The Votive Statue of Acropolis

P1: IKB
CB500-FMB CB500/Keesling November 21, 2002 11:32

THE VOTIVE STATUES
OF THE ATHENIAN
ACROPOLIS
CATHERI NE M. KEESLI NG
Ge o r g e t o wn Uni v e r s i t y
iii
P1: IKB
published by the press syndicate of the university of cambridge
The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom
cambridge university press
The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru, uk
40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, usa
477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, vic 3207, Australia
Ruiz de Alarc on 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain
Dock House, The Waterfront, Cape Town 8001, South Africa
http://www.cambridge.org
C
Catherine M. Keesling 2003
This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception
and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without
the written permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published 2003
Printed in the United States of America
Typefaces Adobe Garamond 11/14.5 pt. and Lithos Regular System L
A
T
E
X2
[TB]
A catalog record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Keesling, Catherine M. 1965-
The votive statues of the Athenian Acropolis / Catherine M. Keesling.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-521-81523-1 (hardback)
1. Athena (Greek deity)Art. 2. Kore statues. 3. Votive offeringsGreeceAthens.
4. Inscriptions, Greek. 5. Acropolis (Athens, Greece) I. Title.
NB163.M5 K44 2003
733
.3dc21 2002073693
isbn 0 521 81523 1 hardback
iv
P1: IKB
Contents
List of Figures and Tables page ix
Preface xv
Acknowledgments xix
P A R T I : A N A T H E M A T A
1 Statues as Gifts for the Gods 3
2 Votive Statue Inscriptions 22
3 Nothing to Do with Democracy? Votive Statues
and Athenian History 36
4 Votive Statues and Athenian Society 63
P A R T I I : D I V I N E I D E N T I T I E S
5 The Identities of the Acropolis Korai 97
6 The Iconography of the Acropolis Korai 122
P A R T I I I : H U M A N I D E N T I T I E S
7 Fifth-Century Portrait Statues on the Acropolis 165
C O N C L U S I O N
Appendix 1: Pausanias on the Athenian Acropolis (1.22.41.28.3) 205
Appendix 2: Sculptors Signatures on the
Acropolis Dedications 208
Appendix 3: Acropolis Statues Matched with Inscribed Bases 210
Notes 215
Selected Bibliography 261
Journal Abbreviations 269
Index 271
vii
P1: IKB
List of Figures and Tables
F I GURES
1 Euthydikos kore (Acr. no. 686). 4
2 Inscribed base (DAA no. 56) with lower legs of Euthydikos kore (Acr.
no. 686). 5
3 Inscribed base (DAA no. 292) for two korai dedicated by Lysias
and Euarchis. 8
4 Red Shoes kore (Acr. no. 683). 9
5 Plan of the Athenian Acropolis. 13
6 Bronze statue of Queen Napir-Asu; Louvre. 17
7 Statue of Chares from Didyma; British Museum. 18
8 Geneleos group in the Samian Heraion; reconstruction. 19
9 Geneleos group; plaster casts on base in situ. 20
10 Archaic seated Athena (Acr. no. 625). 28
11 Antenors kore (Acr. no. 681). 44
12 Inscribed base for Antenors kore (DAA no. 197, Acr. no. 681). 45
13 DAA no. 326 (drawing). 51
14 DAA no. 306 (drawing). 52
15 Inscription on herm of Hipparchos (drawing). 53
16 Altar of the younger Peisistratos from the Pythion (detail). 53
17 Original Boiotians and Chalcidians monument (DAA no. 168). 54
18 Kore from the east pediment of the Late Archaic temple of Apollo
at Delphi. 57
19 Acropolis Potter relief (Acr. no. 1332). 70
20 Illustrations of the Samian technique (drawings). 79
21 Berlin Foundry cup; exterior. 80
22 Bronze Athena Promachos statuette dedicated by Meleso (NM 6447). 82
23 Bronze smiting god statuette from Ugarit; Louvre. 83
24 Nikandres kore from Delos (NM 1). 100
25 Ornithe from the Geneleos group in the Samian Heraion. 103
26 Inscribed base for the dedication of Naulochos (DAA no. 229). 110
27 Inscribed base for the dedication of Kynarbos (DAA no. 79). 115
28 Votive relief of Xenokrateia (NM 2356). 119
ix
P1: IKB
Li st of Fi gures and Tables
29 Acropolis Pig Sacrice relief (Acr. no. 581). 120
30 Archaic terra-cotta gurines (Acr. nos. 11142 and 10695). 126
31 Angelitos Athena (Acr. no. 140). 128
32 Fragmentary kore and inscribed base dedicated by Epiteles (DAA
no. 10). 130
33 Fragmentary kore and inscribed base dedicated by Epiteles (DAA
no. 10); detail. 131
34 Head of a kore/Athena hybrid (Acr. no. 661); front. 132
35 Head of a kore/Athena hybrid (Acr. no. 661); right side. 133
36 Bronze statuette from the Acropolis (Athena?), (NM 6491); front. 134
37 Bronze statuette from the Acropolis (Athena?) (NM 6491); right side. 135
38 Euthydikos kore (Acr. no. 686); right side of the head. 136
39 Peplos kore (Acr. no. 679). 137
40 Archaic bronze statuette of Artemis; Boston Museum of Fine Arts. 138
41 Naxian kore from the Acropolis (Acr. no. 619). 141
42 Propylaia kore (Acr. no. 688). 142
43 Marble Nike (Acr. no. 693). 143
44 Fragmentary right hand and lower arm of a kore statue (Acr. no. 3567). 146
45 Kore with pomegranate and wreath (Acr. no. 593). 147
46 Fragmentary right hand and lower arm of a kore statue (Acr. no. 4308). 148
47 La Dame dAuxerre; Louvre. 151
48 Small kore with forearms inserted separately (Acr. no. 614). 152
49 Cybele and attendants from B ogazk oy. 153
50 Daedalic bronze statuette in Hittite pose; Walters Art
Museum, Baltimore. 154
51 Kore with left forearm outstretched (Acr. no. 615). 159
52 Fragmentary right hand and lower arm of a kore (Acr. no. 386). 160
53 Marble Athena; Hellenistic or Roman (Acr. no. 1336). 166
54 Bronze hoplitodromos statuette; T ubingen. 172
55 Bronze discuss thrower statuette (NM 6615). 173
56 Tyrannicides group; Roman marble copies. 174
57 Roman marble herm of Themistokles from Ostia. 180
58 Archaic marble scribe (Acr. no. 629). 183
59 Dedication of Alkimachos (DAA no. 6) and scribe Acr. no. 629. 184
60 Inscribed base for the dedication of Hegelochos (DAA no. 121, Acr.
no. 13206); drawing. 186
61 Inscribed base for the dedication of Hegelochos, with dowel holes. 188
62 Berlin Foundry cup warrior; detail. 189
63 Roman marble bust of Perikles; British Museum. 193
64 Bronze head of warrior from the Acropolis (NM 6446). 197
x
P1: IKB
Li st of Fi gures and Tables
TABLES
1 Epigraphical Fixed Points, ca. 528/7480 b.c. 52
2 Aristocratic Dedications on the Athenian Acropolis, ca. 600400 b.c. 86
3 Banausic Dedications on the Athenian Acropolis, ca. 600400 b.c. 86
4 Types of Statues Dedicated on the Athenian Acropolis, ca. 600
400 b.c. 87
5 Handheld Attributes of the Acropolis Korai 145
xi
P1: FCH/GRR P2: FCH/GRR QC: FCH/GRR T1: FCH
CB500-01 CB500/Keesling November 21, 2002 11:29
1
Statues as Gi fts for
the Gods
I
n Greek religion, the term anathema verbally depicts the act of setting some-
thing up for the gods. Though it described the prototypical gift from human
worshippers to the gods, this term, and the related verb anat iqhmi, directly
expressed the ideal of display. The inscription on the base for an Archaic mar-
ble kore statue (Figs. 1 and 2) from the Acropolis (Dedications from the Athenian
Acropolis no. 56) illustratestheuseof thisverbtomark giftstothegods: E uq udikov
Qali arcou an eqhken (Euthydikostheson of Thaliarchosdedicated). Callingvo-
tivededicationsanathemata emphasized thephysical and conceptual elevation of
giftsfor thegodsabovethenormal spheresof human interaction and commerce.
1
In thischapter, I usetheterm anathema to refer to aspecic classof permanent,
sculptural dedicationsthat evolvedfrompredecessorsdatingback totheemergence
of thepolisand itscharacteristicreligiousformsin theeighth century b.c.
Dedicationsof statueswith inscribed basesasanathemata enter thescenefairly
latein thelivesof Greek sanctuaries. Theearliest formsof evidencefor thecreation
of sacred spaceafter theGreek Dark Agesaredepositsof pottery, terra-cotta g-
urines, and portablebronzegurinesin theform of both humansand animals. At
Olympia, depositsof such modest offerings(and, in thecaseof pottery, theresidue
of human visitation on alargescale) goback asfar asthetenth centuryb.c., but the
explosion in thededication of small bronzeofferingsdoesnot occur thereand in
theother Panhellenic sanctuaries Delphi, Delos, and Isthmia until thesecond
half of theeighth century.
2
At most sanctuary sites, theappearanceof permanent
but portablevotiveofferingsin thematerial record predatestheconstruction of ar-
chaeologically recognizabletemplebuildings.
3
On theAthenian Acropolis, bronze
tripodsand bowlswereamongtheearliest votivesdedicated in thesanctuary in the
Geometric period (theeighth and seventh centuries), but thelack of inscriptions
associatedwiththeseofferingsleavesuswithnoparticularsabout theindividuals(or
groups) whoset themup.
4
Thetripodseriesat OlympiaandtheAthenianAcropolis
predateandclearlypregurestatueanathemata in their monumental scaleandhigh
cost.
5
3
Anathemata
1. Euthydikos kore(Acr. no. 686); front. Alison Frantz Photographic Col-
lection, American School of Classical Studiesat Athens, neg. AT 514.
D ED I CAT ORY M ECH AN I SM S
VOWS
Not all anathemata dedicatedtothegodswereinscribed, andnot everyinscrip-
tion on an anathema mentionsavow; nevertheless, it ispossiblethat themajority
of anathemata (and maybeeven all of them) result fromthefulllment of vowsto
the gods, even if their inscriptions make no mention of such vows. The English
termvotiveoffering derivesfromtheLatin votum, which in turn wasequivalent
in meaningtotheGreek e uc h.
6
An euche or euchole wasavow, aprayer, or aboast
three items that were certainly not the same thing but that may all derive from
4
Statues as Gi fts for the Gods
2. Inscribedbase(DAA no. 56) withlower legsof Euthydikos kore(Acr. no. 609).
Copyright DeutschesArch aologischesInstitut-Athen, neg. nr. Schrader 37.
an original term denoting asolemn assertion.
7
Theeuche asavow served asthe
fundamental mechanism for dedicating an anathema in a Greek sanctuary. The
worshipper typically promised beforehand to make an offering on the condition
that somebenet (charis) requested of thegodswasreceived; oncethetermshad
been set by theworshipper, thevowhad to befullled if thegodsdelivered.
8
Thededicatory inscriptionson atotal of 19 sixth- and fth-century Acropolis
statuededicationsexplicitlyrefer tothefulllment of avowthroughthededication.
9
What is most striking about the Acropolis dedications that explicitly refer to a
vow is that some fulll vows made not by the dedicator, but rather by another
family member. An otherwiseunknown individual named Timarchosset up DAA
5
Anathemata
no. 236 to fulll avowmadeby hismother; aLysibios(DAA no. 248) fullled the
vowof both parentsor, moregenerally, of hisancestors; and thededicator of DAA
no. 283 named [Di]ophanesor [Pyth]ophanesfullled thevow of hischild. The
implication behind thewording of theseparticular dedicationsisthat therelative
on whose behalf the vow was fullled had died, and consequently it became the
responsibility of thededicator to seethat thededication wasmade.
Whenever a vow was made to the gods, the responsibility to fulll that vow
belonged primarily tothededicator, but upon hisor her death it passed tothenext
generation. TheAthenian obsession with theorderly transfer of property through
the male line carries over to unmet obligations, including vows of sacrices and
anathemata. Because we never know from the Acropolis statue base inscriptions
howlongthegap wasbetween thevowand itsfulllment keepingin mind that
thegap in somecaseswasaslongasageneration dedicatorsmay havesaved their
money for months, years, even most of alifetime, to dedicateasinglestatue. If the
dedication of abronzeor marblestatueon theAcropoliswastoo great anancial
burden for thededicator tobear, by makingavowheor shecould promisetomake
thededication toAthenaat sometime(speciedor unspecied) in thefuture; if the
dedicator wasnever ableto fulll thevow, theburden passed to hisor her nearest
relations.
APARCH E AN D D EKAT E
Along with references to vow fulllment, the inscriptions on the sixth- and
fth-centuryAcropolisstatuededicationsfrequentlyrefer totwoother mechanisms
governingvotivededications: aparche, or rst-fruits, anddekate, or tithe. Atotal
of 34 votivestatuesfrom thisperiod werecalled rst-fruitsdedications, compared
with 29 labeled astithes.
10
Both termsdirectly link privatevotivededicationswith
better understood communal ritualsin Athenian religion, although theexact char-
acter of theseconnectionsmeritsfurther study. Bothaparche anddekate dedications
could beexplicitly labeled asfulllingavow.
Theabsolutenumbersof dedicationsincluding oneof thesethreededicatory
formulas (vow, aparche, and dekate) may seem statistically small in comparison
with thetotal number of inscribed statuebasesfrom thesixth and fth centuries;
however, wemust keep in mind that alargepercentageof thededicatory textsare
fragmentary, and that we have no way of knowing how many of the incomplete
textsoriginally included oneof theformulas. A truer senseof how often explicit
references to a vow, aparche, or dekate occur is to compare the total number of
completestatuebaseinscriptions, 37, with the20 completestatuebaseinscriptions
lackingany oneof thesethreeformulas.
11
Most of thededicationswithout any such
formulaconsist of onlythededicatorsnameandtheverbof dedication, anat iqhmi,
thesimplest typeof dedicatory inscription used on theAcropolis. Asapreliminary
6
todiscussingthemeaningof aparche and dekate, it isalsoworth notingthat neither
termisrestrictedtometrical dedicatoryepigramsandthat not all metrical epigrams
used them, although both could beeasily adapted to thetypical metrical schemes
used on theAcropolis.
12
Perhapsthebest known aparche offeringin Athenian religion isthesixtieth of
theannual tributeoffered by themember citiesof theDelian Leagueto Athenaon
theAcropolisand recorded in theAthenian TributeLists.
13
In contrast, themost
common use of the term dekate in Archaic and Classical Greece referred to the
tithe, or tenth part of thespoilswon in battle, that wasgiven to thegods.
14
The
dekate from war booty took the form of either the captured objects themselves,
or a moregrandioseoffering paid for by thesaleof thebooty: perhapsthemost
famousexampleisthegolden tripod supported by agiant bronzeserpent column
at Delphi, dedicated by theGreek citiesfromthePersian spoilstaken at Plataiain
479 b.c.
15
It isapparent that adekate isalwaysconceived asaten-percent share, whereas
thevalueof an aparche could bedetermined asa percentagedivisibleby six, but
as it was most commonly practiced in sacricial and agricultural contexts, it re-
mained simply asmall shareallotted tothegods. In Greek literature, privatevotive
offeringsof both statuesand other objectsareidentied asdekatai and aparchai.
Herodotus(1.92.14) callstheseriesof offeringsmadebyCroesusof Lydiaat Delphi
and the Amphiareion at Oropos the rst-fruit of his own substance and of his
inheritance.
Though thepracticeof offeringan aparche to thegods, either aspart of astate
festival or in private, was by no means limited to Athens, epigraphically attested
examplesarescarceoutsideof theAthenianAcropolisandafter theArchaicperiod.
16
No literary sourceexplainswhy Atheniansused thisritual mechanism for making
votiveofferings, or how they determined theshareof their wealth or protsthey
wished todedicateon theAcropolisasan aparche. Isaeus5, an early fourth-century
forensic speech, alludes to statues dedicated on the Acropolis as the aparchai of
thewealthy and aristocratic ancestorsof theaccused. In contrast, only oneof the
dedicators(Hermolykosson of Dietrephes, DAA no. 132) of the34 sixth- and fth-
century Acropolisstatuebasesthat includetheword aparche in their inscriptions
certainly belongs the Athenian moneyed aristocracy; none identify themselves as
non-Athenians, two arewomen, and one(Nearchos) seemsto identify himself asa
potter.
17
Nineof theaparche statuesarejoint dedicationsmadeby morethan one
individual, with or without afamily relationship specied.
The29 privatedekate dedicationsclearly result fromtheindividual practiceof
separating out ten percent of oneswealth or protsto pay for avotiveoffering, a
privateritual imitating theprominent public division of thespoilsof war.
18
What
isperplexing isthefact that both aparche and dekate statuesseem to bededicated
7
Anathemata
3. Inscribed base (DAA no. 292) for two korai dedicated by Lysias and Eurachis; the Red Shoes
kore (Acr. no. 683) stood in the round plinth cutting on the viewers right. Copyright Deutsches
Arch aologischesInstitut-Athen, neg. nr. 95/46.
from thesamesortsof prots, makingattemptsto pin down distinctivemeanings
for thetwo termsin theprivatespheredifcult. Nor do theindividualswho gave
dekatai asopposed to aparchai or dedicationsof unspecied typeseem to reect a
link between theuseof thetwo formulasand identiablesociopolitical or gender
divisionsin Athens. Asweseein a subsequent chapter, thesametypesof statues
(e.g., themarblekore) could begiven asan aparche, adekate, or neither one, and
neither formula seems to have been restricted in its use to the period before the
Persian sack of theAcropolisin 480 b.c.
Twoaparche statuededications(DAAnos. 197 and210) reectedincomederived
from the dedicators works or products, and two others were called the rst-
fruitsof thededicators possessions(DAA nos. 290 and 28). Similarly, onedekate
wasmadefrom works (DAA no. 234) and another from produceand property
(DAA no. 184). Threeof thedekatai weremadefromland or frommoney (DAA
nos. 191, 246, and 283). Theprotsfromawindfall prot such asash catch could
8
apparently be dedicated either as an aparche or a dekate.
19
Consequently, neither
formulashould beexclusively connected with protsfromfarming, craftsmanship,
commerce, or shing.
Nevertheless, oneArchaicstatuededication on theAcropolisdemonstratesthat
aparche anddekate wererecognizedasmechanismsfor makingdedicationsdifferent
enough from oneanother to beworth distinguishing.
20
ThisisDAA no. 292, an
inscribed rectangular pillar dedicated jointly by Lysiasand Euarchis(Fig. 3). The
inscription consistsof twoindependent dedicatory textswritten oneafter theother
by thesamehand in threeinscribed lines: Lysiasdedicated to Athenaan aparche;
Euarchisdedicated adekate toAthena. Thetop of thebaseshowscuttingsfor two
separatemarblestatues: an extant under-life-sizemarblekore(Acr. no. 683; Fig. 4)
stood in thelarger, round cuttingon theright-hand side; thecuttingon theleft is
alsoround, anditsdiameter isjust over half that of thecuttingfor koreAcr. no. 683.
If thecuttingon theleft held another marblekoremuch smaller than Acr. no. 683,
4. Red Shoes kore(Acr. no. 683). Alison
FrantzPhotographicCollection, American
School of Classical Studiesat Athens, neg.
AT 471.
9
Anathemata
as I believe it did, then Lysias and Euarchis offered statues of the same type but
of different sizeson thesameinscribed statuebase. Thetwo offeringsmust have
been planned together and made at the same time: the capital of the pillar base
waspurposely madewideenough to support thetwo korai standing next to each
other.
If wereadboththeinscriptionsandthestatuesfromleft toright, Lysiasdedicated
thesmaller koreasan aparche and Euarchisdedicated thelarger one(Acr. no. 683)
asadekate. By offeringstatuesof thesamesculptural typeon thesamebase, Lysias
and Euarchispresented their separateofferingsin away that encouraged theviewer
to comparethesizesof thestatues. I wonder whether theformat of thisdedication
wasintendedtoconveythat LysiasandEuarchispaidfor their offeringswithmoney
derivedfromthesamesource, but in different amounts, withLysias aparche consti-
tutingasmaller percentagethan Euarchis tithe. In thecaseof Lysiasand Euarchis,
two dedicatorspooled their effortsto produceamorecomplex and physically im-
posingofferingthan either could havededicated on hisown. Thesamemotivation
can bepostulatedfor theeight other aparche statuededications(consistingof either
asinglestatueor morethan onestatueon thesamebase) madejointlybymorethan
oneindividual.
AGALM A
Whereasaparche and dekate dened howworshippersplaced their giftswithin
thecontext of communal religiouspractices, theterm agalma returnsto theques-
tion of why the gods were perceived to want statues and other offerings. An
agalma is an object endowed with the quality of being pleasing or capable of
eliciting pleasure; conceptually, all votive offerings were presented to the gods in
the hope that they would become agalmata. From the Homeric poems through
Euripides, agalma occupied distinct but related semantic zonesin Greek: it could
designateany pleasingornament, or apleasingornament dedicated to thegods. In
thefthcentury, Herodotususedagalma torefer specicallytostatues, theagalmata
par excellencedisplayed in thesanctuariesof histime.
21
Statuesfunctioned both as
agalmata and askosmos, theornamentsdecoratingtempleand temenos.
22
Thetermagalma wasinscribed on awidevariety of votiveobjectsbeginningin
theArchaicperiod, ranginginscalefromsmall vasestoexpensive, large-scalebronze
statuegroups.
23
On theAcropolis, theuseof thetermagalma in votiveinscriptions
wasalmost entirely conned to metrical textswritten in hexametersor in elegiac
couplets; most of the examples are Archaic, but one dates to the Early Classical
periodandtwocomefromthefourthcentury.
24
Inthesevotiveinscriptions, agalma
continued to beused to convey thenatureof theoffering asapleasing gift, even
after itsprimary meaningin Greek literaturehad becomestatue.
10
T H E STAT UE AS ANATHE MA
ORI GI N S
Statueswith inscribed basest only with difculty intosomemodern scholarly
constructsof votivereligion. Thecomplexitiesthat makethem interesting to the
student of sculptureor of epigraphyalsomakethemdifcult toclassifyor tosubject
toaquantitativestatistical analysis. Robert Parker hascalledtheArchaicstatuebases
fromtheAcropolisperhapsthemost impressivemonument inGreecetothevotive
religion of thewealthier classes.
25
Ironically, themost physicallyimposingproducts
of Greek votive practice more often than not get left out of votive studies based
upon small nds, such asbronzeand terra-cottagurines, ceramic vessels, ivories,
and even found objects such as fossils.
26
A worshippers choice to dedicate a
statueon abaserather than asmaller, moreportableoffering wasnot determined
entirely on thebasisof economic resources. Anthony Snodgrasshasdocumented
aclear and quantiabletransition in Greek sanctuariesfrom thepredominanceof
raw offerings or objects of everyday life (including dress pins and weapons) to
moreexpensiveconverted offerings, primarily statues, which weremanufactured
specically for dedication.
27
After coexistingrst with tripodsand later with statue
dedicationsin theGreek sanctuariesof theArchaicperiod, rawofferingsdisappear
almost entirely from archaeological sitesin theperiod after 480 b.c. Although the
shift from raw to converted offeringsin theClassical period seemsimportant for
understandinghowGreek votivereligionworked, Snodgrassistherst toadmit that
suchashift isalmost impossibletoexplaininanysingle, historicallymeaningful way.
It can beargued that theintroduction of stonebasesfor Greek sculpturewasa
direct result of thedesiretodisplay votivestatuesmoreeffectively in theopen air of
sanctuaries.
28
Althoughtherst inscribedanathemata of anytypeappearedinGreek
sanctuariesonly ca. 700 b.c., in other words, 100 yearsor so after therst attested
useof theGreek alphabet, large-scalemarblesculptureswereinscribed assoon as
theybegantobeusedasanathemata.
29
Bythemid-sixthcentury, onemajor regional
differencebetweenstatueanathemata ontheAcropolisandthoseof theCycladicand
East Greeksanctuarieshademerged. OntheAcropolis, statuebasesfunctionedasthe
carriersof votiveinscriptions. Elsewhere particularly in East Greek sanctuaries
thepracticeof inscribingon thebody of votivestatuesthemselvescontinued to be
preferredor usedinconjunctionwithstatuebaseinscriptions.
30
Despitethepresence
of statues made by Cycladic and East Greek sculptors on the Archaic Acropolis,
body inscription of both large-scalemarblesculpturesand small bronzestatuettes
wasavoided there.
31
Thus, although theoriginsof inscribed statueanathema can be
traced to theIonian milieu in theseventh century b.c., differencesin how statue
anathemata weretreated on theAthenian Acropolisfrom their beginningsin the
11
Anathemata
sixth century could point to moresignicant divergencesbetween East Greek and
Athenian votivepractices.
STAT UES AN D SACRED SPACE
Not oneof thesixth- andfth-centuryvotivestatueanathemata that constitute
thesubject of thisstudywasfoundin situ ontheAcropolis, andfor obviousreasons:
the history of the Acropolis occupation is long and complex, involving a series
of destructions and reorganizations beginning with the Persian sack of 480 b.c.
Cuttings in the Acropolis bedrock in the area north and west of the Parthenon
showwheremost of theArchaic statuesprobably stood (Fig. 5). After 480, statues
wereclustered around Pheidias colossal bronzeAthenafacingthePropylaia, lined
up along thenorth ank of theParthenon, and grouped between theentranceto
the sanctuary of Artemis Brauronia and the Mnesiklean Propylaia.
32
With a few
notableexceptions, theextant monumentscannot bematched with any certainty
to particular settings. The sheer numbers of statue bases found on the Acropolis
andinother sanctuariessuchasDelphi, Olympia, andtheSamianHeraionindicate
that, already in thesixth century, aestheticprinciplesof presentation wereforced to
giveway toconsiderationsof spaceand expediency.
33
Sacred lawsof theHellenistic
periodfromavarietyof sanctuariesgivetheresponsibilityfor ndingaplacefor new
statueanathemata toeither apriest or anarchitect (architekton). Overcrowdingseems
to havebeen a major problem; new dedicationscould not beallowed to prevent
visitorsfromwalkingthrough thesanctuary or to impedeaccessto buildings.
34
TheAcropolisdedicationsof thesixthandfthcenturiesprovidesomeinternal
cluesastohowand wherethey wereoriginally meant tobedisplayed. Column and
pillar bases varied in height, and it is easy to imagine dedicators vying to attract
attention to their own offeringsby attaching them to taller and taller bases, or al-
ternatively choosingsmall basesthat could beplaced in front of earlier dedications
without completely blockingtheir view.
35
Archaiccolumn baseswith Ioniccapitals
stoodwiththeir statuesfacingthenarrowendof thecapital, andthelong, rectangu-
lar basesfor equestrian monuments(includingfour-horsechariotsin bronze) were
usually inscribed on oneof thenarrow endsof thebase: thisindicatesthat these
monumentswereintended for display in tightly packed rowswherespacewasat a
premium, despitethefact that aviewfromthesidewould seemtobemoreaesthet-
icallysatisfying.
36
Onlyaverysmall number of statuesandbasesfromtheAcropolis
wereleft unworked or minimally worked at theback for placement up against the
wall of abuilding: theseareDAA no. 184 (thebasefor asmall bronzeAthenastat-
uette), no. 294 (thebasefor amarblekore), korai Acr. nos. 593, 675, and696, andthe
torsoof asmall marblerider foundon theAcropolisNorthSlope.
37
Vertical inscrip-
tionsconsistingof multiplelinesoncolumnandpillar basesreadinbothdirections,
either fromleft to right (DAA nos. 9, 191, 233, and 257) or fromright to left (DAA
12
1
2
3
1 Propylaia
2 Sanctuary of AthenaNike
3 Sanctuary of Artemis
Brauronia
4 BronzeAthenaof Pheidias
5 Erechtheion
6 Altar of Athena
7 Parthenon
4
5
6
7
5. Planof theAthenianAcropolisbyJohnTravlos. ReproducedfromJ. Travlos, Bildlexikon zur Topogra-
phie des antiken Attika (T ubingen1984), Figure33. Copyright Ernst WasmuthVerlag, T ubingen/Berlin,
Germany.
nos. 229, 236, and 246), and thechoiceof direction may havedepended upon the
whether themonument stoodontheleft sideor theright sideof apathway.
38
Inone
case, thesametext wasinscribed upon morethan onelateral faceof astatuebase,
makingit possiblethat themonument wasset up at an intersection whereit would
beviewed frommorethan onesideby visitorsto thesanctuary (DAA no. 193).
A handful of theinscribed stonebasesof thesixth and fth centuriesaresmall
enough tohavebeen placed on shelvesinsideatemple(DAA nos. 308, 311315, and
perhaps79 and 81).
39
Otherwise, it issafeto assumethat an outdoor rather than
indoor display of votive statue anathemata was the rule on the Acropolis at this
time; thecomplicated buildinghistory of themid-sixth through late-fth centuries
certainly must havediscouraged theplacement of monumentsof any sizewithin
templebuildings. Even Pausanias(1.24.7), in thesecond century a.c., recordsonly
13
Anathemata
two statues he saw inside the Parthenon, a portrait of the emperor Hadrian and
another of Iphikrates, afourth-century Athenian general; in contrast, hedescribes
multiplestatuesinsidethetemplesof Heraand Zeusat Olympia(5.17.14; 5.10.3;
and 5.12.45), someof which originally stood outside.
40
Templeson theAcropolis
servedasloci for theopen-air displayof votivestatuesbeginningwiththeOldAthena
temple, whichhadcuttingsfor statuesonitsstylobate; after theParthenonwasbuilt,
statuesandinscribedstelai wereplacedontherock-cut stepsbelowthetempleswest
facade.
41
Evidencefrom other sanctuariesindicatesthat statuededicationswould
havebeen lined up alongboth sidesof themain routesthrough thetemenos: thisis
trueof theSamian Heraion in thesixth century and Delphi in thefth. Pausanias
describesstatuesof Zeusat Olympiapositioned to facethesetting sun (5.24.3) or
therising sun (5.23.1). Statuesrepresenting sacricial animalswereplaced around
altarsor walking in thedirection of altars.
42
Though usually taken asevidencefor
cult statues, vasepaintingsshowing statuesof thegodsstanding near altarsmore
likely provideevidencefor thedisplay of votivestatuesin thislocation, particularly
becausemost of thestatuesrepresented on vasesstand on column and pillar bases
likethereal onesused on theAcropolis.
43
Even when Pausaniasdescribesthelocation of votivestatueanathemata on the
Acropolis, wecannot alwaysbecertain that hesaw them in their original setting.
Survivingmonumentscould bemoved and regrouped over thecourseof asanctu-
aryshistory tocomplement newbuildingsand newcongurationsof thetemenos.
At least oneof thededicationsPausaniassawjust outsidethePropylaiaof Mnesikles
predatesthebuilding and must havebeen moved thereat somepoint after it was
nished in 433/2 b.c.: thisisamid-fth-century dedication by theAthenian cav-
alry reused for anewstatuegroup in theRoman period (DAA no. 135). Two other
votive statues displayed inside the Propylaia in Pausanias time might also pre-
datethebuilding: thededication by Kalliassigned by thesculptor Kalamis(DAA
no. 136), andthestatuededicatedbyHermolykosandsignedbyKresilasof Kydonia
(DAA no. 132). Thebronzefour-horsechariot group dedicated by theAtheniansto
commemoratetheir victory over theBoiotiansand Chalcidiansin 507/6 b.c. was
not only replaced after thePersian sack of 480 b.c., but also moved at least once:
Herodotus(5.77.4) sawit on hisleft ashewasenteringthegateway to thecitadel,
but Pausanias(1.28.2) sawit next to thecolossal bronzeAthenaby Pheidias. Other
statuededicationsof thefth century werereinscribed and turned into honoric
statuesin theRoman period, at which timethey might alsohavebeen relocated on
theAcropolis.
Keeping in mind the caveat that statues could be moved from their original
positions, Pausanias account of the votive monuments he saw on the Acropolis
hints that intentional thematic grouping may have been practiced as early as
thefth century.
44
Pausanias(1.24.14) saw a seriesof interlocking statuegroups
14
(symplegmata) representing mythological subjects lined up along the north side
of theParthenon, following therouteof theannual Panathenaic procession. This
groupof anathemata includesthestatuesof Athenaandthesatyr Marsyasattributed
by Pliny (HN 34.57) to themid-fth-century sculptor Myron; fragmentsof Late
Archaic and Early Classical marble symplegmata found on the Acropolis indicate
that thistypeof dedication goesback to theend of thesixth century, even if none
of the extant examples match the monuments Pausanias describes. Immediately
after enteringthePropylaia, Pausanias(1.23.5) tellsusthat heintendstoskipaseries
of undistinguished human portrait statues(eikones) in order to enumeratestatues
representingthegods. Soon after thisstatement, however, hedoesmention aseries
of four statuesrepresentingtheathletesEpicharinosand Hermolykosand thefth-
century Athenians Oinobios and Phormion (1.23.1112); the base of Epicharinos
statue(DAA no. 120), signed by thefth-century sculptorsKritiosand Nesiotes,
has been found. From Pausanias description, it seems that all of these statues
representingmen, both theonesheskipsand thefour hementions, werelocated in
theareastretchingfromthePropylaiaalongthenorthsideof thetemenosof Artemis
Brauronia and ending at the northwest corner of the Parthenon.
45
However, we
must becareful not to read too much into what littleevidencewehave: Pausanias
(1.25.1) notesthat thestatuesof Periklesandhisfather Xanthipposthat hesawonthe
Acropoliswerenot grouped together; Xanthippos portrait stood besideaprobably
unrelated statueof thepoet Anacreon of Teos.
46
Perikles statuemay at somepoint
in itshistory havebeen grouped together with Pheidias AthenaLemnia, dedicated
by theAthenian cleruchssent to Lemnosat Perikles initiative(Paus. 1.28.2).
47
In theAthenian agora, honoricportrait statuesof thefourth centuryandlater
weregrouped thematically in relation to previoushonorandsand in combination
with statuesrepresentingthegods. OneAthenian decreecallsfor astatuerepresent-
ingSpartokos, kingof theBosporos, to beset up besidestatuesof hisancestorsin
theagoraand another statueof him to beset up at an unspecied location on the
Acropolis.
48
Konon theAthenian and Evagorasof Cyprus, assaviorsof Greece, had
their statuesset up near onerepresentingZeusSoter (Savior) in thesanctuary of
ZeusEleutherioson thewest sideof theagora.
49
When Kononsson Timotheoswas
honoredwithastatueintheagora, it wasset upnear hisfathers.
50
TheAtheniansfa-
mouslyrefusedtolet anyoneset uphonoricportraitsnear thestatuesof Harmodios
and Aristogeiton in theagoraunlessthehonorandscould beconsidered equal in
worthtotheTyrannicides; thisinjunctionwasset asideonlyinthecasesof Antigonos
I and hisson DemetriosPoliorcetesand Brutusand Cassius, twopairsof latter-day
tyrant slayers.
51
According to Pausanias(1.8.3), statuesrepresenting Demosthenes,
Lycurgus, and Kallias(proposer of themid-fth-century peacetreaty with Persia)
stood near Kephisodotos statue of Eirene (Peace) holding the infant Ploutos
(Wealth), alocation that revealsasophisticated and intentional thematicgrouping.
15
Anathemata
Though thepossibility hasoften been overlooked, theidentity of thededicator
may also haveplayed an important rolein theplacement of statuededicationsin
Greek sanctuariessuch astheAcropolis. Astory told by Herodotus(2.110), though
it concernsan Egyptian sanctuary, probably reectsGreek attitudes. Accordingto
Herodotus, thepriest of Hephaistos (Ptah) at Memphistold him that Dariusof
Persia wanted to set up a statue representing himself in front of an older group
representing the pharaoh Sesostris and his family; his request was refused by the
priests because Darius, whose conquests stopped short of the Scythians, did not
equal the accomplishments of Sesostris. A similar ethos of competition between
dedicatorsdetermined theplacement of thestatuededicationscrowded just inside
theentrancetothetemenosat Delphi. HereSparta, Argos, Tegea, andAthensset up
expensiveofferingspaidfor byspoilswon fromeachother in closeproximitytoone
another; thesheer numbersof bronzestatuesinvolved (37 in thecaseof theSpartan
dedication from thespoilsof theAtheniansat Aegospotami in 405/4 b.c.) reect
thededicators desireto attract attention to themagnitudeof their achievements
compared with thoseof rival cities.
52
WH OSE STAT UES? D I SJUN CT I VE
REPRESEN TAT I ON
What may bemost surprising about thesixth- and fth-century votivestatueson
the Acropolis is the fact that their inscriptions do not tell us whom the statues
represented, but only whodedicated them, and in somecasesalsowhomadethem.
Inscribed statue dedications refer to themselves as agalma, aparche, dekate, or as
the fulllment of a vow, but only exceptionally does the dedicatory inscription
describeany aspect of thestatueitself. Indeed, theGreeks own usagemakesone
of thisstudysmain tasks, identifyingwhomvotivestatuesrepresented, appreciably
more difcult. The most common and universally used dedicatory formula, X
dedicated, doesnot imply in any way that thestatuebeingdedicated represented
the dedicator X. This fundamental disjunction between statue base inscriptions,
which talk about the dedicator, and the statues they supported can be termed
disjunctive representation. The disjunction between inscription and statue is
most evident when aman dedicatesastatuerepresenting awoman, asin thecase
of korestatuesdedicated by men on theArchaicAcropolis. At thesametime, it isa
mistaketoassumethat amatch between thegender of thededicator and that of the
statueimpliesthat thestatuewasintended to represent itsdedicator. Thestandard
X dedicated formulawasmeant to beread assomethinglikean annotation to the
statue, a verbal representation of its dedicator, and never as a straightforward
label tellingtheviewer whomthestatuewasmeant to represent.
53
16
6. Bronze statue of the
Queen Napir-Asu with
Elamite inscription from
Susa; Louvre inv. Sb 2731.
R eunion des Mus ees
Nationaux/Art Resource,
NY.
Examples of the practice of disjunctive representation can be found in Near
Eastern cultures, whereinscriptionsproclaiming in therst person akingsdeeds
andtitlesmight beinscribeduponavarietyof freestandingandrelief gureswithout
regardtowhat or whomthey represented.
54
Nevertheless, conjunctive asopposed
todisjunctivestatueinscriptionswereequallycommon. Animportant typeof statue
found in both Egypt and theNear East isthespeaking statue, which isastatue
representingaruler or nobleandinscribedwithatext of thesubjectsownutterances.
Oneexampleof aNear Eastern speakingstatueisthelife-sizebronzeimageof the
fourteenth-century b.c. Elamite queen, Napir-Asu, which is now in the Louvre
(Fig. 6). Itsinscription readsasfollows:
I, Napir-Asu, wife of Untash-Napirisha. He who would seize my statue,
whowouldsmashit, whowoulddestroyitsinscription, whowoulderasemy
name, may hebesmitten by thecurseof Napirisha, of Kiririsha, and of
17
Anathemata
7. Statueof CharesfromDidyma; BritishMuseuminv. B278. Copyright The
British Museum.
Inshushinak, that his name shall become extinct, that his offspring be
barren, that theforcesof Beltiya, thegreat goddess, shall sweep down on
him. ThisisNapir-Asusoffering.
55
Though Napir-Asusstatuewasfounddivorcedfromitsoriginal context amongthe
Persian treasures at Susa, it is clear from the wording of the inscription that the
statuewasoriginally votivein function; thequeen wasrepresented with her right
hand crossed over her left, agesturecommon in depictionsof high-statusvotaries
in Near Eastern sculptureof thisperiod. Speakingstatuessuch asthat of Napir-Asu
18
8. Geneleosgroup in theSamian Heraion; reconstruction by H. Kienast. Reproduced by permission.
wereaconjunctiverather thanadisjunctiveformof self-representationincasessuch
asthis, in which it would havebeen clear to viewersof thestatuethat thequeen
herself wasrepresented.
56
I knowof only threeGreek examplesof speakingstatuesfromthesixth or fth
centuries: all threeareArchaic in dateand all threecomefromIonian sanctuaries.
A seated marblestatuefromthesanctuary of Apollo at Didymanowin theBritish
Museum(Fig. 7) bearsthefollowinginscription: I amChares, ruler of Teichioussa,
theagalma isof Apollo.
57
Theinscription appearstotell theviewer that thestatue
representsChares, that it servesasasubstitutefor Charesthat speaksin hisown
voice, but at the same time it also marks the statue as the property of Apollo,
therecipient of Chares dedication. Theother twoexamplesarelesssimilar toNear
Easternspeakingstatueformulas. OneistheGeneleosstatuegroupfromtheSamian
Heraion: hereaseriesof statuesrepresentingthededicator, arches, and hisfamily
haveeach been inscribed with namelabels, combined with adedicatory inscription
that readsarchesdedicatedustoHera; Geneleosmadeus (Figs. 8 and9).
58
Alost
seated statuefrom Didymaboreasimilar inscription, indicating that it originally
belonged to asculptural family group.
59
An important distinction hastobemadebetween truespeakingstatuesandthe
common Greek phenomenon of oggetti parlanti, or talkingobjects.
60
First-person
speechappearsfrequentlyindedicatoryinscriptionsfromtheAcropolis, but it always
takestheform of an utterancespoken by thevotivemonument itself rather than
by themonumentshuman dedicator. In all, thistypeof rst-person speech (also
referred to asIch-Rede) wasused on roughly 20 percent of theinscribed Archaic
votivededicationsof all typesfoundinall sanctuaries; thefact that thesetextsappear
19
Anathemata
9. Geneleos group; plaster casts on base in situ in the Samian Heraion. Copyright Deutsches
Arch aologischesInstitut-Athen, neg. nr. 87/597.
on vasesand statuesof animalsaswell ason statuesrepresentinggodsand human
beingsdemonstratesthat anyanathema couldbeperceivedbytheGreeksasspeaking
intherst person.
61
OntheAcropolisstatuebases, Ich-Redealwaystakestheformof
theaccusativepronoun, me, asinthefollowingexample(DAAno. 3): Iphidikededi-
cated meto AthenaProtector of thecity. Grammatically therst-person pronoun
in theseinscriptionscan beused instead of athird-person demonstrativepronoun,
and on the Acropolis dedications the demonstrative pronoun was employed just
asoften. Dedicatory inscriptionsincorporatingIch-Redegavethemonument asa
wholeavoicedesigned not to identify whomthestatuerepresented, but instead to
prevent viewersfromforgettingthenameof thededicator.
In theArchaic and Classical periods, inscribed namelabelsidentifying votive
statues of gods and heroes continued to be resisted. In his Thirty-First Oration
(31.9093), a speech delivered in the later-rst or early-second century a.c., Dio
Chrysostom observed that votivestatuesrepresenting gods, heroes, and hemitheoi
normally did not have the names of their subjects inscribed upon them. Only a
dozen unambiguousexceptionsto thisrulecan befound fromthesixth, fth, and
fourthcenturiesapart fromherms, whichwerenormallyreferredtobynameintheir
dedicatoryinscriptions.
62
RomanssuchasLuciusMummiuswhofailedtorecognize
thesubjectsof thevotivestatuesdisplayed in Greek sanctuariesweretaken to task
for their ignorancebyDioandother Greek observers.
63
Theimplication isnot only
20
that votivestatueshad xed identities, but also that viewersweremeant to beable
to identify votivestatuesrepresentinggodsand heroeseven without namelabels.
It seemsreasonableto wonder why theGreeksavoided inscribing both name
labelsand speaking statue formulason votivestatueanathemata; after all, such
inscriptionswould havemadetheidentitiesof votivestatuesclear to anyoneable
to read them, even hundreds of years after their dedication in sanctuaries. The
avoidanceof speaking statuesisprobably connected with thefact that it wasun-
common for Greeksof thesixth and fth centuriestodedicatefreestandingstatues
representingthemselvesin sanctuaries. In theArchaicperiod, themajor exceptions
to thisrulearefamily groupssuch astheGeneleosgroup in theSamian Heraion
andtheseatedstatues(sometimescalledtheBranchidai) foundat Didyma, which
alsoseemtohaverepresentedthefamilieswhodedicated them. Athleticvictor ded-
ications, which seem to havebegun at somepoint in thesixth century, constitute
another important exception: theseareaformof conjunctiverepresentationbecause
their dedicatory inscriptionsalwaysincludethenameof theathleterepresented by
thestatue, even if hehimself wasnot thededicator.
Traditional votivestatues, with their characteristic disjunction between statue
andinscription, werenever intendedtobeviewedoutsidethecontext of asanctuary
or without their dedicatory inscriptions. TheAthenians conception of their own
votiveand funerary statuesascomponentsof an inscribed monument rather than
asautonomousentitiesstandsin stark contrast to theway weasmodern scholars
normallystudyGreek sculpture. Theinscribedstatuebasesthat dedicatorsof statue
anathemata on theAcropolisused to contextualizetheir votivegiftsareoften frag-
mentary, aesthetically unappealing objectsthat reveal littleof their importancein
photographs. Theunavoidableconclusion of thisbrief excursuson thelanguageof
votiveinscriptionsonthesixth- andfth-centuryAcropolisisthat theseinscriptions
did not tell thereader whom thestatuerepresented. However, thisdoesnot mean
that they werenot important, or that visitorsto thesanctuary did not read them.
AsI arguein thefollowing chapters, they providethekey to understanding what
theAcropolisdedicatorshoped to accomplish by dedicatingstatues.
21

The Votive Statue of Acropolis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Votive Statue of Acropolis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

P1: IKB

CB500-FMB CB500/Keesling November 21, 2002 11:32

You might also like