Version classiqueVersion mobile

Le donateur, l’offrande et la déesse

 | 
Clarisse Prêtre

Speak, votives, …’. Dedicatory practice in sanctuaries of Hera

Jens Baumbach

Résumé

Les offrandes sont les vestiges durables d’un dialogue en grande partie perdu entre le dédicant et la divinité. En raison de la rareté des attestations littéraires liées aux cultes, les offrandes sont la principale source d’information sur les motifs des dédicaces et elles peuvent nous éclairer sur les aspects du culte au niveau individuel, civique et panhellénique. Le but de cet article est d’évaluer la quantité d’informations que l’on peut récolter sur ces différents aspects grâce à l’analyse des offrandes. La présence d’un même type de dédicace dans différents sanctuaires consacrés à la même divinité implique-t-elle un aspect cultuel panhellénique ? Inversement, les objets votifs rencontrés dans un seul sanctuaire suggèrent-ils un aspect individuel ou civique ? En ce qui concerne les attestations provenant des sanctuaires d’Héra dans le monde grec, on arguera qu’il est difficile d’y repérer des aspects panhelléniques ou individuels du culte. L’analyse des offrandes renseigne surtout sur l’aspect civique, c’est-à-dire la nature d’un culte précis constitué par les croyances religieuses et les besoins propres à la cité à laquelle appartenait le sanctuaire.

Texte intégral

  • 1 F.T. van Straten, “Gifts for the gods”, in H.S. Versnel (ed.), Faith, Hope and Worship. Aspects of (...)

1Since votive offerings were dedicated together with prayer and sacrifice, they form an essential part of the dialogue between man and god.1 As mediators between the two, they are linked with the concerns of the worshippers and the functions of the addressed deities which provide them with a specific meaning and place them in the center of religious activity. The vast number of votive offerings in Greek sanctuaries not just reflects the high level of this activity but also raises the question of the character of the religious dialogues which led to their dedication.

  • 2 Apul., Metam. VI, 4 (transl. by J.A. Hanson).

2A passage from Apuleius’ Metamorphoses helps classify the types of religious dialogues. In her search for her beloved Amor, Psyche turns to Hera and addresses the goddess with an individual concern while also referring to her panhellenic and polis responsibilities:2

Magni lows germana et coniuga, sive tu Sami, quae solapartu vagituque et alimonia tua gloriatur, tenes vetusta delubra; sive celsae Carthaginis, quae te virginem vectura leonis caelo commeantem percolit, beatas sedes frequentas; seu prope ripas Inachi, qui te iam nuptam Tonantis et reginam dearum memorat, inclutis Argivorum praesides moenibus; quam cunctus oriens Zygiam veneraturetomnis occidensLucinam appellat:sismeis extremis casibusluno Sospita,...
O sister and consort of great Jupiter whether you dwell in the ancient sanctuary of Samos, which alone glories in your birth and infant wails and nursing; or whether you frequent the blessed site of lofty Carthage, which worships you as a virgin who travels through the sky on the back of a lion; or whether you protect the renowned walls of the Argives beside the banks of Inachus, who proclaims you now the Thunderer’s bride and queen of goddesses you whom all the East adores as “Yoker” and all the West calls “Bringer into Light” be you Juno Saviouress to me in my uttermost misfortunes...

3Three types of religious dialogues can be distinguished which correspond to the three levels of worship that are characteristic of the Greek gods: the panhellenic level, i.e. the way they were commonly perceived by worshippers across the Greek world, the polis level, i.e. the way they were approached by the city-states they belonged to, and the individual level, i.e. the way they were seen by the individual. With regard to the votive offerings, the question in how far these levels are reflected by the archaeological evidence shall be approached. Does the presence of the same types of votive offerings across several sanctuaries indicate a panhellenic cult aspect and, in turn, do votive types that just occur in one sanctuary express an individual one?

1. Reading votive offerings

  • 3 Baumbach (2004), p. 2.
  • 4 C.G. Simon, The Archaic Votive Offerings and Cults of Ionia, Berkeley, 1986, p. 410.
  • 5 See previous note.

4The validity of votive offerings as a source providing insight into cult characteristics is disputed. While some scholars acknowledge that votive offerings can contribute to our knowledge of ancient religious beliefs, others deny that there is a correlation between the type of dedication and the character of the particular cult.3 One of the strongest supporters of the latter view is Simon who, looking at the evidence from Ionian sanctuaries, concludes that votive offerings were dedicated without much thought and partly because they made the sanctuaries flourish which was important for the stability of the societies to which they belonged.4 This scepticism is not so much based on the fact that almost everything could function as a votive offering but mainly derives from the observation that, instead of being confined to certain sites, most dedications are widely distributed across Greek sanctuaries5 which seems to contradict the view that there is link between gift and receiving deity.

  • 6 Baumbach (2004), p. 9.

5Instead of being examined as to their religious significance, votive offerings were primarily analysed from an art-historical perspective. The study of Greek religion, on the contrary, traditionally focused on literary evidence which is problematic not just because of its selective- and subjectiveness but also because of the scarceness of cult-specific data that could lead to a comprehensive understanding of local cult characteristics. A possibility to fill this gap lies in the analysis of votive offerings keeping in mind its limitations since, due to a variety of reasons such as preservation and the deliberate recasting of precious dedications,6 the material available is probably just a fraction of the original one.

  • 7 Plato, Phaedrus, 230b: Νυμφν τέ τινων ϰαι χελου ερόν π τν ϰορν τε ϰαι γαλμάτων οιϰεν ενα (...)

6A prominent reader of votive offerings is presented in a passage from Plato’s Phaedrus. It is Socrates visiting a country shrine near Athens. Although being unfamiliar with the nature of the cult, he realises by looking at the figurines and statues that it belongs to Achelous and the Nymphs.7 The fact that the votive offerings allow Socrates to identify the cult shows that they can provide insight into cult characteristics. However, how much information about panhellenic, polis and individual cult aspects do votive offerings reveal?

2. Decoding votive offerings

7Whereas the ancient worshipper was familiar with the three levels of worship and approached the deities accordingly, the modern reader lacks this cognition and needs to approach the dedications analytically. This will be done in the form of a case study which draws on the evidence from six Hera sanctuaries from different parts of the Greek world, the Samian Heraion in the East, the Heraion of Tiryns, the Argive Heraion and Perachora in the Peloponnese, and the two Hera sanctuaries of Poseidonia-Paestum in Western Greece.

  • 8 Baumbach (2004), p. 7f., p. 175-183.
  • 9 The selection derives from the fact that both cult aspects comprise a large number of votive types (...)

8As shown elsewhere,8 the votive offerings can be attributed to five basic cult aspects which are shared by all six Heraia and, at first sight, seem to reflect panhellenic responsibilities of Hera: (1) pregnancy, childbirth and growing up, (2) home & family, (3) marriage, (4) agriculture & vegetation, (5) military concerns. For the purpose of this study, not all but two cult aspects will be looked at, i.e. Hera’s concern with pregnancy, childbirth and growing up and the military aspects of her cult.9 The question regarding the panhellenic level of worship will be examined first, followed by the analysis of individual and polis cult levels.

9Prior to the analysis, a general distinction must be made. Votive offerings fall into two categories, i.e. purpose-made and secular votive offerings. While purpose-made dedications were manufactured as votive offerings, secular dedications, which often belong to the category of personal belongings, were used in non-sacred contexts before being dedicated. While many purpose-made votives are self-explanatory, the significance of the secular dedications usually derives from the analysis of the context in which they were found. Since they do not directly provide insight into cult characteristics, they will be analysed after the evidence from the purpose-made dedications has been laid out.

2.1. Panhellenic cult aspects

10Regarding panhellenic cult aspects, let us first take a look at votive offerings that are shared by all six Hera sanctuaries (Tables 1-2, on pages 221-222).

  • 10 Perachora: Perachora I, p. 245 no. 250; Hadzisteliou Price (1978), p. 21 no. 56 (child in arms); Pe (...)

11Comparing the evidence relating to Hera’s concern with pregnancy, childbirth and growing up, there is only one votive type that occurs in all six Heraia, i.e. the image of a woman with a child. While most statuettes show a woman with a child in her arms (Fig. 1), there are also figurines of women with children on their laps. In addition, a statuette of a woman carrying a child and a woman washing a child in a bathtub were found.10

  • 11 Perachora: Perachora I, p. 218-221 no. 97+XI. 99. 102+VII. 110+III, p. 101f. no. 307. 308. 310 (wom (...)

12A votive type which was found in five out of six Hera sanctuaries is the dove which either appears on its own or on statuettes in the hands of women (Fig. 2). It occurs in all Hera sanctuaries except for the urban Heraion at Poseidonia-Paestum where there is no evidence of such figurines.11

  • 12 Hadzisteliou Price (1978), p. 79-186 (local cults and representations); for a recent study on the k (...)

13The presence of the same types of votive offerings in the Heraia suggests that Hera was worshipped in a similar function. Thus, there seems to be evidence for a panhellenic cult aspect. Indeed, the iconography and the fact that both votive types are frequently found in sanctuaries of deities concerned with female fertility and the upbringing of children like those of Aphrodite, Eileithyia and Artemis point to a shared cult aspect that is often referred to by the term kourotrophos.12However, how much information is gained by classifying Hera as a kourotrophos deity on the basis of this evidence?

14First of all, both votive types do not provide information about Hera’s particular concerns as protectress of pregnancy, childbirth and growing up. They are generic types which also occur in sanctuaries of other deities concerned with female fertility and children and relate to broad areas of responsibility that cannot be further specified without taking into account additional evidence.

  • 13 Poseidonia-Paestum (urban Heraion): Sestieri (1954), p. 15; Sestieri (1955 b), p. 39; Pedley (1990) (...)

15Secondly, the meaning of these votive types can vary according to context. At Poseidonia-Paestum statuettes of women with children might relate to pregnancy, childbirth, nursing and infancy as these cult aspects are also attested by other dedications such as images of pregnant and nursing women and statuettes of babies in swaddling clothes.13 The Tirynthian Heraion, on the contrary, does not provide evidence for these aspects. Instead, the dedications only relate to her specific concern with infancy so that the statuettes of women with children seem to belong to this cult aspect.

  • 14 Perachora I, p. 231f. no. 181-183, p. 226f. no. 148 (breast-holding); Perachora I, p. 66f. no. 304 (...)
  • 15 The absence of votive offerings that directly relate to pregnancy and childbirth might derive from (...)

16Likewise, statuettes with doves at the Tirynthian Heraion probably point to Hera’s function as protectress of infancy whereas at Perachora they might also relate to the goddess’ concern with nursing — a cult aspect that is reflected by the presence of images of breast-holding women and women with prominent breasts.14 Due to the absence of dedications that reflect Hera’s function as protectress of pregnancy and childbirth at Perachora, the statuettes with doves cannot be related to this cult aspect.15 The situation at the Heraia of Poseidonia-Paestum differs as Hera’s function as tutelary goddess of pregnancy and childbirth is also referred to by other votives such as the aforementioned statuettes of pregnant women so that a relation between the figurines and this cult aspect can be assumed.

  • 16 This is not just based on the fact that the dove is the most frequent attribute among the seated fi (...)

17However, not just the meaning but also the emphasis of Hera’s concern with female fertility and children differs among the Heraia. This is not only reflected by the quantitative analysis of these votive types but also confirmed by the fact that, at Perachora, the cult statue of Hera is likely to have held a dove.16 Since none of the cult statues at the other Heraia is reported to have held a dove, the dove in the hands of Hera at Perachora is of special significance.

  • 17 Perachora: Perachora I, p. 228 no. 166+VII. 167. 168+V; Tiryns: Frickenhaus (1912), p. 83 no. 141+X (...)

18These observations also apply to the evidence relating to Hera’s military concerns. However, unlike the former cult aspect, there is no votive type relating to Hera’s military concerns that is shared by all cults. The votive type that occurs in most Hera sanctuaries is the terracotta figurine of an armed rider on a horse which was found at the Argive Heraion, the Tirynthian Heraion and at Perachora (Fig. 3).17 Does the shared presence of this votive type indicate a Pan-Peloponnesian cult aspect of Hera?

  • 18 Baumbach (2004), p. 41f.
  • 19 See previous note.

19The horse as an aristocratic symbol, the importance of the ridden force for the city-states and the fact that the figurines show men in armour suggest that Hera was concerned with the cavalry.18 Since healthy offspring provides the basis and secures the strength of the city-states’ military force, this aspect derives from her function as protectress of infancy19 which is attested for her cults at Perachora, Tiryns and Argos. In this sense, the statuettes point to a Pan-Peloponnesian cult feature of Hera.

20However, although being more specific than the statuettes with doves and children, as the figurines point to a particular aspect of the military, i.e. the city-states’ cavalry, it would be misleading to deduce a shared cult aspect from the presence of the same type of votive offering. Other factors such as the topography and literary evidence regarding the individual sanctuaries need to be considered. All three Peloponnesian

  • 20 The central importance of her cult is shown by a passage of the second century BC poet Moschus in w (...)
  • 21 On the significance of the sanctuaries’ topography for the city-states of Argos and Corinth see F. (...)

21Hera sanctuaries are characterised by a different topography. The Heraion at Perachora is located at the border of the Corinthian territory next to the sea, the Tirynthian Heraion is situated on the city’s upper citadel, and the Argive Heraion is placed in the Argive territory on one of the lower hills of Mt. Euboea. Due to these locations, the significance of the images of mounted warriors might differ. The ones from Tiryns point to Hera’s function as state-goddess and cityprotectress which is also attested by literary evidence20 whereas the figurines from Perachora and the Argive Heraion relate to her function as protectress of the city-states’ borders and territories.21 Thus, although the figurines of mounted warriors indicate Hera’s military concerns, their significance differs according to context so that a Pan-Peloponnesian cult feature is difficult to define.

  • 22 G.S. Merker, The Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore. Terracotta Figurines of the Classical, Hellenistic, (...)
  • 23 On the differences between the cults see also Baumbach (2004), p. 185f.

22The evidence shows that the occurrence of the same types of votive offerings need not necessarily indicate shared cult aspects. Taken on their own, these types of dedications just give a vague indication of the goddess’ areas of responsibility which require further differentiation by the analysis of the contexts in which they were found. This not just applies to sanctuaries belonging to the same deity but also to sanctuaries belonging to other deities as shown by the fact that dove figurines and statuettes of women with doves not just occur at the Heraion at Perachora but also at the sanctuary of Demeter on Acrocorinth who was predominantly concerned with agriculture and vegetation22 whereas Hera at Perachora had a strong focus on nursing, infancy and growing up.23

2.2. Individual cult aspects

  • 24 Since the problem of transmission affects all archaeological material, each votive offering that oc (...)

23Leaving aside the problem of transmission,24 the occurrence of singular dedications, i.e. dedications that only occur once in one of the Heraia, at first sight seems to indicate individual cult aspects. However, as shown in the following, they often thematically relate to other votive types in a sanctuary so that individual cult aspects can usually not be identified.

  • 25 See n. 14.
  • 26 See previous note.

24Regarding the evidence relating to Hera’s function as protectress of pregnancy, childbirth and growing up, relatively few singular votive offerings can be detected. A singular find is the aforementioned statuette of a nude woman with prominent breasts from Perachora which probably belongs to the 8th century BC (Fig. 4).25 The emphasized breasts point to Hera’s concern with nursing which is also referred to by statuettes of breast-holding women which date to the 7th and 6th centuries BC.26 Since there is no other dedication relating to Hera’s concern with nursing belonging to the 8th century BC, the statuette might relate to a singular cult aspect at that time. However, the fact that there are other dedications pointing to this cult aspect in the succeeding centuries suggests that Hera’s nursing function is a shared rather than an individual aspect.

  • 27 Perachora I, p. 237 no. 210.
  • 28 Perachora I, p. 219 no. 98; on its identification see Baumbach (2004), p. 30.

25The same also applies to other singular dedications from Perachora. A miniature phallos vase27 relates to Hera’s general concern with female fertility which is also referred to by dedications such as the above-discussed statuettes of women with doves whereas the image of a woman with a bow, if correctly identified as depicting Eileithyia or Artemis,28 points to nursing, infancy and growing up - cult aspects that are also referred to by other votive offerings from the Heraion.

  • 29 Schmidt (1968), p. 64C81.
  • 30 Webb (1978), p. 103f. no. 647. 649-652 (cows with calves); Schmidt (1968), p. 29 T 398 (woman with (...)
  • 31 AH II, p. 41 no. 255 (dove with young); AH II, p. 37 no. 201 (child with doll); see n. 10 (women wi (...)

26Likewise, the image of a falcon feeding its young29 from the Samian Heraion does not indicate an individual cult aspect since there are other dedications relating to Hera’s concern with nursing such as statuettes of cows suckling calves and a figurine of a woman with a baby at her breasts.30 At the Argive Heraion, the statuettes of the dove with its young and the child with a doll thematically correspond to images of women with children and infants on a stool31 as all of them express Hera’s function as protectress of infancy so that here also no individual cult aspect can be detected.

  • 32 B. Freyer-Schauenburg, Samos XI. Bildwerke der archaischen Zeit und des Strengen Stils, Bonn, 1974, (...)
  • 33 I here follow Guarducci’s reading of the inscription. M. Guarducci, “Dedica arcaica alla Hera di Po (...)
  • 34 Schmidt (1968), p. 24 T 2637. 2741. Berlin 499 x (warrior figurines); R. Eilmann, “Fruhe griechisch (...)
  • 35 Sestieri (1955 a), p. 156; Pedley (1990), p. 88; Cipriani (1997), p. 218 (miniature greaves); Sesti (...)

27The votive offerings referring to Hera’s military concerns provide a similar result. Among the purpose-made dedications, there are just a few votive types that occur as singular dedications in just one Hera sanctuary such as the torso of a warrior statue from the Samian Heraion (Fig. 5)32 and a silver disk from the urban Hera sanctuary at Poseidonia-Paestum which is provided with a dedicatory inscription asking the goddess for support in military action.33 However, despite their singularity, both dedications do not point to individual cult aspects as there are other dedications which support Hera’s concern with the military. Beside others, warrior figurines and miniature shields were found at the Samian Heraion34 while Hera at the urban Heraion at Poseidonia-Paestum received miniature greaves and statuettes of a woman in armour35 which might well be images of Hera referring to her function as protectress of the military force.

28As a result, the presence of singular dedications does not necessarily indicate individual cult aspects. Instead, the close correspondence between singular votive offerings and cult aspects which are also attested by other dedications shows that worshippers, whether individuals or groups of dedicators, followed the common perception of Hera at each sanctuary. This surprises as the choice of a certain votive type that, by its uniqueness, stands out from the mass of dedications reflects the worshipper’s wish of individualisation. Indeed, each votive -whether singular or mass-produced- was dedicated with a specific plea such as the one of Psyche asking Hera for help in finding her beloved Amor in Apuleius’ Metamorphoses. Unfortunately, except for where there are dedicatory inscriptions like the one on the above-discussed silver disk or cult-specific literary sources, this part of the religious dialogue between worshipper and goddess is lost. Here, the analysis of the votive offerings faces its limitations as a result of which the individual dialogues between man and god often remain in the dark.

2.3. Polis cult aspects

29In contrast to panhellenic and individual cult aspects which cannot be detected by looking at shared and singular votive offerings in isolation, the polis aspects of the cults can be identified by the analysis of the votive spectra.

30Looking at the votive spectra, several sub-aspects provide a deeper understanding of the nature of the Hera cults. Beside female fertility, aspects such as pregnancy, childbirth, nursing, infancy and growing up can be distinguished. Further aspects that belong to these areas of responsibility are protection in connection with all these stages and a special type of sacrifice that was commonly practised at childbirth. The analysis of the votive offerings that can be attributed to these categories not only shows the diversity among the individual cults as far as the range of votive types is concerned but also the differences between them as not all sub-categories of Hera’s concern with pregnancy, childbirth and growing up are traceable in all cults. In addition, also differences within the same sub-categories can be detected.

  • 36 Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 30 no. 124; Poseidonia-Paestum: see n. 13.
  • 37 Samian Heraion: Webb (1978), p. 27f. no. 122-125. 128, p. 30 no. 141. 142; Poseidonia-Paestum (urba (...)
  • 38 Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 299 no. 2262, p. 324 no. 2714-2728; Poseidonia-Paestum (urban Heraion): C (...)
  • 39 Poseidonia-Paestum (urban Heraion): Sestieri (1954), p. 15; Sestieri (1955 b), p. 39; Pedley (1990) (...)

31Hera’s function as protectress of pregnancy and childbirth is traceable in the Argive Heraion, the Samian Heraion and the two Hera sanctuaries of Poseidonia-Paestum where there are figurines of pregnant women (Argive Heraion, Poseidonia-Paestum),36 images of nude kneeling women relating to birth (Samian Heraion, Poseidonia-Paestum)37 and keys that, symbolically, might relate to the opening of the womb (Argive Heraion, Poseidonia-Paestum).38 In addition, imitations of uteri were found at the urban Heraion at Poseidonia-Paestum, and there are miniature beds which only occur at the Argive Heraion.39 The absence of dedications that directly relate to pregnancy and childbirth at Perachora and the Tirynthian Heraion suggests that these aspects were not features of the local cults.

  • 40 On the finds and their significance see Baumbach (2004), p. 111f.

32However, even though four out of six Hera sanctuaries provide evidence for this cult aspect, Hera’s function as protectress of pregnancy and childbirth seems to differ among the Heraia. This is shown by the fact that, unlike at the other sanctuaries, Hera at the urban Heraion at Poseidonia-Paestum received terracotta uteri and other anatomical dedications such as imitations of breasts and genitals which suggests that, as a local peculiarity, she was perceived as a healing deity in relation to these cult aspects.40

  • 41 Perachora: see n. 14; Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 29f. no. 120, p. 33 no. 155. 156+I, p. 34f. no. 174 (...)
  • 42 Poseidonia-Paestum (urban Heraion): see n. 13; Samian Heraion: see n. 30 (cows with calves); n. 29 (...)

33Except for the Tirynthian Heraion, Hera’s concern with nursing can be traced in all Hera sanctuaries. This aspect is reflected by images of breast-holding women which occur at Perachora, the Argive Heraion, the Hera sanctuary at Foce del Sele and the Samian Heraion (Fig. 6).41 In addition, there are figurines of women with babies at their breasts from the urban Heraion at Poseidonia-Paestum and statuettes of cows suckling calves, falcons and a lion with prey and a falcon feeding its young from the Samian Heraion.42

  • 43 See n. 10 (women with children); see n. 31 (infants on stool from Argive Heraion); Baumbach (2004), (...)

34Hera’ s function as protectress of infancy is a feature of all Hera sanctuaries. Beside the above-discussed statuettes of women with children which occur in all Heraia and might also relate to other cult aspects such as pregnancy, childbirth or nursing, there are images of infants on a stool at the Argive and Tirynthian Heraia, figurines of babies in swaddling clothes at the urban Heraion at Poseidonia-Paestum, statuettes of nude crouching boys at Perachora, and terracotta figurines of a child with a doll and a dove with its young at the Argive Heraion which also belong to this cult aspect.43

  • 44 Perachora I, p. 180 with pl. 80, 15. 16, p. 190 with pl. 86, 30. 31; Perachora II, p. 401 no. 168 ( (...)
  • 45 Tirynthian Heraion: Frickenhaus (1912), p. 65 no. 32, p. 72 no. 55, p. 73 no. 62. 64+III. 65+III, p (...)

35In contrast, Hera’s concern with growing up is only traceable at the Pelo-ponnesian Heraia. At Perachora, strigiles, styli and pipes were found which, as suggested elsewhere, might relate to three different aspects of education44 while at the Argive and Tirynthian Heraia images of women with hares and deer occur that can be identified as representations of Artemis who, being particularly concerned with these cult aspects, occurs as an assisting deity at these sanctuaries.45

  • 46 Perachora: Perachora I, p. 228 no. 162+VIII; Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 41 no. 250. 259; Poseidonia- (...)
  • 47 The occurrence of dog figurines at Perachora surprises at first sight since there are no dedication (...)

36Finally, except for the Tirynthian Heraion, amulets were found in all Hera sanctuaries which, as shown below, played a significant role in relation to pregnancy, childbirth and growing up. In addition, there are dog figurines at Perachora and the Argive Heraion which, like the remains of dog skeletons from the Heraion at Foce del Sele,46 might point to a special type of sacrifice that was practised for purification in connection with childbirth.47

37Regarding the evidence relating to Hera’s military concerns, the classification of the dedications into sub-categories causes difficulties as shown by the fact that miniature weapons could point to ordinary soldiers but also to the cavalry. However, even though all Heraia provide evidence for Hera’s military concerns, there are distinct differences which derive from the analysis of the individual contexts. Thus, as we have seen, the figurines of mounted warriors from the Peloponnesian Heraia, although probably deriving from Hera’s concern with healthy offspring as the basis of the military force, differ in their meaning as votive offerings according to the topographical setting of the sanctuaries. Likewise, there are differences in the significance of the votive offerings from the two Hera sanctuaries of Poseidonia-Paestum as the military dedications from the urban Heraion point to Hera’s function as state-goddess whereas the ones from the Hera sanctuary at Foce del Sele rather stress her concern with the city-state’s borders and territory.

  • 48 D. Ohly, “Holz”, MDAI(A) 68 (1953), p. 111-118; G. Kopcke, “Neue Holzfunde aus dem Heraion von Samo (...)

38Nevertheless, some votive offerings are more specific as they occur in just one Hera sanctuary where they reflect local concerns of the goddess. A good example is provided by the wooden ship models and dedications for naval victories from the Samian Heraion48 which relate to Hera’s function as protectress of the island’s fleet, a local peculiarity of her cult on Samos.

39The diversity of the votive offerings and the fact that not all cult aspects can be traced in all sanctuaries show the differences among the Heraia. As we have seen, each Hera cult is characterised by a unique conglomerate of votive offerings which provides insight into the nature of the individual cult. Whereas some types of dedications speak for themselves, others require further evidence to be taken into account. Thus, the analysis of votive offerings primarily shows the polis aspects of the Hera cult, i.e. the way she was perceived by the worshippers of the city-states to which the sanctuaries belonged.

40So far, primarily purpose-made dedications have been looked at. While there are more overlaps between the Hera sanctuaries as far as secular votive offerings are concerned, these -as they often belong to the category of personal belongings-usually do not provide direct insight into certain cult characteristics. Instead, their meaning as votive offerings needs to be detected on the basis of the analysis of the purpose-made dedications.

  • 49 Perachora: Perachora I, p. 70f., p. 172-175; Argive Heraion: I. STR0M, “The early sanctuary of the (...)
  • 50 Baumbach (2004), p. 36f.
  • 51 Baumbach (2004), p. 31, p. 37.
  • 52 In Attica and the Peloponnese pins served as fasteners for women’s peploi from the Submycenaean Per (...)

41The large number of dress pins found at Perachora and the Argive Heraion49, for instance, might point to Hera’s responsibility for pregnancy, childbirth and growing up since, as stated by ancient literary evidence, clothes were often dedicated in such moments of transition.50 However, as they are also appropriate dedications at marriage expressing the transition from child- to adulthood,51 the dress pins could also relate to this cult aspect. Since they do not speak for themselves, their meaning as votive offerings cannot exactly be determined. Taken on their own, they, being an essential part of women’s clothing, just indicate that Hera was concerned with women52 without providing insight into specific cult characteristics.

  • 53 Perachora: Perachora II, p. 452-455 B 1-25; Perachora I, p. 75 with pl. 18, 20. 30-32 (stone seals) (...)
  • 54 Baumbach (2004), p. 26f.
  • 55 According to Gebhard, there are three faience scarabs, six fragments of faience that may belong to (...)
  • 56 Gebhard, l.c. (n. 55), p. 106.

42Likewise, the significance of the large number of seals and scarabs that were found at Perachora and the Argive Heraion53 derives from the analysis of the purpose-made votive offerings that show Hera’s concern with pregnancy, childbirth and growing up. Since seals and scarabs are attested to have often served as amulets particularly at critical stages such as pregnancy, childbirth and growing up,54 they are likely to relate to this cult aspect. As their significance as votive offerings is based on the context in which they were found, the occurrence of similar dedications in cults of other deities does not necessarily indicate a shared cult aspect. An example is the presence of scarabs in the sanctuary of Poseidon at Isthmia55 whose cult was not concerned with pregnancy, childbirth and growing up. Thus, in contrast to Perachora, where there is evidence for this cult aspect, the scarabs probably relate to other areas of responsibility such as to Poseidon’s function as protector of travellers.56

3. Perspectives

43Let us recall Socrates visiting the country shrine of Achelous and the Nymphs in Plato’s Phaedrus. As he is able to identify the cult by looking at the figurines and statues, we can gain insight into cult characteristics by the analysis of the votive offerings. Hereby, as we have seen, votive offerings mainly provide insight into the polis aspects of the cults while panhellenic and individual aspects are difficult to trace.

  • 57 See also Kilian-Dirlmeier noting that the assembly of votive offerings in a sanctuary is determined (...)

44Regarding the dispute on their validity as a source for the study of cult peculiarities, it can be observed that, while there is hardly any votive type that is confined to Hera at a certain place, the conglomerate of dedications at each sanctuary is unique and provides the key for the understanding of cult characteristics. However, even though we have been looking at sanctuaries belonging to the same goddess, the degree of overlap between votive types as far as purpose-made dedications are concerned, is relatively small. In fact, regarding Hera’s function as protectress of pregnancy, childbirth and growing up, there is just one votive type, the figurine of a woman with a child, that is shared by all cults. The differences in the ranges of votive offerings not just indicate that the sanctuaries developed independently from each other but also show that shared cult aspects can be expressed by different votives. Thus, there is a range of votive types the dedicator can choose from which derives from the fact that votive types are subject to a variety of polis-specific factors such as economic factors, cult peculiarities and the stylistic repertoire of local workshops.57

45Having this in mind, it does not surprise that votive offerings primarily provide insight into polis cult aspects. Being shaped by the social, political and religious peculiarities of the city-states to which they belonged, cults are deeply embedded in the individual polis contexts. Gods were perceived locally so that their functions differed from place to place which brings us back to Psyche’s prayer to Hera in which she refers to peculiarities of her cult in Argos, Carthage and on Samos.

  • 58 Pausanias, II, 35, 2.
  • 59 Pausanias, II, 34,11-12.
  • 60 Poseidonia-Paestum (urban Heraion): Sestieri Bertarelli (1989), p. 39-44; Poseidonia- Paestum (Foce (...)
  • 61 The quantitative analysis of the votive offerings shows that at the urban Heraion most dedications (...)

46However, caution is needed when defining polis cult aspects as many city-states had several sanctuaries belonging to the same deity which were not always homogeneous in their cult. Examples from literary evidence are the three temples of Apollo at Hermione mentioned by Pausanias. While Apollo lacks a cult epithet in the first temple, he is referred to as Pythaeus in the second and Horius in the third58 which suggests that their cults differed from each other. Further examples are the two temples of Aphrodite at Hermione. According to Pausanias, one relates to the harbor and the sea while the other refers to marriage.59 The degree to which dedicators were concerned with differentiating between peculiarities of individual cults on a polis level is nicely illustrated by images of Hera from Foce del Sele and the urban Heraion at Poseidonia-Paestum which show the goddess with a phiale and a pomegranate in her hands. Even though being approached by worshippers of the same polis, the fact that the image of Hera from Foce del Sele carries the phiale in her right and the pomegranate in her left hand (Fig. 7) whereas the one from the urban Heraion at Poseidonia-Paestum holds the phiale in her left and the pomegranate in her right hand (Fig. 8)60 shows that the dedicators carefully differentiated between the two. This suggests that they had different functions as is also shown by the analysis of the other dedications from the sanctuaries. In contrast to the Heraion at Foce del Sele which is characterised by a strong emphasis on female and vegetative fertility which suits the sanctuary’s location on the brink of the colony’s territory next to the river Sele, the votive offerings from the urban Heraion stress Hera’s military concerns and function as tutelary goddess of marriage — cult aspects which fit the location of the sanctuary right next to the colony’s political centre.61 Thus, it must be kept in mind that the results from the study of polis cult aspects cannot be applied to the city-states as a whole but primarily provide insight into the nature of the individual cults discussed.

  • 62 Baumbach (2004), p. 190-192.
  • 63 On the problems of defining Hera’s persona on the basis of literary evidence see Baumbach (2004), p (...)

47As we have seen, deducing a panhellenic cult aspect from the shared presence of similar votive types in different sanctuaries can be misleading. In addition, even though all Hera sanctuaries provide evidence for basic cult aspects such as pregnancy, childbirth and growing up or military concerns, the emphasis of these aspects differs not just synchronically but also diachronically so that no panhellenic cult aspect can be found.62 However, the difficulty in detecting panhellenic dialogues from the analysis of the votive offerings does not imply the lack of a common perception of Hera across the Greek world. As shown by literary evidence such as Homer and Hesiod, a panhellenic perception of the goddess surely existed. Nevertheless, since sanctuaries were polis-based, it played a subordinate role in the cults so that literary evidence can only be applied to the study of Hera with caution.63

  • 64 Apul., Met, VI, 3.

48Let us turn to individual cult aspects. Having in mind that votive offerings were dedicated with specific intentions, the difficulty in gaining insight into the individual dialogues between man and god requires an explanation. A clue regarding their absence is provided by Psyche in Apuleius’ Metamorphoses who, before addressing Hera, sees ribbons attached to the votive offerings which provide information about the reasons why they were dedicated.64 Considering the fact that most votive types are not specific to Hera but also occur in sanctuaries of other goddesses, it seems difficult to detect the individual dialogues between man and god without this kind of information. Moreover, it is questionable whether this type of dialogue was always public since private issues were probably just meant for divine ears. Thus, beside problems of preservation, part of the problem in identifying individual dialogues might derive from the type of dialogue itself that was private and, as in the case of Psyche asking Hera for help in finding her beloved Amor, often confidential.

Table 1. ˇ = 1 / ˇˇ = 2-20 / ˇˇˇ = more than 20

Table 1. ˇ = 1 / ˇˇ = 2-20 / ˇˇˇ = more than 20

Abbreviations

49AH I Ch. Waldstein, The Argive Heraeum I, Boston, 1902.

50AH II Ch. Waldstein, The Argive Heraeum II, Boston, 1905.

51Baumbach (2004) J.D. Baumbach, The Significance of Votive Offerings in Selected Hera Sanctuaries in the Peloponnese, Ionia and Western Greece, Oxford, 2004.

52Capaccio P. Zancani Montuoro, U. Zanotti-Bianco, “Regione III (Bruttium et Lucania). VI. Capaccio Heraion alla foce del Sele (Relazione preliminare)”, NSc (1937), p. 206-354.

53Cipriani (1997) M. Cipriani, “Il ruolo di Hera nel santuario meridionale di Poseidonia”, in J. de La Genière (ed.), Héra. Images, espaces, cultes. Actes du Colloque International du Centre de Recherches Archéologiques de l’Université de Lille III et de l’Association P.R.A.C., Lille, 29-30 novembre 1993, Naples, 1997, p. 211-225.

54Frickenhaus (1912) A. Frickenhaus, Die Hera von Tiryns, Tiryns I, Athen, 1912.

55Hadzisteliou Price (1978) Th. Hadzisteliou Price, Kourotrophos. Cults and Representations of Greek Nursing Deities, Leiden, 1978.

56Heraion I P. Zancani Montuoro, U. Zanotti-Bianco, Heraion alla Foce del Sele I, Roma, 1951.

57Heraion II P. Zancani Montuoro, U. Zanotti-Bianco, Heraion alla Foce del Sele II, Roma, 1954.

58Neutsch (1956) Β. Neutsch, “Archäologische Grabungen und Funde in Unter-italien 1949-1955 ”, JdT 71 (1956), p. 373-450.

59Pedley (1990) J.G. Pedley, Paestum. Greeks and Romans in Southern Italy, London, 1990.

60Perachora I H. Payne (ed.), Perachora I. The Sanctuaries of Hera Akraia and Limenia, Oxford, 1940.

61Perachora II T.J. Dunbabin (ed.), Perachora II. The Sanctuaries of Hera Akraia and Limenia, Oxford, 1962.

62Schmidt (1968) G. Schmidt, Kyprische Bildwerke aus dem Heraion von Samos, Samos VII, Bonn, 1968.

63Sestieri (1954) P.C. Sestieri, Il nuovo museo di Paestum, Roma, 1954.

64Sestieri (1955 a) P.C. Sestieri, “Iconographie et culte d’Héra à Paestum”, RArtMus (1955), p. 149-158.

65Sestieri (1955 b) P.C. Sestieri, “Ricerche posidoniati”, MEFRA 67 (1955), p. 35-48.

66Sestieri Bertarelli (1989) M. Sestieri Bertarelli, “Statuette femminili arcaiche e del primo classicismo nelle stipi votive di Poseidonia. I rinvenimenti presso il tempio di Nettuno”, RIA 7 (1989), p. 5-48.

67Webb (1978) V. Webb, Archaic Greek Faience. Miniature Scent Bottles and Related Objects from East Greece, 650-500 B.C., Warminster, England, 1978.

List of illustrations

68Fig. 1. Pedley (1990), p. 41 fig. 15.

69Fig. 2. Perachora I, pl. 96 no. 102.

70Fig. 3. Perachora I, pl. 100 no. 166.

71Fig. 4. Perachora I, pl. 115 no. 304.

72Fig. 5. Freyer-Schauenburg, l.c. (n. 32), pl. 65 no. 78 A.

73Fig. 6. Schmidt (1968), pl. 29 T 2395.

74Fig. 7. Ingegneria per la Cultura (foto De Masi).

75Fig. 8. J.G. Pedley, Sanctuaries and the Sacred in the Ancient Greek World, Cambridge, 2005, p. 175 fig. 95.

Notes

1 F.T. van Straten, “Gifts for the gods”, in H.S. Versnel (ed.), Faith, Hope and Worship. Aspects of Religious Mentality in the Ancient World, Leiden, 1981, p. 65.

2 Apul., Metam. VI, 4 (transl. by J.A. Hanson).

3 Baumbach (2004), p. 2.

4 C.G. Simon, The Archaic Votive Offerings and Cults of Ionia, Berkeley, 1986, p. 410.

5 See previous note.

6 Baumbach (2004), p. 9.

7 Plato, Phaedrus, 230b: Νυμφν τέ τινων ϰαι χελου ερόν π τν ϰορν τε ϰαι γαλμάτων οιϰεν εναι.

8 Baumbach (2004), p. 7f., p. 175-183.

9 The selection derives from the fact that both cult aspects comprise a large number of votive types which provides a solid basis for the analysis.

10 Perachora: Perachora I, p. 245 no. 250; Hadzisteliou Price (1978), p. 21 no. 56 (child in arms); Perachora I, p. 247 no. 258 (child on laps); Tiryns: Frickenhaus (1912), p. 59 with n. 1 (child in arms); Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 19 no. 37. 38+V, p. 21 no. 57. 58+VI, p. 25 no. 85- 87 (child in arms); AH II, p. 19 no. 39 (child on back); AH II, p. 21f. no. 59-62 (child on laps); Poseidonia-Paestum (urban): Hadzisteliou Price (1978), p. 66 no. 691 (child in arms); Pedley (1990), p. 125f. with fig. 83 (child in bathtub); Poseidonia-Paestum (Foce del Sele): Capaccio, p. 219; Heraion I, p. 14; Sestieri (1954), p. 7; Sestieri (1955 a), p. 153; Hadzisteliou Price (1978), p. 22 no. 59, p. 179; Sestieri Bertarelli (1989), p. 24f. (child in arms); Samian Heraion: Schmidt (1968), p. 16 T 2101, p. 61 C 191 (child in arms).

11 Perachora: Perachora I, p. 218-221 no. 97+XI. 99. 102+VII. 110+III, p. 101f. no. 307. 308. 310 (women with doves); Perachora I, p. 133f. (bronze dove); Tiryns: Frickenhaus (1912), p. 75 no. 96, p. 87 no. 161+III, p. 88 no. 170+III (women with doves); Frickenhaus (1912), p. 85 no. 151 (dove figurine?); Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 34 no. 166-171, p. 36 no. 199. 200+IV (women with doves); Poseidonia-Paestum (Foce del Sele): Capaccio, p. 220, p. 338; M. Dewailly, “L’Héraion de Foce del Sele : quelques aspects du culte d’Héra à l ‘ époque hellénistique d’après les terres cuites”, in J. de La Genière (ed.), Héra. Images, espaces, cultes. Actes du Colloque International du Centre de Recherches Archéologiques de l’Université de Lille III et de l’Association P.R.A.C., Lille, 29-30 novembre 1993, Naples, 1997, p. 203 (dove figurines); Samian Heraion: R.A. Higgins, Greek Terracottas, London, 1967, p. 37f. (women with doves).

12 Hadzisteliou Price (1978), p. 79-186 (local cults and representations); for a recent study on the kourotrophos see S. Ducaté-Paarmann, “«...Eisidotos a offert la courotrophe... » (IG II2 4778). Images, espaces et genres dans les sanctuaires des divinités courotrophes”, in H. Harich-Schwarzbauer, Th. Spath (eds.), Gender Studies in den Altertumswissenschaften: Ràume und Geschlechter in der Antike, Trier, 2005 (IPHIS, 3), p. 37-57 (referring to evidence from central and southern Italy).

13 Poseidonia-Paestum (urban Heraion): Sestieri (1954), p. 15; Sestieri (1955 b), p. 39; Pedley (1990), p. 125 (pregnant women); Sestieri (1954), p. 15; Sestieri (1955 a), p. 153; Neutsch (1956), p. 441; Hadzisteliou Price (1978), p. 180; Cipriani (1997), p. 219 (nursing women); Sestieri (1954), p. 15; Neutsch (1956), p. 441; Hadzisteliou Price (1978), p. 180; M. Cipriani, “Il santuario meridionale”, in A. Stazio (ed.), Poseidonia-Paestum. Atti del XXVII convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia. Taranto — Paestum, 9-15 ottobre 1987, Taranto, 1988, p. 382; Pedley (1990), p. 125 (babies); Poseidonia-Paestum (Foce del Sele): Capaccio, p. 221; Heraion I, p. 15; Dewailly, l.c. (n. 11), p. 203 (pregnant women).

14 Perachora I, p. 231f. no. 181-183, p. 226f. no. 148 (breast-holding); Perachora I, p. 66f. no. 304 (prominent breasts).

15 The absence of votive offerings that directly relate to pregnancy and childbirth might derive from the fact that these areas of responsibility belonged to Eileithyia who had a cult at Corinth. Baumbach (2004), p. 184.

16 This is not just based on the fact that the dove is the most frequent attribute among the seated figurines that are likely to depict Hera but also on the find of an elaborate bronze dove (Perachora I, p. 133f.) that might well have been the attribute of the cult statue. Baumbach (2004), p. 17f.

17 Perachora: Perachora I, p. 228 no. 166+VII. 167. 168+V; Tiryns: Frickenhaus (1912), p. 83 no. 141+XIV; Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 40 no. 244-247+XLIV.

18 Baumbach (2004), p. 41f.

19 See previous note.

20 The central importance of her cult is shown by a passage of the second century BC poet Moschus in which he refers to Tiryns as ‘Hera’s rocky city (Moschus, Megara, 38).

21 On the significance of the sanctuaries’ topography for the city-states of Argos and Corinth see F. de Polignac, Cults, Territory, and the Origins of the Greek City-State, Chicago, 1995, p. 36f., 51-53.

22 G.S. Merker, The Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore. Terracotta Figurines of the Classical, Hellenistic, and Roman Periods, Corinth XVIII, Part IV, Princeton, New Jersey, 2000, p. 43, p. 90f. C 77 (woman with dove), p. 268, p. 278 V 9 (dove figurine); on the sanctuary and its finds see N. Bookidis, R.S. Stroud, Demeter and Persephone in Ancient Corinth, Princeton, New Jersey, 1987, p. 13-16, p. 24-29.

23 On the differences between the cults see also Baumbach (2004), p. 185f.

24 Since the problem of transmission affects all archaeological material, each votive offering that occurs only once in a sanctuary must be envisaged as a singular dedication.

25 See n. 14.

26 See previous note.

27 Perachora I, p. 237 no. 210.

28 Perachora I, p. 219 no. 98; on its identification see Baumbach (2004), p. 30.

29 Schmidt (1968), p. 64C81.

30 Webb (1978), p. 103f. no. 647. 649-652 (cows with calves); Schmidt (1968), p. 29 T 398 (woman with baby).

31 AH II, p. 41 no. 255 (dove with young); AH II, p. 37 no. 201 (child with doll); see n. 10 (women with children); AH II, p. 17 no. 17 (infants on stool).

32 B. Freyer-Schauenburg, Samos XI. Bildwerke der archaischen Zeit und des Strengen Stils, Bonn, 1974, p. 158-162 no. 78 A-C with pl. 65-67.

33 I here follow Guarducci’s reading of the inscription. M. Guarducci, “Dedica arcaica alla Hera di Posidonia”, ArchCl 4 (1952), p. 147f.; see also Baumbach (2004), p. 119f. (with a discussion of other readings).

34 Schmidt (1968), p. 24 T 2637. 2741. Berlin 499 x (warrior figurines); R. Eilmann, “Fruhe griechische Keramik im samischen Heraion”, MDAI(A) 58 (1933), p. 118-125; Ph. Brize, “Archaische Bronzevotive aus dem Heraion von Samos”, Science dell’antichità, Storia archeologia antropologia 3-4 (1989-1990), p. 323-326 (miniature shields).

35 Sestieri (1955 a), p. 156; Pedley (1990), p. 88; Cipriani (1997), p. 218 (miniature greaves); Sestieri (1954), p. 12; Sestieri Bertarelli (1989), p. 31-33 (woman in armour).

36 Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 30 no. 124; Poseidonia-Paestum: see n. 13.

37 Samian Heraion: Webb (1978), p. 27f. no. 122-125. 128, p. 30 no. 141. 142; Poseidonia-Paestum (urban Heraion): Sestieri (1955 a), p. 152f. with n. 20; Sestieri (1955 b), p. 39 with n. 1; Neutsch (1956), p. 432; Poseidonia-Paestum (Foce del Sele): Capaccio, p. 219; Heraion I, p. 14; Sestieri (1954), p. 8; Sestieri (1955 a), p. 152f. with n. 20; Hadzisteliou Price (1978), p. 180; Pedley (1990), p. 74; on their significance see Baumbach (2004), p. 112f., p. 136, p. 154f.

38 Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 299 no. 2262, p. 324 no. 2714-2728; Poseidonia-Paestum (urban Heraion): Cipriani (1997), p. 219; Poseidonia-Paestum (Foce del Sele): P. Zancani Montuoro, “L’edificio quadrato nello Heraion alla foce del Sele”, AttiMemMagnaGr 6-7 (1965-66), p. 152-158; on the significance of keys as votive offerings see Baumbach (2004), p. 81f.

39 Poseidonia-Paestum (urban Heraion): Sestieri (1954), p. 15; Sestieri (1955 b), p. 39; Pedley (1990), p. 125; Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 42 no. 271, p. 328f. no. 2787.

40 On the finds and their significance see Baumbach (2004), p. 111f.

41 Perachora: see n. 14; Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 29f. no. 120, p. 33 no. 155. 156+I, p. 34f. no. 174; Poseidonia-Paestum (Foce del Sele): P. Zancani Montuoro, “Lampada arcaica dallo Heraion alla foce del Sele”, AttiMemMagnaGr 3 (1960), p. 69-77; Samian Heraion: V. Jarosch, Samos XVIII. Samische Tonfiguren des 10. bis 7. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. aus dem Heraion von Samos, Bonn, 1994, p. 136 no. 548, p. 140 no. 603. 604, p. 157 no. 859; Schmidt (1968), p. 16 T 140. 644. 2274. 2395. 2639, p. 29 T 1151+2648+2652. 1397; U. Jantzen, Samos VIII. Âgyptische und orientalische Bronzen aus dem Heraion von Samos, Bonn, 1972, p. 58f. Β 1123; H. Kyrieleis, “The Heraion at Samos”, in N. Marinatos, R. Hägg (eds.), Greek Sanctuaries. New Approaches, London, 1993, p. 146.

42 Poseidonia-Paestum (urban Heraion): see n. 13; Samian Heraion: see n. 30 (cows with calves); n. 29 (falcon with young); Schmidt (1968), p. 64 C 79. 80. 82 (falcons with prey); Schmidt (1968), p. 65 C 165 (lion with prey).

43 See n. 10 (women with children); see n. 31 (infants on stool from Argive Heraion); Baumbach (2004), p. 55 with fig. 3.11 (infants on stool from Tirynthian Heraion); see n. 13 (babies in swaddling clothes); Perachora I, p. 254 no. 295+II (nude crouching boys); see n. 31 (dove with young, child with doll).

44 Perachora I, p. 180 with pl. 80, 15. 16, p. 190 with pl. 86, 30. 31; Perachora II, p. 401 no. 168 (strigiles); Perachora II, p. 445-447 A 357-373 (styli); Perachora II, p. 448-451 A 394- 432 (pipes); on their significance see Baumbach (2004), p. 28f.

45 Tirynthian Heraion: Frickenhaus (1912), p. 65 no. 32, p. 72 no. 55, p. 73 no. 62. 64+III. 65+III, p. 74, no.79+IV; Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 35 no. 176. 177+I. 178+XIX. 179; on their significance see Baumbach (2004), p. 58, p. 85f.

46 Perachora: Perachora I, p. 228 no. 162+VIII; Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 41 no. 250. 259; Poseidonia-Paestum (Foce del Sele): Capaccio, p. 300, p. 303 with n. 3.

47 The occurrence of dog figurines at Perachora surprises at first sight since there are no dedications that directly reflect Hera’s concern with childbirth. However, as argued elsewhere, instead of being regarded responsible for childbirth itself -a function that might have belonged to Eileithyia at Corinth (see n. 15)- she was concerned with the events surrounding this cult aspect. An interesting parallel is provided by the fact that she was also not directly regarded responsible for agriculture and vegetation but for activities that mark the beginning and end of agricultural activity. Baumbach (2004), p. 187.

48 D. Ohly, “Holz”, MDAI(A) 68 (1953), p. 111-118; G. Kopcke, “Neue Holzfunde aus dem Heraion von Samos”, MDAI(A) 82 (1967), p. 145-148; H. Kyrieleis, “Archaische Holzfunde aus Samos”, MDAI(A) 95 (1980), p. 89-94; id., l.c. (n. 41), p. 141-143 (ship models); id., Fuhrer durch das Heraion von Samos, Athen, 1981, p. 88-90 with fig. 65 (ship basis).

49 Perachora: Perachora I, p. 70f., p. 172-175; Argive Heraion: I. STR0M, “The early sanctuary of the Argive Heraion and its external relations (8th — early 6th cent. B.C.). The Greek geometric bronzes”, ProcDanlnstAth 1 (1995), p. 78-81.

50 Baumbach (2004), p. 36f.

51 Baumbach (2004), p. 31, p. 37.

52 In Attica and the Peloponnese pins served as fasteners for women’s peploi from the Submycenaean Period onwards (Strøm, l.c. [n. 49], p. 78). Although they also occur in male graves (I. Kilian-Dirlmeier, Nadeln der fruhhelladischen bis archaischen Zeit von der Peloponnes, Munchen, 1984 [PBF XIII, 8], p. 160f., p. 293), the context in which they were found suggests their connection with women at Perachora.

53 Perachora: Perachora II, p. 452-455 B 1-25; Perachora I, p. 75 with pl. 18, 20. 30-32 (stone seals); Perachora II, p. 410-432 A 23-70. 72-91. 93-97. 99-106. 108-110. 113-123 (ivory disk seals); Perachora II, p. 407-410 A 11-22 (couchant animals); Perachora I, p. 76f. with pl. 18, 27-29; Perachora II, p. 468-476 D 1-750 (scarabs); Argive Heraion: AH II, p. 345-350 no. 1-61 (stone seals); AH II, p. 351f. no. 1-19. 21. 27-29 (ivory disk seals); AH II, p. 367-369 (scarabs).

54 Baumbach (2004), p. 26f.

55 According to Gebhard, there are three faience scarabs, six fragments of faience that may belong to scarabs, a cowrie shell and a piece of white coral. E.R. Gebhard, “Small dedications in the archaic temple of Poseidon at Isthmia”, in R. Hägg (ed.), Ancient Greek Cult Practice from the Archaeological Evidence, Proceedings of the 4th International Seminar on Ancient Greek Cult, organized by the Swedish Institute at Athens, 22-24 October 1993, Stockholm, 1998, p. 106.

56 Gebhard, l.c. (n. 55), p. 106.

57 See also Kilian-Dirlmeier noting that the assembly of votive offerings in a sanctuary is determined by cult- and sanctuary-specific dedicatory practices, geographic position and the economic and political situation of the region or polis it belonged to. I. Kilian-Dirlmeier, “Fremde Weihungen in griechischen Heiligtumern vom 8. bis zum Beginn des 7. Jahrhunderts v. Chr.”, JRGZM 32 (1985), p. 243f.

58 Pausanias, II, 35, 2.

59 Pausanias, II, 34,11-12.

60 Poseidonia-Paestum (urban Heraion): Sestieri Bertarelli (1989), p. 39-44; Poseidonia- Paestum (Foce del Sele): P. Zancani Montuoro, “Piccola statua di Hera”, in E. Homann-Wedeking, B. Segall (eds.), Festschrift fur Eugen v. Mercklin, Waldsassen, Bayern, 1964, p. 174-178; Zancani Montuoro, l.c. (n. 38), p. 65-67; although the lack of comprehensive publication of the votive offerings from the sanctuaries does not allow definite conclusions to be drawn, it seems that the difference in the positioning of the attributes is also a feature of a series of terracotta figurines which relate to the aforementioned Hera images by showing the goddess with a phiale and a fruit bowl in her hands. Like the statue of Hera from Foce del Sele all published figurines from the sanctuary carry the phiale in the right and the fruit bowl in the left hand whereas the iconography of a figurine from the urban Heraion corresponds to the one of the statue of Hera from the sanctuary by showing the goddess with a phiale in her left and the fruit bowl in her right hand. Poseidonia- Paestum (Foce del Sele): Capaccio, p. 219 with fig. 7; Heraion I, p. 14 with pl. V; Sestieri (1954), p. 8; Poseidonia-Paestum (urban Heraion): M. Cipriani, E. Greco, F. Longo, A. Pontrandolfo, The Lucanians in Paestum, Paestum, 1996, p. 63.

61 The quantitative analysis of the votive offerings shows that at the urban Heraion most dedications of the Archaic Period emphasise Hera’s military concerns (81.7 %) while there is less evidence for her function as protectress of pregnancy, childbirth and growing up (16.9 %). The situation at the Heraion at Foce del Sele is the reverse since most votive offerings stress her concern with pregnancy, childbirth and growing up (51.6 %) while her military concerns are referred to by comparatively few dedications (9.4 %). While both sanctuaries share a strong emphasis of Hera’s concern with agriculture and vegetation in the Classical Period (47.9 % at the urban Heraion, 85.5 % at Foce del Sele), marriage is a strong cult aspect at the urban Heraion (32.5 %) while it is less emphasised at the Heraion at Foce del Sele (8.1 %). Baumbach (2004), p. 124, p. 145.

62 Baumbach (2004), p. 190-192.

63 On the problems of defining Hera’s persona on the basis of literary evidence see Baumbach (2004), p. 183.

64 Apul., Met, VI, 3.

Table des illustrations

Légende Fig. 1
URL http://books.openedition.org/pulg/docannexe/image/616/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 304k
Légende Fig. 2
URL http://books.openedition.org/pulg/docannexe/image/616/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 268k
Légende Fig. 3
URL http://books.openedition.org/pulg/docannexe/image/616/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 348k
Légende Fig. 4
URL http://books.openedition.org/pulg/docannexe/image/616/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 352k
Légende Fig. 5
URL http://books.openedition.org/pulg/docannexe/image/616/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 348k
Légende Fig. 6
URL http://books.openedition.org/pulg/docannexe/image/616/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 344k
Légende Fig. 7
URL http://books.openedition.org/pulg/docannexe/image/616/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 272k
Légende Fig. 8
URL http://books.openedition.org/pulg/docannexe/image/616/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 340k
Légende Table 1. ˇ = 1 / ˇˇ = 2-20 / ˇˇˇ = more than 20
URL http://books.openedition.org/pulg/docannexe/image/616/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 728k
Légende Table 1. ˇ = 1 / ˇˇ = 2-20 / ˇˇˇ = more than 20
URL http://books.openedition.org/pulg/docannexe/image/616/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 386k

Auteur

© Presses universitaires de Liège, 2009

Conditions d’utilisation : http://www.openedition.org/6540

Cette publication numérique est issue d’un traitement automatique par reconnaissance optique de caractères.
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search