The naked standing goddess: a group of archaic terracotta figurines from Paestum

AMMERMAN Rebecca Miller, The naked standing goddess : a group of archaic terracotta figurines from Puestum : AJA XCV 1991 203-230. | The source of the CALST UM imagery of 21 naked standing goddess figurines from an extramural sanctuary dating to the first half of the 6th cent. B.C. can be traced to the eastern Mediterranean and the iconography can be associated with Phoenician Astarte or Cypriote Aphrodite. 18502_ The Naked Standing Goddess: A Group of Archaic Terracotta Figurines from Paestum REBECCA MILLER AMMERMAN Abstract The article presents a distinctive group of terracotta figurines from Paestum portraying a naked standing goddess. Excavations at the extramural sanctuary in the locality known today as Santa Venera have led to the recovery of 21 such figurines, which date to the first half of the sixth century B.C. While the technology used in producing the moldmade figurines can be traced ta workshops at Metaponto, the image of the naked goddess itself is almost never represented among the vast corpora of terracottas found at other Greek sites in the West. The source of the imagery is traced to the eastern Mediterranean, where a naked standing goddess is more commonly observed. In the Aegean, the iconography in question can be associated with Phoenician Astarte or Cypriot Aphrodite. In places where the Greeks and Phoenicians came in contact with one another, there is often an overlapping in the persona of the two deities; in addition, a similar conflation sometimes occurs between these two deities and Hera. For the sanctuary at Santa Venera, the argument is thus made, based on the presence of figurines of the naked goddess, that the original patron deity of the cult was related to Phoenician Astarte or Cypriot Aphrodite. Later in the sanctuary’s life, during the Roman period, inscriptions indicate that the cult patron was Venus.* Loi poops avéOyxa reñs mepuxakkès GyoAya, Küngı, teñs hogpijs peotegov ovdév Exwv.! To thee I dedicated a very beautiful image of thy form, Cypris, since I have nothing better than thy form. Whether given in the hope of obtaining divine protection or given in thanks for divine services already rendered, the gifts offered to the gods could be of many kinds. Almost anything—froma lock of hair to a finely crafted gold vessel, from a terracotta figurine to a monumental bronze statue—could be dedicated as a votive gift at a sanctuary.? The choice of the offering was influenced, of course, by the intention of the worshipper as well as by the person’s financial means. Once chosen, the object was set up in the grounds of the sanctuary to serve as a tangible expression of the worshipper's devotion. In terms of what has come down to us in the archaeological record, votive gifts made of terracotta have generally proved to be excellent survivors due to the durable nature of fired clay. This is not generally the case for ex votos made of such perishable materials as wax or wood or for those made of valuable metals, which ne . oS INTRODUCTION In the Greek world, it was common practice to dedicate a votive offering to a deity. The act of dedication could be voiced by the worshipper in such were often melted down to be recycled. Owing to their lack of utility for purposes of recycling, terracottas are instead preserved in large numbers. Among the many votive terracottas recovered from words as the following: the Santa Venera sanctuary at Paestum,? there is one * I would like to begin by thanking John Griffiths Pedley of the University of Michigan and Mario Torelli of the University of Perugia for the interest that they have taken in my research and for their advice and encouragement over the years. 1 am also grateful to Werner Johannowsky and Giuliana Tocco-Sciarelli, the former and present Superintendent of Antiquities of Salerno, Avellino, and Benevento. My special thanks are extended to Angelo Ardovino and Laura Rota, Directors of the Archaeological Museum of Paestum, Marina Cipriani, Antonella Fiammenghi, and Gianni Avagliano, Inspectors of the Superintendency, and all the able staff of the Museum at Paestum. For their help in different aspects of the research, | would like to express my appreciation to the following individuals: Antonio De Siena, Saul Levin, Theresa Menard, David S. Reese, and Maria Luisa Uberti. For preparation of photographs and maps, thanks are given to Aaron Levin, Warren Wheeler, and Ellen Peletz. 1 would also like to thank A/A's reviewers and editors for their comments. Support for this research was provided by a fellowship from the National Endowment for the Humanities and by grants from the Research Council and Division of the Humanities of Colgate University. The following abbreviation is used in subsequent notes: Winter F. Winter, Die Typen derfigürlichen Ter- — o” — American Journal of Archaeology 95 (1991) rakotten. Die antiken Terrakotten 111.1 (Berlin 1903). A recent study by S. Böhm, Die “Nackte Göttin” (Mainz 1990), had not yet appeared when 1 submitted this article for publication. ! Anth. Plan. 16.164. ? For general discussions of votive offering in the Classical world, W.H.D. Rouse, Greek Votive Offerings (Cambridge 1902); F.T. van Straten, “Gifts for the Gods,” in H.S. Versnel ed., Faith, Hope, and Worship (Leiden 1981) 65104; Pensabene et al., Terrecotie votive dal Tevere (StMisc 25, Rome 1980) 25-31. 3 For preliminary reports on the excavations at the sanctuary, W. Johannowsky, J.G. Pedley, and M. Torelli, "Excavations at Paestum 1982,” AJA 87 (1983) 293-303; J.G. Pedley and M. Torelli, “Excavations at Paestum 1983,” AJA 88 (1984) 367-77; J.G. Pedley, “Excavations at Paestum 1984,” AJA 89 (1985) 53-60; P. Sestieri, FA 1953, 131, no. 1710, fig. 39.

Terracotta Figurines from Paestum Abstract The article presents a distinctive group of terracotta Lol uogpñs âvéOnxa tens MEQrxaddés GyaAua, Kongı, tefis woedtis Peotegov ovdév Exwv.! figurines from Paestum portraying a naked standing goddess. Excavations at the extramural sanctuary in the locality known today as Santa Venera have led to the recovery of 21 such figurines, which date to the first half To thee I dedicated a very beautiful image of thy form, Cypris, since I have nothing better than thy form. Whether given in the hope of obtaining divine protection or given in thanks for divine services already rendered, the gifts offered to the gods could be of many kinds. Almost anything—from a lock of hair to a finely crafted gold vessel, from a terracotta figurine to a monumental bronze statue—could be dedicated as a votive gift at a sanctuary? The choice of the of the sixth century B.C. While the technology used in producing the moldmade figurines can be traced to workshops at Metaponto, the image of the naked goddess itself is almost never represented among the vast corpora of terracottas found at other Greek sites in the West. The source of the imagery is traced to the eastern Mediterranean, where a naked standing goddess is more commonly observed. In the Aegean, the iconography in question can offering was influenced, of course, by the intention be associated with Phoenician Astarte or Cypriot Aphrodite. In places where the Greeks and Phoenicians came in contact with one another, there is often an overlapping in of the worshipper as well as by the person’s financial the persona of the two deities; in addition, a similar congrounds of the sanctuary to serve as a tangible expression of the worshipper’s devotion. In terms of what has come down to us in the archaeological record, votive gifts made of terracotta have generally proved to be excellent survivors due to the durable nature of fired clay. This is not generally the case for means. Once chosen, the object was set up in the flation sometimes occurs between these two deities and Hera. For the sanctuary at Santa Venera, the argument is thus made, based on the presence of figurines of the naked goddess, that the original patron deity of the cult was related to Phoenician Astarte or Cypriot Aphrodite. Later in the sanctuary’s life, during the Roman period, inscriptions indicate that the cult patron was Venus.* ex votos made of such perishable materials as wax or wood or for those made of valuable metals, which INTRODUCTION were often melted down to be recycled. Owing to their lack of utility for purposes of recycling, terracottas are instead preserved in large numbers. Among the many votive terracottas recovered from In the Greek world, it was common practice to dedicate a votive offering to a deity. The act of dedication could be voiced by the worshipper in such words as the following: the Santa Venera sanctuary at Paestum,? there is one * I would like to begin by thanking John Griffiths Pedley of the University of Michigan and Mario Torelli of the The following abbreviation is used in subsequent notes: Winter University of Perugia for the interest that they have taken in my research and for their advice and encouragement over the years. I am also grateful to Werner Johannowsky and F. Winter, Die Typen der figürlichen Terrakotten. Die antiken Terrakotten 11.1 (Berlin 1903). A recent study by S. Böhm, Die “Nackte Göttin” (Mainz Giuliana Tocco-Sciarelli, the former and present Superin- 1990), had not yet appeared when I submitted this article for publication. tendent of Antiquities of Salerno, Avellino, and Benevento. My special thanks are extended to Angelo Ardovino and ! Anth. Plan. 16.164. ? For general discussions of votive offering in the Classical world, W.H.D. Rouse, Greek Votive Offerings (Cam- Laura Rota, Directors of the Archaeological Museum of Paestum, Marina Cipriani, Antonella Fiammenghi, and Gianni Avagliano, Inspectors of the Superintendency, and all the able staff of the Museum at Paestum. For their help bridge 1902); F.T. van Straten, “Gifts for the Gods,” in H.S. Versnel ed., Faith, Hope, and Worship (Leiden 1981) 65— 104; Pensabene et al., Terrecotte votive dal Tevere (StMisc 25, in different aspects of the research, I would like to express my appreciation to the following individuals: Antonio De Rome 1980) 25-31. Maria Luisa Uberti. For preparation of photographs and > For preliminary reports on the excavations at the sanctuary, W. Johannowsky, J.G. Pedley, and M. Torelli, “Excamaps, thanks are given to Aaron Levin, Warren Wheeler, vations at Paestum 1982,” AJA 87 (1983) 293-303; J.G. Siena, Saul Levin, Theresa Menard, David S. Reese, and and Ellen Peletz. I would also like to thank A/A’s reviewers Pedley and M. Torelli, “Excavations at Paestum 1983,” AJA and editors for their comments. Support for this research 88 (1984) 367-77; J.G. Pedley, “Excavations at Paestum was provided by a fellowship from the National Endowment 1984,” AJA 89 (1985) 53-60; P. Sestieri, FA 1953, 131, no. 1710, fig. 39. for the Humanities and by grants from the Research Council and Division of the Humanities of Colgate University. American Journal of Archaeology 95 (1991)

of her character. Not only is this her sole vestment but it is the principal hallmark of her divine status: thus, we may speak of a naked goddess.‘ There are two main questions that are raised by this group of votive terracottas at Santa Venera. The first involves the source of the imagery for the figurines; the second concerns the role and meaning of the naked standing goddess within the context of the sanctuary. THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT The sanctuary of Santa Venera, which takes its name from the modern place name of the locality, is situated just south of the city wall of Paestum (fig. 2). Recent excavations at the site, undertaken jointly by the University of Michigan and the University of Perugia, have shown that the sanctuary enjoyed a long history. It is likely that cult activity began there around 600 B.C., soon after the founding of the Greek colony, and continued well into Roman Imperial times. In all, 21 figurines of the naked goddess have been recovered at the site to date (fig. 3). Only 14 examples of this type are known from the other sanctuaries at Paestum. Within the city walls, the Sanctuary of Hera has yielded 10 figurines and the Sanctuary of Athena, one. Outside the Siren Gate on the eastern side of the city, another fragment of a naked goddess was recov- Fig. 1. Terracotta figurine of naked standing goddess from the urban Heraion. H.: 17.9 cm. Paestum, Archaeological Museum 1859. (Photo: author) ered. At the northern boundary of the territory of Paestum, a single figurine was found at the Sanctuary of Hera at Foce del Sele. Finally, one example was present among the votive offerings from the small spring sanctuary at Fonte, 13 km northeast of Paestum.® In other words, the vast majority of the naked goddess figurines—almost three-fifths of the total at Paestum—were found at Santa Venera. If we look more closely at the archaeological contexts in which the figurines are found at the site, it group of particular interest that portrays a standing can be seen that eight of them come from stratigraphical units of Archaic date.” Nine are found in strata woman who is naked except for a single article of (mostly fills) of Classical, Hellenistic, or Imperial date, clothing, a polos, which she wears on her head (fig. 1). It is, in fact, the tall flaring polos that is the sign where they have been redeposited as a consequence * The classic study on the polos is V.K. Müller, Der Polos. Die griechische Götterkrone (Berlin 1915). More recently, N. Weill, Etudes Thasiennes XI: La plastique archaïque de Thasos: Figurines et statues de terre cuite de l’Artemision 1. Le haut illustrated in this article in fig. 1. The other nine figurines may well have come from the same votive deposit. Sestieri 151 also refers to the single figurine from the Heraion at Foce del Sele. For mention of the figurine found near the Siren Gate, M. Cipriani, in Il Museo di Paestum (Capaccio 1986) 60. The figurines from the Temple of Athena and from the sanctuary at Fonte are unpublished. For a brief summary of the finds at Fonte, E. Greco, “Il ‘paesaggio agrario’ dalla fondazione della città alla fine del sec. IV a.C.,” DialArch 1 (1979) 18. 7 Nos. P82 TC69, P83 TCI7, P83 TC25 (fig. 6), P83 TC26, P83 TC35, P84 TC32, P84 TC50, and P84 TC84. 8 Nos. P82 TC19, P82 TC28, P82 TC43, P82 TC54 (fig. archaisme (Paris 1985) 178-95. 5 Johannowsky, Pedley, and Torelli (supra n. 3) 293. 6 Of the 10 figurines from the urban sanctuary of Hera (inv. nos. 1859-68), only one, inv. no. 1859, has been published by P.C. Sestieri, “Iconographie et culte d’Hera a Paestum,” Revue des Arts 5 (1955) 151-52, fig. 4. The same figurine is described in the inventory registry of the Archaeological Museum of Paestum as coming froma votive deposit “del Tempio di Nettuno, SE del 1° Loculo.” The figurine is of later construction activities at the site,’ while four

® Foce del Sele Fonte © Temple of Athena wa ° ie Siren Gate -AHerdion®__-ı FA ® santa Venera Ek) o 1 2km a a | Fig. 2. Sites in the area of Paestum where figurines of the naked standing goddess have been found come from earlier excavations conducted by Sestieri during the 1950s.° Several of the figurines found in Archaic contexts were recovered from strata lying directly under a battuto floor in the Oikos, the main cult building at the sanctuary, or under similar floors of rooms in the structure called the Rectangular Hall. The earliest phase of both buildings (including their battuto floors) is dated to the early fifth century B.C.!° Thus, the date of these floors provides a terminus ante quem of ca. 475 B.C. for the first appearance of the terracotta figurines of the naked standing goddess. A terminus post quem of ca. 600 B.C. is suggested by the date of the earliest Greek pottery recovered at the sanctuary. Stylistic and technical aspects of the terracottas themselves, as we shall see below, indicate a more restricted date: one within the first half of the sixth century B.C. What can be said about the manner in which the figurines were originally displayed at the sanctuary? 8), P83 TC13, P83 TC30, P83 TC31, P83 TC32, and P84 TC12. In addition, a fragment of the torso of a naked goddess (P84 TC47) recovered in the topsoil joins another fragment of the goddess’s head (P84 TC50) found in a sixthcentury B.C. stratum below the Late Archaic floor of Room C of the Rectangular Hall. These joining fragments (fig. 3) exemplify how the site has been disturbed by intervention in antiquity as well as in modern times. 9 Nos. VS 1686-89. For these figurines we lack specific information about the circumstances of their discovery. Handwritten notes stored with the figurines in the Archaeological Museum of Paestum record the dates when the figurines were recovered. The date given on the note associated with no. VS 1686 is 20 March 1957; that with the Fig. 3. Terracotta figurine of naked standing goddess from the sanctuary at Santa Venera. Pres. H.: 8.3 cm. Paestum, Archaeological Museum P84 TC47/P84 TC50. (Photo: A. Levin) three other terracottas is 22 July 1954. For Sestieri’s excavations, see Sestieri (supra n. 3) 131. 10 A date in the first quarter of the fifth century B.C. was first suggested by Pedley (supra n. 3) 55, 57-58.

What do we know about the layout of the early site? It is worth noting the antiquity of the sanctuary with respect to the history of the Greek colony itself. The earliest Greek pottery found in the area of Paestum dates only to ca. 600 B.C., implying that the colony was not established until the end of the seventh century.!! Since the earliest Greek pottery found at Santa Venera also dates to ca. 600 B.C., it would appear that cult activity at the sanctuary was already well established during the early years of the life of the colony. On the other hand, the oldest architectural structures found at Santa Venera date only to the first decades of the fifth century B.C.!? It is possible that the cult was originally practiced in the open air. If this interpretation is correct, a votive figurine of a naked standing goddess was simply left by the worshipper inside the grounds of a sacred temenos, perhaps in the proximity of an altar.!? The fragmentary state of the figurines suggests, in any event, that none was found where it had been placed originally. It is most likely that the figurines, before finally being sealed under the floors of the Late Archaic buildings, were subject to movement and redeposition, often being broken in the process. THE ARCHAIC TERRACOTTA FIGURINES In addition to the 21 figurines of the naked standing goddess, some 200 other votive terracottas, which also date before the time of construction of the Late Archaic buildings, have been found at Santa Venera. In order to assess the position held by the naked goddess figurines within the votive practice of the Archaic cult, it is necessary to consider the entire corpus of sixthcentury figurines. Of primary interest here are the iconographies of the votive figurines and their relative frequencies. Most of the Archaic figurines (about twothirds) portray a goddess best identified as the patron of the sanctuary; one-quarter of the terracottas appear to represent a worshipper. The remaining figurines are female heads that have been separated from their bodies. For these disiecta membra, it is difficult to determine whether they belong to divine or to mortal figures. While the iconography of the terracottas portraying worshippers provides regrettably little specific information about cult practice, it is worth noting a certain number of male figures among Fig. 4. Terracotta fragments of figurines of enthroned goddess from the sanctuary at Santa Venera. Paestum, Archaeological Museum P82 TC22, head; P84 TC46, torso; P84 TC92, skirt. Scale ca. 2:3. (Photo: author) represent pieces recycled from earlier structures at the site, 11 E. Greco, “Qualche riflessioni ancora sulle origini di Poseidonia,” DialArch 1 (1979) 53-54, E. Greco, “La ceramica arcaica a Poseidonia,” in Il commercio greco nel Tirreno the possibility of even earlier cult buildings, which may lie under the nearby modern tomato paste factory, has to be in eta arcaica. Atti del seminario in memoria di Mario Napoli (Salerno 1981) 57. considered. 13 For the basic form of a sanctuary sub divo, consisting 12 Several sandstone column drums and Doric capitals of an altar and temenos, see I. Malkin, Religion and Colonireused in the later structures have been recovered in the zation in Ancient Greece (Leiden 1987) 139-41; and I.E.M. Edlund, The Gods and the Place (SkrRom 4.43, 1987) 38, excavations at Santa Venera. If these architectural fragments

the terracottas portraying votaries. Almost all are sim- 207 appear to be among the earliest figurines at the sanctuary.# The female figurines, for the most part, are moldmade and follow traditional schemes: the standextensively for making votive figurines not only at Paestum but also at Palinuro and at Achaean colonies on the Gulf of Taranto. At these sites, it is known that the figurines were dedicated at sanctuaries associated with a variety of goddesses including Hera, Artemis, ing korai wear either a simple peplos or an Ionic Demeter, and Athena.!® In these cases, the attributes ple, hand-modeled terracottas and several of these chiton and himation and they occasionally hold a wreath in one hand.'> Although figurines of an enthroned goddess account for more than half of the entire corpus of Archaic votive terracottas, they again provide little specific information about the cult. That a hieratically seated goddess wearing a flaring polos was intended held by the goddess do sometimes point to her specific personality. But this is not always the case. What we seem to be dealing with, then, is a generic form of votive offering, suitable for a certain range of female deities. Specific reference to a particular goddess, if desired, could easily be added at the time of production. All that the coroplast had to do was to apply a as a representation of the cult patron is a plausible hand-modeled attribute, such as a piglet or a spear, interpretation, a point that will be discussed more to the basic moldmade figurine.!” As mentioned fully in a later section. But the iconography of the above, however, the figurines dedicated at Santa Venseated figures is so generic that a specific deity cannot be recognized in the clay images. The figurines rarely era normally lack such attributes of individualizafigurines (fig. 4) derive from a single mold series used tion. !# Thus, at Santa Venera one is faced with a situation in which the most abundant group of terracotta figurines points in general toward a female deity. But, the figurines’ lack of specific attributes means that it carry attributes, and the few that are at times present, such as a phiale, may be held by any one ofa number of deities. Moreover, most of the enthroned goddess 137-38. For the fifth-century sanctuary, the excavators be- (Bari 1983) 64, fig. 139. From Saturo: F.G. Lo Porto, “Satyrlieve that the Oikos may have housed an altar. 4 Male figures comprise about one-third of the terracotta figurines portraying worshippers. For two hand-modeled ion (Taranto). Scavi e ricerche nel luogo del più antico examples, see Johannowsky, Pedley, and Torelli (supra n. 3) AttiTaranto 16 (1976) 732, pl. 98.1. From Francavilla: P. Zancani-Montuoro, “I labirinti di Francavilla ed il culto di 301, pl. 37, figs. 21 and 22. 15 A few figurines of a kore holding a dove to her chest insediamento laconico in Puglia,” NSc 1964, 248, fig. 63; FG. Lo Porto, “Recenti scoperte archeologiche in Puglia,” Athena,” RendNap 50 (1975) 138, fig. 12. From Palinuro: R. are also present at Santa Venera. Such figurines were com- Naumann and B. Neutsch, Palinuro. Ergebnisse der Ausgramonly exported from southern Ionia to sites throughout the bungen II. Nekropole und Einzelfunde (RM-EH 4, 1960) 195— Mediterranean. In Italy, the figurines occur at a number of sanctuaries dedicated to several different deities. The iconography of the imported figurines is therefore not to be 96, pls. 60-61. considered a strong line of evidence for questions of local Sestieri (supra n. 6) 155-57, fig. 13a; Zancani-Montuoro (supra n. 16) fig. 16. For such animals as goats, deer, horses, and other quadrupeds, see Sibari III. Rapporto preliminare cult. For discussion of imported Ionian figurines and ample bibliography, see L. Faedo, “Contributo allo studio della coroplastica selinuntina,” ArchCI 22 (1970) 25-54. 16 At Metaponto alone, the figurines are present, e.g., at sanctuaries of Artemis: G. Olbrich, Archaische Statuetten eines metapontiner Heiligtums (Rome 1979) 146-60, 168-82; of 17 For piglet, see Naumann and Neutsch (supra n. 16) 195, pl. 60.2 and 4. For figurines brandishing a spear, see della campagna di scavo: Stombi, Casa Bianca, Parco del Cavallo, San Mauro (1971) (NSc Suppl. 26, 1972) 126-27, fig. 140; Olbrich (supra n. 16) 157, 160, pls. 29, 32.4122 and A130; Lo Porto 1981 (supra n. 16) fig. 32.3 and 4; D. Hera: E. Galli, “Metaponto. Esplorazioni archeologiche e Adamesteanu, D. Mertens, and F. D’Andria, Metaponto 1 sistemazione dell’area del tempio delle Tavole Palatine,” AttiMGrecia (1926-1927) 72-73, figs. 10, 12; of Demeter or (NSc Suppl. 29, 1975) 98, fig. 87d. '8 In addition to the phiale, a single fragment (P85 TC14) of a quadruped, of a type held by figurines found in the Kore: F.G. Lo Porto, “Metaponto (Matera). Nuovi scavi nella città e nella sua necropoli,” NSc 1981, 294, 321-27; and of Persephone: J.C. Carter, “Scavi a Pizzica e Incoronata nei dintorni di Metaponto,” AttiTaranto 17 (1977) 404, 406, pl. 37.1. For examples from Sybaris: in Sibari IV. Relazione preliminare della campagna di scavo: Stombi, Parco del Cavallo, Prolungamento Strada, Casa Bianca (1972) (NSc Suppl. sanctuaries of Hera at Paestum, was recovered from the sanctuary at Santa Venera. If the animal was, in fact, meant as a representation of a horse, the goddess who once held it would be related to the series of Paestan terracottas that have been interpreted as portraits of Hera Hippia by P. From Policoro: B. Neutsch, “Neue archäologische Entdeck- Zancani-Montuoro, “Hera Hippia,” ArchCl 13 (1961) 31-39. As pointed out by M. Verzar, “Pyrgi e l’Afrodite di Cipro,” MEFRA 92 (1980) 54-61, the horse may be associated also ungen in Siris und Herakleia,” AA 1968, 782-83, fig. 33a. From Croton: C. Sabbione, “L’artigianato artistico,” Attiwith Aphrodite, Demeter, and others. The isolated presence of the terracotta quadruped at Santa Venera should not, Taranto 23 (1983) 275-79, pl. 42.1-4. From Taranto: F.G. Lo Porto, “L’attivita archeologica in Puglia,” AttiTaranto 10 therefore, be seen as strong evidence for the identity of the 28, 1974) 36-37, 98, 134, figs. 92, 118-19, nos. 212, 359. (1970) 534, fig. 104; E.M. De Juliis, Archeologia in Puglia terracotta figure who once held the animal.

is not possible to resolve the question of the identity [AJA 95 alone. To establish this identity, it is more productive to turn to the figurines of the naked standing goddess. tween the Paestan figurines and the imagery of the Oriental goddess Astarte?! He preferred, however, to see the terracotta figurines of the naked standing goddess primarily as a representation of “Déesse- Although represented in smaller numbers (compris- Mère Méditerranéenne,” the pan-Mediterranean fering only about 10% of the Archaic figurines), this nology for producing terracottas spread throughout tility goddess worshipped, in his opinion, by indigenous populations at Paestum. Sestieri saw the presence of this iconography among the votive figurines at sanctuaries of Hera as a survival of local preGreek imagery—an imagery that, in his view, may go as far back as the female figurines of the Neolithic period. According to Sestieri, with the Greek colonization of the area, Hera took the place of this indigenous mother-goddess whose concern with fertility was absorbed by the personality of the Hellenic newcomer. In the 35 years since Sestieri published his interpretation, the influence of indigenous ideology on the cults of the early Greek colonists has been explored in great depth”? On the basis of more recent studies, it now appears that there is little evidence for the continuity of indigenous cults at Greek cult centers of the cult’s patron goddess on the basis of this group group may well be the one that is most informative about the nature of the Archaic cult at the sanctuary. TECHNIQUES OF PRODUCTION AND STYLE OF THE NAKED STANDING GODDESS FIGURINES It has long been maintained that the Greeks learned the technique of using molds to make terracottas from Oriental craftsmen, probably coroplasts on the Syro- Phoenician coast, where so many other cultural and technological exchanges took place between the advanced Eastern cultures and the Greeks. In the eighth century B.C., the knowledge of mold technology seems to have arrived first in Cyprus and then in Crete. Between the last quarter of the eighth century and the first quarter of the seventh B.C., this techthe Mediterranean to sites in Ionia and the Greek and that Greek ideology experienced little or no modmainland and onward to sites in Italy.!9 The transmission of mold technology was accomplished by ification as a result of contact with the local inhabitants of Italy. On the contrary, the influence seems to have means either of the exchange of molds themselves or flowed in the opposite direction: that is, indigenous else of the circulation or trade of figurines, which Italic cults over time begin to show a marked Hellenic imprint. Instead of representing Sestieri’s “Déessewere in turn used to make new molds.”° As we shall see below, among the several types of molded terracotta plaques and figurines from the Syro-Phoenician coast adopted by Greek craftsmen was that of a naked standing goddess, who was known to the Phoenicians as the goddess Astarte. Sestieri, who made several observations on the group of naked goddess figurines as part of his gen- Mère Méditerranéenne,” it is more likely that the figurines from Paestum have more direct links with images observed in the eastern Mediterranean. In terms of style, the Paestan figurines stand at the end of a long line of terracotta representations of the naked standing goddess that can be traced back to the East. The naked goddess was particularly well reeral survey in 1955 of the varied iconographies found among the terracottas dedicated in the sanctuaries of Hera at Paestum, noted the general similarities beceived on the islands of Cyprus and Crete where large 19 P.J. Riis, “The Syrian Astarte Plaques and Their Western Connections,” Berytus 9 (1948-1949) 84-85; P.J. Riis, (Stockholm 1937) 596, pl. 203.7-12; J. Karageorghis, La grande déesse de Chypre et son culte (Lyons 1977) 206-207, pl. 34b; V. Karageorghis, Kition (London 1976) 140, fig. “Plaquettes syriennes d’Astarté dans des milieux grecs,” MélBeyrouth 37 (1963) 198. 20 For the exchange of terracotta mold technology, R.L. Miller, “Medma and the Exchange of Votive Terracottas,” Papers in Italian Archaeology 4, Pt. 4: Classical and Medieval Archaeology (BAR-IS 246, 1985) 5-14. 2! Sestieri (supra n. 6) 151-52, esp. n. 10. numbers of figurines with this imagery were made throughout the seventh century B.C. It will be re- 104; V. Karageorghis, Études Chypriotes IX: La Nécropole d’Amathonte, Tombes 113-367 ILI, i: The Terracottas (Nicosia 1987) 21-22; N. Breitenstein, Danish National Museum, Catalogue of Terracottas, Cypriote, Greek, Etrusco-Italian, and Roman (Copenhagen 1941) 4, pl. 4.31-32, 34; Winter 19, figs. 1-6. For Cretan figurines, P. Demargne, “Terre-cuites 22 G. Pugliese Carratelli, “Tempio e culto nella Sicilia greca,” in Il tempio greco in Sicilia. Architettura e culti, archaiques de Lato (Créte),” BCH 53 (1929) 398-400, fig. (CronCatania 16, 1977) 13-14. Also, with further bibliogral’Anavlochos,” BCH 55 (1931) 400-401, fig. 32, pl. 16.3 and phy, M. Torelli, “Greci e indigeni in Magna Grecia: ideologia religiosa e rapporti di classe,” Studi Storici 4 (1977) 45-61. 14, pl. 25.3 and 4; P. Demargne, “Recherches sur le site de 4; D. Levi, “Gli scavi del 1954 sull'acropoli di Gortina,” °3 For Cypriot figurines, many of which are dated to the ASAtene 33-34 (1955-1956) 247-48, figs. 39-42, 48-49; G. Rizza, “Le terrecotte di Axös,” ASAtene 45-46 (1967-1968) sixth century B.C., see E. Gjerstad et al., SwCyprusExp III 221-28, 274-78, 291-93, figs. 5-7; G. Rizza and V. Santa

Fig. 6. Terracotta head of naked standing goddess from the sanctuary at Santa Venera. Pres. H.: 3.6 cm. Paestum, Archaeological Museum P83 TC25. (Photo: A. Levin) called that the mold technology itself needed for making the figurines on Cyprus and Crete derives from the Syro-Phoenician coast. Though clearly inspired by the imagery of the seventh-century Daedalic figurines and plaques, such as those found on Crete and elsewhere in the Aegean, what is striking about the Paestan figurines (with their archaeological contexts of Archaic date) is that they seem to be almost a conscious revival of the Daedalic style. The sharp articulation of geometric forms characteristic of Daedalic figurines has given way to more rounded and integrated volumes and surfaces; the softening in the treatment of the human form betrays the actual date of the Paestan figurines. The triangular shape of the face, balanced on either side by triangular tresses of hair, and the exaggerated proportions of the lenti- Fig. 5. Terracotta heads from the sanctuary at San Biagio. cular eyes conserve a Daedalic flavor. The soft modeling of the flesh of the cheek and the slight prominence of the chin, however, suggest that the coroplast is no longer working fully within the Daedalic tradition. Close stylistic parallels for the terracottas can be found among bronze and alabaster statuettes of kouroi that are more or less the same height as the clay figurines. Two bronze statuettes from the Heraion at Metaponto, Antiquarium: a) 24591, C 189. H.: 4.4 cm, b) C Samos and an alabaster statuette found at Naukratis, 198. H.: 7 cm. (After G. Olbrich, Archaische Statuetten eines a Greek entrepôt on the Nile Delta, are remarkably similar to the fictile figurines with respect to the treatmetapontiner Heiligtums [Rome 1979] pls. 85 and 87) Maria Scrinari, Il santuario sull’acropoli di Gortina 1 (Rome 1968) 161-62, 165-74, pls. 12, 15, 17, 19-21, 24; R.A. Higgins, Catalogue of the Terracottas in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities, British Museum (London 1954) 160, pl. 76.585-87; R.A. Higgins, Greek Terracottas (London 1967) 26-28, pl. 10E; S. Mollard-Besques, Musée national du Louvre. Catalogue raisonnée des figurines et reliefs en terrecuite grecs, étrusques et romaines (Paris 1954) 30, pl. 21.B16971.

Fig. 7. Terracotta figurines of kouroi from the Temple of Apollo. Metaponto, Antiquarium. (After Le Arti 3 [1940-1941] pl. 36, fig. 10) ment of the torso.?* The high-peaked and linearly defined epigastric arch, the swollen volume of the diamond-shaped abdomen, and the flat planes of the flacid pectorals are common to all. The face of the Naukratite kouros—with its oversized eyes, which have the appearance of being applied to the surface of the stone rather than chiseled out of it—also bears a striking resemblance to that of the Paestan figurines.% The kouroi from Samos and Naukratis are dated to the first half of the sixth century B.C. The 24 The terracotta, bronze, and alabaster figurines all measure, when complete, about 20-25 cm in height. For the statuettes and terracotta figurines in general and the absence bronze kouroi, E. Buschor, Altsamische Standbilder 1 (Berlin kouroi is also noted by B.S. Ridgway, The Archaic Style in 1934) 9, figs. 6, 9, 10; and E. Buschor, Altsamische Standbilder Greek Sculpture (Princeton 1977) 32, 66-68. 4 (Berlin 1960) 68, figs. 275-77. For the alabaster statuette 25 Similarly swollen eyes are also present on the centaurs portrayed on the metopes of the “Treasury” at Foce del Sele, dated ca. 570-560 B.C., P. Zancani-Montuoro and U. Zanfrom Naukratis, G.M.A. Richter, Kouroi, Archaic Greek Youths (London 1960) 57-58, figs. 129-30, no. 28. The figure from Naukratis has strong stylistic similarities to Samian sculpture overall. The similarities between the Naukratite archetype used to create the mold series for the Paestan terracottas was most likely made in the first decades of the sixth century B.C., under the stylistic influence of such Ionian workshops as those on Samos. Frequent contact with the city-states of the eastern Aegean and Asia Minor is well attested by the quantities of East Greek pottery brought to the Italian peninsula during the first half of the sixth century of abdominal divisions in East Greek (Milesian and Samian) otti-Bianco, Heraion alla Foce del Sele 11. Il primo Thesauros (Rome 1954) 106, pls. 60, 83, 99-102.

(fig. 6). Although the hair of the figurines differs, the shape and features of the faces are so alike that one might postulate that both the Paestan and Metapontine heads stem from the same archetype or mold series. Much the same situation exists for the bodies of the figurines. Several terracotta kouroi recovered during the course of excavations at the Temple of Apollo at Metaponto (e.g., fig. 7}? resemble the naked female figurines from Paestum (figs. 1 and 8). The principal difference (aside from the obvious one of sex) is that the male figures advance the left leg, whereas the females stand with legs together. The former stance is in accordance with the traditional scheme for an Archaic kouros, the latter with that for an Oriental fertility goddess. The forms and proportions of the torsos of the two groups of figurines suggest that, if the naked goddesses did not derive directly from the same mold series as the kouroi, their roots probably can be traced to the same coroplastic workshop. The similarities go beyond style; they include the techniques used to make the terracottas at the two Fig. 8. Terracotta figurine of naked standing goddess from the sanctuary at Santa Venera. Pres. H.: ca. 10.5 cm. Paestum, Archaeological Museum P82 TC54. (Photo: S. Webb) B.C.% In fact, a fair amount of such imported pottery has been recovered from the Sanctuary of Santa Venera itself 2? While Ionian influence is evident in the style of the figurines, closer examination reveals more direct links with other sites in Magna Graecia. The closest parallels for the Paestan figurines are observed among the coroplastic products of Metaponto. This is seen in terms of both style and technology. The heads of several votive terracottas from the sanctuary at San Biagio (fig. 5)?® are quite similar to those at Paestum sites. All of the figurines are solid and made from a single frontal mold. The lower arms of the figurines are in both cases hand-modeled additions. Among the Metapontine kouroi, two different poses are attested for the forearms of the figurines. In some, stumps of hand-modeled clay form the forwardly extended forearms and upturned palms of the figure;*° in others, clay was added along the flanks of the figure so that the arms are shown hanging straight down.?! At Paestum, the arms of the naked goddesses extend forward according to the former scheme. It is of some interest that such a pose is not represented among the Astarte terracottas or their Daedalic derivatives.3? The gesture of holding both arms forward is commonly found instead on sixth-century terracotta kouroi at Metaponto and elsewhere in Magna Graecia.** 26 G. Vallet et al., Les céramiques de la Grèce de l'Est et leur closely related to the kouroi from Metaponto and may well diffusion en Occident (Naples 1976). 27 This includes pottery from Chios and Samos, as well as derive from Metapontine mold series. 30 Sestieri 1940 (supra n. 29) 101-102, fig. 40; Sestieri some Aeolic bucchero. I would like to thank Theresa Men- 1940-1941 (supra n. 29) 97, pl. 36, fig. 10. 31 Adamesteanu, Mertens, and D’Andria (supra n. 17) 138-39, fig. 143g. % For the traditional gestures in representations of the naked goddess that include 1) holding the arms straight down along the side of the figure, 2) clasping both hands underneath the breasts, and 3) the so-called “pudica” pose, ard, who will be publishing the Archaic pottery from Santa Venera, for this information. See also Johannowsky, Pedley, and Torelli (supra n. 3) 300; Pedley and Torelli (supra n. 3) 374. For Archaic East Greek and Ionian pottery found elsewhere at Paestum, Greco 1981 (supra n. 11) 59-64. 28 Olbrich (supra n. 16) 288, 293, pls. 85, 87, C189 and C198. 29 P.C. Sestieri, “Metaponto. Campagna di scavi (marzo— aprile 1939),” NSc 1940, 101-102, fig. 40; P.C. Sestieri, “Note sull’arte del Metaponto,” Le Arti 3 (1940-1941) 97, see Riis 1948-1949 (supra n. 19) 70-73, 81-85, and Rizza and Santa Maria Scrinari (supra n. 23) 248-49. 33 The pose is present, for instance, on a figurine from Medma, P. Orsi, “Rosarno (Medma): Esplorazione di un pl. 36, fig. 10. Also, Adamesteanu, Mertens, and D’Andria grande deposito di terrecotte ieratiche,” NSc Suppl. (1913) (supra n. 17) 138-39, fig. 143g. Two kouros figurines from Policoro, published by B. Neutsch, “Documenti artistici del santuario della Malophoros a Selinunte,” MonAnt 32 (1927) santuario di Demetra a Policoro,” AttiTaranto 20 (1980) 168, 221, pl. 41.9. pl. 30.3 and 4, should be mentioned here. The figurines are 114, fig. 150, as well as on one from Selinous, E. Gabrici, “Il

Fig. 10. Terracotta figurine of kouros from the sanctuary at Santa Venera. Pres. H.: 7.5 cm. Paestum, Archaeological Museum P84 TC20. (Photo: A. Levin) Fig. 9. Terracotta figurine of kouros from the sanctuary at Santa Venera. Pres. H.: 9.4 cm. Paestum, Archaeological Museum P84 TC21. (Photo: A. Levin) That the gesture of the Paestan figurines, unparalleled among other fictile images of the naked goddess in the Mediterranean, corresponds closely to that of contemporary clay kouroi, bolsters the argument that craftsmen at Paestum remodeled a mold series used for kouros figures—presumably one from Metaponto—to produce the imagery of the naked goddess. Additional support for this interpretation comes from two terracotta kouroi from Santa Venera (figs. 9-10). The male figurines were made from the same mold series used to produce the naked goddesses (e.g., figs. 1 and 8). Such flexibility was achieved without difficulty by the coroplasts at Paestum. Once the cast of a figurine had been removed from its mold, the coroplast could make a male figure by the addition of genitalia; a few strategically placed bits of clay were all that was needed. In order to make a female figure, the molded body was instead left smooth and, by hand, a polos was added to the molded head.*5 It should also be noted that several other mold series employed by coroplasts at Paestum during the sixth century B.C. derive directly from mold series that are well attested at Metaponto. In other words, some of the most common votive terracottas at both sites were made from the same mold series. Two examples are cited here to illustrate the close links between coroplastic workshops at the two sites. The first is a peplophoros figurine from the Santa Venera sanctuary (fig. 11), which belongs to the same mold series as several identical figurines from Metaponto (fig. 12).% The techniques used for making the peplophoros figurines are again the same as those used for making the naked goddess and kouros figurines: a single frontal mold was filled solidly with clay and its back smoothed flat with a sharp instrument; the lower arms were then added by hand. The second 34 Nos. P84 TC20 and P84 TC21. 35 The terracottas that still preserve the head of the figure show that when the polos was added, the back of the head was slightly indented or hollowed out, possibly to reduce the thickness of the clay. In those cases where the polos has broken away, a gray line of unoxidized clay remains, marking the original line of attachment for the polos. One terracotta of the head been indented or hollowed out. The head may instead have once belonged to a male figure. The similarity between the fabric of this fragment and the fabric of one of the fragments preserving the legs of a kouros, P84 TC20, suggests that the two pieces might pertain to the same terracotta figure. fragment of a head without a polos, P83 TC35, does not “Ricerche e scoperte nell’Heraion di Metaponto,” Xenia 1 (1981) 37, fig. 24.6. exhibit either of these features: there is no evidence for the original line of the added clay of the polos, nor has the back 36 Olbrich (supra n. 16) 139, pl. 18, A80; F.G. Lo Porto,

Fig. 11. Terracotta figurine of peplophoros from the sanctuary at Santa Venera. Pres. H.: 7.9 cm. Paestum, Archaeo- 213 Fig. 12. Terracotta figurine of peplophoros from the sanctuary at San Biagio. Metaponto, Antiquarium 23321. H.: 6.6 cm. (After G. Olbrich, Archaische Statuetten eines metapontiner Heiligtums [Rome 1979] pl. 18) logical Museum VS 4536. (Photo: A. Levin) example involves figurines of an enthroned goddess of generic type (fig. 4), which, as mentioned earlier, comprise the most common type of terracotta dedicated at Santa Venera in the Archaic period. Metaponto, where the largest number of these figurines (fig. 13) has been found, is perhaps the strongest candidate for the source of the mold series, although figurines belonging to the mold series have also been recovered in lesser numbers at Sybaris, Heraclea, Tarponto and Paestum than the silence of the written sources regarding links between the two city-states would seem to suggest. Close relationships between Metaponto and Paestum in the sixth and fifth centuries B.C. are documented both in architecture and in coinage. The similarities between the monumental temples at the two sites are well known from the work of Mertens and need no further elaboration here. The numismatic evidence is less well known. Marina Taliercio anto (fig. 14), Saturo, Croton, Francavilla, and Palinhas made the important observation that, in the last uro.” Given the role played by Sybaris in the quarter of the sixth century B.C. the first coins minted by Poseidonia were Metapontine coins that had been overstruck with dies newly fashioned for Poseidonia.*! Given the symbolic value of the coins minted by an ancient state, the appropriation of Metapontine coinage by Paestum has profound implications for not only the economic relations between the two city-states but also their political and cultural histories. If Paestum looked to Metaponto for her first coinage, as now appears to be the case, it should come foundation of Paestum, as mentioned in literary sources, it is tempting to consider Sybaris as an alternative candidate for the source of the mold technology. Notwithstanding the scarcity of finds from the Archaic levels at the site of Sybaris, the mold series of the enthroned goddess is, in fact, attested by a few fragmentary figurines. Other archaeological lines of evidence, however, imply that stronger economic, political, and technological ties existed between Meta- 37 Supra n. 16. 38 Strab. 5.4.13, Pseudo-Scymnus 244-46. On the problematic origins of Poseidonia, see Greco 1979 (supra n. 11) 51-56. % In Sibari I. Saggi di scavo al Parco del Cavallo (NSc Suppl. 1, 1969) 79, figs. 70, 138; in Sibari III (supra n. 17) 79-80, 112, 121, 126, figs. 58, 79, 133, 140, nos. 85, 86, 202, 40 D. Mertens, “Zur archaischen Architektur der achäischen Kolonien in Unteritalien,” in Neue Forschungen 225, 241; in Sibari IV (supra n. 16) 36-37, 98, 134, figs. 92, (1987). I thank her for discussing them with me. 118-19, nos. 212, 359. in griechischen Heiligtümern (Tübingen 1977) 167-96, and Adamesteanu, Mertens, and D’Andria (supra n. 17) 478. 41 The results of Taliercio’s research were presented at the 27° Convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia at Paestum in October 1987, and are to be published in AttiTaranto 27

_ Fig. 14. Terracotta figurine of enthroned goddess from Taranto. (After E.M. De Juliis, Archeologia in Puglia [Bari 1983] fig. 139) be used to make either male or female figurines. At the present time, there is not sufficient evidence to Fig. 13. Terracotta figurine of enthroned goddess from the sanctuary at San Biagio. Metaponto, Antiquarium 29901. distinguish between these two alternatives. In any event, once figurines of the naked standing goddess H.: 20.8 cm. (After Olbrich, pl. 30) began to be made at Paestum, the mold series continas no real surprise then that she also looked to the Achaean colony for the mold technology used in the ued to be used for some time. At least five different generations of the mold series are observed among the 35 figurines found at Paestum.*? What we see, in manufacture of her votive terracottas. other words, is the sustained, long-standing produc- In the case of the naked standing goddess, there tion of this mold series once it made its appearance are two forms that the transmission of technology between the coroplastic workshops at the two cityat Paestum. states might have taken. One possibility is that the Paestan coroplasts adopted a mold series used at Metaponto primarily to make kouros figurines, and remodeled it for their own purposes. The other THE ICONOGRAPHY OF THE NAKED STANDING possibility is that under strong influence from workshops at Metaponto, the Paestan craftsmen created their own more flexible mold series—one that could 42 A considerable effort to locate and identify an example of a standing naked goddess figurine among the votive terracottas found at various sanctuaries in the area of Metaponto was unsuccessful. It seems that no such female figurine is represented among the terracottas recovered to date. Instead, the naked goddess figurines from Paestum find their closest relatives at Metaponto among male figurines of kouroi. I would like to thank Antonio De Siena and the other members of the Archaeological Superintendency GODDESS In order to appreciate the unique position held by the Paestan figurines among Greek colonies in the western Mediterranean, it is useful to review the distribution of the imagery of the naked standing goddess (figs. 15-16). This survey will also shed light on at Metaponto for their much appreciated and cordial assistance in my search for Metapontine terracottas belonging to mold series that are also represented at Paestum. #3 For explanation of terminology, such as generation and mold series, used in the study of molded terracottas, see Miller (supra n. 20) 10-11; and R.V. Nicholls, “Type, Group, and Series: A Reconsideration of Some Coroplastic Fundamentals,” BSA 47 (1952) 217-22.

Fig. 15. Distribution of sites in the western Mediterranean with images of the naked standing goddess: 1) Saturo, 2) Croton, 3) Locri Epizephyrii, 4) Satricum, 5) Marsiliana d’Albegna, 6) Orvieto, 7) Nora, 8) Tharros, 9) Sassari, and 10) Cerro del Carambolo Fig. 16. Distribution of sites in the eastern Mediterranean with images of the naked standing goddess: 1) Kition, 2) Amathos, 3) Vouni, 4) Lapithos, 5) Salamis, 6) Tamassos, 7) Naukratis, 8) Gortyn, 9) Lato, 10) Axos, 11) Lindos, 12) Kamiros, 13) Samos, 14) Ephesos, 15) Sardis, 16) Athens, 17) Corinth, 18) Perachora, 19) Tegea, and 20) Sparta

the contexts in which such images are found. The iconographic type of a naked standing female divinity, [AJA 95 stems ultimately from and heterogeneous manner” in strata assigned to the Archaic period of the site’s history.4° The excavations were conducted on the acropolis of the site where one Asiatic and Egyptian representations of Oriental feror more sanctuaries of the Greek settlement are no as mentioned previously, ulity goddesses. The history of the imagery of such doubt located. In this regard, it is useful to recall a goddesses—Qadesh, Astarte, Neith, and so forth—is summarized by Riis and Rizza** and will not be reviewed here. For our purposes, of more immediate dedicatory inscription to Baoıkig found in previous investigations at Saturo.*” While the epithet Baoıkig concern is the arrival, adoption, and dissemination of world (Persephone at Catania, Demeter in Greece, the imagery in the Greek world and western Mediterranean.* It is best to begin by looking at the distribution in the West itself and then turn to that in the eastern Mediterranean. and Hera at Argos), at Taranto it was used to address Aphrodite.4® The epithet has political and militaristic connotations recalling the bellicose Aphrodite venerated at Sparta, from whence first Satyrion and then the nearby Taranto were founded.* At Croton, an isolated fragment of a terracotta The Western Mediterranean Greek Sites. Virtually every Greek city-state in southern Italy and Sicily has yielded an appreciable number of votive terracottas, often amounting to thousands of figurines. Yet, among the myriad of iconographies portrayed, that of a naked standing goddess is conspicuously absent. Only Saturo (ancient Satyrion), near Taranto, and Croton have each yielded a single terracotta of a naked standing woman. At Saturo, an was used to refer to many goddesses in the Greek relief plaque preserves the hips and thighs of a naked woman.” Since this fragment is a sporadic find, little can be said about its archaeological context. In terms of style, the plaque should date to about 600 B.C.; it appears to be closely related to terracottas made on Crete and it may even have been imported to Croton from that island. Nevertheless, this plaque shares one thing with the Paestan figurines: its occurrence at a unusual hand-modeled figurine preserves the lower torso, hips, and left thigh of a woman whose pubic area is emphasized in paint. The woman holds both hands downward on either side of the navel. In terms of her shrine at Foce del Sele north of Paestum. It is of style, the figurine is of Early Archaic date. DeJuliis, also of interest, a point that we shall return to below, city-state where Hera reigned supreme.5! The fame of the sanctuary of Hera on the Lacinia promontory south of the urban center of Croton was equal to that in a brief report on the excavations, states that terrathat Hera could be styled at both city-states in a warcotta figurines of various types and of different dates were found along with Proto-Corinthian, Corinthian, and Laconian pottery, all deposited in a “confused like fashion as hoplosmia.5? In brief, what may warrant further attention is a pattern of linkage between the overtly sexual image of the naked goddess and sites * Rus 1948-1949 (supra n. 19) 77-84; Rizza and Santa Maria Scrinari (supra n. 23) 248-49. * The survey in this article focuses primarily on examples 2 (1984) 47, no. 361, s.v. Aphrodite (A. Delivorrias). A of the iconography of the naked goddess in which the goddess occurs by herself as a single figurine in the round or as the naked females who form the supports for bronze mirrors, since I believe that these naked women represent not a single figure in relief. The survey does not include the few images of the naked goddess that occur as one element within a more elaborate decorative scheme on such metal objects as gold pendants, silver bowls, bronze shields, horse trappings, and so forth. (Reference to these pieces will, however, be made, where approriate, in the footnotes.) Such gold pendant with a naked goddess from Rhodes, see LIMC second class of objects excluded from this survey is that of goddesses, but rather mortal women. For a fairly complete catalogue of these mirror supports, see L.O.K. Congdon, Caryatid Mirrors of Ancient Greece (Mainz 1981) 14-18, 128— 37, 143-47, pls. 2, 4-7, 10, 12-13, 20. This class also includes the bronze support for a thymiaterion from Albacete in Spain: R. Olmos and M. Fernández Miranda, “El timiaterio items may have been imported from the East and not produced locally at the sites where they are found. It is difficult to evaluate the role played by the naked goddess as a part of the larger, frequently complex, multi-image scenes decorating the surface of these metal objects. On this question, de Albacete,” ArchEspArg 60 (1987) 211-19. see H. Kyrieleis and W. Röllig, “Ein altorientalischer Pferde- % G. Giannelli, Culti e miti della Magna Grecia (Florence 1963) 37-38. schmuck aus dem Heraion von Samos,” AM 103 (1988) 43— 49. Furthermore, the specific imagery that decorated a piece of jewelry or a horse’s harness may have been less valued than the precious metals of which the object was made. In other words, the exotic nature of a gold pendant per se may have been more important to the person who acquired the piece than whatever Oriental imagery (such asa naked standing goddess) made up its decoration. For an example of a © EM. De Juliis, “L’attivita archeologica in Puglia nel 1979,” AttiTaranto 19 (1979) 428, pl. 29.2. 47 Lo Porto 1976 (supra n. 16) 730-31, pl. 101.2. 48 Hesychius, s.v. BaotÀic. 5° Sabbione (supra n. 16) 270, pl. 39.4. 51 For Hera at Croton, Giannelli (supra n. 49) 135-51; and G.F. Maddoli, “I culti di Crotone,” AttiTaranto 23 (1983) # For Hera hoplosmia at Croton, Lycoph. Alex., 856-58. For a warlike Hera at Paestum, M. Guarducci, “Dedica arcaica alla Hera di Poseidonia,” ArchCl 4 (1952) 150-52; and

where the personality of an important female deity, such as Aphrodite or Hera, takes on a belligerent aspect. did indeed preside over important sanctuaries elsewhere in the city: for example, at the temple at Marasa The imagery of the naked goddess, to my knowland at the U-shaped stoa at Centocamere.56 It was at edge, occurs at only one other Greek city-state in the West—that of Locri Epizephyrii, located just to the the latter Locrian sanctuary that the celebrated practice of ritual prostitution, as Torelli argues, was apsouth of Croton on the Ionian Sea. Here, among the parently carried out in honor of Aphrodite.” Mannella cult, it is widely accepted that Aphrodite votive offerings from the Mannella sanctuary dedi- Latin and Etruscan Sites. If the cities of Magna cated to the goddess Persephone, is a small ivory Graecia, with the exception of Paestum, show very figurine of a naked standing female.” The figurine can be dated to the early sixth century B.C., and is little evidence for a naked standing goddess, this is no less the case for Latin and Etruscan sites in central probably an import from the East. From the same Italy, where the image of a naked goddess is equally deposit, there is also a terracotta of a naked standing woman that appears to have been made locally at rare. Only one Latin site and two Etruscan sites have Locri.54 It does not conform strictly, however, to the small, crudely fashioned bronze figurines of a naked iconographic scheme that we have seen in the Paestan terracottas or the ivory figurine from Mannella. The from the sanctuary of Mater Matuta.5® While these Locrian craftsman fashioned a plump, disproportion- “Geometric” figurines, which date to the first half of ate figure by hand, fully in the round. The figurine, the seventh century B.C., are rather primitive, the argument has been made that they are linked to Cypwhich cannot be dated securely to the Archaic period, yielded figurines with this imagery. At Satricum, eight female wearing a solar disc on her head are known is thus iconographically, technologically, and stylistiriot Astarte who came to be identified at an early date cally somewhat of an anomaly. What significance is to with the local Mater Matuta.5° be attached to the presence of these two figurines In Etruria, a small ivory of a kneeling naked woman among the votive gifts offered to Persephone is not entirely clear. On the other hand, perhaps they can is found among the grave goods of a tomb at Marsiliana d’Albegna.° This piece dates to the second quarter of the seventh century B.C. and is commonly thought to be an Oriental import (perhaps from Syria). It is possible that the image of the naked goddess per se may not have been all that important in terms of local religious beliefs and practice; the figurine probably signified more about the status of the deceased individual than about religious beliefs held in Etruria.f! The exotic nature of the ivory figbe better understood if we think more in terms of Aphrodite than of Persephone herself. The importance of Aphrodite at Locri is such that she is shown on many of the votive terracotta reliefs from the Mannella sanctuary—so much so that some scholars have even proposed that she, and not Persephone, was the mistress of the Mannella cult.55 While such a proposal is, no doubt, misdirected with respect to the A.M. Ardovino, J culti di Paestum antica e del suo territorio (Salerno 1986) 113-14. For terracotta figurines of the sixth century B.C. from Paestan sanctuaries of Hera that portray a goddess as hoplosmia, Sestieri (supra n. 6) 156, fig. 13a, Zancani-Montuoro (supra n. 16) fig. 16; and fig. 24 of the present article. 53 The ivory, inv. no. 7200, is unpublished. For the excavations at Mannella, see P. Orsi, “Locri Epizefiri. Resoconto sulla terza campagna di scavi locresi,” BdA 3 (1909) 406-28, 463-82. 54 The figurine is unpublished. 5 H. Prückner, Die lokrischen Tonreliefs (Mainz 1968) 3. % On the cult of Aphrodite at Locri, M. Torelli, “I culti di Locri,” AttiTaranto 16 (1976) 147-56; M. Torelli, “Considerazioni sugli aspetti religiosi e culturali, ” in D. Musti ed., Le tavole di Locri (Rome 1979) 91-101. More recently, M. Guarducci, “Due pezzi insigni del Museo Nazionale Romano: Il ‘Trono Ludovisi’ e L’ ‘Acrolito Ludovisi’,” BdA 33-34 (1985) 1-20. 58 E. Richardson, “Mooned Ashteroth’?” in L. Bonfante and H. von Heintze eds., In Memoriam Otto J. Brendel. Essays in Archaeology and the Humanities (Mainz 1976) 24, pl. 6ac. 59 Richardson (supra n. 58) 22-24; F. Coarelli, Il Foro Boario dalle origini alla fine della Repubblica (Rome 1988) 247-48. °° M. Benzi, “Gli avorii della Marsiliana di Albegna,” RendLinc 21 (1966) 271-72, pl. 3; M. Cristofani and F. Nicosia, “Il restauro degli avori di Marsiliana d’Albegna,” StEtr 37 (1969) 352, pl. 84; L. Bonfante, Etruscan Dress (Baltimore 1975) fig. 161, for illustration and additional bibliography. 61 On the meaning of grave goods, see M. Cristofani, “Il ‘dono’ nell’Etruria arcaica,” PP 30 (1975) 132-52; B. D’Agostino, “Grecs et ‘indigénes’ sur la côte tyrrhénienne au VII“ siècle: la transmission des idéologies entre élites sociales,” AnnParis 32 (1977) 9-17; J-P. Morel, “Greek Colonization in Italy and the West,” in T. Hackens, ND. Holloway, and R.R. Holloway eds., Crossroads of the Mediter- 7 Torelli 1976 (supra n. 56) 150-55. More recently with bibliography, L.S. Amantini, “Ancora sulla prostituzione ranean (Louvain and Providence 1984) 137-38, 156-57, for sacra a Locri Epizefirii,” in Nona miscellanea greca e romana additional bibliography. Also of interest, 1. Morris, Burial (Studi pubblicati dall’Istituto italiano per la storia antica 35, Rome 1984) 39-62. and Ancient Society (Cambridge 1987) 46-52, 140-44. It is worth calling attention here as well to two other precious

urine, covered as it is in gold leaf, may have been more highly prized than its specific iconography. On the other hand, there can be little doubt that the iconography of the other example of a naked standing goddess from Etruria, the so-called “Venus” of Cannicella, possessed a strong cultic meaning for the local population at Orvieto. Here one is not dealing with a small, portable ivory, but rather with a half life-size statue made of Greek marble. Dated to the third quarter of the sixth century B.C., the statue is interpreted as the cult image of an extramural sanctuary located within the necropolis at Cannicella.6? The iconography of the statue, which is probably of vagen een ee — Ionian manufacture, looks back to Aegean models. The breasts of the figure are “detached” from the torso, which is usually explained as the result of damage to the statue. Torelli proposes, however, that this unusual anatomical detail is not accidental and that the image is intended as a portrait of an androgynous Aphrodite, who was worshipped on Cyprus as both Aphrodite and Aphroditos.® Leaving aside the question of whether the breasts of the figure were intentionally fashioned as separable from the statue or “detached” as a result of later damage, the importance of the “Venus” of Cannicella, for our present purposes, resides in the fact that a local population accepted the foreign image of a naked standing goddess as a cult statue to be venerated at an extramural shrine. ——— eeen Punic/Phoenician Sites. If we look further afield, a number of examples of the naked goddess can be seen at Punic/Phoenician sites in other parts of the western Mediterranean. Most of the figurines have been recovered from tombs in Sardinia. Two terracotta figurines come from Archaic graves at Nora and one from a grave at Tharros (fig. 17).54 All three terracottas appear to have been imported to Sardinia Fig. 17. Terracotta plaque of naked standing goddess from objects, identical thin gold laminae embossed with three images of the naked goddess, dating to the mid-seventh Tharros, Sardinia. London, British Museum 11/9. (Courtesy Trustees of the British Museum) century B.C., found in an Etruscan tomb at Narce; M.A. Rizzo, L’oro degli Etruschi (Novara 1983) 284, fig. 112; and to a similar relief in silver from a tomb at Cumae, I. Strgm, Problems concerning the Origin and Development of the Etruscan Orientalizing Style (Odense 1971) 59, 80. 62 A. Andrén, “Il santuario della necropoli di Cannicella ad Orvieto,” StEtr 35 (1967) 50-52, pls. 16-21. 63 M. Torelli, in G. Pugliese Carratelli ed., Rasenna. Storia e civilta degli Etruschi (Milan 1986) 183-84. Another unusual aspect of the Cannicella shrine, in addition to its location in 64 For the terracotta figurines from mid-sixth century B.C. tombs at Nora, see G. Patroni, “Nora, colonia fenicia in Sardegna,” MonAnt 14 (1904) 191, 223-24, fig. 24, pl. 18.1; S.M. Cecchini, “La ‘Statuetta Castagnino’,” RStFen 2 (1974) 193-94, pl. 41.1. For the Tharros figurine, also of the sixth century B.C., Winter 19, no. 5; R.D. Barnett and C. Mendleson, Tharros: A Catalogue of Material in the British Mua necropolis, is the presence of equipment (vats, and so forth) for making wine. The special relationship of Aphrodite to wine is well known, and Torelli sees a strong link between the transmission from East to West of the technology for making wine in the eighth century B.C. and the transmission of the worship of the Cypro-Oriental Aphrodite. On the bisexual nature of Astarte and Aphrodite, see also Coarelli seum from Phoenician and Other Tombs at Tharros, Sardinia (supra n. 59) 280-82. (Paris 1885) 452, fig. 325. (London 1987) 71, pl. 31, no. 11/9. A terracotta from Sardinia, now in Berlin, which is included among naked goddess types by Winter 19, no. 5B, should be excluded. The figure, in fact, wears a transparent garment, which can be seen in a drawing of the terracotta published by G. Perrot and C. Chipiez, Histoire de l’art dans l'antiquité III: Phénicie-Chypre

from the eastern Mediterranean. The same is true of an ivory found in another grave at Tharros as well as one at Cagliari, formerly in a private collection and also said to have come from Tharros.© To these, a third Sardinian ivory from a tomb near Sassari®® should be added. The somewhat naive style of the piece suggests that it was locally made. Again, as in the case of the imported ivory from the Etruscan necropolis at Marsiliana d’Albenga, it is difficult to evaluate the specific religious meaning of such infrequent examples when they form part of the grave goods of a burial. One last figurine remains to be mentioned in the survey of the western Mediterranean: a bronze statuette (fig. 18) found at Cerro del Carambolo near Seville.°” The figurine bears a dedicatory inscription and was evidently imported to Spain from the East. Although the pose of the figure differs from the iconographic type of the naked standing goddess (the naked woman is seated and not standing), the figurine is otherwise consistent with the imagery of the naked goddess. What is of special interest is the Phoenician inscription on the base of this bronze: it states that the statuette was intended as a votive offering to the goddess Astarte. Initially dated by scholars to the eighth century B.C.,68 more recently the statuette has been attributed to the seventh or even possibly the early sixth century.®° The lower dates would perhaps be in better accord with the dates of the other figurines, in ivory and terrracotta, of the naked goddess found elsewhere in the western Mediterranean. Regardless of whether the bronze figurine from Spain belongs to the eighth or the seventh century, it is still the earliest evidence that we have for the identity of one of the deities brought by the Phoenicians to the western Mediterranean. Summary. As the review has shown, figurines of the naked goddess are extremely rare in the western Mediterranean: to my knowledge, in all, there are only 21. When the image is found (obviously with the excepFig. 18. Bronze statuette with Phoenician dedicatory inscription to Astarte on base, from Cerro del Carambolo. Seville, Archaeological Museum 11.136. H.: 16.5 cm. (After Ampurias 28 [1966] 249, pl. 1) 67 J. Sole-Sole, “Nueva inscripción fenicia de España (Hispania 14),” RStOr 41 (1966) 97-108, pls. 1-2; J. Ferron, “La inscripción fenicia de la estatuita de Sevilla,” Ampurias 28 (1966) 246-52; E. Lipinski, “Vestiges phéniciens d’Anda65 The ivories date to the seventh and early sixth century B.C.: E. Acquaro, S. Moscati, and M.L. Umberti, Anecdota Tharrica (Rome 1975) 95, 102, pl. 34.D3; A. Taramelli, “La collezione d’antichita sarde dell’Ing. Leone Gouin,” BdA 8 (1914) 265, fig. 23. The image of the naked goddess also occurs as part of the decoration of two gold pendants found at Tharros dating to the seventh or sixth century B.C.: G. Quattrocchi Pisano, I gioielli fenici di Tharros nel Museo lousie,” Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica 15 (1984) 102-17, pls. 13-14, for most recent bibliography. A naked female holding a dove that forms the support for a bronze thymiaterion from Albacete should be noted here. According to Olmos and Fernandez Miranda (supra n. 45), the bronze was manufactured locally in Spain under the influence of workshops at Cadiz during the late sixth or early fifth cen- Nazionale di Cagliari (Rome 1974) 42-43, nos. 133-34. tury B.C. 68 Sole-Sole (supra n. 67) 106-107. 66 F, Barreca, La civiltà fenicia punica in Sardegna (1986) 246, fig. 229.2. 69 G. Garbini, “Note di epigrafia punica II,” RStOr 42

tion of the sanctuaries at Paestum), it tends to occur as a solitary or isolated piece. In Magna Graecia, there are in fact only three terracotta figurines other than those at Paestum. Similarly, in Latium, Etruria, and on the island of Sardinia, there are very few representations of the naked standing goddess.”° In the case of those figurines made of ivory, all except one (that from a tomb near Sassari) have been interpreted as imports from the eastern Mediterranean. With regard to chronology, dates in the seventh and sixth centuries B.C. are generally attested. It is likely that most of the pieces date to the period roughly between 650 and 550 B.C. Given the isolated occurrences of most of the images, due caution is obviously called for in interpreting their significance at their respective sites. The one case where there is little question is that of the bronze statuette from Seville with its inscription to Astarte. The Eastern Mediterranean In contrast with the West, many images of the naked goddess are found at Greek sites in the eastern Mediterranean. Most of the figurines are terracottas and they are commonly found at sanctuaries. Although [AJA 95 section, the survey begins with the distribution of naked goddess figurines made of ivory, faience, and bronze and then turns to the distribution of those made of terracotta. No doubt the best known examples of the naked goddess imagery in the Greek world are the ivory figurines found in the Dipylon cemetery at Athens.7! The five figurines comprise part of the grave goods of a tomb dated to the third quarter of the eighth century B.C. The statuettes were initially interpreted not as Greek sculptural works, but as luxury items imported from the East. It now seems, however, that they were carved in Attica after Oriental models.” What is important for our purposes (independent of where they were made) is that their presence in a Geometric Attic grave demonstrates the arrival of the Oriental iconography in Athens by the end of the eighth century B.C. The acropolis at Athens has also produced an eighth-century B.C. figurine of a naked goddess in bronze closely resembling the ivories from the Dipylon Cemetery.” The bronze may, like the ivories, be of local manufacture. If that is the case, it nonetheless useful to review this material so that the would provide further testimony for the local adoption at Athens of the imagery of the naked goddess. Ivory figurines and relief plaques of a naked goddess wearing a polos are also found among the votive distribution of the naked goddess imagery in the West can be placed in a more balanced perspective. In this offerings at the Artemision of Ephesos,’* the Heraion of Samos, the Sanctuary of Hera Limenia at Pera- 70 In this context, two other terracotta figurines from Punic sites in the West that represent a naked woman should be mentioned. One was found in a grave (dated to about seventh- and sixth-century B.C. transmission and adoption of the naked goddess imagery in the West. They have therefore not been included in this survey. 600 B.C.) on Motya, off the western coast of Sicily: V. Tusa, 71 E. Kunze, “Zu der Anfangen der griechischen Plastik,” AM 55 (1930) 147-55, pls. 5-8, figs. 40-41. For additional bibliography, see G.M.A. Richter, Korai, Archaic Greek Maidthese figurines are better known in the literature, it is “Relazione preliminare degli scavi eseguiti a Mozia negli anni 1972, 1973, 1974,” in Mozia 9 (1978) 18-19, pl. 11. The other, once in a private collection in Sardinia, has no specific provenience: Cecchini (supra n. 64) 191-99. While the two hand-modeled terracottas were no doubt produced by local craftsmen in the Phoenician/Punic colonies of the West, they ens (London 1968) 21-22, figs. 16-22. 72 J. Boardman, The Greeks Overseas (London 1980) 62- 63. 73 According to H.-V. Herrmann, “Werkstätten geomeare far removed (stylistically and iconographically) from the naked goddesses of the imported ivories and molded terracotta figurines and plaques with which we have thus far been concerned. Another class of images of naked women from small bronze figurine of a naked standing female found on the Acropolis at Athens may be of local manufacture. For Phoenician/Punic sites are those that occasionally occur on votive stelai from tophets on Sardinia, Motya, and at Carfigs. 23-24. A crudely hand-modeled terrracotta figurine from Attica in the Ashmolean Museum, Higgins 1967 (supra thage: see M.L. Uberti, “Le stele,” in Tharros 3 (RStFen 4, 1976) 212, pl. 58.4; S. Moscati, Le stele puniche di Nora (Rome 1970) 37, 121-22, pls. 31-32; S.F. Biondi, Le stele di Monte Sirai (Rome 1972) 34-37, 108-11, 130-32, 165-67, pls. 8— 10, 21, 43-44; P. Bartoloni, Le stele di Sulcis (1986) 57-60, pls. 33-36; S. Moscati, “Nuovi studi sulle stele di Mozia,” RStFen 8 (1980) 189-90, pl. 49b; S. Moscati and M.L. Uberti, Scavi a Mozia: Le stele (Rome 1981) 46-47, 212-25, pls. 133-35, figs. 778-88; and P. Bartoloni, Le stele arcaiche del tofet di Cartagine (Collezione di studi fenici 8, Rome 1976) 72, 86, 150, pls. 18, 164. Since the stelai often date from the trischer Bronzeplastik,” Jd] 79 (1964) 50, figs. 36-38, the good illustration and bibliography, Richter (supra n. 71) 21, n. 23) 20-23, pl. 7A, should also be noted here. 74 For an ivory plaque from Ephesos, D.G. Hogarth, Excavations at Ephesus. The Archaic Artemisia (London 1908) 159, 173, 181, pl. 24.2a, b. 75 Dated to the mid-seventh century B.C., H. Walter, “Ausgrabungen im Heraion von Samos (1952-1962),” ArchDelt 18,B,2 (1963) 294, pl. 340d. Repeated figures of a naked female also appear on other Oriental imports found at the Heraion: bronze reliefs comprising part of the front headband of horse harnesses. One is published by Walter 294, pl. 341; the other, of particular interest for its inscripfourth century B.C. onward and the female figures are tion in Aramaic, is published by Kyrieleis and Röllig (supra sometimes difficult to distinguish from their male counterparts, it is difficult to evaluate them in the context of the n. 45) 37-75. I thank Philip Brize for bringing this piece to my attention.

chora,”® and on the acropolis at Kamiros in Rhodes.” are the geographic distribution of the terracottas rep- Faience figurines of a rather portly naked woman resenting the naked goddess and the possible routes have been recovered in excavations on the acropolis of Lindos in Rhodes’® as well as at Naukratis.”® In of transmission of the imagery. Attention is also paid to the nature of the deities with whom the imagery was associated. Cyprus was apparently the first place where the new mold technology was transmitted from the Levant.® Terracotta figurines and relief plaques based on Syro-Phoenician models of the naked goddess have indeed been found in tombs and sanctuaries at a number of sites on the island including Arsos, Kition (fig. 19), Salamis, and Amathos.** The Cypriot production ofthe figurines has been linked to the continued Phoenician penetration of the island, which began as early as the mid-ninth century B.C., and persisted for several centuries. J. Karageorghis, in her study of the image of the naked female in Cyprus, notes that although the local history of terracottas with such an iconography extends back well into preaddition, mention should also be made of a bronze figurine of a naked female clasping her breasts from the Temple of Athena Alea at Tegea in the Peloponnesos;®® the absence of a well-dated archaeological context in combination with the naive character of the figurine has led scholars to propose dates for the piece ranging from the Bronze Age all the way down to the sixth century B.C.®! More commonly, the image of the naked standing goddess is recovered in the form of baked clay from a sanctuary context. The figurines and plaques are usually moldmade and they appear, for the most part, to have been locally produced. In other words, such votive offerings are not imported exotica. As mentioned earlier, the Greeks learned the technology for making terracottas from molds from the Phoenicians in the eighth century B.C. That some of the earliest moldmade terracottas produced at Greek centers historic times, the figurines inspired by Syro-Phoenician models of Astarte date for the most part to the sixth century B.C.# On the other hand, with regard present iconographical types common among the to the introduction of the worship of Astarte, a ded- Phoenician terracottas is understandable, since the transmission of mold technology normally involves the transmission of the mold’s imagery as well.® The main questions of interest in the following discussion icatory inscription on a vessel from the temple at Kition documents, beyond question, that the cult of the Phoenician goddess had been established on the island by the end of the ninth century B.C.” The 76 For a miniature relief of the late seventh century B.C., see T.J. Dunbabin ed., Perachora 2. The Sanctuaries of Hera change either of molds or of figurines from which new molds Akraia and Limenia (Oxford 1962) 405, pl. 172, A4. are then made: Miller (supra n. 20) 10-12. 77 From the “Great Well” at Kamiros: see Hogarth (supra n. 74) 178-81, pls. 30-31, nos. 9, 11, 15-17, 19. 78 C. Blinkenberg, Lindos 1. Fouilles de V'acropole 1902- 82 The imagery is automatically transferred with the ex- 83 Riis 1948-1949 (supra n. 19) 84-85. # For terracottas from Cyprus, supra n. 23. For the image of the naked goddess as relief decoration on bronze horse 1914. Les petits objets (Berlin 1931) 354, pl. 56, nos. 1285- trappings from the “Royal Tomb” 79 (ca. 700 B.C.) at Sal- 88. amis, V. Karageorghis, Excavations in the Necropolis of Sal- 79 W.M.F. Petrie et al., Naukratis 1 (London 1886) pl. 2, nos. 17-18. 50 C. Dugas, “Le sanctuarie d’Aléa Athéna a Tégée avant le IV“ siècle,” BCH 45 (1921) 357-58, fig. 18, no. 56; M. Jost, Sanctuaires et cultes d’Arcadie (Études Péloponnésiennes 9, Paris 1985) 153, pl. 37.2. amis 3 (Nicosia 1973) 22-24, 81-84, pls. 82-84, 89, 270-72, nos. 155, 165, 178-79, 189-90; on a small bronze plaque from a sanctuary at Vouni, Gjerstad et al. (supra n. 23) 296, pl. 98, no. 596; on a limestone sarcophagus of the first half of the fifth century B.C. from Amathos, A. Hermary, Amanthonte II. Testimonia 2: La sculpture (Paris 1981) 74-83, pl. 8! M.E. Voyatzis, “Arcadia and Cyprus: Aspects of Their 80; and on gold plaques, V. Karageorghis, “A Gold Orna- Interrelationship between the Twelfth and Eighth Centuries ment with a Representation of an ‘Astarte’,” RStFen 3 (1975) B.C.,” RDAC 1985, 158-60, pl. 20.1-3, sees the figurine as 31-35, pls. 7-11; J. Karageorghis (supra n. 23) 152-60. a 12th-century B.C. import from Cyprus and has interpreted 55 V. Karageorghis 1987 (supra n. 23) 21-22. For the date the bronze as possible evidence for religious links between of the initial stage of Phoenician penetration, V. Kara- Aphrodite’s sanctuary at Paphos on Cyprus and ancient georghis 1976 (supra n. 23) 95-96, 101. Arcadia. Delivorrias (supra n. 45) 46 dates the statuette to the eighth century B.C., while Jost (supra n. 80) 153 sees the bronze as Greek work of the seventh or sixth century B.C. Several seventh-century votive bronzes of a plump naked female in Egyptian style have also been found at the Heraion at Samos: U. Jantzen, Samos 8. Agyptische und orientalische Bronzen aus dem Heraion von Samos (Bonn 1972) 13, 16, pls. 14-16. For a crudely fashioned bronze figurine of a naked woman found at Delphi that does not belong to the Oriental tradition of the naked standing goddess, see P. Perdrizet, FdD V. Monuments figures, petits bronzes, terres-cuites, antiquités diverses (Paris 1908) 28, pl. 2.2, fig. 10.2. #6 J. Karageorghis (supra n. 23) 206-208. An Astarte plaque, published by V. Karageorghis 1976 (supra n. 23) 109, 140, fig. 104, does however seem to date before the sixth century B.C. It was found in a bothros associated with the second phase of the Temple of Astarte at Kition, which dates to the eighth and seventh centuries B.C. #7 For inscription, A. Dupont-Sommer, “Une inscription phénicienne archaïque récemment trouvée à Kition (Chypre),” MémAcInscr 44, 2 (1972) 273-94. The earliest phase of the Phoenician sanctuary at Kition dates after the mid-ninth century B.C.: V. Karageorghis 1976 (supra n. 23)

main question that arises, once local production of moldmade terracottas began on Cyprus, is whether the image of the naked goddess was intended solely as a representation of Astarte, or whether it was also associated with another goddess. Among the Greeks, Cyprus was best known as the birthplace of the goddess Aphrodite.*® Already by the time of Homer, who refers to the goddess as Cypris, the belief was well established that the island was her home.*® The poet, for example, tells of her rapid homeward retreat to Paphos on the island once her escapade with Ares is discovered by her cuckold husband.” Unfortunately, the exact origin of the worship of Aphrodite is unclear. While many see her as the Greek version of an Eastern goddess®! and Herodotus (1.105) asserts that her cult was brought to Paphos from Ascalon by the Phoenicians, others maintain that she evolved from a nature goddess worshipped locally on Cyprus well before the arrival of the Phoenicians.” In any event, whether Aphrodite was indigenous to Cyprus or whether she experienced “relocation” there from the East, by the eighth century B.C., both Astarte and she were worshipped on the island.®® The implication is that the imagery of the original naked goddess had somehow been transferred to Aphrodite and that this appropriation took place on the island of Cyprus.’ In addition, we know from inscriptions that by the fourth century B.C., Aphrodite had become fully equated with Astarte.% Not only was Cyprus considered the home of Aphrodite, but it is also considered by many to be the epicenter from which her cult spread throughout the Fig. 19. Terracotta plaque of head and torso of naked standing goddess from the Temple of Astarte at Kition. (After V. Karageorghis, Kition [London 1976] fig. 104) Mediterranean basin. The transmission of the cult 88 Hymn Hom. Ven. 5.1-2, 6.1-2. For complete collection ever, until the late ninth century by a Phoenician votive of literary sources on Aphrodite and Cyprus, K. Hadjioannou, E archaia Kypros eis tas ellenikas Pegas 2 (Nicosia 1973) inscription found in the temple itself, Dugand (supra n. 91). Already by the time of Homer (Od. 8.363-64), Aphrodite is thought to possess a special temenos at Paphos. The goddess worshipped at Paphos is locally called upon, however, as 3-169. 89 Hom. Il. 5.330, 422, 458, 760, 883. 90 Hom. Od. 8.360-66. 9! There is the suggestion, for instance, that the name Aphrodite derives from Attort, the Ugaritic name for the goddess Astarte: J. Dugand, “Aphrodite-Astarté (de l’etymologie du nom d’Aphrodite),” Annales de la Faculté des Lettres et Sciences Humaines de Nice 21 (1974) 73-98. 92 J. Karageorghis (supra n. 23) 109-12; O. Masson, “Cultes indigénes, cultes grecs et cultes orientaux à Chypre,” in Eléments orientaux dans la religion grecque ancienne. Colloque de Strasbourg, 22-24 mai 1958 (Paris 1960) 132-35; and H. Herter, “Die Urspriinge des Aphroditekultes,” in Eléments orientaux (supra) 61—76. For a brief summary of the problem, see W. Burkert, Greek Religion (Cambridge, Mass. 1985) 152-53. 93 Cult activity began at the site of the Sanctuary of Astarte at Kition and at that of Aphrodite at Paphos in the Bronze Age. The Phoenician Astarte is not attested at Kition, howand its associated imagery may have taken a variety of forms. A specific instance of the transmission of “&v0.000,” Masson (supra n. 92) 135, until the third century B.C. when the name Aphrodite finally begins to appear in votive dedications, O. Masson and M. Sznycer, Recherches sur les Phéniciens à Chypre (Geneva 1972) 86. % A. Aloni, “Eteria e tiaso: I gruppi aristocratici di Lesbo tra economia e ideologia,” DialArch 1 (1983) 30; Burkert (supra n. 92) 153. 95 A bilingual text of a gravestone found at Athens of a Phoenician from Ascalon names Astarte and Aphrodite as the same goddess. I would like to thank Saul Levin for bringing to my attention this inscription and two Delian inscriptions of later date that also equate Astarte with Aphrodite Ourania: S. Levin, “The Perfumed Goddess,” Bucknell Review 24 (1978) 56-57, n. 15. Finally, at Aphrodite’s principal shrine at Paphos, a Phoenician inscription of the third century B.C. demonstrates that the Phoenician formula used to address Astarte was identical to the one used for

imagery from the Paphian cult on Cyprus to other parts of the Mediterranean may be exemplified in a story preserved by Athenaeus (15.675). Here we learn of a certain Herostratos, a wealthy seafaring merchant from Naukratis, who bought a small statuette of Aphrodite during a visit to her celebrated sanctuary at Paphos. The statuette is spoken of as &yaApatiov (that is, in the diminutive form); it is further described as onıdauıatov, which means that the object is small enough to fit between the thumb and small finger of an outstretched hand. Herostratos’s statuette, in other words, was essentially the same size as our figurines. Upon his return to the northern coast of Egypt, Herostratos was caught in a violent storm. He and his companions turned to the small statuette of Aphrodite and beseeched the goddess to save them from their plight. Their prayers, we are told, were answered: the storm calmed and branches of myrtle (a plant of particular significance for Aphrodite) made their sudden appearance beside the statuette. Herostratos, in thanks for his salvation, dedicated both the &yaluatiov of Aphrodite and the myrtle branches at her shrine in Naukratis. This eventful voyage is said to have taken place at the time of the 223 ture of the cult statue of Aphrodite set up in her sanctuary at Naukratis.% During the course of the seventh century B.C., the imagery of the naked standing goddess made its way to a number of Greek sites in the Aegean, Asia Minor, and on the mainland. In most cases, the terracottas are of Daedalic style and date from the middle of the seventh to the early sixth century B.C. As at Paestum, the naked goddess usually takes the form of a locally produced terracotta. The figurines are again found for the most part at sanctuaries where they have been dedicated as votive offerings. Crete proved to be fertile ground for the reception of the imagery. Figurines and relief plaques portraying the naked goddess are found at many sites on the island; the naked goddess is particularly well represented at Axos and Gortyn (fig. 21).1°° As is well known, strong links between Cyprus and Crete in the eighth and seventh centuries are shown by other archaeological materials.!%! Canciani, in his study of the Orientalizing bronzes of the eighth and seventh centuries B.C. from Crete, sees evidence for these links, for example, in the presence on Crete of several bronze shields (which Canciani sites in the Mediterranean is thought to have occurred.” In light of the story of Herostratos, a terracotta relief from Naukratis dating to the late seventh holds to be of Cypriot manufacture) whose decoration happens to include figures in relief of the naked standing goddess.!°? Such exchange forms the context for trying to understand the transmission of the imagery of the naked goddess in the Aegean. Much the same cultural contact may account for the transfer to Crete of the mold technology used to make the terracotta figurines and plaques of the naked goddess. century B.C. assumes a new interest.’ This small On the other hand, there is also good evidence for terracotta (fig. 20) portrays a naked goddess standing in a small aedicula or shrine. On her left is placed a mirror and on her right an alabastron. In the context of the passage from Athenaeus, one is tempted to direct exchanges between the Levantine coast and Crete. This may have been an alternative pathway for the transmission of mold technology to Crete. interpret the terracotta as a representation in minia- Greek terracottas, that it was on Crete that the Syro- Aphrodite, suggesting that at Paphos, the one goddess was columns supporting a lintel in the form of a winged solar identified with the other: Masson and Sznycer (supra n. 93) disc creates an architectural frame around the goddess, G. 23rd Olympiad (688-685 B.C.). Although such an early date conflicts with other evidence for the founding of Naukratis,% it is in accord with the time when the transfer of mold technology from Cyprus to other 81-86. 9% Boardman (supra n. 72) 121-22. 7 Riis 1948-1949 (supra n. 19) 84-85. The transfer of mold technology from the Levant to other sites in the Mediterranean may, of course, have been direct and not employed Cyprus as a stepping stone. ® Higgins 1954 (supra n. 23) 404, pl. 208.1542. A small marble relief from Naukratis, now in the Allard Pierson Museum in Amsterdam, also depicts a naked female who stands next to what may be interpreted as a window, Delivorrias (supra n.45)47, no. 362. The presence of the window calls to mind the Aphrodite Parakyptousa of Salamis in Cyprus and her Eastern connections: C. Grottanelli, “Servio Tullio, Fortuna e l’Oriente,” DialArch 5 (1987) 73-78. * The image of a naked goddess standing in an Egyptianizing shrine also appears in repoussé on a bronze bowl of Phoenician manufacture, dating to the second half of the eighth century B.C., found at Olympia: a pair of papyrus Higgins suggests, for instance, in his general study of Markoe, Phoenician Bronze and Silver Bowls from Cyprus and the Mediterranean (Berkeley 1985) 154, 204, 316-17. 100 Supra n. 23. lot J.N. Coldstream, “Some Cypriot Traits in Cretan Pottery, c. 950-700 B.C.,” in Acts of the International Archaeological Symposium “The Relations between Cyprus and Crete, ca. 2000-500 B.C.” (Nicosia 1979) 257-63; and F. Canciani, Bronzi orientali e orientalizzanti a Creta nell’VIII e VII sec. a.C. (Rome 1970) 191-96. Boardman (supra n. 72) 36-37 sees links between the islands from the 10th through the eighth centuries B.C., but holds that there was a significant decline in Cypriot-Cretan relations in the seventh century B.C.: J. Boardman, “Crete and Cyprus in the Seventh Century B.C.,” in Cyprus and Crete, ca. 2000-500 B.C. (supra) 264-68. 102 Canciani (supra n. 101) 20-22, 110-11, 190-96. 103 Markoe (supra n. 99) 116-17; J.W. Shaw, “Phoenicians in Southern Crete,” AJA 93 (1989) 180-82.

Fig. 20. Terracotta plaque of naked goddess standing in aedicula from Naukratis. London, British Museum 86.4— 1.1543. H.: 10 cm. (Courtesy Trustees of the British Museum) Phoenician plaques of Astarte evolved into the Daedalic plaques that subsequently made their appearance at sites throughout Greece.!°* In other words, the routes by which the mold technology of the Astarte plaques spread throughout the Mediterranean may initially have sidestepped Cyprus. In the Aegean, figurines of the naked goddess are found at sites on the island of Rhodes! and at the sanctuary of Hera on Samos.!° In Asia Minor, terracotta figurines have been recovered from the Artemision at Ephesos;!° there is a single one from Sardis.!% Schmidt, in his study of Cypriot sculptures from the Samian Heraion, argues for close ties between Cyprus, Naukratis, Rhodes, and Samos in the seventh century B.C. with regard to the exchange of sculpture as well as mold technology.!® The image of the naked goddess seems to have traveled within a wide circuit of exchange and contact in the southeastern Mediterranean.!!° 104 Higgins 1967 (supra n. 23) 28. 105 For Rhodes, see Blinkenberg (supra n. 78) 496, pl. 93, no. 2071; Higgins 1954 (supra n. 23) 37, pl. 3.16-18. A solid, hand-modeled figure of a naked woman from Kamiros, which dates ca. 700 B.C., should also be noted: Higgins 1967 (supra n. 23) 19-20, pl. 6D. Naively fashioned terracottas of naked women have also been found at Thera: H. Dragendorff, Thera 2. Theräische Gräber (Berlin 1903) 306-307, fig. 494a-c; and at Corinth: G.R. Davidson, Corinth XII: The Minor Objects (Princeton 1952) 24, pl. 1.18. 106 D. Ohly, “Frühe Tonfiguren aus dem Heraion von Samos 1,” AM 66 (1941) 5, 35, pl. 33, no. 232. Also, G. Fig. 21. Terracotta figurine of naked standing goddess from Gortyn. Heraklion, Archaeological Museum 11306. H.: 16.9 cm. (After G. Rizza and V. Santa Maria Scrinari, I santuario sull’acropoli di Gortina I [Rome 1968] pl. 15) Schmidt, Samos 7. Kyprische Bildwerke aus dem Heraion von Samos (Bonn 1968) 16, 19, pl. 29, no. 2395. 107 Higgins 1954 (supra n. 23) 144, pl. 71.529; Ohly (supra n. 106) 35-36, fig. 8, B117. 108 Mollard-Besques (supra n. 23) 53, pl. 36.B343. 109 Schmidt (supra n. 106) 113-19. Only one Cypriot figurine from the Heraion seems, however, to portray a naked standing female. 110 For discussion of Aegean trade networks within which Phoenician goods were exchanged, see Markoe (supra n. 99)

In terms of the distribution in mainland Greece, several votive terracottas of the naked standing goddess are found at the Menelaion and the Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia at Sparta.!!! The imagery is also attested in the case of Corinth by an imported terracotta plaque of Astarte.!!? Given the prominence of Corinth, both as an emporion and as the center of an important cult of Aphrodite, which included the Oriental practice of ritual prostitution, the presence of the naked goddess iconography comes as no surprise.!! Near Corinth, at Perachora, we have already observed a small ivory plaque from the port sanctuary of Hera Limenia that portrays the naked goddess. The iconography may also be present among the votive terracottas from the sanctuary. An early sixthcentury B.C. figurine from the site (fig. 22) has traditionally been identified as a kouros, despite the clear prominence of the figure’s breasts.!!* But, it may well be that here too, the coroplast wished to create an image of a naked goddess, not a male kouros. Nor was the ambiguity of the sex of the figure necessarily unintentional. Another early terracotta from the same sanctuary at Perachora portrays a woman clasping her breasts and rising from a scrotal sac—that is, Aphrodite born from the castrated Ouranos.!!5 The goddess shown in this terracotta is, however, bearded. The bisexuality of the bearded figure recalls that of the Cannicella “Venus” from Orvieto and may likewise be a reflection of the bisexual character of Aphrodite/A phroditos. Summary. There are several points worth stressing with regard to the distribution of the imagery of the naked goddess in the eastern Mediterranean. The first is that the iconography has a much wider distri- 111 Most date to the mid-seventh century B.C. From the Menelaion, M.S. Thompson, “Excavations at Sparta, 1909. The Menelaion. The Terracotta Figurines,” BSA 15 (19081909) 123, fig. 4, no. 60. From the Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia, J. Farrell, “Excavations at Sparta, 1908. Archaic Fig. 22. Terracotta fragments of naked standing goddess Terracottas from the Sanctuary of Orthia,” BSA 14 (1907— 1908) 65-69, fig. 7a-e, k; Higgins 1967 (supra n. 23) 51, pl. 21G; R.M. Dawkins ed., The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia at Sparta (London 1929) 152, 159-60, pl. 36, fig. 114. from the sanctuary of Hera Limenia at Perachora. Athens, 112 Davidson (supra n. 105) 29, pl. 6.85, dated to the sev- 91, no. 42a) enth century B.C. National Museum 16503, 16503a. H.: 13.3 cm, head and torso; 7.3 cm, left leg. (After H. Payne, Perachora 1. The Sanctuaries of Hera Akraia and Limenia [Oxford 1940] pl. 113 Recently on the cult of Aphrodite at Corinth, Guarducci (supra n. 56) 10-11. For pertinent bibliography on ritual prostitution associated with the worship of Astarte in the Near East and in the West (at Eryx, Sicca Veneria, and Pyrgi) cluded. For good illustrations, Richter (supra n. 24) 68, figs. and of Aphrodite at Paphos, Corinth, and Locri Epizephyrii, see C. Grottanelli, “Santuari e divinita delle colonie d’Occidente,” in La religione fenicia. Matrici orientali e sviluppi example, with representations of the naked goddess at Goroccidentali (Rome 1981) 128-29. 24, nos. 152-53. In this context, note should also be made 114 H. Payne, Perachora 1. The Sanctuaries of Hera Akraia and Limenia (Oxford 1940) 207, pl. 91, no. 42. The excavators reject the idea that the figurine represents a female, but note that such an identification cannot be entirely exof another figurine of a naked female, modeled crudely by 163-65, no. 44. The figurine has much in common, for tyn: Rizza and Santa Maria Scrinari (supra n. 23) pls. 4 and hand, also found at Perachora, published by Payne on pl. 115, no. 304. 115 Payne (supra n. 114) 231-32, pl. 102, no. 183a.

bution in the East than in the West. In addition, it terracottas portraying the naked goddess began to be appears that it can be traced back to the Levantine made at Paestum. Not only is there a time lag between the East and the West but what is found at Paestum is unique in the West; there is no evidence for the production of such figurines at other Greek colonies coast and that its spread to the Greek world passed through Cyprus or Crete or perhaps some combination of the two. There is good evidence on Cyprus itself that imagery appropriate to Phoenician Astarte in Magna Graecia. Nor elsewhere in the western Medwas transferred to Cypris, the Greek Aphrodite. iterranean—at Latin, Etruscan, and Punic sites—is While ideally, one would like to trace the exact pathway of transmission for the iconography (as well as, in the case of terracottas, the technology for generthere evidence for the local production of terracotta figurines of the naked standing goddess. Thus, at ating such images from molds), it is unclear the extent Paestum we are concerned with a rather special case of the adoption in the West of an imagery that is well to which this can be done on the basis of the published evidence. For our present purposes, what matters is that the image of the naked goddess is well established established in the East. In tracing how the figurines came to be made at in the Aegean world at an early date. In terms of chronology, the process of transmission may well go back, in the case of Cyprus and Crete, to the eighth terms, the mold technology itself derives from Metaponto. Such borrowing of technology fits in well with century B.C. In any event, the iconography has a wide distribution in the Aegean and mainland Greece by public architecture and coinage. On the other hand, the beginning of the seventh century B.C. Finally, with regard to the contexts in which the terracottas Paestum, it is possible to show that, in mechanical what we know of other links between the two sites in this new knowledge of shared aspects of technology does not help in resolving the question of the source of the imagery, since representations of the naked are found, what is often involved are votive offerings, goddess are not found at Metaponto. This means, in figurines and plaques, dedicated at sanctuaries. A effect, that the exact pathway that brought the naked goddess to Paestum cannot be reconstructed at the present time. In general terms, there are two main possibilities worth bearing in mind. One of these would involve transmission, more or less directly, further observation to be made—a consideration that we shall return to in the closing discussion—is that the image of the naked goddess occurs not only at places where Aphrodite is worshipped, but also at places closely associated with the goddess Hera. DISCUSSION Having reviewed the distributions in the eastern and western Mediterranean, it is time to return to the first question posed in the introduction, the origins of the imagery of the naked goddess at Santa Venera. In terms of iconography, as noted earlier, it is the addition of the polos to the figurines (which might otherwise be interpreted as representations of mere mortals) that gives them their divine status. Thus, we from a Greek site in the eastern Mediterranean to the newly founded Greek colony in southern Italy. The other possibility would allow for a more direct contribution from the Phoenicians themselves. It is well known that the Phoenicians brought the cult of Astarte to the West; the Oriental goddess was worshipped at such sites as Pyrgi, Cagliari, Malta, and Eryx.!!6 The Erycine sanctuary on the west coast of Sicily, as perhaps the most celebrated cult, was instrumental in the spread of her worship to other places in the western Mediterranean.'!? As shown by the are warranted in trying to discover the source of imagery for a naked goddess. As we have seen, and bronze statuette from Seville with its Phoenician inthis comes as no real surprise, the imagery derives in the form of a naked goddess. At the same time, from the Aegean world, where ultimately it can be given the small number of terracottas in the West that scription, Astarte was in some places even worshipped traced back to Syro-Phoenician representations of the portray the naked standing goddess, we are not in a goddess Astarte. Moreover, it was on Cyprus that the imagery for the Oriental goddess was transferred to her Greek counterpart, Aphrodite. As we have also good position to evaluate the potential contribution seen, by the middle of the seventh century B.C., the image of the naked standing goddess is observed on of Phoenician influence. We cannot resolve whether those who transmitted the imagery of the naked goddess to Paestum were Greeks or Phoenicians or perhaps even some combination of the two. date, the first half of the sixth century B.C., that The second question to consider is that of the role and meaning of the figurines of the naked standing goddess for cult practice at the sanctuary of Santa 116 Grottanelli (supra n. 113) 115-29; M. Fantar, “A propos Forum Boarium at Rome, see Coarelli (supra n. 59) 324-25. terracottas at such sites as Gortyn, Rhodes, and Corinth in the Greek world. However, it is only at a later d’Ashtart en Mediterranée occidentale,” RStFen 1 (1973) 19-29. For the relationship between Astarte and Fortuna, who was worshipped at the sanctuary of S. Omobono in the 17 §. Moscati, “Sulla diffusione del culto di Astarte Ericina,” OA 7 (1968) 91-94.

Venera. The fundamental issue concerns the interpretation of the figurines in religious terms. Simply stated, can anthropomorphic figurines be interpreted as representations of the deity to whom they were dedicated? Opinions vary on this question.!!® Nor is it likely that an unqualified, comprehensive answer can ever be given.'!® In the Greek world, variations in the practice of cult from one polis to the next—not to mention between the different cults celebrated within a single city-state—are manifold. The complexity of religious behavior at a single moment, much less the evolved palimpsest of rites that normally develops over the extended life of a sanctuary, is a formidable obstacle to scholarly efforts, based on broad surveys, to provide a simple, standardized answer. It is probably more productive to focus in detail on dedicatory practices within the context of a single city-state. Among the thousands of votive figurines from the sanctuaries at Paestum, it appears that the most commonly dedicated terracotta in the Archaic period was that of a hieratically seated goddess who wears, as a mark of her divine status, a tall, flaring polos (fig. 4). The figurine occurs at all of Paestum’s sanctuaries, including that at Santa Venera. In some cases, we know the name of the deity to whom the figurines 227 Venera but also at other Paestan sanctuaries, such as the urban sanctuary of Hera. This implies that, in terms of ritual practice, the dedication of the imagery was considered appropriate, at some level, at different cult places within the city-state. The presence of votive images of more than one deity at a given sanctuary may simply indicate that representations of other deities were considered suitable and pleasing gifts to the patron deity.!?! It is worth remembering, however, that in the Greek world, subsidiary deities could also be worshipped within a sanctuary presided over by another deity.'?? Thus, it is reasonable to postulate, for example, that the 10 figurines of the naked goddess recovered at the urban sanctuary of Hera imply that a deity, such as Astarte or Aphrodite, was venerated, at least in the Archaic period, within Hera’s spacious temenos where there are thought to have been several subsidiary shrines to deities other than the presiding goddess. '?3 With regard to Santa Venera, the sanctuary, as seen above, has yielded the vast majority of naked goddess figurines recovered at Paestum. Of perhaps even greater importance is the fact that the earliest figurines to be made from the mold series of the naked goddess are those dedicated at Santa Venera. All of the 35 terracottas of the naked goddess found at were dedicated. Inscriptional evidence, for instance, Paestum, as mentioned earlier, belong to the same identifies the patron of the large sanctuary in the southern part of the urban center as Hera.!? It is certainly plausible then to interpret the enthroned goddess figurines dedicated in large numbers within mold series. By means of close examination of the this temenos as representations of Hera. It should be over a certain length of time. At the site of Santa stressed, however, that the figurines, which all derive from the same mold series, are quite generic in charfigurines, it is possible to distinguish several different generations of the mold series, which implies that the figurines were produced by workshops at Paestum Venera, four successive generations of the mold series the naked goddess were dedicated not only at Santa are observed. Of the 10 figurines from the urban sanctuary of Hera, one belongs to the third generation of the mold series, while the other nine figurines document a fifth generation (not present at Santa Venera). At the four other cult places where an image of the naked goddess has been recovered, only later 118 C, Renfrew, The Archaeology of Cult. The Sanctuary at Phylakopi (London 1985) 4, 22-24, provides a framework teri per l’esegesi dei pinakes locresi,” Prospettiva 10 (1977) acter. Thus, when such figurines are found at another sanctuary, they may well have been intended as representations of some other female deity. At the same time, we also know that figurines of for addressing the question. For a pessimistic point of view, Davidson (supra n. 105) 17; and A.N. Stillwell, Corinth XV, Pt. 2: The Potters’ Quarter (Princeton 1952) 8-9. For additional bibliography as well as an attempt to answer the more specific question of whether a figurine can be seen as a representation of a cult statue of a deity, see B. Alroth, Greek Gods and Figurines (Uppsala 1989) 15-18, 65-66, 106-108. 11° This certainly is the case for the study of Alroth (supra n. 118) 15-64, 106-108, who examines the more limited problem of the links between figurines and the cult image at a number of different sanctuaries. '20 Guarducci (supra n. 52) 145-52, Ardovino (supra n. 52) 109-11. '21 Renfrew (supra n. 118) 4, 22-23; Alroth (supra n. 118) 113. 122 Alroth (supra n. 118) 66. For example, E. Simon, “Cri17-18, interprets the different deities depicted on the terracotta pinakes from Locri Epizephyrii as obpBapot of the principal deity of the Mannella sanctuary. 88 Ardovino (supra n. 52) 109-12. For a shrine of Aphrodite and Hermes within the Sanctuary of Hera at Samos, M. Torelli, “Il santuario greco di Gravisca,” PP 32 (1977) 450. The proximity of the shrines of Hera and Aphrodite at the Etruscan port of Graviscae may also be a reflection of a special alliance between the goddesses. It is also worth noting that at Paestum in the urban sanctuary dedicated to Athena, the existence of a subsidiary shrine to Aphrodite has also been postulated on the basis of the iconography of terracottas from a Hellenistic votive deposit: M.P.C. Sestieri, “Ricerche poseidoniati,” MEFR 67 (1955) 40.

generations of the mold series are found. Thus, with its 21 figurines, Santa Venera is both the sanctuary with the largest number of figurines and the one where the earliest generations are found. The inference to be drawn is that more figurines of the naked goddess were used in cult practice at Santa Venera than elsewhere at Paestum and that Santa Venera was the first place where figurines of this kind were dedicated. In other words, the sanctuary of Santa Venera has priority in terms of dedicatory practices regarding the image of the naked goddess. Given the chronological precedence and the relative abundance of the naked goddess figurines, in combination with the generic quality of the other figurines representing a divinity found at the sanctuary, the real question becomes whether we want to interpret the naked goddess figurines as representing the patron deity of the cult or, if not the principal goddess, a secondary goddess, who assumed comparatively greater importance at Santa Venera than at any other Paestan sanctuary. My own view, and the reasons for this will become clearer below, is that the figurines represent the patron deity, a goddess related to Phoenician Astarte or Cypriot Aphrodite. To what extent are other lines of evidence at the site in accord with this interpretation? Without going into a detailed discussion of the findings of the excavations at Santa Venera here, it is useful to see if they offer support for this identification. We have already [AJA 95 temenos.!25 At Himera, a similar temenos dating to the sixth century B.C. precedes temples A and B, which Aloni has recently proposed were dedicated to Aphrodite.!?6 If we return to Aphrodite's home on Cyprus, we see that her principal shrine at Paphos is characterized by dozens of open-air altars heaped daily with burning incense.!2” The location of Santa Venera—outside the walls of the city—is also consistent with what we know about other sanctuaries of the goddess. '*® The extramural sanctuary of Aphrodite at Locri Epizephyrii, the U-shaped stoa at Centocamere, comes immediately to mind.!29 It will be recalled that, even in the first century B.C., the Roman architect Vitruvius still advocated that shrines to the goddess be built extra urbem.139 There is nothing among the votive offerings and the other objects of Archaic date at the site of Santa Venera that appears to be in conflict with the interpretation. The amber pendants, ivory pins, pyxides, and alabaster alabastra—all part of the mundus muliebris—speak to the goddess’s concern for kosmesis.!?! Large numbers of sixth-century aryballoi and other containers for perfumed oils as well as a certain number of thymiateria for the burning of incense have also been found at the site and would similarly find an appropriate place in the worship of the goddess. !*? Among the terracottas themselves, the generic figurines of a seated goddess are in no way at odds with the persona of Aphrodite, as we have already seen. seen that, up to the time of the construction of the The figurines of the male votaries, which occur in a first monumental buildings in the early fifth century, the cult may have been practiced in the open air. Such an open-air temenos would also be appropriate for the worship of Phoenician Astarte and Cypriot Aphrodite (although an open-air setting was in no way certain number at the sanctuary, can be interpreted exclusive to these goddesses). In the western Mediterranean, several of Astarte’s shrines take the form of open courtyards surrounded by porticoes;!4 a similar arrangement can also be observed at sanctuaries of Aphrodite. For example, at Graviscae in southern Etruria, the earliest phase of the sanctuary dedicated to Aphrodite is characterized by a simple open-air as representations of the goddess’s seafaring clientele. The terracotta models of animals and fruit recovered at the site would conventionally be seen to stand for either first-fruits that were offered to the deity, or else for animals and other foods that were sacrificed in her honor. It is of interest that the most common model is that of a bird, possibly a dove, whose association with Aphrodite is well known.'?3 The faunal evidence from the sanctuary documents a notable abundance of bird remains as well. The animal bones recovered from pre-Roman contexts at 124 Grottanelli (supra n. 113) 124, at Malta, Eryx, and 181 Johannowsky, Pedley, and Torelli (supra n. 3) 301, pl. Cadiz. 125 Dated 600-480 B.C., Torelli (supra n. 123) 400. 126 Aloni (supra n. 94) 30. 127 Verg. Aen. 1.416-17, Stat. Theb. 5.61, who describe the 37, figs. 25-26, for amber and alabastra. Pedley (supra n. 3) Paphian shrine with 100 altars. See also K. Galinsky, Aeneas, Sicily, and Rome (Princeton 1969) 73-75, on Eryx and Pa- 59, pl. 8, fig. 17, for ivory pyxis in shape of duck or goose. Sestieri's excavations recovered many ivory pins. 132 Pedley and Torelli (supra n. 3) 374. I am indebted to Theresa Menard for the information on the sixth-century B.C. thymiateria. phos. The Temple of Astarte at Kition also has an open courtyard area: V. Karageorghis 1976 (supra n. 23) 97-100. 128 Torelli (supra n. 123) 431. 129 Torelli 1976 (supra n. 56) 155. At Orvieto, the sanctuary at Sicca Veneria on the north African coast, Ael. NA 4.2, of Cannicella is also outside the walls of the city. Ath. 9.394-95. For sacred doves of Astarte at Eryx and 130 Vitr. De Arch. 1.1.7. 133 In the western Mediterranean setting, one cannot help but recall the well-known migration of sacred doves from the goddess’s Erycine shrine in northern Sicily to her shrine Cadiz, Grottanelli (supra n. 113) 125.

the site indicate the predominance of birds and sheep dess were dedicated.!** In a wider context, the dedior goat,'?* all appropriate sacrifices to Astarte and cation of an image of the naked goddess in a sanctuary Aphrodite. The occurrence of the remains of dog, of Hera is by no means uncommon. We have already hare, and fish, even if they are only present in small seen that figurines of the naked goddess are found, numbers, is perhaps of greater significance, since for example, at the Heraion of Samos as well as at that of Perachora. In addition, literary and epigraphthese animals are associated with a narrower range of deities. The sacrifice of a dog, a purificatory rite, is associated almost exclusively with the worship of Aphrodite;!%6 that of the hare is also closely linked with the goddess. According to Kadletz,!3” the only reference in Greek to the sacrifice of a hare concerns Aphrodite. Fish are also intimately connected with the worship of Aphrodite and Astarte.1% The burned remains of sea bream, a fish sacred to Aphrodite, have been recovered from the the altar of Aphrodite Ourania at Athens and from the altars of Temple B at Kommos on Crete, !# where it has been proposed that Phoenicians established a cult in which Astarte and other deities were worshipped.!# Fishponds formed part of Astarte’s temple complex at Ascalon;!*! and a similar facility for fish-raising is seen in the case of Astarte’s sanctuary at Kition on Cyprus.!?2 Other lines of archaeological evidence thus seem to be consonant with the interpretation that Aphrodite/ ical evidence affirms the close relationship between the goddesses. At Sparta, Pausanias tells us that an ancient xoanon to which maidens sacrificed a lock of hair before marriage was called by the name of Hera Aphrodite. #5 A combined cult of Hera and Aphrodite is attested epigraphically at the Greek colony of Akrai in Sicily, where again the focus is on marriage rituals.!46 Much the same association can occur in the West, where Astarte is sometimes equated with Hera or her local counterpart. The best known example of such an equivalence is given by the gold tablets from Pyrgi, where the Astarte of the Phoenician text is named Uni (i.e, the Etruscan counterpart of Hera) in the Etruscan formulation. On Malta, it appears that Astarte was later equated with Juno Regina, a Latinized Hera.!4” Another manifestation of the overlapping of the personalities of these deities would be that Hera, Aph- Astarte was the patron deity of the early cult at Santa rodite, and Astarte could all be styled as hoplosmia: Venera. In thinking about the identity of the goddess who presided over the sanctuary, we may also want to consider in greater depth the possible conflation of that is, the goddess could assumea bellicose persona, the persona of Hera with that of Astarte and Aphand her warlike character is also manifest at Samos.!49 rodite.!#3 At Paestum, we know of two cases of a sanctuary of Hera, that in the urban center and that at Foce del Sele, where votive figurines of both a dence suggests that Hera possessed a martial characgeneric seated goddess and the naked standing god- Archaic inscription addresses the goddess as one who 134 Pedley (supra n. 3) 58. There is a marked absence of cattle and pig. I wish to thank David Reese for sharing with 141 Canciani (supra n. 101) 146-47. 142 V, Karageorghis 1976 (supra n. 23) 67. For water basins also at Cypriot temples of Aphrodite at Amathos and Golgoi, me the results of his study of the bones from Santa Venera. 5 For birds, Burkert (supra n. 92) 53; Fantar (supra n. symbolized by the brandishing of a spear.!*3 At Argos, Elis, and Croton, Hera may be described as hoplosmia At Paestum too, archaeological and epigraphical eviter. From her sanctuary in the urban center, an E. Lipinski, “Fertility Cult in Ancient Ugarit,” in A. Bonanno 116) 21-23; E. Kadletz, Animal Sacrifice in Greek and Roman ed., Archaeology and Fertility Cult in the Ancient Mediterra- Religion (Diss. Univ. of Washington 1976) 10-21, 272, 274— nean (Malta 1986) 209. 143 Torelli (supra n. 123) 436-37; Torelli (supra n. 22) 59- 76; and J. Karageorghis (supra n. 23) 196. For goat, S. Settis, Xehovyn. Saggio sull’ Afrodite Urania di Fidia (Pisa 1966) 104, n. 431. For sheep and goat remains from the altar of Aphrodite Ourania in the Athenian Agora, D.S. Reese, “Faunal Remains from the Altar of Aphrodite Ourania, Athens,” Hesperia 58 (1989) 64-67. 13° On dog sacrifice and Aphrodite, Torelli 1976 (supra n. 56) 149. For the image of a dog on the coinage of Eryx and Segesta, Galinsky (supra n. 127) 72. A dog is also painted on the back of the terracotta plaque of the androgynous Aphrodite found at Perachora, supra n. 115. 187 Kadletz (supra n. 135) 20, 276. On the hare in general as special to Aphrodite, Guarducci (supra n. 56) 18, n.18. 188 Guarducci (supra n. 56) 18, n. 18; J. Karageorghis (supra n. 23) 196-97. 139 Reese (supra n. 135) 68-70. 140 Shaw (supra n. 103) 182-83. 60; Maddoli (supra n. 51) 323-24. 144 Tt has been suggested that the spring sanctuary at Fonte, where another figurine of the naked goddess was found, may have also been dedicated to Hera: Ardovino (supra n. 52) 113. 145 Paus. 3.13.9. There is also a close relationship between Hera and Aphrodite on Cyprus, see Torelli (supra n. 123) 437, n. 56. 46 IG XIV, 208. 147 Grottanelli (supra n. 113) 119-20. For Pyrgi, where the Etruscan Uni is to be identified also with the Greek Leukothea and Eleithyia, G. Colonna ed., in Santuari d’Etruria (Milan 1985) 128-35. 148 Torelli (supra n. 123) 433-37, for full discussion and bibliography. 149 Maddoli (supra n. 51) 316-17.

from what it was in the eastern Mediterranean or at Phoenican/Punic sites in the West. We are perhaps well advised to avoid falling imprudently into the snare of seeing all cults of Aphrodite as deriving from her Cypriot cult.'53 Astarte and Aphrodite both possessed complex, manifold characters whose traits are articulated in different ways at different sites. Often several sanctuaries were needed in order to fulfill all of the roles that the goddess might play within a given city-state. But there is a further reason, one related to the later history of the sanctuary at Santa Venera, which suggests that we are probably on the right track. In this article, I have tried to make the argument for the nature of the early cult at Santa Venera by looking primarily at the evidence pertaining directly to the Archaic period without surreptitiously looking forward to cult practice at a later time. The reason for this is to avoid assuming, from the start, an inherent or intrinsic link between late cult practice at a site and that in an earlier time. Instead, it is more appropriate to let the early cult practice speak for itself and then to see whether there is continuity or not with what happens later at the sanctuary. When we look to the later history of the cult practiced at Santa Venera, we Fig. 23. Terracotta figurine of goddess as hoplosmia from the urban Heraion. Paestum, Archaeological Museum 1884. (Photo: author) can strengthen one’s military prowess. In addition, several Archaic terracotta figurines (fig. 23) dedicated there portray a goddess whose raised right arm once held a spear.'5° With regard to Aphrodite, literary sources refer to the goddess as hoplosmia at Sparta, Corinth, Cythera, and Cyprus;!5! Astarte could take on a belligerent aspect as well.!52 In trying to resolve questions of identity and persona, one should be cautious, however, and allow that the precise meaning of the imagery of the naked goddess for the local population at Paestum in the sixth century B.C. may have been somewhat different 150 Supra n. 52. Note that the Paestan figurine of the goddess in the attitude of hoplosmia (fig. 23) derives from the same mold series used to make the generic figurines of an enthroned goddess both at Paestum (fig. 4) and at other Achaean colonies in southern Italy (figs. 13-14). 151 Paus. 3.15.10-11, 2.5.1, 3.23.10; Hesychius s.v. Eyxeıog Aggodity. On archaeological grounds, it has been argued that an armed Aphrodite was also worshipped at the emporion of Graviscae in southern Etruria, Torelli (supra n. find unequivocal evidence for the identity of the deity worshipped at the sanctuary. On a marble base for a statue there is a Latin inscription, dated to the third century B.C., which speaks of a dedication to Venus.'54 In addition, a later inscription, which dates to Imperial times, would suggest that the cult may have been linked with that of Venus Erycina.!55 After 273 B.C., when a Latin colony was founded at Paestum, the patron deity at Santa Venera was identified as the Latin Venus. Thus, in light of the identification of the patron deity of the Archaic cult, there seems to be good evidence for a deeply rooted pattern of continuity in cult practice at Santa Venera. DEPARTMENT OF THE CLASSICS COLGATE UNIVERSITY HAMILTON, NEW YORK 13346 found at Gortyn with Astarte. They prefer to see the images as representing Athena. 153 Grottanelli (supra n. 98) 71, n. 3; Grottanelli (supra n. 113) 121-23; and A.M. Bisi, “Testimonianze fenicio-puniche ad Erice,” OA 5 (1966) 239. 154 Pedley and Torelli (supra n. 3) 375, pl. 49, fig. 5; see p. 376 for notice of several marble statues of Venus found at Santa Venera. Venus and her son Eros are also portrayed in many of the Hellenistic terracottas found at the sanctuary. 123) 433-35, and at Himera on the northern coast of Sicily, 155 ] would like to thank Mario Torelli, who will be pub- Aloni (supra n. 94) 30-31. 152 Fantar (supra n. 116) 21-22. It is of interest that Rizza and Santa Maria Scrinari (supra n. 23) 249-50 reject an lishing the inscription, for this information. Finally, the letter “V” appears as an inscription on some of the pottery recovidentification of the terracotta figurines of an armed goddess ered from Santa Venera in Sestieri’s early excavations.