Navigation – Plan du site
III. Delphes et le reste du monde antique

The nexus of inter-regional relations established by creators and artisans in the Ancient sanctuary and the town of Delphi

Le réseau de relations interrégionales établies par les créateurs et artisans de l’antique sanctuaire et de la ville de Delphes
Elena C. Partida
p. 223-242

Résumés

Les relations, les contacts et l’enchainement d’influences peuvent être abordés de différents points de vue : détails du traitement et expérimentation dans le design, la main d’œuvre opérant côte à côte , interaction entre sites d’activité contemporains et coopération des artisans, indices dans les sources épigraphiques sur l’origine des artistes, qualités de la pierre importée qui exige des ouvrier spécialisés, structures en brique crue et leur fonction potentielle comme ateliers. Compte tenu des spécialisations régionales, nous notons la contribution reconnaissable d’artistes venus d’Argos, de Thèbes, d’Egypte, de Pergame et de la côte d’Asie Mineure, de l’Orient (artistes orientaux immigrés) et de l’Occident, d’où les affinités entre les statues de Riace et Delphes. Finalement nous confirmons ce qui peut être déduit de l’antique ville de Delphes et de sa nécropole concernant les produits importés et les imitations, comment les interactions culturelles à l’intérieur du sanctuaire ont affecté la population indigène. Les ateliers locaux et les artisans de Delphes doivent être pris en compte.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

1Attending, as a student, the excavation of the ancient Gymnasium at Delphi by Vangelis Pendazos in 1992, I was particularly impressed by the palaestra, which, from a wrestling bout for the physical encounter of athletes, was gradually converted into a venue for intellectual discourse among sophists, poets and erudite people. Its chambers sheltered lectures by orators and philosophers invited from afar. Yet, the inter-cultural relations and communication at Delphi had started much earlier and been cultivated by people engaged in art and technological know-how.

  • 1 For the artisans’ status and craft specialization: Otto, 2003, 589-600; Spivey–Squire, 2004, p. 162 (...)
  • 2 Spivey–Squire, 2004, p. 317, fig. 489.

2The impression we gain from Homer and Hesiod’s epic poems is that art and craftsmanship was a special skill, a talent or mastery owned by the gods and bestowed upon mortals. In the 6th ct BC the philosophical view of art as the result of constant intellectual quest, rather than a divine gift, prevailed. The sanctuary of Delphi was a crucible for styles and traditions, the cradle of noble rivalry and emulation expressed through monumental creations of architecture, sculpture in stone and ivory, bronze-casting/-forging and miniature crafts. Aside from a major religious centre, Delphi was a focal point for people to meet, to influence, to learn and to evolve. Its various monuments, especially at the stage of worksites, offered ample scope for craftsmen and artisans to exchange knowledge and techniques not only in theory but also in practice. Beyond the pilgrims, the ambassadors, the envoys, the priests, the competitors and spectators of the games, we should reckon with numerous artisans, sculptors, architects, metalworkers, masons, ceramists, stone-cutters and labourmen, who virtually brought the sanctuary to shape and to life. Those qualified and competent δημιουργοί filled the site with masterpieces – stimuli for the advance of civilization. Despite the mythical involvement of divine, supernatural forces in art and architecture (see Apollo and Poseidon as the legendary builders of the walls of Troy), it was the humans who conquered the crafts. Lysippos, Daidalos, Praxiteles and Skopas –to name but a few masters- created statues with spirit and soul and were ranked by their contemporaries among the elite of intellectuals. The accomplishments of δημιουργοί and χειροτέχνες were appreciated1 as creations for the entire community. Truly appealing is the fantastic painting by Lawrence Alma-Tadema,2 who portrayed Pheidias in his atelier, surrounded by visitors enjoying a close-up view of the Parthenon frieze, while it was still at ground-level.

  • 3 Hansen, 1960.
  • 4 Παρτίδα, 2004, ch. 7.
  • 5 Κουράγιος, 2002-2005, p. 82.
  • 6 East of the altar (by the harbour) an older structure might be a treasury (Sinn, 1990, p. 103). Tha (...)

3The burst of construction and the expansion of sacred premises at Delphi, brought up mainly by the treasuries, had implications for monumental topography and site-planning, indicated by the enlargement of the sanctuary and the outward shifting of its precinct wall on all four sides. More clearly, growth is visible on the trace of the south branch of the precinct, the so-called Hellenikon, which was built to include the ‘appended’ new treasuries, of Siphnos and Sicyon.3 Two of the lowest gates into the temenos date probably in that period, circa 500 BC. Which one of them was principal could perhaps be inferred from the orientation of the edifices built later, namely the Theban and the Megarian treasury. In any case, the beginning of the processional way was set east. The erection of treasuries activated various worksites in the temenos and occupied a number of masons, marble-workers and architects from different regions.4 Construction at an intensive pace lasted at least two centuries, given that the building of treasuries at Delphi outgrew the archaic era and continued until the mid-4th ct BC, unlike the cases at Olympia, Delos, Despotikon5 and Perachora.6

  • 7 Partida, 2000.
  • 8 For the development of the technique of working local, Parnassus limestone, the different methods a (...)
  • 9 Partida, 2010.
  • 10 Discussed in Partida, 2010.
  • 11 Partida, 2000, ch.3, with references to work by Dinsmoor, La Genière et al.

4Our collective approach of treasuries7 was didactic. The material selected for a particular building required respectively specialized and often invited craftsmen. Whether in roughly hewn volumes or as prefabricated elements to be refined in situ, marble from the Cyclades was shipped to the port of Kirrha and then carried up to Delphi, escorted by appropriately trained artisans. The inauguration of local limestone quarries at St. Elias instigated new labour-routes and cart-tracks, which we are exploring under the leadership of Prof. Gregers Algreen-Ussing. It also necessitated the employment of stone-cutters and craftsmen trained accordingly.8 Some of the teams were mixed in terms of origins, a practice exemplified by the team/crew responsible for the latest treasury at Delphi, dedicated by Cyrene. Moreover, teams/crews were being relocated to different worksites within the temenos. The parallel putting up of many monuments presented opportunities for reciprocal influence. In such context, some architectural details of the archaic Ionic treasuries are likely to have influenced the design of the temple interior, seeing that the baldachin theoretically restored in the archaic Doric temple of Apollo borrowed its moulding from the Paros/Thasos cultural sphere.9 Later on, the Cyreneans, who came to Delphi for the construction or reconstruction of their own treasury,10 contributed to the sumptuous project of temple-rebuilding. The study of technical treatment and stylistic traits allows us to distinguish between regional traditions and to discern influences like, for instance, the south Italian affinities on the metopes of the Sicyonian monopteros.11 In addition to morphology and style, the mode of laying foundations, the choice of building material for the substructure and the superstructure (with repercussions for the selection of tools, clamps etc) and, above all, the subtle details in design and execution may disclose something about the craftsmen’ provenance.

  • 12 Schmidt-Douna, 2004, p. 125.
  • 13 Le Roy, 1967, p. 65-87.

5The treasuries commissioned by a single city-state on different hieratic premises could vary in order, design or building material. Cyrene, Megara and Sicyon, for example, dedicated treasuries in both panhellenic sanctuaries, at Delphi and Olympia. From the evidence so far, it seems that the Aegean islands and Ionia (the coast of Asia Minor) were not represented by treasuries at Olympia, even though the roof of the Sicyonian treasury was of Parian marble and probably prefabricated on the island.12 By contrast, Ionic-Aeolic treasuries made a dynamic appearance at Delphi, affecting other workforces, too, including that of the archaic temple. Proportionately at Olympia the west Greek element predominated via the treasuries of Gela and Epidamnos. On the other hand, it was not absent from Delphi, as suggested by roof revetments and architectural terracottas.13 The cornice parapet attributed to a treasury of Corfu, though still lacking a suitable foundation, may denote that a craftsman from Corfu worked for another city’s monument and left his imprint. The density of construction-projects entailed an influx of craftsmen, who settled at Delphi for a while, thus providing an opportunity for the diffusion of knowledge between teams who worked simultaneously on different spots of the temenos.

  • 14 Homolle, 1909, p. 62, fig. 32.
  • 15 Partida, 2000, p. 162-172.
  • 16 Ladstaetter, 2001, p. 147, 151.
  • 17 Bommelaer, 2003. I am grateful to Prof. J.-Fr. Bommelaer for offering me his manuscript, prior to p (...)

6Architectural innovations resulted from artistic fermentation or experimentation. The echinus in the shape of a daisy, betraying the artist’s mood for reproducing vegetal motifs, could be considered as a variation or precursor of the Aeolic capital with drooping leaves resembling a palm-tree. It was tentatively associated14 with the ex-Cnidian caryatid bearing a polos decorated in relief. The Cyrenean treasury at Delphi was built by a mixed guild of masons from various origins.15 Due to their collaboration, certain hybrid traits were developed, later to be adopted in monuments beyond Delphi: the attached Doric half-column of the Cyrenean treasury recurs in porticos and heroic architecture at Olympia and later at Lousoi (Arcadia) and Samos.16 Following Didier Laroche’s lead, we are revisiting the restoration of the treasury’s doorframe. The transmission and diffusion of such novelties fit in the context of Delphi, where the multiplicity of architectural traditions provided an ideal setting for emulation in originality and creativity. At the same time, the popularity of the sanctuary and its high frequency facilitated the spread and absorption of novelties. Should we know of all the artists employed at Delphi, we would be able to assess proportionately the representation of each city-state. Nevertheless, it is inferred from literary testimonies, inscribed epigrams and signatures that Theban bronze-casters worked for monuments of Argos, whereas Argive sculptors were commissioned by Spartans and Arcadians.17 Such examples confirm our argument for a vivid network of mutual interaction and successive influences, a nexus of specialized marble-workers, bronze-casters, coroplasts and potters who promoted the evolution of art.

  • 18 Le Roy, 1967.
  • 19 Note, for example, the varieties of poros used in the palaestra and the temple of Apollo. Tradition (...)
  • 20 Otherwise the great domed and vaulted structures of engineering masterpieces would not have been po (...)
  • 21 On the analogy of the Heraion at Olympia. Κεραμόπουλος 1912, p. 63.
  • 22 Feyel, 2006, p. 389.
  • 23 Hansen-Amandry, 2010, p. 451 n. 32.
  • 24 Hansen-Amandry, 2010, p. 454-456.
  • 25 Laroche–Jacquemin, 2001, p. 305-332 and 2001a, p. 394.

7Representative of regional workshops are the clay roof revetments from Argos, Laconia, Asia Minor, North Aegean, Sicily and Western Greece, attributed to edifices of uneven size and form, dispersed in the Delphi sanctuary.18 The choice of building material (marble, poros stone,19 mud-brick) is at least allusive to the origins of artisans and directly related to craft specialization and regional economy. The upsurge in building rates may lead to the development of a certain technique, as suggested by the example of ancient Rome, where the use of concrete, by the mixture of volcanic sand (pozzolana) with high-quality lime to produce a hydraulic mortar of great strength, is held to be one of the greatest technical achievements. Moreover, it was an economical substitute for ashlar masonry, due to its ingredients of low cost, less demanding of highly skilled labour and therefore used for everyday domestic and commercial construction. This technological change brought about socio-economic implications in the 2nd ct BC.20 Returning to building practices at Delphi, even though Plutarch and Pausanias mention no brick structure, the old temple of Athena (7th ct BC) is likely to have had mud-brick walls below an entablature of terracotta with colourful decoration.21 Building accounts of the 4th ct BC describe the manufacture of a considerable quantity of mud-bricks.22 We presume they served the closure of intercolumnar spacings. Also they were destined for temporary shacks (like the one of raw-bricks, which protected the omphalos during repairing operations)23 and ateliers. Euainetos (who was also recruited for repairs to the east precinct) and Charixenos, both Delphians, produced raw-bricks for the atelier of Thyia.24 The polygonal stone footing of the much debated building at the west end of the Pronaia sanctuary (discussed as a workshop, among its various potential functions) probably received a mud-brick superstructure. The two small buildings on the opposite (east) end of the sanctuary of Pronaia, tentatively associated with hero cult, might have had a superstructure of mud-brick layers similar to the one proposed for the oikos that supposedly sheltered the Daochos σύνταγμα.25

8The aforementioned criteria of cost-effective material and lower skill-degree hardly applied to Delphi, where commissioners competed in dedicating the most exceptional monument, to underscore their individual technical achievements and eventually to make a political statement. Without sparing the cost, they sought after the strongest and sturdiest constructions in terms of engineering and statics, given the topography of the site with abrupt inclination, which taxed and challenged every architect or site-planner. On such sloping ground, prone to earthquakes, a light structure of mud-bricks lacking sufficient coherence and armature or girders might prove unstable. Perhaps that is why the Thessalian oikos lived shortly.

  • 26 Maniatis-Déroche, 1989, p. 403-416.
  • 27 For this iconographic fusion, assimilation or interchangeability: Stewart, 1982, p. 205-227, esp. 2 (...)
  • 28 Croissant, 1996, p. 133.
  • 29 For the reflection of politics in contemporary art: Croissant, 1996, p. 127-139, esp. 138.
  • 30 Partida, 2000b, p. 355-363. Cf. Hertz-Palagia, 2002, p. 240-249.
  • 31 Παρτίδα 2004, ch. 2, esp. 106; Hansen, 2000, p. 201-213.

9Two centuries before the quarries of limestone at St. Elias (Delphi) were inaugurated, large quantities of marble from the Cyclades were being shipped to Delphi for the construction of the archaic treasuries. Preference for marble lingered on until the Roman period (evident also in portraits), when a team of masons erected the colonnades of the Agora and the Gymnasium (converting the xystus into the Ionic order) in marble from Levadeia.26 In the 4th ct BC the Athenian sculptors Πραξίας and Ἀνδροσθένης introduced the iconography of Dionysos in the guise of Apollo κιθαρωδός, as if the two gods were fused into one,27 and ordered Pentelic marble for the pedimental sculpture of the temple, which they probably refined in situ, working side by side with another Athenian, named Molossos, in charge of positioning the sculpted sima of the temple.28 At about the same time, in 330 BC, another team of Athenian sculptors arrived at Delphi to fashion an ostentatious public Athenian offering, the superb acanthus column with the dancers,29 also in Pentelic marble. All the same, marble from the Cyclades and especially from Paros was systematically and diachronically used by islanders at Delphi.30 The absence of Aegean artisans from the guild who reconstructed the temple of Apollo can be justified. From contemporary (4th ct BC) financial documents it is inferred that Mainland masons and entrepreneurs,31 with the contribution of local stone-cutters and contractors, predominated in this project, being qualified to carve limestone and poros stone. It turns out that each region or Kulturkreis provided certain materials and accordingly specialized artisans.

  • 32 Within a populous workforce. Hansen-Amandry, 2010, 486, p. 490-494.
  • 33 Feyel, 2006, p. 342.
  • 34 Feyel, 2006, p. 348.
  • 35 Πολύαινος, Στρατηγικά 2,1,7. Cf. Feyel, 2006, p. 364.
  • 36 Examination of geometric bronze offerings (out of a substantial collection of 17.500 items) yielded (...)
  • 37 Feyel, 2006, p. 438.

10Several indigenous Delphians (Ἀγάθων, Δείνων, Εὐαίνετος) were employed in the temple-project.32 Approximately 170 names of artisans with their places of origins are mentioned in relevant inscriptions. As opposed to Athens,33 the ναοποιοί at Delphi, like the ἱεροποιοί and other responsible committees at Delos and Epidauros, recruited specialties from all over Greece for the workforces on sacred premises. Particularly the temple project attracted artisans from Argos, Tegea, Corinth, Sicyon, Achaea, Athens, Megara, Boeotia, Locri, Thessaly, as well as from Olynthus,34 Croton and Cyrene. Nevertheless, it was the Peloponnese that earned the credit δεξαμενή τεχνιτών.35 The recruitment of people of diverse origins in a major sanctuary like Delphi is yet another reason for its radiance and dynamics. Furthermore it suggests that the sanctuaries’ authorities did not hire exclusively aborigines but, instead, those who qualified for the job. Foreign craftsmen settled at Delphi, as they did at Olympia.36 The fact that specialized craftsmen crossed the borders of geography explains, we believe, common traits and mutual influence in contemporary monuments (see the temples at Tegea, Nemea, and the tholos at Delphi). Besides their specialties, craftsmen were versatile and skillful enough to carry out any assignment, from concocting stucco for the temple columns to running maintainance operations. Calliteles, for instance, repaired a hoisting machine at Delphi.37

  • 38 Bousquet, 1989, n. 31, l. 96, 100, 106.
  • 39 Bousquet, 1989, n. 58 I 2; 59 II, 22, 25.
  • 40 For bronze figurines: Heilmeyer, 1979, 192; for tripods: Maass, 1978, p. 105-106.
  • 41 The Trojan Horse, Seven against Thebes (with the chariot of Amphiaraos), Epigonoi and the kings of (...)
  • 42 Pausanias X,9,7-11. It is estimated that the Spartans mustered nine sculptors to produce 37 monumen (...)

11People from Argos participated in the temple reconstruction not only in the capacity of naopoioi. Nikodamos was assigned with the cutting and transportation of orthostates.38 Θωροπίδας was another entrepreneur under contract.39 Yet, Argive artists were equally reputable for their mastery and dexterity in metalwork, as verified by armours, tripods and bronze dedications of Argos at Olympia.40 At least three Argive memorials,41 furnished with lavish bronze statuary, flanked the first stretch of the processional way at Delphi. Adjacent were the ἐπινίκεια monuments for respective supremacies in the battles at Marathon and Aigos Potamoi. Author of the latter, which dominated the entrance to the temenos, was Antiphanes, a renowned sculptor from Argos,42 also responsible for the bronze effigy of the Trojan Horse nearby (Pausanias X,9,12). The most famous Dioskouri in classical Greece were the bronze statues made by Antiphanes for this multi-figure monument, set up at Delphi to commemorate the success of Lysander and the Spartan admirals at Aigos Potamoi in 404 BC, which marked the end of the Peloponnesian war. The workshop of Antiphanes is thought to have inspired the Riace statues and indirectly, many centuries later, the portraits of Augustus’ sons.

  • 43 A close parallel comes from a tumulus in NW Bulgaria, which contained a set of vases of Macedonian (...)
  • 44 Πεντάζος-Σαρλά 1984, p. 137.
  • 45 Partida, 2004a, p. 280-283, nrs 108,109.
  • 46 Partida, 2010.
  • 47 Partida, 2010.

12A bronze hydria (κάλπις) from the ancient cemetery of Delphi instills a flavor of Macedonian metalwork.43 A similar but much more ornate vase, originating from Makrakomi (Phthiotis), was displayed in the old museum of Delphi.44 Relief tomb-stones of the Severe Style45 from the east necropolis suggest that Parian marble and the ateliers of the Cyclades remained in fashion at Delphi. The long-lasting preference for this material is evident also in its employment for the tholos at Pronaia and the Cyrenean treasury, in the 4th ct BC. Even though the building accounts of that age focus on the classical temple of Apollo, on the grounds of architectural sculpture it can be inferred that Parian artists, contemporaries of Skopas, who had previously worked in the Asklepieion at Epidauros,46 participated in the tholos at Delphi. Less known is the recurrence of Parian marble and its masons in the 3rd ct BC, in monuments commissioned by Aetolians.47

  • 48 They are mentioned in Pindar’s Eighth Paean. I sincerely thank Ian Rutherford (Reading University, (...)
  • 49 Partida, 2000a, p. 555-561.
  • 50 Partida, 2010a.
  • 51 Hansen-Amandry, 2010, p. 455.
  • 52 Hansen–Amandry, 2010, p. 486; Feyel, 2006, p. 364.
  • 53 It was especially preferred for colonnades. Marble from Alyki of Thasos was imported for the column (...)

13When lacking financial documents, the stylistic traits and modes of treatment, which refer to a particular regional tradition, help us trace the designers’ origins. The Theban treasury was erected in the 4th ct BC opposite to the Boeotian one, to commemorate different historical and political circumstances. Those architects’ ancestors, Trophonios and Agamedes, laid the foundations of the early temple of Apollo.48 Boeotian traits are identifiable in the limestone temple of Athena Pronaia, too.49 The presence of Boeotians at Delphi and their influence in other fields of art is alluded to by their script on cauldron-rims and by certain types of terracotta figurines.50 We are still investigating whether some isolated votive columns belonged to a typically Boeotian modality of dedication, i.e. tripods with a central prop. Hermon from Thespiae participated in the rebuilding of the temple51 in the 4th ct BC. Κάπων is recorded as a stone-cutter from Boeotia.52 Boeotia held an age-old tradition in skilful architects and Theban masons were recruited in projects of Epidauros, too. In the Hellenistic age Boeotia continued to provide stone-cutters while the marble quarries of Levadeia53 provided building material in the imperial period.

  • 54 Μπούρας, 2000, p. 283-291, esp. 289-290; Παρτίδα, 2004, p. 145-147.
  • 55 Partida, 2000, chs. 14 and 15, with references to and discussion of work by H. Pomtow, W.B. Dinsmoo (...)
  • 56 Weir, 1999, p. 402 n. 24.

14Another region, whose contribution to the Delphi nexus of contacts is identifiable, is Pergamon. Particular modes of masonry (alternation of courses of uneven height, the innovative vault construction)54 certify that Pergamene architects were occupied in the complex of the Attalids, and probably on other worksites round the temenos. Their ancestors from Aeolis (Phocaea, Clazomenae) had already created innovative forms at Delphi, as betrayed by architectural spolia (cymas, fragment of frieze with helmeted figures and horses, capitals with drooping leaves) ascribed to treasuries in the Aeolic order.55 The idiosyncratic moulding of marly limestone, in Delphi Museum, probably belongs to the treasury of Clazomenae together with the column-shaft today on display near the museum entrance. Further south on the coast of Asia Minor, in the region of Caria originated the Cnidians, who arrived at Delphi as pilgrims and dedicators. Their treasury, the earliest one in the Ionic order, introduced Caryatids in architecture. According to Pausanias (X,11,1; X,25,1; X,32,1), whose recount is confirmed by excavations, the Cnidians commissioned also the lesche with painted murals, a statuary complex of Apollo and Artemis arching against Tityos, and a statue of Dionysos near the theatre. Its large base, today by the west parodos of the theatre, is inscribed with a dedicatory epigram in Cnidian script and several later manumission decrees.56 A Cnidian colony, the tiny island of Lipara, offered three significant monuments to Apollo of Delphi, on conspicuous spots of the sanctuary, as we shall see.

  • 57 Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 799-815 ; 2004, ch. 3 ; 2003, p. 38-49.
  • 58 Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 803 ; 2004, p. 133, 142 ; 2003, p. 39, 44.
  • 59 Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 802 ; 2004, p. 129, 140 ; 2003, p. 40, 42.
  • 60 Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 802 ; 2004, p. 140 ; 2003, p. 43.
  • 61 Παρλαμά–Σταμπολίδης 2000, p. 241. Cf. Τιβέριος 2004, p. 295-306.
  • 62 Their Phoenician or Assyrian typology is unusual and their prehistoric or archaic date is dubious: (...)
  • 63 Mitsopoulos-Leon, 2006, p. 87-93.
  • 64 These exotic pendants of Egyptian provenance (imported to Paros, Naxos, Lefkandi, Eretria, Santorin (...)
  • 65 Comparable divine apparition on the east pediment of the Alkmaeonid temple.
  • 66 Differences in style and manufacture justify an estimated 30 years’ time-span between the male and (...)

15The advent of oriental craftsmen and products at Delphi dates in the 9th and mostly the 8th ct BC, as attested by metal objects and tridacna shells, either of oriental provenance or of orientalizing style. A multitude of bronze cauldron-attachments, repoussé or embossed bowls and various accessories were imported from North Syria, Phoenicia, Luristan or modeled on those prototypes and manufactured either by oriental craftsmen settled at Delphi, or by Greek artisans who imitated the oriental manners. Our study for the installation of the new Museum of Delphi offered insight into the eastern liaison57 during the establishment of the sanctuary, long before the influx of the Pergamenes. Eastbound connections are to be found in Olympia, Samos, Dodona and Perachora, among other sanctuaries. Yet, the Cypriot syllabic script58 and the non-deciphered, probably Asiatic dialect on a brazier stand59 at Delphi define unique finds. The clay idol of a maiden holding a tray with loaves of bread (a grave offering from Delphi) represented an everyday errand, popular in Boeotia, Eretria and Corinth. However, it could be interpreted as another eastern allusion, possibly to the legend of Croesus of Lydia, who was rescued by a lady-baker.60 Cypro-Phoenician alabasters decorated with a net-pattern, also from funerary context, may be classified in the Bulas type.61 The infiltration of Egyptian culture is manifested by extraordinary scarabs at Delphi,62 which could be compared to the votive and apotropaic bronze beetles from Lousoi and Olympia or to the clay ones from Crete.63 Both were used as amulets or seal-stones with magical connotations. The occurrence of scarabs in shrines (Delion in Paros, temple of Aphrodite in Santorini),64 too, dissociates them from a strictly sepulchral context. The marble statuettes of Isis and Cybele suggest an analogous act of worship or piety, although no particular space is known at Delphi as reserved for the cult of Egyptian deities, as was the case in the sanctuaries of Dion, Delos, Eretria and the Acropolis south slope. A group of hammered bronze statuettes at Dreros, combining local Cretan with near-eastern elements, are thought to represent Apollo and his divine consorts, Leto and Artemis. These cult recipients in the Iron Age temple of Apollo Delphinios were possibly the forerunners of the chryselephantine trinity or epiphany65 at Delphi. Recent studies, however, show that, like the group at Delphi, the Dreros statuettes were not manufactured as a triad.66 Instead, a xoanon of Apollo (of the late 8th BC) was later joined (early 7th BC) by two priestesses or female worshippers.

  • 67 Παρτίδα, 2009α.
  • 68 Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 804-805, fig. 5; 2004, p. 130, 143; 2003, p. 45-46.
  • 69 Petridis, 1996, p. 124.
  • 70 Schmidt-Collinet, 1986, p. 131-144.
  • 71 Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 807-808; 2004, p. 147-149.
  • 72 Bernard, 1999, p. 237; Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 808.

16The motif of horse-heads (typical of Luristan, modern Iran), incised on an ivory spatula67 from a tomb at Delphi, resembles the motif on a horse-bras or harness ornament68 displayed among early eastern votive offerings. The latest and most impressive import from the east was the panther dating to the Sassanid dynasty from Persia.69 The settling of immigrant artisans, the preservation of architectural elements of the Hellenistic tradition in Nabataean sepulchral monuments on the land of Syria (where Greek traditions were more tenacious than in other parts of the Roman empire),70 the spread or revival of Delphi games71 and, finally, the copying of the Delphi maxims by the Cypriot Κλέαρχος in a heroon in Afghanistan (ancient Bactria)72 endorse our argument for diachronic relations with the east.

  • 73 Rougemont, 1991, p. 157-192; Παρτίδα, 2004, p. 307-313.
  • 74 Of the 5th BC, now in British Museum. The high lead content is regarded as typical of bronzes from (...)
  • 75 Not at all unusual at Delphi - see the monument of Daochos at Delphi and of Agias at Pharsala.
  • 76 Laroche, 1992, p. 218-221 ; Bommelaer, 1996, p. 146-150.
  • 77 Partida, 2000, ch. 16.

17With regard to relations between Delphi and the west, Magna Graecia,73 revelations continue: The bronze leg of a horse-rider, bearing a greave embossed with Medusa,74 is attributed to a copy of the monument set up at Delphi by the people of Taras, to glorify their victory over their neighbours (Peucetians and Iapygians) in mid-5th ct BC. This replica, ‘quoting’ the main dedication at Delphi, was probably set up at home in Taras, in the concept of dual commemoration.75 The original monument was described by Pausanias (X,13,10) as a work of Onatas from Aegina and Ageladas from Argos. In addition to the aforementioned architectural terracottas, which were fabricated in west Greece for the roofs of buildings at Delphi, the classical tholos at Pronaia has been interpreted as an offering by the people of Thourii, possibly a temple dedicated to Boreas (north wind), to commemorate the dispersal of their enemy’s forces in 379 BC.76 Although the Syracusan treasury is under dispute (whereas the Etruscan one is eligible to re-interpretation), some traits about the ‘anonymous Doric’ in the sanctuary of Athena Pronaia indicate the participation of Italiot masons in its construction. So, it is discussed as a possible architectural votive offering of Sybaris77 next to the treasury of people from Massalia (a colony of Phocaea), thus visually plotting the convergence of people in the panhellenic sanctuary of Delphi.

  • 78 Bourguet, 1914, p. 212-213; Jeffery, 1961, p. 350; Bommelaer, 1991, p. 152, 223.
  • 79 Probably restored Λιπαραῖοι ἀπὸ Τυρσανῶν. It preserves sockets for bronze statues: Courby, 1927, p. (...)
  • 80 Bousquet, 1989, p. 182; Bommelaer, 1991, p. 152.
  • 81 A marble plinth reading HIKATI, trimmed and re-shaped into a column-capital in the Byzantine times (...)
  • 82 The double facing of the east, re-entrant end of the polygonal wall (referred to in an inscription (...)

18Our argument that Delphi nurtured the converging of cultures and the balanced, almost democratic representation of ἔθνη and people is corroborated by the Liparean ex-votos. The isle of Lipara near Sicily, a colony of the Cnidians, chose Delphi to lavishly commemorate its naval victories.78 A stone base of the 5th ct BC (atlas *123), between the treasuries of Siphnos and Thebes, is attested by Pausanias (X,11,3-4) as supporting images of mortals, ἀνδριάντες dedicated by the people of Lipara after they had defeated the Etruscans. Another memorial was erected by the same commissioners further up the sanctuary. On the grounds of literary testimonies and fragmentary inscriptions on a series of limestone slabs,79 these have been attributed to a Liparean ex-voto for the capture of twenty Tyrrhenian ships. Such a long (40m) socle commensurates only with the middle stretch of the polygonal terrace-wall (atlas *329). The stepped landings of the east precinct are regarded as too narrow to accommodate it.80 However, the recovery of inscribed marble blocks81 revealed a third monument dedicated by the Lipareans, fitting precisely Pausanias’ recount (X,16,7). Its restoration atop of the polygonal terrace-wall is plausible.82

  • 83 Krumeich, 1991, p. 37-62; Adornato, 2008, p. 29-55.
  • 84 Starting from paleography and a rasura on the preserved block from the stone base of the quadriga, (...)
  • 85 See the proposal for restoring the Daochos group inside a Thessalian oikos: Laroche–Jacquemin, 2001 (...)

19The Deinomenid offerings still raise topics for discussion.83 The tripods offered by the Syracusan princes and their tentative reconstruction with Nike figures instructed the theoretical restoration of other ‘victory monuments’, such as the triangular shaft of the Naupaktians and Messenians. Famous among Magna Graecia dedications is the Charioteer and his quadriga, commissioned by the same royal family. By contrast to the tripods, fashioned by an artist from Miletos, this composition84 was most probably the work of a Syracusan artist. Even though today he features as a unique sample of life-size bronze sculpture at Delphi, this was not the case in antiquity. The champion driver was merely one of the numerous bronze images that used to flank the sacred way, fringe the semicircular niches, crown the polygonal wall that contained the temple-terrace and probably stretches of the precinct. As induced from sockets on pedestals, the majority of statuary at Delphi –particularly those standing in the open– was made of bronze. By contrast, marble statues were usually sheltered inside a building85 or protected by a gable. Literary testimonies help reconstitute what is now missing from the preserved stone bases or foundations.

  • 86 Displayed in the new Museum (Κολώνια-Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 842-843). Some of them, with inlays and gild (...)
  • 87 The traditional thesis has been challenged, as regards the fine levied upon the Phokians by the Amp (...)
  • 88 Harris-Cline, 2000, p. 135-141. Mutilated bronze statues failed to offer an illusion of vividness a (...)
  • 89 The procurement of space was a diachronic issue in every highly frequented sanctuary. By the end of (...)
  • 90 In the course of a remodeling of the sanctuary, the sacred pool was filled with debris including na (...)
  • 91 The shrine at Dodona was hypaethral until the end of the 5th ct BC. An enceinte of bronze tripods w (...)
  • 92 See sacred law of the 4th ct BC: Lefèvre, 1994, p. 99-112.

20The beginning of the processional way was lined by a chain of multi-figure and ‘multi-ethnic’ statuary compositions commissioned by Arcadia, Argos, Lacedaemon, Taras, Aetolia. In his minute recount Pausanias described many of them and named several of their creators. Others were extolled by poets, like the Deinomenid offerings by Βακχυλίδης. Often pedestals preserve the artists’ signatures. Shield grips and arm bands, helmet plumes, mantle pleats, cuirass lappets and body parts with modeled anatomical details86 are the physical remains of the life-size or larger bronze ἀνδριάντες carried by those pedestals. Curiously only a small fraction of the bronzes has been preserved. Romans and Christians alike account for stripping the Delphi sanctuary off its treasures. Τhe Phokian generals were also held responsible for having removed precious dedications from the temenos during the Third Sacred War, in order to supply their army with ammunition.87 Other offerings had been damaged and covered by earthwork or buried in repositories. An inventory account of 330 BC from the Athenian Acropolis88 refers to the melting down and recasting of bronze dedications, which were in a state of disrepair, to be replaced by new ex-votos. The inscription clearly involves κάθαρσιν τῶν οὐκ ὑγιέων, replacement of the obsolete, damaged dedications, since they no longer served the purpose of imitating real life and pleasing the beholder. Considering the multitude of densely spaced votive offerings in major sanctuaries, we believe that the ultimate target of such practice was to make room for new monuments. Clearing operations were not unusual, as we deduce from evidence at Olympia,89 Perachora,90 probably Dodona91 and Delphi.92 By contrast, the recycling of architectural elements, such as the trimming of column-drums from the temple of Apollo until their flutes were totally removed, went unrecorded.

  • 93 Iron pegs and flanges served to join head and torso. The head was a separate casting, most likely t (...)
  • 94 The life-size statue of a nude winged youth (late 2nd BC) had been interpreted as Ἀγών, the personi (...)
  • 95 Statuette of Poseidon from Livadostra bay; statue of Zeus or Poseidon from Artemision cape; the eph (...)
  • 96 Chamoux, 1955, p. 57-66.

21Some of the works that escaped looting and plundering went underwater in wrecks. In fact, the vast majority of bronzes were drawn from the bottom of the sea: the Riace, the Lady from Kalymnos, the ακρόχαλκη sphinx from the coast of former Yugoslavia,93 Ἀγών-Ἒρως from the Mahdia wreck94, as well as several bronzes from the collection of Athens National Museum.95 One of the few life-size bronze statues that were unearthed, instead of ‘fished’, is the Charioteer. The young champion in chariot racing was cast in two separate parts, soldered and joined by means of inner armature.96 Particularly captivating are his inlaid eyes, made of glass paste, rock crystal and enamel. This τέχνεργο is attributed to an artist from Magna Graecia, Pythagoras from Rhegium, competent in modeling physical features and anatomical details, as well as in representing athletes in motion.

  • 97 Boardman, 1989, p. 65.
  • 98 De Grazia Vanderpool, 2000, p. 107-116.
  • 99 For the identification of remains along the first stretch of the sacred way: Bommelaer, 1992, pl. 3 (...)
  • 100 Examining marble copies of the bronze archetype, Despinis (2001, p. 103-127) purports that the icon (...)
  • 101 The possibility that the Corinth portraits (in a linear relation) followed the prototype of the Del (...)

22Despite the broad dispersal of bronze fragments, it is still possible to determine their ancestral models and sometimes to pinpoint their provenance, if not the monuments they originally belonged to. Through individual approaches, the Riace bronzes, retrieved from the Reggio Calabria Sea, tend to be associated with Delphi. The over-life size and nudity of the Riace suggest their interpretation as a warrior-hero and a king, respectively. Due to their similarities in style and technique, it is generally believed that these two masterpieces of the Severe Style (475-457 BC) were meant to be viewed together on a single monument. The above observations, along with certain iconographic details, gave rise to their tentative identification as General Miltiades and King Kodros, the statues made by Pheidias for the ex-voto of Marathon at Delphi.97 In another opinion,98 Riace B has been attached to the workshop of Antiphanes from Argos and may have descended from the Dioskouri made by Antiphanes for the monumental bronze composition showing Lysander crowned by Poseidon among the Spartan admirals who defeated the Athenians at Aigos Potami. This monument, which propagated the supremacy of joined Peloponnesian forces in 404 BC, was set up near (if not beside) the Marathon ex-voto,99 virtually and visually antagonizing it by reproducing the theme of a god crowning a military commander.100 The similarities between Riace B and two Roman portraits (of Gaius and Lucius, the sons of Augustus) in Corinth lead to the assumption that they all derive from a common ancestor, the Delphi Dioskouri by Antiphanes.101

  • 102 Mc Cann, 2000, p. 97.

23The differences between the two Riace statues betray contrast between the two hero-types, as if they represented a pair of opposites. In her comprehensive paper, Mc Cann concludes that the Riace statues represented the two Sicilian leaders, the princes of Syracuse (and brothers of Polyzalos, commissioner of the Charioteer), also portraying their contrasting personalities. Gelon was heroized, as opposed to his brother, Hieron, who was viewed as a cruel sovereign. The statues could have been produced in Magna Graecia by a Greek-trained bronze-caster, possibly Pythagoras from Rhegium, although they are generally regarded to have been created in Mainland Greece. Noteworthy is the mineral composition of their clay cores, found to be geologically compatible with Sybaris in Calabria, Central Euboea, Argos and Delphi.102

  • 103 Partida, 2010.

24A significant military-political power of West Greece, represented by numerous monuments in the sanctuary at Delphi, was the Aetolian ἔθνος that commissioned the unusual bicolumnar dedications beside exedras, sculptural groups and probably a two-storey stoa. It is hard to track down the origins or the authors of the bicolumnar type, particularly because –at least so far– it does not seem to appear in the metropolitan sanctuaries of Aetolia, at Thermon or Kalydon. A triangular pillar, made by sculptor Paionios and dedicated jointly by the Naupaktians and the Messenians, was set up at Olympia. Two similar triangular shafts were dedicated at Delphi. One of them is securely identified, on epigraphic grounds, as commissioned by the Naupaktians and the Messenians. Whether Paionios created these ex-votos at both Olympia and Delphi, it remains to be confirmed. As for the bicolumnar monuments, the contribution of Parians in details of their design is worth noting.103 On the other hand, the pillar erected by the Aetolian League in honour of King Eumenes features typically Asiatic masonry. Consequently the invitation of specialized artisans ad hoc, as we propound, sounds fair enough.

  • 104 A collection of inscriptions is exhibited in an arcade on the lower storey of Delphi Museum: Partid (...)
  • 105 Feyel, 2006, p. 478; Partida, 2009, p. 275, 309-314.

25Inscriptions104 manifest relations and contacts reflected in artists’ signatures, epigrams in verse, manumission and agonistic texts, laws and decrees. Building accounts reveal the sources of revenue at Delphi (such as the fine levied upon the Phokians for the above mentioned sacrilege and collected in regular installments), as well as the vault of the people of Delphi, the town’s inhabitants, who made a generous contribution to the temple-rebuilding.105 The latter has a bearing upon the local population’s quality of life on the outskirts of a major, panhellenic sanctuary. Light on their living standards was shed after a careful look on the settlement and the cemetery of Delphi. The opportunity arose from the preparation of a new permanent exhibition titled ‘The Ancient Polis of Delphi’.

  • 106 Amandry, 1981 and 1984.
  • 107 Πετρόπουλος, 1999, p. 123-125; ΠαρτίδαΤσαρούχα, 2009.
  • 108 Πετρίδης, 2001, p. 279-295; ΠαρτίδαΤσαρούχα, 2009.

26On the outskirts of the Apolloneion lies also the Corycean cave,106 which sheltered cult practices and possibly some primitive prophetic rituals. Over the centuries, pilgrims had deposited there an enormous quantity of clay figurines representing deities, mythological creatures, worshippers, actors of comedy, animals and birds among jewelry, nature-bound offerings and coins spreading across a broad time-span and geographical coverage. The earliest grave offerings date in the Mycenaean times, whereas domestic finds date from the Geometric to the early byzantine times, showing almost undisrupted continuity. The Geometric settlement seems robust, with tableware influenced or imported from Thessaly, Argos and Corinth, including Etruscan type kanthars. Imports from Achaea are inferred from motifs and clay consistency, so much in Geometric pottery as in Roman lamps signed by potters from Patras,107 among imports from Corinth and Athens. Noteworthy are the indications for local fabrication and industrial installations at Delphi of the Late Antiquity.108

  • 109 Several of the animal figurines from the Corycean cave, too, find parallels in the Rhodian repertoi (...)
  • 110 Partida, 2010a.
  • 111 For a Boeotian workshop adapting prototypes of Cameiros: Luce, 1992, p. 268 n.7.
  • 112 Luce, 2008.
  • 113 Partida, 2010a.

27It is the grave offerings, however, which emulate thank-offerings. The cemeteries yielded luxurious objects, unusual types of terracotta figurines among pottery (lekythoi, pyxides, alabasters of the Phoenician type, vessels inspired from sea-shells and mussels) and minor crafts originating from the east Mediterranean (Luristan-borne ornaments in ivory). A 6th ct BC tomb of the east necropolis (Logari) contained Rhodian type109 alabasters in the form of maidens or doves. Some grave offerings are distinct: a Boeotian bell-crater110 depicting the judgement of Paris, relief lekythoi of an Attic workshop, plastic vases, a comic figurine of Hercules, busts of the Boeotian or Rhodian type,111 a concentration of diverse types of figurines in a girl’s tomb dating in the 4th ct BC. Such finds make a statement about contemporary society, which should be evaluated (a) in the context of the respective settlement with nicely built houses112 and domestic ware, which suggest the inhabitants’ welfare, and (b) embedded in the history of Delphi and its cultural interactions. Minor crafts seem to reveal an advanced society in ancient Delphi; peak-periods of the religious centre had an impact upon the inhabitants’ quality of life in the circumference of the temenos. Apparently the town was influenced by the constant cultural fermentation inside the oracular sanctuary. The rich furnishing of the 6th and 5th ct BC tombs is consistent with the glory of the sanctuary in the aftermath of colonization and the Persian wars. In the 4th and 3rd BC, also, the innovative grave offerings denote a robust settlement, confirming what we deduce from the aforementioned inscriptions. The Theban hegemony may account for the density of Boeotian type figurines in the cemetery of Delphi as well as in the Corycean Cave during the 4th ct BC. Yet, mutual influence was bound to persevere between the two neighbours, who –notably- shared the prophetic capacity. One century later, some unusual terracotta figurines suggest a local workshop producing variations of types such as the Tanagra women.113 Besides, this was a peak time at Delphi, anticipating the repulse of the Gauls and the re-organization of Soteria Games. The thriving of terracotta sculpture coincides with the new wave introduced by Aetolians in the field of monumental architectural dedications at Delphi. Wounds of the 3rd Sacred War have healed, the temple has been reconstructed and its surroundings are steadily being remodeled. Living at Delphi is quiet and peaceful.

  • 114 Sincere thanks are due to Prof. Vassilis Aravantinos, Director of Boeotian Antiquities, for grantin (...)
  • 115 Croissant (1983, p. 342-344) observed a distinct style betraying local manufacture.
  • 116 Actually Itea was occupied by installations, which supplied Mainland and the Peloponnese with ceram (...)
  • 117 Rolley, 2002, p. 41-54.
  • 118 A Hellenistic terrace in this region has been confirmed by radiocarbon dating: Badie et al., 1997, (...)
  • 119 Déroche, 1996, p. 186-187.
  • 120 Machinery (e.g. cranes) was available and maintained: Feyel, 2006, p. 438.

28Apparently we ought to reckon with local workshops. Excavation of the Thesmophorion at Orchomenos (Boeotia)114 has yielded busts resembling types recovered from (and probably produced at) Kirrha.115 To place those ceramists’ installations in the littoral zone116 on the outskirts of the sanctuary sounds reasonable. The local bronze foundry deduced from moulds, unfinished or abort products and supposedly situated in the Pleistos valley117 could, instead, have been located in the area later taken up by the south-east villa, a sector already terraced in the Classical period118 and occupied by industrial installations in late antiquity, too.119 The polygonal wall on the spot (partially collapsed during a rainstorm in 1984) could be originally related to that bronze foundry, on profane premises at a lower level and beyond the sanctuary. Let us note the analogy to the χαλκουργεῖον on the south slope of the Athenian Acropolis, wherefrom the statues were hauled up.120

  • 121 For the ateliers at Thyia: Hansen-Amandry, 2010, p. 454-456.

29The locality of workshops and ateliers at Delphi has not been systematically investigated; we presume there was no specific area reserved for this purpose; instead, an atelier could be set up on demand, in proximity to the monument under construction. The ἐργαστήρια were probably temporary shacks of perishable material, brick structures, as inferred from accounts,121 located wherever required. Since domestic quarters spread in the periphery of the temenos, the workshops of bronze-casters, sculptors and stone-cutters extended near Castalia and the Gymnasium (the availability of water was a criterion, too) and underneath the grand west stoa. The latter leveled area is conveniently situated near the temenos and beyond its religious boundaries. It is reasonable to assume that each workforce was organized to meet individual needs. For example, the area to the north of the Theban treasury could easily be converted into a portico. Likewise, the many retaining-walls across the sanctuary could receive a few wooden props and a tiled roof, to shelter masons and craftsmen. Some of them were foreign and co-operated with indigenous colleagues and stone-cutters in the project of temple-rebuilding. The tempo of their tools would resonate in the Phaedriades, like a mystic pulse or heartbeat, while they were chiselling and laying blocks of locally quarried white limestone, in order to offer their god one last glorious residence.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Adornato, G., 2008, Delphic enigmas: The Γέλας ἀνάσσων, Polyzalos, and the Charioteer statue, AJA 112, p. 29-55.

Amandry, P., 1944/45, Petits objets de Delphes, BCH 68/69, p. 36-74.

Amandry, P. (ed.), 1981, L’antre corycien, BCH Suppl. VII.

Amandry, P. (ed.), 1984, L’antre corycien, BCH Suppl. IX.

Andrews, T.K., 2000, Sources of metals at Olympia: the Geometric period, in C.C. Mattusch, A. Brauer and S.E. Knudsen (eds), From the Parts to the Whole, 1, JRA Suppl. 39 (Portsmouth, Rhode Island), p. 19-23.

Badie, A., Déroche V. and Pétrides, P., 1997, Delphes, Villa Sud-Est, BCH 121, p. 754-755.

Bernard, P., 1999, Ai Khanoum (Afghanistan): un témoin de l’expansion grecque en Asie centrale, Alexander the Great, from Macedonia to the Oikoumene (Βέροια), p. 225-241.

Boardman, J., 1989, Ελληνική Πλαστική – Κλασική Περίοδος (μτφρ. Δ. Τσουκλίδου), εκδ. Καρδαμίτσα (Αθήνα).

Bommelaer, J.-Fr. (ed.), 1991, Guide de Delphes – Le Site, Paris.

Bommelaer, J.-Fr., 1992, Monuments argiens de Delphes et d’Argos, in Polydipsion Argos, BCH Suppl. XXII, 265-293.

Bommelaer, J.-Fr., 1996, Sur quelques nouveautés de l’architecture du ive siècle, in P. Carlier (ed.), Le ive siècle av. J-C, approches historiographiques, Nancy-Paris, p. 141-156.

Bommelaer, J.-Fr., 2003, Monuments argiens d’époque classique à Delphes, 100 χρόνια αρχαιολογικής δραστηριότητας στο Άργος, Στα βήματα του W. Vollgraff.

Bourguet, E., 1914, Les Ruines de Delphes, Paris.

Bousquet, J., 1943, Offrandes Delphiques – Les Liparéens, REA, p. 40-48.

Bousquet, J. 1989, Corpus des inscriptions de Delphes, II. Les comptes du quatrième et du troisième siècle, Paris.

Chamoux, Fr., 1955, L’Aurige, FD IV, 5, Paris.

Croissant, Fr., 1983, Protomes feminines archaïques, BEFAR 250, Paris.

Croissant, Fr., 1996, Les Athéniens à Delphes avant et après Chéronée, in P. Carlier (ed.), Le ive siècle av. J-C : approaches historiographiques, Nancy-Paris, p. 127-139.

Croissant, Fr., 2003, Les frontons du temple du ive siècle, FD IV, 7, Athens.

Courby, F., 1927, La terrasse du temple, FD II, Paris.

Davies, J., 2007, The Phokian hierosylia at Delphi: quantities and consequences, in K. Sekunda (ed.), AKANTHINA vol. 2, Çdansk, p. 75-96.

De Grazia Vanderpool, C., 2000, Serial Twins: Riace B and some Roman Relatives, in C.C. Mattusch, A. Brauer and S.E. Knudsen (eds), From the Parts to the Whole, 1, JRA Suppl. 39 (Portsmouth, Rhode Island), p. 107-116.

Delaine, J., 2001, Bricks and Mortar – Exploring the economics of building techniques at Rome and Ostia, in D.J. Mattingly and J. Salmon (eds), Economies beyond Agriculture in the Classical World, Routledge.

Déroche, V., 1996, Delphes à la fin de l’Antiquité, L’espace grec, p. 183-187.

Despinis, G., 2001, Vermutungen zum Marathon-Weihgeschenk der Athener in Delphi, JdI 116, p. 103-127.

Feyel, Chr., 2006, Les artisans dans les sanctuaires grecs aux époques classique et hellénistique (à travers la documentation financière en Grèce), BEFAR 318, Paris.

Flacelière, R., 1954, Inscriptions de la terrasse du temple, FD III4, Paris.

Hansen, E., 1960, Les abords du trésor de Siphnos, BCH 84, p. 387-433.

Hansen, E., 2000, Delphes et le travail de la pierre, in A. Jacquemin (ed.), Delphes, Cent Ans après la Grande Fouille, BCH Suppl. 36, p. 201-213.

Hansen, E. and Amandry, P., 2010, Le temple d’Apollon du ive siècle, FD II14, Paris.

Harris-Cline, D., 2000, Broken statues, shattered illusions: mimesis and bronze body parts on the Akropolis, in C.C. Mattusch, A. Brauer and S.E. Knudsen (eds), From the Parts to the Whole, 1, JRA Suppl. 39, Portsmouth, Rhode Island, p. 135-141.

Heilmeyer, W.D., 1979, Frühe Olympische Bronzefiguren. Die Tiervotive, Olympische Forschungen XII, Berlin.

Herrmann, H.V. and Mallwitz, A., 1980, Zur Topographie des Heiligtums, in H-V.Herrmann and A. Mallwitz (eds), Die Funde aus Olympia, Ergebnisse 100-jähriger Ausgrabungstätigkeit, Athen, p. 17-26.

Herz, N. and Palagia, O., 2002, Investigation of marbles at Delphi, in J.J. Herrmann, N. Herz and R. Newman (eds), Asmosia 5, Interdisciplinary Studies on Ancient Stone, London, p. 240-249.

Hölbl, G., 2006, Die Aegyptiaca vom Aphroditetempel auf Thera, AM 121, p. 73-103.

Homolle, Th., 1909, Art primitif. Art archaïque du Péloponnèse et des îles, FD IV, Paris.

Jacquemin, A., 1999, Offrandes Monumentales de Delphes, BEFAR 304, Paris.

Jeffery, L.H., 1961, Local Scripts of Archaic Greece, Oxford.

Καλτσας, Ν., 2001, Τα Γλυπτά του Εθνικού Μουσείου, Αθήνα.

Κεραμοπουλος, Α., 1912, Τοπογραφία Δελφών, Αθήνα.

Κολωνια, Ρ. – Παρτιδα, Ε., 2006, Η νέα έκθεση του Μουσείου Δελφών, οι στόχοι και οι περιορισμοί, ΑΑρχαιολογικό Έργο Θεσσαλίας και Στερεάς Ελλάδας (Βόλος), p. 837-853.

Κουραγιος, Γ., 2002-2005, Δεσποτικό, ένα νέο ιερό του Απόλλωνα, ΑΑΑ 35-38, p. 37-88.

Krumeich, R., 1991, Zu den goldenen Dreifüssen der Deinomeniden in Delphi, JdI 106, p. 37-62.

Ladstaetter, G., 2001, Der Artemistempel von Lousoi, in V. Mitsopoulos-Leon (ed.), Forschungen in der Peloponnes, Athens, p. 143-153.

Laroche, D., 1992, La Tholos de Delphes : forme et destination, in J.-Fr. Bommelaer et E.J. Brill (eds), Centenaire de la Grande Fouille 1892-1903, Actes du Colloque P. Perdrizet, p. 207-223.

Laroche, D. and Jacquemin, A., 2001, Le monument de Daochos ou le trésor des Thessaliens, BCH 125, p. 305-332.

Laroche, D. and Jacquemin, Α., 2001a, Un matériau de construction méconnu à Delphes : la brique crue, in J.-P. Brun and Ph. Jockey (eds), Τέχναι, Melanges Amouretti, Paris, p. 389-398.

Lefèvre, F., 1994, Un document amphictionique inédit du ive siècle, BCH 118, p. 99-112.

Lefèvre, F., 2002, Documents Amphictioniques, CID IV, Paris.

Le Roy, Chr., 1967, Les terres cuites architecturales, FD II.

Maass, M., 1978, Die geometrischen Dreifüsse von Olympia, Olympische Forschungen X, Berlin.

Luce, J-M., 1992, Les terres cuites de Kirrha, in J.-Fr. Bommelaer et E.J. Brill (eds), Centenaire de la Grande Fouille 1892-1903, Actes du Colloque P. Perdrizet, p. 263-275.

Luce, J-M., 2008, L’aire du pilier des Rhodiens (fouille 1990-1992) à la frontière du profane et du sacré, FD II13, Paris.

Lulof, P.S. and Moormann, E.M., 2000, Man or Sphinx? An Early Archaic Bronze Head in the Allard Pierson Museum, in C.C. Mattusch, A. Brauer and S.E. Knudsen (eds), From the Parts to the Whole, 1, JRA Suppl. 39, Portsmouth, Rhode Island, p. 59-64.

Mc Cann, A.M, 2000, The Riace Bronzes: Gelon and Hieron of Syracuse, in C.C. Mattusch, A. Brauer and S.E. Knudsen (eds), From the Parts to the Whole, 1, JRA Suppl. 39, Portsmouth, Rhode Island, p. 97-105.

Maniatis, Y. and Déroche, V., 1989, Identification de marbres antiques à Delphes, BCH 113, p. 403-416.

Mitsopoulos-Leon, V., 2006, Ein Geometrischer Bronzekäfer aus dem Artemisheiligtum in Lousoi, Γεννέθλιον (Μουσείο Κυκλαδικής Τέχνης, Αθήνα), p. 87-93.

Μπουρας, Χ., 2000, Στωικά κτίρια στους Δελφούς και στην Αττική, in A. Jacquemin (ed.), Delphes, Cent Ans après la Grande Fouille, BCH Suppl. 36, p. 283-291.

Otto, B., 2003, Die Wertschätzung von Techne und Techniten in antiken Griechenland, Althellenische Technologie und Technik, Ohlstadt, p. 589-600.

Παρλαμα, Λ. and Σταμπολιδης, Ν. (eds.), 2000, Η πόλη κάτω από την πόλη, Αθήνα.

Partida, E., 2000, The Treasuries at Delphi – an Architectural Study, SIMA 160, Jonsered.

Partida, E., 2000a, Itinerant Boeotian architects and two Boeotian treasuries at Delphi, 3rd Int. Conference on Boeotian Studies, Επετηρίς Εταιρείας Βοιωτικών Μελετών, Αθήνα, p. 536-564.

Partida, E., 2000b, Architecture in Parian marble at Delphi, in D. Schilardi and D. Katsonopoulou (eds), Paria Lithos, Parian quarries, marble and workshops of sculpture, Athens, p. 355-363.

Partida, Ε., 2003, Ανατολίτες στους Δελφούς από την ίδρυση του ιερού ως την ύστερη αρχαιότητα, Corpus 53, p. 38-49.

Partida, Ε., 2004, Δελφοί: Δαυλός και Δίαυλος Πολιτισμού (Cultural Foundation of the Bank of Cyprus), Athens.

Partida, E., 2004a, Documentary and votive reliefs from Delphi, Mortals and Immortals in Ancient Greece, Beijing exhibition (China Social Sciences Press), p. 212-213, 280-283, nrs 78,108,109.

Partida, Ε., 2006, Δελφοί και Εγγύς ΑνατολήΙχνηλατώντας τις σχέσεις μέσα από τα αναθήματα, ΑΑρχαιολογικό Έργο Θεσσαλίας και Στερεάς Ελλάδας, Βόλος, p. 799-815.

Partida, Ε., 2007, Αρχαιολογικός χώρος Δελφών, ADelt (in press).

Partida, Ε., 2008, Νέες Υπαίθριες Εκθέσεις στον περιβάλλοντα χώρο του Μουσείου, ADelt (in press).

Partida, E., 2009, From hypaethral depots to hypaethral exhibitions, casting light on architecture and society in 4th-3rd BC Delphi, ΑΜ 124, p. 273-324.

Partida, Ε., 2009a, Υπαίθριες εκθέσεις στους Δελφούς: μια προσπάθεια ανασύστασης μνημείων και κοινωνίας της αρχαιότητας, ΓΑρχαιολογικό Έργο Θεσσαλίας και Στερεάς Ελλάδας (in press).

Partida, E., 2010, Parian creators at Delphi and a new find from the age of Skopas, in SKOPAS OF PAROS, 3rd Int. Conference on the Archaeology of Paros and the Cyclades, June 2010 (in press).

Partida, E., 2010a, From the Muses of Mt. Helikon to the Nymphs and ‘Tanagra women’ of Mt. Parnassus, 6th Int. Conference on Boeotian Studies (forthcoming).

Partida, Ε. and Τσαρουχα, Α., 2009, Κτερίσματα, οικιστικά κατάλοιπα κι ένα λατρευτικό σπήλαιο συνθέτουν το « Μουσείο Αρχαίας Πόλης Δελφών », ΓΑρχαιολογικό Έργο Θεσσαλίας και Στερεάς Ελλάδας (in press).

Paunov, E. and Torbov, N., 2000, The bronze vessels from tomb 2 in the Mogilanska Mogila tumulus at Vratsa (NW Bulgaria), in C.C. Mattusch, A. Brauer and S.E. Knudsen (eds), From the Parts to the Whole, 1, JRA Suppl. 39, Portsmouth, Rhode Island, p. 163-172.

Πενταζος Ε. – Σαρλα Μ., 1984, Δελφοί, Αθήνα.

Perdrizet, P., 1908, Petits bronzes, terres cuites, antiquités diverses, FD V1, Paris.

Petridιs, P., 1996, Das frühchristliche Delphi. Die keramischen Zeugnisse, in M. Maass (ed.), στο Delphi – Orakel am Nabel der Welt, Karlsruhe, p. 121-124.

Πετριδης Π., 2001, Εισαγωγές Αττικής κεραμικής στους Δελφούς κατά την παλαιοχριστιανική περίοδο, ΗΕπιστημονική Συνάντηση Νοτιο-Ανατολικής Αττικής, Κερατέα, p. 279-295.

Πετροπουλος, Μ., 1999, Τα εργαστήρια των Ρωμαϊκών λυχναριών της Πάτρας και το λυχνομαντείο, Αθήνα.

Πλιακου Γ., 2009, Η λατρεία και η μνημειακή διαμόρφωση του ιερού της Δωδώνης, Το αρχαιολογικό Μουσείο Ιωαννίνων, επιμ. Κ. Ζάχος, p. 142-159.

Rolley, C., 2002, Le travail du bronze á Delphes, BCH 126, p. 41-54.

Romano, I.B., 2000, The Dreros sphyrelata: a re-examination of their date and function, in C.C. Mattusch, A. Brauer and S.E. Knudsen (eds), From the Parts to the Whole, 1, JRA Suppl. 39, Portsmouth, Rhode Island, p. 40-50.

Rougemont, G., 1991, Delphes et les cités grecques d’Italie du Sud et de la Sicile, in La Magna Grecia e i grandi santuari della Madrepatria, Taranto, p. 157-192.

Σταμπολιδης, Ν. (ed.), 2003, Πλόες από τη Σιδώνα στη Χουέλβα. Σχέσεις Λαών Μεσογείου, 16ος–6ος αι. π.Χ., Αθήνα.

Stewart, A., 1982, Dionysos at Delphi: the pediments of the sixth temple of Apollo and religious reform in the age of Alexander, in B. Barr-Sharrar and E. Borza (eds), Macedonia and Greece in Late Classical and Early Hellenistic times, , Studies in the History of Art, vol. 10, Washington, p. 205-227.

Schmidt-Collinet, A., 1986, Aspects of ‘Hellenism’ in Nabataean and Palmyrene funerary architecture, Ελληνισμός στην Ανατολή (European Cultural Centre, Delphi), p. 131-144.

Schmidt-Douna, B., 2004, Frühe Peripteraltempel in Nordgriechenland, AM 119, p. 107-145.

Sinn, U., 1990, Das Heraion von Perachora. Eine sakrale Schutzzone in der Korinthischen Peraia, AM 105, p. 53-116.

Spivey, N. and Squire, M., 2004, Panorama of the Classical World, Paul Jetty Museum, Thames & Hudson, London.

Τιβεριος, Μ., 2004, Οι πανεπιστημιακές ανασκαφές στο Καραμπουρνάκι Θεσσαλονίκης και η παρουσία των Φοινίκων στο Βόρειο Αιγαίο, επιμ. Ν.ΣταμπολίδηςΑ.Γιαννικουρή, Το Αιγαίο στην Πρώιμη Εποχή Σιδήρου, Αθήνα, p. 295-306.

Tomlinson, R.A., 1990, Perachora, in O. Reverdin and B. Grange (eds), Le Sanctuaire Grec, Entretiens sur l’Antiquité Classique, tome XXXVII, Genève, p. 321-351.

Ulrichs, H.N., 1992, Περί των πόλεων Κρίσσα και Κίρρα (μτφρ. Χρ. Βούσουρας), Φωκικά Χρονικά Δ’, p. 139-156.

Weir, R., 1999, Nero and the Herakles frieze at Delphi, BCH 123, p. 397-404.

Willer, F., 2000, Conservation of the so-called Agon, the life-size bronze statue from Mahdia, in C.C. Mattusch, A. Brauer and S.E. Knudsen (eds), From the Parts to the Whole, 1, JRA Suppl. 39, Portsmouth, Rhode Island, p. 235-240.

Haut de page

Notes

1 For the artisans’ status and craft specialization: Otto, 2003, 589-600; Spivey–Squire, 2004, p. 162-165. Payments of sculptors were higher than those of architects (Feyel, 2006, p. 421), probably because their creations were regarded as embellishing rather than functional.

2 Spivey–Squire, 2004, p. 317, fig. 489.

3 Hansen, 1960.

4 Παρτίδα, 2004, ch. 7.

5 Κουράγιος, 2002-2005, p. 82.

6 East of the altar (by the harbour) an older structure might be a treasury (Sinn, 1990, p. 103). That this building contained the navel-bowls, which subsequently filled up the sacred pool, is merely a speculation.

7 Partida, 2000.

8 For the development of the technique of working local, Parnassus limestone, the different methods and tools employed: Hansen, 2000, p. 201-213. Imported stone was often worked by foreign masons.

9 Partida, 2010.

10 Discussed in Partida, 2010.

11 Partida, 2000, ch.3, with references to work by Dinsmoor, La Genière et al.

12 Schmidt-Douna, 2004, p. 125.

13 Le Roy, 1967, p. 65-87.

14 Homolle, 1909, p. 62, fig. 32.

15 Partida, 2000, p. 162-172.

16 Ladstaetter, 2001, p. 147, 151.

17 Bommelaer, 2003. I am grateful to Prof. J.-Fr. Bommelaer for offering me his manuscript, prior to publication.

18 Le Roy, 1967.

19 Note, for example, the varieties of poros used in the palaestra and the temple of Apollo. Traditionally poros stone was imported from North Peloponnese, especially Corinth (Hansen-Amandry, 2010, p. 179-182). Very interesting is the column-drum ‘abandoned’ at the port of Kirrha.

20 Otherwise the great domed and vaulted structures of engineering masterpieces would not have been possible: Delaine 2001, p. 230.

21 On the analogy of the Heraion at Olympia. Κεραμόπουλος 1912, p. 63.

22 Feyel, 2006, p. 389.

23 Hansen-Amandry, 2010, p. 451 n. 32.

24 Hansen-Amandry, 2010, p. 454-456.

25 Laroche–Jacquemin, 2001, p. 305-332 and 2001a, p. 394.

26 Maniatis-Déroche, 1989, p. 403-416.

27 For this iconographic fusion, assimilation or interchangeability: Stewart, 1982, p. 205-227, esp. 207. Cf. Croissant, 2003, p. 31-37, 163-171.

28 Croissant, 1996, p. 133.

29 For the reflection of politics in contemporary art: Croissant, 1996, p. 127-139, esp. 138.

30 Partida, 2000b, p. 355-363. Cf. Hertz-Palagia, 2002, p. 240-249.

31 Παρτίδα 2004, ch. 2, esp. 106; Hansen, 2000, p. 201-213.

32 Within a populous workforce. Hansen-Amandry, 2010, 486, p. 490-494.

33 Feyel, 2006, p. 342.

34 Feyel, 2006, p. 348.

35 Πολύαινος, Στρατηγικά 2,1,7. Cf. Feyel, 2006, p. 364.

36 Examination of geometric bronze offerings (out of a substantial collection of 17.500 items) yielded that most votive tripods and figurines were made on site by local craftsmen together with masters of resident branch foundries from various Peloponnesian sites and Athens, who came at Olympia specifically to cast bronze. Raw materials, imported from the Adriatic and the Balkans, were stockpiled at the sanctuary and itinerant craftsmen carried out the work. Andrews, 2000, p. 19-23.

37 Feyel, 2006, p. 438.

38 Bousquet, 1989, n. 31, l. 96, 100, 106.

39 Bousquet, 1989, n. 58 I 2; 59 II, 22, 25.

40 For bronze figurines: Heilmeyer, 1979, 192; for tripods: Maass, 1978, p. 105-106.

41 The Trojan Horse, Seven against Thebes (with the chariot of Amphiaraos), Epigonoi and the kings of Argos on semicircular niches. Three more Argive monuments at Delphi are induced from studying the stones (Bommelaer, 2003).

42 Pausanias X,9,7-11. It is estimated that the Spartans mustered nine sculptors to produce 37 monumental bronze statues for their victory’s commemoration: De Grazia Vanderpool, 2000, p. 113-115.

43 A close parallel comes from a tumulus in NW Bulgaria, which contained a set of vases of Macedonian origins, including a hydria of 370-350 BC with a moulded rim resembling an Ionic cyma: Paunov–Torbov, 2000, p. 165.

44 Πεντάζος-Σαρλά 1984, p. 137.

45 Partida, 2004a, p. 280-283, nrs 108,109.

46 Partida, 2010.

47 Partida, 2010.

48 They are mentioned in Pindar’s Eighth Paean. I sincerely thank Ian Rutherford (Reading University, Classics Dept.) for his useful comments on this topic and for sharing his idea that the poem (including an invented myth) perhaps aimed to ingratiate with a Theban patron.

49 Partida, 2000a, p. 555-561.

50 Partida, 2010a.

51 Hansen-Amandry, 2010, p. 455.

52 Hansen–Amandry, 2010, p. 486; Feyel, 2006, p. 364.

53 It was especially preferred for colonnades. Marble from Alyki of Thasos was imported for the columns of an Early Christian basilica on the site of the Gymnasium. Maniatis-Déroche, 1989, p. 403-416.

54 Μπούρας, 2000, p. 283-291, esp. 289-290; Παρτίδα, 2004, p. 145-147.

55 Partida, 2000, chs. 14 and 15, with references to and discussion of work by H. Pomtow, W.B. Dinsmoor, G. Daux. E. Langlotz et al.

56 Weir, 1999, p. 402 n. 24.

57 Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 799-815 ; 2004, ch. 3 ; 2003, p. 38-49.

58 Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 803 ; 2004, p. 133, 142 ; 2003, p. 39, 44.

59 Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 802 ; 2004, p. 129, 140 ; 2003, p. 40, 42.

60 Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 802 ; 2004, p. 140 ; 2003, p. 43.

61 Παρλαμά–Σταμπολίδης 2000, p. 241. Cf. Τιβέριος 2004, p. 295-306.

62 Their Phoenician or Assyrian typology is unusual and their prehistoric or archaic date is dubious: Amandry, 1944/45, p. 36, 50; Perdrizet, 1908, 25, figs. 100-101. On one of them we discern perhaps a Πότνιος Θηρῶν flanked by crocodiles.

63 Mitsopoulos-Leon, 2006, p. 87-93.

64 These exotic pendants of Egyptian provenance (imported to Paros, Naxos, Lefkandi, Eretria, Santorini etc) symbolized renaissance or post-mortem life and became the objects of trade across the Mediterranean by Phoenicians and perhaps also Euboean merchants. Hölbl, 2006, 73-103; Σταμπολίδης, 2003, p. 578-581.

65 Comparable divine apparition on the east pediment of the Alkmaeonid temple.

66 Differences in style and manufacture justify an estimated 30 years’ time-span between the male and the female statues in the Delphi group. Romano, 2000, p. 40-50, esp. 49 n. 60.

67 Παρτίδα, 2009α.

68 Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 804-805, fig. 5; 2004, p. 130, 143; 2003, p. 45-46.

69 Petridis, 1996, p. 124.

70 Schmidt-Collinet, 1986, p. 131-144.

71 Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 807-808; 2004, p. 147-149.

72 Bernard, 1999, p. 237; Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 808.

73 Rougemont, 1991, p. 157-192; Παρτίδα, 2004, p. 307-313.

74 Of the 5th BC, now in British Museum. The high lead content is regarded as typical of bronzes from Magna Graecia and Etruria. Mc Cann, 2000, p. 101, fig. 3.

75 Not at all unusual at Delphi - see the monument of Daochos at Delphi and of Agias at Pharsala.

76 Laroche, 1992, p. 218-221 ; Bommelaer, 1996, p. 146-150.

77 Partida, 2000, ch. 16.

78 Bourguet, 1914, p. 212-213; Jeffery, 1961, p. 350; Bommelaer, 1991, p. 152, 223.

79 Probably restored Λιπαραῖοι ἀπὸ Τυρσανῶν. It preserves sockets for bronze statues: Courby, 1927, p. 142-155, 171, fig. 107; Bommelaer, 1991, p. 152, fig. 58.

80 Bousquet, 1989, p. 182; Bommelaer, 1991, p. 152.

81 A marble plinth reading HIKATI, trimmed and re-shaped into a column-capital in the Byzantine times (Bousquet, 1943, p. 40-48) and a block reading ΑΡΑΙΟΙ with the letters Θ Σ along a second line below (Flacelière, 1954, nr 184). ΗΙΚΑΤΙ suggests 20 statues, probably of Apollo, to equate the 20 captivated vessels, after Pausanias. The inscribed blocks date in the 5th ct BC but were re-engraved in the 4th BC (Jacquemin, 1999, nrs 337-338).

82 The double facing of the east, re-entrant end of the polygonal wall (referred to in an inscription of the imperial period, concerning repairs, Lefèvre, 2002, nr 140) could justify statues on its summit. Besides, the inscription mentions explicitly τὸνάλημμα τό τεσω τὸπὸ τοὺςνδριάντας.

83 Krumeich, 1991, p. 37-62; Adornato, 2008, p. 29-55.

84 Starting from paleography and a rasura on the preserved block from the stone base of the quadriga, Adornato (2008, p. 29-55) proposes that the base should be dissociated from the Charioteer statue, as belonging to a different dedication.

85 See the proposal for restoring the Daochos group inside a Thessalian oikos: Laroche–Jacquemin, 2001, p. 305-332.

86 Displayed in the new Museum (Κολώνια-Παρτίδα, 2006, p. 842-843). Some of them, with inlays and gilding, reflect technologies, which originated in Egypt and the Near East.

87 The traditional thesis has been challenged, as regards the fine levied upon the Phokians by the Amphiktyony: the 10,000 talents suggested by Diodorus are proposed to be much less: Davies, 2007, p. 75-96.

88 Harris-Cline, 2000, p. 135-141. Mutilated bronze statues failed to offer an illusion of vividness and betrayed their artificial nature. They (and their weight) were inventoried and recast in new ones, following current artistic trends and values.

89 The procurement of space was a diachronic issue in every highly frequented sanctuary. By the end of the 7th ct BC the accumulation of dedications at Olympia necessitated a systematic clearance: the debris of plenty of obsolete geometric offerings was found, mingled with ashes from the altar, beneath later monuments: Herrmann-Mallwitz, 1980, p. 17-26.

90 In the course of a remodeling of the sanctuary, the sacred pool was filled with debris including navel-bowls thrown at random, as in a repository of divine property. Alternatively, they could have been kept in a building nearby and fallen into the pool during some earthquake. However, Boardman’s proposal for their ritual throw into the pool during mantic sessions is not embraced. Sinn, 1990, 103. An earthquake in 525 BC caused severe turbulence to the hydraulic network of Perachora. Then the sacred pool was probably filled with earthwork. The site was remodeled and renovated again in the 4th ct BC, after another intense earth-tremor. Tomlinson, 1990, p. 321-351, esp. 341.

91 The shrine at Dodona was hypaethral until the end of the 5th ct BC. An enceinte of bronze tripods with cauldrons encircled and protected the sacred oak, until the early 4th ct BC, when the first temple of Zeus was built near the prophetic tree. Πλιάκου, 2009, p. 142-159.

92 See sacred law of the 4th ct BC: Lefèvre, 1994, p. 99-112.

93 Iron pegs and flanges served to join head and torso. The head was a separate casting, most likely to be placed on a limestone or wooden body. A votive offering or grave-marker crouched on a pillar. Lulof–Moormann, 2000, p. 59-64.

94 The life-size statue of a nude winged youth (late 2nd BC) had been interpreted as Ἀγών, the personification of contest. New scientific analysis, however, suggests he was Ἒρως, holding a bow and an arrow rather than a palm branch. The lead-filling, poured into both legs, helped mount the statue on its stone base and establish its posture. The ancient bronze-caster balanced the statue, using the bow and arrow in his outstretched hand to compensate for the wings. Willer, 2000, p. 235-240.

95 Statuette of Poseidon from Livadostra bay; statue of Zeus or Poseidon from Artemision cape; the ephebe of Marathon; youth from the Antikythera wreck; head of philosopher from Antikythera; the jockey from Artemision cape; statue of Augustus from the Euboea Sea: nrs 86, 93, 242, 248, 275, 286, 318 after Kaltsas, 2001.

96 Chamoux, 1955, p. 57-66.

97 Boardman, 1989, p. 65.

98 De Grazia Vanderpool, 2000, p. 107-116.

99 For the identification of remains along the first stretch of the sacred way: Bommelaer, 1992, pl. 38.

100 Examining marble copies of the bronze archetype, Despinis (2001, p. 103-127) purports that the iconography of goddess Athena crowning Miltiades inspired the neighbouring monument of the Spartan admirals with Lysander being crowned by Poseidon.

101 The possibility that the Corinth portraits (in a linear relation) followed the prototype of the Delphi Dioskouri by Antiphanes confirms their classical bronze relative, Riace B, as a product of an Argive workshop. De Grazia Vanderpool, 2000, p. 116.

102 Mc Cann, 2000, p. 97.

103 Partida, 2010.

104 A collection of inscriptions is exhibited in an arcade on the lower storey of Delphi Museum: Partida, 2009 and 2009a; Παρτίδα, 2007 and 2008. Many thanks are due to Prof. Dominique Mulliez, for his significant contribution.

105 Feyel, 2006, p. 478; Partida, 2009, p. 275, 309-314.

106 Amandry, 1981 and 1984.

107 Πετρόπουλος, 1999, p. 123-125; ΠαρτίδαΤσαρούχα, 2009.

108 Πετρίδης, 2001, p. 279-295; ΠαρτίδαΤσαρούχα, 2009.

109 Several of the animal figurines from the Corycean cave, too, find parallels in the Rhodian repertoire.

110 Partida, 2010a.

111 For a Boeotian workshop adapting prototypes of Cameiros: Luce, 1992, p. 268 n.7.

112 Luce, 2008.

113 Partida, 2010a.

114 Sincere thanks are due to Prof. Vassilis Aravantinos, Director of Boeotian Antiquities, for granting me access to photographs of his recent finds, and to Marcella Pisani for a fruitful conversation.

115 Croissant (1983, p. 342-344) observed a distinct style betraying local manufacture.

116 Actually Itea was occupied by installations, which supplied Mainland and the Peloponnese with ceramic products until the 18th ct AD: Ulrichs, 1992, p. 142, 146.

117 Rolley, 2002, p. 41-54.

118 A Hellenistic terrace in this region has been confirmed by radiocarbon dating: Badie et al., 1997, p. 754.

119 Déroche, 1996, p. 186-187.

120 Machinery (e.g. cranes) was available and maintained: Feyel, 2006, p. 438.

121 For the ateliers at Thyia: Hansen-Amandry, 2010, p. 454-456.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Elena C. Partida, « The nexus of inter-regional relations established by creators and artisans in the Ancient sanctuary and the town of Delphi », Pallas, 87 | 2011, 223-242.

Référence électronique

Elena C. Partida, « The nexus of inter-regional relations established by creators and artisans in the Ancient sanctuary and the town of Delphi », Pallas [En ligne], 87 | 2011, mis en ligne le 01 mars 2012, consulté le 26 juin 2017. URL : http://pallas.revues.org/2024 ; DOI : 10.4000/pallas.2024

Haut de page

Auteur

Elena C. Partida

Curator of Antiquities
10th Ephorate of Prehistoric & Classical Antiquities, Museum of Delphi
elpartida@gmail.com

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

Licence Creative Commons
Pallas – Revue d'études antiques est mis à disposition selon les termes de la licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.

Haut de page
  • Logo Presses universitaires du Midi
  • Revues.org