Part I
Introduction
Introductory framework
Textiles are the widest imaginable category of material culture,1 since they have a broad range of uses as a form of protection from environmental conditions, from clothing to shelter. Over time, textiles have been used as swaddling for babies, as shrouds for the dead, as bandages, as tents, blankets, curtains, and cushions, and also as containers for people, objects, or food. Textiles are also used in equipment such as fishing or hunting nets and sails. And, of course, they are used as clothing. The history of textiles is therefore vital to a greater understanding of the human experience, since textiles represent one of the earliest craft technologies and have always been part of human subsistence, economy, and exchange.2 This centrality of textiles has caused Harlow and Nosch to argue for the inclusion of textiles among the âbig themesâ of scholarship on the ancient Mediterranean, and for greater recognition of the fact that textiles were essential and ubiquitous in the past.3
Scholarship on Classical antiquity, however, still often overlooks this important category of material culture. This omission is, in part, connected with the fact that the textiles themselves are only very rarely preserved in the archaeological record. In the rare instances where textiles are preserved, it is due to exceptional climatic conditions, such as freezing, waterlogging, or desiccation â conditions that are not prevalent in ancient Greece. There are, therefore, only very few preserved textile remains from ancient Greece, and these rare examples are almost exclusively from burials.4 Furthermore, textiles tend to be recovered either in the form of small fragments or in the form of so-called pseudomorphs, which means that, as a result of chemical interaction with metal objects, they are in a mineralised state.5 A further reason for the neglect of textiles in Classical scholarship is the general underestimation of the importance of textiles in much modern scholarship, which is most likely rooted in the perceived gender divide in textile production. In other words, textiles were usually assigned to the realm of women, which was not deemed worthy of intense study in the predominantly male scholarship of the 20th century.6
Classical scholarship that has discussed textiles has tended to focus primarily on clothing. Over the past century, there has been a significant amount of scholarship on the appearance of ancient Greek dress,7 but the earlier studies do not discuss other aspects of textiles or contexts. Within the last few decades, however, scholarship has moved beyond attempting to establish the appearance of Greek clothes to analysing the role of dress in signaling aspects of identity such as gender, status, ethnicity, and age.8 Such studies have demonstrated the great importance of textiles in antiquity as well as their potential significance as a source of information about ancient societies. Furthermore, recent scholarship has established that textiles were a very important part of ancient economies.9 The integration of textiles into the mainstream of current discussions in archaeological theory is therefore an important direction for research, since it has direct impact on basic theoretical assumptions and paradigms.10 In neglecting textiles, we run the risk of developing a distorted view of ancient cultures.
Neglect of textiles is also prevalent in scholarship on ancient Greek religion and ritual, although it is one of the most vibrant and rapidly developing branches of Classical scholarship.11 This neglect is related to the fact that classicists and philologists focus primarily on written sources, while archaeologists have focused mostly on architecture, iconography, and votive offerings that have survived in the archaeological record. Arguments have already been made, however, for the need of a better integration of archaeological material into historically oriented scholarship on ancient Greek religion, where material remains often serve as mere illustrations to aspects or features of Greek religion. Some scholars have proven to be important exceptions to this separation between written sources and the material record. Among the most important are Burkert and Ekroth,12 who both have integrated different types of sources into their studies on ancient Greek religion and ritual, especially sacrifice. This focus on sacrifice in particular has become prevalent in studies of Greek ritual and religion, perhaps in part as a result of influence from studies in social anthropology, where such topics have been prominent in recent decades, and in part because these rites are recognisable in both the written and archaeological record, in the form of animal bones, vessels, altars, iconography, etc.
This brief introduction clearly illustrates that there is a gap in research on the role and importance of textiles in ancient Greek religion and ritual. My intention, therefore, is to introduce textiles into the study of ancient Greek religion in order to illuminate the roles that textiles played in the performance of Greek ritual and their wider effect on participantsâ experience of ritual. Among the questions that I plan to answer here are: how and where can we detect the use of textiles in sanctuaries? How were textiles used in rituals? What was the impact of textiles on the performance of these rituals and the people involved?
Chronological and geographical scope
I adopt a broadly inclusive chronological scope to document the presence and ritual use of textiles in ancient Greek sanctuaries. The documentation includes source material primarily from the 7th century until the end of the 1st millennium BC. In addition, comparative archaeological evidence from the surrounding periods is included. I do not confine myself to the conventionally defined chronological periods, because this historical or art-historical ordering of Greek antiquity into Archaic, Classical, and Hellenistic periods is not particularly well-suited to the study of cult and religion in ancient Greece.13 I do, however, still employ these conventional period designations, since they are an established part of scholarly research and a useful tool in a study such as this. This long chronological view is not meant to give an impression of unbroken continuity, and I am aware of the possible pitfalls that may result, since this approach involves potentially severe methodological challenges, inasmuch as it is difficult to draw conclusions from material from very disparate periods. Nevertheless, the adoption of a wide time-span does allow for a broad perspective on what is not so clear in narrowly focused studies.
Although the Late Bronze Age falls well outside the parameters of this study, it should be noted that attestations of the ritual use of textiles is found in the Mycenaean Period, primarily in wall-paintings as well as in Linear B.14 I am not necessarily arguing for continuity, but it must be said that what we know of Late Bronze Age ritual does seem to prefigure the later use of textiles in Greek cult and ritual.
Similarly, I adopt a broad scope with regard to geography, which allows for useful points of comparison. I do not confine myself to the area of modern Greece or the Aegean, but include relevant comparative material from the wider Mediterranean region, from southern Italy to the Near East, yet still with a primary focus on the Aegean. This geographical scope is meant to avoid an Atheno-centric study, and represents an attempt to balance the rich material from Athens with sources from the periphery of the Greek world.
Theoretical framework
As a disci...