E1. Chariot race (Figs. 1, 5, 6)

As noted in the descriptions of the individual sections, the drawing of both the charioteers and the surviving parts of the horses reflects the painter's intention to convey strong movement. The identification of a race is thus secure and is reinforced by other drawing conventions, as will be shown. No analogous scene is yet known in the Late Geometric repertoire of Achaea; in fact, there are no chariots of any form.Footnote ¹⁵ However, the horse was known to eighth-century Achaean artists. Individual horses appear on an oinochoe fragment also from the sanctuary at Nikoleika (Kolia and Gadolou 2011), and there is a line of horses in impressed techniqueFootnote ¹⁶ on a pyxis from the sanctuary at Ano Mazaraki (Gadolou Reference Gadolou and Greco2002, cat. 104, pl. 17 [RAK 42]; Gadolou Reference Gadolou2003, cat. 19, fig. 7, pl. 3 a). Horse figurines have also been found at Nikoleika (Kolia and Gadolou 2011).

Fig. 7.

Part of a votive plaque depicting parts of two tripods from Ano Mazaraki.

The depiction of horses, alone or with a human figure or a chariot, in Early Iron Age vase decoration (either painted or modelled, as for example on Middle Geometric Attic pyxides), as well as in coroplastic art and in bronze, has given rise to extensive discussion of the meaning of this subject.Footnote ¹⁷ The horse was considered a potent heroic, religious and mythical symbol which reflected the power of the elite who had the economic means to keep horses and to use them in conspicuous display of their wealth, in mortuary as well as in ritual/ceremonial practices.Footnote ¹⁸ As Coldstream notes, the horse models adorning the lids of Attic Geometric pyxides which, in combination with granary models, are frequently found in Athenian burials, represent ‘the basis of social status in ownership of land and its attendant produce and livestock’ (Coldstream Reference Coldstream1977, 55).Footnote ¹⁹ The importance of the horse, not only in human life but also to most of the gods, is reflected inter alia by the large number of votive offerings depicting individual horses or horses with chariots in Greek sanctuaries throughout antiquity (Bevan Reference Bevan1986, 214–15). The presence of the horse and the chariot among the votive offerings at Nikoleika must therefore hold particular significance both for the deity worshipped and for the society to which this sanctuary belonged.

Very little survives of the one-horse chariot depictions on the model – from the chariot race just the edge of one wheel and the pole connecting the chariot to the horse, and from the stationary chariots, part of the stake to which the horse will have been tethered, plus part of one wheel on another sherd. It is thus impossible to determine the type of chariot shown.Footnote ²⁰ The surviving wheels are of the four-spoked type common in all known chariot representations of the Late Geometric period (Crouwel Reference Crouwel1992, 34–6). Indeed, terracotta models of four-spoked wheels, probably from chariots, are present among the votive offerings at Nikoleika (Kolia and Gadolou, forthcoming).

Chariot representations appear in Achaean iconography during the closing years of the Mycenaean period. Notable among the vases recovered from the Mycenaean cemetery at Voudeni is a krater with a representation of charioteers.Footnote ²¹ The drawing of the Nikoleika charioteers, as of the nude seated male figures, finds parallels in the nude dancers on a fragmentary oinochoe from the same sanctuaryFootnote ²² and, strikingly, with the drawing on a fragmentary Geometric krater from DelphiFootnote ²³ previously identified as Corinthian. This identification is open to question, however, because the light brown clay with several inclusions, tempers of calcite and mica, observed in examination of the fragments, is not characteristic of Corinthian pottery. Yet neither is it characteristic of Late Geometric Achaean, and so despite the similarity in the drawing it seems that it cannot have been made in Achaea. Presumably it could be the product of an as yet unidentified local pottery workshop.

There has been extensive discussion of the interpretation and meaning of chariots in eighth-century art. Chariot races are commonly depicted on Late Geometric funerary vases and are usually interpreted as scenes from funerary games.Footnote ²⁴ According to Snodgrass, ‘the chariots on Geometric vases represent no existing contemporary war-chariots, but are “heroic property” inspired partly by surviving representations of Mycenaean chariots, partly by Epic, and partly by the example of other contemporary wheeled vehicles’ (Snodgrass Reference Snodgrass1964, 160). Webster (Reference Webster1955, 44–7) has argued that chariot depictions may well represent heroic rather than contemporary practice. He observes that those showing both wheels belong to processions, whereas those showing only one are in races: the chariots on the Nikoleika model show only one wheel, further indicating that they are part of a chariot race which is not funerary in character.Footnote ²⁵ Rombos (Reference Rombos1988, 127) notes that there is no particular reason to suppose that chariot races were held only at funerary games, and Crouwel (Reference Crouwel1992, 56) argues that the bronze and terracotta chariot models dedicated at Olympia imply that chariot races took place in honour of a god. Even though the chariot race became a formal part of the Olympic games rather later, in 680 bc, it is possible that races took place in the sanctuary much earlier and not necessarily in the context of the games (Morgan Reference Morgan1990, 90). It is thus plausible to connect the chariot race on the Nikoleika roof model with an event in the sanctuary perhaps organised in honour of the deity worshipped (the identity of whom is discussed in detail below).

E2. Seated figures on either side of a tripod (Figs. 2, 6)

The charioteers appear to move towards the central scene on side B of the model, which depicts two identical nude male figures seated on stools on either side of a tripod, on the handles of which rest two birds. This scene is framed by two one-horse chariots which are clearly different in size and character from those in the chariot race, although they provide an iconographical link between the two scenes. There is no exact parallel for the composition on side B in Late Geometric vase-painting. Consequently, its interpretation rests on analysis of the individual iconographical elements.

E2a. The tripod

The significance of the tripod as a votive offering in the eighth century bc has been examined by several scholars.Footnote ²⁶ The example depicted on side B of our model is of the same height as the seated figures and can therefore be described as monumental. However, it is not necessarily unrealistic as several of the metal tripods dedicated in Olympia during the eighth century were monumental in size. The birds on the two ring handles find parallels on a skyphoid krater sherd of Thapsos type from Aegion, which has been characterised as Achaean work of the last quarter of the eighth century (AMA 1554).Footnote ²⁷ We will return to the question of whether the birds on the tripod were merely decorative or held symbolic meaning.

Depictions of tripods on their own, combined with horses, or between human figures (often interpreted as athletes) are found in the Middle Geometric and Late Geometric iconography of several areas of southern Greece, but they are common in Attica, the Argolid and Boeotia. Interpretation of specific representations differs each time.Footnote ²⁸ The earliest known depiction of a tripod as a prize appears on a Late Geometric Argive sherd (725–700 bc).Footnote ²⁹ In other media, tripods appear between figures (perhaps athletes) on an early Archaic sealstone from Brauron (Boardman Reference Boardman1970, 112, fig. 162) and on the leg of a bronze tripod from Olympia, where two helmeted male figures lay claim to the tripod between them. The latter scene has been read as the dispute between Herakles and Apollo over the Delphic tripod (Rombos Reference Rombos1988, 212; Schweitzer Reference Schweitzer1969, pl. 213), an interpretation consistent with more general attempts to identify mythological scenes in Late Geometric art. Yet there are no special features to identify the two figures as mythological, and they could be seen as ordinary athletes claiming the prize.Footnote ³⁰ The figures on either side of a large tripod depicted in a secondary decorative zone on a krater in New York (Metropolitan Museum of Art 14.130.15) have also been interpreted as athletes. On the left of the tripod stands a warrior with helmet and sword, and on the right a double figure identified as the mythical Siamese twins the Aktorione or Molione.Footnote ³¹ The scene is interpreted as the handing over of the tripod as the prize in the chariot race won by the twins (making the second figure to the left the runner up in the race).Footnote ³² These representations might seem to facilitate the interpretation of the figures flanking the tripod on the Nikoleika model as athletes. Yet the fact that they are seated is at variance with this identification, as figures interpreted as athletes on either side of a tripod always stand.

A relief pithos from Prinias offers a useful parallel for the ritual meaning of our scene. An interesting combination of the agonistic with the ritual or cultic is presented in the depiction of the Mistress of Horses (Potnia Hippon) on the neck, and the representation in a zone on the lower body of a chariot race in which the prize tripod is interposed between the competitors (Pernier Reference Pernier1914, 68–70, figs. 37, 39). The use of this pithos as a votive offering in a sanctuary extols the significance of the race and confirms the cultic and symbolic meaning of the elements represented. An analogous spirit seems to animate the representations on the Nikoleika model. As will be further argued, it seems that one of the aims of the dedicators was to reflect ritual performances in the sanctuary.

Alongside tripods interpreted as prizes in athletics games, there are much rarer cases where tripods are shown as prizes in music and dance competitions. The tripod as prize is considered to be depicted on two Late Geometric vases. First, tripods around the outside of the skyphos Athens 874 have been interpreted as prizes awarded for the dance competition depicted on the interior.Footnote ³³ This particular skyphos belongs to a group of Late Geometric vases, in the main funerary, on which tripods depicted in the background of agonistic scenes are usually interpreted as prizes for the victors in funerary games. Secondly, the central scene on the fragmentary funerary krater Athens 810 depicts a dance of young men between two Orientalising-style cauldrons.Footnote ³⁴ It has been argued that this main subject, in combination with those around it (horse taming, a chariot race, and heroic duels), presents a series of events typical of the life of an aristocrat. Nonetheless, the intent behind featuring tripods in the central scene may be to emphasise the principal and essential role of these vessels in ritual acts towards the end of the Geometric period. Finally, in addition to Late Geometric funerary vases depicting tripods interpreted as prizes for victors in chariot races in honour of the dead, one should note a later example in the form of a Protocorinthian aryballos (c.670 bc) from Syracuse, with a representation of four charioteers moving towards the agonothetes, before whom is the victor's prize, a tripod (Johansen Reference Johansen1967, 88–90, fig. 22).Footnote ³⁵ In short, the tripod in Late Geometric iconography is identified generally as the symbol of victory in contests of the body and mind held in the context of important games, either athletic or funerary. Therefore, the tripod depicted between the two seated male figures and the chariots on the Nikoleika model should be interpreted first of all as a prize.

In interpreting scenes in which the tripod is the main or one of the basic iconographic elements, it is important to bear in mind that it was a potent religious symbol of pan-Hellenic significance from Geometric to Roman times.Footnote ³⁶ In addition to its religious meaning and its role as proof of victory in athletic games, the tripod as a prize in poetry competitions and contests of the intellect demonstrated the ‘wisdom’ of the victor and symbolised his good and sound thought – a gift of the gods. For all of these reasons, tripods were mostly returned to the gods as votive offerings (Papalexandrou Reference Papalexandrou2005, 9–11). The victors' obligation to dedicate their prizes is recorded by Herodotus (1.144): ‘At the games in honour of Triopian Apollo, certain bronze tripods were given to the victors. The victors did not take the tripods away with them but dedicated them there to the god, Apollo’.Footnote ³⁷

Literary sources confirm, inter alia, the symbolic significance of the tripod as proof of wisdom or knowledge. Hesiod (Works and Days, 654–9) reports that the prize for his victory in a poetry competition, held on the occasion of the funerary games organised in Chalkis by the sons of Amphidamas for their dead father, was a tripod which he then dedicated in the sanctuary of the Muses on Mount Helicon, because it was thanks to the Muses that he acquired his skill and to them that he owed his victory. And at the end of Odysseus' long tale in the court of Alkinoos, which earned him the distinction of a gifted and ‘veracious’ storyteller, Alkinoos proposed that each member of the council of the Phaeacians give the hero a tripod and a cauldron before his departure for home (Odyssey 13.5–13).Footnote ³⁸ In general in the Odyssey, tripods are presented as objects exchanged between royal personages, with possession considered as proof of prestige (Papalexandrou Reference Papalexandrou2005, 20–2).

Tripods are mentioned much more often in the Iliad than in the Odyssey, however. Their basic use is as loutrophoroi, to hold water with which to bathe dead heroes (Hector and Patroclus included). A comparable use is attested in the Odyssey, but in the milieu of the house. However, the majority of references to tripods concern their importance as prestige objects circulated and exchanged among powerful men in the heroic world. In the Iliad too they commonly appear as prizes in games: thus at Iliad 11.699–702, in recounting the causes of the war between the Pylians and the Epeians, Nestor refers to ‘four horses, winners of prizes’ and their chariot, which were sent to Elis to compete for a tripod. It is telling too that in the funeral games of Patroclus, the victor's prize in the chariot race and the wrestling contest was one tripod and one woman (Iliad 23.259–66).Footnote ³⁹ In the Homeric world the tripod was a more valuable prize than an object of gold (Papalexandrou Reference Papalexandrou2005, 24–30).

The handles of bronze cauldrons are frequently decorated with figurines of various animals or of humans, stimulating discussion of their significance and interpretation (Papalexandrou Reference Papalexandrou2005, 67–70). Bird figurines, however, constitute a very limited category of handle decoration.Footnote ⁴⁰ Miniature bronze tripods and cauldrons with birds on the handles are found at the sanctuary of Olympia and in the northern sacrificial area of the sanctuary of Apollo Daphnephoros at Eretria respectively,Footnote ⁴¹ while isolated bronze bird figurines from Delphi, Olympia and the Argive Heraion have been considered as handle decoration (Benton Reference Benton1934–5, 101, pl. 21:4–5). There are more examples of painted representations of birds in combination with tripods, although not always as handle decorations as on the actual bronze vessels. Birds adorn the handles of the tripod between two horses depicted on the neck of a Late Geometric Attic amphora in Dresden (Sakowski Reference Sakowski1997, 359, pl. 1), as well as on the tripod on a pyxis sherd from the Heraion of Argos (Benton Reference Benton1934–5, 105 no. 13, pl. 26:2; Rombos Reference Rombos1988, 268, pl. 59 f). The depiction of birds in early Greek vase-painting holds multiple symbolic significance,Footnote ⁴² and attempts to interpret birds shown inside or even under tripods are particularly interesting. In comparable cases (see below for a shield from Crete and an oinochoe in Brussels) the presence of birds has been taken to denote either the exterior space in which the event represented takes place, or an oracular symbol. Yet what is the meaning of the birds depicted inside one of the four tripods decorating the neck of a Late Geometric Attic amphora in Athens (Benton Reference Benton1934–5, 105, pl. 25:1), or on the tripods on the lower body of an amphora from a Late Geometric grave in the recently excavated cemetery of Kephissia (Schilardi Reference Schilardi2006, 92–3, fig. 6; Schilardi 2011)? Given the purely mortuary use of these vases, these tripods could be interpreted as prizes awarded in funerary games in honour of the dead (Hesiod, Works and Days 654–9; see also below), or as prizes won by the deceased in his lifetime, while the birds are frequently associated with the religious and metaphysical beliefs of the period, and perhaps symbolised the soul of the deceased (Kourou Reference Kourou1999, 179–82).

In the case of the tripod on the Nikoleika model, however, the birds decorating the handles do not appear to have been metaphysical symbols since the representation is not funerary in character. They could be interpreted as oracular symbols,Footnote ⁴³ a view which will be set alongside evidence for the interpretation of the tripod itself (not only a prize for the chariot race but also an offering to the deity worshipped in the sanctuary, in whose honour the games were held). Bird divination in the Geometric period has been discussed thoroughly by Irad Malkin (Reference Malkin1987, 108–9). Indeed, given that the tripod itself has been interpreted as a means of exchanging information on seafaring, the interpretation of birds as oracular symbols appears attractive. Herodotus (4.179) recounts that during the voyage of the Argonauts, Jason found himself in North Africa, trapped in Lake Tritonis, where he met Triton son of Poseidon.Footnote ⁴⁴ He gave a tripod to Triton in exchange for information on navigation. Papalexandrou proposes the following explanation: ‘It is possible that in Delphi the tripod at a stage when it had not yet become an instrument of divination, was a means of payment for information about colonisation, sea routes, travelling, prospective markers or whatever knowledge was consider necessary for entrepreneurial expeditions outside the narrow confines of the Aegean’ (Papalexandrou Reference Papalexandrou2005, 42). The purificatory and divinatory power of the tripod seems to be supported by certain Cretan works of art, notably the representation on a Late Geometric lid or shield from a grave at Fortetsa which offers interesting analogies to the Nikoleika scene (Stampolidis, Karetsou and Kanta Reference Stampolidis, Karetsou and Kanta1998, 205 no. 227). Here a male figure holding a thunderbolt and a bird advances towards a tripod. A second bird touches one tripod handle with its beak, while a third bird is shown inside the tripod. Under the cauldron, a human bust turned to the right emerges from the ground. The scene has been interpreted as a divine epiphany of Zeus in association with his oracular cults, and mantic practices are reflected by the presence of the birds and tripod (Brock Reference Brock1957, 122–3). While this does not change the interpretation of the tripod on the Nikoleika model as a prize-dedication in the sanctuary, the oracular dimension may be useful in discussion of the identity of the deity worshipped in the sanctuary. It is possible that this specific symbolic dimension may be correlated inter alia with colonisation, and in particular the colonisation of Sybaris from Helike which took place c.720 bc according to Strabo 6.1.13 (C 263).

Tripods were known to the inhabitants of Achaea in early historical times. Fragments of a bronze tripod have been recovered from the acropolis of Aigeira (Mazarakis Ainian Reference Mazarakis Ainian2000, 211–12, pl. 300 a), and a miniature bronze tripod was dedicated in the sanctuary of Artemis Aontia at Ano Mazaraki (Petropoulos Reference Petropoulos2002, pl. 3:3).Footnote ⁴⁵ From this latter sanctuary comes a fragmentary terracotta votive plaque depicting parts of two tripods (Fig. 7), terracotta tripod models from the impressed-ware workshop (Gadolou Reference Gadolou2003, 311–12, 326–8, figs. 24–6), and three joining sherds from a votive plaque painted on both sides (Patras Museum no. 7445, height 0.125 m, preserved width 0.095 m, thickness 0.025 m). This last preserves the upper and lower edges and one side.Footnote ⁴⁶ The barely distinguishable figure representations are in black glaze which has flaked, revealing the orangey red slip. A tripod, part of a horse and a bird can be seen on the lower left edge. The closest parallels for this plaque come from the sanctuary at Eleusis (Noack Reference Noack1927, 12–13, figs. 4–5; Sakowski Reference Sakowski1997, pl. 9).Footnote ⁴⁷ The depiction of tripods on terracotta votive plaques has been rightly interpreted as a substitute for the more expensive ex-voto in bronze (Boardman Reference Boardman1954, 199).

E2b. Seated figures and seats (Figs. 2, 6)

On either side of the tripod are two seated nude male figures, whose outstretched hands touch the tripod handles. The fact that the men are seated is of interest because there is only one other known representation of seated figures on either side of a tripod. Yet while that scene is difficult to interpret, the proposed interpretation is completely different from the representation on the Nikoleika model. Two female or male figures are depicted in the central panel on the shoulder of a mid-eighth century Attic oinochoe now in Brussels (Fig. 8). The figures sit on high-backed seats (thrones?), rest their feet on footstools, and with one hand touch the handles of a tripod set between them, and with the other hand shake sistra. Below the tripod is a mesh-like filling motif which may allude to fire. Rombos places the vase in group 2 of the Krotala Group workshop, with the seated figures interpreted as participating in funerary ritual. It is therefore proposed that the tripod on the Brussels oinochoe should be interpreted as a funerary cremation vase replacing the square chequerboard that Rombos interprets as a grave.Footnote ⁴⁸ Rombos (Reference Rombos1988, 295) interprets the bird upon the tripod somewhat simplistically as indicating that the specific scenes take place in the open air. However, if we accept that birds on tripod handles indicate divine epiphany (Langdon Reference Langdon2008, 238), the representation as a whole could be purely cultic in character and the gestures of the seated figures could reflect some ritual performance rather than a funerary rite.Footnote ⁴⁹

Fig. 8.

Attic Geometric oinochoe. Brussels. Musées Royaux d'Art et d'Histoire (Cinquantenaire) Α 1941.

Taking all of this evidence into consideration, the most tenable interpretation of the scene on the Nikoleika model is that it depicts the prize in the chariot race represented on the other side of the roof. Yet in combination with the interpretation of the seated figures which follows, it is likely that this prize tripod was simultaneously dedicated to the deity in whose honour the chariot race depicted was organised. The conditions in which the object was found and its symbolic meaning allow us to define the reasons behind the dedication of the prize in this particular sanctuary.

So who are the seated figures and what is their relation to the tripod? No particular feature indicates the identity of the two male figures. The elements that may contribute to their identification are the type of seat and the role of those figures represented seated in Geometric iconography. The seat is the diphros of Archaic and Classical times – specifically, Richter's type 3. The basic features of this type are a single seat set on relatively short legs, with perpendicular sides and upward-flaring top. It is used mainly by gods or heroes.Footnote ⁵⁰ No other example of a diphros has yet been identified on Geometric vases apart from on Late Geometric krater sherds in the Louvre (A 517 and CA 3385) where mourners sit on very similar seats (Villard Reference Villard1954, pls. 1:1 and 9:6). Another example is a divine winged figure on an early seventh-century relief pithos from Tenos, on a seat with exactly the same type of legs (Kontoleon Reference Kontoleon1953, 265, fig. 9; Anderson Reference Anderson1975, 30, pl. 5, with select bibliography). The legs of the bier in the prothesis scene on the fragment of a Late Helladic IIIC krater from Agia Triada in Eleia are of the same kind.Footnote ⁵¹ However this particular kind of seat is relatively rare in this period.Footnote ⁵²

There is no evidence with which to define the role of the figures seated on the various types of seats. In a recent study, van Wees (Reference Wees and Crielaard1995, 151) attempted to define the use of different types of seat, according to the specific status of the person seated, through reference to Homer. He concludes that although servants and members of the lower social orders sit on diphroi, the same seat is also used by women in the women's quarters (gynaikonites) of the house, as well as by Nestor himself. Thus it appears that in Homer different types of seats are used indiscriminately. Seated figures in Late Geometric vase-painting are either mourners or persons involved in ritual (usually funerary) performance.Footnote ⁵³ However, a unique scene on the skyphos Athens 784 shows a procession advancing towards an important figure (if not a deity, a person of high status or even a ruler).Footnote ⁵⁴ According to one view, this reflects the habit of representing moments of contemporary cult practice under the influence of oriental iconography (Carter Reference Carter1972, 46–8, pl. 11).Footnote ⁵⁵

In short, while the seat cannot define clearly the role of the person seated on it, the seated figures on the Nikoleika model held some special position in the society to which they belonged. In all probability they were able to own horses, and were of the social and economic standing to enter chariots, driven by themselves or by others, in chariot races organised, perhaps on their own initiative and responsibility, in the sanctuary. They were able to commission this unique work of art, the dedication of which would consolidate their reputation.Footnote ⁵⁶ In the eighth century bc, these were men in the highest social echelons (chiefs, rulers, leaders) who, as evidence from various contemporary sites shows, were charged also with sacerdotal duties, mainly organising and coordinating cult practices (Mazarakis Ainian Reference Mazarakis Ainian2006, 181–211). It was men like these who were responsible for the prize, the tripod. From the dozens of tripods dedicated in the sanctuaries of Olympia and Delphi, we are able to appreciate the size of such objects, as well as the cost of making them.

As various studies have shown, the prevailing system of social stratification was reflected in the use of specific objects with special symbolism.Footnote ⁵⁷ Particularly pertinent is Langdon's observation that ‘The profusion of horses, chariots, and prestigious weaponry that equip the warrior ranks of Geometric pottery provided an archaising model by which aristocratic families or groups could mark their exclusivity and authority’ (Langdon Reference Langdon2008, 10). The wealth and power of the aristocratic elite were also demonstrated indirectly by the dedication in sanctuaries of certain items that, in most cases, had a special symbolic significance (Morgan Reference Morgan1990, 1–25). The elite in early historical times was linked not only to the ownership of metal objects, but also to the supply of metals, and the production, trade or distribution of the final products (Mazarakis Ainian Reference Mazarakis Ainian2006, 181–2; Eder Reference Eder2006, 572). On another view, the Late Geometric elite employed figurative art to underline their social status or heroic descent (Morgan and Whitelaw Reference Morgan and Whitelaw1991; Whitley Reference Whitley1991; Crielaard Reference Crielaard, Crielaard, Stissi and van Wijngaarden1999, 62–8; Langdon Reference Langdon2008, 11; Kourou Reference Kourou2008, 85–7).

In short, our two figures linked to the tripod prize/dedication are likely to have been members of the local aristocracy, men charged with political and ritual duties, distant descendants of the inhabitants of the Aegialeia who participated with 12 ships in the Trojan War under the command of Agamemnon (Iliad 2.198–204, 569–75; Pausanias 7.1.4).Footnote ⁵⁸ Their likely participation at the sanctuaries of Olympia and Delphi, neither far away, made them actors in the dedicatory code used by all powerful elites of the time (Morgan Reference Morgan2003, 38; Eder Reference Eder2006, 566).

Archaeological finds (mainly grave assemblages, particularly in eastern Achaea) reflect the existence of an elite which possessed important artefacts of clay and metal (vases, bronze vessels, jewellery, iron weapons), as well as objects of Eastern provenance (Egyptian scarabs). Thus in the Aegialeia, the distinguished deceased buried in a pithos at Mavriki with two bronze cauldrons, one ‘Thapsos’-type krater and iron weapons as grave goods,Footnote ⁵⁹ may have belonged to the same elite class as those in pithoi VI (in which more than one burial was observed) and XII at Trapeza, where the grave goods included many vases and two bronze fibulae (in pithos VI), as well as iron weapons (an iron spear point and Naue II sword in pithos XII).Footnote ⁶⁰ The deceased buried in a pithos in Plastira Street in Aegion with two scarabs, a jug probably of Cypriot provenance, four Boeotian-type fibulae, two necklaces and one biconical bronze bead, evidently had relations with the East (Petropoulos Reference Petropoulos2002, 148 with n. 39, pl. 1:2–4; Eder Reference Eder2006, 569).

Archaeological data enable us to identify social stratification in Achaea in the eighth century bc. As in other regions at this time, members of elite families constituted the state.Footnote ⁶¹ The seated figures on the Nikoleika model will therefore have been members of the upper class who, by organising chariot races in honour of the deity, worshipping in the sanctuary and dedicating the prize tripod to the deity, sought to consolidate and enhance their social and political status.