Handmade figurine-groups of the Geometric period from Mesarà (Crete) between local tradition and new significance
p. 293-304
Résumés
Les figurines-colonnes de l’époque post-minoenne découvertes en Crète ont toujours reçu peu de considération, à la fois à cause de la difficulté à les dater et de leur situation minoritaire comparée à la masse importante de statuettes moulées (comme en témoigne le cas de Gortyne). Malgré le fait que dans ces dernières années, certains contextes incluant ces figurines (comme Tsoutsouros) ont été publiés et que des observations plus spécifiques concernant la production coroplastique de l’âge du fer ont été proposées, la documentation reste faible.
Le groupe mérite cependant d’être reconsidéré suivant les approches les plus récentes de ces objets, qui abordent l’étude selon une perspective libérée de l’histoire artistique.
Dans le dossier du matériel publié, la quantité la plus importante de spécimens provient de la région dite du Piazzale dei Sacelli à Haghia Triada, en Messarà : malgré la difficulté consistant à définir un cadre chronologique pour les documents n’appartenant pas à l’âge du Bronze, il semble possible de proposer quelques considérations sur l’iconographie de ces figurines. Certaines d’entre elles, appartenant probablement à des groupes et/ou à des maquettes, seront prises en compte sur la base de caractéristiques techniques et de similitudes internes. Les comparaisons en Crète et dans d’autres régions de l’Égée nous permettent de dater les figurines à l’horizon protogéométrique ou géométrique. Dans cet article, nous explorerons la question de l’interprétation de l’image représentée et de sa signification dans le contexte des activités rituelles accomplies sur le site.
The handmade columnar figurines of post-Minoan Age found in Crete have always enjoyed little consideration, both for the uneasy chronological assessment and for the lack of interest compared to the significant bulk of mould-made daedalic ones (as evidenced by the case of Gortyn). In spite of the fact that in recent years some contexts including some of these figurines (like Tsoutsouros) have been published, and more specific observations regarding the coroplastic production of the Iron Age have been proposed, the evidence remains scanty.
The group deserves to be reconsidered, however, following the most recent approaches to these objects, which face the study according to a perspective free from art-historical analysis.
In the dossier of published material, the more significant quantity of specimens comes from the so-called Piazzale dei Sacelli at Haghia Triada, in Mesarà: despite the uneasy task to define a chronological framework for the materials not belonging to the Bronze Age, it seems possible to propose some considerations regarding the iconography of these figurines. In particular, some of them probably belonging to groups and/or models will be taken into consideration on the basis of technical features and internal similarities. Comparisons in Crete itself and in other regions of the Aegean allow us to date the figurines to the Protogeometric or Geometric horizon. In the paper will be explored the issue related to the interpretation of the image represented and its meaning in the context of ritual performances held in the site.
Entrées d’index
Mots-clés : Crète, Haghia Triada, Géométrique, danse, figurines modelées, hymne
Keywords : Crete, Haghia Triada, Geometric, dance, handmade figurines, Hymn
Remerciements
I sincerely thank J. Uhlenbrock for the revision of my English text.
Texte intégral
1As we know, the study of handmade coroplastic production has largely been neglected in favor of mould-made terracottas, which are more easily datable and to which in-depth analysis of the production process, as well as art historical considerations, can be applied. In the following pages, however, it will be shown that the Cretan evidence for hand-modeled figurines of the Geometric period can lead to new research pathways, since this terrain has hardly been travelled. In fact, the lack of attention shown for archaeological material from the post-Minoan era onward on Crete includes naturally terracotta figurines (which until very recently have never generated particular interest)1. A turning point in this field was marked by the discovery and publication of material found in a deposit on the Acropolis of Gortyn: from that moment on the history of Cretan coroplastic production had been linked to the spread of the use of the mould and the development of a figurative language generally referred to as “daedalic”2. As a matter of fact, the handmade figurines that cannot be placed within a Daedalic stylistic sequence, either by chronology or by manufacture, have always remained on the margins of research.
2It is only recently that new research approaches applied to terracottas have made it possible to partially fill the gap between the different forms of evidence, taking into account the provenance and the meaning of these objects, and not just their stylistic and typological sequences. A moment of reflection was marked by the Proceedings of the Congress Pilina Eidolia, held in Catania in 2013, during which several specialists presented papers specifically dedicated to clay production in Crete during the Iron Age, a period of significant social and cultural changes3. Besides, an important role in the understanding of this material was played by new publications and discoveries, such as those from the Tsoutsouros cave at Inatos and the two deposits at the summit of Mount Anavlochos in the Mirabello region4. These latter – in particular deposit n.1 – included a considerable number of terracotta figurines, although most were mould-made, dating from PG to Classical period.
1. The context of the so-called Piazzale dei Sacelli of Haghia Triada
3In light of these considerations, it seems appropriate to re-analyze a small assemblage of figurines from the area of the so-called Piazzale dei Sacelli at Haghia Triada, in the Mesarà plain, that provides an excellent point of departure for an exploration that can fill some gaps in a still so fragmented framework5 (fig. 1).
Fig. 1 – Detail of the southern part of the Piazzale dei Sacelli at Haghia Triada

(from CretAnt 4, 2013, map fold-out).
4This area, probably the site of an open-air sanctuary, consists of a natural terrace, partly paved, that was investigated at the beginning of the last century and that was found to be rich in votive material consisting almost exclusively of terracotta and bronze figurines. The Protogeometric-Orientalising phase of this area yielded the largest concentration of ritual objects, focus of our considerations6. Limited evidence suggests that these objects had been perhaps deposited in pits on a large area, partly in proximity to earlier Minoan structures, such as the FG stoà7 (fig. 2).
Fig. 2 – Area where figurines belonging to PG-EO phase of the Piazzale dei Sacelli where found

(from D’Agata 1999, fig. 5).
5However, this practice had been preceded by a LM IIIC-SM phase that included a scattering of fragmentary clay figurines – quite exclusively zoomorphic – and three bronzes, that testify that ceremonial activity having been carried out “at least in part in an open space”8. This activity had been interrupted during the 10th and the first half of the 9th century, to judge by the very scarce evidence relating to this period, after which time the area of the Piazzale dei Sacelli again became the focus of cultic attendance9.
6The nucleus of terracotta figurines belonging to the Protogeometric-Orientalising horizon consists of 157 pieces, of which 51 are zoomorphic and 78 are anthropomorphic; a few models and some fragments of plastic or multiple vases also were brought to light10. An additional fifteen figurine fragments, considered as having no chronological value, can possibly be included in this nucleus11. Of the anthropomorphic figurines there are 20 hand-modeled heads detached from full figures (and two wheel-made), and 56 smaller figurines, mostly males or ungendered, also hand-modeled12. Among these there were some interesting items that, in all probability, belonged to groups, whether as couples or larger groups.
Fig. 3 – Figurine no. D 2.30 in D’Agata catalogue p. 138, inv.no. MI 3066 + 22381, alt 7,4 cm

(photo Author).
2. The main groups
7A first group is the most easily recognizable. To it belongs a figurine (D 2.30a) that has been identified as female on the basis of the slightly swollen pubic area13 (fig. 3). If we follow this interpretation, we should think that the belt, marked by a painted line at the waist, can be identified as the zone of the parthenoi that also appears on other Geometric female figurines. But the parthenike zone – symbol of fertility and sexuality, characteristic of the maiden-bride – seems to be characterized by some girdle strings, as it’s possible to detect from painted and plastic examples of maiden, provided with this attribute (fig. 4)14. Moreover, the female sex in terracotta figurines of the period is always featured by an incision, and not with this particular swelling15. Besides, female images are really rare among the offerings from the Piazzale dei Sacelli, where the overall picture depicted by clay and bronze figurines is masculine (or ungendered, where the attention is devoted to some other iconographic feature)16.
Fig. 4 – LMC III female figurine from Tylissos, alt 9,3 cm

(from Rethemiotakis 1998, fig. 76).
8All these elements, together with the lack of modeled breast, instead of referring to a prepubescent age class lead us to prefer the interpretation as a male figurine, provided with sex applied and marked with a red stripe (a cache-sexe?), and with a belt. The presence of an arm on left side of our figurine, that must belong to another figure, confirms that this was part of a group, probably of circle dancers. Moreover, a fragment of a base with raised edges that preserves the attachments for at least three legs that are slightly apart, also belongs to this group17 (fig. 5).
Fig. 5 – Fragment of the small base inv.no. HTR 0478, belonging to group no. D 2.30 in D’Agata catalogue p. 139, largh 7,5 cm

(courtesy of Italian Archaeological School of Athens) .
9The technique of this figurine is the same as that of the figurines of group D 2.41, which we will discuss shortly. The body is modeled as a cylindrical form to which short and thin limbs - a common feature of the period - are attached18. In this case, as in the similar group D 2.41, however, the clay cylinder appears to be worked to reproduce bodily forms in a more naturalistic way, as shown by the swelling of the buttocks (fig. 6). In the same way the face takes on a fully oval shape, with the careful detailing of a pointed nose and chin (from which the passage to the neck is clearly delineated). A dating of this figurine to the early Geometric period seems to be indicated by the close comparison with two figurines from Phaistos (fig. 7) and Chalara and a figurine from the Tsoutsouros cave19.
Fig. 6 – Figurine no. D 2.30 in D’Agata catalogue, alt 7,4 cm

(from D’Agata 1999, tav. LXXXII).
Fig. 7 – Female figurine from room P in Phaistòs palace, 18,5 cm

(photo Author).
10Another group portraying a circle dance probably included the figurine of a double flute-player (D 2.29, fig. 8) along with the small figurines D 2.23-26 characterized by arms extended laterally20 (fig. 9). These are similar in size and iconography, as they lack gender characterization, wear a type of headgear that has been called a “benda”, and are distinguished by pierced eyes and nostrils21. Despite their undeniable continuity of the earlier figurative language of LM III C period (such as the three figurines classified as type C 4.1 from the same sacred area)22, these figurines show a more careful rendering of facial features and a distinctive headdress that indicates that they are an autonomous group, rather than appliques from the edge of an open vase23 or from a kernos, as seen i.e. on a Proto-Geometric item from Kourtés24.
Fig. 8 – Figurine no. D 2.29 in D’Agata catalogue, inv.no. MI 22419, alt 4,5 cm

(from Dons des Muses, p. 203).
Fig. 9 – Figurines nos. 2.23-2.26 in D’Agata catalogue, inv.nos. MI 3052, 3057, 3067-3068, alt 6,2 ; 7 ; 6 ; 5,5 cm

(from D’Agata 1999, tav. LXXXII).
11In this group, the usual “pinched” aspect of the columnar Geometric figurines is mitigated in the profile view with a better definition of the individual features. Moreover the eyes, made with two applied clay pellets, are pierced in the center; the nostrils are indicated by two small holes, and the chin projects strongly. The practice of piercing the pupils and nostrils belongs to a tradition already established on Crete at least by the LM IIIC period and was consolidated in heads of larger dimensions25. So this technical feature cannot be used as a chronological indication, since it could be interpreted as the product of a workshop more linked to the Minoan manufacturing tradition, or one that just invested greater care in the rendering of details. The last technical peculiarity of the figurines of the group is the presence of a plastically-applied (and not painted) band around the head, perhaps imitation of a garland.
12The figurine D 2.25, belonging to this hypothetical group, was placed in the 7th century BCE by D’Agata because of its “daedalic sensibility”, revealed by the swelling of the upper lip26. However, it’s difficult to use this rendering as a chronological criterion, and the comparison in the overall shape with other figurines from the Piazzale dei Sacelli leads more properly to a dating in the 8th century BCE27.
13The similarity in manufacture, decoration and iconography of six figurines, cataloged under the number D 2.41 and already recognized by D’Agata, makes it probable that they belong to a group of males (the sex seems to be detached), or at least to pairs of males destined to fulfill a similar function28 (fig. 10). Even the decoration, consisting of a painted band on the upper part of the back, a painted band on the head and traces of paint on the nose, constitutes a trait d’union between these figurines (fig. 11).
Fig. 10 – Male figurines belonging to group no. D 2.41 in D’Agata catalogue, inv. nos. MI 3047a, 3051, 3060, 3099o, MP 75160, 75164, alt 8,6; 6,5; 5; 4,1; 9,7; 6 cm

(from D’Agata 1999, tav. LXXXV).
Fig. 11 – Figurine no. D 2.41e in D’Agata catalogue, inv. no. 75160, alt 9,7 cm

(courtesy of Museo delle Civiltà - MPE L. Pigorini, Rome).
14An interpretive problem conversely arises out of the gesture represented. D 2.41a, c, f hold the right arm bent in front of their chests and the left one extended, while D 2.41e is shown with the right arm extended and the left apparently bent on the torso. The position of the legs, preserved only in D 2.41a and e, seems to suggest an asymmetrical, leftwards movement.
15D’Agata notes that this movement is disjointed, making clear interpretation difficult. The hypothesis that these figurines could constitute a group of dancers, supported by a stylistic similarity with the aforementioned female figurine D 2.30a, is not fully convincing, since circle dancers generally hold their arms outstretched to underscore the union between the figures and the circularity of the represented scheme.
16Another possible interpretation is that these figurines are charioteers. The offset position that characterizes them can be compared with that seen in images of charioteers engaged in the movement of ascending or driving the chariot29. However, in these instances, the figurines are always represented helmeted and sometimes armed. Yet, at least one bronze figurine of a warrior from the same sacred area of the Piazzale dei Sacelli is depicted with legs similarly arranged, but the attributes that characterize it (belt, cache-sexe and helmet) are missing in the figurines of our group30.
17It is therefore preferable to return to the first interpretation, thinking that, in this case, the artisan intended to focus only on the movement accomplished, even if disjointed: that of a dance.
18The only attribute of the figurines, as we have seen, is the painted band on the upper part of the back and the head. These painted “bands” could be interpreted as strips of fabric that were placed on the head or shoulders of the participants in a ritual performance to indicate their status31: the figurines would then represent the symbolic markers of a significant celebration, expressed through a rhythmic movement. The meaning of the dedication lies in fact in the choròs representation, where it’s possible to find a deliberate uniformity, which points to express the idea of belonging to a community.
19If we are dealing with dancers, moreover, they could constitute a perfect counterpart to the figurines of group D 2.30, representing a ritual behavior that reinforces the group identity and the social interaction associated with the ceremony32. A suggestion, but destined to remain so, is that the group was composed with other figurines (animals?) or with a symbolic element held in the center of the group.
3. Other groups composed of two figures
20Two figurines, D 2.28 and 2.50, had already been interpreted by D’Agata as portraying the conjugal act33. She supported this view with the comparison with similar figurines found in the Tsoutsouros cave and with the presence of breaks for attachments on the chest and neck. They had to be placed on a support, or more likely inside a kalathos, in association with another figurine. The first figurine (D 2.28, fig. 12) is very similar to a fragmentary conjugal group from the Tsoutsouros cave, and probably represents, even in the absence of gender markers, the female figure of the couple, raised from the male one34. The facial features are not indicated, given that the face had to be partly covered by the male figurine.
Fig. 12 – Figurine no. D 2.28 in D’Agata catalogue, inv.no. MI 22357, alt 5,3 cm

(from D’Agata 1999, tav. LXXXIII).
21D 2.50 (fig. 13) is more clearly identified as the male figure of a second couple, with represented features and headgear emphasized by an incision. The breaks for attachments on the back of the figurine refer to the position, resting against the wall of an open vessel; the breaks on the chest, instead, allude to the presence of another figurine placed frontally, as in a similar example from the Tsoutsouros cave35. Both comparative groups are dated between the Proto-Geometric B and the Geometric period, the date to which our figurines also probably belong.
Fig. 13 – Figurine no. D 2.50 in D’Agata catalogue, inv.no. MI 3532, alt 7 cm

(from D’Agata 1999, tav. LXXXVII).
22Even though these figurines belonging to conjugal groups may have been attached to kalathoi, as has been suggested for the comparanda just discussed, no such pottery has been found at the Piazzale dei Sacelli at Haghia Triada. However, the absence of pottery sherds of any kind is perhaps to be explained by the common practice of discarding archaeological material considered not relevant, as hypothesized also for the hollow bodies of larger figurines that may have belonged to heads recovered in the same area36.
4. Meaning
23To sum up, we have been able to isolate, in the corpus of terracottas belonging to the phase of attendance of the Piazzale dei Sacelli at Haghia Triada dating between Proto-Geometric B and Geometric period, a select number of figurines that can be traced back to groups consisting of two or more figures. The lack of comparisons and the bad preservation of the pieces prevent us from being certain of the suggested interpretations for some of these examples. However, it is important to remember that the display of figurines in a set, in order to produce narratives or serve specific rituals, expanding and varying the range of meanings of the single dedications, is a known practice37. As a matter of fact, we can assert that the apparent absence of a common basis does not prejudice the possibility of a “constructed” dedication, even if this possibility is destined to remain a hypothesis.
24In any case, some observations can be made about the meaning of the deposition of these objects, which can shed light on the nature of the ceremonial activity practiced in the area. As Polignac pointed out, any offering, even if inexpensive, presupposes a group that bears witness to the dedication itself, a cult community of shared values where the worshipper can be reflected through the public gesture of dedication: in that way the figurines perform a primary communicative function38. In this sense we can believe that even in the figurines we have discussed it is possible to glimpse the reflection of a precise expressive will, where the highlighting of a few elements, such as movement or conjugal act, provides the spectators with clues that allow recognition of the status of the dedicator, responding to the other significant function of terracottas, that is evocative and substitutive of the dedicant39.
25We have suggested that these coroplastic groups be considered dancers and conjugal couples. If our interpretation has validity, this could lead to a two-fold interpretation of the context within which we can put these figurines. On the one hand (dancers), we would have a symbolic and commemorative representation of a ritual performance that should have a relevant meaning for the social body as a whole40. In the other hand (couples), we would have indications that the symbolic and implied value of these modeled objects is even stronger, reiterating that the conjugal act is a necessary step for the survival of the community.
26We even can go deeper and try to understand if we can detect from our figurines some clues about the ritual celebrated in the area of Piazzale dei Sacelli. If, as it seems, the quantity of terracottas is meagre for a rather long period, and not accompanied by pottery, this might lead to the idea of a restricted group of consumers/dedicators, as has been hypothesized for other Cretan contexts in periods of formation: the manipulation and consecration of these objects could probably be reserved to specific ritual actions, that involved a limited number of participants41. It is likely that these actions were carried out on the occasion of the maturation rites of the young members of the community, as we will see later. In this framework, the images of dancers -not fully sexually characterized and with a very limited range of attributes- can be well explained. Dance, with music, plays a key role in the construction of the gender identity, as an important vehicle for group cohesion, as Susan Langdon has correctly stated42. Isolated representations of circle dancers are attested in the Cretan Bronze Age by two well-known clay models from the tholos of Kamilari and Palaikastro43. To this small list has recently been added the likely depiction of the Pyrrhic dance, the armed dance that was part of the constituent elements of the paideia of the young Cretans, on an early PG krater from Thronos-Sybrita44. The island, moreover, is particularly linked to the dance from the literary tradition, starting from the famous Homeric lines that describe Ariadne’s dance on the sparkling shield of Achilles, associated with preparatory phases of a wedding45.
27The high chronology of these groups, if correctly identified, takes on a particular importance in the history of the clay model, that will enjoy greater popularity in the Archaic period, still characterized by handmade columnar figurines46.
28Moreover, these figurines outline a varied figurative palimpsest, together with the significant number of zoomorphic figurines and the figurine types we have not considered here but which have been identified with good probability as hunters, riders, warriors, a possible kriophoros, a kourotrophos and so on47. It is likely that the variety of images represented by these hand-modeled figurines reflects a society that witnessed the rising of groups that required new iconographies for self-representation within their reference community. The probability that the area of Piazzale dei Sacelli at Haghia Triada already had a ceremonial function, and that this function was preserved and in some way revitalized, as evidenced by the deposition of figurines near Minoan structures still visible, can reinforce the hypothesis that the rooting in an ancient tradition was a significant legitimacy for the emerging clans in the PG B period48.
29Anyway, notwithstanding the social class of the donors, it seems clear that the framework depicted by the offerings is referring to an agricultural-pastoral world, where hunting, breeding and farming were the principal activities of the population49. It’s therefore possible to suggest the reflection of a practice not far in its meaning from that mentioned in the Hymn to the Greatest Kouros, known from an Imperial inscription found at Palaikastro, but dated back to the Hellenistic period and rooted in an ancient cult tradition50.
30The hymn was performed during an annual festival of agricultural renewal held in the sanctuary of Zeus Diktaios, in East Crete, celebrating also the acceptance in the adult world of young people, who have reached their coming of age and are ready to be included in the citizen body51. During these feasts, dances and ritual actions have accompanied the singing invocation to the deity to “fertilize the herds, flocks, fields and the homes”. In the final strophe of the Hymn the deity is requested to “leap into (the verb has been differently translated, but bless is the general sense) cities, ships and new citizens”52: the context from Piazzale dei Sacelli seems to illustrate through clay and bronze offerings, that have been part of the ritual action interacting with the participants53, the words of the petitio, that promotes the increase of the prosperity of the community, through the renewal of its properties and its body54.
31It is therefore possible to conclude that even such humble handmade figurines can shed light on particular aspects of a society upset by dramatic changes but strongly rooted in its traditions, before the advent of mould-made production of terracotta figurines in the Orientalizing era allowed wider narrative possibilities.
Bibliographie
Albertocchi 2015 : M. Albertocchi, Shall we dance? Terracotta dancing group of Archaic period in the Aegean world, in : S. Huysecom-Haxhi, A. Muller (dir.), Figurines grecques en contexte. Présence muette dans le sanctuaire, la tombe et la maison, Actes du Colloque de Lille (2011), Villeneuve d’Ascq, Presses universitaires du Septentrion, 2015, 489 p., 13-24.
Aurigny 2012 : H. Aurigny, Une notion encombrante dans l’histoire de la sculpture grecque : le « dédalisme », RA, 2012, 3-40.
Babbi 2015 : A. Babbi, Human Iconography and Identities on Crete at the Very Beginning of the 1st Millennium BC: the Small Columnar Figurines from Prinias, in: Pautasso, Pilz 2015, 85-115.
Brisart 2013 : T. Brisart, Les terres cuites moulées du sanctuaire proto-archaïque sur l’acropole de Gortyne : remarques sur l’organisation de la production, AnnHistA, XXXV, 2013, 9-26.
Calame 1977 : C. Calame, Les choeurs de jeunes filles en Grèce archaïque, vol. I, Rome, Edizioni dell’Ateneo, 1977, 506 p.
Carinci 2019 : F.M. Carinci, Phaistos and Ayia Triadha, from the Final Neolithic to the Early Iron Age: two places of memory, in: E. Borgna, I. Caloi, F.M. Carinci, R. Laffineur (éd.), Mneme. Past and Memory in the Aegean Bronze Age, Proceedings of the 17th International Aegean Conference, Udine-Venice (2018), Louvain-Liège, Peeters, (Aegeum 43), 2019, 778 p., 25-34.
Cucuzza 2013 : N. Cucuzza, Minoan nativity scene? The Ayia Triada swing model and the three-dimensional representation of Minoan divine epiphany, ASAtene, 91, 2013, 175-207.
D’Acunto 2016 : M. D’Acunto, Dance in Attic and Argive Geometric Pottery: Figurative Imagery and Ritual Contexts, in: G. Colesanti, L. Lulli (éd.), Submerged Literature in Ancient Greek Culture. Case Studies, Berlin, De Gruyter, 2016, 396 p., 205-241.
D’Agata 1999 : A.L. D’Agata, Haghia Triada II. Statuine minoiche e post-minoiche dai vecchi scavi di Haghia Triada (Creta), Padova, Bottega d’Erasmo, (Monografie ASAtene XI), 1999, 283 p.
D’Agata 2012 : A. D’Agata, The power of images. A figured krater from Thronos Kephala (Ancient Sybrita) and the process of polis formation in Early Iron Age Crete, SMEA, 54, 2012, 207-247.
Dons des Muses : Dons des Muses. Musique et danse dans la Grèce ancienne, Exposition des musées royaux d’art et d’histoire et du musée du Cinquantenaire de Bruxelles 2003, Athènes, Ministère de la culture de la République Hellénique, 2003, 314 p.
Englezou, Rethemiotakis 2013 : M. Englezou, G. Rethemiotakis, Το Γεωμετρικό νεκροταφειό της Έλτυνας στους Κουνάβους Ηρακλείου, in : W.-D. Niemeier, O. Pilz, I. Kaiser (éd.), Kreta in der geometrischen und archaischen Zeit, Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums Athen (2006), Munich, Hirmer, (Athenaia 2), 2013, 487 p., 157-185.
Gaignerot-Driessen 2018 : F. Gaignerot-Driessen, Terracotta Figures, Figurines, and Plaques from the Anavlochos, Crete, Les Carnets de l’ACoSt, 17, 2018.
Garcia-Ventura, López-Bertran 2013 : A. Garcia-Ventura, M. López-Bertran, Figurines and Rituals. Discussing embodiment theories and gender studies, in : C. Ambos, L. Verderame (éd.), Approaching Rituals in Ancient Cultures. Questioni di rito : rituali come fonte di conoscenza delle religioni e delle concezioni del mondo nelle culture antiche, Proceedings of the Conference Rome (2011), Pise-Rome, F. Serra, (RstOr, suppl.2), 2013, 323 p., 117-143.
Garfinkel 2003 : Y. Garfinkel, Dancing at the Dawn of Agriculture, Austin, University of Texas press, 2003, 326 p.
Gesell 2012 : G.C. Gesell, The Kavousi goddesses with up-raised hands: new information on technology, in: E. Mantzourani, P. Betancourt (éd.), Philistor: studies in honour of Costis Davaras, Philadelphia, INSTAP Academic Press, 2012, 282 p., 43-49.
Hayden 1991 : B. Hayden, Terracotta Figures, Figurines, and Vase Attachments from Vrokastro, Crete, Hesperia, 60, 1991, 103-144.
Huysecom-Haxhi, Muller 2015 : S. Huysecom-Haxhi, A. Muller, Figurines en contexte, de l’identification à la fonction : vers une archéologie de la religion, in : S. Huysecom-Haxhi, A. Muller (dir.), Figurines grecques en contexte. Présence muette dans le sanctuaire, la tombe et la maison, Actes du Colloque de Lille (2011), Villeneuve d’Ascq, Presses universitaires du Septentrion, 2015, 489 p., 421-538.
Kanta, Davaras 2011 : A. Kanta, K. Davaras, Ελουθία χαριστήιον. Το ιερό σπήλαιο της Ειλειθυiας στον Τσούτσουρο, Héraklion, Chorighia Ekdosis, 2011, 197 p.
Kopestonsky 2016 : T. Kopestonsky, The Greek Cult of the Nymphs at Corinth, AJA, 4, 2016, 711-778.
Langdon 2008 : S. Langdon, Art and Identity in Dark Age Greece, 110-700 B.C.E., Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2008, 388 p.
Lefèvre-Novaro 2007 : D. Lefèvre-Novaro, La danse dans les modèles réduits des âges du Bronze et du Fer en Egée et à Chypre, Ktema, 32, 2007, 57-63.
Lefèvre-Novaro 2014 : D. Lefèvre-Novaro, Du massif de l’Ida aux pentes du mont Diktè. Peuples, territoires et communautés en Messara du XIIIe au VIIe siècle av. J.-C., Paris, De Boccard, 2014, vol. 1 375 p., vol. 2 406 p.
Levi 1927-1929 : D. Levi, Arkades. Una città cretese all’alba della civiltà ellenica, Bergame, Istituto Italiano d’Arti Grafiche, 1927-1929. 725 p.
Levi 1961-1962 : D. Levi, Gli scavi a Festòs negli anni 1958-1960, ASAtene, 39-40, 1961-1962, 377-504.
Liveri 2008 : A. Liveri, Representations and interpretations of dance in the Aegean Bronze Age. Ritual dances in Cycladic and Minoan religions, AM, 123, 2008, 1-38.
Lonsdale 1993 : S.H. Lonsdale, Dance and ritual play in Greek religion, Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993, 352 p.
Naerebout 2006 : F.G. Naerebout, Moving Events. Dance at Public Events in the Ancient Greek World. Thinking through its implications, in: E. Stavrianopoulou (éd.), Ritual and communication in the Graeco-Roman World, Liège, Centre international d’étude de la religion grecque, (Kernos Suppl. 16), 2006, 350 p., 37-67.
Palermo 2003 : D. Palermo, Haghia Triada fra il XII ed il VII sec.a.C., CretAnt, 4, 2003, 273-285.
Pautasso 2005 : A. Pautasso, Una statuetta in terracotta dai recenti scavi di Priniàs, in : R. Gigli (éd.), Megalai Nesoi. Studi dedicati a Giovanni Rizza per il suo ottantesimo compleanno, Catane, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche-IBAM, 2005 (Volume I), 327 p., 177-182.
Pautasso, Pilz 2015 : A. Pautasso, O. Pilz (éd.), Pilina Eidolia. New Perspectives in Cretan Coroplastic Studies (13th-7th Cent. B.C.), Proceedings of the Bilateral Workshop Italy-Germany, Atti del Colloquio di Catania (2013), Padoue, Bottega d’Erasmo, (CretAnt, 16), 2015, 239 p.
Perlman 1995 : P. Perlman, Invocatio and Imprecatio: The Hymn to the Greatest Kouros from Palaikastro and the Oath in Ancient Crete, JHS, 115, 1995, 161-167.
Polignac 2009 : F. de Polignac, Quelques réflexions sur les échanges symboliques autour de l’offrande, in : C. Prêtre (éd.), Le donateur, l’offrande et la déesse. Systèmes votifs dans les sanctuaires de déesses du monde grec. Actes du Colloque de Lille (2007), Liège, Centre International d’Etude de la Religion Grecque, (Kernos suppl. 23), 2009, 337 p., 29-37.
Pilz 2011 : O. Pilz, Frühe matrizengeformte Terrakotten auf Kreta. Votivpraxis und Gesellschaftsskultur in Spätgeometrischer und früharcaische Zeit, Möhnesee, Bibliopolis, 2011, 357 p.
Rethemiotakis 1998 : G. Rethemiotakis, Ανθρωπομορφική πηλοπλαστικήστην Κρήτη. Από τη Νεοανακτορική έως την Υπομινὧκή περίοδο, Athènes, The Archaeological Society at Athens Library no. 174, 1998, 187 p.
Rizza 1967-1968 : G. Rizza, Le terrecotte di Axòs, ASAtene, XLV-XLVI, 1967-1968, 211-302.
Rizza 1968 : G. Rizza, parti II e III, in : V. Scrinari, G. Rizza, Il santuario sull’Acropoli di Gortina, Rome, Istituto poligrafico dello Stato (volume I), 1968, 299 p., 97-280.
Salapata 2015 : G. Salapata, Terracotta Votive Offerings in Sets or Groups, in : S. Huysecom-Haxhi, A. Muller (éd.), Figurines grecques en contexte. Présence muette dans le sanctuaire, la tombe et la maison, Actes du Colloque de Lille (2011), Villeneuve d’Ascq, Presses universitaires du Septentrion, 2015, 489 p., 179-197.
Sarian 1969 : H. Sarian, Terres cuites géométriques d’Argos, BCH, 93, 1969, 651-678.
Sjögren 2008 : L. Sjögren, Fragments of Archaic Crete. Archaeological studies on time and space, Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Uppsala, Uppsala Universitet, (Boreas 31), 2008, 255 p.
Soar 2010 : K. Soar, Circular dance performances in the Prehistoric Aegean, in: A. Chaniotis, S. Leopold, H. Schulze et alii (éd.), Body, performance, agency, and experience. Ritual Dynamics and the Science of Ritual, 2, Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz 2010, 583 p., 137-156.
Szabò 1994 : M. Szabò, Archaic Terracottas of Boeotia, Rome, « L’Erma » di Bretschneider, 1994, 150 p.
Notes de bas de page
1In recent years can be observed a new interest in the manufacturing techniques of Cretan terracottas, but this interest is limited to Bronze Age or Subminoan phases: see Rethemiotakis 1998, and now (for goddesses with upraised arms) Gesell 2012.
2For Gortyn, Rizza 1968; for other important studies on mould-made terracottas in particular Rizza 1967-1968, Pilz 2011 and Brisart 2013. For a critical review on the use of the term “Daedalic” in sculpture Aurigny 2012.
3Pautasso, Pilz 2015.
4For the preliminary publication of the findings of the Tsoutsouros cave see Kanta, Davaras 2011. For the deposits of the Anavlochos and specifically the terracotta figurines Gaignerot-Driessen 2018.
5About the excavation and the interpretation of the area see D’Agata 1999, 213-249, with particular attention to clay and bronze offerings; see also recently Lefèvre-Novaro 2014, 258-265.
6The only exceptions to this repertoire of votive material are few vases decorated with protomes, a decorated pithos, some kernoi, a lekythos and an aryballos: D’Agata 1999, 160-166 and 242-243.
7D’Agata 1999, 225-226 and 245-246. On the desire to depose the offerings near older structures also Sjögren 2008, 181, where it is stated that the FG stoà played a role in ritual practices, enforcing their commemorative significance; on the fascination exercised by Minoan antiquities in the area now Carinci 2019.
8D’Agata 1999, 229. The fragmentation of the pieces and the characteristics of discovery suggest that they belonged to a discard deposit located in a peripheral area in the southern part of the Piazzale, created at an unspecified time after the SM phase. See also Palermo 2003, 273-274.
9D’Agata 1999, 239-240 hypothesizes the development of a limited cult activity in this intermediate period, attested by the discovery of three vases of the advanced PG period, together with a couple of little older figurines.
10D’Agata 1999, 106-166.
11D’Agata 1999, 205-207 (group G, which also includes some anthropomorphic heads and quadrupeds).
12D’Agata 1999, 107-117 (group D.1). They belong to bodies -full or hollow- bigger than the figurines object of our investigation.
13D’Agata 1999, 124 and 138, tav. LXXXII.
14For example, a figurine from Tylissos in Rethemiotakis 1998, 23, fig. 76, and several depictions on vases mostly from Argolys in Langdon 2008, especially 151-152.
15See for instance the mourning figurine from Vrokastro in Hayden 1991, 134, fig. 11, 36; Kanta, Davaras 2011, 117, n. 114 (Tsoutouros) and for the same Haghia Triada D’Agata 1999, 139, D 2.32, tav. LXXXIII.
16D’Agata 1999, 243.
17D’Agata 1999, 139 and 124. I thank the Director of the Italian Archaeological School of Athens for granting me permission to do a research in the School archive where, with the help of the responsible I. Simiakaki whom I thank, I was able to find the photograph and the inventory sheet of the base fragment inv.no. HTR 0478.
18On rendering of columnar figurines, D’Agata 1999, 119-120, but also Babbi 2015, 105-106.
19For the figurines from Festòs and Chalara, respectively: Levi 1961-1962, 407, 410, fig. 52 and 500-501, fig. 193. Particularly similar in the profile view is also the rendering of the face of a (female?) figurine in Kanta, Davaras 2011, 107, n. 107.
20D’Agata 1999, 137-138, tav. LXXXII. A beautiful color picture of the flute-player D 2.29 is published also in Dons de Muses 2003, 203, n. 91.
21D’Agata 1999, 122.
22 D’Agata 1999, 102, tav. LXVIII.
23See for example a well-known kalathos from the necropolis of Eltynas in Englezou, Rethemiotakis, 2013, 164-167, fig. 20-28.
24Levi 1927-1929, 619, fig. 651.
25D’Agata 1999, 115-117, D 1.13 e 1.17, tav. LXXVII. About the technique see Pautasso 2005, especially 180, and Babbi 2015.
26D’Agata 1999, 122.
27As a matter of fact, I don’t believe that the swelling of the upper lip could be intentional; moreover, the similarity in shape and iconography with the figurines D 2.23, D 2.24 and especially D 2.26 seems to be a better criterion for dating this figurine.
28D’Agata 1999, 130, 141-142, tav. LXXXV. I thank the “Museo delle Civiltà - MPE L.Pigorini” in Rome for granting me the permission to see and photograph the figurines belonging to this group inv.nos.75160 e 75164, preserved there, and Dr. E. Mangani for facilitating in every way my research.
29Beotia: Szabò 1994, 26, fig. 10 and for the comparison with a charioteer from Argos: Sarian 1969, 651-654, fig. 1.
30D’Agata 1999, 168-169, E 1.8, tav. CIV.
31For D’Agata 1999, 130 it could be a garment.
32Compare what Soar 2010, 151 says on this subject.
33D’Agata 1999, 138, tav. LXXXIII (D 2.28); 143, tav. LXXXVII (D 2.50). For remarks see ibidem, 122 and 132-133.
34Kanta, Davaras 2011, 102, n. 100.
35Kanta, Davaras 2011, 103, n. 102.
36D’Agata 1999, 111.
37About the display of the figurines in sets or groups in some specific occasions see Salapata 2015. For a Cretan example of the Bronze Age period see Cucuzza 2013.
38Polignac 2009.
39Huysecom-Haxhi, Muller 2015, 433-434.
40Regarding the importance of the dance as an excellent medium of communication with the deity in particular Naerebout 2006, with bibliography. The argument has been the subject of numerous essays regarding the ancient world: to mention only some of the most significant studies, we remember Calame 1977, Lonsdale 1993 and Garfinkel 2003.
41For example at Prinias: Babbi 2015, 87, 113.
42Langdon 2008, 158, but also 173 and 196. Also on this topic D’Acunto 2016.
43For a dossier on the representation of dance in Prehistoric Aegean Liveri 2008 and Soar 2010. See also Albertocchi 2015, 15.
44D’Agata 2012.
45See D’Acunto 2016.
46For these groups Albertocchi 2015; for the significant number of dancing groups from the Kokkinovrysi sanctuary near Corinth Kopestonsky 2016.
47D’Agata 1999, 121, tav. LXXX, 2.21 (hunter); 128, tav. LXXXIV, 2.38 (warrior); 120, tav. 134, D 2.6 (kriophoros?); 126, tav. LXXXIV, 2.34 (kourotrophos).
48Moreover, the territorial aspect of ritual performances emphasizes the maintenance of a collective identity.
49Lefèvre-Novaro 2009, especially 587-588.
50For a comment on this Hymn Perlman 1995.
51Perlman 1995, 165-166.
52Perlman 1995, especially 162.
53According to the theory of embodiment, indeed, the figurines were not passive objects, but they participated in rituals: see for a good insight on this theory Garcia-Ventura, López-Bertran 2013.
54Among the offerings there are, as we have seen, many zoomorphic figurines (“herds and flocks”), a little ship and a clear reference to “new citizens”, symbolized by young people that, within a ritual performance, are accepted in the civic body.
Auteur
-
Marina Albertocchi
ACost, Université de Venise, m.albertocchi[at]alice.it
Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Licence OpenEdition Books. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Peupler et habiter l’Italie et le monde romain
Stéphane Bourdin, Julien Dubouloz et Emmanuelle Rosso (dir.)
2014
Archéologie au présent
Les découvertes de l’archéologie préventive dans les médias
Catherine Dureuil-Bourachau
2015
Sarta Tecta
De l’entretien à la conservation des édifices. Antiquité, Moyen Âge, début de la période moderne
Charles Davoine, Maxime L’Héritier et Ambre Péron d’Harcourt (dir.)
2019
Gérer l’eau en Méditerranée au premier millénaire avant J.-C.
Sophie Bouffier, Oscar Belvedere et Stefano Vassalo (dir.)
2019
Le village de la Capelière en Camargue
Du début du ve siècle avant notre ère à l’Antiquité tardive
Corinne Landuré, Patrice Arcelin et Gilles Arnaud-Fasseta (dir.)
2019
Les métaux précieux en Méditerranée médiévale
Exploitations, transformations, circulations
Nicolas Minvielle Larousse, Marie-Christine Bailly-Maitre et Giovanna Bianchi (dir.)
2019
L’Homme et l’Animal au Maghreb, de la Préhistoire au Moyen Âge
Explorations d’une relation complexe
Véronique Blanc-Bijon, Jean-Pierre Bracco, Marie-Brigitte Carre et al. (dir.)
2021