Skip to navigation – Site map

HomeNuméros24A Ghost’s Burial? How the Extraor...

A Ghost’s Burial? How the Extraordinary Use of Terracottas in a Late Archaic Tomb Might Have Served to Prevent Encounters with Unhappy Spirits

Ernst-Andreas Neumann

Abstract

This article is devoted to a clay tub burial from Athens, laid out in the early fifth century B.C.E., where vessels have been found in unusual types, number, and quality. Even more, central parts of the skeleton were missing. Since the objects were arranged in a very special way, the impression arises that the bones have been replaced by vessels and terracotta figurines. Discussing the reasons for such a practice, a reburial evolves as the most likely option. By a glimpse on ancient ghost stories and images, it is pointed out that the reburial might have been triggered by a certain belief: the possibility that the dead could come back to earth. It is argued that in this mindset the replacement of the corpse seemed necessary to prevent the spirit of the deceased, disturbed in his rest by the destruction of the original burial, of leaving Hades and haunting the place of the original grave.

Top of page

Full text

  • 1 I stumbled across this grave during the research on my PhD thesis on terracotta figurines in Attic (...)
  • 2 See Stackelberg 1837, 42–43, where he claims to be the excavator of the grave. The grave has been r (...)
  • 3 See Corbett 1960, 52–54. Research in the British Museum, which holds Burgon’s collection, might wel (...)

1In the very first book about the burial customs of ancient Greeks, Die Gräber der Hellenen by Otto von Stackelberg, a picture of a clay tub burial (fig. 1) can be found that shows two unusual features:1 first, the strangely regular pattern of placement of its terracotta figurines and vessels, and second, it lacks some of the bones of the body, although others are well preserved. Therefore, it deserves a thorough discussion, and in this discussion an explanation for these unusual features will be presented, although only on a hypothetical level. The grave was found in 1813 in front of the ancient Acharnian Gate of Athens and immediately drawn afterwards by Stackelberg himself.2 No further information about the discovery is given, but it is remarkable that Thomas Burgon excavated in the same year at the same findspot, were he found 45 burials, one of which contained the famous Burgon Amphora.3

Fig. 1. Clay tub burial, Athens, ca. 500–480 B.C.E. (length ca. 1–1,35 m). Print of a copper engraving by G.B. Cipriani after a drawing by O.M. von Stackelberg

Fig. 1. Clay tub burial, Athens, ca. 500–480 B.C.E. (length ca. 1–1,35 m). Print of a copper engraving by G.B. Cipriani after a drawing by O.M. von Stackelberg

Scan by Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg from Stackelberg 1837, pl. 8. https://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/​diglit/​stackelberg1837/​0105/​image

  • 4 Usually clay tubs, which must have been some household vessel, did not have their own lids. For bur (...)
  • 5 Stackelberg 1837, 43 gives the measures of the clay tub: “4 F.[uß] 11 Z.[oll] in der Länge, 1 F. ¼ (...)
  • 6 This is not evident from a short discussion by Rumscheid 1999, 1037, 1046–1047 since he uses “enthr (...)
  • 7 Characteristic is the oval shape of the belly, which is missing an indention, see Knigge 1976, 33–3 (...)
  • 8 Since the other vessels fit that date, it is assumed that they are not reused from an older burial (...)

2At the first glance, the grave looks quite familiar to the keen eye. For a burial container, a clay tub had been used, a so-called larnax, from which it is said that a lid was also preserved.4 At one end of a ca. 1–1,35 m long5 clay tub is the skull of the deceased, and at the other end the lower parts of the legs are visible. The space between the legs as well as the rest of the interior is entirely covered by clay vessels and terracotta figurines; one might think at first that no other parts of the deceased are visible. Judging from the figurines, the burial must have taken place between ca. 510 and 470 B.C.E., because it was uncommon to use figurines of enthroned women for burials before and afterwards.6 The shape and décor of the oblong oil vessels (lekythoi) point to a date around 500–480 B.C.E.7 Identical lekyhoi are frequently found in graves that have been bought together as an ensemble, surely shortly before the burial, and not long after their production. It follows then that they provide a date for the burial.8

  • 9 See Kurtz and Boardman 1976, 97–98; see also Houby-Nielsen 2000, 153.
  • 10 See Stroszeck 2012, 58; Houby-Nielsen 2000, 153–155.
  • 11 An example gives the ‘South Hill’ and ‘South Way’ from the Kerameikos necropolis, where ca. 150 chi (...)

3The arrangement of the vessels around the region of the legs is very orderly, which is a common feature. High-quality drinking vessels (cups and skyphoi) and a lamp in the middle, a lekythos on the right leg, and two small vessels next to the left leg, both probably for ointment and makeup (a ‘salt cellar’ and a plemochoe). Nevertheless, the number, quality, and some of the types of these vessels are not usually found in clay tub graves, a burial type which was exclusively used for children in Athens; we might have an exception here.9 The three big high-quality cups are uncommon, even more so if Stackelberg’s suggestion is true and one of them was actually a phiale; also unusual are the mushroom-formed plemochoe, and the lamp. I am uncertain if it is common that one of the vessels, a skyphos with a flat cup or plate used as lid, contained ointment. Either it was a replacement for a similar shaped pyxis, or not properly recognized by the excavator, which is doubtful. Children’s clay tub burials usually contained mainly lekythoi, small ‘miniature’ drinking vessels, and small pyxides as containers for several things.10 These are typically of modest quality, since it is very rare to find more refined examples.11

  • 12 Was it taken out immediately after the burial had been found, and replaced erroneously for the draw (...)
  • 13 Scenes on ‘low-quality’ black-figure lekythoi are often neglected, and this shall be the case here (...)
  • 14 See a cenotaph from the Kerameikos necropolis in Kübler 1976, 76–77, no. 255 (for stratigraphic rea (...)
  • 15 The cenotaph no. 5 HTR 81 II from the Kerameikos in Kübler 1976, 64–65, no. 230, pl. 21, no. 2 and (...)

4It is time to have a look at the stranger aspect of this burial. First, four terracotta figurines of seated women were arranged in a way that seems to trace the form of the deceased. Placed opposite one another, their profiles visualize the shoulder and the hip bones. Moreover, small drinking vessels (two skyphoi and a krateriskos) were arranged in a way that mimics a spine. And finally, oblong lekythoi lay where one would assume that organs, such as the lungs or stomach, would have been. These vessels literally replace the body, or maybe the arms of the deceased; note the placement of the upper lekythoi parallel to the bones of the upper arms. At a free space at the right side of the body a lekythos seems to be missing, which could be the one laying at the right leg. From the drawing it looks identical to the one on the other side.12 One of the lekythoi shows a black-figure scene with a chariot, and it is the only vessel in the burial with figural decoration.13 The arrangement of all these vessels in place of the thorax had been possible because many of the bones, and therefore the main part of the body, were missing. Such bones frequently do not survive the ravages of time, but in this case the skull, the leg bones, and the upper arm bones, as well as the vessels, have been preserved intact. This fact puzzled Stackelberg, and it may have been the reason why he drew and published this burial in such detail. Clearly, the placement of the objects and the lack of the bones are connected. Given that fact, it seems hard to reject the idea that the body-like appearance of the offerings was intentional. The way in which all these items were arranged is striking. During my work on terracotta figurines in the graves of Athens, I have not seen a similar case, nor am I aware of any other, elsewhere. Nevertheless, there are a few examples of cenotaphs in Athens where the whole corpse is missing, perhaps either due to a burial of the body in a faraway place, which could occur after a battle, or its loss perhaps at sea.14 In at least one case15 from the late Archaic period, a big stone was buried instead of the deceased, and objects were placed next to it, as if it were the corpse.

  • 16 See N. N. 1844, 389.
  • 17 The fact that the feet are preserved might point on the possibility that the deceased had not been (...)
  • 18 In fact, I am not aware of other reburials in late Archaic Athens (cases like the displacement of t (...)

5Of course, not only is the placement of the objects striking, but the missing body parts as well. How do the main parts of a body go missing in Athens around 500–480 B.C.E.? One can think of catastrophes like earthquakes, when a column might have fallen on some unlucky passerby, or a sailor stuck and crushed between two ships. Such a catastrophe has been assumed by Stackelberg, who himself lived in a time when fatal injuries like these must have been very unusual, except for soldiers in wartime. Even in those proposed cases, it should have been possible to recover the body for burial. It has been suggested that the dead body was left unburied until it was buried sometimes later, after it had already suffered from feeding beasts, but this suggestion seems to apply only to ancient dramas like Sophocles’s Antigone, not to the remains of real life in a fifth-century polis16. The next thing that comes to an archaeologists’ mind is the possibility of a reburial, and that in this case only the skull and some of the bigger bones could have been recollected.17 Then, the vessels and terracotta figurines must have been added for the reburial, since it is not likely that the original burial included the very objects needed for the special arrangement that was chosen for the reburial. What could have been the reason for excavating and reburying the bones, a very unusual practice for late Archaic Athens?18

  • 19 For a short discussion of Greek and Roman terminology concerning ghosts see Felton 1999, 23–25.
  • 20 Tarlow 2013, has pointed on how beliefs shape the perception of the world and the actions of people (...)

6At this point, a story comes to mind that was heard at a ‘science night’ at the Collection of Antiquities of the University of Freiburg years ago, accompanied by the haunted atmosphere of clinging rusty chains and the sudden touch of ice-cold hands reaching out from the dark. It was a story that Pliny the Younger told when he asked if one should believe in ghosts,19 or not. That a highly educated person like Pliny was in favor of the belief in ghosts points to the validity of these beliefs, at least in first century B.C.E. Rome:20

  • 21 For a discussion of the story and the whole letter see Felton 1999, 62–78.

7“There was at Athens a large and roomy house, which had a bad name, so that no one could live there. In the dead of the night a noise, resembling the clashing of iron, was frequently heard, which, if you listened more attentively, sounded like the rattling of chains, distant at first, but approaching nearer by degrees: immediately afterwards a spectre appeared in the form of an old man, of extremely emaciated and squalid appearance, with a long beard and disheveled hair, rattling the chains on his feet and hands. The distressed occupants meanwhile passed their wakeful nights under the most dreadful terrors imaginable. This, as it broke their rest, ruined their health, and brought on distempers, their terror grew upon them, and death ensued. … It happened that Athenodorus the philosopher came to Athens at this time, and, reading the bill, enquired the price. The extraordinary cheapness raised his suspicion; nevertheless, when he heard the whole story, he was so far from being discouraged that he was more strongly inclined to hire it, and, in short, actually did so. When it grew towards evening, he ordered a couch to be prepared for him in the front part of the house, and, after calling for a light, together with his stylus and tablets, directed all his people to retire …; the ghost then [appeared and] rattled its chains over the head of the philosopher, who looked up upon this, and seeing it beckoning as before, immediately arose, and, light in hand, followed it. The ghost slowly stalked along, as if encumbered with its chains, and, turning into the area of the house, suddenly vanished. Athenodorus, being thus deserted, made a mark with some grass and leaves on the spot where the spirit left him. The next day he gave information to the magistrates and advised them to order that spot to be dug up. This was accordingly done, and the skeleton of a man in chains was found there, for the body, having lain a considerable time in the ground, was putrefied, and mouldered away from the fetters. The bones being collected together were publicly buried, and thus after the ghost was appeased by the proper ceremonies, the house was haunted no more.” (Plin. Ep. 7.27, tr. Melmoth and Bosanquet 2006).21

  • 22 Zelnick-Abramovitz 2015, 76.

8In Pliny’s account, we find the recollection of bones, a reburial, and a motivation to do so. One can imagine stranger things that one would carry out for a nice and peaceful place to live. Following the suggestion of Pliny’s story, it is possible that such a reburial had been executed in the name of the city of Athens, since some magistrates, called Astynomoi, were responsible for burying the dead found on the streets;22 perhaps the same magistrates were also responsible for other unknown dead. However, is it possible that the fear of ghosts was common not only in the first century B.C.E. Athens, where the story takes place, but also in late Archaic Athens?

  • 23 See Johnston 1999, 7–20 and 20–35 for the following poetry, tragedy, and other literature; for dece (...)
  • 24 See Hom. Il. 23.65–92 and Od. 11.51–78. On these stories see also Aguirre 2009, 181–183.
  • 25 Johnston 1999, 31.
  • 26 See Johnston 1999, 71–80; ThesCRA III, 264–270 (Graf, F.); for the objects see, for example, Strosz (...)
  • 27 SEG IX 72; see Johnston 1999, 58–60 with literature. The situation is another one as with the buria (...)
  • 28 See Johnston 1999, 142–160.
  • 29 Johnston 1999, 147.
  • 30 See for example Kurtz and Boardman 1971, 142–148.

9The idea that the spirits of the dead appear to the living to complain about missing or inadequate funerary rites is already found in Homer’s epics, and also subsequent stories about ghosts appear frequently, as Sarah Johnston has pointed out.23 Commonly known are the stories of the dead Patroclus appearing to Achilles in a dream, begging for a proper funeral; of Odysseus calling the spirits of the dead at a portal to the underworld to talk to the seer Teiresias, when unexpectedly the shadow of his companion Elpenor appears, who cannot enter Hades due to the missing burial of his corpse.24 Johnston concluded that “Greek beliefs evolved from a system in which the dead were relatively weak and unlikely to affect the world of the living, except under very special circumstances and then of their own volition, into a system in which the dead were an active force in the world of the living and could be called into action when the living chose.”25 No wonder that Athenians began as early as in the sixth B.C.E. to curse their enemies by conducting magical rites and placing ‘curse tablets’ at the graves of individuals who died early, hoping that they would somehow help to bring evil on the enemy.26 A text from fourth century B.C.E. Cyrene even describes a ritual to remove a ghost who has been sent by magic to haunt a house, and the possibility is expressed that he might be restless.27 It is in this spirit, when allusions are made to malevolent spirits of deceased, who may come to earth to haunt the living. This is frequently found in Classical literature, especially in dramas.28 Johnston emphasizes “that the dead and their agents were primarily imagined to work through mental or psychological means in ancient Greece because it confirms their lack of physical presence.”29 This is an intriguing point, since the destruction of a burial was an active concern, given the enormous value30 assigned to correct burials and funerary rituals. Later writings not only attest the existence of malevolent spirits, but also specify rewards for taking care of improperly buried bones.

  • 31 The provenience of the illustrated lekythos is not known. It appears for the first time in 1974 in (...)
  • 32 See Allen 2017, 197–228; Maderna 2011; Aguirre 2009, 185–186; Oakley 2004, 212–213; Pfeifer 1989.
  • 33 This has been pointed out by Aguirre 2009, 186.

10Additionally, it seems worthwhile to point to the fact that the spirits of the dead were depicted from the later sixth century B.C.E. onwards, as small, winged figures. They are found frequently on Attic white-ground lekythoi of the high Classical period (fig. 2),31 where they sometimes occur over the head of a deceased (which must himself be a kind of ghost).32 Interestingly, the deceased is shown in the same way as a living person, with only some small details to indicate the possibility that he is dead. Such are, in this example, the hands touching the gravestone and pointing downwards to the underworld. Other individuals who are thought to be alive occur in these images and are rendered in the same way as the deceased, only their behavior is different, since they lack the gestures of the deceased. Even though the deceased is thought to be buried, his body is visually present as if he was alive, and his spirit, the eidolon, is leaving this ‘body.’ This works very well for the images, but exposes how constructed they are. A logically inevitable fact is overlooked, since we see a spirit not leaving a dead body, but rather that of a ghost. Also, the soul should already be on its way to (or in) Hades, because the body is already buried.33 Of course, logic is not a concern in these images. Visible at the burial, they give an idealized impression of the buried individual, and depict vividly what is happening at that moment: a last farewell.

11All in all, it is necessary to assume that the idea of ghosts roaming the world of the living was common in late Archaic and Classical Athens (and also later, even in Roman times). Against this backdrop, imagine that a spirit is wandering to the gates of Hades, when it suddenly realizes that something is missing: its entire body! This inconvenience might be a reason to return to earth to complain. Therefore, it seems reasonable that care had been taken to avoid such unwelcome complaints. It may seem plausible then that the reburial in the clay tub might have been arranged not only out of piety, but to avoid the return of a malevolent spirit. Enough opportunities to trigger such an incident would have surely been there. Numerous building activities were undertaken in late Archaic and early Classical Athens, some of them at places where burials had been made for a long time. One must only think of the new water supply of the Enneakrounos, with its water pipes running through the inner city. In the case of the clay tub burial, it appears that not all the bones had been found, and that someone not only had to organize an appropriate burial, but that person even had to make a careful attempt to reconstruct the missing body.

Fig. 2. Attic white-ground lekythos by the Achilles Painter, ca. 440 B.C.E., detail (total height 37,4 cm); New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Inv. no. 1989.281.72, Gift of Norbert Schimmel Trust

Fig. 2. Attic white-ground lekythos by the Achilles Painter, ca. 440 B.C.E., detail (total height 37,4 cm); New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Inv. no. 1989.281.72, Gift of Norbert Schimmel Trust

Photograph by the MET https://images.metmuseum.org/​CRDImages/​gr/​original/​DT6205.jpg

  • 34 Townsend 1955.
  • 35 Townsend 1955, 194–196, fig. 3; 218–219, nos. 39–47, pl. 77 (Agora Inv. nos. P 21266–21274).
  • 36 At this place several sherds from different periods were found. On both lekythoi grave scenes were (...)
  • 37 See Whitley 1994.

12Currently I do not know of any direct parallels for the extraordinary use of terracotta figurines as they are in the clay tub burial. Generally, I know of one comparable case in Athens, from the Agora,34 where objects were offered in disturbed burials. As there might well be more parallels, it is the principal goal of this article to stress the importance of this phenomenon, with the hope that more of such burials eventually will become known. In the case of the Agora, a Mycenean chamber tomb was found, half of it laying under the podium of the temple of Ares. The lower legs of a skeleton, which lay next to the entrance of the tomb, are missing. Instead, seven lekythoi from the fifth century B.C.E. were placed there (fig. 3).35 The vessels have been dated around 470 B.C.E. and are therefore only a bit later than the clay tub burial. A small number of fragments of two white-ground lekythoi from ca. 440 B.C.E. has been found at another entrance, but it is not clear whether their presence was accidental,36 or if additional offerings were placed there when the chamber tomb was found again. The excavators interpreted this as two separate acts of piety, attempts to compensate for the partial destruction of the grave, and not as a continuous deposition of offerings, such as is known from hero cults, which flourished at Mycenaean graves from late Geometric times onwards.37 Of course, this is not a parallel for a reburial and the ‘reconstruction’ of the body, but for the respect shown to an ancient burial. However, the attempt to compensate for the damage in a ritual way is directly comparable. That idea fits very well to an image on one of the lekythoi from 470 B.C.E. It is the only one of the earlier lekythoi with figural decoration showing a winged ‘Nike’ holding a ribbon, similar to ones used to adorn graves (compare fig. 2). Therefore, the image somehow illustrated the use of the vessels that were brought to the grave by loved ones and caring people, both to adorn it and to give the deceased what they deserved, hoping they would be pleased by this act of piety.

Fig. 3. Lekythoi from a Mycenean tomb, Athens, ca. 470 B.C.E. and ca. 440 B.C.E. (height of the top right lekythos 18,7 cm); Athens, Agora Excavation

Fig. 3. Lekythoi from a Mycenean tomb, Athens, ca. 470 B.C.E. and ca. 440 B.C.E. (height of the top right lekythos 18,7 cm); Athens, Agora Excavation

Photograph courtesy of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Agora Excavation, no. 2023.01.0023. Ephorate of Antiquities of Athens-Ancient Agora Excavations/American School of Classical Studies © Hellenic Ministry of Culture / Organization of Cultural Resources Development (H.O.C.RE.D.) https://agora.ascsa.net/​id/​agora/​image/​2023.01.0023?q=references%3A%22Agora%3AObject%3AP%2021270%22&t=&v=icons&sort=rating%20desc%2C%20sort%20asc&s=2

  • 38 The sale catalogue of Stackelberg’s collection might contain one of the figurines (see n. 40), and (...)
  • 39 The two black figure lekythoi might be identical with two lekythoi in one of Burgon’s drawings, sho (...)
  • 40 See Hase 1839, passim; CVA Dresden I–IV s. v. Herkunft; Knoll 1993, 42 and 55 cites that 31 antiqui (...)
  • 41 Dresden, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Skulpturensammlung Inv. H4 041 / 343; see Häger-Weigel 2000, 4 (...)
  • 42 See n. 6.
  • 43 Kerameikos Inv. no. T 55, see Schlörb-Vierneisel 1997, 27, no. 70, pl. 17, no. 1; from the child gr (...)
  • 44 Maybe its bottom line indicates the collar of an undergarment.
  • 45 See Brooke 1921, 337.
  • 46 Most of them are unpublished; see Casson 1921, 355–369; Brouskari 1974, 35, figs. 30–34. Some are o (...)

13The finds from the grave of the Athenian Agora have been kept in proper storage. But, what happened to the bones, vessels, and figurines of the clay tub burial, which had been found ca. 150 years earlier?38 Some of the objects may be in different museums or collections today, but they are hard to identify due to the stylized details of Stackelberg’s drawing, which do not permit secure identifications.39 Nevertheless, one object in the Skulpturensammlung Dresden which has many objects from Stackelberg’s collection,40 comes likely from the grave: a terracotta figurine of an enthroned woman (fig. 4).41 The figurine shows all features of the figurines in Stackelberg’s drawing, except that its stephane is a bit higher. This is an uncommon feature for figurines of enthroned women in Attic graves. Similar specimens were found in fourteen graves of the Kerameikos necropolis,42 but only one43 had a similar high stephane. The good preservation of the Dresden figurine’s original color is fortunate, which might be the reason why Stackelberg added it to his collection. It is still possible to see the palmettes on the wings of the throne, the wide collar and the folds of the dress of the seated women, her two-tiered necklace,44 earrings, the beautifully drawn lips, and the borders of the headgear; all painted red on white. If the black mold is not deceiving, the long hair and the stephane were painted black. Also, the rouge on the cheeks of the woman seems to be preserved, a feature that is known from other examples.45 The figurine is Attic without any doubt, since similar ones have been found all over Athens, especially on the Acropolis.46

Fig. 4: Terracotta figurine, probably from the clay tub burial, ca. 510–470 B.C.E. (height 18,7 cm)

Fig. 4: Terracotta figurine, probably from the clay tub burial, ca. 510–470 B.C.E. (height 18,7 cm)

© Skulpturensammlung, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden, Inv. no. H4 041 / 343 (photograph by Elke Estel/Hans-Peter Klut, courtesy of the Skulpturensammlung)

14All the other objects from the grave, including the bones, remain lost. Therefore, one can imagine the soul of the deceased wandering the paths of earth now, searching for someone to complain to about the disturbance of its rest after the glimpse of 2300 years of sleep. What the spirit might not know is that he has been one of the lucky ones in an archaeologist’s view, given the sheer number of burials that were discovered and not reported or documented at all. A brief review of the holdings of major museums is enough to reveal the most beautiful finds, but they have lost most of the stories they could tell, given their loss of provenience. All the greater is the hope that more tombs like to the one presented here will be discovered or ‘re-excavated’ from oblivion.

Top of page

Bibliography

Aguirre, M. 2009. “Some Ghostly Appearances in Greece: Literary and Artistic Sources.” Gerión 27(1): 179–189.

Allen, M. 2017. “Portraits of Grief: Death, Mourning, and the Expression of Sorrow of White-ground Lekythoi.” Ph.D. Diss. Columbia (https://doi.org/10.7916/D8KD296M).

Brendle, R. 2017. “The Function and Significance of Late Black-Figure Vases. ” Ph.D. Diss, Berkeley (http://jhir.library.jhu.edu/handle/1774.2/60797).

Brooke, D. 1921. “Terracottas.” In Catalogue of the Acropolis Museum II. Sculpture and Architectural Fragments, edited by S. Casson, 315–433. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brouskari, M. 1974. Μουσείον Ακροπόλεως: περιγραφικός κατάλογος. Μουσεία της Ελλάδος, Σειρά Β'. Athens: Εμπορικη Τράπεζα της Ελλάδος.

Charitonides, S. 1958. “Ἀνασκαφὴ κλασσικῶν τάφων παρὰ τὴν πλατεῖαν Συντάγματος”. AEph: 1–152.

Corbett, P. 1960. “The Burgon and Blacas Tombs.” JHS 80: 52–60.

Felch, J. 2012. “Turkey Asks U.S. Museums for Return of Antiquities.” Los Angeles Times, March 30th (https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-xpm-2012-mar-30-la-et-turkey-antiquities-20120331-story.html).

Felton, D. 1999. Haunted Greece and Rome: Ghost Stories from Classical Antiquity. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Fräßle, K. 1986. “Carl Haller von Hallerstein. Lebensdaten.” In Carl Haller von Hallerstein in Griechenland. 1810–1817. Architekt, Zeichner, Bauforscher, edited by H. Bankel, 11–45. Berlin: Reimer.

Häger-Weigel, E. 2000. “Terrakotten.” In Götter und Menschen. Antike Meisterwerke der Skulpturensammlung, Ausstellungskatalog Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden, edited by K. Knoll, 40–44. Dresden: Staatliche Kunstsammlungen.

Hase, H. 1839. Verzeichniss der alten und neuen und übrigen Alterthümer in den Sälen der Kgl. Antiken-Sammlung zu Dresden. Fifth Edition. Dresden: Walthersche Buchhandlung.

Haspels, C.H. 1936. Attic black-figured lekythoi. École française d'Athènes, Travaux et Mémoires publiés par les professeurs de l'Institut supérieur d'études françaises et les membres étrangers de l'École 4. Paris: E. de Boccard.

Hatzivassiliou, E. 2010. Athenian Black Figure Iconography Between 510 and 475 B.C. Tübinger Archäologische Forschungen 6. Rahden: Verlag Marie Leidorf.

Heinrich, C. 1837. Catalogue d’une riche collection d’antiquités égyptiennes, grecques et du moyen âge, de Médailles grecques, romaines et antres en or, argent et bronze, de Peintures d'anciens maîtres italiens et hollandaise et de Dessins qui composaient le cabinet de feu Monsieur le Baron Otto Magnus de Stackelberg, dont la vente se fera lundi le 4. Septbr. 1837 à Dresde. Dresden: Walthersche Buchhandlung.

Houby-Nielsen, S. 2000. “Child Burials in Ancient Athens.” In Children and Material Culture, edited by J. Sofaer, 151–166. London: Routledge.

Johnston, S. 1999. Restless Dead: Encounters Between the Living and the Dead in Ancient Greece. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Johnston, S. 2018. “Many Unhappy Returns: Ancient Greek Concepts of a Return from Death and Their Later Counterparts.” In Round Trip to Hades in the Eastern Mediterranean Tradition: Visits to the Underworld from Antiquity to Byzantium, edited by G. Ekroth, and I. Nilsson, 356–369. Cultural Interactions in the Mediterranean 2. Boston: Brill.

Knigge, U. 1976. Der Südhügel. Kerameikos IX. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Knoll, K. 1993. “Die Geschichte der Dresdener Antiken- und Abgußsammlung von 1785 bis 1915 und ihre Erweiterung zur Skulpturensammlung unter Georg Treu”. Ph.D. Diss, Dresden.

Kübler, K. 1976. Die Nekropole der Mitte des 6. bis Ende des 5. Jahrhunderts. Kerameikos VII(1). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Kunze-Götte, E., K. Tancke, and K. Vierneisel. 1999. Die Nekropole der Mitte des 6. bis Ende des 5. Jahrhunderts: Die Beigaben. Kerameikos VII(2). Berlin: Hirmer.

Kurtz, D., and J. Boardman. 1971. Greek Burial Customs. Ithaca, New York: Thames & Hudson.

Kurtz, D. 1975. Athenian White Lekythoi: Patterns and Painters. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Maderna, C. 2011. “Tod und Leben an attischen Gräbern der klassischen Zeit.” Thetis 18: 40–68.

Marchiandi, D., C. Bernardini, and F. Longo. 2014. “La Porta VI di pl. Kotzia (Acharnikai Pylai)” and “La necropoli e la vialibità suburbana presso le Porte di Acharne (aree di pl. Kotzia e pl. Omonias).” In Topografia di Atene: Sviluppo urbano e monumenti dalle origini al III secolo d.C. III. Quartiri a nord e a nord-est dell’Acropoli e Agora del Caramico, edited by E. Greco, 814–825. Athens: Pandemos.

Melmoth, W., and F. Bosanquet. 2006. Letters of Pliny by Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2811).

Muscarella, O. 1974. Ancient Art: the Norbert Schimmel Collection. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.

N. N. 1844. “Tombeau d’enfant, découvert à Athènes”. RA 1: 388–389.

Oakley, J. 2004. Picturing Death in Classical Athens: The Evidence of the White Ground Lekythoi. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pfeifer, E. 1989. Eidola und andere mit dem Sterben verbundene Flügelwesen in der attischen Vasenmalerei in spätarchaischer und klassischer Zeit. Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 38, Archäologie 28. Frankfurt: Lang.

Rumscheid, F. 1999. “Myrina – Tarent – Athen: Neue Publikationen zu Terrakotta-Figuren aus antiken Gräbern.” GFA 2: 1001–1050.

Schlörb-Vierneisel, B. 1966. “Eridanos-Nekropole, Berichte über die Grabungen 1964 und 1965 südlich der Heiligen Straße: I. Gräber und Opferstellen hS1–204.” AM 81: 4–112.

Schlörb-Vierneisel, B. 1997. Die figürlichen Terrakotten, I. Spätmykenisch bis späthellenistisch. Kerameikos XV. Berlin: Hirmer.

Stackelberg, O. Baron von. 1826. Der Apollotempel zu Bassae in Arcadien und die daselbst ausgegrabenen Bildwerke. Rome.

Stackelberg, O. Baron von. 1837. Die Gräber der Hellenen. (Second edition, first published 1835 as Die Gräber der Griechen in Bildwerken und Vasengemälden). Berlin: G. Reimer.

Stroszeck, J. 2019. “Unterweltsvorstellungen und die Fundorte von Fluchtafeln im Kerameikos.” In Griechische Nekropolen. Neue Forschungen und Funde, edited by H. Frielinghaus, J. Stroszeck, and P. Valavanis, 337–376, pls. 85–107. Beiträge zur Archäologie Griechenlands 5. Möhnesee: Bibliopolis.

Stroszeck, J. 2012. “Grave Gifts in Child Burials in the Athenian Kerameikos: The Evidence of Sea Shells.” In L’enfant et la mort dans l’Antiquité III. Le matériel associé aux tombes d’enfants, Actes de la table ronde internationale organisée à la Maison méditerranéenne des sciences de l’homme (MMSH) d’Aix-en- Provence, 20 22 janvier 2011, edited by A. Hermary, and C. Dubois, 57–75. Paris: Centre Camille Jullian Errance.

Tarlow, S. 2013. “Belief and the Archaeology of Death.” In The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Death and Burial, edited by L. Nilsson Stutz, and S. Tarlow, 617–630. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Townsend, E. 1955. “A Mycenean Chamber Tomb under the Temple of Ares.” Hesperia 24: 187–219, pls. 71–77.

Whitley, J. 1994. “The Monuments that Stood before Marathon: Tomb Cult and Hero Cult in Archaic Attica.” AJA 98: 213–230.

Winter, F. 1903. Die antiken Terrakotten III,1. Die Typen der figürlichen Terrakotten. Berlin, Stuttgart: Spemann.

Zelnick-Abramovitz, R. 2015. “Whose Grave is This? The Status of Grave Plots in Ancient Greece.” Dike 18: 51–95.

Top of page

Notes

1 I stumbled across this grave during the research on my PhD thesis on terracotta figurines in Attic graves, funded by the Humboldt Universität zu Berlin via the Berlin Graduate School of Ancient Studies. For helpful criticism of earlier drafts, I am deeply thankful to Karl Berg and Marie-Christin Künzelmann.

2 See Stackelberg 1837, 42–43, where he claims to be the excavator of the grave. The grave has been republished soon (see N. N. 1844), and mentioned by Winter 1903, IV.

3 See Corbett 1960, 52–54. Research in the British Museum, which holds Burgon’s collection, might well reveal other grave contexts of this excavation. Burgon’s own brilliant watercolors of his finds are available at https://legacy.ashmolean.org/ash/amulets/burgonarchive/picmain.html due to the short-lived Burgon Archive Project under the aegis of the Ashmolean Museum and Michael Vickers. For the Acharnian Gate and its necropolis at modern Kotzia Square see Marchiandi et al. 2014. Here, Carl Haller von Hallerstein conducted excavations as early as 1811, see Fräßle 1986, 33, fig. 6 (a page of Haller’s unpublished diary with observations about Greek burials; today in the Bibliothèque Nationale et Universitaire de Strasbourg, Ms 2720, dossier IV).

4 Usually clay tubs, which must have been some household vessel, did not have their own lids. For burials, a second clay tub was used as a lid. See Kübler 1976, 179; Knigge 1976, 30.

5 Stackelberg 1837, 43 gives the measures of the clay tub: “4 F.[uß] 11 Z.[oll] in der Länge, 1 F. ¼ Z. in der Breite und 5 ¼ Z. in der Höhe.” He might have used the same ‘English foot’ as in Stackelberg 1826, 46. The ‘London foot’ of that time is said to equal 30 cm. Hence, the clay tub was about 135 cm long. This is too long for an early Attic clay tub burial, see Charitonides 1958, 28–30, 60–62, nos. 28, 59 (CXII and LXXXIV). Compared to the length of the terracotta figurines, ca. 20 cm (see n. 40), the clay tub should be around 1 m long.

6 This is not evident from a short discussion by Rumscheid 1999, 1037, 1046–1047 since he uses “enthroned woman” also for figurines of seated women without a throne, although he says that different terms might be useful.

7 Characteristic is the oval shape of the belly, which is missing an indention, see Knigge 1976, 33–38, pl. 77 with literature; especially form III/2 ‘early.’ The form seems quite elongated, but compare Haspels 1936, 163 (date), 252, nos. 58–59, pl. 43, nos. 1–2 (Athens, National Museum Inv. 515; Paris, Louvre Inv. CA 1837), and Knigge 1976, 90, 103–104, no. 20.1, 20.2, 20.6, 58.1, 61.1, pl. 19, no. 2, pl. 24, no. 7, pl. 26, no. 2. For the palmette of one of the lekythoi, see Oxford, Ashmolean Museum Inv. 1927.4456, see Kurtz 1975, pl. 69, no. 2. Compare the lekythoi cited in n. 38.

8 Since the other vessels fit that date, it is assumed that they are not reused from an older burial (see the following paragraphs). However, this cannot be excluded entirely; the ‘snake’ pattern between the handles of the big kotyle and its form find parallels in sixth century B.C.E. vessels from Corinth. See a kotyle in Dresden, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Skulpturensammlung Inv. Dr. 105, see CVA Dresden IV, 95–97, pl. 38 (C. Dehl-von Kaenel).

9 See Kurtz and Boardman 1976, 97–98; see also Houby-Nielsen 2000, 153.

10 See Stroszeck 2012, 58; Houby-Nielsen 2000, 153–155.

11 An example gives the ‘South Hill’ and ‘South Way’ from the Kerameikos necropolis, where ca. 150 child burials and ca. 50 burials of adolescents from 500–425 B.C.E. have been found (only the better preserved were counted). Only one burial, likely of a young woman, contained a red-figure vessel of higher quality. See Knigge 1976, 15.

12 Was it taken out immediately after the burial had been found, and replaced erroneously for the drawing? Its head pointing down seems odd since the others are all pointing up. But one cannot exclude that there was a reason for breaking the very symmetrical arrangement already in antiquity.

13 Scenes on ‘low-quality’ black-figure lekythoi are often neglected, and this shall be the case here because (a) only a small part of one black-figure image is available, (b) the focus does not lie on visual communication, and (c) it is impossible to say whether the grave goods were selected due to the age and gender of the deceased. For such black-figure imagery, see Brendle 2017; Hatzivassiliou 2010; Knigge 1976, 38–43.

14 See a cenotaph from the Kerameikos necropolis in Kübler 1976, 76–77, no. 255 (for stratigraphic reasons, which would be too lengthy to trace here, it should be dated around 480–470 B.C.E.). See Kurtz and Boardman 1971, 99–100, 257–259 with literary sources and other examples from Greece; many of them may be burials of rulers.

15 The cenotaph no. 5 HTR 81 II from the Kerameikos in Kübler 1976, 64–65, no. 230, pl. 21, no. 2 and Kunze-Götte et al. 1999, 62, no. 230, pl. 31, no. 5. Kübler thought the grave was contemporary with his grave no. 229 (35 HTR 40 II). Hence it would date around 550–540 B.C.E.; but Kunze-Götte et al. 1999 dated the vessels of the cenotaph to the early fifth century. This is improbable for stratigraphic reasons: grave no. 236 (35 HTR 59 II) from ca. 500 B.C.E. gives a terminus ante quem to the funerary mount J over the cenotaph; therefore, it should date between 540–510 B.C.E.

16 See N. N. 1844, 389.

17 The fact that the feet are preserved might point on the possibility that the deceased had not been dead for long, since the lower leg bones and the feet still might have been connected. Stackelberg 1837, 43 observed that the skull had been incomplete. He states that all the bones of the upper body, from the shoulders to the hips, were missing, but it is unclear whether the upper leg bones were preserved. While Stackelberg 1837, 42 says that two terracotta figurines were lying on the leg bones, the drawing is not showing them, and it is not clear if the thigh bones were meant by the word “Schenkelknochen.” Judging from the drawing it seems unlikely that the thigh bones were preserved, since they must have been too long to be hidden entirely by the figurines. However, since the published drawing is a copy of Stackelberg’s original sketch, the bones might be missing erroneously.

18 In fact, I am not aware of other reburials in late Archaic Athens (cases like the displacement of the bones of the hero Theseus in the early fifth century B.C.E. are surely not representative of common practices). Kurtz and Boardman 1971, 68–74 do not even mention the possibility of such an act.

19 For a short discussion of Greek and Roman terminology concerning ghosts see Felton 1999, 23–25.

20 Tarlow 2013, has pointed on how beliefs shape the perception of the world and the actions of people.

21 For a discussion of the story and the whole letter see Felton 1999, 62–78.

22 Zelnick-Abramovitz 2015, 76.

23 See Johnston 1999, 7–20 and 20–35 for the following poetry, tragedy, and other literature; for deceased returning bodily from Hades, see Johnston 2018; see also the short account by Felton 1999, 8–15.

24 See Hom. Il. 23.65–92 and Od. 11.51–78. On these stories see also Aguirre 2009, 181–183.

25 Johnston 1999, 31.

26 See Johnston 1999, 71–80; ThesCRA III, 264–270 (Graf, F.); for the objects see, for example, Stroszeck 2019.

27 SEG IX 72; see Johnston 1999, 58–60 with literature. The situation is another one as with the burial under discussion: the ghost had been sent to the house by a third party. Therefore, the means to remove him were different. Male and female figures were made (since the sex of the ghost was not known), they got offerings of food, and were brought to a remote forest afterwards, clearly in the hope that the ghost would follow.

28 See Johnston 1999, 142–160.

29 Johnston 1999, 147.

30 See for example Kurtz and Boardman 1971, 142–148.

31 The provenience of the illustrated lekythos is not known. It appears for the first time in 1974 in a publication of the Norbert Schimmel Collection, see Muscarella 1974, no. 63. It seems likely that the lekythos has been found during tomb-looting some time before, presumably in Italy. The Norbert Schimmel Collection is notorious for probably looted artefacts, see Felch 2012.

32 See Allen 2017, 197–228; Maderna 2011; Aguirre 2009, 185–186; Oakley 2004, 212–213; Pfeifer 1989.

33 This has been pointed out by Aguirre 2009, 186.

34 Townsend 1955.

35 Townsend 1955, 194–196, fig. 3; 218–219, nos. 39–47, pl. 77 (Agora Inv. nos. P 21266–21274).

36 At this place several sherds from different periods were found. On both lekythoi grave scenes were depicted.

37 See Whitley 1994.

38 The sale catalogue of Stackelberg’s collection might contain one of the figurines (see n. 40), and it is possible that some of the vessels and one of the lamps listed there come from this grave. However, the descriptions of the catalogue are not sufficient to determine this. See Heinrich 1837, 7–13.

39 The two black figure lekythoi might be identical with two lekythoi in one of Burgon’s drawings, showing the items No. 15. N and No. 15. O of his collection. If the drawing is to be trusted, No. 15. O is not identical with Ashmolean Museum Inv. 1927.4456, despite its inventory number written on the drawing (see https://legacy.ashmolean.org/ash/amulets/burgonarchive/illustrations/(15n,o)%20%20red%20and%20black%20vases.html, “(15N,O) red and black vases”).

40 See Hase 1839, passim; CVA Dresden I–IV s. v. Herkunft; Knoll 1993, 42 and 55 cites that 31 antiquities have been bought from Stackelberg’s collection (and later also one statue). The Skulpturensammlung is today part of the Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden. For many of its objects see https://skd-online-collection.skd.museum.

41 Dresden, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Skulpturensammlung Inv. H4 041 / 343; see Häger-Weigel 2000, 40, no. 38 (with bibliography). I am very thankful to Saskia Wetzig who made me aware of the figurine and sent me images and information, also of several other objects. See Heinrich 1837, 12, no. 1; Hase 1839, 181, no. 407b, who seems to describe the same figurine. The height of the figurine is 18,7 cm; Hase specifies it as “11 Z.”. But 11 Zoll is likely more than 18,7 cm, since one Zoll was usually longer than 2 cm. According to Hase the figurine is shown on Stackelberg 1937, pl. 57 (he writes “97”, a reading error: 9 for 5), which shows a similar figurine and not the one in Dresden. He says the figurine would come from a child’s coffin.

42 See n. 6.

43 Kerameikos Inv. no. T 55, see Schlörb-Vierneisel 1997, 27, no. 70, pl. 17, no. 1; from the child grave no. HW 44 (skeleton 80 cm, coffin 90 cm long) from ca. 490 B.C.E., see Knigge 1976, 99, no. 42.

44 Maybe its bottom line indicates the collar of an undergarment.

45 See Brooke 1921, 337.

46 Most of them are unpublished; see Casson 1921, 355–369; Brouskari 1974, 35, figs. 30–34. Some are on display in the Acropolis Museum (https://www.theacropolismuseum.gr/en/explore-collections; search for ‘figurine’).

Top of page

List of illustrations

Title Fig. 1. Clay tub burial, Athens, ca. 500–480 B.C.E. (length ca. 1–1,35 m). Print of a copper engraving by G.B. Cipriani after a drawing by O.M. von Stackelberg
Credits Scan by Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg from Stackelberg 1837, pl. 8. https://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/​diglit/​stackelberg1837/​0105/​image
URL http://journals.openedition.org/acost/docannexe/image/3963/img-1.jpg
File image/jpeg, 391k
Title Fig. 2. Attic white-ground lekythos by the Achilles Painter, ca. 440 B.C.E., detail (total height 37,4 cm); New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Inv. no. 1989.281.72, Gift of Norbert Schimmel Trust
Credits Photograph by the MET https://images.metmuseum.org/​CRDImages/​gr/​original/​DT6205.jpg
URL http://journals.openedition.org/acost/docannexe/image/3963/img-2.jpg
File image/jpeg, 178k
Title Fig. 3. Lekythoi from a Mycenean tomb, Athens, ca. 470 B.C.E. and ca. 440 B.C.E. (height of the top right lekythos 18,7 cm); Athens, Agora Excavation
Credits Photograph courtesy of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Agora Excavation, no. 2023.01.0023. Ephorate of Antiquities of Athens-Ancient Agora Excavations/American School of Classical Studies © Hellenic Ministry of Culture / Organization of Cultural Resources Development (H.O.C.RE.D.) https://agora.ascsa.net/​id/​agora/​image/​2023.01.0023?q=references%3A%22Agora%3AObject%3AP%2021270%22&t=&v=icons&sort=rating%20desc%2C%20sort%20asc&s=2
URL http://journals.openedition.org/acost/docannexe/image/3963/img-3.jpg
File image/jpeg, 131k
Title Fig. 4: Terracotta figurine, probably from the clay tub burial, ca. 510–470 B.C.E. (height 18,7 cm)
Credits © Skulpturensammlung, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden, Inv. no. H4 041 / 343 (photograph by Elke Estel/Hans-Peter Klut, courtesy of the Skulpturensammlung)
URL http://journals.openedition.org/acost/docannexe/image/3963/img-4.jpg
File image/jpeg, 199k
Top of page

References

Electronic reference

Ernst-Andreas Neumann, A Ghost’s Burial? How the Extraordinary Use of Terracottas in a Late Archaic Tomb Might Have Served to Prevent Encounters with Unhappy SpiritsLes Carnets de l’ACoSt [Online], 24 | 2024, Online since 01 June 2024, connection on 12 February 2025. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/acost/3963; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/11rv0

Top of page

About the author

Ernst-Andreas Neumann

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Graduate School of Ancient Studies

ernst-andreas.neumann@berliner-antike-kolleg.org

Top of page

Copyright

CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0

The text only may be used under licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. All other elements (illustrations, imported files) are “All rights reserved”, unless otherwise stated.

Top of page
Search OpenEdition Search

You will be redirected to OpenEdition Search