. 2015; Tsouli 2016; Tsouli et al. 2017. 3 Papademetriou et al. 2015; Tsouli 2015; Tsouli et al. 2017; Tsouli et al. 2018. For the ancient road network from Sparta to Megalopolis and from Sparta to Tegea see also Pikoulas 2012: esp. 127-9, 456-7, 554-61, 601, 614-21; Pikoulas 1988: 200, 203-8, 210-16, 224-6; Pikoulas 2001: 325-30. 4 For the earlier survey conducted by the British School of Archaeology see Cavanagh et al. 1996: 355-7, site Η45 (‘Stou Geladari’). For recent archaeological evidence provided by excavation work in the area of the village Kladas see Tsiaggouris 2010: 518; Souchleris 2014. A number of sites excavated within the framework of the National Road Leuktro-Sparta, especially Sites ST 3, 4, 5, Χ.Th. 41+860, ST 2, ΧΘ 41+960-western part (Eleftheriou and Skagkos 2014; Tsouli 2013a; Tsouli 2014a; Tsouli 2014b; Tsouli 2014c; Tsouli 2015; Papademetriou et al. 2015; Tsouli 2016; Tsouli et al. 2017) and Site Η1-Η2, Χ.Th. 42+330

The second funerary monument lies to the north of the one mentioned above and is only partially excavated.6 It consists of layers of brick and mortar, in the opus testacaeum technique, having an entrance in antis. Facing the entrance an undecorated marble sarcophagus was found. and 42+39-42+520 (Maltezou 2013a; Maltezou 2013b; Papademetriou et al. 2015; Tsouli et al. 2017), should also be attributed to ancient Thornax. 5 Site ST 2, X.Th. 41+960, western sector: Tsouli 2014c: figs 114, 115. See also Papademetriou et al. 2015; Tsouli 2015; Tsouli 2016; Tsouli et al. 2017. 6 Site ST 2, X.Th. 41+960, western sector: Tsouli 2014c: figs 114, 115. See also Papademetriou et al. 2015; Tsouli 2015; Tsouli 2016; Tsouli et al. 2017.

142

Maria Tsouli: Mortuary Practices at Roman Sparta

Figure 1. National Road Leuctro-Sparta. Site ST 2, X.Th. 41+960, Ekklesies of Voutianoi. Aerial view of the southern funerary building and the ancient road leading from Sparta to Megalopolis and from Sparta to Tegea (© Photographic Archive of the Ephorate of Antiquities of Laconia).

143

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 2. National Road Leuctro-Sparta. Sites ST 3, 4, 5, X. Th. 41+860, Ekklesies of Voutianoi. View of the northern monumental funerary building with marble sarcophagi (© Photographic Archive of the Ephorate of Antiquities of Laconia).

material are used either on later building phases of the funerary monument itself or in domestic constructions of the Early Christian period excavated at the same area.10 Given the fact that the funerary monument had a marble krepis, we may assume that a number of these architectural members initially belonged to the upper part of the funerary construction,11 thus having a temple-like façade. Temple-like funerary monuments are represented on the Greek mainland especially in the 2nd century AD,12 a period in which our monument is also dated. Furthermore, this type of funerary building finds another parallel in the city of Sparta itself, as we will see below.

The most important monument of this complex (Figure 2) was erected 100 m north of the others.7 It measures 10.90 x 9.80 m, is constructed in the opus mixtum technique and bears niches in its interior.8 Furthermore, it has a monumental façade, bearing a 4-stepped krepis, consisting of marble blocks from an earlier building. Its floor is decorated with a mosaic pavement bearing geometric patterns, being made by the well-known Spartan Workshop of the late 2nd-early 3rd century AD.9 It is worth noting that a considerable number of architectural members of monumental form and

The Marble Sarcophagi of Kladas-Voutianoi

7 Sites ST 3, 4, 5, X.Th. 41+860 and Site ST 2, X.Th. 41+960-western sector. See Eleftheriou and Skagkos 2014: 537-46, 548-9, with analytical description; Tsouli 2013a; Tsouli 2014a; Tsouli 2014b; Tsouli 2014c; Papademetriou et al. 2015; Tsouli 2015; Tsouli 2016; Tsouli et al. 2017. 8 For analogous monumental funerary buildings at Sparta see the discussion below. Also, as far as the Southwestern Cemetery is concerned, Themos 1997: 175; Themos et al. 2009: Funerary Building ΙΙΙ, 263 and fig. 27.5; for the Southeastern Cemetery see Maltezou 2011b: 170-1, fig. 8 (Koulogeorgiou plot); Maltezou and Giannakaki 2010b: 486-8, fig. 43 (Student’s Studio-Mitris plot); for isolated funerary monuments excavated at the University of the Peloponnese plot see Vasilogamvrou et al. 2010: 484-5, fig. 41; for the so-called Altar of Psychiko see Giannakaki 2008: 23-4, fig.4; Maltezou and Giannakaki 2010a: 432-3. The presence of niches in Spartan funerary monuments is discussed in detail by Tsouli and Maltezou in print. 9 Panayotopoulou 1998: 112-13, 115.

As far as the marble sarcophagi of the northern funerary monument are concerned,13 we should note that the one of higher quality and certainly a product of the Attic Workshop is the sarcophagus bearing the depiction of the Amazonomachy (Figure 3). Its cover is Eleftheriou and Skagkos 2014: 538; Tsouli 2014c. Eleftheriou and Skagkos 2014: 538; Tsouli 2014c. 12 Flämig 2007: 47. 13 For a detailed description see Eleftheriou and Skagkos 2014: 540-6 and figs 9-13. 10 11

144

Maria Tsouli: Mortuary Practices at Roman Sparta

Figure 3. Ekklesies of Voutianoi, northern funerary building. Sarcophagus with depiction of the battle between Greeks and Amazons (© Photographic Archive of the Ephorate of Antiquities of Laconia).

of the kline-type, depicting a semi-seated man holding a papyrus. The relief figures on the sarcophagus are placed very close to each other, in groups of two or three, in a style broadly accepted to be dated around AD 220-230.14 The depiction of our sarcophagus finds close iconographic and stylistic parallels with other Attic sarcophagi of the same subject from Athens and Thessaloniki, dated by the 2nd half of the 3rd century AD.15 The theme of the battle between Greeks and Amazons is exceptionally popular16 amongst the

imported Attic sarcophagi found in Laconia,17 as well as in the Laconian workshop of sarcophagi sculpted in the Attic style18 that was active during the 2nd half of the 2nd century AD.19 Our sarcophagus finds exact parallels with the sarcophagus of the Archaeological Musuem of

Giuliano (1962: 17) already emphasizes the fact that the Attic sarcophagi found at Sparta constitute the biggest corpus of analogous imported Attic works of sculpture; also see Koch 1993: 249. For the discussion on the import either of the Attic works of sculpture themselves or of blocks of Pentelic marble, being sculpted at the area of Sparta itself by Attic artists, who also worked on local marbles, see Giuliano 1962: 16 and n. 11, 17; Koch 2012: 50. 18 It is broadly accepted that no other area of the Roman Empire presents so many copies of Attic sarcophagi as Laconia (Koch 1993: 248). For the Laconian workshops producing sarcophagi in the Attic style see Karapanagiotou 2009; Koch and Sichtermann 1982: 361-2, 474, pl. 400-4; Koch 1993: 246-50, with previous bibliography; Koch 2012: 48 and n. 67, 50. Worth noting, amongst the Laconian sarcophagi sculpted in the Attic style and depicting the battle between the Greeks and the Amazons, is the sarcophagus from Sinanbay (modern Sklavochori), now at the British Museum, inv. no. GR 1839.8-6.5 (see Smith 1904: no. 2304, fig. 42; Walker 1990: 41-2, no. 47 pl. 19; Devambez and Kauffmann-Samaras 1981: 617, no. 467). 19 Koch and Sichtermann 1982: 361-2; Koch 1993; Karapanagiotou 2009: 279. 17

Koch and Sichtermann 1982: 391, 458; Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1997: 167; Kintrup 1998: 209-10. 15 See, for example, the sarcophagus at the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki no. AMΘ 283 (Lemerle 1939: 315, pl. 64; Makaronas 1940: 475, pl. Ι; Koch and Sichtermann 1982: 389 ff. with n. 98, 99, 391 with n. 10, 458; Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1997: 164-8, with detailed bibliography, and figs 134-6; Kintrup 1998: 209-10, pl. 93.4) and the sarcophagus at the National Archaeological Museum no. EAM 2716 (Kallipolites 1958: no. 21; Giuliano 1962: 35, no. 101; Devambez and Kauffmann-Samaras 1981: 619, no. 502; Datsouli-Stavrides 1984: 185, pl. 26a). 16 The group of Laconian sarcophagi depicting the Amazonomachy is discussed by Karapanagiotou 2009: esp. n. 29, with earlier bibliography (12 sarcophagi in total). The author emphasizes on the preference of Laconian patrons for this theme, without relating the choice of this specific subject to any specific ideology of death or afterlife. 14

145

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 4. Ekklesies of Voutianoi, northern funerary building. Sarcophagus with depiction of scenes with Dionysus, satyrs and cupids. Dionysus and satyr from the back side of the sarcophagus. Cover of the Kline-type (bottom left) (photos: M. Tsouli).

papyrus, also bearing boxes with papyri and a dog beneath the footstool. The kline’s fulcrum is decorated with depictions of dolphins and geometric patterns. In the sculpted scene the field of the relief is rather empty, bearing separated figures, not in complexes. This fact, in combination with the presence of the Kline-type cover, which appeared in Attic sarcophagi around AD 160,23 points to a chronology of the Dionysus sarcophagus around AD 200. The cupid figures are of exceptional quality, with particular attention paid to the rendering of the hair and the face details. Similar details in the rendering of the hair present the cupids of the sarcophagus at the National Archaeological Museum EAM 1181.24 The field on both sides of the Dionysus sarcophagus, depicting vineyards and grapes, is common in Dionysus iconography, having parallels in Laconia, such as the sarcophagus of the

Thessaloniki ΑΜΘ 283,20 but it can also been compared to other sarcophagi from Laconia, as the one exhibited at the National Archaeological Museum of Athens ΕΑΜ 2716.21 The second sarcophagus, also of Attic production, bears a depiction of cupids with vineyards and grapes at the frontal side, and the depiction of Dionysus with a satyr at the back side (Figures 4, 5). The presence of scenes with Dionysus, satyrs and cupids confirms the preference of the Lakonian clientele to sarcophagi bearing this specific theme.22 The cover is also of the Kline-type (Figure 4), depicting a semi-seated man holding a It was found at the city of Thessaloniki itself. See Kintrup 1998: 20910, pl. 93.4; Koch and Sichtermann 1982: 389 ff. with n. 98, 99, 391 with n. 10, 458; Lemerle 1939: 315, pl. 64; Makaronas 1940: 475, pl. Ι; Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1997: 164-8, with detailed bibliography, and figs 134-6. 21 Datsouli-Stavrides 1984: 185, pl. 26a; Devambez and KauffmannSamaras 1981: 619, no. 502; Giuliano 1962: 35, no. 101; Kallipolites 1958: no. 21. 22 For the first catalogue of Attic works of Laconian provenance bearing scenes with Dionysus and his companions see Giuliano 1962: 36, nos 103-8. 20

Koch 2012: 38. Koch and Sichtermann 1982: 430 no. 9, pl. 457; Papagianni 2007: 2012, no. 38, pl. 3 and 10.5.

23 24

146

Maria Tsouli: Mortuary Practices at Roman Sparta

Figure 5. Ekklesies of Voutianoi, northern funerary building. Sarcophagus with depiction of scenes with Dionysus, satyrs and cupids. The cupids from the frontal side of the sarcophagus (photos: M. Tsouli).

Sparta Archaeological Museum25 and another one from Mistras.26

The Ganymedes sarcophagus was initially thought to be of Attic production.30 As a matter of fact, though, a careful examination on the iconography of Attic sarcophagi as well as on the stylistic details of our monument itself, point to the opposite. The fact that the rear side of the monument is undecorated is not characteristic of Attic sarcophagi. Secondly, the theme of the abduction of Ganymedes by the Eagle-Zeus does not find a single parallel in the extraordinary corpus of Attic sarcophagi, counting more than 100 different themes.31

The Ganymedes Sarcophagus The third sarcophagus, the earliest of all, depicts the abduction of Ganymedes by Zeus in form of an eagle, accompanied by cupids (Figure 6), with a sphinx and a centaur on short sides. The rear side is undecorated and the cover of the sarcophagus is in form of a two-isled roof.27 This type of cover disappears from Attic sarcophagi shortly after AD 160,28 pointing to a chronology of our sarcophagus not much later than the 3rd quarter of the 2nd century. This chronology is also implied by the rendering of the figures far from each other, not in complexes, a change in the style of Attic sarcophagi taking place at about AD 200.29

Depictions of Ganymedes with the Eagle-Zeus are found on sarcophagi from Rome,32 commonly on a central clipeus bearing depictions of cupids, eagles and games of cupids and gooses,33 or on a central scene where

Matz 1968: 118, no. 12, pl. 24; Koch and Sichtermann 1982: 420, 422. Matz 1968: no. 2, pl. 2-3; Koch and Sichtermann 1982: 420, 422. For the perception of the sarcophagus as the house of the dead, with a cover in the form of a two-isled roof, richly decorated with a cymation on its upper and lower sides, finding exact parallels at the earlier tradition of the 5th century BC, see Koch 1988: 155-60, pl. 30-3; Koch 2012: 52. 28 Koch and Sichterman 1982: 371-3; Stefanidou-Tiveriou 2007: 263-70; Koch 2012: 38. 29 For this stylistic differentiation concerning the organization of the

scenes and their relationship with the monument itself, leading to the so-called ‘Stilwandel’, see Koch 1978: 121, with earlier bibliography; Wiegartz 1975: 189, n. 168; Himmelmann places the transition to the latest group around AD 190 (Himmelmann and Wildschütz 1959: 25 ff), whereas Koch around AD 200 (Koch and Sichtermann 1982: 456-7; Koch 2012: 38). 30 ·Eleftheriou and Skagkos 2014: 540, 543. 31 Sichtermann 2012: 54. 32 For the theme of Ganymedes see Sichtermann 1977. 33 Schauenburg 1972: 515-16, Abb. 15-16.

25 26 27

147

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 6. Ekklesies of Voutianoi, northern funerary building. Sarcophagus with depiction of the abduction of Ganymedes by Zeus in form of an eagle, accompanied by cupids. Cover in form of a two-isled roof (top left) (photo: M. Tsouli).

which we may find one specimen depicting Ganymedes or Attis.39 As a matter of fact, modern research has connected the motif of Ganymedes with the eagle by his left side, next to his legs, with a partially preserved statuette from Sparta.40 The theme of Ganymedes being abducted by the eagle is rather rear,41 even though the motif, being developed on the vertical axis, is suitable for the decoration of trapezophora. As a matter of fact, one of the few examples depicting the abduction of Ganymedes is connected with the Laconian workshop.42 In the case of the sarcophagus from Ekklesies, Ganymedes and the eagle are depicted at the same height, the one looking straight to the other’s eyes,

Ganymedes is depicted taking care of the god‑eagle.34 As a matter of fact, the theme of Ganymedes being accompanied by the eagle is popular between the trapezophora35 of the same period being created either by the Attic Workshop,36 or by peripheral workshops working in the Attic style.37 The Laconian craftsmen also produced trapezophora in the Attic style,38 among For two examples from Rome, where Ganymedes is accompanied by the nymphs and marine deities, see Koch and Sichtermann 1982: 147, with earlier bibliography and fig. no. 162. 35 For the adoption of the themes of the Attic relief sarcophagi in the decoration of the trapezophora of the Attic Workshop, as well as their interrelation, see Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1993: 100 ff., 124 ff., 131 ff. 36 Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1993: 125-31, par. 2.7.1. (Ganymedes with the eagle) and 2.7.2. (Ganymedes abducted by the eagle), Cat. Nos. 119-35, 136-7, with earlier bibliography. 37 For the local workshops producing trapezophora in the Attic style see Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1993: 178-88. As far as the trapezophora depicting Ganymedes are concerned, we should mention that the items Cat. Nos. 136-7, in the motif of Ganymedes abducted by the eagle are considered to be products of a local workshop. Items Cat. Nos. 120, 121, 123, 125, 127 (poss.), 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, are cited as made by Pentelic marble and should, thus, be considered as Attic works. 38 Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1993: 178-81, Cat. Nos. 22, 25, 42, 47, 48, 50, 61, 62, 92, 99, 103, 107, 147, 149. The trapezophora Cat. Nos. 6, 25, 47, 48, 61, 147, 149, 162 are made from local, gray, medium-grained marbles, whereas the trapezophoron Cat. No. 42 is made by a sub-white, mediumgrained marble. Items Cat. Nos. 46, 49, 66 and 3, 137 and 148 are also 34

connected with the Laconian production (Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1993: 180-1). 39 Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1993: pl. 76. 40 Tod and Wace 1906: 147, no. 89; Dacos 1961: 364 ff; StefanidouTiveriou 1993: 126. 41 Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1993: par. 2.7.2., with detailed bibliography, and Cat. Nos. 136-7. Both items are products of local workshops. For the absence of this motif by the Attic repertoire as well as for indirect testimonies on the use of this motif by Attic artists see StefanidouTiveriou 1993: 180-1. 42 Athens, National Archaeological Museum, no. EAM 6299. Provenance unknown. See Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1993, Cat. No. 137, with earlier bibliography, and 180-1.

148

Maria Tsouli: Mortuary Practices at Roman Sparta

with the young boy turning his head to the left,43 having embraced the eagle and the latter having grasped him.

The upper part of the monument was not preserved. Three built cist graves which by the 3rd-4th century AD - later than the initial building phase of the monument, were placed by its sides, had incorporated marble slabs coming probably from its superstructure47 – thus giving the building a monumental form.

As far as the stylistic analysis of the sarcophagus is concerned; both the cupid-Herakles and the complex of Ganymedes and the eagle are rendered in an immature, provincial style, not reaching the quality of the Attic works. The anatomic details of the human body are not naturally rendered (e.g. cupid’s hand as it rises), and facial details do not show the strength of the Attic examples. The same provincial style is apparent in the rendering of the wings of the cupid, the eagle and the Sphinx from the short side of the sarcophagus, if compared with the known Attic examples.44 Finally, the macroscopic examination of the marble itself points not to the characteristic crystalloid, small-grained Pentelic marble, but to a marble of rather medium grained texture. As a conclusion, we strongly believe that the sarcophagus of Ganymedes is a work of medium quality, made by the Laconian Workshop in the Attic style.45

Of exactly the same type is the monument excavated quite far north at the Laconian countryside, at the site ‘Psycchraiika’ of Pellana village.48 There is a solid construction of rubble, measuring 9 to 6 m and up to 2.40 m high, which was used as a platform, on which rested a sarcophagus. Next to the monument a destruction layer was found, consisting of building material of its superstructure, among which many pieces of bricks. From the sarcophagus itself only part of the covering is preserved, depicting a semi-seated dressed human figure and dated to the 3rd century AD.49 To sum up the above evidence, there is a considerable number of Roman monumental funerary buildings erected by the main road between Sparta, Megalopolis and Olympia. The owners of these structures made a deliberate choice to erect their funerary monuments by the main land route in southern Peloponnese, given the practical and symbolic value of this location.50 Burial by this road was a strategic choice for tomb owners who aimed at status display: the erection of a funerary building by the main land route between Sparta, Megalopolis and Olympia ensured a suitable audience for one’s tomb.51

The erection of a complex of three monumental burial buildings at the site of Kladas, quite close to the city of Sparta itself, rises up a number of questions; firstly, do we have analogous mortuary monuments of the Roman period found at the Laconian countryside? Secondly, do these monuments find parallels at the city of Sparta itself? And lastly, by whom and why were these monuments erected at this specific place? Monumental Funerary Buildings by the National Road Leuktro-Sparta

Monumentality, Visibility and Social Associations of the Funerary Buildings of Ekklesies

The first question is rather an easy one to answer. Within the public work of the National Road LeuktroSparta a number of small cemeteries and isolated funerary monuments were excavated. Among them quite exceptional is the monument founded at the site ‘Kalamakia’ of Kokkinorachi village,46 at a distance less than 1.5 km from the site where the Kladas funerary monuments were erected. Close to a small cemetery of simple pit graves and a few built cist graves of the Late Roman period, an exceptional funerary building consisting of a rectangular base made of rubble, measuring 7 to 9 m and up to 1.20 m high was erected.

As far as the monumental buildings of Ekklesies are concerned, we should note that, since they were looted and deliberately distracted since antiquity, as well as partially reused in Early Christian times, we lack any epigraphic evidence as well as valuable evidence concerning the exact number of persons being buried there, the burial types adopted, the identity of the family who owned the tomb, the wealth of the grave goods deposited in the graves, the burial rites offered by the family of the dead etc. From what we can judge from the chronology of the sarcophagi and the number of graves erected in the northern and southern

The same turning of the youth’s head to the left is applied to the sculptured trapezophora bearing the motif of the abducted Ganymedes, referred to before, which are possibly attributed to Laconia. As a matter of fact, though, the posture of the legs is completely different. The garment of Ganymedes from Ekklesies also presents similarities to the above-mentioned trapezophora of possible Laconian origin, since both youths’ garments are fastened on the left shoulder. 44 Comparable with similar works of sculpture, as far as their chronology and iconography is concerned, such as the figures of the Sphinx and the griffins depicted at the sarcophagus from Mystras (Matz 1968: no. 2, pl. 2-3), and that from Partas (Matz 1968: no. 4, pl. 4). 45 Tsouli 2016. 46 National Road Leuktro-Sparta, Site Ε 2-5, X.Th. 43+580-43+700. See Tsouli and Tsouktakos 2014: figs 128-130. 43

Tsouli and Tsouktakos 2014, where it is supported, on the basis of excavation and comparative evidence, that the stone platform of the burial monument of Kokkinorachi initially had an upper-structure made of bricks and, most probably, marble architectural elements, forming the burial chamber itself. 48 National Road Leuktro-Sparta, Site 11D, Χ.Th. 25+940. See Maltezou 2011a: 191; Papademetriou et al. 2015. 49 Papademetriou et al. 2015; Tsouli 2016; Tsouli et al. 2017. 50 For the interpretation of place in mortuary practices see Parker Pearson 2009 (1999): esp. 124-41. 51 See the discussion for the case of Colonial Patras in Dijkstra 2017: esp. 44. 47

149

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

monuments, these were family burial structures, intended for collective burials and used for at least three generations. The location they were erected provided the largest audience for the monuments. In fact, it seems that the northern funerary structure with the sarcophagi was the only monumental tomb built in this particular area at the time of construction, which means that the monument actually dominated the area.

Greece, having long ago left Lycurgian laws inactive. Spartan society portrayed great differences in wealth and people were free to exhibit both wealth and individuality. In the case of mortuary manifestations,54 wealth and individuality were exhibited by the erection of impressive funerary monuments and the presence of grave stelae, either with the image and the name of the deceased or with an epigram.

The tomb design in the form of a temple on a marble krepis seems to draw from tomb types from the Hellenistic East. The decision to use an architectural style initially reserved for religious structures was significant: its association with divinity would elicit the feelings of reverence and esteem, and may well have worked as a status enhancer.52 Furthermore, the use of inhumation points to origins in Greek tradition and classical Greek mortuary practices. The mosaic pavement adorning the funerary monument, made by a local mosaic workshop, and the decision to initially place a sarcophagus of Laconian production in the family funerary structure, point to strong cultural influences with the local artistic production. Furthermore, the erection of more elaborate and expensive sarcophagi by the turning of the 3rd century probably point to an increase in wealth on behalf of the family who owned the monument.

Scholars have identified two major Roman cemeteries at Sparta;55 the North cemetery or Cemetery of Mousga,56 named by the nearby stream, and the Southwest Cemetery,57 exceeding by the stream of Magoulitsa, next to the city’s Hellenistic Walls, at the southwest part of the city. The results of the rescue excavations of the last 10 years have provided new evidence on the extent and character of the Southwest Cemetery and have led to the identification of another burial place, the Southeast Cemetery, as well as to a number of monumental funerary buildings at the periphery of the Roman city (Figure 7).58 The Southwest Cemetery of Sparta The Southwest cemetery of Roman Sparta occupies an area spreading at least 160 m.59 The area was used as a burial ground from the 2nd century BC up to the 5th century AD, with most of the graves belonging to the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD. Up to now, more than 770 graves have been located, the majority being build cists of stone, brick or mixed masonry with mortar. A fare number is ovoid or rectangular pits cut into the earth

Compared to other monuments of the imperial era erected in Sparta, the monument of Ekklesies is truly exceptional. Certain aspects of the tomb’s construction seem deliberately unique: strategic utilization of location, rich adornment with a mosaic pavement and a temple like façade on a marble krepis, placement of a group of relief sarcophagi of the highest quality, visibility and tomb architecture worked together to maximize the impact the tomb had on its audience. This tomb seems to have aimed almost exclusively at social competition to advance the interests of the family that erected it. Furthermore, the erection of a monument for afterlife at the area where the elite family had its landed properties and probably complexes for permanent or seasonal habitation, aims to an eternal reminder of their wealth in land, anchoring, at the same time, themselves to their ancestors and taking advantage of the symbolism with which this area was imbued.

On the issue of mortuary practices and spatial organization of cemeteries in Roman Sparta see  Papaefthimiou 1992: 10-14. Raftopoulou 1998: 133-40 (with maps); Kourinou 2000: 215-19; Zavvou et al. 2006: 425 and n.37; Flämig 2007: chapter Κ. Lakonien, nos 6974; Themos et al. 2009; Zavvou and Themos 2009: 119-21; Tsouli 2017; Tsouli and Maltezou in print. 55 On the issue of mortuary practices and spatial organization of cemeteries in the Geometric, Archaic, Classical and Hellenistic times, see Christou 1964; Papaefthimiou 1992: 10-14; Raftopoulou 1996; Raftopoulou 1998: 133-40 (with maps); Kourinou 2000: 215-19; Raftopoulou 2006: 409-10; Zavvou et al. 2006, sporadically; Zavvou and Themos 2009, sporadically; Tsouli 2013d; Tsouli and Maltezou in print. 56 Adamantiou 1931: 92-6; Adamantiou 1934: 123-6; Zavvou 1994: 1856; Themos and Zavvou 2000: 228-9; Themos and Zavvou 2001: 199-200, fig. 15; Themos et al. 2009: 262; Zavvou and Themos 2009: 119. 57 Discovered in 1994; see Raftopoulou 1994: 183 (Sparta-Mystras Road); 1998: 136. 58 For an overview of the finds of the last decade see Tsouli and Maltezou in print; Vasilogamvrou and Tsouli 2015; Vasilogamvrou et al. 2018. 59 Raftopoulou 1994: 183 (Sparta-Mystras Road); Raftopoulou 1998: 136. For the excavation of private plots by Lykourgou and Byzantiou Streets, at B.B. 146, see Bakourou et al. 1995: 166-7; Themos 1996: 11314 (Mavrides plot); Themos 2001: 197-9, fig. 14 (D. Zachariades and G. Demetrakopoulos plot); Themos 2004: 279; Themos 2006: 288-90, fig. 26 (G. Katsaris and Mavrides plot). Parts of the cemetery excavated up until 1995 were published by Raftopoulou (1998: 136), whereas the preliminary publication of the Southwest Roman Cemetery of Sparta, as far as the parts of it excavated until 2005 is concerned, is due to Themos et al. 2009. For the first presentation of the eastern part of the same cemetery, excavated in 2007, see Tsouli and Papagiannis 2010a; Tsouli and Papagiannis 2010b. 54

The Funerary Landscape of Roman Sparta Let us now turn to the city of Sparta itself. Roman Sparta was known at its time for still practicing the ancient austere, Lycurgian training of its youth (agoge).53 Apart from that, Roman Sparta was not different from other provincial cities in the roman-occupied Southern 52 53

See Fedak 1990: 66; Dijkstra 2017: 46. See Cartledge and Spawforth 1989, with extensive bibliography.

150

Maria Tsouli: Mortuary Practices at Roman Sparta

Figure 7. Topographical plan of Sparta. The plots where cemeteries and funerary monuments of the Roman period have been excavated are mentioned in blue triangles (drawing: M. Tsouli).

or in the conglomerate bedrock and covered with clay or stone slabs. There is also a limited number of infant pot-burials.

turn consisted of several burial constructions, either elaborate funerary buildings or simple clusters of graves, usually four in a row.

Most graves contained more than one primary or secondary burial. The only type of burial attested is inhumation in a more or less extended position, frequently accompanied by humble offerings such as clay lamps or drinking and eating pots (cups, dishes, bowls). Less frequent are glass unguentaria and bronze coins (charoneia). The majority of graves belonged to adults, whereas infants were placed either in potburials or in simple pit graves (in four cases).

Two types of funerary buildings are attested. The first one (TK I) is a dry-stone platform61 with two robbed, shallow cists, having close parallels with the monuments of Kokkinorachi and Pellana discussed above.62 The second type of funerary building (TK VIII, IX) is a rectangular construction surrounded by walls, forming an inner flat space between the graves.63 No The type should not be confused with the so-called Exedragräber type of Flämig (2007, type no. III. 5), since, in the second case, there is a three-stepped krepis made of stone plinths leading to the funerary chamber itself. 62 For the first overview of this funerary type discovered within the excavation and construction work of the National Road LeuktroSparta see Tsouli 2015, and Papademetriou et al. 2015. A similar example was recently found at the periphery of Roman Sparta, by the modern village of Magoula (Kontos plot, see Tsouli and Tsiaggouris 2010: 501-2, fig. 51). 63 The type is also known by a number of constructions at the Southwest Cemetery of Sparta, see Themos et al. 2009: 263, Funerary Buildings Ι, ΙΙ, ΙΙΙ, as well as a fourth building not indicated by number. Also see Flämig 2007: nos 72-74. For similar two-spaced funerary 61

The eastern part of the Southwest Cemetery was excavated in 2007 at Katsaris plot (Figure 8).60 An unpaved road 3 m wide led to the cemetery, in a Northeast – Southwest direction, forming a turning, thus separating 3 islets (Burial Islets I-III). These in Tsouli and Papagiannis 2010a; Tsouli and Papagiannis 2010b: 47680, figs. 36-7; Vasilogamvrou and Tsouli 2015; Vasilogamvrou et al. 2018.

60

151

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 8. Sparta, Katsaris plot. The eastern part of the Roman Southwest Cemetery (© Photographic Archive of the Ephorate of Antiquities of Laconia).

door or opening was located in the walls, and no roof tiles were retrieved from the destruction layers of the buildings, leaving thus open the question of their access and roofing.64

The evidence from the Southwest cemetery of Sparta clearly shows that funerary rites were taking place, either as sacrifices (this is perhaps the case of the slaughtered horses) or in the form of funerary banquets. The pots involved in these rites were probably ceremonially destroyed (broken) and deposited in certain areas. Only one case of ritual cancellation of a domestic object can until now be detected (A22/Gr. 31), that is a bowl that was used as a funerary gift, the base of which was marked by an X and two small post-fire holes. It seems likely that this is a case of ceremonial ‘killing’ of an item, in order to accompany the deceased to the afterlife. Some of these rites could have taken place in the various platforms of the cemetery.

A very interesting feature of the cemetery is the presence of platforms, associated directly with specific tombs or clusters of tombs and formed either on the cover of the cist graves, or as a small flat area in one narrow side of the surface of the grave. Furthermore, large amounts of animal bones (young or elder equidae, bovines with butcher markings) were retrieved from the interior of funerary buildings TK IV and TK VIII, which were looted and severely damaged since antiquity, and from the southern part of the road providing access to the cemetery.65 In some cases animal bones have been located with no traces of burning or charcoal. In the case of burial Islet II, though, were deposited large amounts of burnt pottery sherds,66 mixed with black soil, charcoal, and animal bones from ovicaprids. At the same context two restricted places for the deposition of organic material were located.67

We should also mention that only 6 out of the 75 graves excavated at Katsaris plot were marked with funerary stelae,68 indicative of a potential manifestation of individuality on behalf of the deceased’s family. The same low number of funerary stelae applies to most cemeteries of Sparta investigated so far.69 This fact should not be considered as indicative of ancient patterns of erecting tombstones, but rather as the result of post-antique destruction of the cemetery in question, as well as of most burial places of Sparta.

buildings from the North Cemetery of Sparta see Themos and Zavvou 2001: 199-200, fig. 15. 64 According to the typology of Flämig 2007, these buildings find close parallels to the Type no. ΙΙΙ.3. Gemauerte Kammergräber. As a matter of fact, though, since we do not know the way that funerary constructions at Katsaris plot were roofed, we may only describe them as built chambers. 65 See, explicitly, Tsouli and Papagiannis 2010a; Tsouli and Papagiannis 2010b: 480. 66 For the discovery of pottery with traces of burning, assumed to have been used on pyrae for the cooking and consumption of burial offerings, as well as for evidence of other burial practices in several parts of t he Southwest Cemetery see Themos et al. 2009: 264, fig. 27.7. 67 In both cases the earth was black and greasy, in the first containing

bones of a neonate ovicaprid and in the latter charcoal, bird bones (perhaps a dove) and a tooth of a young pig. 68 See, explicitly, Tsouli and Papagiannis 2010a; Tsouli and Papagiannis 2010b. 69 For the rest of the Southwestern Cemetery see Themos 1997; Themos et al. 2009. For the Southeastern Cemetery see Maltezou 2011b: 170-1 (Koulogeorgiou plot, where just one fragment of funerary inscribed stele was retrieved); Maltezou and Giannakaki 2010b: 486-8 (Student’s Studio-Mitris plot); the excavators mention no funerary stele. See also Tsouli and Maltezou in print.

152

Maria Tsouli: Mortuary Practices at Roman Sparta Funerary Monuments at the Southeastern part of the Roman City

century AD (Students’ Studio – Mitris plot) (Figure 9).79 At the north side of the field a monumental funerary building was erected, initially measuring 11.40 x 9.15 m, a very solid construction of rubble, mortar and broken tiles. In the interior of the building a single cist grave and fragments of a marble sarcophagus depicting children, probably cupids, were located. To this building we should attribute a number of architectural members, among which parts of architraves, a few fragments of sculpture and marble slabs located at its exterior, thus indicating the existence of a rich, elaborate mortuary building, probably belonging to the templelike type (Tempelgräber).80 South of this impressive funerary monument a cemetery had been founded, consisting of clusters of 19 built cist graves.81 All graves contained more than one primary or secondary burial. Furthermore, four pit graves covered with tiles were also located at this burial place, the one of them containing the only infant burial of the cemetery.

In the southeastern part of Sparta there was no organized cemetery of the Roman period excavated up until recently. At this area, though, a number of elaborate funerary buildings were located (Figure 7). The one of them, excavated at the plot of the University of Sparta,70 at the area called Psychiko, is a Π-shaped building,71 open at the north side, measuring 4.50 x 3.50 m and being constructed of rubble with mortar and some bricks incorporated into the masonry. The corners of the long west side are more solid than the rest of the building, thus forming a niche. This feature is also attested at some funerary constructions of the Southwest Cemetery,72 as well at a nearby monumental building, known up until now as the ‘Altar of Psychiko’ (Figure 7).73 This so-called altar is also a Π-shaped building,74 with its short sides turning slightly to the interior, measuring 17.60 x 14.10 m. Opposite to the entrance a broad platform was constructed, forming three niches to the side walls of the building. A cist grave of the Roman period was founded in front of it.75 During restoration and enhancement work which took place at the monument in the years 2006-2008,76 some fragments from a marble sarcophagus depicting children, probably cupids (MS 15911) and vineyards (MS 15910) were collected. Furthermore, excavators believe that a number of marble slabs with floral motifs and anthemia, found in the building and initially believed to have belonged to its external decoration, must also have belonged to a sarcophagus,77 thus pointing to the mortuary character of the monument.78

The Southeast Cemetery of Sparta At the area west of the Xenia Hill, at the Southeast part of the ancient city, on both sides of modern Hamaretou Str., parts of an organized cemetery were excavated (Figure 7). They bear two distinctive parts, as far as the typology of the graves and their chronology is concerned. The area east of Hamaretou Str. was initially used as a burial ground (Halkiadakis82 and Sourlis83 plots, B.B. 55), from the late 2nd-early 1st century BC to the 2nd century AD. Most of the 24 graves located here are simple pits cut in the conglomerate bedrock, occasionally covered with roof tiles, with only two examples of the type of the built cist grave (Gr. XIX and Gr. III, Sourlis plot). Furthermore, all but four examples follow the N-S or NW-SE orientation.

Northwest of the aforementioned monuments (Figure 7), there came to light a cemetery of the late 2nd and 3rd

Most graves contained just one adult burial. The only type of burial attested is inhumation in a more or less extended position, frequently accompanied by offerings such as clay lamps or clay unguentaria, but not vessels used for drinking and eating.84 Less frequent are glass unguentaria and ivory pins. Even though no bronze coins (charoneia) were discovered, the considerable number of metal offerings, such as a silver leaf-shaped

Tsouli and Maltezou in print; Vasilogamvrou et al. 2010: 484-6, fig. 42; Vasilogamvrou and Tsouli 2015; Vasilogamvrou et al. 2018. 71 It is supposed that the walls of the short sides of the building ended in antis. For a similar example from the area of modern Magoula see Spyropoulos 1983: 94, fig. 2, tables 43a-b, 44a; Flämig 2007: 172-3, no. 70. 72 See Themos 1997: 175; Themos et al. 2009: 263, fig. 27.5 (Burial Structure ΙΙΙ). For other examples from the Southeast Cemetery of Roman Sparta see Tsouli and Maltezou [in print] and in this paper below. For other examples from the rest of Greece see Flämig 2007: Chap.ΙΙΙ.3. 73 Christou 1962a: 116-21; 1962b: 137-44; 1963: 86, fig. 101a. 74 Christou (1962a: no. 70) has suggested the identification of the monument either with the Sanctuary of Zeus Plousios referred by Pausanias (Paus. ΙΙΙ 19, 7) or with a shrine erected next to the road leading to Amyklai. For the identification of the ‘altar of Psychiko’ with the so-called Phoibaion, referred to by ancient authors, see Kourinou 2000: 199-210; Cartledge and Spawforth (1989: 142) have suggested that this is a ‘Roman burial within a monumental structure of some kind’, whereas Nafissi (1991: 333) identifies it with a club (Leschi). 75 The cist graved was revealed again during enhancement work taking place in the monument in the year 2006. It is depicted in Giannakaki 2008: 24. 76 Giannakaki 2008: 22-4; Maltezou and Giannakaki 2010a: 432-3. 77 See Giannakaki 2008: 24. Furthermore, Tsouli and Maltezou in print, and n. 34, with extensive analysis. 78 Tsouli and Maltezou in print. 70

Maltezou and Giannakaki 2010b: 486-8, fig. 43; Tsouli and Maltezou in print: figs 6, 7, 8; Vasilogamvrou and Tsouli 2015; Vasilogamvrou et al. 2018. 80 For monuments of this type see Flämig 2007: type no. III. 8, Tempelgräber. 81 They present considerable similarities to the typology of graves of the Southwest Cemetery. See Themos 1997: 174-6, fig. 6, 7; Themos 2006: 288-90, fig. 26; Themos et al. 2009. 82 Tsouli 2013b: figs 6-9; Vasilogamvrou and Tsouli 2015; Tsouli and Maltezou in print: figs 9, 10. 83 Tsouli 2013c: fig. 8; Vasilogamvrou and Tsouli 2015; Tsouli and Maltezou in print: fig. 9. 84 For an analytical description of the graves and their finds see Tsouli 2013b and 2013c. 79

153

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 9. Sparta, Students’ Studio – Mitris plot. Part of the Southeast Cemetery with an elaborate funerary building (© Photographic Archive of the Ephorate of Antiquities of Laconia).

fibula, is noteworthy (Figure 10).85 Even though the graves themselves are simple constructions, the presence of specific valuable grave goods, indicating considerable mortuary practices and rituals, is quite impressive.86 To be more explicit, we should mention the finding of sheets of gold to about 30% of the graves of this cemetery,87 which should be attributed to the decoration of garments or of the deceased’s head (Figure 10). The finding of iron nails and fragments of wood in certain graves points to the existence of wooden coffins or stretchers,88 a feature also attested in the Roman Southwest Cemetery of Sparta.89

It seems that by the 2nd century AD the burial place was moved further to the west. Part of it was excavated at Koulogeorgiou plot (Hamaretou Str., B.B. 49A) (Figure 7),90 bearing graves identical, as far typology and masonry is concerned, to the graves of the Southwest Cemetery. Both funerary buildings and simpler burial constructions, usually clusters of cist graves, are attested, oriented NE-SW or NW-SE, rarely N-S. Simple pits covered with roof tiles and a few infant pot-burials are also attested. This part of the cemetery was used by the late 1st – early 2nd century AD to the 4th century AD. Quite impressive for its dimensions and its solid masonry is a funerary building revealed at the west part of the excavated area. Rectangular in shape, measuring 7.50 to 4.80 m but only partially preserved, it had two storeys, the upper of them raising above ground, the lower one bearing niches. Beneath the chamber tomb a row of 6 parallel cist graves was revealed. Funerary monuments of this type are also common at the Southwest Cemetery of Sparta.91

Grave ΧΙ, Halkiadakis plot, inv.no. MS 19082 depicted in Tsouli 2013b: fig. 9 and Tsouli and Maltezou in print: figs 11a, b. For this type of fibula see Malama and Darakis 2008: 436-7. The burial of Grave VII, Halkiadakis plot, was accompanied by a bronze spline with an iron handle (MS 19081). Moreover, two bronze splines were found in Grave V of Sourlis plot. 86 The same applies for the Hellenistic and Roman cemeteries of Patras. In this case, the valuable grave goods accompanying many Hellenistic tombs give their place, in the Early Roman period, to a general decline in the wealth of the grave goods, countered by an increased expenditure on tomb construction; see, recently, Dijkstra 2017: 41-2. 87 Grave VII: inv.no. MS19085. Grave VIII: inv.no. MS 19086, 19087, 19088. Grave Χ: inv.no. MS 19089. Grave XV: inv.no. MS 19090. Grave XVI: inv. no. 19077. Grave XVIII: inv.no. MS 19091. Grave IV, Sourlis plot: inv. no. MS 19075. Grave V, Sourlis plot: inv.no. MS 19076. 88 Grave V: thirteen (13) parts of iron nails (inv.no. MS 19084) depicted in Tsouli 2013b: fig. 8, and Tsouli and Maltezou in print: fig. 11e. Grave V: four (4) parts of iron nails (inv.no. MS 19083) and traces of charcoal. Grave Χ: ten (10) parts of iron nails, depicted in Tsouli and Maltezou in print: fig. 11e. 89 Themos et al. 2009: 264 (a single example). For another example 85

from the Southwest Cemetery (Katsaris plot on Lykourgou, IX Merarchias and Byzantiou Streets), see Kakourou 2010: 476-7. 90 Maltezou 2011b: 170-1, fig. 8; Vasilogamvrou and Tsouli 2015; Tsouli and Maltezou in print: figs 12, 13. 91 For another example, smaller in size, see Themos 1997: 175; Themos et al. 2009: 263, fig. 27.5 (Burial Building ΙΙΙ). Also Flämig 2007: no. 73.

154

Maria Tsouli: Mortuary Practices at Roman Sparta

Figure 10. Sparta, Halkiadiakis and Sourlis plots. Findings from Roman pit graves: sheets of gold, a silver leaf-shaped fibula and iron nails (photos: M. Tsouli).

The Funerary Monument of Karavassos plot and Hyakinthis Road

to express the hypothesis that the central area of the chamber was intended for more elaborate graves than the ones discovered so far, perhaps, for example, for marble sarcophagi.

During a most recent rescue excavation, conducted in October 2016 at Karavassos plot by modern Kap. Zaharia Str.,92 just at the area where the Hellenistic Wall is supposed to have been passing (Figure 11), an impressive funerary monument came to light. Unfortunately, only its eastern part was excavated, measuring 10.50 m in length (N-S) (Figure 12). Structural details indicate that its width was more or less the same, having niches at each corner, thus resembling very closely the dimensions and typology of the funerary monument of Ekklesies discussed above. Despite its quite large size, only two cist graves were found at the south and the southeast niches, the one of them containing as many as 10 skeletons placed the one on top of the other, as well as a pile of removed bones and three skulls by the east niche. The considerable size of the monument, combined with the fact that the central area of the burial chamber was left free from cist graves, allows us 92

In any case, this is a very important funerary monument, being located very close to the Aphetais Road, the most important road of ancient Sparta, following, generally, the route of modern Agesilaou Str. at this area.93 Given the fact that the Karavassos monument is an impressive one, analogous in size only with monuments at the periphery of the Roman urban area, we may strongly support the hypothesis that it had been erected extra muros, outside the Hellenistic Fortification Wall of For the route of the Aphetais Road see Kourinou 2000: 131-9, with references to previous researchers; Stibbe 1989: 66-9; Stibbe (1994: 68-71), supports the hypothesis that the route of the Aphetais Road coincides generally with the route of modern Gortsologou Street and, in its southern part, with Agesilaou Str.; Nestorides (1892: 38-48, 1056) and Overbeek (1993: 32-4, 39-41, 51-3) have proposed that Aphetais Road followed the route of modern Agesilaou Street, ending by the bridge at the area of St. Nikolas Church. For evidence of an organized cemetery of the Classical period, located at this area, see Tsouli 2013d.

93

Tsouli 2017.

155

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 11. Topographical plan of Sparta. The routes of Aphetais Road and Hyakinthis Road as well as Karavassos plot are mentioned in color (drawing: M. Tsouli).

Sparta.94 We may also suppose that access to the monument was possible through the South Gate of the city wall,95 where the Aphetais Road is supposed to have ended (Figure 11). Furthermore, its position gives us a strong indication on the route of the Hellenistic Fortification Wall at this part of the city, which, up until now, was based only on the preserved parts of its foundation, visible only by the early 1830s, south of the Evangelistria Hill, as well as on stamped tiles coming from the superstructure of the fortification wall, found by Evangelistria Hill and the Gymnasia Hill.96

As a matter of fact, we may ‘shift’ the hypothetically placed line of the Hellenistic Wall a little bit to the north, so that the Karavassos funerary monument is placed extra muros (Figure 11).97 Furthermore, on the base of both the descriptions of ancient authors and the topographical,98 and most recent archaeological evidence, given from rescue excavations at this area of the city,99 we should express the hypothesis100 that the Karavassos monument was erected facing the very Komnenos 1898: 255-9, with topographical sketch; Kourinou 2000: 3944; on the stamped tiles as evidence for the route of the Hellenistic Walls, see Wace 1905-1906b and 1906-1907b; at the southern part of the city stamped tiles were found at Evangelistria Hill (Wace 19061907: 2, pl. 1, General Plan F16), at the Gymnasia Hills (Wace 19061907b: 2, pl. 1, General Plan H19), and, in great numbers, at the Xenia Hill (Wace 1906-1907b: 2, pl.1, General Plan L19). 97 Tsouli 2017. 98 See Kourinou and Pikoulas 2011-2012: 163, with previous bibliography. 99 For the excavation of parts of an Archaic road, being interpreted as the road leading from Sparta to Amyklai, see Zavvou et al. 2006: 41314 (Technical Lyceum of Sparta plot, B.B. 252), and Tsiaggouris 2011 (Katsaris ATKE plot, Bizaniou Str., B.B. 254). See also Vasilogamvrou and Tsouli 2015; Vasilogamvrou et al. 2018. Especially, Tsouli 2017. 100 Tsouli 2017.

Tsouli 2017. Intra muros burials in Roman Sparta, erected for distinguished individuals, such as the heroon of C. Iulius Eurykles Herculanus, were certainly an exception in Roman times (see the discussion by Fouquet 2017: 122). 95 The South Gate of the Hellenistic Wall, where the Aphetais Road must have ended, is proposed to have been located at the area north/ north-east of St. Nikolas Church. See Kourinou 2000: 73-4 (and 84-8 for the bridge next to St. Nikolas), with earlier bibliography. For opposite opinions see Armstrong et al. 1992: 305D, 309 no. 5. 96 On the course of Sparta’s Hellenistic Wall fundamental are the studies by Wace (1905-1906a; 1906-1907a); also see Blouet 1834: pl. 46, and, as far as the southern part of the city is concerned, pl. 46 KK (preserved, visible parts of the Walls south of the Evangelistria Hill); Curtius 1852: II, 226, pl. X; Bursian 1868-1872: 119-20, pl. III; 94

156

Maria Tsouli: Mortuary Practices at Roman Sparta

important Hyakinthis Road,101 (Figure 11) a sacred road (hiera hodos), the central cart-road heading to the South, leading from Sparta, via the South Gate of the city wall, to Amyklai and the Sanctuary of Apollo.102 Mortuary Practices, Competitive Display and Strategic Action at Roman Sparta To sum up the above evidence, as far as the city of Sparta is concerned, recent excavations have provided us with valuable evidence concerning the issue of the placement of cemeteries at the southern part of the Roman city, the boundaries of the urban area, the line of its fortification wall of Hellenistic times, as well as the city’s road network. The location of the funerary monument at Karavassos plot and of the Southeast Cemetery west of the Xenia Hill, allow us to shift the line of the Fortification Wall a little bit to the north and considerably to the west, respectively, in these parts of the city. Furthermore, the burial monuments from the Southeast Cemetery show variation in their types, in accordance to types of monuments erected extra muros east of the Roman city. These differentiations, in combination with the presence of expensive marble sarcophagi and valuable grave offerings even in graves of humble types (pit graves) probably indicate an analogous differentiation regarding the social status of the monuments’ owners. Figure 12. Sparta, Karavassos plot. Part of a Roman monumental funerary building (photo: M. Tsouli).

Furthermore, the overview of the funerary landscape of Roman Sparta, presented so far, addresses some interesting remarks on the issue of mortuary practices. The remains of burials of the Late Hellenistic period (2nd-1st century BC), excavated both at the Southwest and the Southeast Cemetery, confront to the general norm attested at Sparta during this period, where the decreased expenditure on tomb construction is encountered by a significant expenditure in the deposition of wealthy grave goods.

to inhumations and the absence of cremations, implying preference to traditional Greek mortuary practices. Even after the Roman occupation, the inhabitants of the city made a deliberate choice to erect their funerary monuments next to or on top of the simple Hellenistic graves. Since burial places of previous generations of a specific family or of a society as a whole can be considered as mnemotopes imbued with local history,104 we can assess that, in our case as well, the close spatial location with the graves of their ancestors was probably motivated by the symbolic value of the place, symbolizing the history of Sparta and serving as a site for local civic identity.

A short time after the last burials in Hellenistic style occurred, brick built tombs in the opus romanus, monumental in form and construction, were erected at exactly the same place. Whilst in the Late Hellenistic period the graves in these cemeteries were belowground,103 the monuments of the Roman period were aboveground and monumental, indicating a strong desire for display. As a matter of fact, though, the combination of tomb types and construction methods, following the opus romanus, contradicts the persistence

The presence of isolated, elaborate funerary monuments at the periphery of Roman Sparta, such as the ones at the area of Psychiko (Psychiko monument), at the University of the Peloponnese, Studio Mitris and Karavasos plots, deserves special attention. We can asses that some members of the socio-political elite of the Roman period employed strategic funerary

101 For the name of the ancient road leading from Sparta to Amyklai, see Kourinou and Pikoulas 2011-2012: 166. The name was once noted (Athen. IV 173f): ‘εν τηι Λακωνικήι φησίν επί της οδού καλουμένης Υακινθίδος...’ 102 For the route of the Hyakinthis Road see, explicitly, Kourinou and Pikoulas 2011-2012. New evidence is provided by Tsouli 2017. 103 For two-storey, monumental family tombs of the Hellenistic period discovered at Sparta see Raftopoulou 1998; Tsouli 2013d.

104

157

See the discussion in Dijkstra 2017: 44.

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece Bibliography

behavior to anchor their presence in the Roman city and to claim a position among the higher echelons of the Laconian hierarchy. They made a deliberate choice to erect their funerary monuments not in the organized cemeteries at the borders of the city, but in isolated monuments who dominated the area and quite literally overshadowed the graves inside the cemeteries.

Adamantiou, A. 1931. Ανασκαφαί εν Σπάρτηι. Prakt: 916. Adamantiou, A. 1934. Ανασκαφαί εν Σπάρτηι. Prakt: 1238. Armstrong, P., W.G. Cavanagh and G. Shipley 1992. Crossing the river: observations on routes and bridges in Laconia from the Archaic to Byzantine periods. ABSA 87: 293-310. Bakourou, A., D. Charalambous and E. Pantou 1995. Σπάρτη. Οδός Λυκούργου (οικόπεδο Μαυρίδη). ArchDelt 50, Chronika: 166-67. Blouet, A. 1834. Expédition Scientifique de Morée, Ordonnée par le Gouvernement Française. Architecture, Sculptures, Inscriptions et Vues du Peloponnese, des Cyclades et de l Attique. Vol. II. Paris. Bursian, C. 1868-1872. Geographie von Griechenland, II. Leipzig. Cartledge, P. and A. Spawforth 1989. Hellenistic and Roman Sparta: A Tale of Τwo Cities. London. Cavanagh, W.G., J. Crouwel, R. Catling and G. Shipley (eds) 1996. The Laconia Survey. London. Christou, Ch. 1962a. Ανασκαφαί Σπάρτης. Ψυχικό. Prakt: 116-21. Christou, Ch. 1962b. Σπάρτη. Ψυχικό. Ergon: 137-44. Christou, Ch. 1963. Α. Λακωνία. Ανασκαφαί. 3. Ψυχικόν Σπάρτης. ArchDelt 18, Chronika: 86. Christou, Ch. 1964. Σπαρτιατικοί αρχαϊκοί τάφοι και επιτάφιος μετ’ αναγλύφων αμφορεύς του λακωνικού εργαστηρίου. ArchDelt 19, Meletai: 123-63. Curtius, E. 1852. Peloponnesos. Eine Historischgoegraphische Beschreibung der Halbinsel, II, Gotha. Dacos, N. 1961. Le Pâris d´ Euphranor. B. Les adaptations en Ganymède. 4. Le Ganymède de Sparte. BCH 85: 371-99. Datsouli-Stavrides, A. 1984. Ρωμαϊκά γλυπτά από το Εθνικό Μουσείο. ArchEph 123: 161-90. Devambez, P. and A. Kauffmann-Samaras 1981. Amazones, LIMC I: 586-653. Dijkstra, T. 2017. Strategies of remembering in the creation of a colonial society in Patras, in Dijkstra et al. (eds): 37-48. Dijkstra, T., I.N.I. Kuin, M. Moser and D. Weidgenannt (eds) 2017. Strategies of Remembering in Greece under Rome. Leiden: Sidestone Press. Eleftheriou, E. and N. Skagkos 2014. Βουτιάνοι Λακωνίας, Εκκλησιές: η ανασκαφική έρευνα. Ι. Horos 22-25 (2010-2013): 535-60. Fedak, J. 1990. Monumental Tombs of the Hellenistic Age: A Study of Selected Tombs from the Pre-Classical to the Early Imperial Era. Toronto. Fouquet, J. 2017. Heroes of their times. Intra-mural burials in the urban memorial landscapes of the Roman Peloponnese, in Dijkstra et al. (eds): 111-24. Giannakaki, Ch. 2008. Tα Μνημεία του Ευρώτα. Hellenic Ministry of Culture-5th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities, Sparta.

It is noteworthy that the funerary monument of Karavasos plot is deliberately located very close to the urban perimeter, being the only monumental tomb built in this particular area at the time of construction, thus dominating the area. Nevertheless, it was the first monument that citizens and visitors encountered when leaving the city towards the south, and the last to be seen before entering it. It may not be a coincidence that the tombs of the Eurypontid kings of Sparta were erected at this part of the city, very close to the city walls.105 The position of the Roman family tomb at this specific position, at an important, meaningful place, would recall the city’s glorious past and would connect the Roman elite to the old kings of classical Sparta. What is equally important, the competitive display characterizing the tomb’s architecture was aimed at enhancing the visibility of its owners on the public space. Such strategic action was not limited to the urban center: the presence of monumental funerary buildings at the periphery of Sparta and at the nearby areas of Magoula, Kladas and Kokkinorachi indicate a conscious choice concerning the erection of impressive funerary monuments, having many parallels in monumental funerary architecture of the social elites in the Peloponnese and mainland Greece. Those who erected these structures were most probably Laconian elite families of the higher social and economic status,106 having their landed properties and probably residences for permanent or seasonal habitation in form of villae suburbanae or villae rusticae, at the area where they chose to erect their funerary monuments.107 The Laconian social elites chose to erect these structures for their afterlife close to their farmlands, as an eternal reminder both of their wealth in land and, secondly, of the political and social privileges they were awarded during their life.

Pausanias ΙΙΙ, 12 8. Eleftheriou and Skagkos 2014: 548; Papademetriou et al. 2015; Tsouli 2016. 107 Tsouli et al. 2018. On the issue of the existence of luxurious funerary monuments at the periphery of Roman Sparta, far beneath the organized cemeteries, their connection with large farms at the fertile plain of the Eurotas river and the discussion concerning the existence of permanent residences of the rich landowners at the farms themselves, see also Cartledge and Spawforth 1989: 142; TSoulid and Maltezou in print; Zavvou 2013: 386-7. 105 106

158

Maria Tsouli: Mortuary Practices at Roman Sparta

Flämig, K. 2007. Grabarchitektur der römischen Kaiserzeit in Griechenland. Rahden/Westf. Giuliano, A. 1962. Il Commercio dei Sarkophagi attici. Rome. Himmelmann-Wildschütz, N. 1959. Fragment eines attischen Sarkophags. MarbWPr: 25-40. Kakourou, Ch. 2010. Σπάρτη. Συμβολή των οδών Λυκούργου, 9ης Μεραρχίας και Βυζαντίου (Ο.Τ. 146, οικόπεδο Γ. Κάτσαρη). ArchDelt 61, Chronika: 476-7. Kallipolites, B. 1958. Χρονολογική Κατάταξις των Μετά Μυθολογικών Παραστάσεων Αττικών Σαρκοφάγων της Ρωμαϊκής Εποχής. Athens. Karapanagiotou, A.V. 2009. New fragment of the Amazon sarcophagus from Laconia, in W.G. Cavanagh, C. Gallou and M. Georgiadis (eds) Sparta and Laconia. From Prehistory to Pre-Modern, Sparta 17-20 March 2005, Proceedings (Annual of the British School at Athens Studies 16): 279-84. Kintrup, C. 1998. Chronologie der attischen Amazonomachie-Sarkophage, in G. Koch (ed.) Akten des Symposiums ‘125 Jahre Sarkophag-Corpus: 206-15. Marburg. Koch, G. 1988. Zum Klassizismus auf attischen Sarkophagen des 2. und 3. Jahrhunderts n.Chr., in ΧΙΙ. International Congress of Classical Archaeology, Athens 4-10 September 1983, Proceedings, vol. Γ’: 55-160. Athens. Koch, G. 1993. Σαρκοφάγοι της ρωμαϊκής αυτοκρατορικής εποχής στην Αρκαδία και τη Λακωνία, in O. Palaga and W.D.E. Coulson (eds) Sculpture from Arcadia and Laconia: 245-250. Oxford. Koch, G. 2012. Οι αττικές σαρκοφάγοι και η σημασία τους, in T. Stefanidou-Tiveriou, P. Karanastasi. D. Damaskos (eds) Classical Tradition and Renovation in the Sculpture of Roman Greece: 35-56. Thessaloniki. Koch, G. and H. Sichtermann 1982. Römische Sarkophage. Handbuch der Archäologie. München. Komnenos, P. 1898 (1999). Λακωνικά Χρόνων Προϊστορικών τε και Ιστορικών, Vol. 5 (2nd ed.) (Etaireia Lakonikon Spoudon, Supplement 3). Athens. Kourinou, E. 2000. Σπάρτη. Συμβολή στη Μνημειακή Τοπογραφία της. Athens. Kourinou, E. and Y. Pikoulas 2011-2012. The Access to Amyklaion. Mouseio Benaki 11-12: 163-7. Lemerle, P. 1939. Chronique des fouilles et découvertes en Grèce en 1939. Macédoine, Thrace, Salonique. BCH 63: 313-16. Makaronas, X.I. 1940. Μακεδονικά Ι. Thessaloniki. Malama, P. and K. Darakis 2008. Νεκροταφείο Ρωμαϊκών Χρόνων στα Νέα Κερδύλλια Σερρών. Thessaloniki. Maltezou, A. and Ch. Giannakaki 2010a. Aνάδειξη – ανάπλαση αρχαιολογικών χώρων και μνημείων της περιοχής του Ευρώτα στη Σπάρτη. ArchDelt 61, Chronika: 432-3. Maltezou, A. and Ch. Giannakaki 2010b. Σπάρτη. Οδoί Παυσανίου και Επισκόπου Δανιήλ (Ο.Τ. 17, οικ. Students’ Studio-Μήτρη). ArchDelt 61, Chronika: 4868.

Maltezou, A. 2011a. Περιοχή Πελλάνας. Χ.Θ.25+925. ArchDelt 62, Chronika: 191. Maltezou, A. 2011b. Σπάρτη, Συμβολή των οδών Χαμαρέτου-Ορέστη (Ο.Τ.49Α, οικόπεδο «Βασίλης Κουλογεωργίου & ΣΙΑ Ε.Ε.»). ArchDelt 62, Chronika: 170-1. Maltezou, A. 2013a. Αυτοκινητόδρομος ΛεύκτροΣπάρτη. Χ.Θ. 42+330, Κούρτη ή Χούνη Κλαδά. ArchDelt 68, Chronika: 163-5. Maltezou, A. 2013b. Αυτοκινητόδρομος ΛεύκτροΣπάρτη. Χ.Θ. 42+390 έως 42+520, Θέση Κούρτη ή Χούνη Κλαδά. ArchDelt 68, Chronika: 165-9. Matz, F. 1968. Die Dionysische Sarkophage. Berlin. Nafissi, M. 1991. La Nascita del Kosmos. Studi sulla Storia e la Società di Sparta. Perugia. Nestorides, K. 1892 (1999). Τοπογραφία της Αρχαίας Σπάρτης, εν Αθήναις (2nd ed.) (Etaireia Lakonikon Spoudon, Supplement no. 4). Overbeek, M. 1993. The Topography of Ancient Sparta. Unpublished Master dissertation, University of Amsterdam. Panayotopoulou, A. 1998. Roman mosaics from Sparta, in W.G. Cavanagh, S.E. Walker (eds) Sparta in Laconia, Proceedings of the 19th British Museum Classical Colloquium, London 6-8.12.1995 (BSA Studies 4): 112-24. London. Papagianni, E. 2007. Αττικές Σαρκοφάγοι με Ερωτιδείς και Γιρλάντες. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Thessaloniki. Papademetriou, A., M. Tsouli, A. Maltezou and L. Souchleris 2015. Νέες αρχαίες θέσεις στη βόρεια Λακεδαίμονα, από τους γεωμετρικούς έως τους ύστερους ρωμαϊκούς χρόνους, in 9th International Congress of Peloponnesian Studies, Nauplio, 30 October -2 November 2015 (in print). Papaefthimiou, W. 1992. Grabreliefs späthellenistischer und römischer Zeit aus Sparta und Lakonien. München. Parker Pearson, M. 2009 (1999). The Archaeology of Death and Burial. Stroud. Pikoulas, Y. 1988. Η Νότια Μεγαλοπολιτική Χώρα από τον 8ο π.Χ. ως τον 4ο αιώνα (Horos, e Megali Vibliothiki 1). Athens. Pikoulas, Y. 2001. Το οδικό δίκτυο της Λακωνίας: Χρονολόγηση, απαρχές και εξέλιξη, in V. Mitsopoulos-Leon (ed.) Forschungen in der Peloponnes, Akten des Symposions anläßlich der Feier «100 Jahre Osterreichisches Archaologisches Institut Athen», Athen 5.3.–7.3.1998 (O.A.I., s.b. 38): 325-30. Athens. Pikoulas, Y. 2012. Tο Οδικό Δίκτυο της Λακωνικής (Horos, e Megali Vibliothiki). Athens. Raftopoulou, S. 1994. Έργα ΔΕΥΑΣ Σπάρτης. ArchDelt 49, Chronika, Β1: 183-4. Raftopoulou, S. 1996. Ταφές της εποχής του Σιδήρου στη Σπάρτη, in Proceedings of the 5th International Congress of Peloponnesian Studies, Argos-Nauplio 6-10.9.1995, Vol. B' (Peloponnesiaka Suppl. 22): 272-82. Athens. Raftopoulou, S. 1998. New Finds from Sparta, in W.G. Cavanagh and S.E. Walker (eds) Sparta in Laconia, 159

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Proceedings of the 19th British Museum Classical Colloquium (Annual of the British School at Athens Studies 4): 125-40. Nottingham. Sichtermann, H. 1977. Der Ganymed Sarkophag von San Sebastiano. AA 1977: 460-72. Schauenburg, K. 1972. Ganymed und Hahnenkämpfe auf römischen Sarkophagen. AA 1972: 501-16. Souchleris, L. 2014. Υποέργο «Αρχαιολογικές έρευνες και εργασίες» του έργου «Κατασκευή δικτύου αποχέτευσης ακαθάρτων λυμάτων στις Τοπικές Κοινότητες Κλαδά, Κοκκινόραχης και Αφυσσού της Δ.Ε. Σπαρτιατών και σύνδεση με το υπάρχον δίκτυο και βιολογικό καθαρισμό του Δήμου Σπάρτης. ArchDelt 69, Chronika (in print). Spyropoulos, Th. 1983. Σπάρτη, Μαγούλα Σπάρτης. ArchDelt 38 (1983), Chronika: 95. Stefanidou-Tiveriou, T. 1985. Τραπεζοφόρα του Μουσείου Θεσσαλονίκης. Thessaloniki. Stefanidou-Tiveriou, T. 1993. Τραπεζοφόρα με Πλαστική Διακόσμηση. Η Αττική Ομάδα. Athens. Stefanidou-Tiveriou, T. 1997. Αττική σαρκοφάγος με Αμαζονομαχία, in G. Despinis, T. StefanidouTiveriou and E. Voutyras (eds) Catalogue of Sculpture from the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki I: 164-8. Thessaloniki. Stefanidou-Tiveriou, T. 2007. Klinensarkophage in Thessaloniki. Sarkophagen Studien 3: 263-70. Stibbe, C.M. 1989. Beobachtungen zur Topographie des antiken Sparta. BABesch 64: 61-99. Themos, A. 1996. Αδιάνοικτο τμήμα οδού Βυζαντίου (Ο.Τ. 146, οικόπεδο Μαυρίδη). ArchDelt 51, Chronika: Β1: 113-14. Themos, A. 1997. Έργα Δημοτικής Επιχείρησης Ύδρευσης και αποχέτευσης Σπάρτης: Οδός Βυζαντίου (ΟΤ 146 και Γ422). ArchDelt 52, Chronika: 174-6. Themos, A. 2001. Οδός Βυζαντίου (Ο.Τ. 146, οικόπεδο Δ. Ζαχαριάδη και Γ. Δημητρακόπουλου. ArchDelt 56, Chronika: 197-9. Themos, A. 2004. Συμβολή των οδών Βυζαντίου, ΙΧ Μεραρχίας και Λυκούργου (Ο.Τ. 146, οικόπεδο Κάτσαρη και Μαυρίδη). ArchDelt 59, Chronika, Β4: 279. Themos, A. 2006. Συμβολή των οδών Βυζαντίου και 9ης Μεραρχίας (Ο.Τ. 146, οικόπεδο Γ. Κάτσαρη και Μαυρίδη). ArchDelt 61 (2006), Chronika Β1: 288-90. Themos, A. and E. Zavvou 2000. Οδός ΣπάρτηςΚαστορίου (έργα κατασκευής νέας οδού). ArchDelt 55, Chronika: 228-9. Themos, A. and E. Zavvou 2001. Oδός ΣπάρτηςΚαστορίου (έργα κατασκευής νέας οδού). ArchDelt 56, Chronika: 199-200. Themos, A., M. Maltezou, G. Pantou and G. Tsiaggouris 2009. The Southwest Cemetery of Roman Sparta: A preliminary account of the results of three rescue excavations, in W.G. Cavanagh, C. Gallou and M. Georgiadis (eds) Sparta and Laconia. From Prehistory to Pre-modern, Sparta 17-20 March 2005, Proceedings

(Annual of the British School at Athens 16): 261-9. London: British School at Athens. Τod, M.N. and A.J.B. Wace 1906. A Catalogue of the Sparta Museum. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Tsiaggouris, G. 2010. Κλαδάς Δ. Σπάρτης. Οικόπεδο ιδιοκτησίας Κ. Γαλάτα. ArchDelt 65, Chronika: 518. Tsiaggouris, G. 2011. Χαρίσι Σπάρτης. Οδός Μπιζανίου (ΟΤ 254, οικόπεδο Εταιρείας ΚΑΤΣΑΡΗΣ ΑΤΚΕ). ArchDelt 66, Chronika: 183-4. Tsouli, M. and A. Papagiannis 2010a. Testimonia on funerary banquets in ancient Sparta, in Dining and Death. Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the ‘Funerary Banquet’ in Ancient Art, Burial and Belief. Conference at the Ioannou Centre for Classical and Byzantine Studies, Oxford, 25-26 September 2010 (only the contribution of M. Tsouli): 353-84. Tsouli, M. and A. Papagiannis 2010b. Συμβολή των οδών Κύπρου και Βυζαντίου (Ο.Τ. Γ470, οικόπεδο Α. Κάτσαρη). ArchDelt 61, Chronika: 476-80. Tsouli, M. and G. Tsiaggouris 2010. Ανασκαφικές εργασίες. Μαγούλα Σπάρτης. Οικόπεδο ιδιοκτησίας Δ. Κόντου. ArchDelt 61, Chronika: 501-2. Tsouli, M. 2013a. Αυτοκινητόδρομος Λεύκτρο-Σπάρτη, Περιοχή Κλαδά Σπάρτης. Χ.Θ. 41+860 (βόρειο τμήμα) και Χ.Θ. 41+770-820, Θέσεις ΣΤ 3, 4, 5 και ΣΤ 6, 7, 8 «Χούνη» Κλαδά. ArchDelt 68, Chronika: 158-65. Tsouli, M. 2013b. Σπάρτη. Οδός Χαμαρέτου (Ο.Τ. 55, οικόπεδο ιδιοκτησίας Ι. Χαλκιαδάκη). ArchDelt 64, Chronika: 121-4. Tsouli, M. 2013c. Σπάρτη. Οδός Χαμαρέτου (Ο.Τ. 55, οικόπεδο ιδιοκτησίας Ν. Σουρλή). ArchDelt 64, Chronika: 124-6. Tsouli, M. 2013d. Ανασκαφή κλασικού νεκροταφείου στην πόλη της Σπάρτης, in K. Sporn (ed.) Internationales Kolloquium ‘Griechische Grabbezirke klassischer Zeit-Normen und Regionalismen’, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Athens 20-21 November 2009 (Athenaia 6): 151-66. Tsouli, M. 2014a. Νέα στοιχεία για την ανθρώπινη παρουσία στην περιοχή της Βορδόνιας Λακεδαίμονος, in Archaeological Conference The Archaeological Work of the 5th EPCA within the framework of the new National Road Leuctro-Sparti, Kastori, Laconia, 7th April 2014 (in print). Tsouli 2014b. Αρχαιότητες και μεγάλα δημόσια έργα στη Λακωνία. Κάποια πρόσφατα παραδείγματα, in 4th Historical and Archaeological Conference, Agoriani, Laconia, 11th August 2014 (in print). Tsouli, M. 2014c. Αυτοκινητόδρομος Λεύκτρο-Σπάρτη. Κλαδάς. Χ.Θ. 41+960 – δυτικό τμήμα, Θέση ΣΤ 2 «Χούνη» Κλαδά. ArchDelt 69, Chronika (in print). Tsouli, M. and H. Tsouktakos 2014. Αυτοκινητόδρομος Λεύκτρο-Σπάρτη. Χ.Θ. 43+580-43+700, Θέση Ε2-5 «Καλαμάκια» Κοκκινόραχης. ArchDelt 69 (2014), Chronika (in print). Tsouli, M. 2015. Νεότερα στοιχεία για τη βόρεια Λακεδαίμονα κατά την περίοδο της Ρωμαιοκρατίας, 160

Maria Tsouli: Mortuary Practices at Roman Sparta

in Roman Seminar, German Archaeological Institute, 23 April 2015. Tsouli, M., A. Maltezou and L. Souchleris 2018. Αγροτικές εγκαταστάσεις και αρχαίο οδικό δίκτυο στη Λακεδαίμονα κατά τη ρωμαϊκή περίοδο, in V. Di Napoli, F. Camia, V. Evangelidis, D. Grigoropoulos, D. Rogers, S. Vlizos (eds) What’s New in Roman Greece? Recent Work on the Greek Mainland and the Islands in the Roman Period (Meletemata 80): 91-109. Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation. Tsouli, M., A. Maltezou and L. Souchleris 2017. Η ύπαιθρος χώρα της Βόρειας Λακεδαίμονας. Αγροτικές και εργαστηριακές εγκαταστάσεις, αρχαίοι δρόμοι και τεχνικά έργα, από τους αρχαϊκούς έως τους ρωμαϊκούς χρόνους. Τα νέα ανασκαφικά στοιχεία στο πλαίσιο του 10ου Υποέργου «Αρχαιολογικές έρευνες και εργασίες» του Έργου «Αυτοκινητόδρομος Κόρινθος-Τρίπολη-Καλαμάτα και κλάδος ΛεύκτροΣπάρτη», in the Scientific Congress Archaeological Investigations and Major Public Works, Directorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities, Hellenic Ministry of Culture, Athens 8-9 December 2017 (in print). Tsouli, M. and A. Maltezou in print. Νεκροταφεία, ταφικά μνημεία και έθιμα ταφής στη Σπάρτη την περίοδο της Ρωμαιοκρατίας, in Cemeteries, Collective Edition. Directorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities, Hellenic Ministry of Culture. Tsouli, Μ. 2016. Ομάδα αττικών σαρκοφάγων και επιφανή ταφικά μνημεία από την ευρύτερη περιοχή της Σπάρτης, in Scientific Symposium in honor of Prof. Georgia Kokkorou-Alevras, Athens, 19-21 February, 2016 (in print). Tsouli, Μ. 2017. Ανασκαφή νέου ρωμαϊκού ταφικού μνημείου στη Σπάρτη. Συμβολή στη μελέτη της τοπογραφίας της πόλης, in 2nd International Congress The Archaeological Work at the Peloponnese, Kalamata, 7-10 November 2017 (in print). Vasilogamvrou, A., M. Tsouli and N. Koulogeorgiou 2010. Συμβολή οδών Πλαταιών και Ορθίας Αρτέμιδος (Ο.Τ. 79, οικόπεδο ιδιοκτησίας Πανεπιστημίου Πελοποννήσου). ArchDelt 61, Chronika: 484-6. Vasilogamvrou, A., M. Tsouli and A. Maltezou 2018. Η πόλη της Σπάρτης μέσα από τις πρόσφατες αρχαιολογικές ανασκαφές, in E. Zymi, A.V.

Karapanagiotou and M. Xanthopoulou (eds) International Congress The Archaeological Work in the Peloponnese (aepel1), Tripolis, 7-11 November 2012, Proceedings: 329-51. Kalamata. Vasilogamvrou, A. and M. Tsouli 2015. Νέα στοιχεία για την αρχαία Σπάρτη, από τους προϊστορικούς έως τους ύστερους ρωμαϊκούς χρόνους, από τις πρόσφατες ανασκαφές, in 9th International Congress on Peloponnesian Studies, Nauplio, 30 October-2 November 2015 (in print). Wace, A.J.B. 1905-1906a. Laconia II. Excavations at Sparta, 1906. The city wall. ABSA 12: 284-8. Wace, A.J.B. 1905-1906b. Laconia II. Excavations at Sparta, 1906. The Stamped Tiles. ABSA 12: 344-50. Wace, A.J.B. 1906-1907a. Laconia II. Excavations at Sparta, 1907. The city wall. ABSA 13: 5-16. Wace, A.J.B. 1906-1907b. Laconia II. Excavations at Sparta, 1907. The Stamped Tiles. ABSA 13: 17-43. Walker, S. 1990. Catalogue of Roman Sarcophagi in the British Museum. London. Wiegartz, H. 1975. Myra. Eine lykische Metropole. IstForsch 30: 189. Zavvou, E. 1994. Περιοχή Καραβά Σπάρτης. ArchDelt 49, Chronika: 85-6. Zavvou, E., A. Themos, A.-V. Karapanagiotou and E. Kountouri 2006. Το Αρχαιολογικό έργο στη Λακωνία κατά τα έτη 1994-1995, in 1st Archaeological Congress of the Peloponnese and Western Greece, Patras 1996: 41126. Athens. Zavvou, E. and A. Themos 2009. Sparta from prehistoric to Early Christian times: observations from the excavations of 1994-2005, in W.G. Cavanagh, C. Gallou and M. Georgiadis (eds) Sparta and Laconia. From Prehistory to Pre-modern, Sparta 17-20 March 2005 (Annual of the British School at Athens Studies 16): 105-22. Zavvou, E. 2013. Αγροικίες και εργαστηριακές εγκαταστάσεις στη Λακωνία των Ρωμαϊκών χρόνων (1ος αι. π.Χ. – 6ος αι. μ.Χ.), in A.D. Rizakis and I.P. Touratsoglou (eds) Villae Rusticae. Family and Market-Oriented Farms in Greece under Roman Rule, Archaeological Museum of Patras, 23-24 April 2010: 36297. Athens.

161

Burial Monumentality and Funerary Associations in Roman Kos Nikolas Dimakis and Vassiliki Christopoulou Abstract: A rescue excavation at Psalidi in Kos revealed a late Hellenistic-Roman cemetery and a proto-byzantine building. The cemetery is located extra muros, close to a recently explored archaic sanctuary and near the early Christian Basilica of St. Gabriel. A Roman (1st-3rd century AD) burial monument with multiple burials furnished mainly by clay lamps stands out from the cemetery. The burial monument, rectangular in plan, was separated by an internal wall in two compartments (North, South) each accessible by four openings/entrances. Clay tubes and small inscribed stelai were placed in front of the entrances while a large deposit of approximately 450 lamps was found outside the southeast opening. In this paper the preliminary results of the monument’s on-going archaeological and anthropological study are being presented supplemented by a discussion of Roman burial customs, rituals, and funerary associations. Keywords: Kos, Roman, burial monumentality, funerary association Introduction

The main aim here is to present and discuss some of the preliminary results that occurred from the burial monument’s on-going archaeological and anthropological study that will largely contribute to our understanding of society and treatment of the dead in Roman Kos.

A late-Hellenistic to Roman period cemetery and a proto-byzantine building came to the light in a plot located in the area of Psalidi in Kos town (Figure 1).1 The plot is extramuros, some 1200 m to the East of ancient Kos’ fortification walls, 140 m to the East of Saint Gabriel’s early Christian Basilica,2 50 m to the North of a yet unidentified ancient sanctuary,3 and 1250 m to the Northwest of the Roman burial monument in the area of Hellenika.4

The Burial Monument Made up on the whole of cast masonry (opus caementicium), the burial monument is a well-made, solid, structure, even though its superstructure is preserved in relatively low height (0.32/0.55 m). It has walls coated with stucco on either side perhaps both for practical reasons and elegance. The floor is made of two successive layers of small stones dipped into mortar, while the monument’s substructure is also cast and protrudes by 0.17 m from the monument’s exterior façade. Rectangular in plan, with N-S orientation, it occupies an approximately 22 m2 area,8 that is separated by a median wall into two relatively equal in size compartments (approximately 10 m2 each),9 each one with a separate entrance (Figure 3).

The cemetery occupied nearly the entire plot while the proto-byzantine building the eastern part (Figure 2).5 Graves consisted of 7 cists, 3 hut-shaped tile graves, 2 clay sarcophagi, 2 pits, 1 surface burial, 1 pot burial and 1 burial monument of the Roman period which is also the focus of the current paper. Between the main part of the cemetery and the proto-byzantine building runs a road of probably early Byzantine date, lined with pebbles, which intersects with the modern littoral G. Papandreou street.6 The Roman burial monument lies alongside the intersection of these two roads.7

The south compartment is accessible by four separate stepped openings, leading to four thekai of similar

1 Kos town, RO.ΚΑ’s plot on G. Papandreou and Odessos Str., Didioumi 2006: 1339; Skerlou 2007: 1367; Christopoulou 2016: 1754. 2 Rocco 1996: 81; Didioumi 2010: 38-9; Baldini and Livadiotti 2011; 2015: 12. 3 A Geometric to 5th century BC shrine is known at Bakaloglou plot, Skerlou 1996: 689-90; 1997: 1115; 1999: 953-4; 2001-2004: 312-14. 4 Unpublished burial monument. It has been excavated by Italian archaeologists before 1931 (Laurenzi 1931). 5 All the above mentioned antiquities were uncovered approximately 0.50 m deep from the surface of the adjacent littoral G. Papandreou Str. 6 We presume that the modern G. Papandreou Str. follows the course of an ancient road as it is the only so far known road leading from Kos town to St. Gabriel’s Basilica and further up to the area of Psalidi, while it also intersects with the pebbled road found in the excavation giving shape to an Hippodameian urban grid in this part of the town. Although the road with the pebbles and the Basilica postdate the cemetery, the general urban planning of Kos never cease to exist/ change displaying remarkable continuity: roads usually follow the exact same course with their predecessors in the same area, with a minimal transformation in width. 7 In many cases, modern roads and paths seem to follow the course of

ancient roads, indicating common travel routes subject to topographic constraints throughout time. For burial monuments alongside roads in Greek Classical and Hellenistic cemeteries, see Petrakos 1999: 335-6 and 363, pl. 238a (Rhamnous); Hellmann 2006: 319-20; Sporn 2013a: 273 (Kerameikos); Dimakis 2009 (Argos); Aggeli 2013: 179-81, pl. 1-4 (Amvrakia); Berns 2013: 213-15 (Knidos); Dimakis 2016 (northern Peloponnese). 8 Dimensions: int. 4.20 m (E-W) × 5.26 m (N-S) / ext. 6.20 m (E-W) × 6.80 m (N-S) at the superstructure. Longitudinal walls (N-S) approximately 1 m wide. Lateral walls (E-W) approximately 0.70 m wide. Preserved height (super+understructure) approximately 1/1.20 m. The monument had a vaulted roof as indicated by the strong longitudinal walls (pers.comm. with G. Rocco and M. Livadiotti), a common feature in Roman burial monuments. For a more detailed study of the burial monument itself see Christopoulou et al. 2018. 9 The median wall (E-W) although scarcely preserved (0.50 m width x 0.40 m height) it is clear that it was built in opus caementicium at the same time as the monument’s floor.

162

Nikolas Dimakis and Vassiliki Christopoulou: Burial Monumentality and Funerary Associations

Figure 1. Map of Kos with the plot (map: V. Christopoulou and D. Grigoropoulos).

Figure 2. Plan of the excavation. The graves are indicated in yellow colour (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of Dodecanese).

163

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 3. The Roman burial monument with the six thekai before (A) and following their excavation (B). View from the north (photos: V. Christopoulou).

size.10 The openings (0.65-0.70 m wide) were sealed by tiles in subsequent layers joined together with mortar, probably as soon as the deposition of the last dead into the corresponding theke was concluded (entrances 4 and 3). The sealing of the entrances seems to display structural variation in matters of detail: the tiles sealing entrance 3 are placed on a small marble plinthos while entrance 2 is sealed by rubble. The sealing of entrance 1 was already destroyed when unearthed. The intermediate walls (0.50-0.55 m wide) separating the thekai from each other are also of cast masonry coated with stucco on either side.

and Marmaroto, while no exact parallel is known upto-date, admittedly, in a period, the late-1st to 3rd centuries AD, of intense burial monumentality in the wider area.11 The Burials The monument has yielded both primary and secondary inhumation burials placed directly on the ground.12 Preliminary skeletal analysis has shown that the human remains represent a minimum number of 23 individuals of both sexes, with adults and children 4 to 12 years of age.13 Seventeen individuals were found in situ in five out of the six thekai preserved (thekai 2-6; theke 1 yielded no skeletal remains); 2 adult males and 1 child (4 years of age) have been identified, it still remains unknown if individuals of relatively liminal status such as elders or infants, were also buried therein. Moreover, we cannot be certain beyond doubt whether the dead shared proper familial links,66 or if they belonged to some sort of association.67 However, the fact that the monument received multiple burials (in sharp contrast to the single inhumation burials found in the surrounding tile-covered, cists and pit-graves) for at least 2 centuries (that is for about 6-7 generations if we accept a generation change every 30 years) without any abrupt or noticeable changes in burial manners, argues for the monument’s use by a specific group of people that was able to endure in time sharing common values and attitudes towards death.

Discussion The discovery of the entire cemetery and the Roman burial monument at Psalidi contributes to our better understanding of the burial landscape around the city of Kos, and in particular inthis area that has received so little scholarly attention in relation to the cemeteries located to the West and South of Kos.63 The selection of this particular location for placing the dead was not arbitrary; it represented a conscious action in order to facilitate local needs such as a burial ground close to the urban core of the city that was easily accessible for regular visits, in the face of its spatial segregation from the city. Indeed, spatial proximity, leveled ground and roadside placement of the cemetery allowed easy access of mourners on foot, or with horses, carriages and carts. These may have been at least some of the main reasons for the cemetery’s continuous use from the late-Hellenistic to the late-Roman period.

Although this is a discussion based on preliminary results of an on-going project and we cannot be certain of the social, even ethnic identity, and status of the people buried in the burial monument, as well as for the continuity, longevity and structure of the rituals involved in their commemoration, we can be certain of one thing; this study will contribute significantly to our knowledge of burial customs in Roman Kos and to our understanding of the way communal identity was expressed in death on the island. Acknowledgements We are sincerely grateful to Giorgio Rocco and Monica Livadiotti for their kindness to share with us their expertise in Koan architecture and to enlighten us further regarding the burial monument’s architectural form; to Georgios Doulfis and Chrysanthi Tsouli for their suggestions on the grave stelai, and to Dimitris Grigoropoulos for his valuable comments on earlier drafts of this papers. We would also like to thank the Ephorate of Antiquities of Dodecanese for granting us permit and workspace to study and publish the material.

Within this burial and natural landscape the visual prominence of the Roman burial monument must have been undeniable. With its large size and elaborate construction (more elaborate than the other graves found in the area) it rises as a reference point if not a territorial marker that displayed the importance of the individuals buried therein, or those that provided the means for its construction, or both. However, since the entire cemetery is not fully excavated it is impossible to

Militsi 1998: 1004-5. Christopoulou et al. 2018: Appendix (by K. Xanthopoulos). 66 Freedmen often had the right and privilege of sharing the family tomb of the patronus (Carroll 2011: 135-6) or those working for the same patronus to form a burial club or collegium (140). 67 cf. collegia in Rhodes: Pugliese Carratelli 1939-1940: 147-200; Harland 2013: esp. 67-9; Constantakopoulou 2015: 213-36. 64 65

e.g. Rushforth 1915; Cumont 1923: 122; Kurtz and Boardman 1971: 211; Toynbee 1971; Pologiorgi 1988: 159; Parisinou 2000: 19, 140; Eckardt 2002. 63 Bosnakis 2008: 14, 20; 2013: 257, n. 8, with bibliography. 62

172

Nikolas Dimakis and Vassiliki Christopoulou: Burial Monumentality and Funerary Associations Bibliography

Constantakopoulou, Ch. 2015. Beyond the polis. Island Koina and other non-polis entities in the Aegean, in C. Taylor and K. Vlassopoulos (eds) Communities and Networks in the Ancient Greek World: 213-36. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Coşkun A. 2011. Theophore Personen namen in Westkleinasien. Neue Überlegungen auf der Grundlage des Lexicon of Greek Personal Names, Vol. V.A. EpigAnat 44: 153-62. D’ Ambra, E. 2006. Imitations of life: style, theme and a sculptural collection in the Isola Sacra Necropolis, Ostia, in E. D’ Ambra and G. Métraux (eds) The Art of Citizens, Soldiers and Freedmen in the Roman World (BAR IS 1526): 73-90. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Didioumi, S. 2010. Το νησί της Κω κατά την παλαιοχριστιανική περίοδο (4ος-7ος αι.). Ta Koaka IA’: 29-109. Dodds, E.R. 1965. Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fraser P.M. and T. Rönne 1957. Boeotian and West Greek Tombstones. Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup. Fraser, R.H. 1977. Rhodian Funerary Monuments. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Grigoriadou, D. 1995. Μαρμαρωτό, Ο.Τ. Γ322, Κ.Μ. 1604 γαιών Κω-εξοχής (οι- κόπεδο Εμ. Πλουμή – Β. Βαλλιανάτου). ArchDelt 50, Chronika: 805-6. Graham, E.-J. 2005a. The quick and the dead in the extra-urban landscape: the Roman cemetery at Ostia/Portus as a lived environment, in J. Bruhn, B. Croxford and D. Grigoropoulos (eds) TRAC. Proceedings of the Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference: 133-43. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Graham, E.-J. 2005b. Dining al fresco with the living and the dead in Roman Italy, in M. Carroll, D. Hadley and H. Willmott (eds) Consuming Passions: Dining from Antiquity to the Eighteenth Century: 49-65. Stroud: Tempus. Cumont, F. 1923. After Life in Roman Paganism. New Haven: Yale University Press. Dimakis, N. 2009. The display of individual status in the burials in the burials of Classical and Hellenistic Argos, in H. Cavanagh, W.G. Cavanagh and J. Roy (eds) Honouring the Dead, Proceedings of the Conference held in Sparta 23-25/4/2009 (http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/csps/documents/ honoringthedead/dimakis.pdf). Dimakis, N. 2016. Social Identity and Status in the Classical and Hellenistic Northern Peloponnese: the Evidence from Burials. Oxford: Archaeopress. Eckardt, H. 2002. Illuminating Roman Britain (Monographies Instrumentum 16). Montagnac: Éditions Monique Mergoil. Hellmann, M.-Ch. 2006. L’Architecture Grecque 2. Architecture Religieuse et Funéraire. Paris: Editions A. and J. Picard. Herzog, R. 1899. Koische Forschungen und Funde. Leipzig: Dieterich‘sche Verlags-Buchhandlung.

Aggeli, Α. 2013. Οι ταφικοί περίβολοι της Αμβρακίας, in Sporn 2013b: 179-89. Alfayé Villa, S. 2010. Nails for the Dead: a Polysemic Account of an Ancient Funerary Practice, in: R. Gordon (ed.) Magical Practice in the Latin West: Papers from the International Conference Held at the University of Zaragoza, 30 Sept.-1 Oct. 2005: 427-56. Leiden: Brill. Armstrong, St. 2012. Collegia and mortuary archaeology: identifying the non-elite of the Roman Empire. Journal of the University of Manitoba. Anthropology Students Association 30: 1-16. Βaldini, I. and M. Livadiotti (eds) 2011. Archeologia Protobizantina a Kos: La basilica di S. Gabriele (Studi e Scavi Nuova Serie 28). Bologna: Ante Quem. Βaldini, Ι. and M. Livadiotti (eds) 2015. Archeologia Protobizantina a Kos: Lacittà e il Complesso Episcopale (Archaeologia 6). Bologna: Bononia University Press. Berns, C. 2013. Grabbezirke von Knidos. Zwei Standarts der Repräsentation in klassischer Zeit, in Sporn 2013b: 203-18. Borbein, A. 1968. Eine Stele in Rhodos. Bemerkungen zum spätgriechischen Grabreliefs. MarbWPr: 74-101. Bosnakis, D. 1998. Οι Αιγυπτιακές θεότητες στη Ρόδο και την Κω από τους ελληνιστικούς χρόνους μέχρι και τη Ρωμαιοκρατία. ArchDelt 49-50, Meletes: 43-74. Bosnakis, D. 2000-2003. Ανέκδοτες επιγραφές από την Κω. Horos 14-16: 269-74. Bosnakis, D. 2008. Ανέκδοτες Επιγραφές της Κω. Επιτύμβια Μνημεία και Όροι. Athens: Archaiologiko Institouto Aigaiakōn Spoudon. Bosnakis, D. 2013. Επιτύμβιες στήλες από ένα «εξοχικό νεκροταφείο» της Κω, in Α. Yiannikouri (ed.) Όλβιος Άνερ. Μελέτες στη Μνήμη του Γρ. Κωνσταντινόπουλου (Ρόδος IV): 247-63. Athens: Archaiologiko Institouto Aigaiakōn Spoudon. Brouskari, E. 1987. Μπρούσκαρη, Περίχωρα πόλης Κω και ύπαιθρος - Νεκροπόλεις- Οδός ανώνυμος (οικόπεδο Μ. Οικονόμου). ArchDelt 42, Chronika: 648-9. Carroll, M. 2011. The mourning was very good. Liberation and liberality in Roman funerary commemoration, in V. Hope and J. Huskinson (eds) Memory and Mourning: Studies on Roman Death: 126-49. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Christopoulou, V. 2016. Περιοχή Ψαλίδι, ΚΜ 959 γαιών Κω εξοχής (οικόπεδο ΡΟ.ΚΑ. Α.Ε. ΚΩ). ArchDelt 65, Chronika: 1754. Christopoulou V., N. Dimakis and K. Xanthopoulos 2018. Ένας μνημειακός τάφος των αυτοκρατορικών χρόνων στο Ψαλίδι της πόλης Κω: αρχιτεκτονική μορφή, χρήση και έθιμα ταφής, in V. Di Napoli, F. Camia, V. Evangelidis, D. Grigoropoulos, D. Rogers, S. Vlizos (eds) What’s New in Roman Greece? Recent Work on the Greek Mainland and the Islands in the Roman Period (Meletemata 80): 537-53. Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation. 173

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Jeffery, H. 1990. The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Kajanto, I. 1963. A Study of the Greek Epitaphs of Rome (Acta Instituti Romani Finlandiae 2, 3). Helsinki: Institutum Romanum Finlandiae. Kleiner, D.E.E. 1977. Roman Group Portraiture: the Funerary Reliefs of the Late Republic and Early Empire. New York: Garland Pub. Kontorini, V. 2001. Οι σύλλογοι στην αρχαία Κω. Dodoni 30: 5-24. Kurtz, D.C. and J. Boardman 1971. Greek Burial Customs. London: Thames and Hudson. Laurenzi, L. 1931. Nuovi contributi alla topografia storico-archeologica di Coo. Historia V: 603-26. Lewis, D. 2018. Notes on slave names, ethnicity, and identity in Classical and Hellenistic Greece. Studia Źródłoznawcze. U Schyłku Starożytności 16:169-99. Lindsay, H. 1998. Eating with the dead: the Roman funerary banquet, in I. Nielsen and H.S. Nielsen (eds) Meals in a Social Context: Aspects of the Communal Meal in the Hellenistic and Roman World (Aarhus Studies in Mediterranean Antiquity 1): 67-80. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. Maillot, S. 2013. Les associations à Cos, in P. Fröhlich and P. Hamon (eds) Groupes et Associations dans les Cités Grecques (IIIe siècle av. J.-C.-IIe siècle apr. J.-C.). Actes de la Table Ronde de Paris, INHA, 19-20 juin 2009: 199-226. Genève: Droz. Masson, O. 1973. Les noms des esclaves dans la Grèce antique, in Université de Franche-Comté (ed.) Actes du Colloque 1971 sur l’Esclavage. Besançon 10-11 mai 1971: 9-23. Besançon: Presses Universitaires de FrancheComté. Mc Lean, B. 2002. An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy of the Hellenistic and Roman periods from Alexander the Great down to the Reign of Constantine (323 BC-AD 337). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. Militsi, E. 1998. Πόλη Κω-Ψαλίδι, βασιλική Αγίου Γαβριήλ. ArchDelt 53, Chronika: 1004-5. Oikonomou, G. 1921. De profusionum receptaculis sepulcralibus, inde ab antiquissimis temporibus usque ad nostram fere aetatem usitatis (The Archaeological Society at Athens Library 21). Athens: P.D. Sacellarii. Papapostolou J.A. 1993. Achaean Grave Stelai (The Archaeological Society at Athens Library 135). Athens: Grafeio Dēmosieymaton. Parisinou, Ε. 2000. The Light of the Gods. The Role of Light in Archaic and Classical Greek Cult. London: Duckworth. Parker, R. 2000. Theophoric names and the history of Greek religion, in S. Hornblower and E. Matthews (eds) Greek Personal Names. Their Value as Evidence (Proceeding of the British Academy 104): 53-82. Oxford:  Published for the British Academy by Oxford University Press. Paton W.R. and E.L. Hicks 1891. The Inscriptions of Cos. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Patsiada, V. 2013. Μνημειώδες Ταφικό Συγκρότημα στη Νεκρόπολη της Ρόδου (Ρόδος ΙΙΙ). Athens: Tameio Archaiologikōn Porōn kai Apallotriōseōn. Petersen, L.H. 2006. The Freedman in Roman Art and Art History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Petrakos, V.Ch. 1999. Ο Δήμος του Ραμνούντος. Ι. Τοπογραφία: Σύνοψη των Ανασκαφών και των Ερευνών 1813-1998 (The Archaeological Society at Athens Library 181). Athens: Archaeological Society at Athens. Petropoulos, M. 1999. Τα Εργαστήρια των Ρωμαϊκών Λυχναριών της Πάτρας και το Λυχνομαντείο. Athens: Tameio Archaiologikōn Porōn kai Apallotriōseōn. Pfuhl, E. and H. Möbius 1977-1979. Die ostgriechische Grabreliefs I-II. Mainz am Rhein: Von Zabern. Pugliese Carratelli, G. 1939-1940. Per la storia delle associazioni in Rodiantica. ASAtene 17-18: 147-200. Pologiorgi, M.Ι. 1988. Μνημεία του Δυτικού Νεκροταφείου του Ωρωπού (Dēmosieumata tou Archaiologikou Deltiou no 63). Athens: Tameio Archaiologikōn Porōn kai Apallotriōseōn. Rizakis, A. 1998. Achaïe II. La Cite de Patras: Epigraphie et Histoire (Meletemata 25). Paris: de Broccard. Rocco, G. 1996. L’isola di Coo. Gli scavi nell’isola, in M. Livadiotti and G. Rocco (eds) La Presenza Italiana nel Dodecaneso tra il 1912 e il 1948. La Ricerca Archeologica. La Conservazione. Le Scelte Progettuali: 77-86. Catania: Edizioni del Prisma. Rushforth, G. McN. 1915. Funeral lights in Roman sepulchral monuments. JRS 5: 149-65. Salem, M.S. 1937. The lychnapsia philocaliana and the birthday of Isis. JRS 27: 165-7. Scholl, A. 1996. Die attischen Bildfeldstelen des 4. Jhs. V. Chr. Untersuchungen zu den kleinformatigen Grabreliefs im spätklassischen Athen. Berlin: Gebr. Mann. Segre, M. 2007. Iscrizioni di Cos, 2. Roma: Quasar. Sherwin-White, S.M. 1978. Ancient Cos. An Historical Study from the Dorian Settlement to the Imperial period (Hypomnemata 51). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht. Sironen, E. 1997. The Late Roman and Early Byzantine Inscriptions of Athens and Attica. Helsinki: Hakapaino Oy. Skerlou, E. 1991. Οικόπεδο Παπαχρήστου (KM 1528). ArchDelt 46, Chronika: 490-2. Skerlou, E. 1996. Περίχωρα της πόλης Κω-Περιοχή Ηρακλής (οικόπεδο Μπακάλογλου). ArchDelt 51, Chronika: 689-90. Skerlou, E. 1997. Ψαλίδι-Περιοχή Ηρακλής (οικόπεδο Κ. Μπακάλογλου). ArchDelt 52, Chronika: 1115. Skerlou, E. 1999. Ψαλίδι-Περιοχή Ηρακλής (οικόπεδο Κ. Μπακάλογλου). ArchDelt 54, Chronika: 953-4. Skerlou, E. 2001-2004. Ηρακλής, Ψαλίδι Οικόπεδο Κ. Μπακάλογλου. ArchDelt 56-59, Chronika: 312-14. Skerlou, E. 2007. Περιοχή Ψαλίδι, ΚΜ 959 γαιών Κω εξοχής (οικόπεδο «ΡΟΚΑ ΑΕ ΚΩ»). ArchDelt 62, Chronika: 1367. 174

Nikolas Dimakis and Vassiliki Christopoulou: Burial Monumentality and Funerary Associations

Şőfőroglou, M. and L. Summerer. 2016. Light for the Death. Lamps as Grave Offerings in Light of a New Hellenistic/Roman Tomb in Kormakiti/Koruçam. In L. Summerer and H. Kaba (eds) The Northern Face of Cyprus. New Studies in Cypriot Archaeology and Art History: 259-75. Istanbul: Meda. Sporn, K. 2013a. Grabbezirke und Grabmarker im klassischen Griechenland, in Sporn 2013b: 261-82. Sporn, K. (ed.) 2013b. Griechische Grabbezirke klassischer Zeit. Normen und Regionalismen. Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums am Deutschen Archäologischen Institut, Abteilung Athen 20.-21. November 2009 (Athenaia Band 6). München: Hirmer. Stirling, L. 2004. Archaeological evidence for food offerings in the graves of Roman North Africa, in R.B. Egan and M.A. Joyal (eds) Daimonopylai: Essays in Classics and the Classical Tradition Presented to Edmund G. Berry: 427-51. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Centre for Hellenic Civilization. Toynbee, J.M.C. 1971. Death and Burial in the Roman World. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Tsouli, Chr. 2009. The Koan Banquet reliefs: parallels in the Aegean region, in G. Deligiannakis and Y.

Galanakis (eds) The Aegean and its Cultures, Proceedings of the First Oxford-Athens Student Workshop Organized by the Greek Society and the University of Oxford, Taylor Institution, 22-23 April 2005 (British Archaeological Reports IS 1975): 95-108. Oxford: Archaeopress. Tsouli, Chr. 2013. Ταφικά και Επιτάφια Μνημεία της Κω. Συμβολή στη Μελέτη της Τυπολογίας και της Εικονογραφίας των Επιτάφιων Μνημείων των Ελληνιστικών και Ρωμαϊκών Χρόνων. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Athens. Vlassopoulos, K. 2010. Athenian slave names and Athenian social history. ZPE 175: 113-44. White, D. 1984. The Extramural Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone at Cyrene, Libya. Final Reports 1: Background and Introduction to the Excavations. Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania. Wolski, W. and I. Berciu 1973. Contribution au problème des tombes romaines à dispositif pour libations funéraires. Latomus 32: 370-9. Zanker‚ P. 1975. Grabreliefs römischer Freigelassener. Jdl 90: 267-315.

175

Grave Markers (Semata) of the Koan Necropoleis (3rd century BC-3rd century AD) Chrysanthi Tsouli Abstract: The aim of this paper is to offer a survey of iconography and, mainly, forms and chronology of the rich group of Koan grave markers, covering a fairly large chronological span, from the 3rd century BC to the 3rd century AD. The relief stelai constitute a small group of monuments in all periods. The contribution of the Koan workshop to the Hellenistic funerary art lies, mainly, in the systematic production of aniconic types of grave markers, especially of various types of altars, usually adorned with bucephalia connected with garlands: cylindrical altars, rectangular altars with volutes and pillar-shaped altars, especially a variation crowned by a relief pediment on the front, which is known in other regions during the Roman period. Innovative is also the production of the type of marble, solid krater as a grave marker. The heyday of the workshop occurs in 2nd and 1st centuries BC. The production of relief stelai and altars declines during the Roman period, whereas the plain stelai increase in number. The Romanization of art is apparent in some new types of monuments, such as the portrait busts, the ornamented sarcophagi, the columellae and the gladiatorial reliefs, all of them few in number. Keywords: Kos, grave markers, funerary reliefs, stelai, altars Introduction

markers is pretty uneven: no more than 18 tombstones date to the Archaic and Classical periods, while the rest of the monuments range in date from the 3rd century BC to the 3rd century AD, almost equally distributed in the Hellenistic and Roman periods.

The present study is based on my PhD thesis, entitled ‘Koan funerary monuments: a contribution to the study of the typology and the iconography of the funerary monuments of the Hellenistic and Roman period’,1 which was the first thorough, in-depth survey of the entire surviving assemblage of published and unpublished tombstones from the island of Kos, even before the publication of the Koan corpus of sepulchral inscriptions in IG XII4.3 and IG XII 4.4 in 2016 and 2018.2 The detailed in-situ examination of the tombstones, not only of those housed in the Museum, the Neratzia Castle and the Ephorate storerooms, but also of many others incorporated into modern buildings and churches, or scattered all over the island, resulted in compiling a corpus that encompasses 1200 monuments, all of them properly illustrated. However, small fragments of tombstones, especially of plain stelai shafts, not contributing to the study of iconography or typology, were left out.3 The temporal distribution of the grave

The Early Monuments Judging from the scarce fragments of Archaic and Classical funerary reliefs discovered so far, it appears that marble was imported at that periods,4 the island of Paros being the more common source. The same holds true for the marble of other Koan sculpture from the same periods. The systematic extraction of marble from the quarries of Mount Dikaios on the island and the flourish of the local sculpture workshops began in the 3rd century BC.5 The synoecism of 366/365 BC6 and the recognition of the Asklepieion asylia (inviolability)

group entitled ‘stelae mutilate’, nos 2471-2632), do not contribute to the study of the monuments’ typology. Uninscribed monuments were de facto left out from this corpus. Thus, for the quantitative data of the present typological and iconographic study, it was mainly Tsouli’s (2013) study that was taken into account. The corpus of IG XII 4.4 (Bosnakis and Hallof 2018), comprising 145 funerary inscriptions from the Koan demes, appeared in autumn 2018, when the present volume was on its way to the publisher, so it was not possible to cite it thoroughly. 4 Poupaki 2012: 139-40, summing up earlier bibliography. 5 Poupaki 2012: 45-51, summing up earlier bibliography; KokkorouAlevras 2017: 14-15. 6 Stabo 14.2.19: ‘Ἡ δέ τῶν Κώων πόλις ἐκαλεῖτο τὸ παλαιὸν Ἀστυπάλαια, καὶ ὠκεῖτο ἐν ἄλλῳ τόπῳ ὁμοίως ἐπί θαλάττῃ ἔπειτα διὰ στάσιν μετῴκησαν εἰς τὴν νῦν πόλιν περὶ τὸ Σκανδάριον, και μετωνόμασαν Κῶν ὁμωνύμως τῇ νήσῳ’. Diodοrus Siculus, Historiae 15.76.2: ‘ἀπὸ δὲ τοὺτων τῶν χρὸνων αἰεί μᾶλλον ηὐξήθη προσόδοις τε δημοσίαις καὶ τοῖς τῶν ἰδιωτῶν πλούτοις, καὶ τὸ σύνολον ἐνάμιλλος ἐγένετο ταῖς πρωτευούσαις πόλεσιν’. For the Koan synoecism see Carlsson 2010: 284, 293-5; Paton and Hicks 1891: xxvii; Sherwin-White 1978: 68-71; Stefanaki 2012: 18-21.

Tsouli 2013. Bosnakis and Hallof 2016; Bosnakis and Hallof 2018. For earlier corpora of Koan funerary inscriptions see Paton and Hicks 1891: nos 155-352, 327-342, 350-360, 364-366, 374-381, 397-400, 416-434; Herzog 1899: nos 169-73, 180-4, 199-207, 213-16, 224-5; Maiuri 1925: nos 487-664, 666-673, 677-693, 695; Kokkorou-Alevras 2004: nos N.E. 16-19, A.K. 51-66; Segre 2007; Bosnakis 2008. For recently published inscriptions, Bosnakis 2013; Doulfis and Kokkorou-Alevras 2017: nos K10-16; Kokkorou-Alevras 2018. 3 Bosnakis and Hallof ’s (2016) latest thoroughly researched edition of the complete corpus of funerary inscriptions from the city of Kos encompasses 1814 inscribed monuments, classified in typological groups. Many of these monuments, however, including the whole group entitled ‘stelae et tabulae formae incertae vel ignotae’ (Bosnakis and Hallof 2016: nos 2633-2701) are unidentified or lost since the late 19th-early 20th century, thus their concise description is based exclusively on old reports and excavation diaries, without illustration of the monuments. Moreover, fragments of tombstones, preserving part of the shaft and their inscription (Bosnakis and Hallof 2016: 1 2

176

Chrysanthi Tsouli: Grave Markers (Semata) of the Koan Necropoleis

one (Figure 1) is a fragmentary relief depicting a boy holding an aryballos and a cock, apparently a gift from the main, now missing, figure, probably an athlete.11 This relief is one of the earliest, probably the earliest Ionian-style relief with a two-figured scene, giving Kos the precedence over the production of funerary reliefs of this new type. The lack of other available Archaic sculpture from the island of Kos impairs identification of a distinct local production.12 We can, however, recognize a distinct artistic perception, characterized by the smooth treatment of the marble surface, decorative elements and vividness. All these traits are quite common in the production of the rest of the Dorian islands of the Dodecanese, with an apparent influence from the neighbouring Ionic artistic schools.13 Noteworthy is also the lack of significant evidence from the Classical period,14 regarding not only the funerary reliefs, but the votive ones as well. The surviving three fragments of Classical grave reliefs present Attic iconographic traits, although their style and technique recall the Ionic tradition.15 The question as to whether they can be attributed to a local workshop, inspired by Attic iconography widespread throughout the Greek world, or to an Attic sculptor, who travelled to the Aegean islands following the prohibition law implemented by Demetrius of Phaleron in 317/307 BC, is not an easy task to answer.16 The Attic type of relief is also apparent in a couple of votive banquet reliefs from Kos, which date to the second half of the 4th century.17 Complying with the norm of the late 4th century for the placement of lion statues on grave complexes, four lion statues have survived,18 presenting typological affinity to Attic and East Greek examples. The number of the fourth-century aniconic, inscribed funerary monuments from Kos is extremely limited.19 Their form is relevant to aniconic tombstones of the Hellenistic period.

Figure 1. Archaic grave relief from Kos town. Kos Museum no. 30 (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of Dodecanese/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

in 242 BC7 also had a great impact on the floruit of the city of Kos, the new capital, whose necropolis has yielded the greater number of grave markers. Two reliefs amongst the four surviving ones from the Archaic period8 are quite innovative. The first one9 shows erotic action in a mixed gender symposium with a male reclining figure and his consort, accompanied by a flute-player and a drunken banqueter on the floor. This is a vivid scene, otherwise unattested in funerary art; the erotic connotation of the symposium finds good parallels in Etruscan fresco paintings and in late Archaic Attic vase painting.10 The artist is bold and, at the same time, capable of depicting a plethora of figures in overlapping arrangement. The second

Morricone 1959; Hiller 1975: 51, 52, 60, 61, 122, 128, 158, no. Ο12, pl. 8,1; Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: 17-18, no. 26, pl. 7; Tsouli 2013: 70-2, pl. 79. 12 There is just one surviving Kore statuette of the Late Archaic/Early Classical period from Halasarna (Kokkorou-Alevras 2017: 18-19, no. K1). Poupaki (2012: 126, n. 976) refers to one more fragmentary Kore statuette in the Castle of Neratzia. 13 Sherwin-White 1978: 39; Kokkorou-Alevras 1997: 150, n. 4, 153-154, n. 56; Walter-Karydi (1998: 296) has put forward the existence of an East Dorian School claiming that ‘the leading centre of East Dorian art lies elsewhere (not Rhodes), in all likelihood in Kos, and perhaps also Calymnus’. 14 According to Sporn (2013: 274-5 with n. 114, 276, n. 123) a big number of tombstones, either in relief or just inscribed, is lacking during the Classical period in most of the Greek world, but for Attica, especially in the island regions. 15 Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: nos 34, 55; Kantzia 1984: 147, pl. 56α; Tsouli 2013: 73-5, pls 80-82; Kokkorou-Alevras 2017: 51-2, no. K60. 16 Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: 4, 25; Kabus-Preisshofen 1989: 18, n. 27. 17 Tsouli 2009: 96-7; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 461, 472. 18 Tsouli 2013: 241-3, cat. nos 1155-1158; Kokkorou-Alevras 2017: 46-8, no. 53. 19 Tsouli 2013: no. 1126 (stele base); Bosnakis and Hallof 2016: nos 1551, 1676, 2133, 2633, 2634, 2938; Kokkorou-Alevras 2018: no. 4. 11

7 Sherwin-White 1978: 110-14; Buraselis 2004, with earlier bibliography; Höghammar 2016: 144-54. 8 Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: nos 7, 26; Skerlou 2004; Segre 2007: no. 834; Tsouli 2013: 66-72, pls 76-79. Just one more Archaic funerary monument survives, an inscribed triangular cippus, Bosnakis and Hallof 2016: no. 1246. 9 Laurenzi 1938: 73-80, pl. 6, figs 46-48; Karusos 1962: 121-9, pl. 35; Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: no. 7; Tsouli 2013: 66-8, pl. 76. 10 Fehr 1971: 174-5; Bianchi Bandinelli and Giuliano 1974: 263 fig. 301, 266 fig. 304; Schäfer 1997: 57, 65.

177

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece The Iconography of the Hellenistic and Roman Tombstones Based on the significant number of tombstones from the succeeding periods, most of which were made of local marble, one can draw the conclusion that there was a highly active workshop at Kos from the 3rd century BC to the 3rd century AD, specializing in the production of gravestones. Despite the fact that only 5.75% of the monuments bear a relief scene,20 the iconography of the relief tombstones is thoroughly explored by gender, posture, number of persons depicted and compositional elements. Following a practice customary in many Aegean regions for the early Hellenistic period, the iconographic themes in the 3rd century depend largely on the Attic repertoire.21 The traditional theme of the mistress accompanied by a maid (Figure 2),22 as well as that of the naked male figure represented as an athlete,23 revive in this period. This time, however, we see incorporated into the composition a number of additional elements or parts of landscape that contribute to the characterization of the merits of the deceased or to the depiction of refined surroundings, such as the mirror, the throne and the phoriamos (chest) of the gynaikonites, or the prizes of the victorious athlete (wreath, branch of palm and amphora). The banquet motif is among the most popular themes in the visual repertoire of the island (Figure 3). New iconographic elements are also added to these scenes, whose composition is usually restricted to the reclining banqueter, his consort and the oinochoos, all of them now dressed in a chiton and a himation.24 An innovative aspect of the iconographic repertoire appears in the depiction of vessels related to funerary practices or post-funeral rites, usually kraters, as an autonomous theme.25 The heyday of the relief tombstones production, as far as the quality but to a large extent also the quantity of the production is concerned, occurs in the 2nd century BC.26 The reliefs of that period, as well as those of the 3rd century, artistically outmatch the more massive

Figure 2. Relief grave stele, depicting mistress and maid. Inv. no. E199 (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of Dodecanese/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

70 out of 1200 monuments in Tsouli’s 2013 corpus. Seven more reliefs are reported since 2013, Bosnakis and Hallof 2016: nos 2907, 2910, 2915, 2918 (the last one now lost); Kokkorou-Alevras 2017: no. K59; Bosnakis and Hallof 2018: nos 3242, 3272. 21 Linfert 1976: 137 ff.; Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: 43-4. 22 Bosnakis 2008: nos 1, 4; Tsouli 2013: 286-91, cat. nos 17-18. 23 Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: nos 117, 146; Tsouli 2013: 271-3, cat. nos 465, 473. 24 Pfuhl and Möbius 1979: nos 1563, 2054, 2040, 1638; Tsouli 2009: 97-8, figs 8-11; Tsouli 2013: 324-7, cat. nos 4, 11, 464, 596. 25 Pfuhl and Möbius 1979: nos 2263, 2264, 2257; Tsouli 2013: 347-8, cat. nos 462, 463, 478. The same theme is also very popular in Kos in kraters in the round, see infra, n. 103. 26 The sudden increase in Koan tombstones production is certainly due to the economic prosperity and more stable conditions in the Eastern Aegean during that era. The heightened production in the funerary field is also apparent in a variety of locations in Eastern Aegean, see Linfert 1976: 138; Schmidt 1991: 41; Karlsson 2014: 7, 9. 20

production of the 1st century BC and show the adoption of norms that were current at the time throughout the Hellenistic world. The traditional theme of a seated woman and a standing man united in a handshake (dexiosis) is one of the most favourite schemes.27 The dexiosis between a standing couple is scarce, whereas frontally standing couples appear only once.28 Laurenzi 1955-6: 147, no. 219; Pfuhl and Möbius 1979: no. 1064; Tsouli 2004: 141, fig. 7; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 9, 589. 28 Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: nos 706 and 537; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 587 and 474 respectively. 27

178

Chrysanthi Tsouli: Grave Markers (Semata) of the Koan Necropoleis

Figure 3. Banquet relief in the Neratzia Castle, Kos (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of Dodecanese/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

Regarding the single-figured reliefs, the theme of the standing, frontal male, female or child, occasionally accompanied by an attendant or a pet, predominates.29 These pictorial elements evoke the slave-serviced and pet-enlivened domestic environment, the oikos, of the well-to-do. The presence of a herm or pillar next to male figures harbours associations with the gymnasium and the palaestra,30 denoting the new type of learned and politically active citizen. The banquet motif persists in this period for the commemoration of couples or whole families,31 having though completely obliterated the heroic elements, with the exception of armour hanging in the background and alluding to military prowess. The depiction of vessels goes on. Vessels are either symbols of the deceased’s virtues and inclinations, like the kalathos (wool basket) that alludes to a virtuous housewife,32 or they are interpreted as heroic attributes or associated with chthonian deities and funerary rites, as in the case of the skyphos/kantharos.33

Within this homogeneous repertoire two exceptional reliefs, most probably special commissions, deviate from the standard format and stand out for their originality; a female figure nursing a baby (Figure 4), an extremely scarce theme in funerary iconography,34 and a male figure depicted in the scheme of the symposiast on the prow of a war-ship,35 a theme elsewhere unattested. In the 1st century BC an equally active, but more massive production is carried on. The type of the frontal, standing figure, either a child with its favourite animal or an adult in a statuary pose, usually accompanied by one or more servants, denoting one’s wealth, enjoys great success during that period.36 Seated figures, or a combination of a seated and a standing, frontal figure are not so frequent.37 Male figures are occasionally represented as warriors in repose,38 following the traditional scheme. The theme of the youth seated on a rock is heavily dependent on Delian archetypes for castaways widespread throughout the Aegean in the advanced Hellenistic period.39 Heroic

Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: no. 732; Tsouli 2004: 137, fig. 3; Bosnakis 2008: no. 132; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 7, 588, 763. 30 Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: no. 175; Tsouli 2004: 139, fig. 5; Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 16; Kokkorou-Alevras 2017: 49-51, no. K59. The same iconographic type appears in a funerary naiskos of the 1st century BC/1st century AD (Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 1). 31 Laurenzi 1955-6: no. 238; Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: no. 1571; Tsouli 2009: 98, figs 3, 14-15; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 5, 335, 597. 32 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 919, 1168. cf. the 3rd-century BC stele in Tsouli 2013: cat. no 478. 33 Bosnakis 2008: no. 290; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 601, 919. 29

Bosnakis 2012: 382, fig. 8; Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 76. Pfuhl and Möbius 1979: no. 1276; Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 6. 36 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 20, 21, 336 (children or maidens with a pet), 14, 460, 1067 (male figures), 590 (female figure). 37 Segre 2007: no. 178; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 666, 591, 592. 38 Laurenzi 1955-6: no. 220; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 2, 476. 39 Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: no. 828; Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 459. 34 35

179

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 5. Grave relief of the gladiator Ounion, Neratzia Castle, Kos. Inv. no. E219 (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/ Ephorate of Antiquities of Dodecanese/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

themes,40 that is the horseman, libation at an altar and, particularly, the banquet are very popular. The banquet reliefs are the only ones incorporating a number of additional elements, such as elaborate furniture and accoutrements of the banquet, to put the emphasis on luxuriant ambience.41 Coiling snakes, armour and a horse bust depicted on a ledge at the background add a heroic connotation to the scenes. Plants, animals and inanimate objects bearing a symbolic meaning, such as lions, snakes, ivy garlands and weapons, are occasionally depicted as autonomous themes.42 The relief tombstones production declines from the era of Augustus onwards, especially during the Middle and Late Empire. Only a few themes of the Hellenistic repertoire, such as the funerary banquet or animals as independent images, are retained.43 The Romanization

Figure 4. Relief grave stele depicting a nursing mother, Kos Museum. Inv. no. E20 (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/ Ephorate of Antiquities of Dodecanese/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

Laurenzi 1955-6: nos 229, 223 and 231; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 604 and probably 599 (libation), 598 (horseman). 41 Pfuhl and Möbius 1979: nos 1492, 1515; Tsouli 2009: 98, figs 13, 16; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 8, 466, 467, 1068. 42 Pfuhl and Möbius 1979: no. 2201; Berges 1996: no. 277; Segre 2007: nos 350, 436; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 475 and 920 (animals), 3, 602, 603 (ivy garlands), 13 (shield). 43 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 593 (funerary banquet), 468 (amphora), 479, 607, 669 (animals). 40

180

Chrysanthi Tsouli: Grave Markers (Semata) of the Koan Necropoleis

Figure 6. The typology of Koan gravemarkers

of art manifests itself in some new themes, such as objects denoting professions44 and portraits,45 both appearing only once. The gladiatorial reliefs (Figure 5),46 on the other hand, accounting six relief monuments, form the largest group of the Middle and Late Imperial times and are the principal visual trace of change wrought by Roman rule. They depict gladiators either fighting or standing with the insignia of their victories.

absent. The stele is the type of grave monument which usually bears a relief scene, though the number of relief stelai is quite limited in comparison to aniconic, inscribed ones. The number of 3rd century BC stelai is fairly small.48 By the 2nd century BC, however, and throughout the 1st century BC the typology of the stelai becomes fully crystallized and fairly standardized. The relief scenes are more often rendered in a recessed panel or surrounded by a simple frame than by a naiskosshaped frame.49 The type of aniconic stele (Figure 7) that enjoys great popularity in the 2nd century is the one with a cornice crowning (type Α.ΙΙΙ.β).50 Stelai with a pedimented crowning, either free standing (type Α.ΙΙ.α.ii) or rendered in relief on the triangular top of the tombstone (type Α.ΙΙ.γ), are quite numerous.51

The Typology of the Hellenistic and Roman Monuments As already stressed, the Koan funerary monuments with a relief, figural scene (the fragmentary pieces included) constitute only a small part of the funerary production. Noteworthy is, though, the variety of the aniconic monuments (Figure 6). Their typological classification is made on the basis of their form, architectural frame and crowning. The way the relief scene, if any, is incorporated in the monument is also taken into consideration.

2008: 185-8. For a systematic classification of the whole corpus Tsouli 2013: 80-137, 82 dr. 1, cat. nos 1-16 (type A.I, naiskos-shaped stelai), 17-334 (type A.II, stelai with pedimented crowning), 335-458 (type A.III, stelai with cornice crowning), 459-568 (type, A.IV, plaques), 569586 (type A.V, pillar-shaped stelai), 587-606 (type A.VI, fragmentary relief stelai), 608-610 (type A.VI, stelai with an arched top). For the recent classification of Bosnakis and Hallof 2016: nos 1676-1794 (stelae fastigatae), 1795-2132 (stelae parvae cum automate insculpto vel inciso), 2133-2306 (stelae cymatio ornatae), nos 2307-2470 (stelae simplices), 2471-2632 (stelae mutilae), 2633-2701 (stelae et tabulae formae incertae vel ignotae), 2927-2934 (tabulae regulis marginatae et ansatae). For recent finds Bosnakis 2013; Doulfis and KokkorouAlevras 2017: nos K10-16. 48 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 4, 5, 11, 12, 17, 18, 462-465, 473, 478, 596 (relief stelai), 22, 23, 339-347, 449, 480-483 (aniconic stelai). 49 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 19, 335, 474, 587, 588, 597, 601, 604 and 6, 7, 16 respectively. 50 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 348-379, 449-451. 51 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 24-29, 78-84, 106.

Stelai form the largest group, numbering 610 pieces of various forms: naiskos-shaped stelai, stelai with a pedimented or cornice crowning, atectonic stelai or plaques, without any architectural structure, and pillarshaped stelai (Figure 7).47 Palmette stelai are completely Pfuhl and Möbius 1979: no. 2265; Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 337 (rudder). Segre 2007: no. 766; Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 595. 46 Pfuhl and Möbius 1979: nos 1202, 1233, 1234; Bosnakis 2008: no. 206; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 10, 470, 471, 477, 594, 770. 47 For a first typological classification see Tsouli 2004: 137-50; Bosnakis 44 45

181

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 7. The typology of Koan grave stelai (drawing: A. Ginti)

The pediments of these stelai are projecting the shaft of the monument and present a plastic rendering of their morphological traits (acroteria, geison, cyma). Sporadically appears the type of plain stele or wide slab (type Α.IV.δ.ii).52 The same types of stelai, either plain or adorned with a relief scene, are also produced throughout the 1st century BC.53

introduced, as a result of the change that came with the establishment of the Roman Empire in the Greek world. The last relief stelai are produced in the 1st century AD, an exception in the following centuries being only the gladiatorial reliefs and one or two more reliefs in a recessed panel.54 The aniconic stelai are still produced in abundance, but their morphological traits are reduced to the minimum forms of each type. Such is the case with the pediment stelai: the free-standing pediment of the Hellenistic period is usually replaced by a pediment which has no central acroterion and it does not protrude the sides of the shaft, thus resembling an extension of

Many of these types will persist in the Roman era in a simplified form, while novelties will be gradually Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 484–488. Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 2, 3, 8, 13, 14, 20, 21, 76, 336, 459, 460, 466, 467, 475, 476, 569, 570, 589-592, 598, 599, 602, 603 (relief stelai), 30-42, 8596, 380-424, 452-453, 489-497 (aniconic stelai).

52 53

54

182

See supra, nn. 43-46.

Chrysanthi Tsouli: Grave Markers (Semata) of the Koan Necropoleis

the shaft and not the crowning.55 The horizontal geison and cyma are in most cases omitted, whereas in some of the later examples just the outline of the sloping geison with oversize or diminutive side acroteria can be discerned. Two new types of pediment stelai make their appearance and enjoy great success in this period; the first one is the stele with a pediment inscribed in relief (type A.II.δ) or incised (A.II.ζ) within the rectangular outline of the marble slab.56 The numerous stelai that fall into these categories, especially the ones dating to the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD, usually have oversized acroteria and scanty ornamental elements in the tympanon. The second new type of that era is the stele with a triangular top (type A.II.β),57 a simplified version of the pediment. The production of stelai crowned by a cornice is quite limited,58 though their morphological traits remain the same. Pillar-shaped stelai (type A.V),59 with or without crowning, as well as plain stelai or plaques (type Α.IV.δ.ii),60 are quite common. The latter may be near-square in shape or have an accented horizontal axis and were sometimes meant to be attached to, or incorporated into, a burial structure.61 A unique example with a curvilinear formation at the top, as well as a couple of rectangular slabs with an inscription carved on a tabula ansata or in a panel bordered by moldings,62 apparently meant to be integrated into an architectural construction, are clearly influenced by the Roman taste.

appear as early as the beginning of the 3rd century BC, before the production of rectangular and cylindrical altars, with whom they share the same function.65 They constitute the most popular type of tombstone during the 3rd century BC, when they served as freestanding monuments. Plenty of the Roman cubes, however, have an accented horizontal axis and were meant to be incorporated into a burial structure, like the aforementioned plaques. An intermediary type between the cubic monuments and the rectangular altars is a mensa fitted with a cubic crowning that bears a shallow cavity for choes (type Δ).66 Altars (type E) amount to 317 monuments and correspond to the second largest group of Koan funerary monuments, surpassed only by the group of stelai. Three main types of monolithic altars are under investigation, each with several sub-groups, classified on the basis of their form, crowning and, if any, relief decoration. The main types are the rectangular pillarshaped altar, the rectangular, oblong altar with volutes and the cylindrical altar (Figures 8-9). The pillar-shaped altar (type E.I), named after the near square cross-section of its orthostat, accounts for 95 pieces and it can bear crown moldings (type Ε.I.α), crown moldings with corner acroteria atop (type Ε.I.β), two relief pediments, inscribed on the barriers or the finial of the short sides (type E.I.γ), and, in the most common type, a relief pediment on the front (type E.I.δ) (Figure 8).67 The particular feature of the set-back stepped finial, combined with all types of crowning in the majority of Koan altars, finds good parallels in the crowning of monumental funerary edifices in Asia Minor,68 as well as in smaller funerary steppedblock monuments in Loryma in the Karian Chersonese (Rhodian Peraia), Alexandria, Cyrene, Sicily and Magna Graecia in the West.69 The orthostat of the Koan altars

Another type of monument, used almost exclusively to mark the boundaries of private or religious associations’ burial grounds, are roughly worked stones of various forms (type B),63 numbering 54 examples. They occasionally take the form of a near-rectangular slab, with the inscribed part better smoothed than the rest of the monument. Their morphological traits remain constant in their production from the 2nd century BC to the 2nd century AD. Cubic monuments (type Γ, comprising 92 pieces),64 used not only as grave markers but also as recipients of offerings to the deceased like the trapeza (mensa),

Patsiada (1996: 100-1) has also argued that funerary trapezai, dating to the late 4th and 3rd centuries BC and found in the urban necropolis of Rhodes, were later replaced by cylindrical altars. 66 Bosnakis 2008: no. 303; Tsouli 2013: 141, cat. no. 762. cf. a Karian funerary cube, fitted with a rim on its upper surface for capturing liquids during libation, that is identical in form to a votive altar, Held 2003: nos 25 and 19 respectively. 67 Tsouli 2013: 141-69, cat. nos 763-768, 769-776, 777-783 and 784-841 respectively; Tsouli in print/a. There are sixteen more examples missing their crowning, Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 842-857. For the relevant group in Bosnakis and Hallof 2016: ‘arae sepulcrales tetragonales’, nos 1398-1525; Bosnakis and Hallof 2018: nos 3060-3063, 3116-3120, 3151-3152, 3171, 3195-3196, 3254-3258, 3372, 3841. The type of pillar-shaped altar with a relief pediment was completed ignored in 19th- and early-20th-century epigraphic corpora, where many such monuments were identified as pedimented stelai, cf. Paton and Hicks 1891: nos 237, 251, 258, 311, 324; Herzog 1899: nos 97, 99, 110; Maiuri 1925: nos. 594, 604. 68 Tsouli 2013: 154-5; Held 2014: 252-3; Lundgren 2016: 252-5; Tsouli 2017a: 189, nn. 26-29. For depictions of funerary naiskoi with stepped finials in Apulian vases see de Julis and Loiacono 1985: fig. 522; Montanaro 2007: fig. 584. 69 Tsouli 2013: 153, 155; Tsouli 2017a: 190, n. 31; Especially for Loryma see recently, Held 2003: nos 13-16, 20-21, 23; Held 2014; Lundgren 2016: 255-65. 65

Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 47-49, 51 -63. The only exceptions are nos 4446, 50 and 97-103, 108. 56 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 108-180 and 196-334 respectively. Both types had scanty predecessors in the 1st century BC, see Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 106, 107 and 194, 195. 57 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 64-75. 58 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 425-448, 454-458. 59 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 571-579, 581-586. 60 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 498-568. 61 cf. the Macedonian plaques in Nigdelis 2017: nos 1083-1329. 62 Tsouli 2013: 120 n. 125, 123 n. 650, cat. nos 114, 117, 121, 164. Much more frequent is an incised border of the inscription, occupying almost the whole front side of the stelai, Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 110, 142, 148, 191, 197, 311, 313, 325. cf. the Karian stelai from Stratonikeia, Șahin 1982: nos 802, 817, 819, 820, 1214, 1216, 1237, 1249. 63 Tsouli 2013: 137-8, cat. nos 611-664. cf. the relevant group in Bosnakis and Hallof 2016: ‘termini sepulcrales’, nos 2702-2826. 64 Tsouli 2013: 138, cat. nos 670-761. cf. the relevant group in Bosnakis and Hallof 2016: ‘lapides cubici’, nos 1551-1675. 55

183

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

Figure 8. The typology of Koan rectangular altars (drawing: Chr. Tsouli)

is usually undecorated or, rarely, adorned with a relief garland suspended by bucephalia, one in the middle of each side,70 a feature that differentiates them from later altars, produced during the Roman times elsewhere. An exceptional monument has a figural scene in a naiskos-shaped frame.71 The systematic typological classification of the Koan pillar-shaped altars revealed that their form is heavily depended on the Archaic 70 71

Ionian altars with crown moldings, as well as on the wider disseminated Classical altars with pedimented barriers of Mainland and Island Greece.72 Their main morphological features, combined with different types of crowning, remain constant in the Koan funerary production throughout the whole Hellenistic period, along with a restricted number of altars from Mainland

Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 764, 778, 785-791, 842-844. Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 763.

For Archaic and Classical altars, Yavis 1949; Bakalakis 1963; Aktseli 1996; Ohnesorg 2005.

72

184

Chrysanthi Tsouli: Grave Markers (Semata) of the Koan Necropoleis

Figure 9. The typology of Koan cylindrical altars (drawing: Chr. Tsouli)

and Island Greece73 and a significant group of altars with pedimented relief barriers produced in Rhodes and its territory.74 The same basic form is reproduced by the Roman funerary altar, whose origins scholars had till now located in the West75 and which was

predominant in Rome and Pompeii in the 1st century AD, crowned either by moldings or by a freestanding triangular or curvilinear pediment (Volutengiebel), combined with acroteria and side cushions (pulvini).76 From there it spread to North Italy, Hispania and the Germanic provinces, Norricum, Pannonia and Dalmatia and appeared in Macedonia, Thrace and Asia Minor

Tsouli 2013: 148-9, nn. 766-767, 152 n. 783; Tsouli in print/a: nn. 9-10, 24. Fraser 1977: 13-25; Ohnesorg 2005: 137-8; Tsouli 2017a: 191, nn. 4449. 75 Altmann 1905: 1-8, 27, 32-33; Tsouli (2013: 149, nn. 770-771) sums up relevant arguments in earlier bibliography. 73 74

Altmann 1905; Boschung 1987: 12, 16-22, 38; Kleiner 1987: 15-16, 31, 37-8; Dräger 1994: 21.

76

185

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

in the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD.77 The particular feature of the relief pediment on the front, occurring in insignificant numbers in Western and Eastern provinces from the 2nd century AD onwards,78 but appearing in the majority of the Macedonian altars inscribed within the crowning impost block of the three faces, for this reason referred to by scholars as ‘Macedonian’ type of altar,79 predominated in Kos as early as the middle Hellenistic period. The Koan pillarshaped altar made its appearance in the 3rd century BC and was systematically produced during the 2nd and 1st centuries BC. Its production entered into decline in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD. The Roman Koan altars presented the same basic morphological features with the monuments of the Hellenistic period, while minor differences can be detected only in the proportions of the individual parts (accented base and crowning).

three bucephalia, or, only once, with deer heads on the front and rear and one bucephalion on the short sides supporting a relief garland of flowers and fruits. The particular feature of these altars is the upwards turning volutes at the extremities of a fascia on the upper part, ornamented with a palmette-and-tendril-frieze. The classification in sub-variants is based on whether the floral tendrils spring from a central acanthuscalyx (type E.II.α) or from the volutes (type E.II.β) or on whether the fascia remains practically unadorned (type E.II.γ). The dating of the monuments was mainly based on stylistic grounds, since inscriptions are missing, as well as on comparison with more precisely dated monuments from other regions that bear similar decorative motifs, that is architectural friezes and decorative bands of Achaean and Boeotian stelai. Thus, typology, accompanied by a stylistic analysis, provides a chronological sequence for the three subvariants production:86 type Ε.ΙΙ.α represents the most elaborate and early monuments, dating back to the late 3rd – early 2nd centuries BC, and continues into the late Hellenistic period. The production of type E.II.β begins in the middle of the 2nd century, flourishes in the second half of that century and goes on to the late Hellenistic period. Type Ε.ΙΙ.γ, lastly, with minimum decorative motifs on the crowning band, makes its appearance in the second half of the 2nd century, but the majority of the monuments date to the 1st century BC. This type of altar does not have any impact on other Hellenistic workshops,87nor does it continue into the Roman period. The detailed examination of the stylistic and technical characteristics of the decorative motifs of the altars block, boucephalia and garlands, proves their affinity to the workmanship of the decoration of the Koan cylindrical altars and their production by the same, local workshops.88

The type of rectangular, oblong altar with sofavolutes (type E.II, Figure 8 bottom), or ‘bench-altar’ according to Fraser,80 accounts 58 monuments, largely unpublished.81 These altars do not mark the grave, since, save one,82 they are not inscribed, but they are used as recipients of offerings for the dead or, more scarcely, as a base for an upper member, as indicated by the dowel-holes on the upper surface of some of them.83 Its unadorned form, usually with down-turning volutes, was known at earlier periods for a cult or votive use in Mainland and Island Greece, as well as in Asia Minor and Magna Graecia.84 In Kos it is produced at the turning of the 3rd to the 2nd century BC onwards for funerary use,85 adorned for the first time with two or Gabelmann 1977: 212ff.; Dexheimer 1998: 7-13 (North Italy); Gamer 1989: 101-3 (Hispania); Scholz 2012: 276 (Germanic provinces); Cambi 2013: 89, 98 (Dalmatia); Adam-Veleni 2002; SpiliopoulouDonderer 2002: 112; Adam-Veleni 2012; Nigdelis 2017: no. 1083-1414; Papageorgiou 2017 (Macedonia); Rizakis and Touratsoglou (2016: 124, nn. 39-40) stress that this category of monuments possessed a regional dimension within Macedonia, being restricted to the northwest, south and central areas of the province, and that their distribution indicates that the altar type was valued in Roman colonies and in urban centers. For Asia Minor see Tsouli in print/a: nn. 11, 26; Tsouli in print/b: n. 84. For scanty 1st-century examples in Asia Minor see Blümel 1992: no. 415; Şahin 1994: no. 138; Engelmann 2012: no. 18. 78 Tsouli in print/a: nn. 55-56. This altar type was more valued in Hispania, see Tsouli in print/a: n. 57. 79 Adam-Veleni 2002: 23 n. 3, 59, n. 245, with earlier bibliography. 80 Fraser 1977: 31, 119-20, n. 158, who was the first to make a short reference to this type. 81 For the whole corpus see Tsouli 2013: 169-92, dr. 2, cat. nos 858-915. Some of these altars are also mentioned in Poupaki 2012: nos B205-B207, B228-B234, B276-B282, B284-B285. In the corpus of Bosnakis and Hallof (2016: no. 1503) just the only inscribed piece is included, under the group ‘arae sepucrales tetragonales’. 82 Maiuri 1925: no. 571; Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 891. 83 Tsouli 2013: 192, cat. nos 861, 867, 897, 904 (one dowel-hole in the middle), 883, 892, 894, 895 (two dowel-holes symmetrically placed on the upper surface). 84 Déonna 1934: 430-1, figs 41.8-10, 42.11-17; Yavis 1949: §61, 160-5, figs 43, 44, 46; Aktseli 1996: ‘Volutenaltäre’, 65-6, 72-3, type Va-c, figs 7-9, tb. 6.2; Ohnesorg 2005: ‘Polsteraltäre’, 4, 192, nn. 1070-1073, fig. 3. 85 Fraser (1977: 31 n. 158) argues against the funerary use of such monuments, and in favor of their being a type of bench or altar, since only one bears a funerary inscription. On the other hand, Berges (1996: 26, n. 66) thinks that their funerary use is quite possible. 77

The third, and far more numerous type of Koan altar, amounting to 164 pieces, is the cylindrical altar (type Ε.ΙΙΙ, Figure 9),89 a type which usually bears bucephalia, ornamented with taeniae (fillets) or vittae and connected with a garland, and it is rarely unadorned90 or bears a figurative decoration.91 The garland is either simple, made of laurel leaves (leaf-garland), or much richer, made of ivy and vine leaves and adorned with flowers, fruits and cereals (fruit-garland). The subsidiary Tsouli 2013: 175-89. As regards the decoration of the altars’ block, it resembles the one of the afore-mentioned Rhodian group of altars with pedimented barriers (supra, n. 74). Two altars from Delos (Couilloud 1974: nos 222, 500) bear the same type of decoration with crown mouldings, as well as two more altars from Sicilian Solus (Berges 1997: 95, pl. 21.5), whose crown mouldings are missing at the edges. 88 Tsouli 2013: 190-2. 89 Tsouli 2013: 192-223, dr. 3, cat. nos 916-1079. See also Bosnakis and Hallof 2016: type ‘arae sepulcrales rotundae’, nos 1243-1397; Bosnakis and Hallof 2018: nos 3111-3115, 3149-3150, 3166-3170, 3191-3194, 3249-3253. 90 Tsouli 2013: type E.III.α, 198, cat. nos 916-918. 91 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 919-920, 1067-1070. 86 87

186

Chrysanthi Tsouli: Grave Markers (Semata) of the Koan Necropoleis

Furthermore, we attempt for the first time to establish a systematic typological and mainly chronological classification of the altars in their totality,95 including those already published but also the unpublished ones along with some recently found, by a) using the evidence of certain altars that are relatively securely dated, on prosopographical criteria contained in their inscriptions,96 b) by exploring the possibilities of dating the remainder on the basis of palaeographical data,97 and c) by combining the prosopographical and palaeographical data with the stylistic analysis of the vegetal decoration of the altars, substantiated through comparisons with architectural works. Through the assessment of the data above, it becomes clear that the main production of the Koan cylindrical altars, on account of monuments with relief decoration of bucephalia and garlands (type E.III.γ, Figure 10), began, in all probability, from the end of the 3rd century to the 2nd quarter of the 2nd century BC, when some altars are securely dated on the basis of prosopography. The production of all subtypes continued to be favoured into the 2nd and 1st centuries BC, but their relative proportion of occurrence changed. The most monumental subtype of all (EIII.γ.i.A1) with the dikeras, which retains the fewer in number examples, destined obviously for the financially stronger class, presents a clustering in the late 3rd – first half of the 2nd century BC with hardly any examples in the 1st century BC. An almost equally balanced production of monuments is observed in the 2nd and 1st centuries regarding the remaining subtypes of cylindrical altars, common is though the increased schematization of the bucephalia and the garland’s decorative elements. The production goes on in the late 1st century BC and the 1st century AD, whereas in the 2nd and 3rd centuries earlier altars are widely re-used for a second or even a third time.

Figure 10. Funerary altar from Pyli, Kos. Inv. no. 1517 (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of Dodecanese/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

decoration also includes dikerata (double cornucopiae), so-called Manschetten and bunches of grapes. The first systematic typological study of the Koan cylindrical altars appeared in Berges’ study on Koan and Rhodian cylindrical altars more than 20 years ago.92 110 Koan altars were gathered in it, about two thirds of the present corpus. The biggest weakness of that study, however, is the lack of chronology for the majority of the altars and the dating of the remaining ones within a broad framework, exclusively on stylistic grounds.93 Berges’ overall typology is here maintained, although a number of more refined types is introduced in order to achieve the highest possible degree of homogeneity in the classification of these monuments (Figure 9).94

Trying to evaluate the place of the Koan production of cylindrical altars in a wider cultural framework, one should mention the close relation of Koan altars, particularly of one group (subtype E.III.γ.i.Ε),with

other secondary motif; nos 990-1047, subtype E.III.γ.i.Δ1, with a laurel leaf-garland, usually with vittae, Manschetten and bunches of grape; nos 1048-1058, subtype E.III.γ.i.Δ2, with a simple, unadorned garland and no secondary motifs; nos 1059-1063, subtype E.III.γ.i.E1, belonging to the so-called Rhodian type, usually with a Rhodian type crowning, a rich fruit-garland, moving taeniae and vittae, bunches of grapes and occasionally crossed strings above the bucephalia; nos 1064-1066, subtype E.III.γ.i.E2, belonging to the so-called Rhodian type with a Rhodian type crowning and a thin, simple, unadorned garland; nos 1067-1068, subtype E.III.γ.ii, with a garland, bucephalia and a relief scene in a recessed panel; nos 1069-1070, subtype E.III.γ.iii, Nike-altars; nos 1071-1079, subtype E.III.δ, separately made altars’ crownings and bases. 95 Tsouli 2013: 199-217, 220-2. 96 Höghammar 2004: 69-75. 97 The datings in IG XII 4.3 (Bosnakis and Hallof 2016) are used when they refer to the primary inscription of the monuments and not when just the secondary inscription survives.

Berges 1996. For earlier typological treatments, within the broader framework of cylindrical altars from various areas, see Fraser 1977: 29-31; Righetti 1982; Ajtai 1988/1989. 93 See comments in Höghammar 2004: 77-9. 94 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 916-918, type E.III.α, unadorned altars; nos 919920, type E.III.β, altars with a relief scene on the shaft; type E.III.γ, altars with a garland and bucephalia, nos 921-933, subtype E.III.γ.i.A1, with a fruit-garland, dikeras, wide taeniae and occasionally vittae; nos 934-964, subtype E.III.γ.i.A2, with a fruit-garland, taeniae and vittae; nos 965-980, subtype E.III.γ.i.B, with a fruit-garland, flowers, vittae, Manschetten above the bucephalia and in the middle of the garland’s arches, where a bunch of grape hungs; nos 981-989, subtype E.III.γ.i.Γ, with a fruit-garland, flowers and occasionally vittae, without any 92

187

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

of them also served as pedestals for other tombstones, as indicated by the cuttings on their upper surfaces.101 The rest of the Koan grave markers are classified in small groups of monuments, such as columellae or phallus-shaped monuments (type Z), prevailing in the 1st century BC and the Roman times, a few inscribed bases (type H), some inscribed architectural members, incorporated into burial structures (type Θ), a few miscellaneous sculptures in secondary use as tombstones and a variety of sculptures in the round (type I), comprising human figures and portraits dating to the Roman times, as well as a sphinx and a herm.102 Αn almost unknown type of grave marker is also presented here, that of the marble solid volute krater carved in the round (Figure 11), a type also depicted in relief in Kos, where it comprises the most numerous group of the Greek World.103 An attempt is made to trace its diffusion in Mainland and Island Greece (four pieces in Macedonia, one in Nisyros) and in Magna Graecia (seven pieces in Tarent, three in Sicily).104 Lastly, a few local sarcophagi decorated with garlands are mentioned, dependent on Asia Minor sarcophagi workshops but presenting similar technical and iconographical traits to the local altar workshop.105 As has been repeatedly stressed, the input of the Koan workshop into the Hellenistic funerary art lies, mainly, in the systematic production of aniconic types of gravemarkers, which became very popular during the Late Hellenistic and Roman periods throughout the Greek world, notably the pillar-shaped and the cylindrical altar. The big number of Koan funerary altars,106 especially with regard to the monuments of the Hellenistic period, when they surpass in number that of relief and aniconic stelai altogether,107 inevitably raises several questions:

Figure 11. Marble krater from Kamari, Kephalos, Kos. Inv. no. Γ1041 (© Ministry of Culture and Sports/Ephorate of Antiquities of Dodecanese/Archaeological Receipts Fund).

the Rhodian altar workshop,98 though the Koan counterparts display an exquisite detailing and superior craftsmanship, partly depending on their material, albeit superior to lartian (Rhodian) stone. Furthermore, we should stress that the Koan production preceded that of other local Aegean island workshops, e.g. that of Delos in the Cyclades which began after 166 BC. An attempt is made to assign to distinct stonemasons or local sculptural workshops some groups of Koan cylindrical and rectangular altars, as well as some cylindrical altars from the neighbouring areas of Asia Minor, on the basis of similar morphological traits, iconographic schemata, technical workmanship and the marble provenance.99 Lastly, we must mention that although all Koan cylindrical altars served as grave markers100 and recipients of offerings or libations, a few

one more was probably originally used as such, IG XII 4.2 no. 538 and Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 995 and 955 respectively. 101 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 922, 959, 1010, 1011, 1038, 1050, 1054, 1057. 102 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 1080-1125 (type Z, columellae or phallusshaped monuments), 1126-1131 (type H, bases), 1132-1142 (type Θ, architectural members), 1143-1154 (type I, sculptures). See respectively Bosnakis and Hallof 2016: ‘cippi rotundi et fungiformes’ nos 2863-2904, ‘bases’ nos 2938-2971, ‘aedificiorum sepulcralium membra architectonica’ nos 2972-3010, ‘protomae’ nos 2919-2922, ‘arulae, hermae’ nos 2923-2926. 103 Tsouli 2013: 243-6, cat. nos 1160-1167; Kokkorou-Alevras 2017: 55-6, cat. no. K63 (C. Tsouli). 104 Tsouli 2013: 246-58; Tsouli 2017b: 349-50, nn. 45-63. 105 Tsouli 2013: 259-64, cat. nos 1168-1177. 106 Funerary altars of all types amount to 317 pieces and equal to 26% of the whole Koan funerary production in Tsouli’s (2013) corpus. 107 If one takes into account the monuments of the Hellenistic period alone, (in the Hellenistic period date 144 out of 164 cylindrical altars, 67 out of 95 pillar-shaped altars, all of the rectangular oblong altars (58), 53 relief and 170 aniconic stelai out of 610 stelai and 115 out of 273 of the rest grave markers types in Tsouli’s 2013 corpus, 607 monuments in total, see Tsouli in print/b: n. 17), the number of altars, 269 in total, surpasses that of stelai and equals to 44.3% of the whole Hellenistic funerary production. Most of the discrepancies in dating between this corpus and the one of IG XII 4.3 (Bosnakis and Hallof 2016) are due to the fact that the latter’s dating does not refer to the monuments, but to the surviving inscriptions, which, in the

Tsouli 2013: 215-17. Tsouli 2013: 222, nn. 1090-1094; Tsouli in print/b: n. 103. The identification of the marble provenance has been made with macroscopic observation by Dr. Eir. Poupaki, whom I warmly thank for her valuable help. The interrelations between Koan and Karian cylindrical altars had been already stressed by Fraser (1977: 43-5), Berges (1986: 60ff.), Höghammar (2004: 80), Poulsen (2004: 196) and Poupaki (2012: 144-5, 216-18). 100 Just two Koan cylindrical altars had a secondary votive use, and 98 99

188

Chrysanthi Tsouli: Grave Markers (Semata) of the Koan Necropoleis

why was this type of tombstone so much valued in this region, the cylindrical altar in particular, also favoured in the rest of the Dorian cities of Rhodes, Halikarnassos and Knidos?108 Why would someone being able to afford the cost of the material and carving prefer to invest it on an altar than on a costly stele with a relief scene?109 It is possible to deduce a response to this phenomenon if considering that altars have a dual function, both as memorials and as recipients of the offerings and libations to the deceased. Due to the existence of cavities on the upper side of several altars,110 it can be sustained that libations were practiced on them. Several others, mainly rectangular ones, preserve a dowel-hole for the attachment of a small epithema,111

probably a small kioniskos for suspending wreaths, like the Rhodian rectangular altars’ bosses.112 Altars thus played an active role to commemorative activities and post-funerary rituals atop the grave.113 A few of them list at least two generations of a single family, thus denoting that altars must have been regarded as the monument par excellence which decorated the family tomb. A substantial number of such monuments114 was either relieved of original inscriptions or was ‘enriched’ with secondary inscriptions added by new owners next to the old ones decades or even centuries later, in the 1st century BC and the Early and Middle Empire. Serving the cult of the dead, they became the means of visualization of the idea of heroization. Bestowing the nenomismena to the deceased115 and contributing to his commemoration and heroization with altars116 seemed more important in the Koan society than self-representation through funerary statues or reliefs, and even than expressing one’s emotional distress through touching relief scenes. On account of the big number of Koan honorary inscriptions and statue bases, it also seems probable that honorary statues was a means Koans chose to express their need for social display and shelf-representation during their life-time, not after death.117 On the other hand, epigraphic evidence on plenty Hellenistic rectangular altars in Rhodes, as well as on several Late Hellenistic – Early Imperial cylindrical altars in Karia, confirms that these particular types of monuments were selected for bestowing post-mortem honours to citizens by religious thiasoi (associations), local communities, koina or the demos, who even accorded the honour of a public funeral (ethapsen demosia taphe).118 It seems undeniable that

majority of the altars, are carved in their secondary use. 108 During the 2nd and 1st centuries BC Rhodian funerary relief stelai, that amount to 60 pieces, play a secondary role in comparison to altars, accounting more than 300 cylindrical and about 75 rectangular ones, along with a few sculptures in the round, see Fabricius 1999: 191, 203, 211; Puddu 2010: 36, 48. Hellenistic relief stelai from Halikarnassos are rare since they do not exceed 15 pieces, see Bean and Cook 1955: no. 31 (one stele); Allen 1975 (3 relief bases or pillarshaped stelai); Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: nos 141, 364, 748 (three stelai); Hansen 2008: nos A-E (five banquet reliefs); Bru and Lafli 2011: no. 5 (one stele); Bru and Lafli 2014: nos 2-3 (two stelai). Cylindrical altars, on the other hand, account to 54 speciments, Bean and Cook 1955: no. 43 (one altar base); Berges 1986: Beil. 2, nos 2, 4, 10, 11, 18-19, 22, 29-32, 33, 35-36, 45, 50, 59, 61, 71, 88-89, 91-92, 110, plus nos 1, 23-24, 28, 39-41, 43, 48-49, 60, 70, 86, 93 of unknown provenience in Bodrum Museum, 38 altars in total; Poupaki 2012: nos B182-189, B191-192 (10 altars); Bru and Lafli 2014: nos 4-6 (three altars); Carbon et al. 2017 (one plain altar); Poulsen (2004: 195-7) adds one rectangular altar with figural scenes on all four sides, and Tsouli (in print/b, fig. 10) two unadorned ones. The publication of I.Halikarnassus might potentially change this data. The frequent occurrence of cylindrical altars in contrast to a limited number of stelai is attested in Hellenistic Knidos as well (Berns 2013: 206-8), where just three relief stelai are reported (Pfuhl and Möbius 1977: no. 1068; Blümel 1992: no. 395; Berns 2013: 206, fig. 7) along with a few aniconic ones (Blümel 1992: nos 321, 385, 437, 441, 514, 515, 531, 622, 629, 630, 634, 636), whereas altars make up 46 species, Berges 1986: nos 6-9, 12-17, 20-21, 25-27, 42, 46, 47, 51, 52, 55, 56, 58, 64, 68, 69, 72, 73, 75-85, 87, 96 (41 in total, many of which were re-used in Roman times); Blümel 1992: nos 326, 379, 381, 389 (four pieces); Blümel 2017: no. 38. One should draw the attention to the fact that six more cylindrical altar bases were found in the same region, Blümel 1992: nos 327, 355, 418, 427, 495, 632. The cylindrical altar type is extremely popular in other Karian cities as well, such as Aphrodisias, Stratonikeia, Loryma and the rest of the Rhodian Peraia, while in Iasos it is fairly attested, see Berges 1986: 12-26; Bresson et al. 2001: passim; Lundgren 2016: 264 (Loryma); Nováková 2016: 36-37, 100-3; Tsouli in print/b: n. 96, summing up earlier bibliography. 109 The collation of the afore-mentioned data (nn. 107-108) reveals that the ratio of relief stelai to altars is one to five on Kos, one to six on Rhodes, one to four on Halikarnassos and one to 17 on Knidos. See also Tsouli in print/b, fig. 10. 110 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 930, 942, 972, 973, 976-978, 980-983, 988, 992, 1004, 1046, 1006, 1007, 1015, 1018, 1021, 1024, 1033, 1064, 1131 (cylindrical altars), 881, 910 (oblong, rectangular altars), 851 (pillar-shaped altar), 762 (mensa). Such cavities are not so frequent on Rhodian altars (Fabricius 1999: 217), in contrast to altars in Halikarnassos, for example Berges 1986: nos 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 40, 48, 50, 93 and 9, 20, 78 from Knidos. 111 An integral kioniskos survives on top of the pillar-shaped altar Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 782. Similar epithemata must have been attached on oblong altars (supra, n. 83), and pillar-shaped altars (Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 765, 766, 769, 800, 811, 813, 822, 824), judging by the circular dowel-holes on their upper surface. Rectangular dowel-holes on four pillar-shaped altars (Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 783, 801, 846, 850) were apparently meant for a small epithema of rectangular cross-section. For cylindrical altars serving as pedestals, see supra n. 101.

Fraser 1977: 15-17. Brouma 2015: 160-1; Nováková 2016: 37. 32 pillar shaped and 80 cylindrical altars in Tsouli’s 2013 corpus. 115 Quite revealing is the inscription on a Roman rectangular funerary altar from Karian Arykanda (Şahin 1994: no. 136), fitted with a phiale on top, whose inscription explicitly mentions that the deceased’s mother set up the altar in order to perform the nenomismenai choes to her daughter, ‘κατέστησα τὸν βωμὸν ὥστε ἐπιτελεῖν τὰς νενο[μ]ι̣σμένας χοὰς τῇ γλυ[κ]υτάτῃ θυγατρί μου’. 116 Fabricius (1999: 216 n. 249, 218) also argues in favor of the Rhodian altars’ iconography and use for suspending wreaths or offering of libations as denoting a connection with the ideal of heroization. Gabelmann (1968: 101), Κurtz and Boardman (1971: 301) and Wypustek (2013: 65, 67), among others, consider altars as symbols of heroes. Such claims of heroization have been utterly rejected by Fraser (1977: 80-1). 117 The same holds true for Rhodes, where honorary statues are abundant, see Fabricius 1999: 203, 211; Puddu 2010: 36, 48 and 54-55 respectively. 118 For the inscriptions on Rhodian altars, referring to wreath proclamations at the graves or in the club houses for members of associations, who were almost all metics, see Fraser 1977: 13-24; Fabricius 1999: 202-10, 214-18; Fabricius 2016: 52. Incised wreaths occasionally appear on these altars. There is just one instance of such a funerary, honorific inscription carved on a cylindrical altar from Rhodes (Fraser 1977: 65), and one more from the Koan demos of Phyxa (Paton and Hicks 1891: no. 327), according the honour of public erection of the tombstone. Much more frequent is the occurrence of funerary dedications, usually combined with honours of a public funeral and occasionally with the addition of the title ἥρως, on 112 113 114

189

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

this elevated concept of honours imply some kind of superiority of these persons vis-à-vis the communities, thus attesting to their heroic assimilation.119

in classical types for secular use, bear this type of decoration. A pillar-shaped altar has even offerings rendered in stone on its upper surface.124 Thus, the pictorial language of the decorative motifs of altars hints to the visualization of cult and chthonian symbols.125 Taking into consideration the cost of the marble and of the sculpted decoration an altar required, it must have also been a status symbol, after all.

Although it remains difficult to interpret the phenomenon of heroization for ordinary people, textual attestations confirm that it had a particular character and was firmly rooted in Kos back to the late 4th century BC, as testified by the inventory of the private cult foundation of the heroized Diomedon, venerated along with Herakles.120 The inscription gives detailed information on a heroon with a temenos, gardens, xenones (guest rooms) and a lesche (club house), as well as on the setting up of an endowment for regular sacrifices. The Charmyleion, a monumental temple-like tomb on a podium, with a subterranean chamber, was also equipped, according to the surviving inscription, with a peribolos (precinct), a garden, and a temenos, dedicated to the cult of Charmylos and the Twelve Gods.121 Early Hellenistic heroa with temenoi are not absent from Karia either, as, for example, the mid-3rd-century temenos complex of the benefactor ἥρως Antigonos, son of Epigonos, in Knidos, which included a sekos, a thymele (altar), a dromos, a palaistra and loutra (baths).122 The precincts and the rituals they framed were the raison d’être of these complexes that determined the importance and sanctity of the sites, rather than the tomb buildings on their own. The popularity of the funerary banquet theme from the 4th century to the Roman times also stands as evidence for the prevailing trend of heroizing the dead in these regions.123

Sepulchral Inscriptions Due to the lack of context for the majority of the monuments,126 as they were removed from their original grave sites without recording the circumstances of their discovery, the identification of the person commemorated and its social background can be detected on the basis of the epitaph alone. Greek was overwhelmingly the language of choice for funerary inscriptions, Latin or bilingual texts attested only infrequently.127 It seems that Latin was chosen by colonists or other Latin-speaking immigrants and their descendants and rarely by Greek speakers with Roman citizenship.128 Epigrams usually oscillate between the use of stereotypical formulation and the need to express the uniqueness of the loss and the magnitude of the pain.129 Verse epitaphs are also highly standardized, repeating the same formulas, and typically consist of the name, the patronymic and/or the ethnic of the deceased, or the name alone, occasionally accompanied by the invocation chaire (farewell), or hero chaire (hero farewell), sometimes with an attribute of chreste (good or noble) or mneias charin (in memory of).130 As time passed, and in accordance with Roman prototypes, additional data was occasionally provided about the age and cause of death, in cases of untimely death or of a remarkably long life span, the deceased’s profession or public office, the person or social group that set up the monument.131 Demotics lack completely, and that also holds true in most instances for words denoting the servile status of the deceased (slave, freedman etc.)132 It is thus very complicated to determine the status of an individual based on the onomastikon alone.133

Furthermore, not only did altars serve the cult of dead, but they were also adorned with pictorial motifs (bucephalia, garlands, vittae) that echoed real offerings in divine cult practices, some of which, such as pomegranates, vine and ivy leaves, were closely connected with the underworld. It is no mere incident that all rectangular, oblong altars and the majority of the cylindrical ones, two types of altars that originated cylindrical altars and their bases in Late Hellenistic and Early Imperial Knidos (Blümel 1992: nos 326, 327, 328, 334, 632; Blümel 2017, no. 38), the Rhodian Peraia (Bresson et al. 2001: 109-10, nos 3, 4, 5, 6, 37, 42, 43; Wiemer 2010: 429-431) and Sratonikeia (Varinlioǧlu 1988: nos 26, 2930, 32, 36, 40, 42; Șahin 2010: nos 1492-1493, 1560, 1566, 1577). 119 Hero titles and heroic honours awarded to recently deceased persons are not to be understood as a statement about their ontological status, but, rather, they should be interpreted within the framework of a system of civic honours, Fabricius 2016: 45-6. 120 IG XII 4.1 no. 348, with earlier bibliography; Tsouli 2013: 192, 412. 121 Schazmann 1934; Tsouli 2013: 33-8, summing up earlier bibliography. 122 Blümel 1992: no. 301; Berns 2013: 211. 123 For Koan banquet reliefs see supra, nn. 17, 24, 41; also, Tsouli 2009. For Rhodian banquet reliefs, Fabricius 1999; Fabricius 2016: 52-6. Halikarnassian banquet reliefs, though not very numerous, constitute one third of the total local relief stelai production, supra, n. 108. Nováková (2016: 35-6) claims that ‘an altar and a relief depiction of a funerary banquet can be understood as carriers of the same or similar ideological message’.

124

8.

Segre 2007: no. 175; Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 770; Tsouli in print/a: fig.

Brouma 2015: 161-2. Even though recent excavations on the island have occasionally uncovered tombstones, they are not published in conjunction with the graves they marked yet. 127 Kearsley 2001: nos 63-65, 99-100; Tsouli 2013: 423-5, cat. nos 452, 921, 929, 939, 982, 991, 1001 (bilingual inscriptions, all of them, but the first, carved on cylindrical altars in their second use), 750, 1068, 1041 (Latin inscriptions). 128 For factors leading to language choices, Latin or Greek, see Kearsley 2001: 150; Bauzon 2008: 116. 129 Breuer 1995: 128-9, n. 351; Wypustek 2013; Tsouli 2013: 425-7. 130 Tsouli 2013: 397-400. 131 Tsouli 2013: 401-12. 132 For exemptions see Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 805 (ἀπελεύθερος), 921, 929, 1001 (libertus), 1039. 133 Bosnakis 2008: 197-202, 209-12; Tsouli 2013: 432-48. For the Koan onomastikon fundamental remains the relevant appendix in Sherwin125 126

190

Chrysanthi Tsouli: Grave Markers (Semata) of the Koan Necropoleis

Taking that into consideration, it also proves notorious difficult to reach a safe conclusion for the correlation between the social status of the deceased and the type of monument selected.134 On the basis of nomenclature and prosopography together we can assess that the type of the cylindrical altar was common among Koan citizens, some of which were eminent members of the local community, but it was also chosen by metics and by persons of humble origin.135 This was also the case for the more modest, pillar-shaped altar.136 A freedman bore the cost for the erection of such a monument for his master.137 The type of free-standing cubic monument seems extremely popular among foreigners in the Hellenistic period, although favoured by citizens as well.138 Most types of stelai were equally balanced between citizens and non-citizens, with a slight bias on behalf of persons of humble origin.139 An eminent citizen may have chosen an undecorated stele for his commemoration,140 whereas metics/foreigners chose two of the most elaborate inscribed relief stelai of the island.141 The economic recession of the imperial era, that caused the decline of the relief tombstone production,142 resulted in the re-use of earlier monuments, especially of the most costly cylindrical altars, even by an imperial freedman, a procurator entrusted with the collection of the vicessima hereditatium, who commemorated his

wife by re-using a cylindrical altar.143 Many members of eminent Koan families are commemorated in aniconic stelai: a priestess and a gymnasiarch have stelai with a pedimented crowning and incised wreaths in correlation to their offices,144 an hierokeryx, belonging to a prominent family of Halasarna, is honoured in a modest stele/plaque.145 Even more striking is the type of monument used by an asiarch and a priest of the monarchs – a simple columella.146 Gladiators are the only ones able to afford a relief stele or even a relief pillarshaped altar in the Late Imperial era.147 The assessment of the above data proves that there is no evident differentiation in the type of the monument selected contingent on the origin or social status of the deceased. It is rather one’s willingness or capability to invest money on his funerary monument that leads to the choice of each type. The promotion of post-funerary cultic activities atop the grave also seems to have been an important factor in the selection of specific types of grave markers, as altars. Bibliography Adam-Veleni, P. 2002. Μακεδονικοί Βωμοί. Thessaloniki: Tameio Archaiologikōn Porōn kai Apallotriōseōn. Adam-Veleni, P. 2012. Μακεδονικοί βωμοί. Τιμητικοί και ταφικοί βωμοί των αυτοκρατορικών χρόνων από τη Θεσσαλονίκη, in P. Adam-Veleni and D. Terzopoulou (eds) Αγρός – Οικία – Κήπος – Τόπος: 153-65. Thessaloniki: Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki. Ajtai, R. 1988/1989. Rundaltären mit Niken aus Rhodos und Kos, Studi Classici, Annali di Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia 26, N.S. 12: 12-27. Aktseli, D. 1996. Altäre in der archaischen und klassischen Kunst. Untersuchungen zu Typologie und Ikonographie (Archäologie 28). Espelkamp: Marie Leidorf. Allen, R.E. 1975. Three Bases from Halikarnassos. BSA 70: 1-5. Altmann, W. 1905. Die römischen Grabaltäre der Kaiserzeit. Berlin: Weidmann. Bakalakis, G. 1963. Επιτύμβιοι βωμοί από την Θράκη. ArchDelt 18: 161-5. Bauzon, É. 2008. L’épigraphie funéraire bilingue des Italiens en Grèce et en Asie au IIe et Ie s. av. J.C., in Fr. Biville, J.-C. Decourt and G. Rougemont (eds) Bilinguisme Gréco-Latin et Epigraphie:  Actes du Colloque Organisé à l’Université Lumière-Lyon 2 les 17, 18 et 19 Mai 2004 (Collection de la Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée. Série épigraphique

White (1978: 385-551). 134 Tsouli 2013: 448-52. Before comparing the source materials, one should always take into account the total number of surviving inscrptions in each ‘social’ group. Tsouli (2013: nn. 2421-2422, 2425, 2441) includes in her corpus 278 inscriptions relating to citizens (Greek name and patronymic), 112 inscriptions relating to foreigners and metics (name and ethnic, usually with patronymic) and 153 examples relating to people of humble origin and/or slaves (single name). 135 Tsouli 2013: type E.III, 436-7 n. 2425 (43 examples in the category of ‘citizens with Greek names’, i.e. 15% of this social group), 436 n. 24212422 (12 examples in the category of metics or foreigners, i.e. 10.7% of this group), 439 n. 2441 (11 examples in the category of persons with a single name, i.e. 7.2% of this group). This type of monument was widely used, or re-used, by persons with a Roman name and a Greek or Latin cognomen, that is Romanizing Greeks or Romans of Italic origin respectively, Tsouli 2013: 443-5, nn. 2469-2474. Specifying the correlation between specific subtypes of circular altars and buyers of different financial resources, is beyond the scope of such a short article. 136 Tsouli 2013: type E.I, 436-7 n. 2425, (38 examples in the category of ‘citizens with Greek names’, i.e. 13.7% of this social group), 436 n. 2421 (15 examples in the category of metics or foreigners, i.e. 13.4% of this group), 439 n. 2441 (13 examples in the category of persons with a single name, i.e. 8.5% of this group). 137 Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 946 (cylindrical altar), 831 (pillar-shaped altar). 138 According to Sherwin-White (1978: 248-9), half of the Hellenistic examples belong to metics. Our corpus (Tsouli 2013: type Γ, 436 n. 2421-2422, 437 n. 2425) indicates that Hellenistic cubes were used by 13.7% of citizens and by 16% of metics/foreigners. 139 Tsouli 2013: type A, 436-7 n. 2425 (131 examples in the category of ‘citizens with Greek names’, i.e. 47% of this social group), 436 n. 24212422 (60 examples in the category of metics or foreigners, i.e. 53% of this group), 439 n. 2441 (105 examples in the category of persons with a single name, i.e. 68% of this group). 140 For example Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 348. 141 Bosnakis 2008: no. 14; Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 1 and 18. 142 Significant relief tombstones production is lacking during the imperial era in most cities of the Aegean islands and the coast of Asia Minor, Puddu 2010: 38.

Tsouli 2013: cat. no. 929; Bosnakis and Hallof 2016: no. 1378. Tsouli 2013: cat. nos 176 and 121 respectively. For other examples, Tsouli 2013: 450-1. 145 Doulfis and Kokkorou-Alevras 2017: no. K14. 146 Tsouli 2013: nos 1123 and 1092 respectively. 147 Supra, n. 46. 143 144

191

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

et historique 37:6): 109-28. Lyon: Maison de l’Orient Méditerranéen. Bean, G. and J. Cook 1955. The Halicarnassus Peninsula. BSA 50: 85-171. Berges, D. 1986. Hellenistische Rundaltäre Kleinasiens. Freiburg: Wasmuth. Berges, D. 1996. Rundaltäre aud Kos und Rhodos: 84-109. Berlin: Gebr. Mann. Berges, D. 1997. Neue Forschungen zum gräcopunischen Solus. AntK 40: 81-102. Berns, Chr. 2013. Grabbezirke von Knidos. Zwei Standards der Repräsentation in klassischer Zeit, in K. Sporn (ed.) Griechische Grabbezirke klassischer Zeit. Normen und Regionalismen. Akten des Internationalem Kolloquiums am deutschen Archäologischen Institut, Abteilung Athen 20-21 November 2009 (Athenaia 6): 203-218. München: Hirmer. Bianchi Bandinelli, R. and A. Giuliano 1974. Etrusker und Italiker vor der Römischen Herrschaft. München: Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung. Blümel, W. 1992. Die Inschriften von Knidos (Inschriften griechische Städte aus Kleinasien 41). Bonn: R. Habelt. Blümel, W. 2017. Addenda und Corrigenda zu Inschriften griechische Städte aus Kleinasien 40 (Knidos). EpigAnat 50: 45-75. Bosnakis, D. 2008. Ανέκδοτες Επιγραφές της Κω. Επιτύμβια Μνημεία και Όροι. Athens: Archaiologiko Institouto Aigaiakōn Spoudon. Bosnakis, D. 2012. Επιτύμβια ανάγλυφη στήλη με παράσταση θηλάζουσας από την Κάλυμνο. ArchDelt 58-64 (2003-2009), Meletes: 377-90. Bosnakis, D. 2013. Επιτύμβιες στήλες από ένα ‘εξοχικό νεκροταφείο’ της Κω, in Α. Giannikouri (ed.) Όλβιος Άνερ. Μελέτες στη Μνήμη του Γρηγόρη Κωνσταντόπουλου: 247-62. Athens: Archaiologiko Institouto Aigaiakōn Spoudon. Bosnakis, D. and K. Hallof 2016. Inscriptiones Graecae Insularum Maris Aegaei praeter Delum, fasc. IV. Inscrptiones Coi Calymnae insularum Milesiarum, pars III Inscriptiones Coi insulae. Tituli sepulcrales urbani (Inscriptiones Graecae XII, 4.3). Berlin: de Gruyter. Bosnakis, D. and K. Hallof 2018. Inscriptiones Graecae Insularum Maris Aegaei praeter Delum, fasc. IV. Inscrptiones Coi Calymnae insularum Milesiarum, pars IV Inscriptiones Coi insulae: Tituli sepulcrales demorum, Tituli varii incerti alieni – Inscrptiones insularum Milesiarum (Inscriptiones Graecae XII, 4.4). Berlin: de Gruyter. Boschung, D. 1987. Antike Grabaltäre aus den Nekropolen Roms (Acta Bernensia X). Bern: Stampfli. Bresson, A., P. Brun and E. Varinlioğlu 2001. Les inscriptions grecques et latines, in P. Debord and E. Varinlioğlu (eds) Les Hautes Terres de Carie: 81-242. Paris: de Boccard. Breuer, Ch. 1995. Relief und Epigramme griechische Privatgrabmäler; Zeugnisse bürgerliche Selbstverständnisse vom 4. bis 2. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Weimar: Bohlau.

Brouma, V. 2015. Cylidrical altars and post-funerary ritual in the south-eastern Aegean during the Hellenistic period: 3rd to 2nd centuries BC, in Z. Theodoropoulou-Polychroniades and D. Evely (eds) Aegis: Essays in Mediterranean Archaeology Presented to Matti Egon by the Scholars of the Greek Archaeological Committee UK: 155-64. Oxford: Archaeopress Publishing Ltd. Bru, H. and E. Lafli 2011. Inscriptions gréco-romaines d’Anatolie. Chronique d’ Orient. Chronique 2011. Dialogues d’histoire ancienne 37/2: 191-216. Bru, H. and E. Lafli 2014. Inscriptions gréco-romaines d’Anatolie. Chronique d’ Orient. Chronique 2014, Dialogues d’histoire ancienne 40/2: 268-82. Buraselis, K. 2004. Some remarks on the Koan Asylia (242 BC) against its International Background, in K. Höghammar (ed.) The Hellenistic Polis of Kos. Proceedings of an International Seminar organized by the Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University, 11-13 May 2000 (Boreas 28): 15-20. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Uppsaliensis. Cambi, N. 2013. A review of the development of the funerary monuments in Dalmatia, in N. Cambi and G. Koch (eds) Funerary sculpture of the Western Illyricum and neighbouring regions of the Roman Empire. Proceedings of the International Scholarly Conference held in Split from September 27th to the 3rd October 2009 (Biblioteka Knjiga Mediterana 72): 81-99. Split: Književni krug. Carlsson, S. 2010. Hellenistic Democracies: Freedom, Independence and Political Procedure in Some East Greek City-States. Stuttgart: F Steiner. De Julis, E. and D. Loiacono 1985. Il Museo Archeologico. Taranto: Mandese. Déonna, W. 1934. Mobilier délien. BCH 58: 381-447. Dexheimer, D. 1998. Oberitalische Grabaltäre. Ein Beitrag zur Sepulkralkunst der römischen Kaiserzeit (British Archaeological Reports IS 741). Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Doulfis, G. and G. Kokkorou-Alevras 2017. Νέες επιγραφές (Β΄), in G. Kokkorou-Alevras (ed.) Αλάσαρνα VI: Γλυπτική-Λιθοτεχνία-Επιγραφές από το Ιερό του Απόλλωνα Πυθαίου-Πυθαέως και τον Πρώιμο Βυζαντινό Οικισμό: 119-51. Athens: Typografeio Panepistimiou Athinon. Dräger, O. 1994. Religionem Significare. Studien zu reich verzierten römischen Altären und Basen aus Marmor. Mainz: P. von Zabern. Engelamnn, H. 2012. Inschriften von Patara. ZPE 182: 179-201. Fabricius, J. 1999. Die hellenistischen Totenmahlreliefs. Grabrepräsentation und Wertvorstellung in Ostgriechischen Städten. München: Pfeil. Fabricius, J. 2016. Hellenistic funerary Banquet Reliefs – Thoughts on problems old and new, in C. Draycott and M. Stamatopoulou (eds) Dining and Death: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the ‘Funerary Banquet’ 192

Chrysanthi Tsouli: Grave Markers (Semata) of the Koan Necropoleis

in Ancient Art, Burial and Belief: 32-69. Leuven – Paris – Bristol: Peeters. Fehr, B. 1971. Orientalische und Griechische Gelage. Bonn: Bouvier. Fraser, P.M. 1977. Rhodian Funerary Monuments. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Gabelmann, H. 1968. Oberitalische Rundaltäre. RM 75: 87-105. Gabelmann, H. 1977. Zur Tektonik oberitalischet Sarkophage, Altäre und Stelen. BJb 177: 199-244. Gamer, G. 1989. Formen römischer Altäre auf der hispanischen Halbinsel. Mainz am Rhein: P. von Zabern. Hansen, S.S. 2008. Hellenistic Totenmahl reliefs from the Halikarnassos Peninsula, in P. Pedersen (ed.) Halikarnassian Studies (Halikarnassian Studies 5): 119-36. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark. Held, W. 2003. Neue und revidierte Inschriften aus Loryma und der karischen Chersones. EpigAnat 36: 61-85. Held, W. 2014. Hellenistische Grabmonumente der karischen Chersones, in A. Matthaei and M. Zimmermann (eds) Stadtkultur im Hellenismus (Die hellenistische Polis als Lebensform 4): 250-3. Heidelberg: Verlag Antike. Herzog, R. 1899. Koische Forschungen und Funde. Leipzig: T. Weicher. Hiller, H. 1975. Ionische Grabreliefs des ersten Häfte des 5. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. (Istanbuler Mitteilungen Beih. 12). Tübingen: E. Wasmuth. Höghammar, K. 2004. The inscribed, cylindrical, funerary altars: questions of date and stylistic development, in K. Höghammar (ed.) The Hellenistic Polis of Kos. Proceedings of an International Seminar organized by the Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University, 11-13 May 2004 (Boreas 28): 69-81. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Uppsaliensis. Höghammar, K. 2016. International Networks of an Island Port in the Hellenistic Period – the Case of Kos, in K. Höghammar, B. Alroth and A. Lindhagen (eds) Ancient Ports: the Geography of Connections. Proceedings of an International Seminar at the Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University, 2325 September 2010 (Boreas 34): 69-81. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Uppsaliensis. Kabus-Preisshofen, R. 1989. Die hellenistische Plastik der Insel Kos (Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Athenische Abteilung. Beiheft 14). Berlin: Mann. Kantzia, H. 1984. Το ιερό του Απόλλωνα στην Αλάσαρνα της Κω. Το Ιστορικό μιας Καταστροφής. ArchDelt 39 (1984), Meletes: 140-62. Karusos, C. 1962. Άσπιλ’ εν νέοισιν. AM 77: 121-9. Karlsson, S. 2014. Emotions Carved in Stone? The Social Handling of Death as Expressed on Hellenistic Grave Stelai from Smyrna and Kyzikos. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Gothenburg.

Kearsley, R. 2001. Greeks and Romans in Imperial Asia. Mixed Language Inscriptions and Linguistic Evidence for Cultural Interaction until the End of the AD III (Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien 59). Bonn: Habelt. Kleiner, D. 1987. Roman Imperial Funerary Altars with Portraits. Rome: G. Breitschneider. Kokkorou-Alevras, G. 1997. Ionian sculpture of the Archaic period on Dorian Rhodes, in I. Jenkins and G.B. Waywell (eds) Sculptors and Sculpture of Caria and the Dodecanese: 150-6. London: British Museum Press. Kokkorou-Alevras, G. 2004. Αλάσαρνα Ι: Οι Επιγραφές. Athens: Horos. Kokkorou-Alevras, G. 2017. Περίοπτα γλυπτά και ανάγλυφα έργα, in G. Kokkorou-Alevras (ed.) Αλάσαρνα VI: Γλυπτική-Λιθοτεχνία-Επιγραφές από το Ιερό του Απόλλωνα Πυθαίου-Πυθαέως και τον Πρώιμο Βυζαντινό Οικισμό: 9-66. Athens: Typografeio Panepistimiou Athinon. Kokkorou-Alevras, G. 2018. Επιγραφές συστηματικής επιφανειακής έρευνας στην Καρδάμαινα (αρχαία Αλάσαρνα) της Κω κατά τα έτη 2003-2006. Grammateion 7: 5-16. Kurtz, D. and J. Boardman 1971. Greek Burial Customs. London: Thames and Hudson. Laurenzi, L. 1938. Monumenti di scultura del Museo Archeologico di Rodi IV e dell’ antiquarium di Coo. ClRh 9: 9-120. Laurenzi, L. 1955-56. Sculture inedite del Museo di Coo. Annuario della Scuola archeologica di Atene e delle missioni italiane in Oriente 33-34, N.S. 17-18: 59-156. Linfert, A. 1976. Kunstzentren hellenistischer Zeit: Studien an weiblichen Gewandfiguren. Wiesbaden: Steiner. Lundgren, C. 2016. Leben und Tod in Loryma. Topographische Bezüge zwischen Nekropolen, Heligtümern, Siedlung und Gehöften, in E. Mortensen and B. Poulsen (eds) Death and Burial in Karia (Halicarnassian Studies 6): 250-75. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark. Maiuri, A. 1925. Nuova Silloge Epigrafica di Rodi e Cos. Firenze: F. Le Monnier. Montanaro, A. 2007. Ruvo di Puglia e il Suo Territorio. Le Necropoli (Studia Archeologica 160). Roma: L’ Erma di Breitschneider. Morricone, M. 1959. Frammento di bassorilievo arcaico da Coo. BdA 44: 1-5. Nigdelis, P. 2017. Inscriptiones Macedoniae, fasc. I. Inscriptiones Thessalonicae et vicinae. Tituli int. MCMLXMMXV reperti (Inscriptiones Graecae X, I). Berlin: de Gruyter. Nováková, L. 2016. Tombs and Burial Customs in the Hellenistic Karia (Universitäts forschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie 282). Bonn: Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH. Ohnesorg, A. 2005. Ionische Altäre: Formen und Varianten einer Architekturgattung aus Insel- und Ostionien 193

Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece

(Archäologische Forschungen 21). Berlin: Gebr. Mann. Papageorgiou, P. 2017. Ανάγλυφοι ταφικοί βωμοί από τη βόρεια Πιερία, in E. Voutyras, E. Papagiannis and N. Kazakidis (eds) Bonae Gratiae. Μελέτες Ρωμαϊκής Γλυπτικής Προς Τιμήν της Καθηγήτριας Θεοδοσίας Στεφανίδου-Τιβερίου: 297-305. Thessaloniki: City University Press. Paton, W.R. and E.L. Hicks 1891. The Inscriptions of Cos. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Patsiada, V. 1996. Grabtische und Grabaltäre in der Nekropole von Rhodos, in D. Berges (ed.) Rundaltäre aud Kos und Rhodos: 84-109. Berlin: Gebr. Mann. Pfuhl, E. and H. Möbius 1977-1979. Die ostgriechische Grabreliefs I-II. Mainz: von Zabern. Poulsen, B. 2004. Sculpture and Altars from Hellenistic Halikarnassos, in S. Isager and P. Pedersen (eds) The Salmakis Inscription and Hellenistic Halikarnassos (Halikarnassian Studies 6): 191-203. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark. Poupaki, R. 2012. Κωακοί Λίθοι και Κωακή Λιθοξοΐα. Η Χρήση των Λίθων της Κω στην Αρχιτεκτονική, Γλυπτική και Κατασκευή Επιτυμβίων, Ενεπίγραφων Μνημείων και Τέχνεργων από την Αρχαϊκή έως την Υστερορρωμαϊκή-Παλαιοχριστιανική Περίοδο. Η Σημασία της για την Οικονομία του Νησιού. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Athens. (http://thesis.ekt.gr/thesisBookReader/id/ 27083#page/1/mode/2up) Puddu, M. 2010. La Polis allo specchio: il relievi funerary con figure di politai nelle città dell’ Asia Minore ellenistica. Eidola 7: 29-69. Righetti, P. 1982, Altari cylindrici a bucrani e festoni in Grecia. Studio preliminare. Xenia 3: 49-70. Rizakis, A. and I. Touratsoglou 2016. In search of identities: a preliminary report on the visual and textual context of the funerary monuments of Roman Macedonia, in S. Alcock, M. Egri and J. Frakes (eds) Beyond Boundaries. Connecting Visual Cultures in the Provinces of Ancient Rome: 120-36. Los Angeles: Getty Publications. Şahin, Μ. 1982. Die Inschriften von Stratonikeia, II, 1 (Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien 22,1). Bonn: Habelt. Şahin, M. 1994. Die Inschriften von Arykanda (Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien 48). Bonn: Habelt. Şahin, Μ. 2010. Die Inschriften von Stratonikeia, III (Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien 68). Bonn: Habelt. Schäfer, Th. 1997. Unterhaltung beim griechischen Symposion: Darbietungen, Spiele und Wettkämpfe von homerischer bis in spätklassische Zeit. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. Schazmann, P. 1934. Das Harmyleion. JdI 39: 110-27. Schmidt, S. 1991. Hellenistische Grabreliefs: Typologische und Chronologische Beobachtungen. Koln: Bohlau. Segre, M. 2007. Iscrizioni di Cos, Vol. 2. Roma: L’ Erma di Breitschneider.

Sherwin-White, S.M. 1978. Ancient Cos. An Historical Study from the Dorian Settlement to the Imperial Period (Hypomnemata 51). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht Scholz, M. 2012. Grabbauten des 1.-3. Jahrhunderts in den nördlichen Grenzprovinzen des Römischen Reiches. Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum. Skerlou, El. 2004. Ενεπίγραφη επιτύμβια στήλη με εγχάρακτη παράσταση οπλίτη, in D. Damaskos (ed.) Χάρις Χαίρε. Μελέτες στη μνήμη της Χάρης Κάντζια, Vol. A’: 47-61. Athens: Archaiologiko Institouto Aigaiakōn Spoudon. Spiliopoulou-Donderer, I. 2002. Kaiserzeitliche Grabaltäre Niedermakedoniens (Peleus 15). Mannheim Möhnesee: Bibliopolis. Sporn, K. 2013: Grabbezirke und Grabmarker im klassischen Griechenland, in K. Sporn (ed.) Griechische Grabbezirke klassischer Zeit. Normen und Regionalismen. Akten des Internationalem Kolloquiums am deutschen Archäologischen Institut, Abteilung Athen 20-21 November 2009 (Athenaia 6): 261-82. München: Hirmer. Stefanaki, V. 2012. Νομίσματα – Νομισματική Αιγαίου (Κως Ι). Athens: Archaiologiko Institouto Aigaiakōn Spoudon. Tsouli, C. 2004. Η τυπολογία των επιτυμβίων αναγλύφων της Κω, in D. Damaskos (ed.) Χάρις Χαίρε. Μελέτες στη μνήμη της Χάρης Κάντζια, Vol. Α’: 135-50. Athens: Archaiologiko Institouto Aigaiakōn Spoudon. Tsouli, C. 2009. The Koan Banquet reliefs: Parallels in the Aegean Region, in G. Deligiannakis and Y. Galanakis (eds) The Aegean and its Cultures, Proceedings of the First Oxford – Athens Students Workshop Organized by the Greek Society and the University of Oxford, Taylor Institution, 22-23 April 2005 (British Archaeological Reports IS 1975): 95-108. Oxford: Archaeopress. Tsouli, C. 2013. Ταφικά και Επιτάφια Μνημεία της Κω. Συμβολή στην Μελέτη της Τυπολογίας και της Εικονογραφίας των Επιτάφιων Μνημείων των Ελληνιστικών και Ρωμαϊκών Χρόνων. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Athens. (http:// thesis.ekt.gr/thesisBookReader/id/33274#page/1/ mode/2up) Tsouli, C. 2017a. Βαθμιδωτές επιστέψεις ταφικών (;) μνημείων από την Κω: ένας ιδιόμορφος τύπος μνημείων του αιγαιακού χώρου, in P. Triantafyllides (ed.) Το Αρχαιολογικό Έργο στα νησιά του Αιγαίου, Διεθνές Επιστημονικό Συνέδριο, Ρόδος 27 Νοεμβρίου – 1 Δεκεμβρίου 2013: 187-204. Mytilene: Ministry of Culture and Sports, Secretariat General for the Aegean and Island Policy. Tsouli, C. 2017b. Τα επιτάφια μνημεία της Εύβοιας ως μαρτυρίες των επαφών με την ηπειρωτική και τη νησιωτική Ελλάδα. H περίπτωση των στηλών με παράσταση κρατήρα, in Ž. Tankosić, F. Mavridis and M. Kosma (eds) An Island between Two Worlds: The Archaeology of Euboea from Prehistoric to Byzantine 194

Chrysanthi Tsouli: Grave Markers (Semata) of the Koan Necropoleis

Times, Proceedings of International Conference, Eretria 12-14 July 2013 (Papers and Monographs from the Norwegian Institute at Athens 6): 345-58. Athens: Norwegian Institute at Athens. Tsouli, C. in print/a. Ο τύπος του επιτάφιου πεσσόσχημου βωμού στην Κω: συμβολή στη μελέτη της προέλευσης του ρωμαϊκού επιτάφιου βωμού, in Scientific Symposium in honour of Emer. Prof. Georgia Kokkorou-Alevras, Athens, 19-21 February 2016. Tsouli, C. in print/b. Cultural interdependence between Kos and Karia as illustrated by the grave markers of the Hellenistic period, in International Conference ‘Karia and the Dodekanese, Danish Institute at Athens, 24th-26th of January 2018. Varinlioǧlu, E. 1988. Inschriften von Stratonikeia in Karien. EpigAnat 12: 79-128. Walter-Karydi, E. 1998. Nothing to do with Crete: towards defining the Character of East Dorian Art,

in V. Karageorghis and N. Stampolidis (eds) Eastern Mediterranean. Cyprus – Dodecanese – Crete, 16th – 6th century BC. Proceedings of the international Symposium held at Rethymnon – Crete in May 1997: 287-300. Heraklion: University of Crete: Ministry of Culture, XXIII EPCA. Wiemer, H.-U. 2010. Structure and development of the Rhodian Peraia: evidence and models, in R. van Bremen and J.-M. Carbon (eds) Hellenistic Karia (Ausonius editions. Études 28): 425-34. Bordeaux: de Boccard. Wypustek, A. 2013. Images of Eternal Beauty in Funerary Verse Inscriptions of the Hellenistic and Greco-Roman Periods (Mnemosyne Suppl. 352). Leiden: Brill. Yavis, C. 1949. Greek Altars. Origin and Typology. St. Louis: St. Louis University Press.

195

Even though, at death, identity and social status may undergo major changes, by studying funerary customs we can greatly gain in the understanding of a community’s social structure, distribution of wealth and property, and the degree of flexibility or divisiveness in the apportionment of power. With its great regional diversity and variety of community forms and networks, ancient Greece offers a unique context for exploring, through the burial evidence, how communities developed. Mortuary Variability and Social Diversity in Ancient Greece brings together early career scholars working on funerary customs in Greece from the Early Iron Age to the Roman period. Papers present various thematic and interdisciplinary analysis in which funerary contexts provide insights on individuals, social groups and communities. Themes discussed include issues of territoriality, the reconstruction of social roles of particular groups of people, and the impact that major historical events may have had on the way individuals or specific groups of individuals treated their dead.

Nikolas Dimakis is a postdoctoral research fellow in Classical Archaeology at the University of Athens. He specialises in the funerary archaeology of Classical to Roman Greece and examines the interplay of emotions, ritual and identity in the burial context. His research interests also include childhood and gender archaeology, the archaeology of religion and ritual, and terracotta lamps. Nikolas has coordinated and participated in international meetings and in many archaeological projects in Attica, the Peloponnese, Thrace and the Dodecanese. Tamara M. Dijkstra is a researcher at the Department of Greek Archaeology at the University of Groningen. She specialises in the funerary archaeology and epigraphy of Classical to Roman Greece and examines the relation between mortuary practices, social structure, and social identities. She also studies Hellenistic domestic archaeology within the Halos Archaeological Project.

Archaeopress Archaeology www.archaeopress.com