Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T15:37:43.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

LACONIAN AND MESSENIAN PLAQUES WITH SEATED FIGURES: THE SOCIO-POLITICAL DIMENSION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 February 2014

Gina Salapata
Gina Salapata*
Affiliation:
Massey University, New Zealand
*
g.salapata@massey.ac.nz
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The characteristic terracotta plaques with seated figures accompanied by snakes were created for local use, as they are hardly ever found outside Laconia and Messenia. They served a type of cult, the heroic, as shown by both their widespread distribution in this region and their complete absence from divine sanctuaries. Their generalised and standardised iconography made them versatile offerings that could be used in various contexts, with the seated figure acquiring the identity of the locally honoured hero in a specific sanctuary setting. Distribution patterns also show variety. In Laconia, plaque findspots show this type of offering was favoured much more in the region inhabited by the homoioi. By contrast, the Messenian plaques, offered both at Bronze Age tombs and at urban sanctuaries, must have been dedicated primarily by perioikoi. The similarities between Laconian and Messenian types of plaques need not be correlated with the contested ethnic identity of the Messenians. Rather, they should be attributed to the flexibility and variety in their use. The Messenian cults that attracted plaque dedications honoured heroes not necessarily because they were Achaean, but because they were celebrated local mythical or historical figures. Creating a link with the past through heroes was a well-established way to articulate a strong local and communal, but not necessarily ethnic, identity.

Λακωνικά και μεσσηνιακά πλακίδια με καθιστές μορφές: κοινωνικο-πολιτική διάσταση

Τα χαρακτηριστικά πήλινα πλακίδια με τις καθιστές μορφές που συνοδεύονται από φίδια κατασκευάστηκαν για τοπική χρήση, καθώς δεν έχουν βρεθεί σχεδόν ποτέ εκτός Λακωνίας και Μεσσηνίας. ϒπηρετούσαν μία ιδιαίτερη μορφή λατρείας, την ηρωική, όπως δείχνει τόσο η ευρεία εξάπλωσή τους σ' αυτήν την περιοχή όσο και η πλήρης απουσία τους από ιερά αφιερωμένα σε θεότητες. Χάρη στην γενικευμένη και τυποποιημένη εικονογραφία τους προσφέρονταν για ποικίλους σκοπούς και μπορούσαν να ανατεθούν σε διάφορα ηρώα, όπου η καθιστή μορφή ταυτιζόταν κάθε φορά με τον συγκεκριμένο τοπικό ήρωα. Ποικιλία επίσης παρατηρείται και στις περιοχές ανεύρεσης των πλακιδίων. Στη Λακωνία, από τα σημεία στα οποία βρέθηκαν τα πλακίδια συνάγεται ότι αυτό το είδος αναθήματος ήταν πολύ πιό δημοφιλές στις περιοχές που κατοικούνταν από τους «ομοίους». Αντίθετα, τα μεσσηνιακά πλακίδια που προσφέρονταν τόσο σε τάφους της εποχής του Χαλκού όσο και σε αστικά ιερά πρέπει να ήταν αφιερώματα κυρίως περιοίκων. Οι ομοιότητες που παρατηρούνται ανάμεσα στα λακωνικά και τα μεσσηνιακά πλακίδια δεν συσχετίζονται απαραίτητα με την επίμαχη εθνική ταυτότητα των Μεσσηνίων, αλλά πρέπει να αποδοθούν στην ευελιξία και την ποικιλία της χρήσης τους. Οι μεσσηνιακές λατρείες που προσέλκυσαν αφιερώσεις πλακιδίων δεν τιμούσαν απαραίτητα τους ήρωες επειδή ήταν Αχαιοί, αλλά επειδή ήταν λαμπρές μυθικές ή ιστορικές προσωπικότητες αυτού του τόπου. Η σύνδεση με το παρελθόν μέσω των ηρώων ήταν ένας καθιερωμένος τρόπος για την άρθρωση μιας ισχυρής τοπικής και κοινοτικής αλλά όχι κατ' ανάγκη εθνικής ταυτότητας.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Annual of the British School at Athens , Volume 108 , November 2013, pp. 187 - 200
Copyright
Copyright © The Council, British School at Athens 2014 

INTRODUCTION

Terracotta dedicatory offerings, found in abundance throughout the Greek world, are expressive products of human cultic behaviour. They can thus shed light not only on the nature and character of the divine or heroic recipients but also on the associated cult practices. In addition to their value in a religious sense, terracotta offerings also have a social value. In particular, types featuring a distinctive local iconography can often give us glimpses of the process by which dedicators constructed their social and cultural identity, and help us understand the social and political functions of local ritual practice.

This article concerns the characteristic terracotta plaques depicting seated figures often accompanied by snakes, which were used as votive offerings throughout Laconia and Messenia from the sixth through to the fourth century bc. It will argue that the plaques were employed in hero cults of local mythical or historical personalities, with the seated figure acquiring the identity of the locally honoured hero or heroine in a specific sanctuary setting. These heroes, who could have been worshipped by all residents of Laconia and Messenia, helped forge a strong communal and civic, but not necessarily ethnic, identity.

PLAQUES WITH SEATED FIGURES

Mould-made terracotta relief plaques are one of the most characteristic types of votive offerings in Laconia. Fabric, manufacture, style and iconography indicate that these plaques were produced locally, probably in or near Sparta (Salapata Reference Salapata, Palagia and Coulson1993, 189). Many such plaques were discovered with other offerings in two votive deposits excavated at Amyklai, the fifth kome of Sparta, located about five kilometres to the south and a short distance south-west of the famous Amyklaion sanctuary.Footnote 1

Among the various subjects depicted on the Amyklaian plaques, the most dominant is that of a seated man holding a drinking cup, usually a kantharos, and often accompanied by a snake (Fig. 1), a type created in the late sixth century bc (Salapata Reference Salapata, Palagia and Coulson1993; Salapata Reference Salapata2006, 542, 553–4). Other types include an attending figure, either a woman with oinochoe and offerings (Fig. 2) or a boy with strainer and oinochoe (Fig. 3). Later variations show a female with a sceptre seated next to the man (Salapata Reference Salapata, Gorman and Robinson2002b, fig. 3), or even represented alone, again accompanied by a snake (Salapata Reference Salapata, Gorman and Robinson2002b, fig. 4). Plaques with seated figures show a wide spectrum of quality and size, ranging from large, detailed images to small and simplified versions (Fig. 4 a–b).

Fig. 1.

Terracotta plaque with seated man holding kantharos and accompanied by snake from Amyklai. Sparta Museum no. 6230/1.

Fig. 2.

Terracotta plaque with seated man holding kantharos and staff, and accompanied by female attendant and snake from Amyklai. Sparta Museum no. 6231/1.

Fig. 3.

Terracotta plaque with seated man holding kantharos and accompanied by boy attendant and snake from Amyklai. Sparta Museum no. 6229/1.

Fig. 4.

Small, schematic terracotta plaques from Amyklai. a: seated man with phiale and staff: Sparta Museum no. 6039/222; b: seated figure accompanied by standing figure: Sparta Museum no. 6039/104.

Literary, epigraphic and archaeological evidence clearly associates the Amyklaian deposits with the sanctuary of Cassandra (known in Laconia as Alexandra), which allegedly contained the graves of Agamemnon and Cassandra (Pausanias 3.19.6; Salapata Reference Salapata, Gorman and Robinson2002b). Pottery shows that a heroic cult was practised there since at least the early seventh century. This cult is related to a variant tradition that placed the palace, and therefore the murder of Agamemnon and Cassandra, not in the Argolid as the tragic poets said, but in Laconia. Sixth-century Spartan aspirations for leadership over the Peloponnese probably enhanced the pre-existing local tradition and cult; thus, by promoting Agamemnon, the ‘lord of men’ in Homer, to the role of a Laconian hero personifying the glorious past and symbolising local history and identity, Sparta would have nicely mirrored and legitimised her ambitions for a Peloponnesian alliance and, at the same time, would have undermined any Argive claim (Salapata Reference Salapata2011, 41–3).

The dedication of the first plaques indicates an intensification of the cult at the Amyklai sanctuary from the late sixth century on. The iconography fits well with the identification of the recipients as Agamemnon and his consort, the prophetess Cassandra. The stock image of a seated figure with cup, and its variations, would have denoted the ideal mythical hero as known primarily from epic poetry, with the kantharos referring to wine consumption during feasting. The woman, seated by herself or next to him, assumes the role of his consort Cassandra, with the sceptre alluding to her priestly status and especially her prophetic abilities (Salapata Reference Salapata, Gorman and Robinson2002b, 142–3; Salapata Reference Salapata2011, 52). The commonly occurring snake, which appears also in other media from the sanctuary deposits, would have referred to the heroic nature of the couple, who are frequently accompanied by attendants and adorants (Salapata Reference Salapata, Gorman and Robinson2002b, 142–3; Salapata Reference Salapata2006, 552–3).

Plaques with seated figures, many made in the same (or derivative) moulds as those from Amyklai, have been discovered at various other Laconian sites both as isolated finds and as part of comparable votive deposits. They have been found in more than 30 sites throughout Sparta, but with major concentrations to the south and east of the acropolis hill, especially in the kome of Limnai (Fig. 5) (e.g. Wace Reference Wace1905–6; Flouris Reference Flouris2000; Steinhauer Reference Steinhauer1973–4; Pavlides Reference Pavlides, Cavanagh, Cavanagh and Roy2011, 563–8; Tosti Reference Tosti2011; Salapata in press, Appendix 1).Footnote 2 An example found in a deposit in Stauffert Street is illustrated in Fig. 6. Far fewer have been discovered in other Laconian sites (Fig. 7; Salapata in press, Appendix 1), for example at Angelona (Wace and Hasluck Reference Wace and Hasluck1904–5; Stibbe Reference Stibbe1991, 9, 38, 43, fig. 31 no. a4).

Fig. 5.

Map of Sparta showing findspots of terracotta plaques with seated figures.

Fig. 6.

Terracotta plaque with seated man holding kantharos from deposit on Stauffert Street in Limnai, Sparta. Sparta Museum no. 13471. After Flouris Reference Flouris2000, pl. 29.

Fig. 7.

Map of southern Peloponnese showing findspots of terracotta plaques with seated figures.

The iconography of the plaques is closely related to a series of more than 50 stone reliefs discovered throughout Laconia but mainly in and around Sparta (Fig. 8). These reliefs encompass an astonishingly broad range of dates, beginning in the third quarter of the sixth century, a little earlier than the plaques, and lasting through the Hellenistic period into Roman times (Andronikos Reference Andronikos1956; Stibbe Reference Stibbe1991; Hibler Reference Hibler, Palagia and Coulson1993; Salapata Reference Salapata, Palagia and Coulson1993; Salapata in press, chapter 4 and Appendix 2).Footnote 3 As I have argued in detail elsewhere (Salapata in press, chapter 5), the eclectic iconographic type of the seated figure holding a cup and accompanied by a snake was created in Laconia during the third quarter of the sixth century based on regional, panhellenic and foreign (Egyptian and Near Eastern) prototypes, which were modified according to Greek aesthetic and cultic requirements. Remarkably, this iconographic type remained basically the same through the centuries, although in a stylistically updated form.

Fig. 8.

Map of southern Peloponnese showing findspots of stone reliefs with seated figures.

Reliefs and plaques with seated figures conform to the same basic types (single man alone, single man or couple accompanied by woman or boy attendant) and follow a similar stylistic development. The series of plaques probably started as an inexpensive and quickly made alternative to the larger stone reliefs (Salapata Reference Salapata, Palagia and Coulson1993), but the religious significance of all these votive types must have been the same, with symbolic value most important: as long as the type of offering was appropriate, material, size and quality of execution were probably secondary (cf. Andronikos Reference Andronikos1956, 301; Kyrieleis Reference Kyrieleis, Hägg, Marinatos and Nordquist1988, esp. 215). The persistence of the imagery for more than five centuries with a clear stylistic evolution but few variations indicates that the scheme was fixed by tradition and expressed an important aspect of local religiosity.

Distribution

Terracotta relief plaques in general are widely distributed in the Greek world, showing they were not restricted to particular deities or sanctuaries (Salapata Reference Salapata, Gorman and Robinson2002b, 25–6).Footnote 4 Plaques with seated figures, however, were created for a specific local use, as they are hardly ever found outside Laconia and Messenia, an area greatly influenced by Sparta, as I will discuss later.

The vast majority of plaques with seated figures were found in Sparta and Amyklai. Their distribution in votive deposits throughout the city (Fig. 5) emphasises their total absence from major divine sanctuaries such as those of Athena Chalkioikos, Orthia and Apollo Amyklaios, all of which have been extensively excavated, and also from the more recently excavated sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus at Tsakona, to the north-east of Sparta (Catling Reference Catling2002). This absence seems related to the nature of the recipients of these votives and can be explained if this type of offering was reserved for heroes, like Agamemnon and Cassandra at Amyklai (Salapata Reference Salapata, Palagia and Coulson1993, 194; Salapata in press), with the similar iconographic types showing their affinity.Footnote 5 This also seems to be true for the related stone reliefs of pre-Hellenistic times,Footnote 6 whether they were dedicated to heroes of the mythical past or to exceptional historical personalities (like Chilon).Footnote 7 Their dedication to a range of different heroes would account for both their widespread distribution (Fig. 8)Footnote 8 and their complete absence from divine sanctuaries. Support for this interpretation comes from plaques (and reliefs)Footnote 9 associated with earlier burials, which must have been the centre of a heroic cult (see further below).Footnote 10

The wide regional distribution of reliefs and plaques with seated figures corresponds to the pattern of small local shrines commonly scattered throughout the Greek countryside and especially Laconia, an area exceptionally rich in hero shrines. Pausanias mentions more than 50 such hero shrines in Sparta proper and about 25 more in other Laconian sites (Stibbe Reference Stibbe and Lorenz1978, 7–8; Hibler Reference Hibler, Palagia and Coulson1993, 199).Footnote 11

The image of the seated man, woman or couple accompanied by a snake was generic enough to allow dedicators to offer it to different heroes in Laconia, so in a specific sanctuary setting the general image of the seated figure would have been ascribed the identity of the locally honoured hero (Salapata Reference Salapata, Palagia and Coulson1993, 194).

Plaques with seated figures and hero cults

As a diverse class of superhuman being, heroes were honoured by a variety of social groups and for different reasons. The Spartan interest in their heroic past goes back at least to the early seventh century, as the cult of Agamemnon at Amyklai shows.Footnote 12 Some heroic figures may have been worshipped privately and informally by members of specific professional categories or by leading families,Footnote 13 because the mirage of egalitarianism among the homoioi does not mean absence of differentiation in social, economic and political matters. Down to the Classical period some families had managed to enjoy more status and prestige than others (Hodkinson Reference Hodkinson2000, 399–445; Christesen Reference Christesen2010, esp. 51, 60), and one of the methods to maintain and legitimise their elite status could have been the forging of connections with heroes of the past from whom they claimed descent.

The kome of Limnai was the earliest region of Sparta to be occupied and is rich in Protogeometric and Geometric burials (Kennell and Luraghi Reference Kennell, Luraghi, Raaflaub and Wees2009, 240). In association with such tombs, various deposits have been found, some dating as early as the seventh century, with several containing terracotta plaques among the finds (Fig. 5 nos. 1, 3, 5–7; for more details, see Salapata in press, Appendix 1 nos. 3, 5, 6, 9–11; Pavlides Reference Pavlides, Cavanagh, Cavanagh and Roy2011, 563–5). The concentration there of such deposits may indicate that an ancestral burial ground became the focus of heroic cults from early in the Archaic period, some of which may have survived until the time of Pausanias' visit (Pausanias 3.16.6). Some cults would have been established not long after the burials, while others would have developed when graves were discovered by chance during later building activities (Pavlides Reference Pavlides, Cavanagh, Cavanagh and Roy2011, 562–9).Footnote 14 Some of these private or familial cults may have been appropriated and formalised by the state, so that these heroes were eventually worshipped by the entire community, as was the case in other regions (cf. Mazarakis Ainian Reference Mazarakis Ainian and Hägg1999, 36; Taita Reference Taita2001, 69–70).

Other heroic cults were newly created in the Archaic period and were community-oriented from the beginning (cf. Wees Reference Wees, Deger-Jalkotzy and Lemos2006, 376–7). Important local individuals of the mythological and historical past, like Agamemnon and Chilon, represented the values and ideals of the entire polis (Pavlides Reference Pavlides, Cavanagh, Cavanagh and Roy2011, 561–2), and, by honouring these kinds of heroes who transcended individual families, the Spartan state sought to discourage family allegiances and foster a strong communal civic identity that bound not only the homoioi but also the perioikoi (cf. Hall Reference Hall and Flensted-Jensen2000, 87–8). The perioikoi formed a distinct status-group within the Lacedaemonian polis that lacked full political rights. They were, however, ethnically and culturally indistinguishable from the homoioi, and integrated into the political and military structure of the polis (on the perioikoi see Hall Reference Hall and Flensted-Jensen2000; Mertens Reference Mertens, Powell and Hodkinson2002; Nafissi Reference Nafissi, Raaflaub and Wees2009, 123–4); in addition, they worshipped the same divinities, adopted similar cult practices and participated in important festivals of the polis, as Spartiates attended festivals in perioikic regions (Parker Reference Parker and Powell1989, 145; Shipley Reference Shipley and Hansen1997, 203; Mertens Reference Mertens, Powell and Hodkinson2002, 288; Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 143). Group solidarity and strong communal civic identity constructed through links with ancestors or heroes would have been crucial during the Archaic period, as Sparta aspired to bolstering her position in the Peloponnese and claiming its leadership.

All these various heroic cults could have been well served by the reliefs and plaques with seated figures. The original but adaptable iconography could be applied in different cases, and, most importantly, this peculiarly Laconian class of votives would have differentiated local Laconian heroes from all others.

This distinctive Laconian iconography influenced terracotta plaques produced in Messenia, a region under Spartan control for centuries.Footnote 15 Such plaques were dedicated along with other offerings at urban sanctuaries in ancient Messene, and also at Bronze Age cemetery sites, especially in the area of Pylos and near Kalamata (Fig. 7) (see e.g. Messene: Themelis Reference Themelis1993, 49–55; Themelis Reference Themelis and Hägg1998; Voidokilia: Peppa-Papaioannou Reference Peppa-Papaioannou2012). They clearly depend thematically and typologically on the Laconian plaques, with some evidently made in the same or derivative moulds (Fig. 9). However, production in local clay suggests that these were not imports but that moulds, or plaques from which new moulds could have been manufactured, were imported from Laconia (Peppa-Papaioannou Reference Peppa-Papaioannou2012, 103–8).Footnote 16

Fig. 9.

Terracotta plaque with seated man holding kantharos and staff, and accompanied by snake from ancient Messene. Archaeological Museum of Messenia no. 6060. Photo courtesy of Petros Themelis.

Like the Laconian plaques, the Messenian plaques with seated figures have been connected with heroic cults. For example, the cult at the earlier shrine at the Demeter sanctuary in Messene has been attributed to Leukippos and his daughters (Themelis Reference Themelis1993, 52–4; Themelis Reference Themelis2000, 27; Zunino Reference Zunino1997, 257–62, 290),Footnote 17 and the cult at the Asklepieion court to Asklepios and Messene, worshipped there as mythical pre-Dorian rulers of Messenia at least since the time of liberation in 369 bc (Themelis Reference Themelis2000, 5–24, Themelis Reference Themelis2003, 9; Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 234, 270, 275).

However, while the finds at the Demeter sanctuary do indicate a hero cult, nothing allows a specific identification (cf. Boehringer Reference Boehringer2001, 274–7, 282, 352; Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 126). On the other hand, the plaques at the Asklepieion court may indeed at some point have been offered to Asklepios and Messene. Asklepios was probably a newcomer, since his panhellenic cult expanded from the late fifth century onwards (Riethmüller Reference Riethmüller2005, 76–7). The iconography of the plaques from the sixth to the fourth century remained unchanged, implying there was no change in the deities worshipped, but because the iconography is not very specific and the seated figure resembles Asklepios (especially because of the snake), his identification with this iconography may have arisen from an earlier, possibly healing, local hero.

Several plaques with seated figures and other subjects (riders, banqueters and warriors) from Voidokilia on the Messenian west coast were found in and around a small Early Hellenistic building located inside a Bronze Age cemetery, pointing to its use as a shrine (Antonaccio Reference Antonaccio1995, 80–1; Korres Reference Korres1985, 164–5).Footnote 18 The excavator argued that the tholos tomb there was intact and visible during historic times and the area of this prehistoric cemetery was selected by later inhabitants of the area for ancestor cult or perhaps cult specifically to the hero Thrasymedes, son of Nestor. Other groups of plaques, mainly depicting banqueters, are associated with cults at or near Bronze Age tombs in Messenia (Salapata in press, Appendix 1, nos. 56, 57, 60); this is a distinctive local cult practice that differs strongly from Laconia, where such cults connected with Bronze Age tombs did not exist.Footnote 19

Identity of dedicators

The dedication of Messenian plaques at heroic sanctuaries and their similarity to those found in Laconia contribute to the long-running debate on the Messenians' ethnic identity. Did the Messenians have a collective consciousness and distinct identity that they managed to preserve during the centuries of Spartan subjugation, and which was resurrected with the founding of Messene (Zunino Reference Zunino1997, 253, 297; Alcock Reference Alcock2002, 32–75; Themelis Reference Themelis2003, 6)? Or, did Messenian identity emerge only during the fifth century in opposition to Spartan domination, as an articulation of the distinction within the Spartan social system (Hall Reference Hall, Luraghi and Alcock2003; Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008)?

According to one view, Messenian cultural and religious traditions survived during Spartan domination and found expression mainly in the cults at Bronze Age tombs. These cults began in the eighth century and continued sporadically in Archaic and Classical times, flourishing again after independence (Korres Reference Korres1985, 163, 168; Korres Reference Korres1988, 312, 325; Musti and Torelli Reference Musti and Torelli1991, 270; Alcock Reference Alcock2002, 146–52, 165–7).Footnote 20 They presumably honoured ancestors and local heroes, and are seen as a form of resistance by the Messenians to ethnic assimilation by the Spartans; thus, they are associated with a feeling of nationalism and regional identity which was oppressed but not quenched during Spartan rule. According to this view, then, a link to the heroic Achaean past would have united the Messenian population and created a sense of Achaean identity in opposition to the Dorian identity of the Spartiates. The implication is that the Messenians regarded themselves, or were thought of, as having pre-Dorian or Achaean heritage (see Hall Reference Hall, Luraghi and Alcock2003, 155–62).Footnote 21

A second view questions the notion that Messenia had a cohesive and distinct regional and political identity before the Spartan conquest in the eighth century. This view argues that Messenian identity was constructed consciously, starting in the fifth century, either among the Messenian diaspora or in the context of the perioikic revolt in the 460s, and building up after liberation with largely invented traditions.Footnote 22 Laconian and Messenian helots were not pre-existing homogeneous ethnic groups enslaved early on and en masse within their own territories;Footnote 23 they were instead impoverished members of the community taken into servitude somewhat later. Their subservient status and ensuing resentment and hatred over their exploitation by the Spartiates would have been enough to foster solidarity among the Messenian helots, who then started fabricating a nationalist history. Thus, this view argues that the notion of ‘the Messenians’ was a gradual development over centuries, emerging out of a broader Laconian identity (Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 202, 229, 339; cf. Patterson Reference Patterson, Luraghi and Alcock2003).Footnote 24

It does seem likely that the idea of Messenia as an ethnic or territorial unit was not something that already existed and managed to survive under Spartan domination, but instead arose during the Spartan conquest and was indeed a by-product of that subjugation. Archaic Messenia appears to have been integrated with the Lacedaemonian state, with the population culturally and ethnically almost completely homogeneous with that in Laconia (Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 134–6). This is shown by the common dialect and alphabet, similar material culture since Geometric times, and closely related cults that continued even after liberation.Footnote 25 Among the Laconian type of votive offerings found in Messenia are the plaques with seated figures (as well as several other subjects), many of which are similar to those found at Amyklai and Sparta, and some even produced in the same or derivative moulds.

Who dedicated these plaques in the Laconian and Messenian hero shrines? The low cost, mediocre quality and intensive production over a long period indicate a broad level of participation in such cults. These were popular mass-produced offerings affordable by most dedicators, but not necessarily restricted to the lower socio-economic strata. Rather than just reflecting the financial means or social status of the votaries, the terracotta plaques must have fulfilled a cultic need (cf. Bonias Reference Bonias1998, 104; Baumbach Reference Baumbach2004, 5).Footnote 26

In Laconia, the distribution of plaque findspots shows this type of offering was favoured more in the region inhabited by the Spartiates. Still, the discovery of some plaques in perioikic territory suggests that perioikoi, who were culturally homogeneous with the Spartiates, may also have dedicated such plaques.Footnote 27 In contrast, the Messenian plaques dedicated to heroes at urban sanctuaries and Bronze Age tombs must have been dedicated primarily by perioikoi, since the homoioi were based in Sparta (Hall Reference Hall2007, 175). Nonetheless, there are indications that helots may also have dedicated such plaques.Footnote 28 The Messenian helotic pattern of settlement suggests some independent social organisation and even some social differentiation. Messenian helots lived in agglomerated settlements or extensive estates rather than in small farmsteads dispersed through the countryside as in Laconia (Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 138–40); thus ‘elite’ overseer helots, who managed the estates of the absentee Spartiates, could well have been involved in such cults (Hodkinson Reference Hodkinson2000, 125–31; Alcock Reference Alcock2002, 154; Patterson Reference Patterson, Luraghi and Alcock2003).

Like other manifestations of a shared culture, the continuity in the cult at Messenian sanctuaries after liberation and the fact that the plaques remain similar to those in Laconia indicate that the residents of Messenia were ethnically indistinguishable from the Spartans (cf. Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 133, 144–5, 233–9). Still, I believe that the Messenian cults that attracted plaque dedications honoured heroes not necessarily because they were Achaean, but because they were celebrated local mythical or historical figures. Reaching back to the heroic age through heroes was a well-established way to articulate a strong local and communal identity, but not necessarily an ethnic one.Footnote 29

In conclusion, the similarities between Laconian and Messenian plaques with seated figures need not be correlated with the contested ethnic identity of the Messenians. Rather, they should be attributed to the flexibility and variety in their use. The same types of plaques could be used in separate heroic cults because they depicted versatile, generalised images that assumed their significance from the specific context (cf. Lippolis Reference Lippolis2001, 228, 235). Rather than being specific to a particular cult, the plaques with seated figures served a type of cult – the heroic – and could be dedicated by residents of both Laconia and Messenia, whether they were homoioi, perioikoi or helots.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank David Hibler and the second, anonymous, referee for their valuable suggestions for improvements. I also thank Petros Themelis for permission to publish the photograph of the Messene plaque reproduced here as Fig. 9.

Footnotes

1 The first deposit was excavated in the late 1950s/early 1960s (see references in Stibbe Reference Stibbe1991; Salapata Reference Salapata, Palagia and Coulson1993, 189); the second deposit was discovered in 1998 (Themos et al. Reference Themos, Zavvou, Karapanagiotou and Efstathiou1998, 173). On the manner of display of the plaques, see Salapata Reference Salapata2002a, 26–31.

2 See also the reports of the local ephoreia published in the Aρχαιολογικόν Δελτίον. However, vagaries of rescue excavations may have partly influenced these concentrations. Question marks on the map indicate presence of plaques whose subject is not confirmed (potentially they could represent seated figures).

3 The best-known example was found near Chrysapha: Berlin, Staatliche Museen 731: Salapata Reference Salapata, Palagia and Coulson1993, fig. 1.

4 Pilz Reference Pilz, Deligiannakis and Galanakis2009 (Cretan plaques) and Karoglou Reference Karoglou2010, 63 (painted plaques in general) associate plaques with female divinities.

5 Unfortunately, in these other cases clear evidence for the identity of the cult recipients, such as inscriptions or literary testimonies, is lacking, so specific identifications are impossible or contested: e.g. heroon of Astrabakos, either in the Heroon by the River Bank (Wace Reference Wace1905–6, 288, 293) or in square O13 (Stibbe Reference Stibbe1989, 87, 89; see also Flouris Reference Flouris2000, 159–60).

6 The extension of heroisation to some private individuals immediately after death during the Hellenistic period (Jones Reference Jones2010) means that many of the post-Classical reliefs probably honoured recent dead.

7 One of the stone reliefs with seated figures was dedicated to the famous sage Chilon since it is inscribed in retrograde with his name: Sparta Museum 1005; Stibbe Reference Stibbe1991, passim and figs. 6–7. This must have been placed in his heroon in Sparta mentioned by Pausanias (3.16.4).

8 Stone reliefs have been found in a wider range of Laconian places than plaques, with almost half of them from outside Sparta. The vast majority, however, have been found in later (Roman or Byzantine) contexts or built into modern structures: Stibbe Reference Stibbe1991; Salapata in press, Appendix 2.

9 In fact, a few stone reliefs have been found together with or near plaques: e.g. Gitiada Street (Fig. 5 no. 8; Flouris Reference Flouris2000, 133–4) and nearby Bougadi plot (Fig. 5 no. 9; Steinhauer Reference Steinhauer1973, 166).

10 E.g. Wace Reference Wace1905–6, 288–94; Flouris Reference Flouris2000, esp. 4, 13–18, 152. See Fig. 5 nos. 1, 3, 5–7, 16 and perhaps 4; for more details, see Salapata in press, Appendix 1 nos. 3, 5, 6, 7, 9–11, 21, 48.

11 Of course some of these would be post-Classical but there would also be others extinct by Pausanias' time.

12 The cult of Menelaos and Helen near Sparta was also founded in the 7th century: Antonaccio Reference Antonaccio1995, 155–66, 197.

13 E.g. the cooks and waiters of the syssitia may have practised the cult of Maton and Keraon: Taita Reference Taita2001, 71.

14 Since Limnai was sparsely built up in Roman times, several of these heroic shrines were preserved in later years: Steinhauer Reference Steinhauer, Cavanagh, Gallou and Georgiadis2009, 275. The pattern of hero shrines built over earlier (Mycenaean and Geometric) graves was found elsewhere in Greece, for example, Corinth (Williams Reference Williams1981, 410; Tofi Reference Tofi1981, 220) and Athens (Lalond Reference Lalond1980). See further examples in Mazarakis Ainian Reference Mazarakis Ainian, Bartoloni and Benedettini2007–8; Pavlides Reference Pavlides, Cavanagh, Cavanagh and Roy2011, 564.

15 Messenia was part of the Lacedaemonian state from the late 8th century until 369 bc, when it was liberated by the Theban Epameinondas who founded a new capital, Messene, at the foot of Mount Ithome.

16 Still, some types appear to have been new creations: Themelis Reference Themelis and Hägg1998, 173–4 and fig. 35.

17 Themelis also associated the deposit next to the gymnasium propylon with a shrine of Aristomenes, since most of the plaques there depict the hero as banqueter or warrior: Themelis Reference Themelis2000, 34–40; Themelis Reference Themelis2003, 20. For Aristomenes, see Zunino Reference Zunino1997, 268–74; Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 88–94.

18 Korres (Reference Korres1988, 313–14) compared it with shrines such as that in the Corinthian agora; cf. Alcock Reference Alcock1991, 453.

19 For examples of cults at Bronze Age tombs from elsewhere in Greece, see Antonaccio Reference Antonaccio1995, 102–26; Boehringer Reference Boehringer2001, 47–131.

20 Interest in Bronze Age tombs peaked in the Late Classical period and was sustained through later centuries: Alcock Reference Alcock1991; Kamp Reference Kamp1996; Boehringer Reference Boehringer2001, 243–90; Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 239–45.

21 Contra Patterson (Reference Patterson, Luraghi and Alcock2003), who suggests they were an early wave of the migrating Dorians.

22 Hall Reference Hall, Luraghi and Alcock2003 (diaspora); Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, esp. ch. 7 (perioikic revolt); Hall Reference Hall2009; Kennell and Luraghi Reference Kennell, Luraghi, Raaflaub and Wees2009; cf. Boehringer Reference Boehringer2001, 321–66.

23 In Kennell and Luraghi Reference Kennell, Luraghi, Raaflaub and Wees2009, 250–2, Luraghi argues for a gradual conquest of Messenia.

24 For a detailed theoretical discussion of the various views, see Siapkas Reference Siapkas2003.

25 Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 108–32, with a review of archaeology in Messenia in ch. 5. Some Messenian sanctuaries date back to the 8th century and show continuity in cult during Archaic and later times; others were established when Messenia was under Spartan control: Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 133, 144–5, 233.

26 Comparable is the case of the distinctive lead figurines found in their thousands in Laconian sanctuaries: Gill and Vickers Reference Gill and Vickers2001; Antonaccio Reference Antonaccio, Hägg and Alroth2005, 109–10.

27 Even helots may have participated in such cults, although we know almost nothing about the religious practices of helots in Laconia, because they are archaeologically invisible: Parker Reference Parker and Powell1989, 145; Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 202. See below for helotic activity in Messenia.

28 Since both Messenian perioikoi and helots probably engaged in this distinctive local cultic behaviour, and because of their discontinuous pattern before the late 5th century, the cults at Bronze Age tombs, revering ancestors or local heroes, do not seem to have been an expression of anti-Spartan resistance (pace Alcock Reference Alcock2002, 149–52): Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 144–5, 202.

29 Luraghi (Reference Luraghi2008, 243–5, 206) believes that during the centuries of conquest some Messenian ethnic consciousness must have been created.

References

REFERENCES

Alcock, S.E. 1991. ‘Tomb cult and the post-Classical polis’, American Journal of Archaeology 95, 447–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alcock, S.E. 2002. Archaeologies of the Greek Past (Cambridge).Google Scholar
Andronikos, M. 1956. “Λακωνικά ἀνάγλυφα”, Πελoπoννησιακά 1, 253–314.Google Scholar
Antonaccio, C.-M. 1995. An Archaeology of Ancestors: Tomb Cult and Hero Cult in Early Greece (Lanham, Md).Google Scholar
Antonaccio, C.-M. 2005. ‘Dedications and the character of cult’, in Hägg, R. and Alroth, B. (eds.), Greek Sacrificial Ritual, Olympian and Chthonian (Stockholm), 99–112.Google Scholar
Baumbach, J.D. 2004. The Significance of Votive Offerings in Selected Hera Sanctuaries in the Peloponnese, Ionia and Western Greece (Oxford).Google Scholar
Boehringer, D. 2001. Heroenkulte in Griechenland von der geometrischen bis zur klassischen Zeit. Attika, Argolis, Messenien (Berlin).Google Scholar
Bonias, Z. 1998. Ένα αγροτικό ιερό στις Αιγιές Λακωνίας (Athens).Google Scholar
Catling, H.W. 2002. ‘Zeus Messapeus at Tsakona, Lakonia, reconsidered’, Λακωνικαί Σπoυδαί 16, 67–107.Google Scholar
Christesen, P. 2010. ‘Kings playing politics: The heroization of Chionis of Sparta’, Historia 59, 26–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flouris, Ch. 2000. ‘I pinakes fittili dell'area di Limnai a Sparta: aspetti tecnici e iconografici’ (PhD dissertation, University of Naples).Google Scholar
Gill, D.W.J. and Vickers, M. 2001. ‘Laconian lead figurines: Mineral extraction and exchange in the Archaic Mediterranean’, Annual of the British School at Athens 96, 229–36.Google Scholar
Hall, J.M. 2000. ‘Sparta, Lakedaimon and the nature of perioikic dependency’, in Flensted-Jensen, P. (ed.), Further Studies in the Ancient Greek Polis (Stuttgart), 73–89.Google Scholar
Hall, J.M. 2003. ‘The Dorianization of the Messenians’, in Luraghi, N. and Alcock, S.E. (eds.), Helots and their Masters in Laconia and Messenia: Histories, Ideologies, Structures (Cambridge, Mass. and London), 142–68.Google Scholar
Hall, J.M. 2007. A History of the Archaic Greek World ca. 1200–479 bce (Malden, MA).Google Scholar
Hall, J.M. 2009. Review of N. Luraghi, The Ancient Messenians: Constructions of Ethnicity and Memory (2008), Classical Philology 104, 516–22.Google Scholar
Hibler, D. 1993. ‘The hero-reliefs of Lakonia: Changes in form and function’, in Palagia, O. and Coulson, W. (eds.), Sculpture from Arcadia and Laconia (Oxford) 199–204.Google Scholar
Hodkinson, S. 2000. Property and Wealth in Classical Sparta (London).Google Scholar
Jones, C.P. 2010. New Heroes in Antiquity: From Achilles to Antinoos (Cambridge).Google Scholar
Kamp, J.S. van der 1996. ‘Anonymous tomb cults in western Messenia: The search for a historical explanation’, Pharos 4, 53–88.Google Scholar
Karoglou, K. 2010. Attic Pinakes: Votive Images in Clay (Oxford).Google Scholar
Kennell, N. and Luraghi, N. 2009. ‘Laconia and Messenia’, in Raaflaub, K.A. and Wees, H. van (eds.), A Companion to Archaic Greece (Chichester and Malden), 240–54.Google Scholar
Korres, Y.S. 1985. “Δεδoμένα ταφικής και χθoνίας λατρείας εις το πρoϊστoρικόν νεκρoταφείoν Βoϊδoκoιλιάς Πύλoυ”, in Πρακτικά του ΧΙΙ Διεθνούς Συνεδρίου Κλασικής Αρχαιολογίας, Αθήνα, 4–10 Σεπτεμβρίου 1983 (Athens), 162–8.Google Scholar
Korres, Y.S. 1988. ‘Evidence for a Hellenistic chthonian cult in the prehistoric cemetery of Voïdokoiliá in Pylos (Messenia)’, Klio 70, 311–28.Google Scholar
Kyrieleis, H. 1988. ‘Offerings of the “common man” in the Heraion at Samos’, in Hägg, R., Marinatos, N. and Nordquist, G.C. (eds.), Early Greek Cult Practice (Stockholm), 215–21.Google Scholar
Lalond, G.V. 1980. ‘A hero shrine in the Athenian Agora’, Hesperia 49, 97–105.Google Scholar
Lippolis, E. 2001. ‘Culto e iconografie della coroplastica votiva’, Mélanges de l'École française de Rome, Antiquité 113, 225–55.Google Scholar
Luraghi, N. 2008. The Ancient Messenians: Constructions of Ethnicity and Memory (Cambridge).Google Scholar
Mazarakis Ainian, A. 1999. ‘Reflections on hero cults in early Iron Age Greece’, in Hägg, R. (ed.), Ancient Greek Hero Cult (Stockholm), 9–36.Google Scholar
Mazarakis Ainian, A. 2007–8. ‘Buried among the living in Greece: the Protogeometric and Geometric Periods’, in Bartoloni, G. and Benedettini, M.G. (eds.), Sepolti tra i vivi (Buried Among the Living): Evidenza ed interpretazione di contesti funerari in abitato (Scienze dell'antichita: storia archeologia antropologia 14/1; Rome), 365–98.Google Scholar
Mertens, N. 2002. ‘οὐκ ὁμοῖοι, ἀγαθοὶ δέ: The perioikoi in the Classical Lakedaimonian polis’, in Powell, A. and Hodkinson, S. (eds.), Sparta: Beyond the Mirage (London), 285–303.Google Scholar
Musti, D. and Torelli, M. 1991. Pausania, Guida della Grecia, libro III: la Laconia (Milan).Google Scholar
Nafissi, M. 2009. ‘Sparta’, in Raaflaub, K.A. and Wees, H. van (eds.), A Companion to Archaic Greece (Oxford), 117–37.Google Scholar
Parker, R. 1989. ‘Spartan religion’, in Powell, A. (ed.), Classical Sparta: Techniques Behind her Success (London), 142–72.Google Scholar
Patterson, O. 2003. ‘Reflections on helotic slavery and freedom’, in Luraghi, N. and Alcock, S.E. (eds.), Helots and their Masters in Laconia and Messenia: Histories, Ideologies, Structures (Cambridge, Mass. and London), 289–309.Google Scholar
Pavlides, N. 2011. ‘Worshipping heroes: Civic identity and the veneration of the communal dead in Archaic Sparta’, in Cavanagh, H., Cavanagh, W. and Roy, J. (eds.), Honouring the Dead in the Peloponnese (Nottingham), 551–76. (Available online http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/csps/documents/honoringthedead/pavlides.pdf.)Google Scholar
Peppa-Papaioannou, I. 2012. Πήλινα αναθήματα από την Πύλο. Ανασκαφή Βoϊδoκoιλιάς (Athens).Google Scholar
Pilz, O. 2009. ‘The contexts of Archaic Cretan terracotta relief plaques with a note on the Oxford plaques from Papoura’, in Deligiannakis, G. and Galanakis, Y. (eds.), The Aegean and Its Cultures (Oxford), 47–57.Google Scholar
Riethmüller, J.W. 2005. Asklepios: Heiligtümer und Kulte (Heidelberg).Google Scholar
Salapata, G. 1993. ‘The Lakonian hero reliefs in the light of the terracotta plaques’, in Palagia, O. and Coulson, W. (eds.), Sculpture from Arcadia and Laconia (Oxford), 189–97.Google Scholar
Salapata, G. 2002a. ‘Greek votive plaques: Manufacture, display, disposal’, Bulletin antieke Beschaving. Annual Papers on Classical Archaeology 77, 19–42.Google Scholar
Salapata, G. 2002b. ‘Myth into cult: Alexandra/Kassandra in Lakonia’, in Gorman, V.B. and Robinson, E. (eds.), Oikistes: Studies in Constitution, Colonies, and Military Power in the Ancient World (Leiden), 131–59.Google Scholar
Salapata, G. 2006. ‘The tippling serpent in the art of Lakonia and beyond’, Hesperia 75, 541–60.Google Scholar
Salapata, G. 2011. ‘The heroic cult of Agamemnon’, Elektra 1, 39–60. (Available online http://electra.lis.upatras.gr/article/view/29/35.)Google Scholar
Salapata, G. in press. Heroic Offerings: The Terracotta Plaques from the Spartan Sanctuary of Agamemnon and Kassandra (Ann Arbor).Google Scholar
Shipley, G. 1997. ‘“The other Lakedaimonians”: The dependent perioikic poleis of Laconia and Messenia’, in Hansen, M.H. (ed.), The Polis as an Urban Centre and as a Political Community (Copenhagen), 189–281.Google Scholar
Siapkas, J. 2003. Heterological Ethnicity: Conceptualizing Identities in Ancient Greece (Uppsala).Google Scholar
Steinhauer, G.Y. 1973. “Ἀρχαιότητες καί μνημεῖα Λακωνίας–Ἀρκαδίας”, Aρχαιολογικόν Δελτίον, Χρονικά 28:1, 164–80.Google Scholar
Steinhauer, G.Y. 1973–4. “Λακωνία”, Aρχαιολογικόν Δελτίον, Χρονικά 29, 286–7, 291–2.Google Scholar
Steinhauer, G.Y. 2009. “Παρατηρήσεις στην πολεοδομία της Ρωμαϊκής Σπάρτης”, in Cavanagh, W.G., Gallou, C. and Georgiadis, M. (eds.), Sparta and Lakonia: From Prehistory to Pre-modern Times (London), 271–7.Google Scholar
Stibbe, C.M. 1978. ‘Dionysos auf den Grabreliefs der Spartaner’, in Lorenz, T. (ed.), Thiasos: sieben archäologische Arbeiten (Amsterdam), 6–26.Google Scholar
Stibbe, C.M. 1989. ‘Beobachtungen zur Topographie des antiken Sparta’, Bulletin antieke Beschaving. Annual Papers on Classical Archaeology 64, 61–99.Google Scholar
Stibbe, C.M. 1991. ‘Dionysos in Sparta’, Bulletin antieke Beschaving. Annual Papers on Classical Archaeology 66, 1–44.Google Scholar
Taita, J. 2001. ‘Indovini stranieri al servizio dello stato spartano’, Dike 4, 39–85.Google Scholar
Themelis, P. 1993. “Ανασκαφή Mεσσήνης”, Πρακτικά της εν Αθήναις Αρχαιολογικής Εταιρείας 1993, 48–72.Google Scholar
Themelis, P. 1998. ‘The sanctuary of Demeter and the Dioscouri at Messene’, in Hägg, R. (ed.), Ancient Greek Cult Practice from the Archaeological Evidence (Stockholm), 157–86.Google Scholar
Themelis, P. 2000. Ήρωες και ηρώα στη Μεσσήνη (Athens).Google Scholar
Themelis, P. 2003. Heroes at Ancient Messene (Athens).Google Scholar
Themos, A., Zavvou, E., Karapanagiotou, A.-V. and Efstathiou, I. 1998. “Εʹ Εφoρεία πρoϊστoρικών και κλασικών αρχαιoτήτων”, Aρχαιολογικόν Δελτίον, Χρονικά 53:1, 147–86.Google Scholar
Tofi, M.G. 2004. ‘I santuari del Potters' Quarter di Corinto’, Annuario della Scuola archeologica di Atene e delle Missioni italiane in Oriente 82, ser. 3.4, vol. 1, 209–24.Google Scholar
Tosti, V. 2011. ‘Una riflessione sui culti eroici nella Sparta katà komas. L’edificio con banchina di odos Staufert’, Annuario della Scuola archeologica di Atene e delle Missioni italiane in Oriente 89.2, 95–108.Google Scholar
Wace, A.J.B. 1905–6. ‘Laconia. II. Excavations at Sparta, 1906. 3. The heroön’, Annual of the British School at Athens 12, 288–94.Google Scholar
Wace, A.J.B. and Hasluck, F.W. 1904–5. ‘Laconia. I. Excavations near Angelona’, Annual of the British School at Athens 11, 81–90.Google Scholar
Wees, H. van 2006. ‘From kings to demigods: Epic heroes and social change c. 750–600 bc ’, in Deger-Jalkotzy, S. and Lemos, I.S. (eds.), Ancient Greece: From the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer (Edinburgh), 363–79.Google Scholar
Williams, C.K. II 1981. ‘The city of Corinth and its domestic religion’, Hesperia 50, 408–21.Google Scholar
Zunino, M.L. 1997. Hiera Messeniaka: la storia religiosa della Messenia dall'età micenea all'età ellenistica (Udine).Google Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1.Terracotta plaque with seated man holding kantharos and accompanied by snake from Amyklai. Sparta Museum no. 6230/1.

Figure 1

Fig. 2.Terracotta plaque with seated man holding kantharos and staff, and accompanied by female attendant and snake from Amyklai. Sparta Museum no. 6231/1.

Figure 2

Fig. 3.Terracotta plaque with seated man holding kantharos and accompanied by boy attendant and snake from Amyklai. Sparta Museum no. 6229/1.

Figure 3

Fig. 4.Small, schematic terracotta plaques from Amyklai. a: seated man with phiale and staff: Sparta Museum no. 6039/222; b: seated figure accompanied by standing figure: Sparta Museum no. 6039/104.

Figure 4

Fig. 5.Map of Sparta showing findspots of terracotta plaques with seated figures.

Figure 5

Fig. 6.Terracotta plaque with seated man holding kantharos from deposit on Stauffert Street in Limnai, Sparta. Sparta Museum no. 13471. After Flouris 2000, pl. 29.

Figure 6

Fig. 7.Map of southern Peloponnese showing findspots of terracotta plaques with seated figures.

Figure 7

Fig. 8.Map of southern Peloponnese showing findspots of stone reliefs with seated figures.

Figure 8

Fig. 9.Terracotta plaque with seated man holding kantharos and staff, and accompanied by snake from ancient Messene. Archaeological Museum of Messenia no. 6060. Photo courtesy of Petros Themelis.