The use of caves in Greece

While caves have undeniably propelled Stone Age research in Greece, it is crucial to acknowledge that they represent only a fraction of the sites utilized during the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic (Kotjabopoulou and Bailey Reference Kotjabopoulou and Bailey1998). Moreover, for much of its historiography, Greek cave archaeology was sidelined within Aegean archaeological discourse, only gaining prominence as sanctuaries linked to the illustrious Minoan or Classical civilizations (Darlas and Andreasen Reference Darlas, Andreasen, Andreasen, Plantzou, Papadopoulos and Darlas2017: 9–11). The brief survey of recent archaeological research especially in southern Greek caves offered here is illustrative rather than exhaustive. It is, however, a fortunate coincidence that a recent exhibition at the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki, along with its accompanying scholarly catalogue, provides a comprehensive overview of cave sites in northern Greece (Georgiadis and Gadolou Reference Georgiadis and Gadolou2025). In this report, select references to cave research beyond the Aegean are also employed to underscore the discipline’s anthropological and archaeological contributions, as well as the scientific methodologies employed.

Cave archaeology has been significantly enhanced through collaboration with other scientific disciplines, fostering the application of multidisciplinary research frameworks which include (but are not limited to) geology, radiocarbon dating, physical anthropology, palaeopathology, DNA analysis, archaeozoology, micromorphology, geomorphology, sedimentology, and palynology. For example, ancient DNA has been successfully extracted from cave sediments (Massilani et al. Reference Massilani, Morley, Mentzer, Aldeias, Vernot, Miller, Stahlschmidt, Kozlikin, Shunkov, Derevianko, Conard, Wurz, Henshilwood, Vasquez, Essel, Nagel, Richter, Nickel, Roberts, Pääbo, Slon, Goldberg and Meyer2022), while geosciences have substantially enriched our understanding of human evolutionary history (O’Connor et al. Reference O’Connor, Barham, Aplin and Maloney2017; Morley et al. Reference Morley, Moffat, Kotarba-Morley, Hernandez, Zerboni, Herries, Joannes-Boyau and Westaway2023). In Greece, archaeological investigations in the central Ionian Sea region have engaged with ongoing research into prehistoric climate and sea-level change, and their impact on Palaeolithic settlement patterns and archaeological visibility (Galanidou Reference Galanidou2018: 17). Furthermore, the adoption in the field of tools such as GIS has greatly improved our understanding of caves as subterranean spaces and has helped to mitigate issues relating to sediment mixing and reworking (Fig. 9.2). This is especially effective when used alongside 3D methods, while terrestrial laser scanning and close-range photogrammetry have also been employed (e.g. Lerma et al. Reference Lerma, Navarro, Cabrelles and Villaverde2010; Katsianis et al. Reference Katsianis, Mavridis, Tankosić, Tsipidis, Tankosić, Mavridis and Kosma2017; Vouklari et al. Reference Vouklari, Papanikolaou, Pagounis, Zacharis, Tsakiri, Arabatzi, Koui, Zezza and Kouis2018; Landeschi et al. Reference Landeschi, Apel, Lundström, Storå, Lindgren and Dell’Unto2019). Robotic mapping has also been implemented, while recent advances in computer science are being harnessed for the analysis of archaeological datasets (Tabib et al. Reference Tabib, Goel, Yao, Boirum and Michael2022). Underwater cave exploration presents its own unique set of challenges (Soldevilla, González and Lladó Reference Soldevilla, González and Lladó2023). Caves are also key loci for studies concerning climate change, pollution, and habitat degradation (Psenner and Sattler Reference Psenner, Sattler and Bell2012), while speleothem analysis proves sensitive in identifying past environmental and climatic events (e.g. Theodorakopoulou et al. Reference Theodorakopoulou, Athanassas, Kyriakopoulos, Maniatis, Galanopoulos, Economou, Mavridis and Darlas2020).

Fig. 9.2.

Distribution of finds with the use of GIS. Agia Triada Cave, Karystos (drawn by M. Katsianis) after Katsianis et al. Reference Katsianis, Mavridis, Tankosić, Tsipidis, Tankosić, Mavridis and Kosma2017. Publication of the Norwegian Institute at Athens.

Furthermore, archaeological research is progressively shifting away from the concept of the cave as a ‘laboratory of archaeological stratification’ predicated on the systematic excavation of individual sites, towards a broader framework that integrates regional survey methods, sometimes in conjunction with excavation (e.g. Efstathiou-Manolakou Reference Efstathiou-Manolakou, Cavanagh, Gallou and Georgiadis2009; Koumouzelis et al. Reference Koumouzelis, Kozlowski, Nowak, Sobcyk, Kaczanowska, Pawlikowski and Pazdur1996; Darlas Reference Darlas2012; Katsarou and Darlas Reference Katsarou and Darlas2017; Galanidou Reference Galanidou2018; Mavridis and Trimmis Reference Mavridis and Trimmis2020; see also below). This approach significantly enhances our understanding of the spatial, temporal, and socio-economic dimensions of cave use, highlighting their multifaceted significance and meaning (Mlekuž Reference Mlekuž2021). In this way, cave finds are more effectively incorporated within wider thematic and regional research agendas. For example, the regional Tithorea Cave Survey revealed a dense cave landscape characterized by spatial and geomorphological variation (e.g. caves and rock shelters, single- and multi-chamber sites), demonstrating a diachronic emphasis on ritual use (Katsarou et al. Reference Katsarou, Kormazopoulou, Laufer, Neumann, Sporn, Zygouri, Sporn, Farnoux and Laufer2024). Similarly, the Maleas Peninsula Project has brought to light several cave sites with evidence of use from prehistoric to modern times, while also examining the region’s palaeoenvironmental conditions, geological and topographical features, and hydrological characteristics (Eftathiou-Manolakou Reference Efstathiou-Manolakou, Cavanagh, Gallou and Georgiadis2009; Efstathiou, Karkazi and Basiakos Reference Efstathiou, Karkazi and Basiakos2025). Moreover, the Pelion Survey Project (ID 808), which focused primarily on post-medieval cave use, adopted a multidisciplinary approach involving archaeology, archival research, graffiti studies, literary evidence, toponymy, mythology, historical texts, and ethnographic interviews (Darlas and Andreasen Reference Darlas, Andreasen, Andreasen, Plantzou, Papadopoulos and Darlas2017: 10), thereby highlighting the complexity of cave use and meaning across different synchronic layers (Plantzou and Papadopoulos Reference Plantzou, Papadopoulos, Andreasen, Plantzou, Papadopoulos and Darlas2017: 151).

Considering that approximately 7,000 caves are known in Greece (Darlas Reference Darlas2022: 767), of which more than 3,000 are located in Crete (Darlas Reference Darlas2020: 157), and more than 2,000 exhibit evidence of human activity across various periods (Katsarou and Nagel Reference Katsarou, Nagel, Katsarou and Nagel2021), it is evident that caves constitute a prominent feature of the Greek landscape. As such, they require specialized archaeological research protocols and adjusted methodological practices (Katsarou and Darlas Reference Katsarou and Darlas2017), as well as distinct administrative and conservation measures (e.g. Gillieson Reference Gillieson2021).

The Stone Age

Extensive investigations have been conducted in caves globally, and in many regions where open-air sites are poorly preserved, caves constitute the sole source of information on human fossil remains (e.g. in southeast Asia, see Gilbertson et al. Reference Gilbertson, McLaren, Stephens, Hunt, Rose, Dykes, Grattan, Bird, Lewis, Kealhofer, Banda, Bandang, Daly, Rushworth, Pyatt, Thompson, Piper, Rabett and Barker2013; Sutikna et al. Reference Sutikna, Tocheri, Morwood, Saptomo, Jatmiko, Wasisto, Westaway, Aubert, Li, Zhao, Storey, Alloway, Morley, Meijer, van den Bergh, Grün, Dosseto, Brumm, Jungers and Roberts2016; Morley et al. Reference Morley, Goldberg, Sutikna, Tocheri, Prinsloo, Jatmiko, Saptomo, Wasisto and Roberts2017; McAdams et al. Reference McAdams, Morley, Fu, Kandyba, Derevianko, Nguyen, Doi and Roberts2020; Maloney et al. Reference Maloney, Dilkes-Hall, Vlok, Oktaviana, Setiawan, Priyatno, Ririmasse, Geria, Effendy, Istiawan, Atmoko, Adhityatama, Moffat, Joannes-Boyau, Brumm and Aubert2022; for the Aegean, see Darlas Reference Darlas, Stefani, Merousis and Dimoula2014; Harvati et al. Reference Harvati, Öding, Bosman, Karakostis, Grün, Stringer, Karkanas, Thompson, Koutoulidis, Moulopoulos, Gorgoulis and Kouloukoussa2019, and below). Cave archaeology has substantially enriched our understanding of the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic periods in Greece. Thanks to cave finds – both fossil and archaeological – researchers have been able to integrate innovative methodological and interpretative models addressing, for example, the relationship between Neanderthals and anatomically modern Humans, their dispersal across continents and seascapes, and other pertinent topics. The Mani peninsula has long been a focal point for Palaeolithic research, with the highest concentration of Palaeolithic and palaeoanthropological sites in Greece (Fig. 9.3), particularly from the Middle and Late Palaeolithic. Notable among these are three systematically excavated reference sites with human remains: the caves of Kalamakia (ID 10292), Lakonis (ID 1488), and Apidima (ID 16943) (Elefanti, Panagopoulou and Karkanas Reference Elefanti, Panagopoulou and Karkanas2008; Harvati Reference Harvati, Schepartz, Fox and Bourbou2009; Harvati, Stringer and Karkanas Reference Harvati, Stringer and Karkanas2011; Darlas Reference Darlas2012; Harvati et al. Reference Harvati, Darlas, Bailey, Rein, El Zaatari, Fiorenza, Kullmer and Psathi2013). The discovery and analysis of Neanderthal skeletal remains in the Mani has provided crucial insights into the presence of Homo neanderthalensis in the Balkans (Ligkovanlis and Darlas Reference Ligkovanlis and Darlas2024, with references therein). In parallel, the Maleas Peninsula Project has identified Upper Palaeolithic sites – both caves and open-air – along the eastern coast of the southeastern Peloponnesian peninsula (Efstathiou-Manolakou Reference Efstathiou-Manolakou, Cavanagh, Gallou and Georgiadis2009; Efstathiou, Karkazi and Basiakos Reference Efstathiou, Karkazi and Basiakos2025). Therefore, the combination of survey and excavation, primarily of caves but also of open-air sites, has yielded a comprehensive picture of landscape use, human mobility, resource exploitation, and the broader integration of cave sites within the Palaeolithic cultural landscape (e.g. Koumouzelis et al. Reference Koumouzelis, Kozlowski, Nowak, Sobcyk, Kaczanowska, Pawlikowski and Pazdur1996; Darlas Reference Darlas2012; Tourloukis et al. Reference Tourloukis, Thompson, Garefalakis, Karkanas, Konidaris, Panagopoulou and Harvati2016). Projects such as those in the Inner Ionian Archipelago and Lefkas, which investigate both cave and open-air sites, are designed to explore issues of connectivity and mobility during the Middle and Late Palaeolithic (Galanidou Reference Galanidou2018: 2, 3, 18).

Fig. 9.3.

Anavalos cave, Mani, with Palaeolithic finds. © EPS/I. Efstathiou.

Moreover, the re-examination and systematic publication of material from Palaeolithic cave sites has significantly advanced our knowledge of chronology, lithic technology, palaeoenvironmental reconstruction, site use, subsistence strategies, ideological frameworks, mobility, connectivity, and more (e.g. Darlas and Psathi Reference Darlas, Psathi, Harvati and Roksandic2016; Ligkovanlis Reference Ligkovanlis, Elefanti, Andreasen, Kardulias and Marshall2016; Starkovich Reference Starkovich2017; Starkovich et al. Reference Starkovich, Elefanti, Karkanas and Panagopoulou2018; Elefanti and Marshall Reference Elefanti and Marshall2023). The systematic study of ornaments from Franchthi Cave has established it as the richest European site for such evidence (Perlès Reference Perlès2016; Reference Perlès2018). Further systematic analysis of lithic industries from Late and Final Upper Palaeolithic sites has demonstrated that Mesolithic stone industries on the Greek mainland retained elements of the late Upper Palaeolithic (Epigravettian) tradition (Fig. 9.4), at least in the early phases of the period (Kaczanowska and Kozłowski Reference Kaczanowska and Kozłowski2014; Reference Kaczanowska and Kozłowski2018; Papadea et al. Reference Papadea, Mavridis, Minou-Minopoulos, Yamaguchi, Apostolikas, Papadimitriou, Wright, Fachard and Polychronakou-Sgouritsa2020; Elefanti and Marshall Reference Elefanti and Marshall2023).

Fig. 9.4.

Lithics from Schisto Cave, Attica, after Papadea et al. Reference Papadea, Mavridis, Minou-Minopoulos, Yamaguchi, Apostolikas, Papadimitriou, Wright, Fachard and Polychronakou-Sgouritsa2020. © EPS/F. Mavridis.

The Mesolithic represents a crucial transitional period for understanding responses to climate change and the origins of the Greek Neolithic (Elefanti and Marshall Reference Elefanti and Marshall2023). When targeted surface surveys were conducted, research encompassed both caves and seascapes (e.g. Panagopoulou et al. Reference Panagopoulou, Runnels, Tsartsidou, Murray, Allen, Mullen and Tourloukis2002; Runnels et al. Reference Runnels, Panagopoulou, Murray, Tsartsidou, Allen, Mullen and Tourloukis2005; see review in Galanidou Reference Galanidou2014; Elefanti and Marshall Reference Elefanti and Marshall2023), leading to the identification of numerous Mesolithic sites and ushering in a new era in Mesolithic research. It is estimated that the number of sites with definite or probable Mesolithic chronology in Greece has tripled over the last two decades (Elefanti and Marshall Reference Elefanti, Marshall, Coward, Hosfield, Pope and Wenban-Smith2015). These discoveries have generated discussion on a wide array of topics, including lithic production, subsistence strategies, seascape exploitation, and many more. Beyond the traditional reference sites, Franchthi Cave in the eastern Peloponnese (Cullen Reference Cullen1995), Theopetra Cave (ID 1980) in Thessaly (Kyparissi-Apostolika Reference Kyparissi-Apostolika2021; Papagrigorakis et al. Reference Papagrigorakis, Maravelakis, Kyparissi-Apostolika, Stravopodi, Konstantaras, Apostolikas, Toulas, Potagas, Papapolychroniou and Mastoris2022), and the settlement of Maroulas on Kythnos (ID 11517; Sampson, Kaczanowska and Kozłowski Reference Sampson, Kaczanowska and Kozłowski2010), new finds including human remains have come to light. Notably, the 2019 rescue excavations at Kouvaras Cave in East Attica (Fig. 9.5) uncovered stratified Mesolithic deposits and a primary burial of a woman in contracted position, along with other paleoanthropological remains (Mavridis et al. Reference Mavridis, Zafeiriadis, Papadea, Stravopodi, Trantalidou, Theodorakopoulou, Athanassas and Maniatis2021; Mavridis and Papadea Reference Μavridis and Papadea2024). Additionally, a primary burial was excavated at Negros Cave on Astypalaea, dated to ca. 9000 BC. This early Mesolithic burial represents the earliest known human presence on the island and constitutes one of the very few securely dated burials from the Mesolithic period in the Aegean (Efstathiou Reference Efstathiou2023; Stravopodi Reference Stravopodi and Vlachopoulos2023). These discoveries have enabled the exploration of burial practices and beliefs concerning the afterlife and, through ancient DNA, strontium isotope analysis, and related analyses, offer a unique opportunity to construct biocultural profiles of prehistoric Aegean populations. Such ongoing studies will also yield new data on gene flow, mobility, residential patterns, biological relationships, health, and diet based on systematically excavated and stratified samples (Fig. 9.6). It has been proposed that caves played a central role in Mesolithic communities (Galanidou Reference Galanidou2011), serving multiple functions as base camps, burial and feasting locales, and stopovers during hunting, fishing, and gathering expeditions (Galanidou, Vukosavljević and Perlès Reference Galanidou, Vukosavljević, Perlès, Nilsson Stutz, Peyroteo Stjerna and Tõrv2025: 372).

Fig. 9.5.

Kouvaras Cave, Attica. © EPS/F. Mavridis.

Fig. 9.6.

Mesolithic burial, Negros Cave, Astypalaea, after Efstathiou Reference Efstathiou2023. © EPS/I. Efstathiou.

Research on Neolithic cave use has traditionally emphasized dwelling and periodic occupation, often linked to specialized economic practices such as transhumance, the latter particularly during the Late Neolithic (Mavridis Reference Mavridis, Dietz, Mavridis, Tankosić and Takaoğlu2018a; Reference Mavridis, Nanoglou and Mavridis2024). However, recent excavations and analyses of Neolithic cave finds and their contextual associations reveal a more complex picture, with ritual activity playing a significant role beyond mortuary use. Evidence for symbolic behaviour has been identified in several cave sites. For example, in the Cave of the Cyclops (ID 3094) on Youra (North Sporades), fine ware pottery was deposited in a pool deep within the cave, suggesting symbolic practices (Katsarou Reference Katsarou, Katsarou and Nagel2021). At Sarakenos in Boeotia (ID 10873), the ritual nature of Late Neolithic deposits is evident, including hundreds of figurines dated to around 4000 BC (Katsarou and Sampson Reference Katsarou, Sampson, Mavridis and Jensen2013; Sampson Reference Sampson2014). In some instances, deer antlers were discovered alongside figurines on occupation floors or near hearths (Sampson Reference Sampson2014: 55, 56). At Lion’s Cave on Mount Hymettos in Attica, figurines were deliberately placed in association with other artefacts beneath stone-lined floors, with stone figurines positioned singly and clay ones grouped (Karali, Mavridis and Lambropoulos Reference Karali, Mavridis, Lambropoulos, Dietz, Mavridis, Tankosić and Takaoğlu2018; Mavridis Reference Mavridis, Marthari, Renfrew and Boyd2019). Similarly, at Pan’s Cave in Attica (Mari Reference Mari, Dietz, Mavridis, Tankosić and Takaoğlu2018), deer antlers were associated with secondary burials and other finds (Mari Reference Mari, Nanoglou and Mavridis2024a; Reference Mari2024b). Agriomenos Cave on Samos yielded evidence of ritualized activity, including artefact deposition, food consumption, hearth maintenance, and human burial (Menelaou et al. Reference Menelaou, Marzec, Georgiadis, Katsarou, Siros and Darlas2024). Alepotrypa Cave (ID 16941; Papathanasiou et al. Reference Papathanasiou, Parkinson, Pullen, Galaty and Karkanas2018) reveals an exceptionally complex subterranean ritual system involving a wide range of ceremonial practices. These were spatially demarcated across chambers and niches and included both primary and secondary mortuary treatment of remains, including disarticulation, cremation, and the exposure of cranial and post-cranial remains in ossuaries (Katsarou Reference Katsarou, Katsarou and Nagel2021). Tharrounia Cave (ID 14974) in central Euboea (Katsarou Reference Katsarou, Katsarou and Nagel2021) and Drakaina Cave in Kephalonia (ID 8882; Stratouli and Metaxas Reference Stratouli, Metaxas, Sarris, Kalogiropoulou, Kalayci and Karimali2017) further exemplify the diversity of Neolithic cave use. Such evidence underscores the significant role caves played in Neolithic communities, suggesting that ‘through ritualization, the everyday is referenced and transformed’ (Tomkins Reference Tomkins2009: 125).

The Bronze Age

During the Early Bronze Age, a period during which organized cemeteries predominated (e.g. Doumas Reference Doumas1977, for the Cyclades), caves were rarely employed for burials or other functions in mainland Greece and the Cyclades, in contrast to Crete (Papadatos Reference Papadatos, Antoniadou and Pace2007: 433; Vavouranakis Reference Vavouranakis2007: 157). Most often, only sherds and pottery are found (e.g. Schisto Cave, Attica, and Kalampaki Cave, Paros, as well as several caves in the Maleas peninsula), without any specific contexts yet excavated that could provide evidence regarding a specific cave’s use and meaning. Nonetheless, notable exceptions do exist. The cave at Agia Triada (ID 4732), Karystos, Euboea (Fig. 9.7), presents a complex burial assemblage, including archaeologically attested sequential rituals involving food offerings (Vykukal et al. Reference Vykukal, Mavridis and Tankosić2021). Also present are traces of Cycladic mortuary practices, Cycladic/Helladic material culture (Mavridis and Tankosić Reference Mavridis and Tankosić2016), and evidence for the manipulation of human remains (Prevedorou, Mavridis and Tankosić Reference Prevedorou, Mavridis, Tankosić, Κουntouri and Gadolou2019), further highlighting the unique contextual importance and special role that this cave played in the lives of local people. These finds may only be paralleled at open-air sites in mainland Greece (Mavridis and Tankosić Reference Mavridis and Tankosić2016; Reference Mavridis and Tankosićforthcoming). In this context, the ossuary at Lake Vouliagmeni in Perachora (ID 14109; Stravopodi Reference Stravopodi2024) should be interpreted as reflecting specialized treatment of the dead, connected to ideologies concerning the ancestral past and memory (Mavridis and Tankosić Reference Mavridisforthcoming). Moreover, the cave of Vri in Laconia brought to light Neolithic, Early and Middle Bronze Age, as well as Classical and Hellenistic pottery and appears to be associated with an Early Bronze Age settlement located directly above it, on top of the hill Klisizes (Efstathiou-Manolakou Reference Efstathiou-Manolakou, Cavanagh, Gallou and Georgiadis2009).

Fig. 9.7.

Agia Triada Cave, Karystos. © EPS/F. Mavridis.

With regard to the Middle and Late Bronze Age in mainland Greece, the utilization of cave sites has been discussed by several scholars (Vasileiou Reference Vasileiou2000; Mavridis et al. Reference Mavridis, Kormazopoulou, Papadea, Apostolikas, Yamaguchi, Tankosić, Kotzamani, Trantalidou, Karkanas, Maniatis, Papagianni, Lambropoulos, Mavridis and Jensen2013; Katsarou Reference Katsarou, Katsarou and Nagel2021). Middle Bronze and Mycenaean material is known from caves on the Maleas peninsula and in the Mani region (Efstahiou-Manolakou Reference Efstathiou-Manolakou, Cavanagh, Gallou and Georgiadis2009). Archaeological investigations have revealed additional cave sites with evidence dated from around 2000 BC and onwards, although consisting primarily of ceramic finds (e.g. Agios Ioannis, Irakleia (ID 19998), and Vintsi Cave, Attica), highlighting our limited understanding of their function and significance during these phases. In Crete, the study of caves reflects the broader history of Greek prehistoric archaeology (Mavridis et al. Reference Mavridis, Kormazopoulou, Papadea, Apostolikas, Yamaguchi, Tankosić, Kotzamani, Trantalidou, Karkanas, Maniatis, Papagianni, Lambropoulos, Mavridis and Jensen2013). As elsewhere in Greece, early investigations in Cretan caves sought to identify sites referenced in classical literature, particularly the tomb of Zeus (Bradley 2000, cited in Mavridis et al. Reference Mavridis, Kormazopoulou, Papadea, Apostolikas, Yamaguchi, Tankosić, Kotzamani, Trantalidou, Karkanas, Maniatis, Papagianni, Lambropoulos, Mavridis and Jensen2013; see also Faro Reference Faro, Mavridis and Jensen2013; Platon Reference Platon, Mavridis and Jensen2013; Stampolidis and Kotsonas Reference Stampolidis, Kotsonas, Mavridis and Jensen2013; Tyree Reference Tyree, Mavridis and Jensen2013). Cretan caves (Fig. 9.8) were used continuously from the earliest human presence on the island. Research at sites such as Asphentou (Strasser et al. Reference Strasser, Murray, van der Geer, Kolb, Ruprecht, Κaranastasi, Τzigounaki and Tsigonaki2020) and the renewed examination and publication of material from Pelekita Cave (ID 18447), which revealed significant Aegean-like material (Kanta, Ferrence and Bonga Reference Kanta, Ferrence and Bonga2020), offer valuable insights into cave utilization prior to the Bronze Age. Regional cave studies (e.g. Gavrilaki Reference Gavrilaki2017) have contributed to our understanding of their diachronic use and evolving patterns. Ongoing research by the Ephoreia of Palaeoanthropology and Speleology continually identifies new sites and re-evaluates previously known ones (Darlas Reference Darlas2020; Efstathiou, Kanta and Kontopodi Reference Efstathiou, Kanta and Kontopodi2020; Liakopoulos Reference Liakopoulos2020; Efstathiou et al. Reference Efstathiouforthcoming). Moreover, the systematic publication and study of significant diachronic cave sites on Crete, such as the Inatos Cave on the southeastern coast – a shrine to Eileithyia, the goddess of childbirth and motherhood, from the Bronze Age to the Late Roman/Early Byzantine period (ca. 1900 BC–400 AD) – has provided new and detailed information regarding the use and importance of the islands’ caves (Kanta, Davaras and Betancourt Reference Kanta, Davaras and Betancourt2022). The Idaion Cave is considered to have been a prominent sanctuary during the Iron Age in Crete (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki Reference Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki2011; Reference Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki2013). The diversity of artefacts found within it and other caves, some of which are imports from various Mediterranean locales, underscores their ritual importance (Stampolidis and Kotsonas Reference Stampolidis, Kotsonas, Mavridis and Jensen2013). Beyond the prehistoric period, the evidence suggests an increase in cave use during the Geometric, Archaic and Roman periods (Stampolidis and Kotsonas Reference Stampolidis, Kotsonas, Mavridis and Jensen2013).

Fig. 9.8.

Stravomytis Cave, Heraklion. © EPS/I. Efstathiou.

In Crete, exceptional votive deposits, including ceramics, terracottas, and bronzes, have been discovered in caves such as Idaion, Psychro, Kamares, and Arkalochori, contributing to the conceptualization of the ‘Cretan divine grotto’ (Katsarou and Nagel Reference Katsarou, Nagel, Katsarou and Nagel2021). The identification of ritual caves in Minoan Crete, their associated rituals and activities, their relationship to other site types, and their role in the dynamics of settlement and religious systems, have been the focus of extensive research (e.g. Tyree Reference Tyree1974; Reference Tyree, Mavridis and Jensen2013; Faro Reference Faro, Mavridis and Jensen2013; Vokotopoulos Reference Vokotopoulos, van Wijngaarden and Driessen2022 and references therein). Burial caves of the Early to Middle Bronze Age, such as Agios Charalambos (ID 9820), which served as an ossuary for secondary burials and their associated grave goods, were the locus of complex ceremonies (Betancourt, Davaras and Stravopodi Reference Betancourt, Davaras, Stravopodi and Betancourt2014). The consistent ritual use of Cretan caves is widely acknowledged to have begun during the Middle Minoan period in caves such as Kamares, Psychro, Skoteino, and Stravomyti (Platon Reference Platon, Mavridis and Jensen2013: 157; Efstathiou, Kanta and Kontopodi Reference Efstathiou, Kanta and Kontopodi2020). Furthermore, the emergence of Minoan rural sanctuaries has been linked to the development of complex socio-political structures during the second millennium BC, serving as loci for the creation of communal ideologies and group identity (Agouridis and Vokotopoulos Reference Agouridis and Vokotopoulos2018: 95). Recent studies have also emphasized the diverse nature of cave use. For instance, the submerged cave of Kathedriko at Akrotiri, Chania, revealed ritual activity potentially linked to freshwater use; the ceramic assemblage includes conical cups suggesting ritual consumption of food and drink (Agouridis Reference Agouridis2012: 95). In relation to the Neopalatial period, Minoan sanctuaries have been classified into three types: those associated with specific centres, border sanctuaries, and sites of pan-Cretan significance (Adams Reference Adams2004). Accordingly, two caves, Anekathestos and Kato Spilios in eastern Crete, have been interpreted as border sanctuaries of the Minoan centres at Palaikastro and Zakros, respectively (Agouridis and Vokotopoulos Reference Agouridis and Vokotopoulos2018: 96, 97). In another example, the Adiavatos coastal cave in eastern Crete, based on its marginal location, archaeological finds, and morphology, appears to have served a local ritual function associated with rites of passage during the Final Neopalatial and early Third Palatial periods (Vokotopoulos Reference Vokotopoulos, Andreadaki-Vlazaki and Papadopoulou2011). Alternatively, the Ouranias to Froudi cave complex is among the few definite second millennium BC cave sites on Crete that show evidence of everyday activities such as storage and food processing, suggesting seasonal use (Kopaka Reference Κopaka and Platon2020).

Significant discoveries are also reported from Cycladic caves. At Agios Ioannis Cave (ID 19998) on Irakleia (Fig. 9.9) and several caves on Paros, material dating to the transition from the Middle to Late Bronze Age, corresponding with the Minoan eruption of the Santorini volcano, has been identified for the first time (Mavridis Reference Μavridis2018b). The finds from Irakleia and Katafygi Cave (ID 19999) on Paros represent the first evidence of symbolic and ritual cave use in the Cyclades, a phenomenon previously documented only in Minoan Crete. The presence of inverted conical cups beneath volcanic ash layers in the small anonymous cave on Irakleia, and in inaccessible parts of Kalampaki Cave on Paros, supports this interpretation (Mavridis Reference Μavridis2018b; Reference Mavridisforthcoming). The co-occurrence of contemporaneous burnt organic materials, animal bones, large quantities of terrestrial and marine shells, a seal, a dagger, and scattered human remains in Katafygi Cave constitute a context thus far unparalleled in Cycladic cave archaeology (Mavridis Reference Μavridis2018b; Reference Mavridisforthcoming). Taken together with evidence from Daskalio Cave on Kalymnos (Benzi Reference Benzi, Gauss, Lindblom, Angus and Smith2011) and burial contexts in Katafygadi Cave on Kythera (Trantalidou et al. Reference Trantalidou, Lazaridis, Trimmis, Gerometta, Maniatis, Milidaki, Papadea, Zikidi, Kotzamani, Papayanni, Chatzitheodorou and Stefanou2019), these findings reflect the complex and multifaceted use of caves during the period, extending beyond, or possibly influenced by, practices in Crete.

Fig. 9.9.

Agios Ioannis Cave, Irakleia. © EPS/F. Mavridis.

Historic times

As in the case of Crete, cave sanctuaries from the historical periods also became privileged sites of archaeological research, yielding exceptional finds and attracting the attention of pioneering scholars (Katsarou and Nagel Reference Katsarou, Nagel, Katsarou and Nagel2021: 2). The remarkable cave complex at Vari in Attica, also known as the Nympholept Cave, is distinguished by its rock-cut decoration, featuring votive reliefs and carved stairs dated to the fifth century BC (Schörner and Göette Reference Schörner and Göette2004; Mari Reference Mari2024c). Similarly, Pitsa Cave in Corinthia is notable for its exceptionally preserved painted wooden plaques (Orlandos Reference Orlandos1935; Reference Orlandos1965; Katsarou and Nagel Reference Katsarou, Nagel, Katsarou and Nagel2021: 2; Kavvadias Reference Kavvadias, Georgiadis and Gadolou2025 with references therein), while the Corycian Cave near Delphi (Pasquier Reference Pasquier1977; Amandry Reference Amandry1981) has yielded over 16,000 vessels and 50,000 figurine fragments, significantly contributing to our understanding of the sacred landscape of ancient Phokis (Katsarou and Nagel Reference Katsarou, Nagel, Katsarou and Nagel2021).

Numerous excavations have expanded our understanding of cave shrines during historical periods, such as the Cave of Pan at Marathon (Bravo and Mari Reference Bravo, Mari, Katsarou and Nagel2021), Schisto Cave (ID 17981) on Mount Aegaleo in Attica (Mavridis et al. Reference Mavridis, Kormazopoulou, Papadea, Apostolikas, Yamaguchi, Tankosić, Kotzamani, Trantalidou, Karkanas, Maniatis, Papagianni, Lambropoulos, Mavridis and Jensen2013; Spathi Reference Spathi, Sioumpara and Psaroudakis2013; Zampiti Reference Zampiti, Mavridis and Jensen2013), and the Mastros Cave in Aetoloakarnania (Nagel Reference Nagel, Katsarou and Nagel2021). In the Cyclades, work by the Ephorate of Palaeoanthropology and Speleology has revealed previously unknown cave shrines dating from the mid-Geometric period onwards, on islands such as Paros (Mavridis Reference Mavridis and Jensen2025) and Irakleia (Mavridis, Tankosić and Kotsonas Reference Mavridis, Tankosić, Kotsonas, Angliker and Tully2018). Geometric-Archaic material from the cave on Antiparos, considered alongside recent discoveries from Paros, Irakleia, and other sites, suggests a growing trend in cave use in the Cyclades from the late eighth to seventh centuries BC (Mavridis Reference Mavridisforthcoming). Ritual activity in the cave of Agios Ioannis, Irakleia, was confirmed by the discovery of three clay female figurines (Mavridis, Tankosić and Kotsonas Reference Mavridis, Tankosić, Kotsonas, Angliker and Tully2018). Finds include imports from across the central Aegean, while fifth-century BC layers feature Attic or Attic-type black-glazed pottery (Mavridis, Tankosić and Kotsonas Reference Mavridis, Tankosić, Kotsonas, Angliker and Tully2018). The cave witnessed renewed activity during the Roman and Late Roman/Early Byzantine periods, as indicated by lamps, terra sigillata imports and amphorae. Recent investigations on Paros also suggest the existence of another cultic cave from the Geometric-Archaic era, the cave of Agios Georgios (Mavridis Reference Mavridis and Jensen2025; Reference Mavridisforthcoming).

The study of coastal cave shrines as a diachronic phenomenon in antiquity reveals a mosaic of cultic forms where religion is intertwined with the sea and the ancient maritime world, including, among other sites already mentioned in the text, the lake cave of Melissani, Kephalonia, the caves of Agia Kyriaki on Leukas, Cyclops on Meganisi, Koutalas on Serifos, and many more (Efstathiou et al. Reference Efstathiou, Katsarou, Mari, Mavridis, Agouridis, Zygouri. and Vlachopoulos2025). In more detail, on the island of Astypalaea, two coastal caves functioned as sanctuaries dedicated to the Nymphs, serving as pilgrimage sites for locals, sailors, traders, and travellers (Efstathiou Reference Efstathiou, Αntonopoulou and Petrounakos2022). In the cave of Negros, located above Vatses Bay, inscriptions attest to its dedication to the Nymphs (Fig. 9.10), while the names of male and female dedicants offer rich material for the understanding of the portraiture of Astypalaea (Efstathiou Reference Efstathiou2023; Efstathiou and Zavou Reference Efstathiou and Zavou2023). Figurines discovered at the site confirm that the Nymphs were co-worshipped with deities such as Aphrodite, Pan, Isis, Dionysus, and Heracles (Efstathiou Reference Efstathiou2023; Reference Efstathiouforthcoming). In Drakospilios Cave, situated on the island’s northwestern coast and notable for its lake and numerous finds, ceramics, jewellery, and artefacts from eastern Mediterranean trading centres point to the island’s integration within extensive economic and cultural networks. Animal bones discovered in both caves indicate that sacrificial rites and feasting were integral components of ritual practice (Efstathiou Reference Efstathiou2024).

Fig. 9.10.

Negros Cave, Astypalaea, pottery with inscriptions, after Efstathiou and Zavou Reference Efstathiou and Zavou2023. © EPS/I. Efstathiou.

The so-called Chrysospilia Cave on Folegandros in the Cyclades (ID 11495) represents a unique example among Aegean sanctuaries (Vasilopoulou Reference Vasilopoulou, Angliker and Tully2018). The ongoing documentation and study of inscriptions within the cave promise to enhance our understanding of its role as a cult centre. Hundreds of inscriptions, mostly male names but with some female names as well, often including clues as to their ethnicity, have been preserved. These inscriptions, dating from the fourth to second centuries BC, mainly originate from the Aegean islands, with others from mainland Greece, Crete, Cyprus, and beyond (Vasilopoulou Reference Vasilopoulou, Angliker and Tully2018).

The cave at Lechova (ID 1423), Corinthia, dedicated to the Nymphs according to some graffiti finds on pottery sherds, has revealed material from the Late Archaic (end of the sixth century BC) to the end of the fourth century BC (Kormazopoulou, Zygouri and Papathanassiou Reference Kormazopoulou, Zygouri, Papathanassiou and Lolos2011; Spathi Reference Spathi2020). In western Greece, the systematic study and re-evaluation of excavated materials from cave shrines such as Drakospilia on Kephalonia (Samartzidou-Orkopoulou Reference Samartzidou-Orkopoulou, Muller and Lafli2015), the coastal shrine of Drakaina Cave on the same island (Hatzioti Reference Hatzioti2007; Karadima 2021; Reference Karadima2024), and the Polis Cave on Ithaca, which was used from the Mycenaean-Geometric through to later periods (Benton Reference Benton1935, Reference Benton1939; Morgan and Hayward Reference Morgan, Hayward, Katsarou and Nagel2021), have revealed important aspects of cultic activity. The Cave of Kouritas (Hatziotis Reference Erlichforthcoming), located approximately 10 kilometres east of Vonitsa and a few kilometres inland from the southern shore of the Ambracian Gulf, appears to have been a significant sanctuary within the territory of ancient Thyreion (Katsarou and Darlas Reference Katsarou and Darlas2017). Excavations have yielded stratified deposits containing ritual assemblages from the sixth to second centuries BC, including pottery, lamps, bronzes, glassware, and a notable sequence of terracotta figurines, from dancing groups and busts to relief plaques (Katsarou and Darlas Reference Katsarou and Darlas2017; Hatziotis Reference Erlichforthcoming). The cave of the Leibethrid Nymphs (Andron) on Mount Helikon (ID 3082) in Boeotia, mentioned by Pausanias and Strabo, has produced a wealth of votive offerings and stands as a prominent mainland cave shrine dedicated to Pan, the Nymphs, and other deities (Vasilopoulou Reference Vasilopoulou2024). Syntheses of the available evidence have underscored the complex and varied nature of cave shrines across the Aegean (Sporn Reference Sporn, Haug and Μüller2020; Angliker Reference Angliker, Katsarou and Nagel2021).

As opposed to the Hellenistic and Early and Middle Roman periods, the Late Roman/Early Byzantine is characterized by more intensive use of caves, mainly related to rural or domestic activities, including herding, temporary shelter, and storage places, with several representative examples found in Attica (e.g. Wickens Reference Wickens, Mavridis and Jensen2013: 242, 243). They were also used as refugia in times of turmoil and danger (Kormazopoulou Reference Kormazopoulou2023: 140–43, with relevant bibliography). Later, many caves were fashioned into shelters, as dwellings and places of prayer for monks and asketes, transformed even later into chapels or evolving into monasteries (Paliouras Reference Paliouras2004). The ancient symbolism of caves as liminal spaces between light and dark persisted in Christian iconography, albeit with altered significance. While caves were clearly significant locales, many aspects of their importance remain only partially understood (Mavridis et al. Reference Mavridis, Kormazopoulou, Papadea, Apostolikas, Yamaguchi, Tankosić, Kotzamani, Trantalidou, Karkanas, Maniatis, Papagianni, Lambropoulos, Mavridis and Jensen2013). A reassessment of material from the Cave of Pan at Vari, which included more than 2,000 intact clay lamps (the largest assemblage of Athenian lamps from a single context so far) alongside other ceramic wares dated from the fifth to seventh centuries AD, promises to illuminate production, distribution, and usage patterns in cave contexts during these phases (Gerousi-Bendermacher Reference Gerousi-Bendermacher, Caminneci, Giannitrapani, Concetta Parello and Serena Rizzo2023). Epigraphic and graffiti evidence from Daveli Cave in Attica, dated to the seventh century AD, further illustrates the diverse range of material available for study from cave sites (Mari, Zavou and Kormazopoulou Reference Mari, Zavou and Kormazopoulou2023). Numerous caves have yielded Byzantine and post-Byzantine finds, particularly pottery. Fieldwork in the Cyclades, for instance, has documented Byzantine pottery from the cave of Agios Ioannis on Irakleia (Fig. 9.11), dating primarily from the sixth to eighth centuries, and offering significant insights into commercial activities and connectivity during a period for which historical sources are often silent (Kormazopoulou and Diamanti Reference Kormazopoulou, Diamanti, Petridis, Yangaki, Liaros and Bia2021). Perhaps the most distinctive case is that of Andritsa Cave (ID 2404) in the municipality of Lerna, Argolid, which contained a rare sealed archaeological assemblage (Kormazopoulou and Hatzilazarou Reference Kormazopoulou and Hatzilazarou2005; Kormazopoulou Reference Kormazopoulou2024). The finds narrate the story of a group of individuals who used the cave as a refuge, sealed within it with their possessions, for obscure reasons (Kormazopoulou and Hatzilazarou Reference Kormazopoulou, Hatzilazarou and Bitha2024). The assemblage included human skeletal remains, vases, lamps, metal objects, and coins. Osteological analysis suggests the individuals were in good health and died in situ (Stravopodi Reference Stravopodi2006). The latest coin find, from the reign of Tyberius-Constantinus (578–82 AD), provides a terminus post quem for the event (Kormazopoulou and Hatzilazarou Reference Kormazopoulou, Hatzilazarou, Papanikola-Mpakirtzi and Kousoulakou2010).

Fig. 9.11.

Pottery of the sixth to eighth centuries AD. Agios Ioannis Cave, Irakleia, after Kormazopoulou and Diamanti Reference Kormazopoulou, Diamanti, Petridis, Yangaki, Liaros and Bia2021. © EPS/F. Mavridis.