Weapon assemblage

The volume of weapon dedications is indeed remarkable. Without detailing an extensive list, we may note that Christou unearthed in a deposit on the inside of the retaining wall, and on top of it, numerous iron spearheads, 20 iron javelin heads, many miniature iron spear and javelin heads,Footnote ¹² and small knives. From the rescue excavations in 1988 an even more substantial number of finds was unearthed at the height of the retaining wall: 356 iron arrowheads, 105 bronze arrowheads, 2 miniature swords (0.037 m and 0.022 m), 57 javelin heads and spearheads, 24 iron fragments of spears and arrowheads, 3 bronze axes, 3 small axes, 1 bronze spearhead and 10 knife blades, among other finds.Footnote ¹³ Many of the weapons were probably not functional, as they were made of thin bronze sheet, which is characteristic of weapons made for dedicative purposes (Snodgrass Reference Snodgrass1964, 126). The finds, therefore, consist of a large number of real-life weapons which could be ‘raw’ dedicationsFootnote ¹⁴ and miniature weapons made for dedicatory purposes. The site differs from other Laconian sanctuaries in that it has not produced bronze vessels, as at the sanctuary of Apollo Hyperteleatas further south in Laconia (Stibbe Reference Stibbe2008; see Supplementary Material catalogue no. 40). In fact, it has only produced a few bronze statuettes, pottery, a couple of agricultural instruments and no terracotta statuettes.

The distinctive nature of the finds is also noteworthy, since the weapons consisted mostly of spearheads, javelin heads and arrowheads; that is, offensive weapons. Helmets, cuirasses, greaves and shields, which commonly appear as war booty at other sanctuaries, are absent. However, Apollo Maleatas is not the only sanctuary to preserve dedications of offensive weapons only. Some Peloponnesian sanctuaries of Apollo, such as those at Halieis and Apollo Parrhasios in Arcadia, have revealed predominantly offensive weapons (Larson Reference Larson and Prêtre2009, 131), but the numbers are low, as is the secure identification of these sites as belonging to Apollo.Footnote ¹⁵

Weapon dedications in Greek sanctuaries

The unusual uniformity in military finds from the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas becomes more obvious when compared with other Laconian, Messenian and Greek sanctuaries.Footnote ¹⁶ Although a number of weapon dedications have been found at the sanctuary of Apollo Tyritas further north in Laconia (see below), hardly any have been found in other perioikic sanctuaries: from the rich array of bronzes from the temple of Apollo Hyperteleatas only a bronze spear-butt and a spearhead are reported (Stibbe Reference Stibbe2008, 29–30, nos 41–2, figs 40–1; see Supplementary Material catalogue no. 40). Likewise, the sanctuary of the Mother of the Gods only produced two examples of spearheads (Genière Reference de la Genière2005, 31, nos 49–50, pl. xxiv; see Supplementary Material catalogue no. 39), while the sanctuary of Aigies near Gytheion produced only a few examples, one of which is a Corinthian helmet (Bonias Reference Bonias1988, 100–1, nos 551, 557–8; see Supplementary Material catalogue no. 18).

In Spartan sanctuaries, especially those of Apollo Amyklaios, the votives include weapons, swords, spearheads, an inscribed helmet and bronze sheets belonging to shield decorations.Footnote ¹⁷ Weapon dedications have also been unearthed at the MenelaionFootnote ¹⁸ and the sanctuary of Zeus at Tsakona.Footnote ¹⁹ Other sanctuaries, such as those of Artemis Orthia,Footnote ²⁰ Athena ChalkioikosFootnote ²¹ and the EleusinionFootnote ²² are poor in weapon dedications. Numerous weapon dedications in bronze and iron were unearthed (Versakis Reference Versakis1916, 88–91 nos 11–17, figs 24–9; 97–9, no. 45, figs 45–6) at the temple of Apollo Korythos at Longa in Messenia (Versakis Reference Versakis1916, 116–17; Zunino Reference Zunino1997, 168; Luraghi Reference Luraghi2008, 118–19),Footnote ²³ including two inscribed spear-butts, one of which commemorates a victory over the Athenians (Jeffery and Johnston Reference Jeffery and Johnston1990, 206 nos 3, 10; Bauslaugh Reference Bauslaugh1990, 661–8).Footnote ²⁴ The warrior nature of Apollo Korythos is further expressed by a well-known bronze figurine of a hoplite dated to 540–525 and found at the sanctuary (Versakis Reference Versakis1916, 106, pl. A; Herfort-Koch Reference Herfort-Koch1986, 117 no. K 135; Stibbe Reference Stibbe2000a, 96–7, figs 33–4; Proskynitopoulou Reference Proskynitopoulou and Kaltsas2006, 164 no. 67).Footnote ²⁵ Although many Laconian sanctuaries have produced weapon dedications, none have yielded numbers as large as those of Apollo Maleatas, votives of such a predominantly offensive type, or finds of such limited diversity.

Spearheads and arrowheads are well attested in Greek sanctuaries, especially in Archaic contexts (Simon Reference Simon1986, 253; cf. Larson Reference Larson and Prêtre2009, 130 fig. 6), though they are not usually found in such high numbers. Only a few sanctuaries have produced large quantities: Olympia produced more than 400 projectiles and the sanctuary of Artemis and Apollo at Kalapodi produced more than 300 spearheads, which have been interpreted as war booty.Footnote ²⁶ Generally speaking, while armour is found in many sanctuaries the numbers are not very high, and there are only a few sanctuaries other than those of Panhellenic standing, such as Olympia, Isthmia or Delphi, where more than 100 weapons of any type have been found.Footnote ²⁷ The 198 projectiles unearthed at the Stymphalos sanctuary could perhaps be the remnants of an attack or series of attacks, rather than the result of votive practice (Hagerman Reference Hagerman and Schaus2014, 98–102).Footnote ²⁸ Compared to these, the weapons found at the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas are so numerous (e.g. 356 iron arrowheads, 105 bronze arrowheads) that they can be paralleled only by those deriving from larger sanctuaries, such as those at Olympia and Kalapodi, which had a wider audience and a varied votive assemblage.Footnote ²⁹ Yet we can hardly compare the material evidence from the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas to Olympia. The sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas in Laconia would have had a more regional audience.

The sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas has produced both a more distinct character of weapons (offensive) and a larger number of weapons than most Greek sanctuaries. In order to understand the significance of the cult and its position among the communities living in Laconia, one must attempt to understand the reasons behind the existence of the large number of weapons. In his study of the weapons found at the Stymphalos sanctuary, Hagerman (Reference Hagerman and Schaus2014, 95–6) suggests that a sanctuary could serve as a storage site for military weapons, that weapons could have been dedicated, or that weapons could appear as the result of warfare.

Sanctuary under attack?

It is not unlikely that the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas came under attack. The area of Thyreatis/Kynouria was disputed between Sparta and Argos and the two faced each other in a number of battles. The current consensus is that the region was taken by Sparta from Argos by 546, after the famous ‘Battle of the Champions’,Footnote ³⁰ though the two cities had a history of warfare predating the mid-sixth centuryFootnote ³¹ and continuing into the Classical (Thucydides 5.41; Pausanias 2.20), Hellenistic (Anthologia Palatina 7.430–2)Footnote ³² and Roman (Pausanias 7.11.1–2) periods. Sparta also had some towers along the borders: those of Xeropigado, Xylopyrgos and Anemomylos all date to the second half of the fifth century and show the strategic importance of the area (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 201–5; Baumer Reference Baumer2004, 143). Still, it is unknown whether the conflict between Sparta and Argos ever reached as far south as this particular area of the Parnon mountain range. It is also unclear whether or not Sparta lost this area in 338 when Philip II gave the Thyreatis and parts of Kynouria to Argos, but attempts were made to reconquer the area with some periods of success in the third century; the area was certainly lost to Argos by 195 (Polybius 4.36; Shipley Reference Shipley2000, 378–9; cf. Cartledge and Spawforth Reference Cartledge and Spawforth2002, 33–4). The sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas was on a main road connecting Prasiai with the main perioikic polis of Geronthrai and the Eurotas plain, so we cannot exclude the possibility that the sanctuary may at some point in its history have come under attack, though no literary sources, as far as I am aware, mention such an episode.

While the possibility that weapons appeared at the sanctuary due to military conflict remains open, we can at least assume that many weapons, particularly miniatures or weapons made of thin bronze sheet, were probably dedicatory. The deposits found do not exclude the possibility that there was cleaning of the sanctuary after an attack which would have included debris from a siege together with votive material (cf. Hagerman Reference Hagerman and Schaus2014, 98).

Votives

Since a significant volume of material appears to be miniature versions of real weapons, the possibility that the archaeological assemblage is votive must be taken into consideration. The numbers reported for the miniatures are suspiciously large. Phaklaris (Reference Phaklaris1990, 183 n. 576) reports 50 iron spearheads as miniatures and gives the length as 0.04–0.055 m. The finds have not been properly published, so definitive conclusions can only be met with caution, but a number of the published images (pls 91b, 92b–c) show that these may be arrowheads, not miniature spearheads. A comparison with arrowheads from Olympia shows the variety and typology of such weapons, which could easily be confused with miniature spearheads (Baitinger Reference Baitinger2001, 6–32, pls 4–12). Moreover, there are many examples of small arrowheads of dimensions of 0.055 m and smaller from both OlympiaFootnote ³³ and Kalapodi.Footnote ³⁴ It is not that miniature versions of assault weapons do not exist: miniature spearheads and other weapons are known from Olympia, which are made of thin sheet metal (Baitinger Reference Baitinger2001, 80, 238 nos 1347–50, Br 1946, Br 6023, pl. 67) and so thought to be votive rather than ‘raw’ dedications. Some bronze offensive miniature weapons have been found at the temple of Apollo at Bassai (Kourouniotis Reference Kourouniotis1910, 318 fig. 38) but the real versions are in iron (Arapogianni Reference Arapogianni2002, 26–8 fig. 28).Footnote ³⁵ Miniature spearheads from the Diktaian cave on Crete are also made of thin bronze sheet (Boardman Reference Boardman1961, 26–7, nos 104–11 fig. 10).Footnote ³⁶ In general, miniature versions of weapon dedications in Greek sanctuaries tend to be defensive weapons, such as shields, helmets and greaves, while assault weapons are less frequent and even completely absent (Baitinger Reference Baitinger2011, 159). Moreover, miniature weapons are predominantly found in bronze (such as the numerous examples at Bassai), though there are also terracotta examples (Baitinger Reference Baitinger2011, 160). The so-called miniature spearheads from Apollo Maleatas, however, are made of iron, but one bronze and one lead version of a spearhead are reported (see above) as well as others made of thin bronze sheet. Arrowheads are not uncommonly confused with miniaturised versions of real weapons, and so-called miniature versions appear at times to have been fully functional weapons (Kiernan Reference Kiernan2009, 90).Footnote ³⁷ It appears, therefore, that many of the so-called miniature spearheads from the temple of Apollo Maleatas are probably arrowheads. If the weapons are real-size arrowheads, then they are ‘raw’ dedications and, together with the large numbers of other spearheads and javelins discovered at the site, they could have a significant impact on our understanding of the character of the cult at the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas. The sanctuary could be interpreted as a place where it was ‘fashionable’ to dedicate (or which had a tradition of dedicating) captured or retired offensive weapons. Miniatures, on the other hand, are deliberately made for votive purposes only. Their high numbers would suggest a different picture, in which items symbolising weapons were traditionally dedicated alongside the ‘raw’ dedications which are in the majority at the sanctuary.

Weapon dedications could have been presented to the god as thank-offerings for aid in battle. In Panhellenic sanctuaries, most notably Olympia, Delphi and Isthmia, such dedications also demonstrated the victor's glory and the loser's shame (Chaniotis Reference Chaniotis2005, 143–8).Footnote ³⁸ One could also dedicate old or battle-damaged weapons, such as the famous helmet of Miltiades at Olympia, or offer one's armour to the god upon retirement from military service (Pritchett Reference Pritchett1979, 249–52). Mercenaries setting off for or returning from an expedition could also dedicate weapons.Footnote ³⁹ Only inscribed votives can prove the occasion of a dedication,Footnote ⁴⁰ but the ‘raw’ offering of an enemy's captured weapons symbolised the violence of the battle. The sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas was not Panhellenic, so military dedications could have been directed at a regional audience without excluding the possibility of visitors from abroad.

A Laconian sanctuary

If these weapons were votive dedications, then we can explore the role of the sanctuary in the communities of Laconia. Who were the individuals who dedicated the offensive weapons, and what was the reason behind the offering of such distinct votives to this particular cult of Apollo?

The first question is more difficult to answer given the lack of epigraphic or literary evidence identifying individuals or groups that would have frequented the sanctuary. The most famous attestation of the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas is, of course, on the late fifth-century Damonon stele dedicated at the sanctuary of Athena Chalkioikos in Sparta (IG V 1.213; see below). Lines 56–8 mention the Maleateia, which is traditionally taken to mean a festival taking place at the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas in Thyreatis/Kynouria, which Damonon won in the category of boys as a παĩς.Footnote ⁴¹ The stele also mentions the Parparonia, further north in the Thyreatis (ll. 44, 63), along with other festivals in other perioikic sanctuaries, which suggests that Spartans competed in festivals in Thyreatis/Kynouria. At the very least, the Damonon stele shows that there were Spartans visiting the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas and that there was a festival in which boys would participate.Footnote ⁴² A recent publication of an inscribed halter (jumping stone) found near the sanctuary further attests to athletic competitions taking place at the sanctuary (Lanérès and Grigorakakis Reference Lanérès and Grigorakakis2015).

This, of course, does not confirm that Spartans were the only ones who could have dedicated the large number of weapons in the sanctuary. In fact, there is some evidence that the custom of dedicating captured arms of enemies was frowned upon in Sparta. Plutarch records that when asked why the Spartans do not dedicate booty from their enemies, the Spartan King Kleomenes replied that it is because it is taken from cowards (Moralia 224b). When asked the same question, King Leotychidas replied that since these weapons were taken from enemies because of their cowardice it would not be good for young men to see or dedicate them to the gods (Plutarch, Moralia 224f; cf. Aelian, Varia Historia 6.6; Pritchett Reference Pritchett1979, 292).Footnote ⁴³ But Plutarch's account is not altogether confirmed by archaeological finds; military dedications appear in Laconian sanctuaries, as seen above.Footnote ⁴⁴ To the list can be added a trophy of arms at Olympia (550–525) by Eurystratides, of which an inscribed bronze strip survives (SEG XI 1214; Jeffery and Johnston Reference Jeffery and Johnston1990, 199 no. 19, pl. 36). The archaeological remains from Spartan sanctuaries confirm that Spartans and other Lakedaimonians dedicated captured armour at their sanctuaries. Due to the lack of inscriptional evidence, however, it is unclear how much of the armour was their own or their enemies’.

It is worth noting that defensive weapons, such as shields and helmets, do not appear as votive dedications at the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas, which is striking if the sanctuary was traditionally the recipient of captured weapon dedications. Shields and helmets were more impressive and valuable than the large number of iron weapons found. This may suggest that large numbers of spearheads and arrowheads at the sanctuary were not war spoils at all but rather specifically chosen dedications, or rather place-specific dedications for this particular sanctuary.Footnote ⁴⁵

In Sparta, Apollo was a war god, most famously seen at his cult at Amyklai where there was an armed statue of the divinity holding a spear and bow (Pausanias 3.19.2–3); similar imagery was probably found at the cult of Apollo Pythaeus at Thornax in the periphery of Sparta (Pausanias 3.10.8).Footnote ⁴⁶ The military importance of the cult is also reflected in the rites of the Hyakinthia, at which participants were shown the breastplate of Timomachos,Footnote ⁴⁷ the Aegeid who had supposedly conquered Amyklai for the Lakedaimonians (Pindar Isthmian 7.13–15; Aristotle, Lakedaimonion Politeia fr.532 Rose; Scholia Pindar Isthmian 7.18a).Footnote ⁴⁸ Other Spartan festivals of Apollo, such as the Karneia (Athenaeus, Deipnosophistai 4.141e–f; Pettersson Reference Pettersson1992, 62–6; Ducat Reference Ducat2006, 275–6) and the Gymnopaidia, had military components.Footnote ⁴⁹ The Spartans allegedly sacrificed and sang the paean before battle and marched to the rhythm of the song (Plutarch, Lykourgos 22.2–3; Pettersson Reference Pettersson1992, 63 n. 363). Apollo, it is safe to say, was predominantly a military deity in Sparta. The many spearheads, javelin heads, arrowheads, and the bronze warrior statuetteFootnote ⁵⁰ found at the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas would have been appropriate offerings to a military deity whose attributes were the spear and the bow. This is specifically indicated by the miniature versions of weapons in lead, bronze and perhaps iron found at the site, as well as the numerous non-functional and probably votive examples in thin bronze sheet. The sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas, therefore, appears to have been a place of a specific type of dedication of offensive weapons, whether ‘raw’ or made for votive purposes.

The festival of the Maleateia may have been the occasion for such dedications. As with other festivals of Apollo in Laconia, such as the Gymnopaidia, the Karneia and the Hyakinthia, this too would have been a festival where the military attributes of Apollo were celebrated. The Maleateia festival, in which Damonon competed as a boy, would therefore also have been a communal celebration of the military aspects of Apollo, at which the young would have participated, as was also the case at the Gymnopaidia, Karneia and Hyakinthia (Ducat Reference Ducat2006, 263–5, 268–74, 277), where the young also partook in the festivals.Footnote ⁵¹ The votive weapons may have been personal objects, perhaps dedicated to the warrior-god by both Spartans and perioikoi (who served in the Lakedaimonian army: Herodotus 8.28.1; Thucydides 4.38.5; Xenophon, Hellenika 5.3.9)Footnote ⁵² at the end of an active military career – many had traces of ash and carbon on them, probably indicating sacrifice at the festival.

Apart from its location – the sanctuary was easily reached by many perioikic communities – its setting atop the Parnon mountain range, linking the Eurotas Valley with Thyreatis/Kynouria, the gateway to Argos, made the sanctuary of great strategic importance. Its peak votive period, based on Laconian pottery finds, dates to the Archaic and Classical periods, when Sparta dominated Laconia. Although it is uncertain whether the sanctuary was in use in the Hellenistic period, one would assume that King Lykourgos would have used this route and passed by the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas when he attempted to regain the lost territory of Kynouria (Polybius 4.36); he captured the nearby perioikic polis of Prasiai, but not Glyppia, 10 km to the north. In fact, Polybius mentions that in his time Glyppia was the frontier of Sparta and Argos, and that it was there that the Messenian allies of Philip V gathered (Polybius 5.20.3). The sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas, therefore, was located at a site of military significance. The military dedications found at the sanctuary may reflect a tradition of dispute and border conflict.Footnote ⁵³ The link between military hostilities and sanctuaries is evident at the sanctuary of Artemis Limnatis in Volimnos, Messenia (Koursoumis Reference Koursoumis2014). Its location on the border of Laconia and Messenia and the route crossing Taygetos from Sparta to Messenia cannot be accidental; it demonstrates how the location of sanctuaries symbolised such enmities. It is exactly the geographical location of the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas that may explain the tradition and choice of this sanctuary as a centre of the warrior-god Apollo. Placed on the route from the Eurotas Valley to Kynouria, military dedications would have been an appropriate offering to Apollo at a sanctuary with strategic importance.

The interplay between cult, politics and military antagonism between Sparta and Argos is apparent in other cults in the region. The Hermai, the three large stone cairns seen by Pausanias (2.38.7), delineate the border of Sparta, Argos and Tegea (see Supplementary Material catalogue no. 5). Further north in the Thyreatis lies the cult of Parparos at Xerokambi, as confirmed by an inscribed sixth-century bronze figurine of a bull (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 183–5; see Supplementary Material catalogue no. 1). The name is found in literary sources connected with a mountain Parparos (Pliny, Natural History 4.5.17) and as the site of the famous ‘Battle of the Champions’ between the Argives and the Lakedaimonians in 546 which delineated the border between Sparta and Argos (Pritchett Reference Pritchett1979, 110–14; Christien and Spyropoulos Reference Christien and Spyropoulos1985, 459; Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1987; Reference Phaklaris1990, 185, n. 582; Vaquero and Monedero Reference Vaquero and Monedero2014, 85–9). Since the Lakedaimonians were victorious and Sparta came to dominate the region, a cult of Parparos would have celebrated Sparta's victory and reflected its control over the region, demonstrating its power and reminding its opponent of its defeat. This would have been further enforced by the Parparonia mentioned on the Damonon stele, which probably took place in the region (IG V 1.213, l.63). It is suggested that the Parparonia may have initially celebrated the Spartan victory over the Argives but after the loss of the Thyreatis in the fourth century have been added to the festival of the Gymnopaidia in Sparta, which commemorated the Spartan victory over the Argives at the Thyreatis (Athenaeus, Deipnosophistai 15.678b–c; Suda s.v. Γυμνοπαίδια; Brelich Reference Brelich1961, 31; cf. Pritchett Reference Pritchett1979, 112; Wallner Reference Wallner2008, 321–2; Richer Reference Richer2012, 404). If this hypothesis is correct, there is evidence to show how cult sites in the Thyreatis/Kynouria were consciously used by Sparta to celebrate their victory over the Argives and to express their domination over the area. Besides, the interplay between warfare and religious festivals was often linked in Sparta in various events (Brelich Reference Brelich1961, 24–33). The Maleateia festival could have been another occasion which offered the opportunity for the Spartans to link their polis to the Laconian countryside and to unify the perioikic landscape with a festival which celebrated military aspects of their society.

The sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas and its position in the power interplay between Sparta and Argos may also have extended to his homonymous cult at Epidauros, which is first attested c.500.Footnote ⁵⁴ McInerney has recently suggested that the local Epidaurian god was Apollo and that Maleatas was adopted from Sparta when the Epidaurians were ‘making overtures to Sparta at the expense of their nearest neighbour, Argos’.Footnote ⁵⁵ If this is correct, then we can see the political use of religion by a Greek polis. The choice of Apollo Maleatas was an interesting one, as it suggests a close connection between Sparta itself and the perioikic sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas in Laconia, so much so that the epithet ‘Maleatas’ would have had Spartan connotations. Spartan interest in the sanctuary is supported by the existence of a cult of Apollo Maleatas in Sparta (Pausanias 3.12.8). Its foundation date is unknown, but the cult may have been a way for Sparta to connect with its perioikic territory and the cult of Apollo Maleatas in Kynouria.Footnote ⁵⁶

The location of the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas would have made it an appropriate central place for a festival that gathered together the Lakedaimonians. Located on a high pass through the Parnon mountain range, it was situated on one of the most important routes connecting the Eurotas Valley to the region of Kynouria. This route, which probably linked the important perioikic town of Geronthrai with Prasiai, passed by the temple of Apollo Maleatas.Footnote ⁵⁷ Additionally, another road appears to connect the sanctuary more directly with Marios, extending perhaps towards the fort at modern Zavraina, which was in use from Classical to Roman times.Footnote ⁵⁸ Other perioikic settlements, such as Selinous, Kyphanta and Glyppia, were also located near the sanctuary. A central sanctuary such as that of Apollo Maleatas would have contributed to the unity of the communities living nearby and enhanced Lakedaimonian identity for those who had travelled from further afield.

Evidence suggests that in Laconia and Messenia religious occasions, such as festivals, games and oracles, perhaps more than other times of the year, gave rise to considerable movement of, and interaction between, Spartans and perioikoi.Footnote ⁵⁹ The Damonon stele offers evidence of nine different festivals that Damonon and his son participated in.Footnote ⁶⁰ A victory list from Geronthrai (IG V 1.1120) records the festival Hekatombaia, which was possibly held at the perioikic polis of Geronthrai; Strabo (8.4.11) claims that the festival was held annually by the hundred cities of Laconia.Footnote ⁶¹ When Pausanias visited the sanctuary of Artemis Limnatis in Volimnos, Messenia, he described (4.4.2–3) how incidents that took place during a common festival held at the sanctuary shared by the Messenians and the Spartans resulted in the outbreak of the first Messenian War.Footnote ⁶² While the incident of the sanctuary is usually discussed in relation to Sparta's subjugation of Messenia, it also suggests the sanctuary's importance to both Lakedaimonians and Messenians: a shared cult of Artemis Limnatis at Volimnos, and a festival that they alone of all the Dorians participated in. The oracular sanctuary of Ino-Pasiphae also served a Laconian function when ephors visited (IG V 1.1317; SEG XIII 260; Cartledge Reference Cartledge2002, 165; fourth/third century; Lanérès Reference Lanérès2015, 107–11; see Supplementary Material catalogue no. 32). A fragment of Sosibios offers evidence for perioikic participation in festivals in Sparta (FGrH 595 F 4), since during the Promachia festival ‘the people from the country (τοὺς μὲν ἀπὸ τῆς χώρας) are garlanded with reeds, while the boys undergoing Spartan training follow ungarlanded’.Footnote ⁶³ Parker (Reference Parker and Powell1989, 145) suggests that by ‘people from the country’ Sosibios means the perioikoi. Lastly, Plutarch (Agesilaos 29.2) mentions that during the festival of the Gymnopaidia the city was ‘full of strangers’, indicating that non-Spartans – perhaps perioikoi – attended the festival. There is enough evidence to suggest that, far from being isolated, Laconian and Messenian sanctuaries acted as gathering places for people from their own region and beyond. Moreover, Spartan cults, such as that of the Dioskouroi, were celebrated in perioikic poleis, such as Sellasia and Geronthrai (see Supplementary Material catalogue nos 12, 13, 21, 50). Religion would contribute significantly towards unity and common Lakedaimonian identity.

Cults and festivals in Laconia, such as the Gymnopaidia and the Parparonia (see below), could be used to celebrate Spartan victories, especially against their long-term rival, Argos. The temple of Apollo Maleatas offers another example of a strategically placed sanctuary with a unique votive assemblage that celebrates the Spartan control of the disputed region of Kynouria. Beyond that, the sanctuary was a central gathering place within Laconia that focused on the military nature of Apollo, not unlike the military nature of the Spartans themselves. It presented another opportunity for the Laconian landscape to be unified in a religious setting.

Sites and finds

The site, excavated in 1910 by Romaios, has been confirmed as that of Apollo Tyritas (Romaios Reference Romaios1911) by votives, such as a bronze male figurine inscribed with ΑΠΕΛΟΝ ΤΥΡΙΤΑΣ (SEG XI 892; Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 175, fig. 101, pl. 76a–b), a bronze figurine of a bull (IG V 1.1518; Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 174) and a bronze phiale inscribed with the letters ΑΠΕΛΟΝ ΤΥΡΙΤ[AΣ] (IG V 1.1517; Romaios Reference Romaios1911, 269; Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 174). The earliest material consists of terracotta standing and seated figurines and a bone stamp, which suggest a seventh-century commencement of the cult (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 177, pls 89d, 89a), while several architectural fragments give some indication of architectural phases.Footnote ⁶⁵ The cult site must have undergone building work in the late seventh or early sixth century, on the basis of Laconian antefixes dated by Winter (Reference Winter1993, 106–7, 138, 141) to 650/620–580.Footnote ⁶⁶ Further building and renovations were undertaken in the sixth century: a fragment of an antefix appears to have features of later repairs and is of Arkadian style (c.525–500; Romaios Reference Romaios1911, 259, fig. 3; Reference Romaios1953, 254–5; Winter Reference Winter1993, 138, 141). One of two marble Doric capitals found by Romaios has a very flat echinus and belongs to an Archaic period temple, while a fragment of a poros architrave may belong to the same building (Romaios Reference Romaios1911, 20; Reference Romaios1953, 251–2). Although a fourth-century altar and statue bases are attested, the temple of Apollo Tyritas fell slowly into disuse. The reason for this is uncertain, as is its connection with a possible Argive presence when Philip II gave parts of the Thyreatis/Kynouria to Argos in 338 (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 178).

The typology and chronology of the finds have prompted scholars to associate the early history of the sanctuary with the Argive control of the region. Generally it is thought that the area produced Argive ceramics into the seventh century (cf. Voyatzis Reference Voyatzis and Østby2005, fig. 6) and that the sanctuary had Argive votives until the first half of the sixth century (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 178). Such observations are in line with Herodotus’ claim (1.82) that the region, including also the Malea peninsula and Kythera, belonged to Argos, though this statement is more likely later Argive propaganda.Footnote ⁶⁷

Sparta's takeover of the Thyreatis/Kynouria, so famously secured in the ‘Battle of the Champions’ in 546, can hardly be expected to have been the result of a sharp transition between the Argive and Spartan control of the area, if there was really a transition at all. As with other areas of Laconia and Messenia, Sparta's gradual expansion in the southern Peloponnese was probably the result of a complex process that did not just involve warfare. Rather, it saw the absorption of villages in the vicinity of Sparta (e.g. Amyklai), and resettlements of populations (as for example Messenian Asine, which was supposed to have been populated by exiles from Asine in the Argolid; see below), along with the expulsion of local populations and the foundation of Spartan settlements in Laconia (e.g. Geronthrai and Pharis; Pausanias 3.2.6; 3.22.6). Sparta's interest in the region must predate the mid-sixth century, since Sparta and Argos had already fought over the Thyreatis/Kynouria in the early sixth and perhaps even the seventh century.Footnote ⁶⁸

Sparta's influence in the region is difficult to detect before the sixth century. Still, stylistic evidence, such as late seventh-/early sixth-century Laconian antefixes, shows that the region was connected with other parts of Laconia. This type of antefix is seen on other Laconian temples and is found on the early temple of Artemis Orthia at Sparta, the Amyklaion, the Menelaion, the temple of Apollo Hyperteleatas in the Malea peninsula in Laconia, and the temple of Athena Soteira and Poseidon at Vigla near Tegea (Winter Reference Winter1993, 106–7, 138, 141). The architectural similarities between prominent Laconian temples (as well as that at Vigla) reveal the links that this region had with Laconia. Far from being isolated, it shows that whoever was responsible for designing the temple had commissioned an architect who was well aware of current architectural trends. The chronology of the architectural remains pushes Laconian contacts with the region of Thyreatis back further than Phaklaris and others have suggested. It also shows that the communities that lived near the borders, such as those who built the temple of Poseidon at Vigla, and of Apollo Tyritas, probably did not have clearly defined Laconian, Arcadian, or Argive identities in the seventh and early sixth centuries, but had fluid cultural connections at this time (cf. Voyatzis Reference Voyatzis, Nielsen and Roy1999, 143–5).

Beyond the early architectural remains, we need to address some of the seventh- and early sixth-century votive assemblage. The identification of the votive assemblage as ‘Argive’ is based on observations on pottery that has for the most part not been properly studied or published; more specifically, pottery discovered at sites such as Prasiai and Kythera in the earlier twentieth century has not been accurately analysed in terms of its style (Christien Reference Christien and Piérart1992, 166–7). Some pottery has been labelled ‘Geometric’ rather than assessed on the basis of stylistic analysis as Argive, Corinthian or Laconian.Footnote ⁶⁹ In consequence, among the seventh-/early sixth-century material from the sanctuary of Apollo Tyritas it is not particularly clear where the seventh-century Argive material is. The sanctuary has some seventh-century Corinthian pottery (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, pls 84–5), but the appearance of Corinthian pottery at the cult site of Apollo Tyritas is not unique among Laconian sanctuaries.Footnote ⁷⁰ It would be reasonable to assume that the communities living in the area may not have been culturally uniform in the seventh century, and we may expect regional adaptations and influences from all over the Peloponnese, including the Argolid and Laconia.Footnote ⁷¹ Morgan and Whitelaw (Reference Morgan and Whitelaw1991, 80) describe the pottery of Kynouria as ‘a distinctive fusion of Argive and Lakonian influences’.

Stibbe's extensive work on Laconian pottery and bronzes (together with the terracotta antefixes) confirms that Laconian influence on material culture becomes apparent at the sanctuary of Apollo Tyritas by the late seventh and early sixth century. Among the most noticeable finds are a fragment of a volute crater with parts of animal friezes dating to Laconian II (c.600; Stibbe Reference Stibbe1989, 126, fig. 139) and an aryballos (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, pl. 86; Stibbe Reference Stibbe2000b, no. A35) that should date from the first quarter of the sixth century, given a similarly shaped one in Sparta (Stibbe Reference Stibbe2000b, 27). Earlier evidence for Laconian influence in the sanctuary can be seen in a black-glazed aryballos of c.650–600 for which parallels are known from Artemis Orthia (Stibbe Reference Stibbe2000b, 47, no. O15; cf. Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990 177, pl. 87).Footnote ⁷² Pottery confirms Laconian stimulus in the sanctuary's material culture by at least the early sixth century, if not earlier.

The appearance of Laconian material in the Thyreatis/Kynouria does not offer a unique picture compared to the rest of the Spartan-dominated regions. Throughout Laconia and Messenia the material culture is homogeneous in terms of architecture, pottery and inscriptions. Nor can the appearance of Laconian material culture in the Thyreatis/Kynouria necessarily define the identity of the inhabitants; but it can reveal the Spartan impact in the area from an early date as well as cultural contacts with the rest of Laconia.

From the sixth century onwards, once the Laconian material appears in the sanctuary, the site yields many remarkable bronze dedications. These dedications not only reveal the wealth and status of the visitors, but also highlight the sanctuary's importance as a cult place in the Thyreatis/Kynouria and its links with the rest of Laconia. Among the most notable is a bronze askos in the shape of a siren (Herfort-Koch Reference Herfort-Koch1986, 121 K157; Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 175, pl. 78c–d; Tsiafakis Reference Tsiafakis2001, 15–16, figs 8a–b; Stibbe Reference Stibbe2006, 204, fig. 38; Ambrosini Reference Ambrosini2013, 71, figs 40–1), which is considered the earliest in its series and dates from the first quarter of the sixth century.Footnote ⁷³ An inscribed bronze fibula of a lion (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990 174, pl. 76c; Stibbe Reference Stibbe1994b, 113 n. 32; Proskynitopoulou Reference Proskynitopoulou and Kaltsas2006, 173 no. 76) has Spartan parallels in two examples from the Artemis Orthia (Droop Reference Droop1929, 200 pl. lxxxvii, f and lxxxviii, m), one from the Menelaion (Dawkins et al. Reference Dawkins, Droop, Woodward, Giles, Wace and Thompson1908–9, pl. ix), one from Apollo Hyperteleatas (Kalligas Reference Kalligas1980, 21, fig. 9), and one of many Laconian bronzes from the Athenian Acropolis (Stibbe Reference Stibbe2008, 41, no. 13, fig. 65a–b).Footnote ⁷⁴ An inscribed bronze oinochoe handle of c.560–555, depicting a lion head between two ape heads, was dedicated by Menoitos to Apollo Pythaeus and found near the sanctuary of Apollo Tyritas (IG V 1.928; Jeffery and Johnston Reference Jeffery and Johnston1990, 200, n. 36; Stibbe and Pelagatti Reference Stibbe and Pelagatti1999, 41–2, fig. 18; Stibbe Reference Stibbe2006, 139, fig. 14).Footnote ⁷⁵ This handle belongs to a well-known series of such bronze oinochoai produced in Laconia in the sixth century (Stibbe and Pelagatti Reference Stibbe and Pelagatti1999; Stibbe Reference Stibbe2006, 139). A remarkable container in the shape of a horse with a vessel on its head is probably a unique shape in bronze in the Greek worldFootnote ⁷⁶ (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 175, fig. 77δ, 78γ-δ; Stibbe Reference Stibbe2006, 149–51, fig. 44–5; Proskynitopoulou Reference Proskynitopoulou and Kaltsas2006, 157, 158 fig. 4). Lastly, another unique bronze statuette features a seated figure with a vessel between his legs inscribed ΑΠΕΛΟΝ ΤΥΡΙΤΑΣ (SEG XIX 892; Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 174–5, fig. 101, pls 76α–β; Stibbe Reference Stibbe2009, 29–30, figs 10–12). Thus the Laconian-style bronzes and pottery have parallels in other prominent Laconian sanctuaries, both in Sparta itself and in the rest of Laconia. The finds not only confirm the cultural connections that the region had with Laconia, but also, based on some of the unique shapes, highlight the tradition of perioikic crafts.Footnote ⁷⁷

A perioikic sanctuary

As shown by the high quality of the votives and the lifespan of the sanctuary from the seventh to fourth centuries, the sanctuary of Apollo Tyritas must have been important within north-eastern perioikic Laconia and beyond. This view is further strengthened by the amount of building undertaken at the sanctuary over its lifespan, with an Archaic architectural phase, repairs, and the construction of an altar in the fourth century. The centrality and prominence of the cult is further confirmed by the simple fact that no other sanctuary has been unearthed nearby; even Prasiai, with activity dating from the seventh century, has not produced remains associated with cult (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 129–37), though future investigations may reveal some of the cults mentioned by Pausanias (3.24.4–5).

It is uncertain whether the sanctuary was connected with the nearby settlement of Tyros, where archaeological evidence suggests a fourth-century occupation, postdating the life of the cult of Apollo Tyritas (Christien and Spyropoulos Reference Christien and Spyropoulos1985, 495; Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 142–5; LS BB 28), although a fifth-century polis may have existed (Shipley Reference Shipley, Hansen and Nielsen2004, 576). It is possible that the temple was connected with the nearby perioikic polis of Prasiai (Shipley Reference Shipley, Hansen and Nielsen2004, 586), an important port town within easy reach of the Argolid. There is evidence of a fifth-century settlement nearby at Paliochora, including foundations (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 139; LS BB27), which indicates that other smaller but as yet undetected settlements, such as farmsteads and hamlets, were located within the temple's catchment area (cf. Catling, R.W.V. Reference Catling2002, 247). A number of bronze strips found at the sanctuary, some of which were unfinished, have been linked to travelling artisans who would have visited different festivals and made their products on the spot (Kourouniotis Reference Kourouniotis1910, 330–1; cf. Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 176 n. 547 pl. 83α–β).Footnote ⁷⁸ We can, therefore, assume that the sanctuary was linked to a festival that would have brought people living in Thyreatis/Kynouria and beyond together to celebrate the cult of Apollo.Footnote ⁷⁹

The high number of expensive dedications in bronze demonstrates further the central status of the sanctuary of Apollo Tyritas to the communities living in Thyreatis/Kynouria. The Laconian countryside did not produce very large nucleated settlements and most of the population lived in dispersed farmsteads. It is suggested that the wealthy elite lived in the nucleated centre and were also in control of the communal cults (Catling, R.W.V. Reference Catling2002, 247). The wealthy local (and foreign) elite dedicated a rich array of votives to Apollo Tyritas and would have used the sanctuary as a central gathering place. There are many questions regarding the wealthy elite and their relationship to Sparta, their involvement in the building of the temple, and the repairs and construction of the fourth-century altar, as well as Spartan presence at the sanctuary. Unfortunately, there is little evidence to aid our understanding of the specific mechanisms by which Sparta controlled and kept connections with the perioikic territories, though it is generally thought that it was done through the wealthy perioikic elite.Footnote ⁸⁰ Festival occasions, with Spartan participation, would have been an opportunity to unite the Spartan-dominated areas and bring greater interaction between the Spartan and the perioikoi.

The status of the temple of Apollo Tyritas within the communities of Thyreatis/Kynouria can be further expressed by the inscribed dedication on an Attic cup: [Εὐγ]ειτονίδας ἀνέθ̣εκε τõι Ἀπ̣όλονι πὰρ Δοριέος δọ̃ρον, ‘Eugeitonidas dedicated to Apollo an offering (on behalf?) of Dorieus’ (IG V 1.1521; SEG XI 893; XXXV. 298; Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 175, pl. 77β-γ; Steinhart and Wirbelauer Reference Steinhart and Wirbelauer2000, 265). Stibbe has argued that this cup was dedicated by [Eug]eitonidas on behalf of the discontented Spartan prince Dorieus (Herodotus 5.42–3; Stibbe Reference Stibbe1996, 241–6; 1998, 74). Although it is tempting to accept this hypothesis, one would expect a more elaborate gift from a royal to Apollo than a black-glazed cup. Stibbe's argument has been received with criticism, since the use of παρ(α)+genitive is not common and its use could signify that the cup was a gift that Eugeitonidas received from Dorieus, which he later dedicated to Apollo (Steinhart and Wirbelauer Reference Steinhart and Wirbelauer2000, 264–5). Moreover, the name Dorieus is not unique (Steinhart and Wirbelauer Reference Steinhart and Wirbelauer2000, 265 n. 41). This cup is not an isolated example of Attic pottery at the temple of Apollo Tyritas, as five fragments of Attic kylikes are reported, two of which depict ithyphallic satyrs (first third of the sixth century; Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 177, pl. 88α–ε). A lekanis (sixth–fourth century), a shape commonly associated with Attic rather than Laconian pottery, has also been unearthed at the sanctuary.Footnote ⁸¹ These votives show that the sanctuary would have received dedications from further away places, perhaps alluding to a wealthier audience.

The aforementioned inscribed Attic cup is not only notable for its unusual inscription ‘(on behalf) of Dorieus’. Whoever Eugeitonidas was, he used the form Ἀπόλονι on the graffito rather than the Doric Ἀπέλον, and its occurrence is not unique at the sanctuary. A bronze fibula of a crouched lion with a tail of a bearded serpent is inscribed with Ἀπόλονος ἐμι (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 174, pl. 76γ; Jeffery and Johnston Reference Jeffery and Johnston1990, 200 no. 40). Its existence may further explain the status of the communities living in the area and their relationship to the Argolid, since ‘Apellon’ rather than ‘Apollo’ is the more common form in Laconia and Messenia (Buck Reference Buck1955, 46 no. 49.3; Miller Reference Miller2014, 204 no. 17.11), e.g. Apellon Korythos (SEG XI 993–4),Footnote ⁸² and other Doric-speaking areas,Footnote ⁸³ with the exception of ArgosFootnote ⁸⁴ and the temple of Apollo Maleatas at Epidauros,Footnote ⁸⁵ where the Doric speakers use ‘Apollo’. In other Laconian sanctuaries, such as that of Apollo Hyperteleatas in the Malea peninsula, inscriptions use the form ‘Apellon’.Footnote ⁸⁶ In other examples from the sanctuary of Apollo Tyritas he is also called Apellon (IG V 1.1517–18), not Apollon. Moreover, since inscriptions from the eastern Argolid use the same alphabet as Laconia (Jeffery and Johnston Reference Jeffery and Johnston1990, 175; cf. Steinhart and Wirbelauer Reference Steinhart and Wirbelauer2000, 265 n. 41), the two ‘Apollo’ inscriptions found at Apollo Tyritas may indicate that the sanctuary was frequented by non-Laconians, perhaps from communities living in the Argolid or Attica, where ‘Apollon’ would have been a more common form. After all, Apollo Tyritas was within easy reach of the Argolid. In nearby Prasiai another inscription (IG V 1.929c) is dedicated to Apollon Maleatas and not to ‘Apellon’. Geographic proximity meant that it would have been inevitable that the communities living in the area shared cultural contacts with the Argolid (Morgan and Whitelaw Reference Morgan and Whitelaw1991, 80).

Influences from a wider geographical area beyond Laconia are found in further examples. The appearance of dedications to Apollo Pythaeus, at the sanctuaries of both Apollo Maleatas and Apollo Tyritas, will be discussed below, as will the cult's connections with the Argolid. Moreover, nearby Prasiai was a member of the Kalaureian Amphiktyony (for which Sparta paid its dues), which united the maritime poleis of Aigina, Athens, Epidauros, Hermione, Nauplia and Boiotian Orchomenos (Strabo 8.6.14; Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 137; Kõiv Reference Kõiv2003, 307).Footnote ⁸⁷ A large iron trident found at the sanctuary of Apollo Tyritas may have been destined for Poseidon (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 176 pl. 82a).Footnote ⁸⁸ The population of Kynouria may have perceived themselves differently from the rest of Laconia, as they were autochthonous and apparently the only Dorianised Ionians (Herodotus 8.73). The population in the area of Kynouria was close to the borders of Argos and may have kept traditions in tune with the Argolid, including Epidauros.Footnote ⁸⁹

Spartan involvement in the sanctuary?

Regardless of the wider cultural connections that the sanctuary may have had with the Argolid, Sparta's influence is clear in the material record from the early sixth century onwards, when building activity commences and votives become numerous. Sparta's direct involvement in the cult is difficult to discern, given the lack of inscriptions that could identify anyone as Spartan. Examining the region within the historical context of border antagonism may be fruitful in order to perceive Sparta's possible interest in the cult as well as its significance for the regional perioikoi.

In his study of settlement patterns in Laconia, Catling comes to the conclusion that the disputed northern borderlands between Sparta and Argos (and Tegea) saw an expansion of settlement in areas that had had little occupation beforehand and were consolidated under Spartan control in the early sixth century (Catling, R.W.V. Reference Catling2002, 240–3).Footnote ⁹⁰ Catling even suggests that the consolidation of settlements in the northern borderlands may be explained as ‘a deliberate Spartan policy conceived to assert full authority over the region’ (Catling, R.W.V. Reference Catling2002, 243). It is possible that the early Archaic building phase at the sanctuary of Apollo Tyritas, which shows Laconian influence, may have taken place under Spartan auspices whereby patronage of an Apollo sanctuary in a remote region of Laconia could have demonstrated their influence and claim to the territory in the years preceding the ‘Battle of the Champions’.Footnote ⁹¹ The sanctuary, therefore, could be viewed within the framework of animosity of the two powerful Peloponnesian poleis.

Spartan patronage of, and perhaps deliberate support for, the sanctuary can be confirmed by the fact that the sanctuary's life appears to coincide with Sparta's control of the Thyreatis/Kynouria. It is during the late seventh/early sixth century that Laconian material first appears, a chronology contemporary with Sparta's struggles against Argos in the area. The architectural similarities with Spartan and other Laconian temples may reveal connections maintained at an official level between the wealthy perioikoi, who may have organised the building of the temple, and Sparta. Beyond that, the perioikoi who lived in the Thyreatis/Kynouria may too have regarded the sanctuary as a frontier place between the Argolid and Laconia;Footnote ⁹² after all, the Tyritai considered themselves Lakedaimonians in the third century (see below). The life of the temple continued until the fourth century, which saw the construction of an altar and statue bases either by private or by public initiative. After that, activity at the temple of Apollo Tyritas slowly diminishes. The cause of the cessation of cult is unclear, but may be linked with instability in the area after Sparta lost the Thyreatis (and perhaps also parts of the Kynouria) in 338.

Indeed, the Thyreatis saw the erection of a number of late fourth-century fortifications (Elliniko, LS AA13) and watchtowers (Kastro tis Orias, LS AA21a; Elliniko, Charadros, LS AA330) that are probably of Argive construction, while nearby Tyros (LS BB28) is a fortified settlement of late Classical foundation with most activity in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, but some also earlier.Footnote ⁹³ An inscription (SEG LIX 356, c.340–330 bc) might delineate the Argive defensive system on the western border after 338.Footnote ⁹⁴ The evidence thus suggests an organised and heavy defence border between Sparta and Argos following the fourth century. It is unclear whether or not Philip II gave the region of Kynouria to Argos, but by 275 Sparta probably re-established itself in the area of Tyros, as the Tyritai call themselves κώμα Λακεδαιμονίων on a third-century inscription from Delphi (SIG ³ 407; Shipley Reference Shipley2000, 378; cf. Cartledge and Spawforth Reference Cartledge and Spawforth2002, 33–4). Regardless of whether it was lost or not, this sanctuary, like other perioikic sanctuaries,Footnote ⁹⁵ shows decline in the fourth century, when Sparta and Laconia went through a number of years of instability following their loss of territory.Footnote ⁹⁶

Another point further expresses the position of the sanctuary of Apollo Tyritas both within the context of Spartan antagonism against Argos and as a frontier sanctuary for both the Spartans and perioikoi. A significant number of weapons have been discovered at the site: six iron spearheads, an inscribed sword, six iron swords, arrows, a ring belonging to a wooden bow, a fragment belonging to a shield and a large fragment of a helmet (Romaios Reference Romaios1911, 274–5; Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 175–6). The substantial number of weapon dedications reveals the military nature of Apollo, which was also celebrated at the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas further south. The weapon dedications are noticeable, since they are rare in other prominent Laconian perioikic sanctuaries, e.g. the sanctuary of Apollo Hyperteleatas, where among the plethora of valuable bronzes only two weapons have been unearthed (see above). The military aspect of Apollo honoured here reflects the sanctuary's geopolitical setting. It was situated in a contested area with Argos, Sparta's long-term enemy, and it provided access to the Argolid by both land and sea. The cult, which flourished during Spartan control of the area, may have adopted some of Apollo's military characteristics, which were apparent at the Amyklaion, the cult of Apollo Pythaeus at Thornax and the temple of Apollo Maleatas at Kosmas. A sanctuary of military Apollo would have been appropriate as a military guardian of Lakedaimonian land, and the cult may have been promoted by Sparta itself. Both Spartans and perioikoi living in the region could have dedicated the armour at their strategically placed sanctuary.

Inasmuch as the sanctuary was located in a crucial area for Sparta, Spartan attendance at the sanctuary is difficult to detect. Four lead figurines in the shape of wreaths may reveal Spartan presence, since such figurines are commonly found at the sanctuaries of Artemis Orthia and the Menelaion, but less so in Laconian and Peloponnesian sanctuaries (Phaklaris Reference Phaklaris1990, 176, pl. 79c; cf. Boss Reference Boss2000, 7–14).Footnote ⁹⁷ As the evidence of the Damonon stele illustrates, Spartans travelled and participated in games at perioikic festivals; it is thus likely that Spartans attended the sanctuary of Apollo Tyritas too, especially given its prominent position among the perioikoi in the region. Support from elsewhere shows that some Spartans were involved as officials in perioikic cults: three inscriptions from the temple of Apollo Hyperteleatas in Laconia, dating to the Hellenistic period (IG V 1.1014–16), mention Spartans.Footnote ⁹⁸ The inscriptions record that Spartans held the office of priests and of πυροφόροι (fire-bearers; cf. IG V 1.965; Xenophon, Constitution of the Lakedaimonians 13.2). The inscriptions demonstrate how Sparta maintained good relations with perioikic sanctuaries even after the area of the Malea peninsula was lost in 195 (Kennell Reference Kennell, Hodkinson and Powell1999, 194), but they may also reflect the earlier close ties between Sparta and perioikic sanctuaries, which cannot otherwise be detected. The temple of Apollo Tyritas, too, may have had Spartan contacts at an official level through the wealthy perioikoi. Interest in and patronage of a prominent perioikic sanctuary would have connected Sparta with its perioikic neighbours and promoted Sparta's claims to a strategic and disputed area in the Archaic and Classical periods.