Childbirth Votives and Rituals in Ancient Greece PDF

UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI
May 17, 2005
Date:___________________
Susan Wise
I, _________________________________________________________,
hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of:
Doctor of Philosophy
in:
Classics
It is entitled:
Childbirth Votives and Rituals in Ancient Greece
This work and its defense approved by:
Brian Rose
_______________________________
Chair: Charles
Jack
Davis
_______________________________
Holt
Parker
_______________________________
Susan
Cole
_______________________________
Jenifer
Neils
_______________________________
Childbirth Votives and Rituals in

Ancient Greece
A dissertation submitted to the
Division of Research and Advanced Studies
of the University of Cincinnati
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
DOCTORATE OF PHILOSOPHY (Ph.D.)
in the Department of Classics
of the College of Arts and Sciences
2007
by
Susan Wise
B.A., University of Maryland, Baltimore County, 1993
M.A., University of Cincinnati, 1995
Committee Members: C. Brian Rose (chair), Jack Davis, Holt Parker, Susan Cole, Jenifer
Neils
Abstract
This dissertation provides the first comprehensive account of private worship
associated with childbirth throughout the ancient Greek world. It documents the rituals
performed by individuals during various stages of the reproductive cycle and the
different types of votives that were dedicated to the gods for fertility and birth. My
work on this subject builds upon previous studies, which have collected much of the
available evidence, by asking new questions of the material. In particular, I have sought
to define the patterns of childbirth rituals that occurred in the lives of Greek women
and to examine how the dedication of childbirth votives fits within this larger pattern of
worship.
The first chapter examines the cultural background within which the rituals and
the votives must be understood. In addition to providing information about the
divinities who oversaw childbirth and the sanctuaries for which childbirth worship is
attested, this chapter explores the wider social and religious attitudes towards
procreation and birth that played a defining role in the formation and practice of
childbirth rituals.
The second chapter provides a detailed discussion of the rituals surrounding
childbirth. By examining the private rituals performed both within sanctuaries and
within the home, this chapter establishes the patterns of ritual that punctuated the
entire process of birth from the period immediately preceding conception through the
time when the mother and child were (re)admitted into society after the birth.
The third chapter examines the votives that represent the best-preserved
evidence for childbirth rituals. By providing a critical assessment of the votives by type,
I first define what objects were dedicated as childbirth votives, and then I examine these
votives in order to gather further information about childbirth rituals and Greek
attitudes towards childbirth in general. A catalogue of the votives is provided in
Appendix 1.
In my conclusions I summarize the patterns of ritual that accompanied
reproduction and analyze the iconography of the childbirth votives within the broader
context of artistic depictions of birth.
ii
2007 by Susan Jennifer Wise. All rights reserved.
iii
Acknowledgements
This dissertation has been many years in the making, and it would not have been
possible at all without the help of a great many colleagues, friends, and family
members. I am delighted to have the opportunity here to thank them for the support
and assistance that they have given me throughout my work on this project.
I am grateful to the Classics Department at the University of Cincinnati for the
generous financial and intellectual support that I have received throughout the years of
my graduate studies. I could not have conducted my study without the assistance of the
Semple Fund. I am likewise grateful for the Cedric Boulter Memorial Scholarship and
the Marion and Dorothy Rawson Fellowship in Archaeology, which enabled me to
spend several months traveling throughout Greece to study the material for this
dissertation.
I am indebted to all the members of the Classics Department for providing an
atmosphere of open scholarly exchange of ideas. The many discussions that I have had
with students and faculty have enriched my scholarship immeasurably. This is true
above all for the members of the Dissertation Discussion Group: Joanne Murphy,
Kathleen Quinn, Shari Stocker, Carol Hershenson, Carrie Galsworthy, and Julie Hruby.
I am deeply grateful that I have had such a thoughtful and helpful group of scholars
with whom to discuss my ideas and to expand my own thinking by listening to theirs.
Without their support, encouragement, and advice this dissertation would never have
happened.
There are many others who have provided invaluable help to me along the way.
I am indebted to Diane Harris-Cline, whose seminars confirmed for me that Greek
religion was truly a passion I wanted to pursue. While I was in Greece, I found
iv
considerable support from members of the American School of Classical Studies, the
British School, the Greek Ephoreia, and the curators of the many museums I visited. I
especially wish to thank Nancy Bookidis for opening up the storerooms of the Corinth
Museum for me. The blissful days that I spent examining drawers of terracotta figurines
were a highlight of my research, and proved extremely useful. I thank Carol Lawton
and Leslie Beaumont for taking the time to discuss and clarify my ideas, particularly
concerning votives and children.
I am deeply indebted to the members of my dissertation committee. My main
advisor, Brian Rose, has been a bastion of support throughout my years at Cincinnati.
His encouragement, advice, and occasional prodding were much needed and deeply
appreciated. Jack Davis' careful reading and questioning of my draft, as always, has
clarified my thinking and my prose considerably. Susan Cole, Jenifer Neils, and Holt
Parker have each lent important insights into various aspects of this work. For all of
their suggestions and comments, I am grateful.
Jean Wellington and Mike Braunlin of the Blegen Library in Cincinnati provided
invaluable assistance in locating resources for this study. John Wallrodt contributed his
considerable technical expertise to many aspects of this project, from advice on the
implementation of the databases that I used to store my data to trouble-shooting the
production of the final draft.
I extend my thanks to the many people who have provided the most valuable
help of all: their unwavering support. I thank my colleagues and friends at Earlham
College, who have taken great interest in my work and who have cheered
enthusiastically every step that I have made towards its completion. I thank my very
dear friends, who have seen this project through from beginning to end, and who have
managed to love me despite it. I hardly have the words to thank Joanne Murphy, whose
v
friendship through these years has been the solid rock to which I have clung in all the
ups and downs. Kathleen Quinn, David Kime, Carol Hershenson, Carrie Galsworthy,
Shari Stocker, Bethany Qualls, Holly Jennings, and of course, Joanne, have been the best
cheerleaders one could ask for.
I dedicate this dissertation to my parents, Wayne and Bernardina Wise, who
have always encouraged me to follow my dreams, no matter where they led, and to my
son, Andrew Wallrodt, who I hope will follow his own marvelous dreams.
vi
Table of Contents
Abstract
Table of Contents
List of Figures
Introduction
Chapter I: Background
17
Social and Religious Considerations
17
Divinities of Childbirth
28
Sanctuaries
48
Chapter II: Rituals
71
Fertility Rituals
71
Rituals During Pregnancy
76
Rituals During Birth
84
Rituals Following the Birth
88
Summary
99
Chapter III: Votives
101
Anatomical Votives (cat nos. 1.1-1.66)
103
Figurines (cat nos. 2.1-2.46)
117
Reliefs (cat. nos. 3.1-3.15)
180
Statues and Statue Bases
207
Other Objects
217
The Iconography of Birth
232
Conclusions
253
Appendix I: Catalog
263
Bibliography
291
List of Figures
Fig. 1: Marble anatomical votive of female genitalia, Sanctuary of Artemis

Kalliste, 1.5. Photograph by author.
Fig. 2: Marble votive plaques from the sanctuary of Eileithyia, Paros. 1.57. Paros
museum nos. 329, 305, and 307. Photograph by author.
Fig. 3: Terracotta Baubo figurine (2.13). Image from Schmidt 1911, pl. 42, fig. 115.
Fig. 4: Terracotta Baubo figurine (2.10). Image from Besques 1971, pl. 373, d.
Fig. 5: Terracotta Baubo figurine (2.4). Image from Paris 1892, pl. 11.4.
Fig. 6: Terracotta Baubo figurine (2.14). Image from Schefold 1955, fig. 3.
Fig. 7: Terracotta Baubo figurine (2.6). Image from Besques 1971, pl. 151b.
Fig. 8: Terracotta Baubo figurine (2.15). Image from Schefold 1955, fig. 1.
Fig. 9: Terracotta figurine of nude round-bellied woman (2.21). Image from
Besques 1971, p. 230.
Schne 1892, pl. 36.
Delos XXIII, pl. 90.
Lindos I, pl. 142, no. 3048.
Fig. 13: Terracotta pregnancy figurines from the sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus,
Lakonia (2.24). Image from Cavanaugh et al. 1996, pl. 13a.
Fig. 14: Terracotta figurine of round-bellied woman (2.31). Image from Besques
1971, pl. 230a.
Fig. 15: Terracotta doll, possibly pregnant (2.26). Image from Lindos I, pl. 112.
Fig. 16: Terracotta figurine of nude, round-bellied woman (2.27). Image from
Corinth XII, no. 153, pl. 10.
Alexiou 1956, pl. A, 2.
from Corinth XII, no. 153, pl. 10.
Fig. 20: Terracotta pregnancy figurines (2.33). Image from Price 1978, pl. 2c.
Fig. 21: Terracotta pregnancy figurine (2.35a). Drawing by author.
Fig. 22: Terracotta pregnancy figurine (2.35b). Drawing by author.
Orlandos 1965, p. 206, fig. 229 center.
Fig. 24: Terracotta comedic figurine (2.36). Image from Peredolskaja 1964, pl. 2.1.
Fig. 25: Terracotta comedic figurine (2.37). Image from Peredolskaja 1964, pl. 4.1.
Fig. 26: Figurine of nude woman, kneeling (2.45). Image from Lindos I, pl. 137, no.
2966.
3
Fig. 27: Nude female figurine, kneeling, with two genii (2.44). Image from Stoop
1960, pl. 1.
Fig. 28: Nude female figurine, kneeling (2.42). Image from Jamot 1895, fig. 3.
Fig. 29: Marble group of kneeling woman with two genii (2.40). Image from Tod
and Wace 1906, figs. 50-51.
Fig. 30: Terracotta figurine group from Cyprus. Image from Karageorghis 1998,
pl. 58, no. 10.
Fig. 31: Terracotta figurine group from Cyprus. Image from Karageorghis 1998,
pl. 58. no. 9.
Fig. 32: Kourotrophos figurine from the Sanctuary of Athena at Lindos. Image
from Lindos I, pl. 108 no. 2125.
Fig. 33: Kourotrophos figurine from the Sanctuary of Athena at Lindos. Image
from Lindos I, pl. 108 no. 2318.
Fig. 34: Terracotta kourotrophos figurine from Gortys, Crete. Image from
Besques 1971, pl. 160a, no. D870.
Fig. 35: Terracotta kourotrophos figurine. Image from Winter 1903, vol. 3.1, p.
166 no. 7.
Fig. 36: Terracotta kourotrophos figurines from the sanctuary of Eileithyia Inatia,
Crete. Image from Price 1978, pl. 2a and b.
Fig. 37: Two views of a terracotta kourotrophos figurine from the sanctuary of
Athena at Lindos. Image from Lindos I, pl. 80 no. 1864.
Fig. 38: Terracotta seated child figurines from the sanctuary of Athena at Lindos.
Image from Lindos I, pl. 111, nos. 2369, 2371, and 2372.
4
Fig. 39: Terracotta figurine of infant in cradle. Image from Besques 1971, vol. 3,
pl. 229i, no. D1139.
Fig. 40: Terracotta figurines of infant in cradle from the sanctuary of Athena at
Lindos. Image from Lindos I, pl. 136 nos. 2935 and 2936.
Fig. 41: Terracotta figurines of swaddled infants. Image from Winter 1903, vol.
3.2, p. 271 nos. 12 and 13.
Fig. 42: Terracotta figurines of embracing couple from the sanctuary of Eileithyia
Inatia, Crete. Image from Daux 1965, p. 886, fig. 10.
Fig. 43: Terracotta figurines of embracing couple from the sanctuary of Eileithyia
Inatia, Crete. Image from Davaras 1976, p. 85, fig. 47.
Fig. 44: Terracotta ithyphallic figurine from the sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus,
Argolid. Image from Cavanaugh et al. 1996, pl. 12b.
Fig 45: Terracotta figurines of female figures displaying genitalia. From the
sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus, Argolid. Image from Cavanaugh et al. 1996,
pl. 12a.
Fig. 46: Fragmentary relief showing sacrifice made by a worshipper (3.1). Image
from Delos XI, fig. 248.
Fig. 47: Votive relief depicting worshippers sacrificing to Athena (3.2). Image
from Staes 1886, pl. 9.
Fig. 48: Childbirth relief (?) (3.3). Image from Kontoleon 1970, p. 13, pl. VIII.2.
Fig. 49: Votive relief of childbirth scene and divinities (3.4). Image from
Mitropoulou 1977, p. 45 no. 66, fig. 104.
Fig. 50: Marble relief depicting a woman in childbirth. Phillips 1973, fig. 3.
5
Fig. 51: Relief depicting sacrifice to Artemis (3.8). Image from Delos XI, p. 299 and
fig. 247.
Fig. 52: Relief depicting worshippers; inscribed to Eileithyia (3.7). Image from
Smith 1892, vol. III, p. 238, pl. 28.
Fig. 53: Relief of worshippers and Artemis (3.5). Image from Philadelpheus 1927,
p. 158 no. 1.
Fig. 54: Relief of Artemis with torch standing before a temple (3.9). Image from
Bruneau 1970, no. A3158, pl. 1.
Fig. 55: Relief of worshipper and goddess (3.10). Image from Mitropoulou 1977,
p. 64 no. 127.
Fig. 56: Fragmentary votive relief of female figure (3.11). Image from Pingiatoglu
1981, p. 123 no. 22 and pl. 21.1.
Fig. 57: Relief of female figure with torch (3.12). Image from Delos XI, p. 303, fig.
255.
Fig. 58: Relief depicting the presentation of a child to Artemis (3.13). Image from
Cole 1998, pp. 34-35.
Fig. 59: Relief of seated woman, two standing figures, and a child (3.14). Image
from Kastriotis 1903, pp. 40-41, pl. 9.
Fig. 60: Relief of women and infants (3.15). Image from Clairmont 1993.
Fig. 61: Marble statue of standing girl, from Brauron. Image from Daux 1959a, p.
595, fig. 27.
Fig. 62: Marble statue of seated girl, from Agrai. NM 695. Image from Svoronas
1917, pl.1.
6
Fig. 63: Detail of black figure Attic amphora depicting the birth of Athena.
Image from LIMC Athena 339.
Fig. 64: Detail of black figure Attic cup depicting the birth of Athena. Image from
LIMC Athena 347.
Fig. 65: Detail of black figure Attic amphora depicting the birth of Athena. Image
from LIMC Athena 348.
Fig. 66: Detail of a fourth century B.C. polychrome pyxis from Eretria depicting
the birth of Apollo. After Pingiatoglu 1981, pl. 8.
Fig. 67: Classical marble relief depicting the birth of Apollo (?). Image from
Mitropoulou 1977, fig. 146.
Fig. 68: Detail of Attic lekythos depicting the birth of Dionysus. Image from
LIMC, Dionysus 666.
Fig. 69: Detail of Apulian volute krater depicting the birth of Dionysus. Image
from LIMC, Dionysus 667.
Fig. 70: Funerary stele from Rhodes. Rhodes Archaeological Museum 1470-3;
Image from Demand 1994, pl. 11.
Fig. 71: Lekythos of Peidestrate and Mnesagora. NM 1077. Image from Demand
1994, pl. 3.
Fig. 72: Funerary stele; Arthur M. Sackler Museum 1905.8. Image from Demand
1994, pl. 5.
Fig. 73: Stele of Plangon and Tolmides; NM 749. Image from Demand 1994, pl. 6.
Fig. 74: Lekythos of Theophante; NM 1055. Image from Demand 1994, pl. 2.
Fig. 75: Detail of the funerary relief of Francesca Tornabuoni, erected in the
church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva, AD 1477. Bargello, Florence. Image
from Musacchio 1999, fig. 20.
Fig. 76: Detail of Apulian volute-krater depicting the death of Semele. Tampa
Museum of Art no. 87.36. Image from Stewart and Gray 2000, fig. 10.10.
Introduction
Conception and childbirth have been the focus of elaborate religious and magical
ceremonies in many cultures, from antiquity to the present.1 Ancient Greece was no
exception. Literary and epigraphical sources indicate that numerous deities were
regarded as watching over both mother and child during the critical time of childbirth.2
Part of the reason for the preponderance of ritual activity associated with birth was the
significance placed on the production of heirs in ancient Greek society; both men and
women considered producing children an essential function of adult life.3 This was
especially true for women, whose status as gyne depended upon the birth of a child,
preferably a son. The importance placed on reproduction in ancient Greece gave rise to
ritual activities intended to ensure fertility and successful birth.
Despite the fact that childbirth itself, as well as the rituals that accompanied it,
played an important and continuing role in the lives of women in ancient Greece, this
aspect of women's lives has remained surprisingly obscure. Even some of the most basic
questions about the rituals women used to alleviate their fears about childbirth, how
and when they turned to the gods for assistance, and what objects they chose to give to
the gods to thank them for a successful birth, are yet to be answered.
The reason for this lack of knowledge comes in part from the poverty of the
ancient sources themselves. Greek literature was written largely by and for men, and
Beckman 1978; Laget 1982; Gross 1980; Jacobson 1980; Bhatia 1981; Adamson 1985; Scurlock 1991; Jordan
1993; Sered 1994; Goodburn et al. 1995; Bates and Turner 2003.
2
For a full list of childbirth divinities, see below, pp. 24-43.
3
Lys. 1.6-7, Xen. Mem. 2.2.5.
therefore rarely addressed issues that predominantly belonged to the female sphere.
This problem is magnified in the case of ritual practice associated with childbirth, as
there was a distinct bias in male attitudes towards women's approach to religion.
Women were seen as superstitious and emotional, and religious customs that were
characterized as "female" were frequently regarded with scorn.4 It is no wonder, then,
that the private rituals performed by women in association with childbirth are so
difficult to find in ancient literature.
Given the paucity of information available in the written sources, it is clear that a
multidisciplinary approach, combining all available sources of information on the topic,
including literary references, archaeological remains, and epigraphical records, is
necessary. Indeed, those who have previously explored this topic have used this
approach with considerable success. Paul Baur wrote the first organized assessment of
religious practice pertaining to childbirth in ancient Greece in a Philologus supplement
of 1899-1901.5 Baurs work, which summarizes the archaeological and literary evidence
for the statues, sanctuaries, and votives that were dedicated to Eileithyia, has provided
the basis for most other studies of the topic. More recently, two other works have dealt
with cults closely connected with childbirth. In 1978, Theodora Hadzisteliou Price
published an extremely useful account of kourotrophic divinities, the Greek deities
involved in the nursing and upbringing of children, many of which were also
worshipped for childbirth.6 Not long after, Semeli Pingiatoglu published her
dissertation on the cult of Eileithyia, providing a much-needed update to Baur's
Plutarch, Superstit. 3.166; Diogenes Laertius 6.37-38; Lyons 2002.

Baur 1899-1901; This work was later translated into English and published by the University of Missouri
(Baur 1901). I have referenced the translated version of Baur's work throughout.
6
Price 1978.
5
10
research.7 Like Baur, Pingiatoglu provides a broad discussion of the cult of the goddess
Eileithyia, including a summary of the sanctuaries and votives of the goddess as well as
an account of the representations of Eileithyia in art and myth. Most recently, Nancy
Demand has examined the social implications of the medical practices of childbirth in
ancient Greece in her 1989 publication Birth, Death, and Motherhood in Classical Greece.
Each of these works has made a significant contribution to the study of childbirth in
ancient Greece, and I have relied heavily upon them as a foundation for my own
research. The combined insights of these authors have enabled me to approach the topic
of childbirth rituals in a more synthetic way than has been done previously.
My own research focuses upon expanding our current knowledge of the rituals
and votives pertaining to childbirth. While previous scholarship has concentrated
primarily upon collecting the evidence for this topic, my own study seeks to assess
critically that evidence in order to gain a broader understanding of the patterns of
childbirth rituals that occurred in the lives of Greek women and how the dedication of
childbirth votives fit within this larger pattern of worship.
The first chapter of this dissertation provides the necessary background for the
study of childbirth rituals and votives in Greece. Included in this chapter are lists of the
myriad divinities that were worshipped for childbirth and the sanctuaries for which
childbirth worship is attested. In order to place the study of childbirth rituals and
votives within the wider framework of Greek thought, I also discuss some of the social
and religious attitudes that the Greeks held towards procreation and birth.
The second chapter provides a discussion of the rituals of childbirth. This
chapter not only documents the numerous rites that women in ancient Greece
performed in association with childbirth, but establishes the pattern of rituals that
7
Pingiatoglu 1981.
11
punctuated the lives of individuals throughout the entire cycle of birth, from the
preparation for conception to the time when both mother and child were (re)integrated
into society after the birth. It is important to note that in considering this pattern of
ritual worship, I have focused solely on those rituals that were performed as acts of
private worship by individuals or families. I have omitted any discussion of the ways
that the community as a whole sought to ensure or to regulate the fertility and
reproduction of its citizens.8 One of the benefits of limiting my research to the sphere of
private worship is that I have been able to explore all of the various rituals employed by
individuals for childbirth purposesboth those performed within a public sanctuary
setting and those that were performed within the confines of the homein order to
gain a clearer picture of these rituals and their significance within the daily lives of the
people who used them.
The third chapter examines the votives that were dedicated for childbirth, as the
most tangible and best-preserved evidence for private childbirth rituals. My study of
the votives has two aims. The first is simply to define what types of votives were given
to the gods after the birth of a child. In this, I follow in the tradition of those scholars
who have already sought to gather such evidence, particularly Baur, Price, and
Pingiatoglu. My study differs from these earlier works most markedly in my approach
to the evidence, in that I establish a set of criteria by which one may identify childbirth
votives in the archaeological record, and I provide a critical assessment of these votives
by type. The second aim of this chapter is to examine how the votive objects preserved
in the archaeological record add to our understanding of childbirth rituals and ancient
attitudes towards childbirth in general. Among the questions that I ask of the votives
There are many excellent studies of the public festivals and rites pertaining to fertility and reproduction.
To cite just a few examples: Lveque 1985; Cole 1984; Foley 1994; Robertson 1983.
12
are: Why were certain objects considered appropriate as childbirth votives? Why were
some types more popular than others, and, most importantly, what does the choice of
visual theme and the use of iconography say about religious belief, ritual practice, or
attitudes towards childbirth and women's role in reproduction?
Naturally, there are inherent problems in addressing such broad questions to a
topic so poorly documented by the ancient evidence. I have already mentioned the
difficulties presented by the literary evidence, namely the lack of interest of ancient
writers in recording private religious activities performed by women. The
archaeological evidence presents its own difficulties. In identifying what votives were
dedicated for childbirth, for instance, one is faced with a problem encountered by all
scholars who study votive objects in order to reconstruct ritual activity: ambiguity. The
Greeks rarely inscribed their votives, and when they did, they almost never recorded
the reason why the votive was given. This fact naturally makes it difficult to pinpoint
the purpose of the dedication behind most Greek votives, and, in the case of the current
study, to link them securely with childbirth. Adding to the difficulty of drawing farreaching conclusions about the votives are two factors that are often associated with the
use of archaeological evidence in general. First, many potentially illuminating finds are
from poor or undocumented contexts. Votive reliefs, for example, are often discovered
by chance as isolated finds or in reused contexts rather than through systematic
excavation. Second, many of the finds from the best contexts are unpublished or poorly
published.9
9
I have chosen to include artifacts that lack context, including stray finds and some examples that have
come to museums through private collections, despite the fact that the information that they may impart
is extremely limited. I include them because my aim in this study is to provide as accurate a picture of
ancient religious activity and belief as possible. Given the limitations in our knowledge due to the nature
of the subject itself, I feel that to ignore a body of evidence would be to provide only a partial picture,
despite the limited help that such objects can provide. Nevertheless, I have made sparing use of such
artifacts, including them only when they are unique and without a parallel from a better context.
13
I have sought to overcome these difficulties by adopting a multi-disciplinary

approach to the evidence. First, in using the written evidence that is available on the
subject, I have tried to keep in mind the biases and problems inherent in the literary
sources themselves. This includes not only the gaps and inaccuracies caused by the
biases of the male authors in relating matters of little interest to them, but also the
potential dangers of trying to draw conclusions about reality from fictional works.10
Second, in my study of the votive dedications, I have supplemented the scanty
epigraphical evidence with iconographical analysis in order to draw conclusions about
the types of votives that were dedicated for childbirth and to extrapolate religious
practices and beliefs. In doing so, I have made a concerted effort to be mindful of the
limitations and the pitfalls inherent in interpreting the "meaning" of art produced by
and for a different culture, particularly one that is separated from my own frame of
reference by such a considerable span of time and geographical space.11 Finally, I have
sought to fill in gaps in our knowledge through the use of ethnographic comparisons.
Throughout this work I have made use of anthropological studies from a wide range of
different cultures, both ancient and modern, in order to identify potentially similar
practices and beliefs found in ancient Greece.
One further aspect of my study deserves mention here. No one city or region has
enough material to allow a local, synchronic study of childbirth practices and rituals. As
a result of this, I have from necessity drawn my evidence from the wide geographical
and temporal boundaries that define the ancient Greek world. My study extends from
the Geometric period to the Roman Imperial period, and covers nearly every place of
10
I have made use of ancient literature of all genres, including ancient plays, poetry, epigrams
(particularly those found in the Palatine Anthology) and dialogs. For a discussion of the use of fictional
works to draw conclusions about ancient practices and beliefs, see Parker 1983, pp. 13-14; on the use of
fictional epigrams, see Simon 1986, pp. 178-182.
14
Greek habitation, from the Greek mainland to Asia Minor, the Cyladic islands, Crete,
Cyprus, Magna Graecia, and Southern Russia.
The use of such wide-ranging material clearly has many dangers, the most
obvious of which is the oversimplification of beliefs and practices that inevitably had
regional and temporal variations. This is a very real danger, but one that is alleviated in
part by the nature of the activity under consideration. Childbirth practices, particularly
the religious and symbolic activities that accompanied childbirth, belong to the sphere
of tradition that is often passed down from generation to generation with very little
alteration.12 Such traditions have been shown to be conducted for long periods of time,
sometimes lingering within a culture long after other elements of society (even such
important elements as religion or government) have changed drastically.13
The fact that all religious practices surrounding childbirth address the same limited
needsneeds that are defined at least in part by biologysuggest that they would be
less susceptible to regional variation than other religious practices. In a classic essay on
birth practices, E.S. Hartland identified six main foci of birth rites that appear to be
nearly universal: 1) the condition of tabu caused by gestation and birth, 2) the dangers
of evil spirits and witchcraft, 3) the attempt to secure an easy delivery, 4) the attempt to
secure good fortune for the child, 5) admission of the child into society, and 6) the
11
For a useful discussion of the problems of iconographical analysis, see Stewart 1997.
In an anthropological study of modern American Jewish childbirth rituals, Susan Sered (1994) notes the
surprisingly high percentage of women who relied upon what she calls "folk-religious" ritualsprivate
rituals that are traditionally practiced in Jewish communities but that are not required by Jewish law.
Such practices include the use of amulets, ritual blessings, and talismans. Her study indicates that such
rituals persist even among well-educated women who are acquainted with modern secular childbirth
practices intended to ease labor (such as Lamaze). Sered suggests that the popularity and persistence of
such rituals is due to their effectiveness in helping expectant mothers to deal with feelings of
vulnerability and in mediating between conflicting expectations within the family that arise as a result of
pregnancy.
13
In their study of modern Greek beliefs and customs, Richard and Eva Blum recorded numerous
"survivals" of ancient cult practices. See Blum and Blum 1970. The longevity of childbirth or fertility
traditions is also witnessed outside of Greece; Gelis records that women in France continued to use pagan
practices long after the Christian church leaders had forbidden them. See Gelis 1991, pp. 86-87, and 14712
15
readmission of the parents into society.14 While not all of these elements would
necessarily be addressed by each society, and the details of the rituals may differ
somewhat from place to place, the main goals of these ritualsto secure the safety of
mother and child and to ease the participants through the transitional period of birth
would undoubtedly be the same. In using a synthesis of material from various locations
and times, I have not sought to provide the full range of regional and temporal
variation in ancient Greek childbirth rituals (though, naturally, I have made an effort,
whenever the evidence allows, to present those variations), but rather to reveal the most
basic attitudes and practices that were found throughout the ancient Greek world.
148.
14
Hartland 1908, p. 635. Recent scholarship supports these observations. See Adamson 1985 and Newton
and Newton 2003.
16
Chapter I: Background
In order to appreciate the significance of childbirth rituals, it is necessary first to

understand cultural attitudes towards procreation and birth in general. This chapter
explores some of the factors that contributed to the predominance of childbirth rituals
in Greece, including societal expectations for the production of heirs, fears of the
physical and spiritual dangers associated with pregnancy and birth, and the belief in
the ritual impurity caused by childbirth. It then moves to a discussion of the divinities
worshipped for childbirth and the sanctuaries for which childbirth rituals are attested.
Social and Religious Considerations
The Social and Civic Importance of Parenthood

The ancient Greek writers were quite clear in expressing the view that the
primary reason for marriage was to produce children.1 Indeed, bearing and rearing
legitimate children, particularly sons, was not only the womans main duty to the
family, but was also considered her greatest contribution to the community as a whole.
Just as men went into battle and sacrificed their lives for the good of the state, so
women produced the sons who would someday become good citizens.2 Legitimate
sons were not only legally necessary for perpetuating the family line and for passing on
1
See, for instance, Xenophon Mem. 2.2.4-5. The marriage contract between the groom and the father or
guardian of the bride stated specifically that the purpose of the marriage was to produce legitimate
children. For this contract and the ancient sources that preserve the wording, see Sealey 1990, p. 25.
2
Aristotle (Pol. 1335a) considers the age limits for which a man and a woman may serve the state in the
matter of producing children. For the fact that the civic worth of a woman lay solely in her ability to
produce future citizens and soldiers, see Aristophanes, Lys. 587-589; Sealey 1990, p. 14; Loraux 1995, p. 27.
In a recent article on disability in ancient Greece, Martha Edwards argued that, since the ancient
17
the fathers property, but were the best guarantee for security in old age.3 Women who
gave birth to legitimate children, therefore, were treated with higher regard by their
husbands, and were sometimes awarded greater freedom within the family.4 Indeed, it
was through the production of a child, especially a son, that the young wife established
her full status as gyne and alokhos.5
These social values placed considerable pressure on a young wife to become a
mother. Adding to this pressure was the widespread belief that young women who
were approaching menarche were susceptible to a strange illness resulting in fever,
depression, suicidal tendencies, hallucination, and strangling suffocation.6 The
Hippocratic cure for this was a prompt marriage and pregnancy.7 The belief that
pregnancy was a medical necessity for womens sanity and health, along with the social
value placed on the production of heirs, would have made pregnancy and childbirth
socially desirable for women, especially for new wives. The importance placed on
childbirth in the lives of women, therefore, made it a prime focus for rituals that were
designed to guarantee fertility, a successful pregnancy, and a healthy (preferably male)
child.8
definition of disability was the inability to fulfill ones primary role in the polis, a disabled woman would
be one who could not fulfill her role as a childbearer. See Edwards 1998.
3
The pleasures and advantages of having children are ennumerated in Euripides, Ion, 472-491. For the
misery of childlessness, particularly for a woman, see Euripides, Ion, 607-619, and 759-764. Similar
attitudes towards women's roles in reproduction are evident in other patriarchal societies; see, for
example, Musacchio 1999, pp. 20-21; Jacobsen 1980, p. 77.
4
Lys. 1.6-7.
5
Cole 1984, p. 243 and n. 62; Demand 1994, p. 17; Loraux 1995, p. 25. Loraux provides a particularly
useful discussion on the term alokhos and its signficance.
6
Hippocrates, Peri Parthenion 5-6. For recent discussions on ancient Greek perceptions of womens bodies,
see Dean-Jones 1991; Dean-Jones 1994 (especially p. 136); King 1998; King 1995; King 1994; Demand 1994,
pp. 35-6, 95-99, 103-7; Lefkowitz 1981, pp. 12-25.
7
Hippocrates, Peri Parthenion.
8
On the preference for male children and the fact that ancient literature rarely mentions the birth of
daughters, see Loraux 1995, p. 27.
18
The Fear of Pain and Death in Childbirth

As important as childbirth was for the social fulfillment of women in ancient
Greece, there is no doubt that the desire for children was accompanied by misgivings,
worries, and fear. It was no secret that childbirth was a painful event, as the ancient
literature makes all too clear. In an oft-quoted Euripidean passage, Medea eloquently
expresses her regret at the death of her children, emphasizing the pain and difficulty
she endured in giving birth to them: It was all in vain, I see, that I brought you up, all
in vain that I labored and was wracked with toils, enduring harsh pains in childbirth.9
Indeed, Plato uses the pains of childbirth as an extended metaphor for men who are
seeking philosophical enlightenment, saying: Now those who associate with me are in
this matter also like women in childbirth; they are in pain and are full of trouble night
and day...10 The Hippocratic corpus also acknowledges the fearful pain that
accompanies labor, and in tragic plays, childbirth, though not enacted on stage, was
indicated by the off-stage screams and cries of the woman in labor.11
Womens fears were not unfounded. Pregnancy and childbirth in antiquity
involved very real medical risks. 12 Without the benefits of modern medical innovations
such as antibiotics, caesarean section, blood transfusions, and hygenic precautionary
measures, complications in childbirth could easily mean the death of mother, child, or
both. Infection, toxemia, and hemorrhage posed considerable threats to the mother,
and there is no doubt that many women died in childbirth as a result of these
Euripides, Med. 1029-1030 (D. Kovacs, trans.); Cf. Euripides, Med. 250-251; Euripides, Suppl. 1135.
Plato, Theatetus 151a (H. Fowler, trans.)
11
Hippocrates, On the Nature of the Child 18.2. For childbirth cries in theatrical performances, see Plautus,
Aulularia 692-3; Terrence, Adelphoe 486-7; Terrence, Andria 473 (all of which were borrowed from
Menandrian originals).
12
For the physical dangers of childbirth in medical literature, see Hippocrates, On the Nature of the Child
30, 11; On the Diseases of Women 1.1, 36, 42, 46, 72.
10
19
problems.13 Some studies have estimated that as many as five to ten percent of all
pregnancies in antiquity resulted in the death of the mother either during delivery or
soon afterward.14
Doubtless contributing to the high mortality rate was the early age at which
women in antiquity began to have children. The ideal age for marriage for women was
in the early teenage years, and wives were expected to give birth not long after they
were wed.15 The cultural norm in ancient Greece, therefore, was for women to give
birth to their first child while they themselves were still adolescents.16 The mortality
rate for women who give birth before the age of seventeen is considerably higher than
for older women. Early childbearing can pose the additional risk of damaging the
mothers reproductive organs and can result in small, under-developed children.17
These facts did not escape the notice of ancient scholars.18 The terrifying symptoms that
could accompany complications in pregnancy and childbirth are made explicit in the
13
An excellent assessment of some of the medical risks of pregnancy and childbirth in ancient Greece
may be found in Demand 1994, pp. 71-86.
14
These statistics, which were based upon research done primarily on pre-industrial societies, were
provided by Rousselle for Roman mortality rates in childbirth. See Rouselle 1992, p. 298. French (1988, p.
1357) gives a lower estimate of 2.5 percent, based upon statistics gleaned from modern societies that do
not regularly use antiseptic practices during obstetrical procedures. For factors leading to a high maternal
mortality rate, see Loudon 1991, Shiffman 2000.
15
For the age of women at marriage, see Garland 1990, pp. 210-213; Greenwalt 1988; King 1983, p. 112.
16
It has been argued that prepubescent girls as young as seven to ten years of age were already
undergoing rites to prepare them for their mature roles as wife and mother. The arkteia at Brauron has
been interpreted as an initiation rite intended to protect the girls from the retribution of Artemis when
they first become mothers. For a further discussion of this interpretation, see below, p. 48-49. According
to Walter Burkert (1966), the arrephoria was also concerned with preparing young girls for childbirth.
Certain aspects of this interpretation have been challenged by Noel Robertson (1983). Recently, Gloria
Merker has suggested that a similar initiation rite was performed in the sanctuary of Demeter and Kore at
Corinth. See Corinth XVIII.4, p. 127 and p. 337.
17
Demand 1994, pp. 102-3 and citations.
18
Soranus, Gynec. 4.1.53; Aristotle, Pol. 1335a.
20
Hippocratic Epidemics, and the fear and reality of death in childbirth appear frequently
in literature.19
The Dangers of Divine Jealousy
Several stories in the Greek mythological repertoire relate how childbirth could
be hindered or complicated by the interference of a jealous divinity, nearly always
female. Given the philandering tendencies of her immortal spouse, it is not surprising
that Hera often figures in this role. Two different accounts preserve the story of how
Hera attempted to hinder or prolong Alcmenas birth of Herakles.20 Hera was a threat
not only to mortal women, but also to goddesses in travail. It was because of Heras
jealousy that Leto had such difficulty in giving birth to Apollo.21 In at least one version
of the story, Hera was actually present on Delos during the birth and posed a direct
threat to Leto and her offspring. It was only through the actions of the Curetes, who
frightened Hera and helped Leto to conceal her newborn children that Artemis and
Apollo were safely delivered.22
Like Hera, Artemis, too, could be dangerous for a pregnant woman, especially
one who was about to become a mother for the first time. Although Artemis herself was
regarded as one of the most important guardians of women in childbirth, it is a role that
the goddess seems to have accepted only grudgingly, and often not reliably. Just as she
could aid in birth, Artemis could readily destroy the women who sought her
19
Hippocrates, Epidemics 2.2.17; 2.2.20; 2.6.3; 4.24; 5.11; 7.6; 7.49. Literature pertaining to death in
childbirth: Plutarch, Theseus 20.5; Pausanias 2.7.3. Funerary epigrams also dwell on this topic. Cf. Anth.
Pal. 7.730; Peek 1955, no. 548; Peek 1932, pp. 235-7, no. 14.
20
Pausanias 9.11.3 records how the Thebans believed that Hera sent witches to hinder Alcmenas birth of
Herakles, but that a simple ruse performed by one of the women attending the birth sent the witches
away. In Pseudo-Apollodoros (1.167) it is recorded that Hera ordered the Eileithyias to delay the birth of
Herakles.
21
Homeric Hymn to Delian Apollo, 91-104.
22
Strabo, 14.1.20. For a discussion of Hera's interference in births, see Zeitlin 2002, pp. 199-200.
21
protection.23 It is no coincidence that Euripides locates the tomb of Iphigeneia, who was
said to receive gifts of the robes of women who died in childbirth, next to the sanctuary
of Artemis at Brauron.24 This tradition seems to suggest that the women who lost their
lives during childbirth were regarded by the Greeks as sacrificial victims to Artemis in
much the same way that Iphigeneia herself was intended to be. Kevin Clinton has
suggested that the cult of Artemis Brauronia was not, as often assumed, that of a
kourotrophos or protector of children, but rather that of a harsher goddess who needed
to be befriended and appeased. In this light, he has argued that the function of the
Arkteia at Brauron served to protect the young girls from a goddess who might well
claim their lives in childbirth.25 This interpretation is well founded; several ancient
sources refer to the need for women to perform rituals as a means of placating the
goddess and preventing her revenge for the loss of virginity.26
The anxiety concerning the guise in which Artemis would appear at the side of a
woman in labor is eloquently expressed in one of the poems of the Palatine Anthology:
Artemis, the son of Cichesias dedicated the shoes to thee, and Themistodice the
simple folds of her gown, because that coming in gentle guise without thy bow
thou didst hold thy two hands over her in her labour. But Artemis, vouchsafe to
see this baby boy of Leons grow great and strong.27
23
It is Artemis, acting on behalf of Apollo, who serves as the vengeful power that slays Coronis while she
is still pregnant with Asklepios (Pindar, Pyth. 3.8) and who strikes down Callisto for giving birth to Zeus'
child (Apollodorus Bib. 3.8.1). For Artemis striking at pregnant women and their unborn children, cf.
Callimachus, Hymn to Artemis 124-128; Homer, Il. 6.205; Il. 21.483; Od. 11.324; Pausanias 4.30.5; Pausanias
8.23.6-7.
24
Euripides, I.T. 1462-1467. Ekroth (2003) suggests that the cult of Iphigeneia at Brauron was a Euripidean
invention since this practice does not fit the standard votive practice of offering dedications for divine
help. Cole (2004, pp. 218-219) suggests that the clothing of those who died in childbirth were not intended
as votive offerings but rather as a way of appeasing the entities that threatened human reproduction.
25
Clinton 1988, pp. 8-10 and n. 20.
26
Suda, s.v. [Arkto" h] Braurwnivoi"; Schol. Theoc. 2.66. See also Kearns 1989, p. 29.
27
Anth. Pal. 6.271 (Translation by W. R. Paton, 1916).
22
In this case, each of the parents gladly dedicated an offering to Artemis to show their
thanks that she chose to come, not in the guise of a huntress who kills her prey, but as
kind and gentle assistant to those in labor.
Even Eileithyia, the primary goddess of childbirth, was sometimes viewed with
trepedation and concern. Paul Baur suggested that Eileithyia was originally seen as a
hostile divinity who must be appeased and propitiated.28 It is clear from early literary
sources that Eileithyia was closely connected with the pangs of childbirth. Rather than a
kindly goddess who eases women in their travail, she is depicted as the force that
actually causes the pains of labor:
But when the wound waxed dry, and the blood ceased to flow, then sharp pains
came upon the mighty son of Atreus. And even as when the sharp dart striketh a
woman in travail, [270] the piercing dart that the Eilithyiae, the goddesses of
childbirth, sendeven the daughters of Hera that have in their keeping bitter
pangs; even so sharp pains came upon the mighty son of Atreus.29
Given the potentially dangerous nature of the goddesses who controlled fertility and
childbirth, one of the major purposes of childbirth rituals in ancient Greece was to win
their help and continued favor.
The Danger of Supernatural Attacks
Hostile divinities were not the only danger faced by expectant and new mothers.
The periods during pregnancy, labor, and recuperation after birth were seen as
particularly dangerous times when one was vulnerable to malevolent supernatural
powers.30 Among the potential threats was the influence of the evil eye, which could be
28
Baur 1902, pp. 89-90.

Il. 11.265-270 (Translation by A. T. Murray, 1924).
30
Ancient magic was often aimed at warding off the powerful supernatural forces that could threaten
female sexuality and reproduction. For examples, see Aubert 1989.
29
23
caused by the envy of ones neighbors.31 This fear is reflected in one late story, in which
Apuleius relates how a jealous Thessalian witch uttered a magical word to close the
womb of her lovers pregnant wife, preventing her from giving birth for eight years.32
The myth of Letos birth of Apollo may be understood in a similar light. Several
versions of this myth make it clear that it is because of Heras jealousy that Leto suffers
such a difficult labor. In Strabos account, for instance, it is necessary for the Curetes to
shield Leto from the jealous eyes of Hera:
Above the grove lies Mt. Solmissus, where, it is said, the Curetes stationed
themselves, and with the din of their arms frightened Hera out of her wits
when she was jealously spying on Leto, and when they helped Leto to
conceal from Hera the birth of her children.33
The act of hiding or keeping quiet the birth of a child for fear of attracting the attention
of jealous supernatural powers is found in many cultures.34 Various means of
preventing supernatural attacks on the woman and her newborn child during and
immediately after birth have been recorded in different societies, including taking
precautions to ensure that the placenta and afterbirth are not stolen, and sealing up the
house to prevent the entry of malicious spirits.35 Similar preventative measures were
31
Anything that represents wealth, abundance, or productivity is particularly vulnerable to the influences
of the evil eye. It is understandable, then, that pregnant women and newborn children, as well as crops
and herds, would be particularly vulnerable to the evil eye. Plutarch, Mor. 682F-683A; Gravel 1995, pp. 38. For the tenacity of such beliefs see Dickie 1995.
32
Met. 1.9.
33
Strabo 14.1.20.
34
Lefber and Voorhoeve noted, for instance, that in many societies, very few preparations were made
for the upcoming birth for fear of attracting the attention of evil spirits. Lefber and Voorhoeve 1998, p.
25. In her study of modern Hindu birth customs, Jacobson (1980, p. 82) revealed that when the baby
emerged from the womb, the women were careful not to make exclamations, but would only quietly state
the sex of the child, for fear of the evil eye. Jacobson. It is quite likely that a similar practice was observed
in ancient Greece. Soranus (II, 10) notes that once the midwife received the newborn and had examined
whether it was male or female, she was to make an announcement by signs as is the custom of women.
(O. Temkin, trans., 1991).
35
On the stealing of the afterbirth, which was thought to pose a great risk for the newborn infant, see
Lefber and Voorhoeve 1998, p. 46. On sealing the house in Mexico, see: Lefber and Voorhoeve 1998, p.
25; in early modern France, see Glis 1991, p. 97. Other measures include the use of amulets, concoctions,
or symbols intended to repulse spirits. Stol 2000, pp. 143-145; Lefber and Voorhoeve 1998, p. 25;
Goodburn et al. 1995; Jacobson 1980, p. 80; Mogk 1908, p. 662-663; Blunt 1878, pp. 1-3.
24
used in ancient Greece. Evidence for the practice of sealing the house after birth, for
example, is found in a passage of Photius, who mentions that it was not uncommon in
Greece to smear with pitch the houses in which a birth had occurred in order to drive
away any demons or evil entities who might cause harm to the new mother and child.36
Newborn infants and young children were also vulnerable to spiritual, magical,
and supernatural attacks. As Sarah Johnston has pointed out, some of the demons and
mythological beings that supposedly posed a threat to young children in popular Greek
thought were believed to have been women whose childless state caused them to steal
or kill the children of other women.37 It is difficult to judge how seriously the ancient
Greeks regarded these stories. Many of the tales may simply reflect popular folklore
that was no more (or less) believed than are modern stories of werewolves or vampires.
On the other hand, comparanda from modern rural Greece suggests that these stories
may have been accepted as based in truth at least in some communities. In The
Dangerous Hour, Blum and Blum provide personal accounts of modern Greek villagers
who swear that they have had encounters with malignant supernatural entities such as
demons or Nereids.38
Whether or not individual demons such as Mormo were regarded as real, it is
clear that parents in ancient Greece believed that supernatural forces, either acting on
their own or called up by other humans, posed a serious threat to very young children.39
In the Homeric Hymn to Demeter, Demeter accepts the role of the nurse of Damophoon,
36
Photius, Lex., s.v. rJavmno".

Johnston 1995.
38
Blum and Blum 1970, pp. 12-21. Similar accounts of modern villagers belief in Nereids who steal
children or cause them to die may be found in Lawson 1910, pp. 141-144.
39
As Golden (2004, p. 152) has remarked, such beliefs served the practical purposes of redirecting the
blame for an infant's death away from the parents and providing parents with a sense of control by
setting out specific measures that could be taken to protect their children.
37
25
reassuring his mother that she will be a good nurse because she is competent in
protecting children from evil forces and magic:
'May you also be of good cheer, woman, and may the gods grant you all
good things; I willingly accept the child, as you bid me. I will nurse him,
and I do not expect that he will be injured by nurses incompetence,
supernatural attacks nor magical cuttings, for I know a fine preventative
against malignant attacks.40
The Ritual Impurity of Birth
One final cultural attitude towards birth must be mentioned here: the belief that
the act of childbirth caused spiritual pollution. Childbirth was one of the few naturally
occurring events in life that was considered to cause spiritual pollution.41 Indeed,
childbirth was considered so contaminating that it was forbidden within any sacred
space.42 The new mother herself was polluted for a period lasting approximately ten
days after birth, during which time she was confined to the house, and contact with
others was extremely limited.43 Furthermore, the pollution of birth extended not only to
the woman who had given birth herself, but also to all who entered the house or had
contact with her.44 Anyone tainted with this impurity was likewise forbidden to enter
sanctuaries or worship the gods.45 This belief in the polluting nature of childbirth is not
40
Homeric Hymn to Demeter, 224. Susan Shelmerdine (1995, p. 46) notes that this passage is phrased in the
same way that a magical incantation would be.
41
Another was death. An indispensible discussion on the pollution caused by these events may be found
in Parker 1983, pp. 32-73. Cole (2004, pp. 140-145) examines the way that Greek ideas of miasma affected
female ritual participation.
42
Pausanias 2.27.1; IGII2 1035.10; Thucydides 2.52.3, Xenophon, Hell. 5.3.19; Aristophanes, Lys. 742.
43
For the estimate of ten days for the period of impurity, see Parker 1983, p. 52 n. 74. See also, Euripides,
El. 655. The period of confinement for a new mother most likely was marked by two distinct phases: the
first ten days would have consisted of a period of intense impurity, which was then followed by a more
extended period, probably lasting approximately forty days, of lesser impurity. I discuss the evidence for
this as well as the practice of observing a period of confinement for new mothers in greater detail below,
pp. 86-89.
44
Theophrastus, Char. 16. Cyrene cathartic law, lines 16-20, states explicitly that whoever enters the house
of a woman who has just given birth will be considered ritually unclean for a period of three days. On
this passage, see LSS 115 A 16-20; Parker 1983, p. 336.
45
Euripides, IT 380-384.
26
unique to Greeceindeed, it is attested for numerous cultures, both ancient and

modern. Its presence in ancient Greek society deserves to be noted, however, as such
beliefs undoubtedly had a significant effect both on how childbirth itself was perceived
and on the rituals surrounding birth. 46
Summary
The social, religious, and cultural attitudes towards birth examined above
undoubtedly had a great impact not only on the way that women in ancient Greece
regarded their own experiences with pregnancy and childbirth , but also on the types of
rituals that they performed and the votives that they dedicated for birth. The social
expectation that a woman would produce heirs for her husband and citizens for the
polis encouraged new brides to have children quite early, in many cases at an age when
they were physically and emotionally immature. The very real physical dangers of
pregnancy and childbirth, especially at such an early age, were undoubtedly as familiar
to the young women themselves as to the contemporary doctors and scholars who
recorded them. The fear of pain and death in childbirth, which were often regarded as
divinely caused, most certainly encouraged the widespread use of childbirth rituals,
particularly the dedication of votive gifts as a means of gaining divine favor and
assistance. Belief in the vulnerability of pregnant and parturient women to supernatural
attacks would have heightened the sense of need for spiritual or supernatural
protection. Finally, the cultural taboos associated with childbirth, particularly the
spiritual pollution caused by birth and the ensuing period of confinement, had the
effect of excluding the new mother from the sanctuaries of the gods at a time when she
46
For parallels for this belief in other cultures and the accompanying period of seclusion, see: Hartland
1908, p. 635 (in general); Blum and Blum 1970, pp. 19-20 (for modern Greece).
27
was most in need of divine protection. This combination of beliefs and taboos most
likely resulted in the greater use of superstitious and semi-magical practices in
association with birth, and may have dictated to a certain extent the types of objects that
were dedicated to the gods.
Divinities of Childbirth
Women who sought to obtain divine assistance in conceiving and safely
delivering a healthy baby had a wide choice of divinities to whom they could turn.
Among the main divinities of Greek religion, at least nine were worshipped in
connection with fertility, pregnancy, and childbirth. These are: Artemis, Aphrodite,
Asklepios, Athena, Demeter, Eileithyia, Hera, Leto, and Zeus. In addition, a number of
minor divinities and local heroes could be worshipped for these reasons, including
Ariadne, Auge, Damia and Auxesia, the Erinyes, the Eumenides, the Genetyllides,
Hekate, Helen, the Hyperborean maidens, Iphigeneia, Lecho, the Moirai, the Nymphs,
and the Tritopatores. Each of these divinities and heroes is listed below along with their
epithets and a brief summary of the evidence that suggests that they were worshipped
for fertility, childbirth, or the care and upbringing of children. I have also included a
short list of some of the most common epithets given to divinities when they were
worshipped in this capacity.
28
Divinities connected with fertility and childbirth (alphabetically arranged)
Aphrodite (Kolainis, Genetyllis, Kourotrophos, Kolias): Aphrodite could, on occasion, be

worshipped for fertility, offspring, and the care of children. She received female
anatomical votives in her sanctuary at Daphne, and vulvae were inscribed on the rock
face of her sanctuary at Tyre.47 There is also a story related by Pausanias that Aigeus
introduced the cult of Aphrodite Ourania to Athens because of his childlessness.48 In
some areas, her cult appears to have been assimilated with that of the Genetyllides,
minor childbirth divinities (discussed below). The cult of Aphrodite Kolias in Attica
may possibly have been connected with childbirth worship as well. Although the
meaning of the epithet remains obscure, the Koliades are sometimes mentioned in late
sources along with the Genetyllides as minor divinities of childbirth.49 This cult may or
may not have been connected with that of Aphrodite Kalias, whose spring on Mt.
Hymmettos, according to Photios, was believed to help in matters of fertility and birth.50
On Ceos, Aphrodite was worshipped as Aphrodite Ctesylla, a local figure who was said
to have died in childbirth.51 Aphrodite was also occasionally worshipped as
Kourotrophos, particularly in Cyprus, where her sanctuaries received numerous
figurines of children.52
Apollo: On rare occasions, Apollo himself could look after childbirth. At Delphi, Apollo
received at least one thank-offering for overseeing the birth of a child. A third century
47
For the anatomical votives and their possible use as childbirth votives, see below, pp. 99-112; for the
rock cuttings at Tyre, see Baur 1902, p. 65 n. 97.
48
Pausanias 1.14.6.
49
Pirenne-Delforge 1994, pp. 76-78. For the connection between the Koliades and the Genetyllides, see:
Lucian, Erotes 42; Alciphron 3.11; Pausanias 1.1.5.
50
Baur 1902, pp. 62-63; Photios, Lex., s.v. Kuvllou Phvran.
51
For Aphrodite Ctesylla, see Pirenne-Delforge 1994, pp. 74-75, 411 n. 11, and 426-428.
52
For the cult of Aphrodite Kourotrophos in general, see Farnell 1896, vol. II, p. 759, no. 118i; for her cult
on Cyprus, see Price 1978, pp. 90-100. For figurines of children, see below, pp. 161-170.
29
B.C. stele, discovered in 1892, records the assistance of Apollo, along with several other
divinities, in two miraculous births.53 In Euripides Ion, Apollo is also attributed with
making sure that Creusas childbirth of Apollos own son, Ion, was successful.54 At
Sparta, Apollo Karneios was worshipped in the same sanctuary as Artemis Hegemone
and Eileithyia, a fact that Baur believed was indicative of his status there as a childbirth
divinity.55 Apollo could also serve as a kourotrophic god, overseeing the nurture and
education of children.56
Ariadne: Ariadne may well have been worshipped as a minor childbirth divinity on
Cyprus, apparently closely connected with the cult of Aphrodite. Plutarch relates an
alternate version of the story of Ariadne's abandonment by Theseus in which she is
abandoned on Cyprus while pregnant and subsequently dies in childbirth on the island.
He then notes that Theseus returned to establish a cult of Ariadne, and describes an
annual custom at the tomb of Ariadne Aphrodite in which a local youth would imitate a
woman in childbirth.57
Artemis (Eileithyia, Eulocheia, Geneteira, Hekate, Kithone, Lochia, Lysizonos, Mogostokos,

Oupis, Praos).58 There is a vast corpus of ancient sources that mentions Artemis in her
role as guardian of childbirth, only a few of which may be listed here. As a divine
midwife who could be called upon to assist women in labor, Artemis was worshipped
under the epithets of Lochia, Eulochia, and Geneteira. 59 Her cult was frequently conflated
53
SEG 3.400; Price 1978, p. 137.

Euripides, Ion, 1595-6.
55
Baur 1902, pp. 24-25.
56
Price 1978, p. 189.
57
Plutarch, Thes. 20.3-4; Pirenne-Delforge 1994, pp. 349-350. The fact that Ariadne's myth connects her
explicitly with childbirth (since she was said to have died in childbirth) and that she was later
worshipped at her tomb as a divine heroine fits well with the pattern of other local heroines who were
worshipped as childbirth divinities. Cf. Iphigeneia, the Hyperborean maidens, and Helen.
58
CIG 24; Rouse 1902, p. 254 n. 4.
59
For these epithets, see below.
54
30
with that of Eileithyia and Hekate in their roles as goddesses of childbirth.60 As Artemis
Lysizonos, she was regarded as the goddess who oversaw the loosening of a woman's
girdle, either during intercourse or for childbirth. She frequently received gifts of
clothing, including girdles, as thank offerings from grateful worshippers who had
received her assistance in childbirth.61 Due to her fierce and unpredictable nature,
Artemis was often feared as one who could strike women down in the midst of
childbirth; it was no doubt because of this danger that she was sometimes worshipped
as Artemis Praos, a tamed and gentle version of herself who would kindly assist women
in birth.62 Other epithets of Artemis that pertain to her role as childbirth goddess
include Bolosia, Kolainis, Oupis, and Soodine.63
Asklepios : As a healing divinity, Asklepios appears to have also aided his worshippers
in issues of fertility and reproduction. Aristides, for instance, praised him as the god
who gives humans immortality through granting them offspring.64 Numerous female
anatomical votives were dedicated in his sanctuaries, at least some of which may have
been dedicated in the hope of obtaining offspring.65 Several 4th century B.C. cure records
from Epidauros record Asklepios' miraculous assistance in obtaining fertility and help
during difficult pregnancies, suggesting that Askepios was regarded as a god who
could assist in childbirth.66 Herodas fourth mime supports this interpretation. Herodas
describes a visit to an Asklepieion by a woman named Cynno, who makes a thank-
60
Gonnoi II, no. 175-179; Aeschylus, Supp. 670-675.

Schol. Call. Hymn to Zeus 77; Euripides, I.T. 1464; Anth. Pal. 6.59.
62
For the fear of Artemis, see: Callimachus, Hymn to Artemis 124-128; Il. 6.205; Il. 21.483; Od. 11.324;
Pausanias 4.30.5; Pausanias 8.23.6-7.
63
For general references to Artemis as a childbirth divinity, see Anth. Pal. 9.46; Anth. Pal. 6.201-2; Anth.
Pal. 6.242; Euripides, Hip. 165; Euripides, IT 1090-1105; Euripides, Suppl. 955-960; Plato, Theat. 149B;
Pausanias 4.30.5; Diodorus Siculus 5.72.5.
64
Aristides 42.5.
65
See Appendix I, nos. 1.1, 1.2, 1.15, 1.16, 1.18-1.37.
66
IG IV2, 1, 121-122. These inscriptions are discussed in greater detail below, pp. 110-112. See also IC I,
xvii, no. 9.
61
31
offering to the god for a successful healing. At the conclusion of the mime, a sacristan
makes the following invocation to the god: Oi, Oi, Paeon, be propitious on the occasion
of these womens fine sacrifices and to any who are married and near birth. Oi, Oi,
Paeon, may this come about.67
Athena (Kourotrophos, Meter, Lochia ): Although often more of a kourotrophic goddess

than one worshipped for birth itself, Athena does appear to occasionally have had
connections with fertility and the desire for offspring. According to Pausanias, girls
sometimes dedicated belts to Athena before marriage, and an epigram in the Palatine
Anthology includes Athena among the divinities that a female dedicant thanked for a
successful marriage and the birth of a male child.68 On one occasion at Elis, the women
prayed to Athena for offspring, and set up a sanctuary to Athena Meter in thanks for
answering their prayers.69 According to Aristides, Athena Lochia assisted in Letos birth
of Apollo and Artemis.70 Both in Athens and at Troezen, her cult seems to have had
strong associations with fertility and the care of children.71
Auge: In some regions, Auge may have been worshipped as a minor childbirth divinity
whose cult was confused or conflated with that of Eileithyia. According to Pausanias, a
statue of Eileithyia at Tegea was called by local residents "Auge on her knees,"
commemorating Auge's birth of Telephos within the local sanctuary of Eileithyia.72 Baur
suggested on the basis of this passage that Auge was among the oldest of the minor
childbirth divinities.73 Farnell argued that Auge was merely an epithet of the goddess
67
Herodas, IV, 82 ff.

Pausanius 2.33.1; Anth. Pal. 6.59; Schmitt 1977.
69
Pausanius 5.3.2.
70
Aristides 37.18. Farnell (1896, vol I, p. 303) interpreted Aristides' use of this epithet as being purely
metaphorical in nature. For a refutation of this, see Price 1978, pp. 101-103.
71
For her cult in Athens, see especially Price 1978, pp. 101-105. For Troezen, see Farnell 1896, vol. I, p. 302.
72
Pausanias 8.48.7.
73
Baur 1902, p. 32.
68
32
Artemis.74 It is quite possible that Auge's cult as a childbirth goddess was limited to
those areas where the myth of Telephos was most popular, such as at Tegea and at
Pergamon. The fact that the tomb of Auge at Pergamon is said by Pausanias to have
been decorated with the statue of a nude woman may lend weight to the interpretation
of Auge as a local childbirth divinity.75
Curetes: These daemones, who both assisted in the birth of Zeus and who looked after
the infant to keep him safe from Cronus, may have been worshipped as minor
childbirth divinities in some cities.76 In Strabos version of the birth of Artemis and
Apollo, the Curetes also played the part of childbirth aids to Leto and protected her
against the jealousy of Hera.77 According to Pausanias, the shrine of Eileithyia at
Messene was located very near a shrine of the Curetes, perhaps indicating a similarity
of function.78
Damia and Auxesia: These minor goddesses were worshipped in sanctuaries at Argos
and Aegina, according to Herodotus.79 Although ancient sources do not specifically
connect them with fertility and childbirth, it is likely that these goddesses were
worshipped for such purposes.80 Simon notes that, like the cult of Demeter in Attica, the
worship of Damia and Auxesia included ritual obscenity and abuse, suggesting that the
cult was linked to fertility.81 In addition, the cult statues of these goddesses were,
74
Farnell 1896, vol. 2, p. 441.

Pausanias 7.4.9.
76
Strabo 10.3.11.
77
Strabo 14.1.20.
78
Pausanias 4.31.9.
79
Herodotus 5.86.3.
80
In Italy, Damia's worship as a childbirth and kourotrophic goddess is more secure. See Price 1978, pp.
166-169.
81
Simon 1986, p. 201.
75
33
according to Herodotus, depicted on their knees.82 This fact has sometimes been taken
to mean that they were portrayed in a childbirth posture.83 Although an inscription
regarding their cult was found on Aegina, no sanctuary to these divinities has been
located either at Aegina or Argos.84 In Thera, Archaic inscriptions carved into a natural
rock outcropping include Damia among a list of childbirth and kourotrophos divinities;
it is unclear whether the name Lochia serves as an epithet for Damia or refers to a
separate divinity.85
Demeter (Kourotrophos, Epilysamene): Demeter seems to have been worshipped as a

childbirth goddess mainly in Magna Graecia, where her cult was also strongly
kourotrophic in nature.86 Hesychius relates that in Syracuse and at Tarentum she was
identified with Eileithyia.87 She and Kore together received votive offerings in the form
of female breasts in a sanctuary at Knidos.88 That Demeter served as a childbirth
goddess is also suggested by her presence on a vase painting, in which she serves as a
counterpart to Eileithyia in assisting in the birth of Athena.89 More frequently, however,
Demeter appears to have been concerned less with childbirth than with childcare.90
82
Herodotus 5.82.
For the kneeling position as a childbirth posture, see below, pp. 141-153. Among those who have
interpreted Damia and Auxesia as childbirth goddesses because of this posture are Jacobsthal 1956, p. 100
and Stoop 1960, p. 26.
84
IG IV. 1588. For this cult, see Baur 1902, pp. 32 and 35, n. 47; Frazer 1913, IV, pp. 436-437.
85
The names mentioned in this inscription are Lochaia, Damia, Kale, the Nymphs, and Zeus Koures. See
Baur 1902, pp. 34-35; for a useful summary of the names of Damia and Auxesia and the evidence for the
nature of their cult, see Jacobsthal 1956, pp. 99-100.
86
Price 1978, pp. 170-186. Note, though, that at Kos, too, an inscription mentions a cult of Demeter
Kourotrophos. Cf. LSCG 154.
87
Hesychius, s.v. jEpilusamevnh.
88
Baur 1902, p. 63.
89
Berlin Staatl. Mus. F1704; Beazley ABV 96, 14; Cassimatis 1984, p. 986 no. 346; Cook 1940, pp. 673-675,
fig. 485 and pl. LIV; Baur 1902, p. 78.
90
For Demeter's role as nurse and Kourotrophos, see Hymn to Demeter 224; Pliny 2.5.8; Price 1978, pp. 190191.
83
34
Eileithyia (Eukoline, Kourotrophos, Mogostokos): As numerous sources attest, the primary

function of Eileithyia was always as a childbirth goddess.91 Sometimes referred to in the
plural (the Eileithyiae) and sometimes in the singular, this goddess may have originally
been the deified personification of the childbirth pangs themselves, whose role in
childbirth was essential, but whose potentially hostile nature needed to be appeased.92
The Homeric Hymn to Delian Apollo seems to support this concept by linking the arrival
of Eileithyia on the island of Delos with the first labor pains of Leto.93 Eileithyia was
connected with childbirth to such an extent that her name frequently served as an
epithet for other goddesses who acted in the role of childbirth goddess. Eileithyia
herself therefore rarely took on epithets. Two exceptions are the epithet Eukoline, used
of Eileithyia in Attica, and Kourotrophos, which was occasionally attached to Eileithyia
as a guardian of children.
Eumenides:94 In at least a few instances, the Eumenides appear to have been

worshipped for fertility and childbirth. Pausanias mentions an offering of flowers,
honey-water, and pregnant sheep to the Eumenides and the Moirai at Sicyon, most
likely in their role as childbirth divinities.95 In addition, in Aeschylus' Eumenides (834836), Athena promises these goddesses that they will receive numerous offerings
pertaining to the family, including first fruits, offerings for children, and wedding
offerings. Interestingly enough, Hesiod has the Erinyes rather than the Eumenides serve
as the midwives at the birth of Horcus by Eris. 96
91
See, for example: Il. 11.264-275; Il. 19.100-105; Pindar, Pyth. 3.8; Pindar, Nem. 7.1-4; Anth. Pal. 6.200;
Anth. Pal. 6.146; Anth. Pal. 6.270; Diodorus Siculus 5.73.4-6. A useful list of literary sources pertaining to
Eileithyia and childbirth divinities has been gathered by Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 144-152. See also Farnell
1896, vol. 2, pp. 608-617.
92
Homeric Hymn to Delian Apollo 113; Baur 1902, pp. 89-90. See also Hesychius s.v. Eijl eiquiva".
93
The Homeric epithet Mogostokos, or "of the birth pangs" also supports this idea.
94
Hesiod, Op. 800.
95
Pausanias 2.11.4; Baur 1902, p. 39. The Moirai were also considered childbirth divinities. See below,
Moirai.
96
Aeschylus, Eu. 834-836. Baur (1902, p. 39) suggested that a series of Archaic limestone reliefs found near
35
Genetyllis, Genetyllides, Gennaides, or Genethliai: The name of these minor childbirth

daemones varies considerably by region. According to Pausanias, these were known as
Genetyllides in Athens, and in Phokaia they were the Gennaides.97 Genetyllis, a minor
childbirth goddess, was often associated with Aphrodite, Hecate, and Artemis.98 The
cult of the Genetyllides appears to have been quite popular among women in Attica,
despite the general air of suspicion and distain with which male writers regarded
them.99
Hekate (Eukoline, Genetyllis, Artemis-Hekate, Kourotrophos): It is not surprising that

Hekate, as a chthonic deity associated with crossroads and portals, was sometimes
regarded as a divinity that could assist in birth, a dangerous time of transition. Her cult
was most often conflated with that of Artemis, including Artemis Kalliste, whose
sanctuary at the Kerameikos in Athens received several female anatomical votives.100
Hekate was also identified with other childbirth divinities, including Eileithyia,
Iphigeneia, and the Genytillides.101 She was also sometimes regarded as a
Kourotrophos.102 A figure on the south frieze of the 2nd century B.C. temple of Hekate at
Lagina has been interpreted as Hekate Kourotrophos.103 Though Hekate could be called
Argos were votives dedicated to the Eumenides as divinities of childbirth. While it is possible that the
reliefs were dedicated for this purpose, there is no clear evidence to prove that these were childbirth
votives. For the reliefs themselves, see Milchhoefer 1879, pp. 152 and 174, and pls. IX and X.
97
Pausanias 1.1.5.
98
See Farnell 1896, II, p. 759, no. 118g (Aphrodite Genetyllis), p. 602, no. 23k (Hekate Genetyllis). For
Artemis Genetyllis, see Jayne 1962, p. 323 n. 192 and Hesychius, s.v. Genetulliv".
99
Aristophanes (Nu. 52) dismissed the Genetyllides as foreign goddesses, while Lucian (Pseud. 11; Am.
42) assessed them as divinities of dubious character whose cults played upon the superstitions of women.
100
Aeschylus, Supp. 670-675; LSCG 18 B 6-13; Hesychius s.v. Kallivsth. For the sanctuary of Artemis
Kalliste in Athens and its connection with childbirth, see pp. 61-62. For Artemis Hekate in association
with childbirth, see Johansen and Whittle 1980, vol. 3, pp. 41-43.
101
Eileithyia: Eusebius, Praep. Evang. 4.23.7; Iphigeneia: Pausanius 1.43.1; Genetyllides: Hesychius s.v.
Genetulliv". For the epithet Eukoline, see Et. Mag. p. 392.
102
Hesiod, Th. 450-452; Schol. Arist., Vesp. 800.
103
Schober 1933, p. 77.
36
upon to give protection to mother and child during labor, as the evidence above
indicates, her role as a childbirth goddess may have centered more on her apotropaic
and cathartic powers. In Athens, her images were placed before the doors of houses to
protect the house from all sorts of evil.104 Since she was frequently regarded as a
divinity worshipped by women, these apotropaic images may well have warded off the
dangerous powers that threatened women giving birth. In addition, there is some
evidence to suggest that the house was cleansed of the spiritual pollution of birth
through a dog sacrifice to Hekate.105
Helen: According to Pausanias, Helen dedicated a shrine to Eileithyia at Argos while

she was pregnant with Theseus child, Iphigeneia.106 The story of her pregnancy and
labor, and the connection of Helen with both Eileithyia and Iphigenia (also a minor
childbirth divinity) suggests that Helen may have been worshipped as a local childbirth
goddess in the Argolid.
Hera (Eileithyia): Like Artemis, there is a great deal of literary evidence to show that
Hera was a major divinity worshipped for childbirth. In one epigram, a worshipper
entreats both Hera and Zeus to provide an easy birth.107 As the mother of Eileithyia, she
is often depicted in ancient literature as having control over the outcome of childbirth
by commanding Eileithyia to help or to hinder the labor.108 It is quite likely that any
sanctuary dedicated to Hera could and would be used at least some of the time for
childbirth worship. The Samian Heraions connection with childbirth, for instance, is
highlighted by Pausanias remark that the Samians believed that Hera gave birth in the
104
Aristophanes, Vesp. 804; Hesychius s.v. Fulavda.

Plutarch, Quaest. Rom. 52.
106
Pausanias 2.22.6.
107
Anth. Pal. 6.244.
108
Pausanias 1.18.5; Pseudo-Apollodoros 1.167; Homeric Hymn to Delian Apollo, 91-104.
105
37
spot where the sanctuary stood.109 Similarly, archaeological and literary evidence
suggests that the cult of Hera at Perachora was connected to matters of female
fertility.110 That Hera in Argos was considered a childbirth goddess is stated by
Hesychius, who specifically assimilates her with Eiliethyia.111 Hera may also have been
worshipped under the epithet of Eileithyia at Thorikos.112 A late 5th century B.C. decree
from Chios concerning sacrificial procedures for the cult of Eileithyia likewise suggests
a strong connection between the cults of Hera and Eileithyia.113
Hermes (Eukolos): Though this aspect of his cult was minor, there is some evidence to
suggest that Hermes was connected with childbirth and the rearing of children.
According to Hesychius, Hermes was worshipped as Eukolos, an epithet associated with
childbirth.114 Hermes was also a kourotrophic god. In mythology, he often ensured the
upbringing of abandoned or orphaned infants such as Dionysus.115
Hyperborean maidens: The earliest and most complete account of the Hyperborean
maidens is found in a somewhat confused passage in Herodotus.116 He mentions that
the graves of four Hyperborean maidens were honored in Delos, and that these graves
were located in or near the sanctuary of Artemis. Two of the maidens, named
Hyperoche and Laodike, came to Delos in order to dedicate childbirth votives to
Eileithyia. In honor of these maidens, he says, it was the custom on Delos for young
women and men before their wedding to offer locks of their hair on the tomb of these
109
Pausanias 7.4.4.
Novaro-Lefvre 2000.
111
Hesychius, s.v. Eijleiquiva".
112
According to one reading of a boundary stone inscription. For this and alternative readings, see
Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 162 no. E60.
113
SEG XXXV.923; Lupu 2005, pp. 305-315.
114
Hesychius, s.v. eu[kolo".
115
For images of Hermes in his role as kourotrophos, see Price 1978, p. 70.
116
Herodotus 4.33-35.
110
38
two maidens. As Baur has pointed out, this custom appears to have served as a ritual
intended to ensure the fertility of the marriage.117
The same passage in Herodotus mentions two other maidens, Arge and Opis
(also called Oupis), who were more explicitly connected with childbirth. They were said
to have come from the land of the Hyperboreans in the long-distant mythological past,
quite possibly in connection with Leto's birth of Apollo on the island. For these two
maidens, Herodotus notes, it was customary for Delian women to perform an unusual
ritual of begging, in which the names of these two maidens were invoked, and to place
the ashes from the burnt offerings of thigh bones at their tombs.
In addition to the explicit connection between Arge and Opis with the goddess
Eileithyia (who is also said to have come to Delos from the Hyperborean region in order
to assist in Leto's birth of Apollo), the fact that all of the tombs of the Hyperborean
maidens were located within or nearby the sanctuary of Artemis is significant.118 These
figures may well have had a cultic relationship to Artemis similar to that of Iphigeneia,
whose tomb was connected with the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron. Indeed, Farnell
suggests that the name of Oupis, which was sometimes used as an epithet for Artemis,
was originally an ancient name for Artemis "the watcher" who looked after women in
childbirth.119 Later literary sources give other names for the Hyperborean maidens,
including Hekaerge, Opis/Oupis, and sometimes Loxo.120 Like Oupis, Hekaerge also
seems to have been used as an epithet of Artemis, particularly in connection with
childbirth.121
117
Baur 1902, pp. 68-69.

The tradition that Eileithyia herself came to Delos from the Hyperborean region is found in Pausanias
1.18.5. For a discussion of Eileithyia and the Hyperborean Maidens, see Delos XI, p. 305. For the possible
identification of the tombs of the Hyperborean maidens on Delos, see below, pp. 55-56.
119
Farnell 1896, II, pp. 487-488.
120
Pausanias 1.43.4; 5.7.8; Callimachus, Hymn to Delos 292-293; Nonnus, Dion. 5.489-91, 48.331-334.
121
For the name of Hekaerge as an epithet of Artemis and its connection with the cult of Ctesylla at Ceos,
who supposedly died in childbirth, see Farnell 1896, II, pp. 465-466 and especially p. 466 n. a. A useful
summary of the evidence for the cult of the Hyperborean maidens on Delos and their worship for
childbirth may be found in Robertson 1983, pp. 144-153.
118
39
Iphigeneia: The cult of Iphigeneia appears to have been directly linked with that of
Artemis; literary sources indicate that both were connected with childbirth. According
to Euripides, women dedicated the clothing of those who had died in childbirth to
Iphigeneia at Brauron.122 A sanctuary to Eileithyia at Argos, supposedly established by
Helen while she was pregnant with Iphigenia, probably incorporated both Helen and
Iphigeneia as local childbirth divinities.123 Farnell suggested that Iphigeneia was merely
a local cult name for Artemis.124 Kearns recently adopted a similar view of the heroine,
suggesting that originally Iphigeneia had served merely as an aspect of Artemis that
was particuarly concerned with childbirth.125 Supporting this view is the fact that the
cults of Iphigeneia and Artemis were closely interconnected at Aigeira and that at
Hermione the name seems to have been used purely as an epithet for Artemis.126
Isis (Artemis, Lochia): As an Egyptian goddess whose cult was often associated with
creation, rebirth, and nurturing, Isis was occasionally worshipped in the Greek world as
a childbirth or kourotrophic goddess, particularly during Hellenistic and Roman times.
In some places, Isis was assimilated with Artemis, and her cult could include Artemis'
role as the protectress of women in childbirth.127 Like Artemis, she sometimes took the
epithet Lochia, and, as Isis Lochia, received childbirth worship.128 Isis was also regarded
122
Euripides, I.T. 1462-1467. For recent scholarship on this cult and its peculiar connection with
childbirth, see Ekroth 2003; Cole 2004, pp. 198-201.
123
Pausanias 2.22.6.
124
Farnell 1896, vol. 2, p. 441.
125
Kearns 1989, pp. 27-35, especially pp. 32-33.
126
Pausanias 7.26.3; Pausanias 2.35.1; Hesychius s.v. jIfigevneia. On the cult of Iphigeneia and her
connection with Artemis, see also Lloyd-Jones 1983; Hollinshead 1985.
127
An inscription by an Athenian priest of Serapis seems to link Artemis and Isis. See Roussel 1915-1916,
p. 179. In an elegy about on his mistress' attempted abortion, Ovid (Am. 2. 13) prays to Isis and to
Eileithyia as guardians of women in childbirth. Isis' role as guardian of childbirth is also celebrated in the
Isis hymns. See Peek 1930. For further discussion of the conflation of Artemis and Isis, see Witt 1971, pp.
141-151.
128
For a Roman period dedicatory inscription to Isis Lochia set up by parents in thanks for their
daughter, found reused as an altar in the Church of St. George at Beroea, see Cormack 1946. For a stele
40
as a kourotrophos; numerous figurines and statues depict her holding or nursing the
infant Horus.129
Leto (Kourotrophos): Leto was commonly associated with childbirth because of the
popularity of the story of the difficult birth of her divine offspring, Apollo and
Artemis.130 In the Palatine Anthology, Leto receives gifts of clothing as childbirth
offerings.131 She is also named among the many childbirth and kourotrophic divinities
on a small altar found in Athens.132
Moirai: The Moirai preside over most important stages of ones life: birth, marriage, and
death, and are sometimes depicted as birth assistants in much the same capacity as
Eileithyia.133 Pausanias states that Eileithyia was occasionally associated with or
confused with the Moirai.134 According to Baur, on the east pediment of the Parthenon,
the Moirai take the place of Eileithyia as the childbirth goddesses in charge of assisting
in the birth of Athena.135
Nymphs (Geraistai, Genethliai): That the nymphs were worshipped for fertility,
childbirth, and the care of children is suggested by a number of ancient texts and
found in Thessaloniki mentioning an altar of Isis Lochia, see IG X 2, 1, 97.

129
The most complete survey of this image type is Tran Tam Tinh 1973.
130
For various versions of the myth of Letos birth of Apollo, see Homeric Hymn to Delian Apollo;
Callimachus, Hymn 4; Ovid, Met. 6.333; Strabo 14.1.20. 639; Plutarch, Q.N. 38; and Aristotle, Hist. an. 580a
15, which preserves the tradition of Leto coming from the land of the Hyperboreans to give birth on
Delos.
131
Anth. Pal. 6.202 and 6.272.
132
IG II2 4547. For this altar and full bibliography, see Ervin 1959, pp. 147-8. For Leto as a kourotrophos,
see Theocritus 18.50 and Price 1978, pp. 193-194.
133
Pindar, Ol. 6.42; Euripides, Bacch. 100-105. For the fates represented in birth scenes in vase paintings,
see Cook 1940, p. 80 fig. 23 and p. 716 fig. 530 (Louvre E 861).
134
Pausanias (8.21.3) notes that, in a Delian hymn to Eileithyia, Olen designated Eileithyia the good
spinner, an epithet usually given to the Moirai.
135
Baur 1902, pp. 83-5. See, however, Palagia 1993 for the difficulties in identifying the figures on the East
Pediment.
41
inscriptions.136 A passage in Euripides' Electra suggests that animal sacrifices were made
to the nymphs for childbirth.137 The nymphs were likewise known to be nurses of
various divinities and heroes during infancy or childhood.138 Those who cared for the
infant Zeus in Gortyn were known as the Geraistiades.139 According to Pausanias,
several nymphs were present at the birth of Zeus and assisted in the purifying bath
after birth, and Callimachus tells us that during Leto's birth of Apollo, it was the
nymphs who sang a sacred song to Eileithyia.140 A small altar discovered in Athens was
inscribed to a number of different childbirth and kourotrophos divinities, including the
Geraistai Nymphai Genethliai.141 It has long been thought that the modern practice of
sliding down a smooth rock face on the Hill of the Nymphs in Athens in order to obtain
fertility and a safe childbirth was a continuation of the ancient belief in the nymphs as
childbirth divinities.142 There is some evidence to suggest that nymphs which were
connected with specific families were worshipped by those families in order to
guarantee future generations.143
136
Jennifer Larson (2001, p. 100) has suggested that one reason why the nymphs were so widely popular
in rituals of the female life cycle was because the nymphs themselves had the ability to represent all the
stages of female development, from prepubescent girls to mature women.
137
Euripides, El. 625.
138
Among those whom the nymphs supposedly raised were Semele, Dionysus, Aeneas, Aristaeus, Zeus,
and possibly Minos. For the nymphs as kourotrophoi, see Price 1978, p. 194; Richardson 1974, p. 18;
Diodorus Siculus 4.81.1-3 (Aristaeus); Diodorus Siculus 5.70.2-3 (Zeus).
139
Et. Mag. s.v. Geraistiavde".
140
Pausanias 8.41.2; Callimachus 4.257.
141
IG II2 4547. For this altar, see Ervin 1959, pp. 147-148.
142
Baur (1902, p. 35, n. 47) noted this modern practice as evidence for the continued belief in the nymphs
as childbirth divinities. Ervin (1959) produced a complex argument to connect the Geraistai Nymphai
Genethliai, (nymphs who were worshipped for childbirth and fertility) with the Hyakinthides and to
locate their cult on the hill in Athens that in modern times has taken the name the Hill of the Nymphs.
Like Baur, he noted the modern practice of women sliding down the rock, as well as the presence on this
hill of the later church of Aghia Marina (a saint who is known for caring for women and children), as
continuation of the ancient fertility cult of the nymphs. Gerald Lalonde recently argued against the
continuation of cult on this hill in a paper presented at the 2001 Annual Meeting of the Archaeological
Institute of America (Lalonde 2001).
143
Larson 2001, p. 183.
42
Tritopatores: According to one late source, before a wedding ceremony the Athenians
prayed to the Tritopatores, the guardians of the winds, to ensure that the union was
productive.144 Baur suggested that it was because of their connection with the winds,
which themselves were thought to endow the earth with fertility, that the Tritopatores
were worshipped as minor birth divinities.145
Zeus (Hypsistos, Lecheates): Scattered evidence suggests that Zeus was occasionally
worshipped as a deity concerned with childbirth and child care. As Zeus Hypsistos, he
received numerous female anatomical votives, most likely dedicated for childbirth.146
Zeus is also included in an Archaic inscription of childbirth and kourotrophic divinities
from Thera.147 In an Augustan epigram in the Palatine Anthology, Zeus is worshipped
along with Hera as a god who eases childbirth.148 Pausanias mentions that in Arcadia,
there was an altar to Zeus Lecheates (Zeus in childbed) in commemoration of his birth
of Athena.149
Epithets pertaining to childbirth
Bolosia (Bolosiva): of the pangs. In describing a dedication to Artemis Bolosia,
Procopius explains the epithet as one that originally belonged to Eileithyia, because the
pains of childbirth were sometimes called bolae, or pangs.150
Eleutho ( jEleuqwv): "she who comes." According to Hesychius, this epithet is one of the
many variant forms of the name of the goddess Eileithyia.151 Other variations include:
144
Suidas s.v. Tritopavtore".

Baur 1902, p. 11.
146
See below, p. 101.
147
Thera I, p. 150.
148
Anth. Pal. 6.244.
149
Pausanias 8.26.6.
150
Procopius, De Bellis 8.22.27-29.
145
43
Eleuthia, Eileoneia, and Eileithuia.152 Baur connected the meaning of this epithet with
the onset of labor, as he regarded the original nature of Eileithyia as a personification of
the birth pangs themselves.153
Epilysamene ( jEpilusamevnh): "the releaser, the one who unties or frees." According to
Hesychius, this epithet was used of Eileithyia and of Demeter, particularly in areas of
Magna Graecia.154 Its meaning appears to be quite similar to the more common epithet
Lysizonos.
Eukoline ( Eujkolivnh) and Eukolos (Eu[kolo"): "good natured, easy." This epithet appears to
appeal to the kindlier aspect of those divinities whose help was desired, in much the
same way that Artemis was called Praos (see below).155 A votive column found at the
Ilissos dedicated to Eileithyia was inscribed with this epithet.156 Hermes at Metapontum
was sometimes called Eukolos, as was Asklepios at Epidauros.157
Eulochia ( Eujlociva): of good birth, or helping in birth.An epithet most frequently

associated with Artemis and Eileithyia.158 A painted votive stele was dedicated to
Artemis under this epithet in her sanctuary at Gonnoi in Thessaly.159
151
Hesychius s.v. jEleuqwv.

LSJ s.v. jEleuqwv.
153
Baur 1902, pp. 88-89.
154
Hesychius, s.v. jEpilusamevnh.
155
For the epithet Eukoline applied to Hekate, see Et. Mag. p. 392.27.
156
Baur 1902, pp. 14, 17 and n. 19.
157
Hesychius s.v. eu[kolo"; IG IV 1260.
158
Euripides, Hipp. 166; Anth. Pal. 6.146; Hesychius s.v. Eujlociva.
159
Gonnoi II, p. 173, no. 3.
152
44
Geneteira or Genetaira ( Genevteira): giver of birth. Sometimes applied to Eileithyia and

to Artemis, to whom five painted votive stelai were dedicated under this epithet at
Gonnoi.160
Kithone or Chitone (Citwvnh): "of the chiton." An epithet of Artemis particularly at Miletus
and Syracuse. This epithet is thought to derive from the practice of dedicating women's
garments (chiton) to Artemis as a thank offering after birth.161
Kolainis (Kolainiv"): An obscure epithet of Artemis.162 Though the meaning of the epithet
is unclear, it was presumed by Baur to pertain to childbirth.163 At least one votive breast
was dedicated to Artemis Kolainis.164
Kolias (Kwliav"): An obscure epithet of Aphrodite, who was worshipped on a
promontory of Attica of the same name.165 Aphrodite Kolias may well have been
worshipped as a childbirth divinity, as she is mentioned in connection with the
Genetyllides by Pausanias and Lucian.166
Kourotrophos (Kourotrovfo"): the nurse; the one who cares for children. This epithet
was widely applied to any divinity who looked after the birth and upbringing of
children. Goddesses typically associated with childbirth were frequently regarded as
Kourotrophoi who continued to look after the children that they helped to bring into
the world.167 Other divinities, such as Apollo and Hermes, served as Kourotrophoi
160
Gonnoi II, pp. 168-172; Pindar, Nem. 7.1.

Schol. Call. Hymn to Zeus 77; Cole 2004, pp. 218-225. For the practice of dedicating clothing as a thank
offering for birth and additional references for Artemis Chitone, see below pp. 221-223.
162
Aristophanes, Av. 874; IG III 216.
163
Baur 1902, pp. 61-63.
164
Baur 1902, p. 61. For the votive, see Appendix I, 1.54.
165
Hesychius, s.v. Kovlia". Hesychius associates the epithet with the word kw'lon, or limb.
166
Pausanias 1.1.5; Lucian, Erotes 42. For additional discussion of this epithet, see Farnell 1896, II, p. 655.
167
Artemis: Diodorus Siculus 5.73.4-6; Hekate: Hesiod, Th. 450; Aphrodite: Homer, Epigr. 12; Leto:
161
45
when they oversaw the upbringing and education of children and youths.168 A thorough
discussion of this epithet and the numerous divinities that were regarded as
Kourotrophoi may be found in Price 1978.
Lecheates (Leceavte"): of the bed. Epithet of Zeus. According to Pausanias, there was an
altar of Zeus Lecheates in Arcadia to commemorate his birth of Athena.169
Lochia (Lociva) or Locheia (Loceiva) or Lexo (Lecwv): of childbirth. Most commonly an

epithet of Artemis in her role as the overseer of childbirth. 170 A sanctuary of Artemis
Lochia is attested on the island of Cos.171 This epithet was sometimes also used for
other divinities who could take on a childbirth role, such as Isis and Athena. 172
Lysizonos (Lusivzwno"): "the freer of the zone." Commonly an epithet of Artemis in her
role of overseeing the loosening of the zone, an article of clothing worn by Greek women
as a belt or girdle.173 This epithet was also sometimes given to Eileithyia.174 The
loosening of a woman's girdle was symbolic of the opening of the womb itself during
critical points of transition in a woman's life, particularly on the wedding night and in
childbirth.175
Theocritus 18.50; the Nymphs: Euripides, El. 625-626; Ge: Aristophanes, Thes. 295-305, and Eileithyia:
Antimachus of Colophon (Matthews 1996, frag. 99).
168
Apollo: Schol. Od. 19.86; Hermes: Apollodorus 3.29.3.
169
Pausanias 8.26.6.
170
See for example, IG IX 141-142; Orphic Hymn 36.3-8; Euripides, IT 1097; Euripides, Suppl. 958; SIG
1219.33; Plutarch Quaest. Symp. 659A; Gonnoi II, no. 173; IG II2 4547.
171
This sanctuary is mentioned in passing in a Coan inscription of sacred laws dating to the 3rd century
B.C. See: LSCG 154, A 16-17.
172
Isis: IG X 2, 1, 97; Cormack 1940-45, pp. 105-106. Athena: Aristides, Or. 37.18.
173
Hesychius s.v. Lusivzwno"; Schol. Ap. Rhod. I.288; Orphic Hymn 2.7 and 36.5.
174
Theocritus 17.60.
175
Pindar, Ol. 6.39; Callimachus 4.209; Suda, s.v. Lusivzwno" gunhv. For a discussion of the need to loosen
the zone during transitional points in a woman's development, see King 1983, pp. 120-121. The loosening
of the zone was a magical act intended to open the womb through sympathetic magic. On the wedding
night, a woman's womb would need to be "opened" in order to properly receive her husband's seed, just
as in childbirth, the womb would need to be opened in order to allow the passage of the child. In
46
Mogostokos (Mogostovko"): "of the birth pangs." An early epithet of Eileithyia found
frequently in Homer.176 This epithet was sometimes also applied to Artemis.177
Oupis (Ou\pi") or Opis ( \Wpi"): "the watcher." This epithet was occasionally used for
Artemis, particularly in areas of the Peloponnese. 178 The Etymologicum Magnum, though
a late source, provides the clearest explanation of the epithet, stating specifically that
Artemis Oupis oversees the birth and upbringing of children.179 Originally, the epithet
of Oupis most likely referred to Artemis' role as the goddess who watches over women
in labor.180 Indeed, Herodotus tells a story about a mythological Hyperborean maiden
named Opis whose myth and later cult at Delos appear to have been deeply intertwined
with both Artemis and Eileithyia as goddesses of childbirth.181
Praos (Prao"): Mild, gentle, tamed. This epithet seems to refer to a divinity whose
potentially cruel nature has been made gentle and kindly; an epithet particularly
appropriate for Artemis in her role as childbirth goddess.182 A thank-offering of the 3rd
century A.C. to Artemis Praiai by a married couple was most likely given as a childbirth
votive.183
pregnancy, on the other hand, the womb would need to be "sealed" or "locked" in order to prevent
miscarriage. These ideas are discussed in greater depth below, pp. 81-82.
176
Il. 16.185; Il. 19.100; Il. 11.270.
177
Theocritus 27.30.
178
For the cult of Artemis Oupis in Sparta and possibly at Troezen, see Farnell 1896, II, pp. 487-493. At the
sanctuary of Artemis at Messene, at least one votive was dedicated to Artemis Oupis. For this sanctuary,
see below, p. 59.
179
Et. Mag. s.v. Ou\pi". Antimachus of Colophon includes the names of Oupis and Eileithyia in a fragment
apparently celebrating Artemis' role as a childbirth goddess. See Matthews 1996, fragment 99 (=Wyss,
fragment 174).
180
Farnell 1896, II, pp. 487-488. He suggests that in later periods, the epithet of Oupis took on a broader
moral sense of one who watches over the deeds of humans, similar to that of Nemesis.
181
See pp. 34-35 and 55-56.
182
See for example, Anth. Pal. 6.271 and 6.244.
183
IG VII 3101; Baur 1902, pp. 19-20; Schachter 1981, p. 101.
47
Sanctuaries
Given the multitude of divinities in the Greek pantheon that could be

worshipped as childbirth divinities, the number of sanctuaries where childbirth
worship occurred must have been quite large. It would be impossible to list all of the
sites where such worship was conducted; indeed, a comprehensive list would be so vast
as to ultimately be of little use in clarifying patterns of ritual worship. Nevertheless, I
have thought it worthwhile to present a sampling of these sanctuaries and to discuss
the evidence that connects them with childbirth worship. My purpose in assembling
such a list is twofold: 1) to place childbirth votives and rituals into the physical context
to which they originally belonged, and 2) to provide an overall picture of the range of
sanctuaries that received worship of this nature.184
Identifying Childbirth Sanctuaries

I have approached the study of childbirth sanctuaries systematically, first
establishing the criteria by which childbirth sanctuaries may be identified, and then
providing a classification of these sanctuaries based upon the confidence with which
they may be linked to childbirth worship. Two criteria may be used to identify
childbirth sanctuaries:
1) Epigraphical or literary evidence that suggests either a) that the sanctuary was
sacred to a major childbirth divinity, such as Eileithyia or Artemis Lochia, or b) that the
184
In compiling a list of childbirth sanctuaries, I follow in the footsteps of several scholars. Baur (1901)
relied heavily on literary evidence to discuss the many sanctuaries in which Eileithyia was worshipped.
More recently, Pingiatoglu (1981) has summarized the evidence, including archaeological data, for many
childbirth sanctuaries. A particularly useful map of all of the locations for which there is literary and
48
sanctuary was the focus of childbirth rituals (for example, literary evidence that
connects the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron with childbirth dedications).
2) Deposits of votives that appear to connect the sanctuary with childbirth in
some way, especially those votives that explicitly depict pregnancy or childbirth.
A Word About Circular Argumentation

The similarity of the criteria listed above to those that I have set out for the
identification of childbirth votives below (p. 97) seems at first to cause a circular
argument. That is, if the discovery of certain votives allows one to identify sanctuaries
as childbirth sanctuaries, and at the same time, the fact that childbirth sanctuaries
commonly receive certain votive types is used to connect the votives to childbirth, it
would seem that we run the risk of circular argumentation, in which sanctuaries and
votives are both used to bolster the others link with childbirth. Indeed, with such
criteria the danger for a circular argument does exist, but only if these were the
exclusive criteria used for identification. In this dissertation, I have taken great care to
use multiple types of evidence to connect both sanctuaries and votives with childbirth.
The result is inevitably hierarchical in nature, in which the sanctuaries and votive types
may be linked with varying degrees of confidence to childbirth rituals.
Classification of Sanctuaries
Based on the criteria listed above, the sanctuaries may be grouped into three
rough categories based on the degree of confidence with which they are connected with
childbirth rituals. Those sanctuaries for which both written and archaeological
evidence suggest a connection with childbirth may be identified as secure childbirth
epigraphical evidence for the cult of Eileithyia may be found in Pingiatoglu 1981, plate 9.
49
sanctuaries; those for which there is written evidence alone, or for which the written
evidence is the main reason for identifying it with childbirth activities may be deemed
probable childbirth sanctuaries; those for which no written evidence is available, but
in which votives that appear related to childbirth were found may be termed possible
childbirth sanctuaries. Below is a list of sanctuaries divided into these three categories
and arranged according to degree of confidence with which the sanctuaries are
identified. For each sanctuary I have included a brief synopsis of the evidence and
bibliographic references.
Secure Childbirth Sanctuaries
Sanctuary of Eileithyia on Paros185

Located on the south face of Mt. Kounados on Paros, this informal sanctuary
consists of a small cave housing a natural spring and an open-air terrace beside a rock
outcropping.186 Numerous votive niches are carved into the rock face. Rubensohn
excavated the sanctuary in 1898, but never fully published his results. The numerous
inscriptions that came from this sanctuary firmly establish that the sanctuary was
sacred to Eileithyia.187 Pingiatoglu published the artifacts from this sanctuary in her
1981 dissertation on Eileithyia.188 Her study of this material, which consisted of pottery,
marble plaques, terracottas, a few bronze pieces, and numerous statue bases, indicates
185
Rubensohn 1900; IG XII 5, 183-209; Price 1978, pp. 86-87; Faure 1964, pp. 90-94; Pingiatoglu 1981, pp.
36-37.
186
Rubensohns description of the sanctuary states that the shrine included a cave and a spring.
Pingiatoglu (1981, p. 36) reports that the cave has collapsed and is no longer visible. During my visit to
the site in the spring of 2000, however, I explored a small cave from which the spring still flows. It may
well have been this cave that Rubensohn had in mind.
187
Fourteen inscriptions preserve Eileithyia's name at least partially: IG XII 5, 187, 189, 190, 192-200, 1022,
1023. Additional fragmentary inscriptions include IG XII 5, 185, 188, 191, 201-207.
50
that the sanctuary was in use from the Geometric to Roman times.189 In addition to the
numerous inscriptions, many finds connect this sanctuary to both Eileithyia and
childbirth, including female anatomical votives (some inscribed to the goddess), and
images of seated children in the form of both terracotta figurines and a relief.
Cave of Eileithyia Inatia at Tsoutsouros, Crete190

A cave situated on the southern coast of Crete near the modern town of
Tsoutsouros (ancient Inatos) has been identified as a shrine to Eileithyia Inatia based on
both literary references and inscriptions.191 This cave was originally discovered by
looters, and was excavated in the early 1960s by the Greek Archaeological Service in
order to prevent further plundering of the finds. Although a brief account of the results
of the excavation is available, no full publication of the extraordinary artifacts from this
cave exists.192 The upper levels of fill were badly disturbed by the looters; nevertheless,
the available evidence indicates that the cave was used as a sanctuary from the Late
Minoan to the Archaic period, then after a long interruption, again in Roman times.193
The majority of the preserved finds dates to the Geometric period, and include large
numbers of terracotta figurines. Among the figurine types represented are ithyphallic
male figures, nude female figures, embracing couples, pregnant female figures,
188
Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 120-134.

Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 36.
190
Alexiou 1963, pp. 310-311; Alexiou 1968, pp. 9 and 91; Daux 1965, pp. 884-887; Faure 1964, pp. 90-94;
Price 1978, pp. 86-87; Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 31-32 and 50-52.
191
Several ancient sources mention Eileithyia under the local epithet Inatia. See Callimachus fr. 524,
Steph. Byz. s.v. Ei[nato"; IC IV 174. 60. A votive inscription to Eileithyia found near Tsoutsouros confirms
that the sanctuary of Eileithyia at Inatos was located in the vicinity. For this inscription see Platon 1956, p.
421.
192
For the excavation report, see Alexiou 1963, pp. 310-311. See also Daux 1965, pp. 884-887. The artifacts
from this cave have been discussed in the following places: Alexiou 1968, pp. 89 and 91; Price 1978, pp.
86-87; Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 31-32 and 50-52; Sakellarakis 1983, pp. 98-99.
193
Faure (1964, p. 92) suggests that this interruption in cult activity at the cave during the Classical and
Hellenistic periods reflects the movement of the cult's center of worship to a location within the city.
189
51
kourotrophoi, and infant and children figures.194 In addition to these explicit childbirth
votives, there were also dedications of jewelry and Egyptian charms and scarabs, which
may well have been dedicated as childbirth votives.
Sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron, Attica195

The rural sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron and the accompanying shrine of
Iphigeneia have long been recognized as centers for childbirth and kourotrophic
worship. The primary festival at this sanctuary, the Arkteia, performed by young
Athenian girls, is frequently thought to have served to mark the participants' transition
from the status of child to that of a marriageable maiden, whose primary function in
adult life would be to bear children.196 In marking this transition, it has been suggested
that this festival was intended in part to appease Artemis for the loss of virginity that
comes with marriage and to win the goddess' favor during childbirth.197
Regardless of whether this festival actually had such significance, there is ample
evidence to suggest that women made private childbirth dedications in this sanctuary.
A late scholiast records an Attic custom of dedicating clothing to Artemis on the
occasion of childbirth.198 More tellingly, Euripides states that Iphigeneia received the
194
Some of the figurines from this cave are discussed and illustrated below. See Appendix I, 2.33 and Fig.
20.
195
For the site and rituals performed there, see Themelis 1982; Kahil 1983; Kondis 1967; Linders 1972;
Nilsson 1925 I2, p. 485; Clinton 1988; Kearns 1989; Clinton 1993; Giuman 1999; Cosi 2001. For 4th century
womens dedications at Brauron, see IG II2 1388, 1400, and 1514.
196
Jeanmaire 1939, p. 260; Cole 1984, pp. 238-244.
197
Perlman 1989, pp. 118-127. See particularly p. 121 n. 46 for ancient sources pertaining to this issue. See
also Cole 1998, p. 33 and n. 9 and 10; Clinton 1988; Faraone 2003.
198
Schol. Call. Hymn to Zeus 77: Nhleu;" oJ Kovdrou ajpoikivan qevmeno" ajpo; jAqhnw'n e[labe crhsmo;n ejgei'rai
xovanon th'/ jArtevmidi ajpo; pagkavrpwn xuvl wn. kai; dhvpote eJorth'" th'/ jArtevmidi ejn Citwvnh/ (e[sti de; dh'mo"
jAttikh'") ajpelqw;n eu|re dru'n pavmpolunkai; ejk touvtou ejpoivhsen a[galma th'/ qea'/, kai; ou{tw metwv/kisen ejn
Milhvtw/. ajpo; tou' dhvmou ou\n e[sce th;n ojnomasivan hJ jArtemi" h] o[ti tiktomevnwn tw'n brefw'n ajnetivq esan iJmavtia th'/
jArtevmidi.
52
clothes of women who died in childbirth in her shrine at Brauron.199 From this
combined literary evidence, it has sometimes been assumed that there was a strict
division between the cult of Iphigeneia at Brauron, who presided specifically over death
in childbirth, and the cult of Artemis at Brauron, who oversaw successful childbirth.200
As Kearns has pointed out, however, this strict division of functions would be highly
unusual; it is far more likely that both Artemis and Iphigeneia were worshipped as
childbirth divinities at Brauron and received offerings of clothes in connection with this
role.201 Numerous dedications of clothing were recorded in inventory lists for the
sanctuary.202 Although the precise reason for dedication is not recorded, the fact that all
of the dedicants listed were women and that many of the articles listed were garments
that were worn by women and children suggests that many of these dedications could
have been made as childbirth offerings.203
Both the sanctuary of Artemis and the heron of Iphigenia were excavated by
Ioannes Papadimitriou for the Greek Archaeological Society in 1946-52 and in 1956-63.
The finds from these excavations were never properly published after Papadhimitriou's
death. Preliminary accounts of the findings, however, seem to confirm that these
sanctuaries received childbirth votives.204 In addition to clothing, it appears that women
frequently dedicated articles of jewelry and terracotta figurines of children.205 A relief
199
Euripides, I.T. 1464.

Kondis 1967, pp. 157-161.
201
Kearns 1989, pp. 28-29.
202
IG II2 1514-1531. These inscriptions were discovered on the Athenian acropolis, but most likely refer to
the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron. See Linders 1972.
203
Linders 1972, pp. 12-13. Linders notes the fact that most of these female garments were not made
specifically for dedication, but had actually been worn by the dedicants; these garments therefore likely
represent private dedications by individuals. For the custom of dedicating worn garments in sanctuaries,
see Linders 1972, p. 13 n. 55.
204
Preliminary reports for the sanctuary were published by Papademitriou in Praktika and Ergon, and by
Daux in BCH from 1949-1963. Also useful is Papademitriou 1963 and Kondis 1967.
205
Price 1969.
200
53
from the sanctuary depicting families approaching an altar with small children and an
infant is also suggestive of the goddess' childbirth or kourotrophic function.206
Probable Childbirth Sanctuaries
Sanctuary of Eileithyia at Agrai, Attica207

Evidence for the sanctuary of Eileithyia at the village of Agrai, located near the
Ilissos, consists primarily of scattered finds. An inscription in the theater of Dionysus at
Athens mentions the honorary seats of two Ersephoroi who served Eileithyia in
connection with this village, suggesting that a sanctuary to Eileithyia existed at Agrai.208
Further evidence for this sanctuary was derived from the discovery in 1878 of four
marble statuettes of young seated girls.209 Although various interpretations have been
suggested for these statuettes, the presence of a votive column inscribed to Eileithyia,
also found in the area, suggests that they may have been dedicated at the sanctuary of
this goddess.210 Strengthening this identification was the discovery in the area of
Pankrati of another statuette inscribed to Eileithyia.211
Sanctuary of Artemis Lochia, Delos212
206
Kondis 1967, pl. 104a.

Furtwngler 1878, p. 197; Baur 1901, pp. 16-18; Karousou 1957, p. 77; Burkert 1966, pp. 4-6; Pingiatoglu
1981, pp. 43-44 and 61-65; Price 1978, p. 104, 124 and n. 123-126.
208
IG II2 5099; Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 43 and pl. 17.2.
209
On these statuettes, see below, p. 215.
210
Karousou (1957, p. 77) interprets them as childbirth votives to Eileithyia. Burkert (1966, pp. 4-6)
believes that these were offerings from Arrephoroi, an interpretation accepted by Price (1978, p. 104, 124
and n. 123-126).
211
For this statuette, see Peek 1942, p. 56 no. 94.
212
Demangel 1922; Delos XI, pp. 293-308; Vallois 1966, p. 53 n. 3, and pp. 79-80; Bruneau 1970, pp. 191-195.
207
54
This small sanctuary, located on Mt. Kynthos, was excavated in 1920 by

Demangel under the auspices of the French School in Athens.213 Andr Plassart also
included this sanctuary in his final publication of the excavations on Mt. Kynthos.214 The
remains of the sanctuary include a temenos wall, a small building, remains of a poorly
preserved altar, and several votive reliefs found within the temenos (many within the
building itself). The sanctuary appears to have been built in the 5th century B.C., but did
not flourish until the 2nd or 1st centuries B.C. The majority of datable finds, consisting of
stamped tiles and ceramics, provide a 1st century date.
The identification of the divinity worshipped here as Artemis is reasonably
secure. One relief depicts a temple with the letters ART[....] inscribed on the architrave,
suggesting that the goddess worshipped here was Artemis. This identification fits well
with the iconographical evidence of the reliefs: in one relief the deity wears a short
chiton suitable for hunting, and in several others, either the dedicants or the divinity are
depicted with torches.215
The identification of this shrine as a childbirth sanctuary is based in part on a
passage of Euripides Iphigeneia at Taurus, which mentions a cult of Artemis Lochia on
Mt. Kynthos.216 The iconography of the reliefs found in this sanctuary also suggested to
scholars that it was a focus of reproductive rituals.217 One relief has been interpreted as
depicting a pregnant worshipper.218 Another was thought to show a married couple
offering a sacrifice to the goddess in the hope of having a child.219 Several other reliefs,
213
For the results of this excavation, see Delos XI.

Delos XI.
215
Appendix I, 3.1.
216
Euripides, I.T. 1097-1099.
217
I discuss these reliefs in detail below, pp. 180-207.
218
Appendix I, 3.1. For the identification of the figure, see Plassart 1928, p. 309; Bruneau 1970, p. 193.
219
Appendix I, 3.8.
214
55
all mere fragments, depict female worshippers alone. The picture of worship that
emerges from these reliefs is one of a goddess who was called upon by families and by
individual women, at least one of whom was pregnant.
Based upon the presumed focus of the cult on childbirth, Demangel identified
the sanctuary as the sanctuary of Artemis Eileithyia, connecting it with a sanctuary of
Eileithyia mentioned in several Delian inscriptions. He assumed that Artemis and
Eileithyia had been merged into one divinity, given the similarities of their worship as
childbirth goddesses. Vallois later suggested that the identification be changed to that of
Artemis Lochia, based upon the literary testimonia of Euripides.220 Bruneau, noting that
the sanctuary on Mt. Kynthos did not fit the descriptions of the sanctuary of Eileithyia
mentioned in the Delian inscriptions, preferred Vallois identification.221 I have
included this sanctuary as a probable childbirth sanctuary based upon the combination
of epigraphical evidence that suggests that this was a sanctuary to Artemis and the
literary evidence that suggests that Artemis cult in this location was focused on
childbirth. Given the mythological tradition of Artemis assisting in the birth of her
brother on Delos, it is quite likely that all sanctuaries of Artemis on the island received
some worship associated with childbirth.222
Sanctuary of Eileithyia, Delos223

The location of this sanctuary, only known from inscriptional evidence, has
never been identified. It is likely that it was situated near the sanctuaries of Apollo,
Artemis, and Leto, given the importance of Eileithyia in the myth of Apollos birth on
220
Vallois 1966, p. 79.

For fuller discussion of his arguments, see Bruneau 1970, p. 194.
222
Apollodorus 1.4.1.
221
56
the island.224 Inscriptions from Delos mention the existence of the sanctuary as early as
304 B.C.225 The dedications recorded in these inscriptions suggest that the sanctuary
received at least a moderately steady worship, though judging from the number of
objects recorded for the sanctuary, it never seems to have been as popular as the larger
sanctuaries on the island.226 This is not surprising, since Artemis was probably also
quite popular as a childbirth goddess on Delos, and we can expect that her sanctuaries
would have recieved many of the offerings associated with childbirth. As Bruneau has
noted, all of the dedicants named in the inscriptions for the Eileithyiaion are female.227
Despite the limited number of offerings that were dedicated at the Eileithyiaion, literary
sources indicate that the cult of Eileithyia on Delos was an important one. A festival
that included feasting, sacrifice, and the chanting of sacred hymns was held annually
for Eileithyia on the island.228
Sanctuary of Athena Pronaia, Delphi229

The sanctuary of Athena Pronaia, located on a narrow terrace below the sanctuary of
Apollo on Mt. Parnassus, appears to have housed a number of cults that attracted the
worship of female dedicants. In addition to several buildings associated with the cult of
Athena, the excavations revealed the location of a series of small 5th century B.C. altars
dedicated to divinities associated with childbirth, healing, and women's work. Among
223
The most complete discussion of the evidence for this sanctuary is found in Bruneau 1970, pp. 212-219.
For the most recent treatment of the inscriptions, see Hamilton 2000, pp. 191-192 and 213-214.
224
Homeric Hymn to Apollo, 97-119.
225
IG XI 2, no. 144, line A113.
226
Hamilton (2000, p. 191) notes that the number of objects that were added to the sanctuary in the
interval from one temple inventory to another was always quite small, dwindling to nothing in the latest
records.
227
Bruneau 1970.
228
Pausanias 8.21.3; Callimachus, Hymn to Delos 255-257; Linders 1994.
229
FdD II, i-iii.
57
the divinities associated with these altars were Athena Zosteria, Eileithyia, and
Hygeia.230 The presence of deposits of jewelry and weaving equipment suggest that this
sanctuary was popular among female worshippers.231 At least one votive offering
discovered in this sanctuary, a bronze mirror, was also inscribed to Eileithyia.232 The
bases of three statues dedicated to Eileithyia have been found elsewhere at Delphi;
these may have originated from this sanctuary.233
Sanctuary of Artemis Lochia, Gonnoi, Thessaly234

This sanctuary, located on the southern slope of the northwest hill of the city, at
the foot of the acropolis, was excavated by Arvanitopoulos in the early 1900s. The
remains of a building were uncovered here, and numerous dedications were found in
the area.235 Many dedications were inscribed to Artemis under various cult titles, most
of which refer to her role as childbirth goddess. The epithets under which she was
worshipped at Gonnoi include: Genetaira, Eileithyia, Lochia, Eulochia, Euonymos, and,
once, Eleia. The earliest inscriptions date to the 4th century B.C.; her cult flourished in
the 3rd and 2nd centuries B.C., with only a few inscriptions dating as late as the 1st
century A.C., when the town itself seems to have begun to decline. As Pingiatoglu has
230
Two dedicatory inscriptions (one to Hygeia and one to Eileithyia) were found carved into the wall of
the sanctuary. The presence of an altar to Hygeia in this area led excavators to assume that a similar altar
to Eileithyia (now missing) originally stood in this location. Not far away were found two small pillars
inscribed to Athena Ergane and Athena Zosteria. These have been variously interpreted as votive pillars
or libation altars. See FdD II, iii, pp. 49-54.
231
Jewelry: FdD II.iii, pp. 51-54; loomweights: FdD II.iii, figs. 106-107.
232
For this mirror, see below, p. 228.
233
A 2nd century B.C. base for a statue of a priestess of Eileithyia was reused as a building block in the east
corner of the polygonal wall (Delphi Museum no. 820). See Marcad 1953, I, p. 101. A second statue base,
dated to the 3rd century B.C. was discovered in the Roman Agora (Delphi Museum no. 3793). See Homolle
1899, pp. 386-7; Pomtow 1912, pp. 41-42. A third base, c. 300 B.C. was discovered in the "Maison des
Membres" to the southwest of the Apollo temenos. See Bousquet 1963, pp. 190-191; SEG XXII 474.
234
Arvanitoupoulos 1911, pp. 317-320; Gonnoi I, pp. 95, 120, 130, 148; Gonnoi II, nos. 161-196; Pingiatoglu
1981, pp. 107-112.
235
One votive stele was discovered in situ. See Gonnoi II, no. 173.
58
noted, the cult of Artemis seems to have survived here considerably longer than the
other sanctuaries of the town.236 Not surprisingly, given the focus of the cult on
childbirth, all of the preserved dedications were made by female worshippers, at least
one of which was also a priestess of Artemis cult.
The excavation report mentions that various types of objects were found in or
near this area, including marble statuettes, figurines, bone needles, jewelry, black glaze
pottery, bases, two votive altars, and hundreds of votive stelai.237 Unfortunately, of
these rich finds, only the inscribed stelai have been published.238
Argive Heraeum239
The Argive Heraeum, located between Mycenae and Argos, at the foot of Mt.
Euboea, was built in the 8th century B.C. At this sanctuary, Hera was worshipped under
many different aspects of her cult, including her role as the city goddess of Argos and as
a goddess of marriage. It appears that her cult here was also that of a childbirth
divinity, since Hesychius equates Eileithyia with Hera at Argos.240 Excavation of the
sanctuary, conducted by Waldstein under the auspices of the American School of
Classical Studies, began in 1892. Although most of the votives found in this sanctuary
point to a generalized cult of Hera, there were at least two kourotrophos figurines and
one pregnancy figurine dedicated here.241 Following the ancient literary evidence,
236

Arvanitopoullos 1916, p. 121; Arvanitopoullos 1911; for the altars, see Gonnoi II, nos. 165 and 166.
238
Gonnoi II, nos. 161-196.
239
Argive Heraeum I, pp. 8, 13-14. This site is currently being restudied by members of the American
School of Classical Studies. The ongoing studies of the finds from this sanctuary will undoubtedly shed
new light on religious activity and the connection of this site with childbirth. For a useful summary of
excavation history and recent bibliography see Argive Heraion I.
240
Hesychius s.v. Eileithyia.
241
Kourotrophos figurines: Argive Heraeum I, p. 19 no. 37, p. 25 no. 87. Pregnancy figurine: Appendix I,
2.22.
237
59
Waldstein believed that the Argive Heraeum served as a center for childbirth worship,
and even suggested that the baths at this sanctuary formed a kind of special
sanitarium for women in their troubles.242
Tombs of the Hyperborean Maidens on Delos243

According to Herodotus, there existed two tombs on Delos that served as
sanctuaries where the Hyperborean maidens were worshipped as minor childbirth
goddesses.244 Excavations on the island have revealed two Mycenaean chamber tombs
that may have served as the cult locations that Herodotus described. The first of these,
dubbed the thk, was located to the east of the sanctuary of Artemis, corresponding
with Herodotus' description that the tomb of the first two maidens to arrive on the
island, Arge and Opis, lay to the east of the Artemisium, near the banqueting hall of the
Ceians.245 This tomb, which was surrounded by a Hellenistic enclosure wall, appears to
have been used as a sanctuary from Geometric through Hellenistic times. The remains
of a second Mycenaean tomb, designated by the excavators as the sma, were found not
far from the Artemisum. It appears that this tomb also was used as a sanctuary during
the Hellenistic period, and may have housed a minor cult to Laodike and Hyperoke,
two other Hyperborean maidens.
242
Argive Heraeum I, p. 8.
Vatin 1965, pp. 225-230; Bruneau 1970, pp. 45-46; Bruneau and Ducat 1983, pp. 34, 144-145 no. 32, and
149-150, no. 41.
244
Herodotus 4.33-35. For the myth of the Hyperborean maidens as told by Herodotus and their
connection with childbirth, see pp. 34-35.
245
The identification of this tomb as the sanctuary of Arge and Opis is by no means universally accepted.
For a useful summary of the arguments for and against this identification, see Bruneau and Ducat 1983,
pp. 145 no. 32.
243
60
Sanctuary of Artemis at Thasos246

A sanctuary of Artemis Eileithyia is mentioned in a 1st century B.C. decree from
Thasos.247 Though the location of this sanctuary is uncertain, since the inscription in
which it was mentioned was found in a secondary context, it may have been identical to
the sanctuary of Artemis located in the eastern corner of the agora of Thasos that was
excavated intermittently from 1957 to 1985.248 This sanctuary, built in the 6th century
B.C., shows strong evidence of receiving childbirth worship. Votives from this site
include marble statues of women and children, terracotta figurines of seated children,
kourotrophoi, ithyphallic Silenoi, and nude female figures (including one possibly
representing a pregnant woman), protomes, and jewelry.249
Sanctuary of Asklepios at Epidaurus

The sanctuary of Asklepios at Epidaurus, established perhaps as early as the 6th
or 5th century B.C., became one of the major healing sanctuaries of the ancient world
during the 4th century B.C. The excavations by Panayotis Kavvadias under the auspices
of the Archaeological Society of Athens from 1881 to 1928 revealed quite an extensive
sanctuary, including a temple, abaton, thymele, and numerous other structures. 250
Though there is a strong likelihood that women prayed to Asklepios for fertility and
safe childbirth at all of his sanctuaries, at Epidaurus this fact is made evident by a series
246
Daux 1958; Daux 1959b; Daux 1960; Maffre and Salviat 1976; Maffre and Salviat 1978; Grandjean and
Salviat 2000, pp. 89-91.
247
Thasos Museum 1491; Salviat 1959, p. 362.
248
The divinity worshipped in this sanctuary is identified as Artemis through several inscriptions, at least
two of which use the epithet Polo. For these inscriptions, see IG XII Suppl. 382 and 383; Daux 1966, p. 965
no. 2439. For the epithet Polo and its possible connection with young women, see Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 119
and n. 319.
249
For the artifacts from this sanctuary, in addition to citations above, see also: IG XII Suppl. 382-388;
Grandjean and Salviat 2000, pp. 297-8. For the kourotrophos figurines, most of which are unpublished,
see Price 1978, p. 47 no. 450a, p. 51 no. 546a, and p. 164. Pingiatoglu mentions a terracotta figurine of a
nude pregnant female figure (Thasos Museum no. 2396 II) that I have not seen. Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 119.
61
of 4th century cure records inscribed on stelai found at the site. Among the miraculous
cures attributed to the god were several instances of women who received help in
conceiving or in giving birth under extraordinary circumstances.251 It is quite likely that
at least some of the female anatomical votives at the site were also dedicated as
childbirth votives.
Possible childbirth sanctuaries
Cave of Eileithyia at Amnisos, Crete252

Literary sources establish the presence of a cult of Eileithyia at the site of ancient
Amnisos (modern Palaoichora).253 Homer states specifically that the sanctuary was
located in a cave. A cave located approximately nine kilometers east of Heraklion (at the
site of modern Koprana) has been dubbed by modern scholars the cave of Eileithyia.
This cave was first excavated by Chatzidakis and Halbherr in 1884, and further
excavations were conducted by Marinatos in 1929 and 1930. The finds from this
excavation, mainly consisting of lamp and vessel fragments, range in date from
Neolithic to Roman times. Few finds from the Archaic through the Hellenistic periods
were discovered, but Roman lamps, pottery, and other finds were numerous.254 The
cave appears to have been mainly used in the Minoan period and later in Roman times.
Since its discovery, questions of whether the cave was sacred, and whether it was
250
Epidaure I; Kavvadias 1900.

These records are discussed below, pp. 110-111.
252
Chatzidakis 1886; Faure 1956, p. 96; Daux 1959b, p. 740; Faure 1964, pp. 82-90; Petrocheilou 1984, p.
157. See also Tyree 1974; Schfer et al. 1992.
253
Od.19.188; Pausanias 1.18.5; Strabo, 10.476; Hesychius s.v. jAmnisiva.
254
For a discussion of the general lack of Greek finds and possible explanations for it, see Faure 1964, p.
83 and citations.
251
62
sacred to Eileithyia, have been heavily debated.255 Unfortunately, no votives directly

link the cave to the cult of Eileithyia.256 The cave itself has certain natural features that
would be fitting for such a cult, however. One calcarious concretion within the cave has
been interpreted as resembling a woman and child; another resembles the legs and
abdomen of a woman. The fact that these natural formations were the focus of human
attention suggests their importance for whatever activities occurred at the site. Both
were surrounded by a low stone enclosure, and the one resembling a womans
abdomen and legs shows evidence of being rubbed smooth by human contact.257 It is
entirely possible, however, that the cult of Eileithyia mentioned by the literary sources
was located elsewhere.258
Sanctuary of Artemis Ortheia, Messene259

A small sanctuary with a prostyle temple was excavated to the northwest of the
Asklepieion at Messene in 1991-1992. The divinity to which the sanctuary belonged was
identified by a dedicatory inscription as Artemis Ortheia. Numerous terracotta
figurines, some of which represent Artemis, were discovered within the sanctuary.
Although this shrine went out of use c. 150 B.C., it appears that the worship of Artemis
Ortheia was transferred to a room within the nearby Asklepieion (sometimes referred to
as Cult House K of Artemis Phosphoros, mentioned in Pausanias 4.31.10). At least one
255
For a summary of these debates, see Schfer et al. 1992, pp. 7-8.
A few Roman finds are suitable for womens worship: one small bronze plaque (Heraklion museum
no. 2487) depicted a female figure carrying a sow (see Daux 1959b, p. 740); a pot sherd with an inscribed
votive dedication has been restored as being dedicated to Artemis, whose cult was often conflated with
that of Eiliethyia. See Schfer et al. 1992, pp. 319-320. Given the uncertainties of these objects, however,
they can tell us little about the nature of the cult.
257
Woman and child stalactite: Faure 1964, p. 13 and pl. VII, 6. Female torso stalactite: Faure 1964, p. 84
258
Indeed, Marinatos (1996) has recently suggested that Eileithyia was worshipped not here, but in the
nearby sanctuary of Zeus at Amnisos, since this sanctuary produced fertility charms.
259
For the early sanctuary of Artemis Ortheia at Messene, see Themelis 1991, pp. 28-30, fig. 41; Themelis
1994, pp. 101-107. For the later shrine of Artemis within the Asklepieion, see Orlandos 1962; Themelis
256
63
inscription found in this room mentions the epithet Oupis, a cult title under which
Artemis was worshipped as a childbirth goddess.260 Other inscribed bases within this
later shrine, some of which originally held statues of young girls, were dedicated to
Artemis Ortheia. Although the connection with childbirth is somewhat tenuous, as
none of the votives from this sanctuary are clearly dedicated for this purpose, the fact
that Artemis here was worshipped at least once under the epithet Oupis does suggest
that this sanctuary did occasionally receive childbirth worship.261
Cave of the Nymphs at Pitsa262

This cave, located near the Gulf of Corinth, was discovered in the 1930's and was
subsequently excavated by A.K. Orlandos. The cave appears to have been a sanctuary
sacred to the nymphs, popular from the 7th century B.C. to the 2nd century B.C. Votive
finds from the cave included numerous terracotta figurines of women and satyrs, as
well as painted pinakes. Orlandos interpreted the cult as one of childbirth and
childcare. The most striking find was a terracotta figurine of a nude pregnant woman.263
Although the votive evidence for childbirth worship in this cave is scant, the fact that
nymphs were frequently connected with marriage, fertility, and childbirth makes its use
as a childbirth sanctuary quite likely.
Sanctuary of Eros and Aphrodite on the North Slope of the Athenian Acropolis264
1994, pp. 107-122.

260
See above, p. 42.
261
Themelis (1994, pp. 111-115) suggests that the cult names Oupis, Ortheia, and Phosphorus were
interchangeable and all referred to Artemis' role as goddess of childbirth.
262
Orlandos 1965, pp. 200-206; Larson 2001, pp. 232-233.
263
Appendix I, 1.28.
264
Broneer 1932; Broneer 1933; Broneer 1935.
64
This rustic sanctuary was excavated by Broneer in the 1930s under the auspices
of the American School of Classical Studies. Situated on the north slope of the
Acropolis, the sanctuary seems to have consisted primarily of a series of niches for
votives carved into the natural rock. Inscriptions in the rock indicated that the shrine
was sacred to Aphrodite and Eros. Not surprisingly, the votives unearthed during the
excavations seem to indicate that worship at the site was connected to issues of fertility.
Dedications found in the area include at least three anatomical votives of reproductive
organs (one male and two female), as well as a terracotta figurine of a sleeping infant,
and several stones set in mortar that Broneer interpreted as being phallic symbols.265
Sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus at Tskona, Lakonia266

This sanctuary was first discovered in 1984 during the Lakonian Survey by the
British School; it was subsequently excavated by Catling in 1989. Finds from the
sanctuary range in date from 6th century B.C. to 4th century A.C., but the site may have
experienced long periods in which it was not used. The votives found in the sanctuary,
such as armor, weapons, and athletic gear, suggested to Catling that the sanctuary was
primarily visited by male worshippers.267 The nature of the handmade Archaic
terracotta finds discovered at this sanctuary (approximately 2,600 total) seem to indicate
a distinct interest in human fertility and reproduction, however. Among the most
popular were figurines representing ithyphallic males. In smaller numbers were found
265
Figurine: Broneer 1933, p. 337 fig. 9; stone phallus: Broneer 1933, p. 346; stones: Broneer 1933 p. 342,
fig. 14 and p. 347.
266
Catling, 1990a, pp. 276-95; Catling, 1990b, pp. 15-35 and pls. 3-6; Cavanagh et al. 1996, pp. 190-191
(figurines), 390 (site) and pls. 11-13; Cavanagh and Crouwel 1988; Pariente 1990, pp. 734-736.
267
Catling 1990b, p. 34.
65
nude female figurines squatting and displaying genitalia (possibly parturient women)
and at least two pregnancy figurines.268
Sanctuary of Artemis Kalliste, Athens269

This small sanctuary, located near the Dipylon gate in the Athenian Kerameikos,
was discovered in 1922 during test excavations by Philadelpheus. Evidence for the
sanctuary consists of part of a temenos wall and several votive offerings, including four
female anatomical votives, two inscribed bases, and one relief. Three of the votives were
inscribed to Artemis Kalliste, providing the identity of the deity of the sanctuary.270
Identification of the sanctuarys connection to childbirth is entirely dependent upon the
types of dedications discovered there, primarily the anatomical votives, which
Philadelphus interpreted as requests for fertility or safe childbirth. The relief, depicting
a sacrificial scene in which a couple stands at an altar before Artemis, was interpreted as
a votive offered for fertility.271
Cave at Stavromyti, Crete272

This cave, located on the south-west side of Mt. Iouktas, Crete, was excavated by
Evans from 1898 to 1924 and by Marinatos in 1949 and 1950. The finds discovered at the
site indicate that the cave was used from Minoan to Roman times, with the primary
period of activity falling in the Geometric period. During the Minoan period the cave
268
Two pregnancy figurines found in the area during the Lakonia survey have been published in
Cavanagh et al. 1996, p. 190 and plate 13a (Appendix I, 2.34). Catling (1990b, p. 30) mentions that
figurines representing pregnancy and possibly parturient women were also discovered during
excavation, but gives no indication of how many of these were found.
269
Philadelpheus 1927; Roussel 1927.
270
This sanctuary was also mentioned by Pausanias (1.29.2).
271
Appendix I, 3.5. For the interpretation of the relief, see Roussel 1927.
272
Minos II, pp. 68-71. Marinatos campaigns are described in Praktika 1949, pp. 108-9; 1950, pp. 248-257;
66
was used as a place of refuge and as storage for provisions. A small cult may have
existed here in later times, evinced by remains of an altar (or offering table) and finds
which have been identified as votives. The types of votives discovered, such as a
feeding bottle, a spindlewhorl, and astragaloi, suggested that this was a sanctuary used
mainly by women. Marinatos suggested a cult of Eileithyia analagous to the cave at
Amnisos. Other suggestions for the deity of this cave have included Diktynna, Artemis,
or the Nymphs.
Sanctuary of Artemis Mounichia in Piraeus273

This sanctuary was first excavated by Threpsiades in the 1930s under the
auspices of the Greek Archaeological Services. Excavations were renewed by
Palaiokrassa in 1984.274 Palaiokrassa suggested in her 1983 study of the sanctuary that
the cult was involved with fertility, childbirth, and childcare. The votives found in this
sanctuary included at least one example of a figurine of a swaddled infant, and a
fragmentary list of votive dedications from the sanctuary may have included clothing,
possibly offered for childbirth, as at Brauron.275
Sanctuary of Aphrodite at Daphni276

The sanctuary of Aphrodite at Daphni, situated on the Sacred Way between
Athens and Eleusis, was excavated during the late 1800s by Kampoupoglos. The scanty
remains include an enclosure wall surrounding the poorly preserved foundation of a
building. Numerous niches in the rock face, which originally held votive offerings, are
1951, pp. 126-127. See also Faure 1964, pp. 173-5.
273
SEG XXXIX 322; Threpsiades 1935; Palaiokrassa 1991.
274
See Palaiokrassa 1989.
275
SEG XXXIX 163.
67
still visible today. Among the objects discovered in the excavation were many examples
of anatomical votives and marble dove figurines. It is likely that Aphrodite was
worshipped here as a healing divinity whose cult was particularly helpful in problems
with fertility and concerns about having a fruitful marriage, though no dedications of
explicit childbirth votives depicting pregnancy or childbirth were uncovered.
Features Characteristic of Childbirth Sanctuaries
Although nearly any sanctuary could receive childbirth votives, certain features
do seem to characterize those sanctuaries where childbirth and fertility were a main
focus. These sanctuaries tend to be informal shrines that incorporate natural features
such as sources of water, caves, hills, and rock outcroppings.
Springs and water sources are common in childbirth sanctuaries, probably
reflecting a general association of water with fertility.277 In particular, the sanctuary of
Eileithyia on Paros was focused on a small natural spring, and the sanctuary of Artemis
at Brauron featured a "sacred spring into which votives were thrown. The close
association of the nymphs with both childbirth and springs is also worth noting.278 In
addition to springs, rivers may also have been regarded as significant features of
childbirth sanctuaries. Accounts of divine births often place the event near a river where
the new mother is said to bathe herself and her infant immediately after birth.279
276
Travlos 1937; Travlos and Kourouniotis 1938; Travlos 1939; Pirenne-Delforge 1994, pp. 73-74.
For fertility and childbirth rituals involving special water sources, see below, pp. 70-73.
278
Larson 2001, p. 227.
279
Hera: Pausanias 7.4.4; Leto: Strabo 14.1.20; Rhea: Pausanias 8.41.2; Pausanias 8.28.2.
277
68
Like springs, caves may well have had a special cultic meaning, since caves have
an obvious birthing symbolism.280 Numerous childbirth sanctuaries and shrines are
either located in caves or associated with them, including the sanctuary of Eileithyia on
Paros; the sanctuary of Eileithyia at Amnisos, and the sanctuary of Eileithyia Inatia at
Tsoutsouros, all of which are cave shrines; the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron, which
had a small cave that has been traditionally identified as the tomb of Iphigeneia; and
the cave of the nymphs at Pitsa. Caves and mountaintops feature prominently in
mythological stories about birth. Particularly common are stories about divine births in
which various gods were born or hidden in a cave, including stories of the infant Zeus
being hidden in either the Dictean cave or the Idean cave.281 Hermes, too, was said to
have been born in a cave near Corinth.282 Caves associated with human birth also
appear in mythology, but are less frequent. In Euripides Ion, for instance, Creusa gives
birth to her illegitimate son in a cave and abandons him there.283
Another common feature of childbirth sanctuaries is their location on hills,
mountaintops, and rocky formations. This feature is perhaps most surprising, since one
would not expect to find sanctuaries frequented by pregnant women or women with
young children in such inaccessible locations.284 Nevertheless, those sanctuaries that are
clearly connected with childbirth are frequently found on hilltops and mountains. The
280

For the Dictean cave on Crete: Hesiod, Th. 481-4; Petrocheilou 1984, p. 159. For a discussion of
whether the Dictean cave excavated near Psychro was actually the Dictean cave recorded in ancient
myth and legend, see Boardman 1961, pp. 1-5. For the Idean cave: Diodorus Siculus 5.70.1-4; Petrocheilou
1984, p. 155. The finds from the Dictean and the Idean caves excavated on Crete do not show any clear
evidence of being the focus of childbirth or fertility cult, despite the fact that both caves appear to have
been used as sanctuaries. For a sampling of the finds from these caves, see Boardman 1961. A single
bronze figurine of an infant was reportedly found in the Dictean cave in 1896. The date of this figurine is
uncertain, as is its cultic significance. See: Boardman 1961, p. 8 and 11, and pl. III, 22; Neils and Oakley
2003, p. 237 no. 38.
282
Petrocheilou 1984, p. 132.
283
Euripides, Ion 500.
284
For the fact that women visited such shrines throughout pregnancy, however, see pp. 72-78.
281
69
sanctuary of Eileithyia on Paros, for instance, is a good two hours walk from the
outskirts of Paroikia, up the fairly steep rocky slope of Mt. Kounados. Similarly, the
sanctuary of Artemis Lochia on Delos is located on top of Mt. Kynthos. A pregnancy
figurine was discovered in a Geometric peak shrine at Kavousi, and Eileithyia was
worshipped as a minor deity in the sanctuary of Athena Pronaia near the top of Mt.
Parnassus. The sanctuary of Aphrodite and Eros on the Athenian Acropolis, the
sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus in the Argolid, and the sanctuary of Artemis Lochia at
Gonnoi are all reached by climbing high hills as well. Many of these sanctuaries are
nestled among rock outcroppings, which undoubtedly highlighted the rustic
appearance of the sanctuary and emphasized the fundamentally wild and uncivilized
nature of the cult.285
It is true that childbirth worship was not exclusively relegated to rural areas
outside of the city confines. As Pingiatoglu has noted, there are examples of sanctuaries
of Eileithyia within city walls. 286 Indeed, it is likely that childbirth worship took place
in many large civic sanctuaries as well as in the more specialized shrines. Nevertheless,
from the examination of childbirth sanctuaries above, it is clear that those sanctuaries
that were solely dedicated to childbirth and fertility (or in which this aspect played a
prominent role) tended to take the form of small rustic shrines located in remote areas
and used primarily for popular religion and private worship rather than state cult.
285
Many childbirth divinities had a chthonic or mysterious element to their cult and some, such as the
Genetyllides, were regarded by men with an air of suspicion. For futher discussion of this aspect of
childbirth and kourotrophic cult, see Price 1978, p. 200.
286
70
Chapter II: Childbirth Rituals and Practices
In societies where traditional birthing customs are in practice, the use of ritual is
a common element that appears in nearly every stage of the reproductive process.1 In
this chapter I examine the use of ritual in ancient Greece for each of the main stages of
reproduction: the period prior to conception, the duration of pregnancy, the time of
birth itself, and the period of postpartum recovery. I have limited my investigation to
private rituals those that were performed by individual women and their immediate
family members in order to insure successful procreation rather than including the
numerous festivals and rites performed on behalf of the community as a whole. The
private rituals that I document here include those that were performed in informal
shrines and within the home, as well as those performed in public sanctuaries.
Fertility Rituals
Given the great importance that Greek society placed upon the production of
heirs, it is not surprising that there were a number of different types of fertility rituals
intended to ensure successful procreation. Indeed, it is likely that most marriage
celebrations incorporated certain rituals to ensure the fertility of the newlyweds. One
such ritual, practiced in Athens, involved the new bride spending the night with the
pais amphithales, a male child with two living parents.2 It seems that the presence of this
healthy male child in the marriage bed acted as a sort of living fertility charm to ensure
The distinction between traditional (or indigenous) birthing practices, in which the birth and subsequent
care of mother and child are overseen by family members or traditional birthing assistants such as
midwives, and modern medical practices, in which they are dictated largely by trained physicians and
nurses, is common in anthropological literature. See, for instance, Lefber and Voorhoeve 1998.
2
Pollux, On. 3.40. For further information on the pais amphithales, see Golden 1990, p. 30.
71
the fruitfulness of the union.3 The pais amphithales also performed another ritual during
Athenian wedding ceremonies: he carried a liknon filled with cakes. It has been argued
that this, too, served as a sort of fertility ritual, with the cakes acting as symbols of the
as-yet unborn children of the couple, still waiting in the womb.4
Prenuptial dedications and sacrifices to the gods in the hopes of ensuring the
fertility of the marriage were common.5 On Delos, Herodotus tells us that it was the
custom for young women and men who were about to marry to dedicate locks of hair
on the tomb of the Hyperborean maidens named Hyperoch and Laodic, who may
well have been worshipped at Delos as minor fertility or childbirth divinities.6 As Baur
has pointed out, similar dedications of hair before the wedding day are known from
other parts of Greece, and also appear to have been intended to prevent barrenness.7
After marriage, couples who did not conceive in a timely manner most likely first
turned to the gods for help.8 Appeals to oracles for advice on matters of conception
appear to have been relatively common. In Euripides' Ion, for instance, both Xuthus and
Creusa go to the sanctuary of Apollo at Delphi in order to seek help in conceiving a
child.9 A number of inquiries made at the oracle of Zeus at Dodona indicate that
procreation was as much a concern for men as for women.10 The cure records from the
Asklepieion at Epidauros also suggest that it was not uncommon for women having
difficulty conceiving to seek the assistance of a healing god, sometimes traveling
3
This ritual has been recently recognized in vase paintings of wedding scenes. For a discussion of these
images, see Kauffmann-Samaras 1988, pp. 290-292; Reilly 1989, pp. 426-427.
4
Corinth XVIII, iv, p. 70; Redfield 1982, p. 193.
5
The Atthidographer Phanodemos states that the Athenians performed such a sacrifice before marriage
to ensure children. See Jacoby 1954, pp. 181-182, no. 325, F6. For additional prenuptial fertility rites, see
Oakley and Sinos 1993, pp. 11-14; Schmitt 1977.
6
For these divinities, see above, pp. 34-35.
7
Baur 1901, pp. 68-69. He cites specifically dedications made at Megara at the tomb of Iphino and at
Athens to Hera Teleia, Artemis, and the Moirai.
8
For the expectation that children would follow shortly after marriage, see above pp. 12-13.
9
Euripides, Ion, 404-406 and 422-424. Aegeus likewise consults the Delphic oracle about his childlessness.
72
considerable distances in order to do so. Of the five surviving records that mention
appeals of this sort, two of the women lived locally within the Peloponnese, while three
others journeyed to the sanctuary from as far away as Epirus, Ceos, and Lebena.11
Many families would be unable to expend the time and money necessary to
make a special trip to an oracular or healing sanctuary in order to address the issue of
childlessness; it is very likely, therefore, that most appeals to the gods for fertility were
done by offering prayers within a local sanctuary or shrine.12 Such personal appeals to
the gods rarely find their way into literature, but scattered references do survive. In the
Homeric Hymn to Demeter, for instance, Metaneira emphasizes the importance of her
only son by telling Demeter: " Nurse this child for me, whom the immortals have given
me, late-born and unexpected, but much prayed for."13 Other sources record mostly
extraordinary or miraculous examples of divine aid. An epigram in the Palatine
Anthology, for instance, gives the fictional story of a childless blind woman who prayed
to Artemis either to restore her sight or to grant her offspring; both prayers were
generously (and miraculously) granted by the goddess.14 It is quite likely that, in many
cases, these prayers for fertility were accompanied by small gifts dedicated in the
sanctuary at the time that the prayer was made.15 Indeed, it is possible that many of the
terracotta figurines of children discussed in the votive section below were dedicated
See Plutarch, Thes. 3.5; Apollodorus 3.15.5.

10
Syll.3 III 1160; Parke 1967, II.5, II.7, II.8, II.9, II.11.
11
Edelstein and Edelstein 1945, nos. T423, case no. 31, p. 235; T423, case no. 34, p. 236; T423, case no. 39, p.
237; T423, case no. 42, p. 237; T426, pp. 239-240. All of these inscriptions are given in translation below,
pp. 110-111.
12
A similar practice may be seen in modern Hindu villages in India, where childless wives are
encouraged by their families to worship Matabi, the village mother-goddess, to obtain fertility. If
infertility persists, they may also offer special oblations to Lord Shiva, or even make special trips to
shrines further away which specialize in fertility and birth. See Jacobsen 1980, p. 79.
13
Homeric Hymn to Demeter, 212. It is interesting to note that, since Metaneira is said to have already had
four daughters, her prayer was certainly for a male child. Gender-specific prayers were probably quite
common, given the marked preference in Greek society for sons.
14
Anth. Pal. 9.46.
15
On the practice of dedicating a small, inexpensive gift at the time of offering a prayer, see below.
73
either at the time of marriage as a way of ensuring the quick and successful growth of
the family or when an appeal for fertility was made.16
In addition to the more formal fertility rituals mentioned above, women
undoubtedly used a wide variety of informal or spontaneous practices to enable them
to conceive. Such practices would leave little or no trace in the archaeological record
and were generally not of interest to male authors, and so are extremely difficult to
reconstruct. Based upon the few extant literary references to such rites, however, it
seems quite likely that women in ancient Greece made use of a type of ritual, known
widely in other cultures, which relies upon contact with certain natural features that are
thought to possess the power of fertility.
Sacred springs and special water sources are a common element in fertility rites
around the world. The underlying principle behind these rituals appears to be based
upon the assumption that, since water is a necessary element to the fertility and growth
of crops, it may also aid in human fertility. Fertility rituals involving water inevitably
focus upon direct contact with the sacred water source; most commonly these rites take
the form of immersion to allow the transference of the fertile properties of the water to
the participant. Alternative rituals often include drinking the sacred water or even
dipping clothing or bits of cloth into the water.17 A description of this type of activity in
Greece is preserved in a late source. Photios relates that barren women would drink
from a spring sacred to Aphrodite Kalias on Mt. Hymettos in order to become fertile.18
As I have noted above, springs and other water features are a fairly common feature of
childbirth sanctuaries; it would not be surprising if many of the springs and pools
16
Gloria Merker has interpreted children figurines at Corinth in exactly this way. See Corinth XVIII, iv, p.
329.
17
See, for example, Gelis 1991, p. 25.
18
Photios, Lex. 185, 21. Kullou' phvran; Pirenne-Delforge 1994, pp. 74-75.
74
within these shrines were regarded as possessing special fertility properties and were
places where minor rituals of this sort occurred.19
Contact with certain rocks or stones may also have been used to obtain fertility.
Fertility rites of this nature appear to have been quite common all over Europe, and
were still performed as late as the last century in Greece.20 Baur records a contemporary
custom in Athens in which barren women sought to ensure fertility by sliding down a
smooth rock on the Hill of the Nymphs.21 It is often thought that this fertility rite
reflects a continuation of ancient practices, since the presence of an ancient shrine of the
nymphs indicates that the hill was always connected with fertility.22 Although there is
no way to prove that this ritual was practiced in antiquity, the fact that such traditions
tend to be long-lived suggests that it is not impossible.23
The use of fertility charms of naturally shaped smooth stones is also paralleled
in ethnographic records.24 Stones and minerals have often been thought to possess
special properties that could affect (either favorably or adversely) human health and
19
See pp. 63-66 for features associated with these sanctuaries. For a discussion of the importance of water
in Greek religion in general, see Cole 1988.
20
Glis (1991, p. 28), for example, describes fertility rituals performed in early modern France that
involved sliding down a smooth stone face on bare buttocks, rubbing one's navel against or even
simulating sex with large pillar-shaped standing stones, and sleeping on certain rocks in order to
conceive.
21
Baur 1902, p. 35 n. 47.
22
The most complete discussion may be found in Ervin 1959.
23
Recently, Gerald Lalonde has argued against a continuity of cult. He has shown that, despite the
similarity of cult functions between the shrine of the nymphs and the later church of Santa Marina that
occupied the hill, an unbroken continuity of cult did not exist between the pagan and Christian fertility
cults here. Lalonde, 2001. The fact that the cults themselves do not share an unbroken tradition does not
necessarily mean that the practice of fertility rites was discontinued, however. The enduring association
of a place with fertility properties is not necessarily dependent upon the preservation of the cult. Gelis
(1991, p. 73) records, for instance, the continued veneration of a pagan statue by pregnant women in the
seventeenth century A.D., despite attempts by the church to prevent such activities.
24
In the 19th century young girls living in Porret sought for a beach stone of a certain shape and color,
which they believed would grant them fertility, deliver them from danger, and give them a husband at
the right time. See Gelis 1991, pp. 19-20.
75
reproduction.25 Stones, especially those that exhibited an unusual feature, such as a

distinctive shape or color, may well have played a role in private fertility rituals in
ancient Greece, as elsewhere.26 The presence of certain naturally smooth stones in the
sanctuary of Eros and Aphrodite on the North Slope of the Athenian Acropolis may
possibly indicate their use in a fertility ritual performed in this sanctuary.27 River
pebbles were also found in votive deposits in a small sanctuary of Demeter on the hill of
Bitalemi near Gela.28 Given that the cult of Demeter is closely associated with fertility
and nursing in Magna Graecia, it is not unlikely that these smooth stones served as a
symbol of human fertility.29
Rituals Performed during Pregnancy

Rituals performed during pregnancy were usually intended either to prevent
miscarriage or to assure an easy delivery and prepare for birth. A number of ritual
practices might be employed by an expectant mother to accomplish these goals, but
most involved either going to a special (usually sacred) location or coming in contact
with objects thought to have sacred or magical properties.
Visiting Special Springs
25
Such beliefs were certainly common in antiquitysee below, p. 79. These powerful beliefs still persist
in modern American thought, witnessed, for example, by such phenomena as the use of magnets to heal
carpal-tunnel syndrome.
26
For a discussion of the use of certain unusual stones as amulets during pregnancy and childbirth, see
below, p. 79. For special stones associated with conception and birth in Assyro-Babylonian beliefs, see
Pinches 1908, p. 644.
27
The elongated shape of these stones suggested to Broneer that they served as phallic symbols. See
Broneer 1933, p. 347.
28
Kron 1992, p. 631-633 and fig. 8; Orlandini 1966, pl. xxiii, 7.
29
For Demeters connections with fertility and child-rearing in Magna Graecia, see Price 1978, pp. 170186.
76
The very same springs that were used in the fertility rituals discussed above
were also visited by pregnant women in order to ensure a successful pregnancy and an
easy delivery.30 The water from these springs was used in other rites connected with
childbirth as well. Antimachos of Colophon, writing in the 4th century B.C., describes
rituals performed by pregnant women that involved collecting water from a special
spring to use for the ritual bath after delivery.31
Visiting Distant Sanctuaries

A network of shrines available for childbirth worship existed within the Greek
landscape. This network included a few extremely popular shrines whose main
function was that of fertility and childbirth, and which may well have drawn a very
wide cult following to which pregnant women or women seeking fertility and offspring
would make pilgrimages. These shrines probably included the major sanctuaries of
Eileithyia, such as the cave of Eiliethyia at Paros, the Cave of Eileithyia Inatia on Crete,
and the sanctuary of Eileithyia on Delos, as well as the sanctuary of Artemis Lochia on
Delos. 32
It may seem unlikely that pregnant women would be willing to travel
considerable distances to visit one of these sanctuaries, but this practice is well known
from other periods. Gelis mentions that women in early modern France would make
pilgrimages to shrines or statues of saints known to help with pregnancy and childbirth
even late into their pregnancy: These big regional shrines presented certain problems
30
Photios (Lex. 185, 21) mentions that the same spring of Aphrodite Kalias on Mt. Hymettos that was
supposed to grant fertility was also visited by pregnant women. For water rituals intended to prevent
miscarriage and facilitate birth performed in early modern France, see Gelis 1991, p. 76.
31
Matthews 1996, pp. 274-276, no. 104 (= 179 Wyss). For more on the ritual bath after birth, see below, pp.
85-86. As Susan Cole (2004, pp. 191-194) has recently observed, the regular visitation of such springs by
the women of the polis not only formed an important part of the ritual experience of individual women,
but also played a key role in affirming community identity.
77
to women with child, especially that of distance. The time of year had to be taken into
account, and also the womans condition: the more difficult the pregnancy, the more
important the pilgrimage, and it was then that women could be imprudent.33
Although evidence for this practice in Greece is slim, it seems likely that the same
custom existed in antiquity, with pregnant women from a wide geographical area
making trips to the most important sanctuaries that focused on human fertility and
reproduction. Our best evidence for this lies in the cure records at the Asklepieion at
Epidauros. At least two of these record that women in an advanced state of pregnancy
(indeed, extraordinarily advanced) made special pilgrimages to the sanctuary at
Epidauros to receive the god's aid.34 Antimachos of Colophon mentions offerings
(pelaneia) made by pregnant women to Eileithyia Kourotrophos, Diktaia, and Artemis.35
Women may well have gotten around the difficulties of travel during pregnancy
by sending someone else in their stead, to vow on their behalf to give a votive gift and
to visit the shrine in person, with the child, after the divinity had granted help in the
birth process.36 We may assume, although Herodotus does not couch it in these terms,
that the story of the Hyperborean maidens who traveled to Delos to offer votive gifts to
Eileithyia after they had given birth is a reflection of the fulfillment of such a vow.37 An
alternative solution may have been that the pregnant woman made her vow in a local
shrine, with the promise of fulfilling the vow by traveling to a larger sanctuary of the
divinity to offer a dedication of thanks there after birth.38 Similar arrangements are
32
For these sanctuaries, see above, pp. 46-48, and 51-53.

Glis 1991, p. 70.
34
Edelstein and Edelstein 1945, nos. T423, case 2 and T423, case 31. A full translation of these inscriptions
is provided below, p. 110-111.
35
Matthews 1996, pp. 269-270, no. 101 (= 176 Wyss).
36
In one of Lucian's dialogs, a pregnant character mentions in passing that she sent out her servant to
pray to Artemis on her behalf that she be delivered safely. See Lucian, Dial. Meret. 2.3.
37
Herodotus 4.34-5; for the full story, see pp. 34-35 and p. 68.
38
Osborne's prosographical study of the dedicants named in the inventory lists for the temple of Artemis
33
78
known even in modern contexts.39 In instances where the woman could not fulfill the
vow herself, it could be fulfilled by her husband or another family member on her
behalf.40
Further evidence for the common practice of pregnant women visiting shrines
may be deduced by the religious laws that forbade childbirth within the temenos of a
sanctuary. Pausanias mentions that no one was allowed to give birth within the
temenos of Asklepios or on the island of Delos.41 Although the prohibition of giving
birth applied to all sanctuaries, we may assume that Pausanias mentions these
sanctuaries precisely because these are the shrines that pregnant women would be most
likely to visit to seek help during labor.42
Glis notes that whenever possible, women in early modern Europe would try to
schedule their pilgrimage to a special shrine to coincide with important festivals or
saints days.43 We might imagine that women in ancient Greece would have done the
same, in order to increase the power of the blessing or protection that they received
from the visit. We know of at least one main festival of Eileithyia, held in the winter
month of Posedonia at Delos.44 Since Delos was itself a place particularly associated
at Brauron indicates that women even from the most distant Attic demes offered dedications of clothing,
most likely after birth. See Osborne 1985, pp. 154-160. One may speculate that many of the women who
lived in or near Athens would have made vows to dedicate these gifts during their pregnancy in the
closer Brauronian on the Athenian acropolis. Close connection of the two shrines is clear. Cole (2004, p.
196) notes that the Brauronion on the Athenian acropolis served to bring into the city the cult of the
goddess whose principle shrine was on the outskirts of Athenian territory.
39
In their survey of the beliefs of modern rural Greece, Richard and Eva Blum (1970, p. 59) recorded this
testimony concerning an unfulfilled vow that a villager made during pregnancy: When I was pregnant
with Froso, I offered to christen the newborn at Tenos if the Panaghia would let it be born safely and stay
well. When Froso was born we didnt have any money, and since I was afraid the child might die before I
got to Tenos to get it baptized... I decided to baptize the child in Spathi.
40
For an example of a dedication made by a man on behalf of his wife in order to fulfill a vow that she
had made, see Cole 1998, p. 34.
41
Pausanias 2.27.1.
42
See also Aristophanes, Lys. 742-755, in which one of Lysistratas followers pretends to be in labor as an
excuse to leave the sacred confines of the Acropolis.
43
Glis 1991, p. 73.
44
Bruneau 1970, pp. 215-219; Linders 1994.
79
with fertility and birth, renowned as the birth place of Apollo and Artemis, it is
reasonable to postulate that pregnant women or women seeking offspring would travel
to the island to attend this festival in honor of the goddess of childbirth.
Visiting Local Shrines

Naturally, not every woman was able to travel to the main childbirth sanctuaries.
The cost of such a journey could prove prohibitive to those who lacked the financial
resources to make a long trip or who could not afford to be absent from their duties as
mother and general manager of daily household affairs. Thus, many women would find
it necessary to worship a divinity closer to home. It would not be difficult to find an
appropriate sanctuary nearby, however. Shrines to Eileithyia were popular throughout
Greece, and, as is apparent from the list of deities above, numerous deities could be
petitioned for childbirth. It is likely, therefore, that many women would simply visit a
local sanctuary of one of these divinities to obtain the desired help.
An excellent example of a site that received local childbirth worship is the
sanctuary of Artemis Lochia at Gonnoi, in Thessaly.45 Though the remains of this
sanctuary are poor, and the finds have not been well published, from the evidence that
is available, it appears that this sanctuary served primarily as a place where local
women sought divine assistance in childbirth. The sanctuary itself was probably quite
small, as the remains were limited to a single building. Nevertheless, over the course of
about four centuries, the sanctuary received hundreds of votive stelai.46 These were
almost certainly the dedications of women who lived in Gonnoi or the surrounding
area. Not only are the stelai a votive type that is unique to the region, but the names of
45
46
This sanctuary is described above, pp. 54-55.

On the votive stelai from this sanctuary, see pp. 231-233.
80
the female dedicants in the inscriptions on many of these stelai are found on local
tombstones and other inscriptions.47
In addition to the Olympian gods, there were many minor deities and even local
heroes who specialized in childbirth aid.48 Local shrines to these deities were probably
quite common, despite the difficulty of identifying them in the archaeological record.
That women visited local sanctuaries and shrines throughout their pregnancy, and that
such activities were considered both fitting and beneficial, is suggested by a passage in
Aristotles Politics, in which he urges legislators to ensure that pregnant women get
sufficient exercise by passing laws that cause them to make frequent trips to the
sanctuaries:
And pregnant women also must take care of their bodies, not avoiding
exercise nor adopting a low diet; this it is easy for the lawgiver to secure
by ordering them to make a journey daily for the due worship of the
deities whose office is the control of childbirth.49
The only evidence for restrictions on pregnant women visiting sanctuaries is provided
in a passage of Censorinus that states that in Greece, pregnant women would not visit
shrines until after the fortieth day of pregnancy.50 The reason for this custom was most
likely the fear of miscarriage caused by exertion during the early stages of pregnancy,
rather than for any religious reason.51
47
For the names, see, for example, Gonnoi II, nos. 161, 168, 171, 172, 174, 175 bis, 180-183, 187, 188, 190.
See, for example, discussions of Helen, Iphigeneia, the nymphs, and the Genytillides above, pp. 31- 32,
35, and 37.
49
Aristotle, Pol. 1335a.
50
Censorinus, De die natali 11.7.
51
On this subject, Parker (1983, p. 48) writes: in Greek medical texts the forty-day period is of particular
importance precisely in relation to pregnancy and birth; during the first forty days after conception, for
instance, menstruation continues, and miscarriage is a constant danger, while by the end of this period
the embryo is formed and the male child begins to move. The dangerous transitional period therefore
lasts forty days, and during this period, if Censorinus is right, the mother is excluded from communal
life.
48
81
One must not assume that women felt confined to choose just one divinity or one
method of obtaining protection. It is likely that women in antiquity took every
precaution available to help them through such a difficult time, no doubt worshipping a
number of different divinities for the same purpose. A pregnant woman in Athens, for
instance, may well have visited the shrines of any number of different divinities within
the city who might offer assistance during childbirth, including the Genetyllides,
Eileithyia, Ge, Athena Kourotrophos, the nymphs, Artemis Kalliste, or Aphrodite; she
may also have made a special trip outside of the city to the nearby sanctuary of Artemis
at Brauron.52
Sacrifices During Pregnancy

As part of their visits to sanctuaries during pregnancy, women made sacrifices to
the divinities of childbirth. Indeed, in a fragmentary passage, the Cyrene Cathartic Law
indicates that a sacrifice to Artemis before birth was not only customary, but also
mandatory.53 Fathers, too, made animal sacrifices in preparation for the approaching
birth. In Euripides Electra, when Orestes inquires about Aegisthus whereabouts, he is
told by a servant that he is preparing to sacrifice a bull for the nymphs. Orestes
response is to ask whether the sacrifice is As thanks for childrens nurture, or before a
birth?54
52
The Genetyllides were popular childbirth deities in Athens; for the shrine of Eileithyia near the Ilissos,
see childbirth sanctuaries p. 50; on the nymphs, which had a sanctuary on the Hill of the Nymphs in
Athens, see pp. 37-38; for Artemis Kalliste, see pp. 61-62; for the shrine of Aphrodite and Eros on the
Acropolis, p. 60; for Athena kourotrophos and Ge kourotrophos in Athens, see Price 1978, pp. 101-117; for
the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron, see pp. 48-49.
53
SEG IX 72 (LSS 115), lines 15-23. Numerous commentaries have been offered on this law. For a
relatively recent translation and discussion, see Parker 1983, pp. 332-351, especially p. 345. See also, Cole
1998, p. 34; Perlman 1989, pp. 127-130.
54
Euripides, Electra, 625-626. Translation by Kearns (1989, p. 22). Lines 628-629 make it clear that this is a
private sacrifice made only in the company of the household.
82
It appears that, in some instances, a dog was considered an appropriate

sacrificial animal for childbirth purposes. In a passage of the Moralia, Plutarch notes the
practice at Argos of making dog sacrifices to the cult of Eilioneia/Eileithyia for easy
childbirth.55 Such a sacrifice, though unusual, is understandable given the fact that
Eileithyia, like Hekate, had a strong chthonic element to her cult.56
Amulets Used During Pregnancy

Just as the act of visiting special springs or sanctuaries was thought to bring
about divine or supernatural aid during pregnancy and birth, so too did the act of
coming in contact with objects that were thought to have special properties or powers.57
In ancient Greece, this belief was usually manifested in the act of wearing certain objects
as amulets.58 Amulets could be made from any number of different materials, including
strips of gold, silver, or papyrus inscribed with spells or magical words or symbols,
rings with special markings, pendants intended to hold magical objects or concoctions,
and even organic substances such as herbal compounds or animal products. While rare
or exotic materials made appealing amulets, thought to be powerful precisely because
they were foreign and strange, it is likely that most amulets consisted of commonly
found materials that possessed properties suggesting that they would work through
sympathetic magic.
One such stone was the eagle-stone, or aetites, sometimes also called the
pregnant stone because it often contained within it a small concretion thought to
55

On the chthonic aspects of the cult of Eileithyia and other divinities of childbirth, see Price 1978, p. 200.
57
Glis (1991, pp. 73-76) discusses how women in France believed that physical contact with special
statues of saints would secure those saints' aid in childbirth.
58
For the popularity of the use of amulets in general, see Kotansky 1991. For uterine amulets, see Aubert
1989.
56
83
resemble an embryo in a womb.59 It was because of this property that it was belived to
be of use to pregnant women. Pliny writes that eagle-stones were wrapped in the skins
of sacrificed animals and worn throughout the pregnancy by women (or even
sometimes attached to pregnant animals). He further states that these amulets were not
to be removed during the pregnancy except at the moment of delivery otherwise
there would be a prolapse of the uterus, but that if the women did not remove it during
childbirth, no birth would take place.60
The eagle stone was used as a womens amulet,
especially powerful for preventing miscarriage, until quite recently in Europe.61 Its use
for such purposes can be traced at least to Hellenistic times.62
Rituals During Birth

Rituals performed during birth are common in all cultures, especially those that
rely upon traditional birth practices.63 These rituals tend to focus on one of several
goals: to hasten delivery, to relieve the fears or pains of the parturient woman, and/or
to protect the mother and child from the physical and supernatural dangers of birth.
Traditional birthing practices often combine the use of practical methods, such as the
use of massage and medical ointments and pessaries, along with religious or magicoreligious methods in order to accomplish these goals, rarely making a distinction
between the effectiveness of these different techniques.64 Most of the ritual childbirth
59
The most common of these stones, according to Eichholz (1965, p. 91), are limonite nodules.
Pliny, NH 36.149-151. A good discussion of the eagle stone can be found in Waegeman 1987, pp. 162163.
61
Glis 1991, p. 68.
62
Theophrastus De Lap. 5.
63
As Lesley Dean-Jones (1994, pp. 34-35) has noted, in cases of unproblematic pregnancies, women in
Classical Greece were likely to have relied upon the traditional birthing practices overseen by midwives
and local "wise-women" rather than turn to male Hippocratic doctors.
64
Hittite texts indicate, for instance, that obstetrical knowledge was limited, and that the primary
methods of assisting in labor consisted of magical and medico-magical practices such as the use of
60
84
practices attested for ancient Greece are of the magico-religious type, frequently relying
upon popular beliefs in the sympathy and antipathy of objects to obtain the desired
outcome.
Concepts of Binding and Loosening the Womb

One of the major goals of rituals performed during childbirth was to ensure that
the womb would open at the proper time. The concept of needing to open the womb
during birth through magic is found in many societies, both ancient and modern. This
was obtained primarily through the use of symbols.65 The gesture of an open hand made
by Eileithyia in numerous artistic representations in Greek vase paintings may have
served as one such symbol. That is, the goddess of childbirth can magically aid in the
opening of the womb through the symbol of her opened hand.66 A similar concept may
be seen in the early modern European practice of placing a Jericho rose in a bowl of
water during labor. Not actually a rose, but a dried bundle of twigs that resemble a bud,
the Jericho rose unfolds when exposed to moisture. According to different accounts, the
practice of placing the rose in water during labor would either be used as a diagnostic
tool to determine how easily the labor would go or to ensure that the labor pains would
be brief, lasting no longer than it took for the rose to open.67 Notably, in at least one
instance, a statuette of Eileithyia depicts the goddess holding a flower in one hand as
incantations, sympathetic magic, and potions. See Pringle 1983, p. 137. A passage in Plato's Theatetus
indicates that midwives in ancient Greece likewise used a combination of medical and magical practices
to obtain the desired results. Plato, Theat. 149c-d.
65
Aubert 1989, p. 426.
66
The image of the hand held open with palm visible may have been a particularly potent symbol of the
opened womb if in ancient Greece, as elsewhere, the palm was considered a sign of the kteis, or female
genitalia. On this symbolism, see Gravel 1995, p. 122. For this gesture in association with Eileithyia, see
Price 1978, p. 56 no. 623 and fig. 46; Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 18-19.
67
Glis 1991, p. 117. It must be noted that, although the concept of opening the womb is not explicitly
stated for the use of the Jericho rose, the belief nevertheless appears to underlie the practice. In either
case, the opening of the rose is equated with a similar opening of the womb. When used as a diagnostic
85
her attribute.68 We may speculate that this flower might have taken the place of the
open hand as a symbol for the opening womb, just as the Jericho rose did in French
customs.
It has long been recognized by scholars that childbirth customs in ancient Greece
were largely concerned with the concept of loosening or opening the womb during the
time of labor.69 During labor, the parturient woman commonly undid all knots and ties
on her body, removing tight garments or articles of clothing such as girdles, and even
letting down her hair.70 Similar customs are common in the traditional birthing
practices of many cultures.71 No doubt it was because of this belief that the cult epithet
of lusivzwno" ("the freer of the zone") was applied to Artemis and Eileithyia.72
There is some evidence to suggest that keys may also have been used as
important symbols of opening the womb during childbirth in Greece. Keys were
often used in other types of binding spells, in which one wished to prevent a person
from performing some action or attaining a particular goal.73 Keys could also magically
open or close the womb, by either locking or unlocking it.74 Given the natural
tool, the Jericho rose is seen to predict how readily the womb itself will open; when used as an aid in
childbirth, the rose ensures a speedy delivery presumably by helping to open the womb.
68
For this image of Eileithyia, see Baur 1902, p. 76; Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 67-68 and p. 157 no. E31.
69
Baur 1902, p. 67, n. 99.
70
Soranus 2.6.1; Theocritus 17.60; Pindar, Ol. 6.37-41. For the idea that a pregnant woman is keeping her
child under her zon see Aeschylus, Cho. 992; Aeschylus, Eu. 608.
71
In her ethnographic study of modern Hindu birthing practices, Jacobson (1980, p. 81) recorded attempts
to open the way for the baby by undoing buttons, braids, knots, and even unlocking the locks on
trunks. In France, in addition to the use of the Jericho rose discussed above, women just prior to labor
would remove earrings and finger rings, unfasten their girdles, and untie all laces. See Glis 1991, p. 95.
Lefber and Voorhoeve (1998, p. 33) noted similar practices of loosening clothing and hair in modern
Indonesia, and in Malaysia the practice of opening all the doors and windows of the house to free the
womb. They also noted that some tribes assumed that a difficult labor signaled a wifes infidelity to her
husband. By confessing this infidelity, the woman would open her heart and enable her body to open
as well.
72
On this epithet, see p. 46.
73
Deubner 1908, p. 436.
74
For the action of magically locking the womb after intercourse in order to aid conception, see
Gourevitch 1988, p. 42. See also Aristophanes, Thesm. 973-976 for a reference to the "nuptial keys" that
hang on the girdle of Hera, quite possibly referring to the idea of "opening" the womb on the wedding
night.
86
observations that the womb acts as both a container for the fetus during pregnancy and
as a portal through which the newborn passed during birth, it is not particularly
surprising that keys could be employed as a magical or symbolic way to attempt to
control the timing and ease of birth.75
Just as sympathetic magic could ensure an open womb and quick birth, it could
also prevent or delay it. A well-known example is provided by Ovids version of the
story of the birth of Heracles.76 In this Romanized account, the birth goddess, Lucina,
under the orders of Hera, magically binds the womb of Alcmena by sitting at the door
of the birthing room with crossed legs and clasped hands. It is only after she has been
tricked into believing that Alcmena had already given birth that Lucina relaxes from
this posture and breaks the spell.77 Similar stories concerning the use of magic to bind
the body of an enemy or rival appear in other cultures as well.78
Childbirth Amulets
In addition to magically "opening" the womb during birth, women also relied
upon the use of amulets to facilitate the birthing process. Certain natural objects were
thought to be particularly effective in easing delivery in childbirth. According to
Dioskourides, for instance, jasper was worn on the thigh as an amulet during birth.79
Amulets made of organic materials were thought to be effective due either to popular
ideas of sympathy and antipathy among objects, or to folk knowledge of the healing
properties of the plant. In the case of sympathetic or antipathetic amulets, materials
75
For keys as possible childbirth votives, see below, pp. 226-227.

Ovid, Met. 9.292-324.
77
Several literary sources relate the story, including Pausanias 9.11.3 and Pseudo-Apollodorus 1.167, but
this is the only version to mention the goddesss use of magic in order to prevent the birth.
78
A remarkably similar story may be found in Talbot 1915, p. 22. In this account, a jealous wife sat before
the door of her husbands lover and used keys and padlocks as well as knots, crossed legs, and locked
fingers in order to magically bind her.
76
87
were chosen on the basis of their similarity to the afflicted part. Thus, Soranus mentions
the popular folk belief in the efficacy of the use of the wombs of mules as contraceptive
amulets.80 Various plants that were used for medicinal purposes were also used as
amulets. For instance, the Hippocratic corpus mentions the medicinal uses of cyclamen
as a pessary for several gynecological purposes, including curing dropsy of the womb
in pregnant women and for promoting lochial discharge and menstruation.81
Theophrastus notes, however, that the root of this plant could also be used as an amulet
to aid in childbirth.82
The use of amulets during childbirth was undoubtedly more common than the
ancient sources would have us believe. As Lloyd-Jones notes, the Hippocratic writings
remain entirely mute on the use of medico-magical amulets in this fashion; it is only
through passing references in authors such as Theophrastus that we learn of their use at
all. 83 In ethnographic parallels, amulets are among the most common ways to combat
the fears and dangers of childbirth.84 From a passage in Soranus' Gynecology, in which
the doctor urges his readers to permit the use of amulets for the psychological benefits
that they provide for the patient, we may infer that the use of amulets, particularly in
problematic or difficult labors, was probably quite widespread.85
Rituals Following Birth
79
Dioskourides De Materia Medica 5.142.

Soranus 1, 63, 47.16.
81
Mul. 1, 60, 50.8 120.17; Mul. 1, 74, 50.8 viii 154.19; Nat. Mul. 9, L vii 324.15.
82
Theophrastus, HP ix 9.3.
83
Lloyd-Jones 1983, p. 129.
84
For the importance of amulets during childbirth in early modern Europe, see Glis 1991, pp. 115-117.
Birth charms are listed among other important birthing paraphernalia in the estate inventories of some
wealthy Renaissance families in Italy. For these, see Musacchio 1999, pp. 8, 13, 125, 144.
85
Soranus III.42.
80
88
In ancient Greece, as in many cultures, the rituals performed after birth had two
important functions: to purify the participants of the pollution associated with birth,
and to mark the successful (re)entry of both mother and child into society. Since many
of the rituals performed after birth contain elements of both purification rituals and rites
of incorporation, my discussion of them follows the chronological order in which the
rituals were celebrated.
Ritual Bath
After the birth, both mother and infant were given a bath, an action that was
both practical and religiously significant.86 The ritual bathing of the infant after birth is
well known from ancient literary sources. Aristophanes humorously describes one
character as not having had a bath since his birth.87 This ritual bath is also described in
various birth stories of the gods. Pausanias mentions that a river in Arcadia was named
the bathing river after the ritual bath of Zeus after his birth.88 It is interesting to note
that this ritual appears to have served not as a rite of purification, since the bath had no
effect on the state of pollution brought upon the household by the birth, but rather as a
rite of incorporation.89 The bathing of the infant immediately after birth may have
constituted an initial (and unofficial) acceptance of the child, at least on the part of the
mother. In Euripides Ion, Creusa describes in detail the process of abandoning her
illegitimate newborn son:
I fitted around you these baby-clothes, the work of my flying shuttle, done
when I was a girl, in secret from my mother. I did not offer you milk, nor a
86
In ancient Greece, it appears that this bath occurred not long after birth; in some cultures, the bath of
mother and infant is delayed until several days after the birth. See, for instance, Blunt 1878, pp. 7-9.
87
Aristophanes, Plut. 80.
88
Pausanias 8.28.2. For other ritual baths of divine infants, see: Homeric Hymn to Apollo 120-121;
Callimachus Jov. 14-16; Pausanias 8.41.2-3.
89
Parker 1983, p. 51.
89
mother's nourishment from the breast, nor did I wash you; you were cast
out on the deserted cave, a victim of the beaks of birds, and a feast for
Hades.90
In this passage, the absence of the bath is indicative of the mothers rejection of
the child; although Creusa wraps the infant in a cloth, she denies her son both
food and the symbol of acceptance that the bath represents.
Period of Confinement after Birth

The period immediately after birth was considered a time of ritual impurity for
the new mother, and during this time her activities and contact with others were
limited.91 It is likely that, in Greece, this period included a time of greater impurity
lasting a week to ten days, during which the mother and infant were confined indoors,
and then a time of lesser impurity and seclusion, lasting approximately thirty to forty
days, in which restrictions were not as severe.92 This period of seclusion after birth has
numerous parallels in other cultures. Indeed, it appears to be a nearly universal
practice, often seen as a means of confining and limiting the spread of pollution that the
new mother herself causes to household items and other people.93 Ethnographic
90
Euripides, Ion, 1489-1496. Translation by Robert Potter.

For the belief in the ritual impurity of birth, see above, pp. 21-22.
92
Although in ancient Greece the period of true impurity appears to have lasted approximately ten days
after birth, ancient medical and scientific writers refer to an extended period of purification lasting
around thirty to forty days. For the initial period of ritual uncleanliness, see above, pp. 21-22. For the
extended period of katharsis, see Hippocrates, Nat. Puer. 18 = Mul. 72; Aristotle, Hist. An. 7.3 583a 30-32.
Parker suggests that these two phases of impurity reflect the different degrees to which lochial blood was
discharged. See Parker 1983, p. 55 and n. 87.
93
Lefber and Voorhoeve 1998, p. 48; Gross 1987; Hartland 1908; Modi 1908, p. 661. A similar practice of
isolation, in which the new mother is regarded as being in a state of extreme pollution for the first few
days after birth and in a state of lesser impurity for roughly the next month, is found in modern Hindu
birth customs and in Biblical Jewish customs. For the Hindu rituals, see Jacobsen 1980, pp. 84-85 and p.
90; for ancient Jewish customs see: Leviticus 12; Gaster 1908, p. 653. In the southeastern United States
even in the 1970s, women were confined to bed for seven or more days after birth. See Dougherty 1978,
pp. 161-2.
91
90
parallels show that during the extended period of confinement, new mothers are often
forbidden to cook or prepare food since they are still considered spiritually polluting.94
This practice may be (and often has been) explained as having either a religious
or a superstitious basis. In terms of religious rationale, the period of seclusion is a way
to mark an important transitional phase within the lives of both mother and child.95 As
with most rites of passage, the transition from one status to another is signaled by a
period in which the participant belongs to neither, and is therefore excluded from the
activities of normal life. The transition of the infant from one world to another would
require exactly this process of initial exclusion, followed by rituals intended to integrate
the child fully into the society of this world. Regarding superstitious beliefs, the period
of isolation after birth is often seen as a means of protecting mother and child from
dangerous outside influences such as evil spirits or the potentially dangerous envy of
neighbors (i.e. the evil eye). These dangers are considered more pronounced for new
mothers and their infants precisely because they are in a period of transition.96
At the root of these beliefs, however, there may lie a practical reason for this
custom. The belief in the spiritual vulnerability of mother and child may reflect the very
real physical vulnerability that both experience after birth. The days immediately
following birth are a time in which the immune system of both mother and child is
weakened.97 This is the period, too, when the mortality rate for both mother and child
94
Lefber and Voorhoeve 1998, pp. 51-52; Jacobson 1980, p. 85.

For an excellent discussion linking the ancient Greek perception of pollution at birth and death with
transitional rites of passage, see Parker 1983, pp. 59-63.
96
For the ancient Greek belief in the vulnerability of pregnant women, new mothers, and infants to such
spiritually dangerous forces, see above, pp. 18-21. Many modern cultures still explain this period of
isolation after birth in terms of protecting mother and infant from demons or dangerous spirits. See, for
example, Lefber and Voorhoeve 1998, pp. 51-52. For modern Greek beliefs regarding the vulnerability of
the lechona or new mother, see Blum and Blum 1970.
97
For high mortality rate during the neonatal period (the first month after birth), see Hart 1998, p. 218;
Chidambaram, McDonald, and Bracher 1985.
95
91
are highest.98 Concerning the medical risks of new mothers and newborns, Lefber and
Voorhoeve state:
The universal indigenous custom of keeping mother and child indoors is
in accordance with the great vulnerability of both. The first week is the
period in which the umbilical cord is falling off. (The average time of this
process is 6 days.) In these days, the infant mortality is the highest of the
first year. Just after one week there is any hope that the infant may
survive. A period of 40 days of seclusion is the period necessary for the
uterus to recover.99
It is probably no accident that the first week to ten days after birth, which is is by far the
most critical period for the health of both mother and child, coincides with the time of
greatest spiritual impurity, in which mother and child were confined to the house and
in which the number of visitors was greatly restricted. The extended period of
restriction, lasting forty days, also coincides neatly with the medical need for the
mother's body to rest and recuperate. Thus, whether explicitly acknowledged or not,
the practice of ritual isolation of the mother and child after birth served as a means of
addressing concerns about their safety and provided them with the best conditions to
help them overcome very real physical dangers. Parker eloquently expressed this idea,
stating that the pollution of birth which led to the establishment of this period of
separation in Greece "would thus have helped to define and so limit a period of danger
and anxiety; the ceremony ending it would be a ritual expression of the hope that the
child, having surmounted the physical dangers, now belonged to this world and would
live on."100
Purification Rites
98
A fact that was recognized in antiquity. See: Arist. Hist. An. 588a 8-10.
Lefber and Voorhoeve 1998, pp. 51.
100
Parker 1983, p. 65.
99
92
After the period of seclusion had ended, purification rites were conducted to
cleanse the new mother and the household of the spiritual impurity of birth. Our
knowledge of these rites in ancient Greece is poor, but there is limited evidence to
suggest that dog sacrifices were occasionally made as a means of purification after the
birth. Dog sacrifices were especially common to Hekate because of her role as a
chthonic deity.101 The offering of a dog sacrifice, both to Hekate and to other divinities,
is known to have been used as a means of purification from all sorts of pollution.102
From a passage in Plutarch's Moralia, it appears that this applied to the pollution of
birth as well. In questioning why the Romans perform a dog sacrifice to the goddess
Geneta Mana, Plutarch speculates that the reason for this sacrifice was that "Geneta is a
spirit concerned with the generation and birth of beings that perish".103 He backs up this
speculation in two ways: he tries to show that the name of the goddess is connected
with birth, and then he notices a similar custom in Greece: "Accordingly, just as the
Greeks sacrifice a bitch to Hecate, even so do the Romans offer the same sacrifice to
Geneta on behalf of the members of their household." This passage, though late, seems
to suggest that in Greece, there existed a custom of sacrificing a dog to Hekate in
connection with childbirth, and that the sacrifice may well have been connected with
the purification of the house after it had been polluted by birth. As a goddess connected
both with childbirth and with rites that cleanse pollution of all sorts, Hekate was an
ideal recipient for rituals performed to cleanse the household of the ritual pollution of
101
Dog sacrifices to Hekate: Plutarch, Quaest. Rom. 68; Pausanias 3.14.9. See also Scholz 1937, pp. 40-43;
Day 1984, p. 27 and n. 25.
102
Dog sacrifice as a means of purification: Plutarch, Quaest. Rom. 68; Theophrastus, Char.16.13; Scholz
1937, pp.16-18. Most recently, Susan Rotroff (1988) has suggested that the numerous dog bones
discovered along with the skeletons of several neonates within a Classical well in the Athenian Agora
were deposited there in connection with a purification rite.
103
93
birth.104 It has even been suggested that dog burials were performed in connection with
purification rites for women who died in childbirth.105
Amphidromia and Dekate

The amphidromia, which took place on either the fifth or seventh day after birth,
marked the infants formal acceptance into the household.106 Although the details of this
ritual remain unclear, the primary event seems to have consisted of the head of the
household, usually the child's father, carrying the newborn infant around the hearth.
The main purpose of the ritual was to introduce the child to the hearth as the ritual
center of the household.107 Around the same time as the amphidromia, the family
announced the birth of the child publicly by decorating the door with wreaths and
branches adorned with wool.108
Parker convincingly suggests that a secondary purpose of the amphidromia was to
purify the child from the pollution of birth.109 There is scattered evidence to link the
amphidromia with purification of the household in general. According to Golden,
attendance at the amphidromia was limited to those immediate relatives who had
104
For Hekate's connection with birth in general, see pp. 32-33.

This argument made for a dog burial associated with a Geometric grave of a woman buried on the
Athenian Areopagus. See Smithson 1974.
106
For the amphidromia, see: Isaeus, De Pyrrhi Hered. 30; Deubner 1952. The formal acceptance of the
infant by the father is well known from other ancient cultures. For the Hittite custom of placing the
newborn on the fathers lap, see Hoffner 1969, p. 201 and n. 27; for the Roman practice of the father lifting
child from floor, see Soranus 2.10. A similar custom existed among Teutonic peoples. See Mogk 1908.
107
Some scholars point to the ritual of the katachysmata, which occurred at the hearth, and which involved
the pouring of fruits and nuts over the heads of a newly married couple and of newly bought slaves, as a
similar ritual of introduction into the household. On the katachysmata, see Oakley and Sinos 1993, p. 34.
108
Hesychius notes that this is a particularly Attic custom. Hesychius s. v. stevfanon ejkfevrein. See also
Hesychius s.v. koruqaliva and Lucian, Dial. Meret. 2.3.
109
Parker 1983, p. 51. On the use of fire and torches in childbirth rituals and their possible association
with purification, see: Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 81-86; Kontoleon 1961-62. Purification by torches is not
unknown in other spheres of Greek religion; for purification by torches in the Eleusinian mysteries, see
Burkert 1985, p. 78. Fire and smoke have been used as a source of purification after childbirth in other
cultures as well. See Lefber and Voorhoeve 1998, p. 43.
105
94
attended the birth.110 The reason for the limited attendance may well have had to do
with the ritual impurity of the household, since, according to some ancient sources, the
rite of the amphidromia served to purify the women who had assisted at the birth.111 The
amphidromia coincided with the end of the initial period of ritual impurity for the
mother.
The infant was sometimes named during the amphidromia, as many female
children and the children of poorer families often were. Wealthier families, however,
frequently chose to name their sons during a separate ceremony, the dekate, on the tenth
day after birth.112 An animal sacrifice was made to the gods as part of the dekate. This
sacrifice, performed by the father in a public sanctuary, would more than likely have
excluded the mother and infant, who continued to remain at home at this time.
Euripides Ion gives a sense of how the dekate would have been performed, despite the
unusual circumstances. When Xuthus learns from the Delphic oracle that Ion is his
illegitimate son, his first action is to perform the sacrifice that he should have performed
in honor of Ions birth.113 The offering he presents to the gods involves both an animal
sacrifice and a pelanon, a cake sacrifice. It is immediately followed by an elaborate
feast.114 The celebration offered by well-to-do families on the tenth day after birth was
commonplace in Athens, and appears in literature as a fairly boisterous and festive
event.115 This celebration most likely marked the end of the new mothers period of
intense ritual impurity, and served as a way to introduce the infant as a member of the
wider community.
110
Golden 1990, p. 23.

Scholiast on Plato Tht. 160e, Suda s.v. jAmfidrovmia. See also Parker 1983, p. 51 n. 72 for conflicting
evidence on this point.
112
The dekate is mentioned in Demosthenes, 39.20.
113
Euripides, Ion, 650-653.
114
For a description of the preparations of the feast, see Euripides, Ion, 1122-1176.
115
Aristophanes, Av., 494-495; Isaeus, 3.69-71.
111
95
Dedication of Childbirth Votives as Thank Offerings

The completion of the series of rituals surrounding childbirth was marked with
the dedication of a votive in thanks to the deity who helped. These votive offerings,
called pausotokeia in at least one inscription, were most likely dedicated after the
extended period of isolation since, immediately after birth, the mother and infant were
both considered spiritually impure and were confined to the home.116 If the child
survived the first forty days after birth, the mother would then dedicate her votive
offering in the sanctuary.117
Indeed, the trip to the sanctuary to dedicate a childbirth votive is likely to have
been the first public appearance made by the mother after birth. The dedication of a
votive offering, then, may well have served as the public act that signalled to the
community the end of the extended period of ritual impurity after birth, and may have
marked the full assimilation of both the mother and child back into society.118
Presentation of the Child to the Gods

That children were presented to the gods in an official manner is quite likely,
despite the general lack of information that we have for this event.119 The earliest years
of a childs life were punctuated with rituals and ceremonies in which the child was
116
The term pausotokeia is known from a single inscription from Gonnoi (Gonnoi II, no. 175 bis). For a
discussion of the word, see Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 112 n. 300.
117
It is at the end of the forty-day period of isolation that the new mother in some regions of China first
visits the temple and offers incense to thank the gods for their assistance in the safe delivery. See Walshe
1908, p. 646. In ancient Jewish customs, too, the new mother first visited the temple to present her
offerings after the extended period of impurity. See Leviticus 12.
118
On the fortieth day festival, see Censorinus, De die nat. 11.7. Rituals to commemorate the end of
impurity in other cultures, such as the visit to the communal well performed by Hindu women in India,
also involve the first public appearance of the mother after birth. See Jacobsen 1980, p. 90.
119
A small number of reliefs depict a child or group of children at the knee of a large seated figure. These
reliefs were originally thought to be tomb markers for the graves of children. Kontoleon (1970, pp. 1-21),
96
officially recognized within important social and political spheres. Just a few days after
birth, the rite of the amphidromia marked the acceptance of the child by the father and
the official welcoming of the child as a member of the family. This formal recognition
was made public at ten days after birth during the celebration of the dekate, when male
children of wealthy families were given their namesnames that, more often than not,
reflected their familial ties.120 Other rituals introduced the child to important social and
political groups. In Athens, there were separate official ceremonies in which the child
was welcomed as a new member into the genos and into the phratry. Although the exact
age at which a person underwent these ceremonies is uncertain, what little evidence
there is suggests that it was quite early, probably during the first year of life.121
From the evidence above, it is clear that the newborn child was systematically
introduced to all important members and spheres of the community. We may surmise
that a similar ceremony (or series of ceremonies) served to introduce the newborn to the
gods as well. It would be important for families to do this quite early in the childs life
for two reasons. First, such a ceremony would serve to identify the child as a legitimate
member of the family before the gods in much the same way that bringing them before
the genos and the phratry allowed them to be recognized as legitimate members of the
community. It would be ideal to perform such a ceremony early in life, since young
children from an early age attended sacrifices and participated in religious
however, has reinterpreted them as votives commemorating the childs presentation to the gods. For a
votive relief that may well depict this ritual, see Appendix I, 3.13.
120
Golden 1990, pp. 24-25. It appears that male children tended to be given names that linked them to
their fathers family more often than female children.
121
Golden suggests that introduction to the genos occurred soon after birth. There appear to have been
three ceremonies at which a person was brought before the members of the phratry in conjunction with
the annual celebration of the Apaturia. The first of these most likely occurred during infancy, presumably
at the first celebration of the Apaturia after the birth. It is possible, as Golden (1990, p. 25-27) suggests, that
this earliest introduction to the genos was an optional ceremony performed by wealthier families. Golden.
The age at which children were introduced to the phratry is unclear. Some sources indicate that this
occurred in infancy; others give a later age. For these, see Golden 1990, p. 190, n. 12.
97
ceremonies.122 Second, and perhaps more importantly, an introduction ceremony

performed shortly after birth would allow parents to place the newborn child under the
care of gods who could protect them during the dangerous period of infancy and early
childhood.123 More often than not, these gods would be the very same divinities who
had presided over the birth itself.
Most childbirth divinities also had a kourotrophic function that, of course,
encouraged a long-standing and personal relationship between the divinity and the
child. 124 It is indeed quite possible that the personal relationship that one had with the
gods and goddesses who helped in ones birth could extend throughout ones youth,
and even into early adulthood. This is suggested by a Classical marble relief dedicated
for a musical victory in Miletus.125 The relief depicts the dedicant and four divinities.
The names of the divinities are inscribed: Kourotrophos, Leto, Apollo, and Artemis. As
Price notes, all four of these divinities have kourotrophic aspects, and one must assume
that the dedicant attributed his musical victory to the continued help of these divinities,
who had assisted in his birth and upbringing.126 The same point is brought home even
more clearly by an epigram from the Palatine Anthology, describing the continued
relationship that one had with the divinities that watched over birth:
On the long-desired morn we offer this sacrifice to Zeus Teleius
and Artemis who soothes the pangs of child-bed. For to them did my
122
Numerous reliefs depict children of all ages present at sacrifices performed by their parents. In
addition, certain rituals focused on very young children as the primary participants. In Athens, for
example, during the month Anthesterion, three-year old children observed a special ceremony in which
they were crowned with wreaths of flowers. For a recent discussion of this rite, see Hamilton 1991, pp. 7173. For a general discussion of childrens participation in religious events, see Golden 1990, pp. 30-32.
123
In some modern Hindu villages, where there are similar beliefs in the extreme vulnerability of infants
and children to both physical and spiritual dangers, children are presented to the gods at the time when
the child receives the first haircut, usually within the first year or two of life. See Jacobsen 1980, p. 91.
124
This fact is made clear by the list of divinities enumerated on the Xenocratia relief in the National
Museum (NM 2756). This relief was dedicated by a grateful mother to numerous deities who were
worshipped both as gods of childbirth and as kourotrophoi to thank them for the upbringing and
education of her child. For this relief, see IG II2 4548; Walter 1937.
125
For this relief, see Price 1978, p. 61 no. 657.
126
Price 1978, p. 157.
98
brother while yet beardless vow to offer the first spring-bloom that clothes
the cheeks of young men. Accept it, ye gods, and from this season of his
tender beard lead Eucleides straight on to the season of grey hairs.127
It is likely that the presentation of the newborn child to the gods was the first
public ceremony of the infant outside of the home, coinciding with the mother's full reassimilation back into society and her offering of a childbirth votive or sacrifice in
thanks.128 This visit to the sanctuary would occur after the time of confinement,
approximately forty days after birth, when the child was already several weeks old and
was presumably strong enough to handle such an outing. The fortieth-day period seems
to have been an important milestone in the life of the new child, for it was around this
time, according to Soranus, that women removed the swaddling clothes used on
newborn children.129
Summary
In addition to the many private rituals that occurred within the home or in
informal sacred spaces (such as sacred springs), it is clear from the discussion above
that women visited public sanctuaries throughout all of the major phases of the
reproductive cycle. It was common for those seeking to have children to go to a
sanctuary to request fertility from the gods. During pregnancy, too, women made
pilgrimages to certain public shrines with the intention of obtaining divine protection.
After the period of confinement, the new mother returned to the sanctuary in order to
127
Anth. Pal. 6.242.

The presentation of a child to the gods is a common feature of childbirth rituals that appears
throughout many parts of the world. Although the time and manner in which the child is presented often
varies depending on cultural and religious customs, it is not uncommon for the presentation of the child
to occur when the forty days of isolation for the mother have ended. See Hartland 1908, pp. 640-641.
128
99
thank the appropriate deities for their assistance. This final visit most likely included a
small ritual in which the newborn was formally introduced to the gods and placed
under their continued protection, as well as the mother's dedication of a gift to the gods
as thank offerings for successful birth. These offerings, the only tangible remains of this
complex pattern of childbirth ritual, are examined in depth in the following chapter.
129
Soranus, Gynec. 2.42.111. The practice of swaddling newborns appears to be connected to the increased
risks of infant mortality during the neonatal period. For the possibility that swaddling clothes were used
as a means of ritual protection against evil spirits, see Adamson 1985; Vukanovic 1980.
100
Chapter III: Votives

In the preceeding chapter I examined the practice of dedicating votive offerings
to the gods as one of the key rituals performed in association with the birth of a child.
This chapter seeks to define the types of objects that were dedicated for this purpose. I
have established several criteria by which childbirth votives may be identified. These
are:
1) The iconography of the object explicitly suggests that it was connected with
fertility or the desire for children. An example of this would be a figurine that clearly
represents pregnancy or the act of childbirth.
2) The presence of a dedicatory inscription that suggests that the object was
given to a divinity for reproductive purposes. Among the inscriptions included are
those that indicate that the object was dedicated to a childbirth divinity and those that
specifically state that the purpose of dedication is connected with fertility or children.
3) A context that suggests that an object may have been dedicated for childbirth.
This includes objects that were excavated in a sanctuary of a childbirth divinity and
objects that are recorded in the inventory inscriptions of a childbirth sanctuary.
4) Additional evidence that suggests that a certain type of object may have been
dedicated as a childbirth votive, such as literary or epigraphical sources that mention
childbirth dedications. Evidence of this sort is particularly useful in reconstructing
childbirth votives that leave little or no trace in the archaeological record, such as
clothing, gifts of food, and locks of hair.
Naturally, the application of these criteria has limitations. I have tried to take
into consideration the complexities of the evidence in order to be as accurate in my
interpretation as possible. Whenever the evidence allows, I use multiple criteria for
determining childbirth votive status. I have also considered alternative interpretations
101
of the objects, whenever feasible.

What follows is a discussion of the various objects that were likely to have been
dedicated as childbirth votives. Unlike previous studies, I have chosen to organize this
discussion by artifact type rather than by geographical location, since the data is widely
scattered over broad geographical and temporal boundaries, and our knowledge of the
childbirth practices of any one place is limited.2 Grouping the evidence by type has the
added advantage of allowing one to ask different questions of the data particularly,
to explore issues of iconography and representation. It also encourages the comparison
of similar material from different areas.
My goal is not to provide a comprehensive list of all known examples of
childbirth votives. Given the constantly growing corpus of excavated material
througout the Greek world, such a list would not only be extremely difficult to compile,
but would quickly become outdated as current excavations bring to light new finds. The
purpose of this chapter, rather, is to provide a detailed analysis of the types of objects
used as childbirth votives. For each artifact type, I provide a physical description, an
overview of where examples have been found, and an examination of the evidence that
suggests their use as childbirth votives. I have provided a full catalog (Appendix I) for
only a few types of artifacts, in order to facilitate discussion of those classes of artifacts
that have not been well studied in the past or whose assessment as childbirth votives
required a detailed iconographical analysis of individual examples. I have included in
my discussion both those types that have been identified as childbirth votives in
previous scholarship and those whose use as childbirth votives are newly identified
here.
Pingiatoglu 1981; Baur 1902.
102
Anatomical Votives
Scholars have long acknowledged that anatomical votives, replicas of parts of the
human anatomy that were usually dedicated for healing, present particularly
challenging difficulties in interpretation.3 Standardized representations of body parts
make the nature of the physical ailment obscure; indeed it is often not even possible to
determine whether the problem indicated was of an internal or an external nature.
Unlike their Italic counterparts, Greek anatomical votives
almost never portray internal organs; one must assume that
internal problems were represented in the votives by their
corresponding external views.4 Only rarely do the votives
make allusions to the physical problems themselves, either in
5
the image or in an accompanying inscription. Inscriptions,
Fig. 1
when present at all, are nearly always of a cursory nature that

provides little assistance in interpreting the reason behind the dedication.
Female anatomical votives those representing either the breasts or female
genitalia present even further complications because of the possibility that they may
refer to reproduction rather than to an ailment or problem. Most scholars who have
examined this type of votive have acknowledged the plethora of interpretations that
could be applied to them.6 This section of my dissertation discusses the known
3
Girardon (1993, p. 31) provides a concise summary of some of the scholarly views on anatomical votives
and their meaning expressed in the scholarship of the last century.
4
Exceptions include several possible uteri included in Appendix I (1.15-1.17).
5
Exceptions to this rule do exist. Many votives portraying male genitalia show evidence of phimosis. See,
for example, Girardon 1993, p. 34. Occasionally superficial conditions, such as warts or varicose veins, are
also represented.
6
The breasts, in particular, are open to numerous interpretations. Among those suggested are that they
were a thank offering for a cure from a breast disease, a plea for motherhood, or a request for increased
milk-flow. Girardon (1993, p. 34) acknowledges all three possibilities. Aleshire (1989, p. 41) suggests that
they were more likely to represent a desire for fertility or milk rather than gratitude for a cure. Turfa
(1994, p. 224) assumes that the collection of breast votives at Egnazia were probably intended to ensure
lactation. Female genitalia might just as easily represent pleas for pregnancy or thanks for successful birth
as for a cure. Each of these interpretations is discussed more fully below.
103
examples of female anatomical votives dedicated in the Greek world, with the intention
of clarifying, if not resolving, the difficulties in interpreting this class of artifact. In
particular, it explores the question of whether they could have been dedicated for
7
reasons related to fertility and childbirth.
Female anatomical votives were a popular form of dedication throughout the

Greek world.8 They are found over a wide geographical area, including the Greek
mainland, the islands, Cyprus, and Asia Minor. They range in date from the 8th or 7th
century B.C. to the 3rd century A.C., with the majority falling in the late Classical,
9
Hellenistic, and Roman periods. Of the eighty-five examples of female anatomical

votives included in my study, twenty-one are not preserved archaeologically, but are
10
recorded in sanctuary inventory lists.
The small number of preserved examples most certainly does not present an
accurate picture of the practice of dedicating these objects. Many more female
anatomical votives must have been dedicated throughout the Greek world in antiquity;
unfortunately, it is extremely difficult to reconstruct this practice with any degree of
accuracy due to the poor survival rate of the artifacts themselves, and to inconsistent
recording methods. Many dedications of this type made out of finer materials, such as
gold and silver, were undoubtedly melted down and reused. We get a glimpse of this
11
practice in certain temple inventory records. During periodic cleanings of the

sanctuaries, when many votives were melted down for reuse or otherwise disposed to
Baur (1902, pp. 55-66) interprets female anatomical votives in this way. His discussion of these votives is
extremely valuable.
8
For a recent and very thorough discussion of anatomical votives in general, see Forsn 1996a.
9
A possible vulva from the sanctuary of Artemis at Ephesus dates as early as the 8th or 7th century B.C.
(1.6). A pair of female breasts from Katakekaumene (1.51) was dated by Diakonoff (1979, p. 152 no. 33) to
c. 210-240A.C. Eighteen female anatomical votives can be dated to the 4th-3rd centuries B.C.; two are from
the 3rd-2nd centuries B.C.; twenty-one fall in the period of the 1st -3rd centuries A.C. Only one (1.6) may be
attributed to the Archaic period; six date to the Classical period (5th-4th centuries B.C.).
10
Those recorded in inscriptions include 1.17, 1.22, 1.23, and 1.38.
11
IG VII 303 is a decree that regulated the reuse of gold and silver offerings; among the gifts included in
the list are two single female breasts (1.38).
104
make room for new votives, the priests sometimes noted the dedicant and dedication
and displayed these lists in the sanctuary in place of the original offerings. Recording
practices varied from region to region; undoubtedly one of the reasons why so many of
these votives are noted in Attic inscriptions is that the Athenians had a tendency to
12
record everything on stone.
In other regions where the priests were less scrupulous in
their record-keeping or where the records were kept on perishable material, no

evidence of these dedications survives. Out of the many metal examples that may have
been dedicated, only one gold example has survived (1.6).
Further complications arise from modern recording methods. In the final
excavation report at the Corinthian Asklepieion, Roebuck lists twelve female anatomical
13
votives. This collection may represent only a fraction of the actual number of these
votives dedicated at that sanctuary, however, for his catalog includes only the best14
preserved examples. A preliminary report suggests a much higher number.
Anatomical Votives Dedicated for Healing

In interpreting the reason behind the dedication of these votives, it is necessary
to rely heavily upon context. Most of the female anatomical votives were found in the
sanctuaries of healing divinities. Asklepios received a total of thirty-nine votives over
three times as many votives as any other divinity.15 The next most frequent is Zeus
Hypsistos, a god whose main function, at least at Athens, appears to have been that of a
16
healer. Amphiarios and Amynos, too, were heroes known for their healing powers.
12
Seventeen of the twenty-one epigraphical records for female anatomical votives are Athenian.
Corinth XIV, pp. 121-122.
14
According to de Waele (1933, p. 443): we found the remains of some sixty-five female breasts, offered
singly or in pairs...
15
1.1, 1.2, 1.15, 1.16, 1.18-1.37.
16
1.3, 1.4, 1.40-1.47. In addition to female anatomical votives, in his sanctuary at Athens he received
votives depicting the lower part of a face, part of a shoulder (or thigh?), a pair of thighs, a right foot, a
relief of footprints, and three pairs of eyes. Furthermore, as van Straten (1981, p. 117) points out, the word
qerapeuqei`sa appears in one votive inscription to this god. In Cyprus, Zeus also received anatomical
votives, including a pair of eyes and three plaques with phalloi. See Cook 1940, p. 879 no. 15. The cult of
13
105
Likewise, both Men and Artemis Anaetis (or sometimes simply Anaetis) seem to have
17
acted as healing divinities.
In all, over half of these votives were dedicated in
sanctuaries of healing gods.

The anatomical votives dedicated in the sanctuaries of healing divinities could
represent a host of illnesses and ailments. Diseases of the external genitalia are
described in the Hippocratic corpus and other literature, including likely cases of
candidiasis, herpes, lymphogranuloma venereum, puerperal ulcers, condylomas,
urogenital tuberculosis, possible cancer of the uterus, and numerous types of sexually
18
transmitted diseases. Nor can we be certain

that a votive depicting an external view of
female genitalia (Fig. 1) did not in fact refer
to difficulties in the urinary tract or even the
19
bladder.
The votives of female breasts (Fig. 2)

could likewise reflect physical problems or
Fig. 2
conditions. The most serious of these, of
course, is breast cancer. Although ancient societies are thought, on the whole, to have
had fewer cases of cancer than modern societies, there is evidence that the disease was
20
known in ancient Greece. The Hippocratic corpus provides a succinct account of one
womans death as a result of breast cancer:
In a woman, at Abdera, a carcinoma developed on the breast; its
appearance was so: a bloody ikhor flowed from the nipple; once the
Zeus Hypsistos in general seems to have been a fairly late phenomenon; the earliest dedications date to
the 2nd century B.C. For the late date of the introduction of the cult at Athens, see Forsn 1996, pp. 47-56.
17
Diakonoff 1979, pp. 161-162.
18
Grmek 1989, pp. 148-151.
19
Aleshire (1989, p. 41) suggests that votives of male genitalia may have in fact been dedicated for bladder
stones.
20
For a dicussion of cancer in antiquity and statistics for frequency of cases, see Grmek 1989, p. 72.
Evidence of breast cancer in antiquity: Hippocrates, De mul. II, 133; Gland. 17.
106
21
flow stopped, she died.
It is thought that certain works of art from antiquity actually depict the effects of breast
cancer.
22
In addition to cancer, women may well have suffered from cases of mastitis
23
and infection of the mammary glands.
Given the wide range of possible problems for which the female anatomical
votives could have been given, it is worthwhile to examine the evidence for indications
that these votives were, in fact, dedicated for cures. Several votive stelae dedicated to
Anaetis that have reliefs depicting various parts of the body are helpful. Unlike most
anatomical votives, these late stelae explicitly state in their dedicatory inscriptions the
reason for the gift. One stele indicates, for example, that Meltine had problems with her
24
feet; another records that Stratonike appealed to the goddess because of her eyes. In
one instance, it is possible to determine that a stele depicting female breasts was
dedicated in thanks for a cure rather than in connection with fertility or childbirth.
Alexandra set up her stele to Artemis Anaeitis and Men Tiamou specifying, in words
and in illustration, that it was for her breasts (1.51: uJpe;r twvn mastwvn ).
Less certain is the interpretation of another stele dedicated to Anaeitis and Men
(1.50). This stele is of the type known as confession stelae. In such cases, the dedicant
attributed his physical affliction to the god as an act of punishment for some
impropriety he had committed. The ailment was thought to last until the victim
confessed his guilt and dedicated a stele that acknowledged both his wrongdoing and
25
the punishment justly given to him by the god.

21
This stele is an unusual example, in
Epidemics 7.116. Translation from Littr, V, 462. A parallel account may be found in Epidemics 5.101
(Littr, V, 258). Discussion of the diagnosis of this case and of breast cancer in antiquity may be found in
Grmek 1989, p. 350 and his citations in n. 25.
22
Grmek 1989, p. 72 n. 95.
23
Herodotus 3.133 records the case of Queen Atossa, wife of Darius, who suffered an ailment of the
breasts. Some modern scholars have diagnosed her condition as breast cancer; others argue for mastitis.
See Grmek 1989, p. 351 and n. 28.
24
Diakonoff 1979, nos. 28 and 7.
25
Confession stelae were common votives for the goddess Anaeitis. For other examples, see Diakonoff
107
that it was erected collectively by several members of two different families rather than
by an individual. The reliefs on the stele bear witness to the various problems that they
felt were called down upon them by the divinities: a leg, a pair of breasts, and a pair of
eyes. While it is likely that the breasts depicted on this stele referred to a physical
problem of the breasts themselves, we cannot rule out the possibility that they
symbolized some problem pertaining to fertility. Such a symbol could conceivably refer
to a physical problem such as infertility, an unsuccessful childbirth, or the birth of a
malformed child. Indeed, the last, the birth of monstrous children and animals, was
26
often regarded as a punishment from the gods. In such a light, the fact that these
families felt compelled to erect this stele not only for themselves but on behalf of their
children and livestock (uJpe;r tevknwn kai; qremmavtwn e[sthsan) takes on new meaning. It is
tempting to speculate that occurances of abnormalities in the birth of children and/or
livestock, coupled with other more common physical complaints in various members,
led them to conclude that they were being punished by the gods for some transgression.
Another votive depicting female breasts (1.63) may possibly refer to the healing
of a tumor. On the plaque just below the breasts is a relief of a large, grape-like
protrusion that may possibly represent a tumorous growth.
27
Unfortunately, the
28
interpretation cannot be certain; it could also possibly represent an internal organ.
Most of the other votives found in sanctuaries of healing gods are remarkably
unhelpful. Of the many dedications found in sanctuaries of Asklepios, none provide
concrete proof that they were offered for a cure. The preponderance of female
anatomical votives dedicated to Zeus Hypsistos at Athens suggests that the god was
worshipped primarily by female devotees who sought the gods aid in gynaecological
1979, pp. 162-163.

26
This particular punishment was often included in self-imprecating oaths. See Strubbe 1991; Aubert
1989, pp. 440-441.
27
Hollnder 1912, p. 300.
28
Italic anatomical votives frequently depict internal organs in such a manner. See Turfa 1994.
108
issues, but whether those issues involved healing or fertility is not discernable in the
archaeological remains.
The votives dedicated in sanctuaries of female divinities not typically associated
with healing, are in fact, not much more helpful. Artemis seems to have received only
scattered offerings of female anatomical votives. I know of no large deposits of such
votives in any of her sanctuaries. The sanctuary of Artemis Kalliste in Athens received
the largest number of examples, totaling three: two vulvae and a pair of breasts.29 This
sanctuary was thought by the excavator to belong to Artemis as a protectress during
30
childbirth. His reason for interpreting it as such was based upon the female
anatomical votives themselves. Other examples include a single female breast dedicated
to Artemis Kolainis in Athens (1.51), and one dedicated to Artemis Dunatera on Crete
(1.55).
One other dedication to Artemis (1.6), a small gold votive possibly representing a
vulva, may have been given for a cure. It was found along with several other miniature
replicas of human members such as eyes, ears, a hand and arm, and a leg and foot. It is
important to note, however, that these anatomical reliefs are much smaller than most
later anatomical votives, and they were discovered along with numerous other gold
and silver foil representations, including various types of animal and plant motifs.
Some of the miniature anatomical representations found at this sanctuary even appear
31
to have been used as charms for jewelry.
Thus, the anatomical votives from this
sanctuary may represent a somewhat different tradition from most of the other
examples that are under consideration here.
Aphrodite, on the other hand, seems to have more frequently received female
anatomical votives, at least in one sanctuary in Attica. Although she rarely received
29
1.5, 1.53. It is important to note, however, that this sanctuary was never fully excavated.
Philadelpheus 1927, pp. 155-163.
31
Hogarth 1908, p. 107.
30
109
votives depicting breasts (only one example, 1.56), she received nearly half of all votives
representing female genitalia (8 out of 17 examples). This raises the possibility that
female anatomical votives could have yet another interpretation, unrelated to fertility or
healing: that votives of female genitalia refer to the loss of virginity and change of a
womans status upon marriage. Literary sources make it clear that women made
32
dedications in sanctuaries of Aphrodite at this stage in their lives.
One votive to Aprodite, found on the South slope of the Acropolis at Athens,
(1.56) may well have been connected with childbirth. The reading of the third line of the
2
inscription is debated. IG II 4729 records it as ---N ! ......NPWKOIS, an unintelligible

33
reading that van Straten accepts. Earlier scholars, however, restored the line to read --ni tovkoi". If this earlier restoration is correct, this would make the dedication of
anatomical votives for childbirth certain.
It is the votives dedicated to Eileithyia, however, that provide the most secure
evidence that female anatomical votives were at least sometimes dedicated for
pregnancy or childbirth. Eileithyia, whose primary function was to aid women in
labour and ease the pangs of childbirth, was commonly sought out to resolve issues of
fertility or to ensure a safe childbirth.34 The dedication of two pairs of female breasts
(1.57, 1.58) and one single breast (1.59) to Eileithyia in her sanctuary at Paros makes it
clear that on several occasions, it was felt appropriate to dedicate a female anatomical
votive for childbirth or pregnancy.
In attempting to understand the motivation behind the dedication of these
votives, one must take into account not only the reason for their dedication, but at what
point in the ritual they were given. Votive offerings could be dedicated either in
fulfillment of a vow made to the god as a thank offering for granting the worshippers
32
Pausanias 2.34.11; Anth. Pal. 6. 206-8. For the importance of Aphrodite in Greek weddings in general,
see Oakley and Sinos 1993.
33
van Straten 1981, p. 115.
34
See above, p. 31.
110
request, or at the time that the request itself was made, as a sort of additional incentive
35
for the god to grant the request.
It is difficult to know for certain when the anatomical
votives were dedicated. Some scholars argue that all anatomical votives should be
36
viewed as thank-offerings for cures, dedicated after the god had satisfied the prayer.
Others, such as Aleshire, believe that they were offered as prayers for fertility, and for
abundant milk supply rather than as thank offerings.37 If that is the case, then they
represent the hope expressed in the prayer rather than the fulfillment of it.
While it is clear that it was possible to offer the god gifts while praying for help,
the practice of vowing a gift to be given upon receipt of help seems to have been the
39
more common practice.38 Philostratus gives us an idea of the thinking behind this. He
describes an incident in which Apollonius noticed that lavish sacrifices and gifts were
being given to Asklepios by a visitor to the shrine. When he learned from the priest that
all of this was being done before the mans prayer had been granted, Apollonius is said
to have exclaimed, ...his very conduct in sacrificing on such a magnificent scale before
he has gained anything from the god is not that of a votary, but rather of a man who is
40
begging himself off from the penalty of some horrible and cruel deeds.
The
expectation, clearly, was that one would not normally give expensive gifts before the
prayer was answered; if one gave a gift beforehand at all, it was understood that it
should be just a small token gift to catch the gods attention.41
It may not be possible, given the available evidence, to determine what
35
For a detailed discussion of the ususal process of dedicating a votive, see van Straten 1981, pp. 65-74;
Burkert 1985, pp. 68-70.
36
Roebuck suggests that they were probably given as thank-offerings after a cure, citing at least one
clear example in which an anatomical votive was given as such (IG IV2, 440) and likening them in general
to the cure inscriptions discovered at Epidauros. See Corinth XIV, p. 117.
37
Aleshire 1989, p. 41; for an ethnographic parallel for the dedication of votive breasts, see Cassar 1964.
38
For the principle of reciprocity in the dedication of votives, see Bremmer 1998.
39
Philostratus, Vita Apollonii, I, 10.
40
Translation is that of Edelstein and Edelstein 1945, No. 517. For other examples of votives being given to
the god in fulfillment of a vow once the prayer has been answered, see Edelstein and Edelstein 1945, nos.
522, 523, and 537-41.
41
Parker 1998, pp. 118-121.
111
constituted a token gift, and what was considered worthy of an offering that fulfilled a
vow. Worshippers seem to have generally given on the basis of what they could afford
to give; thus, what to some might be a trifle to catch the gods attention might be more
42
expensive than others could afford to give at all.
Since the value of the object itself
gives no indication of whether it was offered as a prayer or as a thank-offering, we must

simply rely on the fact that votives were more commonly given to the gods after the
prayer had been granted than beforehand.
There is some evidence to suggest that this was indeed the case with at least one
female anatomical votive. A 4th century marble relief depicting female genitalia,
dedicated to Aphrodite in her sanctuary at Daphni (1.11), provides the typical statement
that the worshipper gave the object to Aphrodite, but adds, exceptionally, that passersby should praise the goddess. (ejpaivneiste oiJ pariovnte"). It seems clear that this is not an
object intended to cajole the goddess into helping the dedicant, but is rather one that
offers thanks and praise to Aphrodite for help already received.
Interpreting Votive Breasts

The identification of female anatomical votives as thank-offerings for healings
rests upon their similarity to other types of anatomical votives (and an assumed
similarity in purpose), and the frequency with which they appear in sanctuaries of
healing divinities. A few examples, discussed above, may with confidence be identified
as having been dedicated for healing purposes. The great majority, however, provide no
clues as to the purpose of their dedication.
Among the existing examples of female anatomical votives, breast votives
42
For the discrepancies in gift giving at sanctuaries, see Hesiod, Works and Days 336; Herondas 4. 20-21,
in which visitors to a sanctuary of Asklepios give a modest offering, and gape at the much more elaborate
dedications surrounding them. The same discrepancy can be felt in many excavated sanctuaries; it is not
uncommon to find extremely modest gifts such as spindlewhorls and poorly made terracotta figurines
alongside more elaborate offerings of statues, armor, and jewelry.
112
comprise the majority; over three times as many votive breasts as vulvae have been
found. Given the higher percentage of potential complications and problems associated
with the female genitourinary system, we would expect a much higher number of
votives depicting vulvae than breasts. The likelihood, therefore, that female anatomical
votives strictly refer to the healing of these parts of the body is quite low. We must
search for another explanation for their popularity.
I suggested above the possibility that votives of female genitalia dedicated to
Aphrodite may have served as symbolic representations of the important transition in
womens lives from virgin to non-virgin, from daughter to wife. The dedication of these
objects in a sanctuary of Aphrodite may have referred not to a physical ailment, but
instead to the hope, upon the change of status, for a happy married life and a successful
43
outcome of that union. A similar meaning may be attributed to at least some of the
votive breasts. In certain instances, the breasts depicted on the votives may have served
not to thank the god for healing that part of the body, but rather as a symbol of a change
in status, this time from the status of new bride to that of established wife and mother.44
In the three instances in which women dedicated anatomical votives to Eileithyia, the
votives depicted breasts, either singly or in pairs (1.57-1.59). It is quite likely, then, that
at least some anatomical votives of breasts were dedicated as thank offerings for a
successful birth, and may well mark the dedicants change in status from nymphe to
gyne. 45
The fact that many of the votive breasts were discovered in sanctuaries of healing
divinities does not invalidate the possibility of this interpretation of them.
It is unlikely that all votives dedicated in healing sanctuaries were dedicated for the
43
A successful marriage included not only a satisfactory marriage partner, but also the continuance of the
oikos through children. Gratitude to the gods for such success is expressed in Anth. Pal. 6, 59.
44
For the iconography of bared breasts in connection with Aphrodite on wedding vases, see Oakley and
Sinos 1993, p. 40.
45
For the social importance of these categories in Greek society, see above, p. 13.
113
46
purposes of healing.
In fact, there is strong evidence that Asklepios was addressed in

47
requests for fertility or for problems involving pregnancy.
Seven instances of such
invocations are recorded in the cure records from the Asklepieion at Epidauros. The
first six were recorded on a stele dating to the second half of the 4th century B.C.; the last
dates to the 2nd century B.C.48
1. Cleo was with child for five years. After she had been pregnant
for five years she came as a suppliant to the god and slept in the
Abaton. As soon as she left it and got outside the temple precincts she
bore a son who, immediately after birth, washed himself at the
fountain and walked about with his mother. In return for this favor she
inscribed on her offering: Admirable is not the greatness of the tablet,
but the Divinity, in that Cleo carried the burden in her womb five
years, until she slept in the Temple and He made her sound.
2. A three-years pregnancy. Ithmonice of Pellene came to the
temple for offspring. When she had fallen asleep she saw a vision. It
seemed to her that she asked the god that she might get pregnant with
a daughter and that Asclepius said that she would be pregnant and
that if she asked for something else he would grant her that too, but
that she answered she did not need anything else. When she had
become pregnant she carried in her womb for three years, until she
approached the god as a suppliant concerning the birth. When she had
fallen asleep she saw a vision. It seemed to her that the god asked her if
she had not obtained all she had asked for and was pregnant; about the
birth she had added nothing, and that, although he had asked if she
needed anything else, she should say so and he would grant her this
too. But since now she had come for this as a suppliant to him, he said
he would accord even it to her. After that, she hastened to leave the
Abaton, and when she was outside the sacred precincts she gave birth
to a girl.
3. Andromache of Epeirus, for the sake of offspring. She slept in
46
Forsn, who divides the divinities who received anatomical votives into two groups: healing divinities
and childbirth divinities, acknowledges the fluidity between these groups and the types of worship that
they received. See Forsn 1996b, p. 157.
47
The unusual votive dedicated in the Asklepieion at Kos depicting a female trunk with a swollen
abdomen (1.16) is quite likely to indicate pregnancy rather than dropsy, as Meyer-Steineg (1912, p. 17)
suggests. Van Straten (1981, p. 131) compares this votive to another terracotta figurine from the cave of
Pitsa (2.28) and agrees with Hollnders diagnosis of pregnancy. See Hollnder 1912, p. 267 fig. 159.
48
IG IV2, 1, 121-122; IC I, xvii, 9. Translations from Edelstein and Edelstein 1945, nos. T423, cases 1, 2, 31,
34, 39, 42 and T426, pp. 228-240. The cures recorded on these stelai derive at least in part from individual
votives that had been dedicated in the sanctuary. See Li Donnici 1995, pp. 40-49.
114
the Temple and saw a dream. It seemed to her that a handsome boy
uncovered her, after that the god touched her with his hand,
whereupon a son was born to Andromache from Arybbas.
4. ...of Troezen for offspring. She slept in the Temple and saw a
dream. The god seemed to say to her that she would have offspring
and to ask whether she wanted a male or a female, and that she
answered she wanted a male. Whereupon within a year a son was born
to her.
5. Agameda of Ceos. She slept in the Temple for offspring and
saw a dream. It seemed to her in her sleep that a serpent lay on her
belly. And thereupon five children were born to her.
6. Nicasibula of Messene for offspring slept in the Temple and
saw a dream. It seemed to her that the god approached her with a
snake which was creeping behind him; and with that snake she had
intercourse. Within a year she had two sons.
7. The god ordered Pharlaris, the son of Euthychion, of Lebena,
who had no children and was already in his fiftieth year, to send his
wife to sleep in the Temple, and when she entered the Adyton he put
the cupping instrument on her belly and ordered her to leave in a
hurry and she became pregnant.
Discounting the fantastic elements of the accounts, these records provide
excellent evidence that Asklepios oversaw issues of pregnancy and fertility.49 While the
first of these cases, that of Cleo, could rightly be seen as a medical cure not unlike other
healings attributed to Asklepios (in that the woman was having a problem and
supplicated the god to fix it), the others make it clear that women could turn to
Asklepios purely in the hope of obtaining offspring. It is important to note, too, that a
woman who went to Asklepios to request offspring used the same procedure as one
who sought a cure. She slept in the temple and presented her request to the divininity
in a dream just as any other patient would do. Upon the fufillment of her request, she
dedicated an offering to the god in gratitude. It seems logical to assume that, just as she
49
Li Donnici (1995, pp. 50-57) suggests that these fanciful elements are indicative of narrative
amplification.
115
used the same procedure as those seeking a cure, her thank-offering to the divinity
would likewise mimic those that were dedicated for cures. Indeed, it is quite possible
that the Greeks made no real distinction between a request for healing and a request for
pregnancy or offspring; a request for offspring is in essence a request for a cure for
infertility. Anatomical votive plaques of female breasts could easily serve to indicate the
new maternity that the god had granted to the suppliant, and would be a fitting type of
childbirth votive to give to a healing divinity.
Summary
Female anatomical votives may be interpreted in numerous ways. By examining

the known examples of female anatomical votives for clues to the reason for dedication,
it is immediately clear that no single interpretation accounts for the dedication of all of
the votives. While some were undoubtedly offered to healing divinities in thanks for a
cure, it is clear that others were dedicated in order to mark an important change in a
woman's status as she became a wife or mother. It is quite likely, therefore, that at least
some of the anatomical votives found in Greek sanctuaries, including those found in
healing sanctuaries, were dedicated as childbirth votives.
116
Figurines
In antiquity, terracotta figurines were among the most popular votives dedicated
in Greek sanctuaries. They have been found in numerous shrines and sanctuaries
throughout the Greek world in all time periods; indeed, their use as votives is so
universal that it is not uncommon to identify a site as a sanctuary based upon the
presence of terracotta figurines.44 Their popularity as votives is understandable they
were small and could be easily transported; made out of clay and often mass-produced,
they were not only affordable but also very expressive gifts to give to the gods.45
Votives, whether given as a thank offering for help already received or as a gift given in
the hope of obtaining help, ideally served to attract and keep the deitys attention
focused on the dedicant.46 Representational votives that depicted the dedicant or that
illustrated in some way the request of the dedicant, were ideal.
It is in large part because figurines were such popular and common votives that
they are among the most difficult objects to securely identify as dedications for
childbirth. Unlike more expensive dedications, such as statues, reliefs, or even
anatomical votives, which might be accompanied by an inscription, figurines never
record the intention of the dedicant in making the offering. Similarly, figurines were
such commonplace dedications in sanctuaries that they do not usually appear in temple
inventory records that might have explained the reason for the dedication. In the
absence of such information, therefore, I have relied heavily upon the iconography of
the figurines to assess their use as childbirth votives. Unfortunately, it is often the case
that the iconographical clues that might have carried a clear and specific meaning for an
44
For the use and popularity of figurines in sanctuaries, see Ammerman 1990, pp. 42-44.
Thompson 1963, p. 71.
46
van Straten 1981, p. 74.
45
117
ancient Greek observer are no longer readily intelligible to modern viewers. For those
examples in which the iconography is uncertain, I have tried to derive meaning through
comparison with similar representations in other examples of Greek art.
I have also tried, wherever possible, to use the context of the figurines to shed
light on whether they might have been dedicated as childbirth votives. Indeed, there
does seem to have existed a certain correlation between the iconography used in votives
and the nature of the deity to whom they were offered. In Platos Phaedrus, for instance,
Socrates stops at a small rural shrine outside of Athens, and identifies the gods
worshipped there by the kinds of figurines and statues that were dedicated in the
shrine.47 As Gloria Merker has noted, the iconography of the terracotta figurines
probably reflects the nature of the divinity more accurately than more expensive
dedications, because the figurines, which lacked intrinsic value, derived their value
mainly through the subjects that they represented.48
Pregnancy Figurines
In order to assess whether figurines of pregnant women were dedicated as
childbirth votives in Greece, it is first necessary to determine whether the identification
of the figurines as pregnant is accurate. Nearly all examples share the same
iconographical features consisting of a large, round abdomen and swollen breasts. A
quick survey of Greek terracotta figurines reveals that there are a number of contexts
for which large breasts and an exaggerated abdomen were considered appropriate.
Representations of old men and old women frequently display these traits. In
fact, the breasts and abdomen of elderly figures, both female and male, are often so
47
48
Plato, Phaed. 230b.

Corinth XVIII, iv, p. 325.
118
exaggerated that when additional clues, such as wrinkled facial features or male
genitalia are absent, it is difficult to distinguish these figurines from those that may
illustrate pregnancy. This problem is especially difficult in the case of nurse figurines, in
which female figures with ample breasts and large abdomens are shown either alone or
with infants or small children.49
The most likely reason for emphasizing these characteristics is that they were
intended to represent a more or less accurate portrayal of the human form in old age.
Many of these figurines are Hellenistic in date, when realism in coroplastic art had
become popular, and many examples come from workshops, such as at Smyrna, where
coroplasts experimented with representing the entire range of the human form as it
appeared in illness, old age, or even with abnormalities. In the case of the nurse
figurines, these qualities may also be emphasized as a way of highlighting the maternal
nature of their work. Some figurines depict wet nurses rather than elderly nurses.50 For
these figurines the enlarged breasts would undoubtedly indicate lactation, and the
rounded bellies are probably illustrative of the figures own maternal status rather than
indicating old age. A final possible reason for emphasizing these physical traits in nurse
figures would be to indicate the nurses lower class or servile status. A number of
servile or comedic figures, both male and female, are represented with large abdomens
and sagging breasts.51 In such cases, these traits were probably intended to present a
contrast to ideals of physical fitness and beauty.
49
For examples of these figurines, see Schulze 1998, pls. 19-21; Winter 1903, vol. II, p. 464 no. 4, p. 465 nos.
8 and 12, and p. 469 nos. 5 and 8.
50
For figurines of wet nurses, see Winter 1903, II, p. 464 nos. 1 and 2, and p. 465 no. 9.
51
Such traits appear, for instance, on flute-players. See Winter 1903, II, p. 464 no. 6. In addition, nonhuman creatures are often given these traits. For instance, Satyrs, especially the squatting satyr types, and
certain representations of dwarves. See below, p. 156.
119
Since the same physical traits could be used as iconographical clues to indicate
old age, maternal status, lower class status, and pregnancy, it is clear that one must use
great caution when identifying pregnancy figurines. In selecting the figurines to be
considered in my research, therefore, I have included only those that have very round,
taut abdomens without many creases or folds (in other words, those whose
iconography was more suited to representing pregnancy than obesity or old age). I have
also included figurines that others have interpreted as representing pregnancy, in order
to assess whether the interpretation was accurate.
Rather than cataloging every individual example, I have chosen to illustrate the
most common types. The grouping of these figurines into different types admittedly has
a certain degree of arbitrariness to it. For instance, some of those figurines that I have
labeled as obese types could easily have been included in the unique types section
since I have found no parallels for them. Similarly, some of the figurines included in
this chapter as pregnancy figurines might just as easily have been included in the
following section on childbirth figurines, as it is often unclear whether these figurines
are illustrating the status of pregnancy or the act of labor itself. Whenever this
ambiguity presented itself, I counted the figurine as representing pregnancy rather than
childbirth. The resulting catalog (Appendix I) includes artifacts that range in date from
the Geometric to the Hellenistic periods. Interestingly, the figurines that are most
securely identified as illustrating pregnancy seem to cluster in the Geometric and
Hellenistic periods, with very few examples from the intervening centuries. The
pregnancy figurines considered here also span a wide geographical range that includes
the Greek mainland, Asia Minor, the Black Sea region and Crete. It is important to note,
finally, that pregnancy figurines have been found primarily in sanctuary and funerary
contexts. I discuss the sanctuary contexts of some of these figurines in greater depth at
120
the end of the chapter, when evaluating them as possible childbirth votives. In the
catalog entry for each artifact, I have included information on the context and date
whenever this information was available. I have also tried whenever possible to include
examples with a secure provenance; unfortunately, due to the considerable number of
pregnancy figurines that lack good contexts, I have been forced to include
unprovenanced examples in order to present a full range of variations for each type.
Baubo Figurines (2.1-2.15)52
There are numerous examples of so-called Baubo figurines, which derive their
name from the nurse of Demeter who, according to several ancient accounts, caused the
grieving goddess to laugh by revealing her genitalia to the
goddess. Several different types have been labeled Baubo
figurines; all share the common characteristic of being
indecent or clearly displaying the female genitalia.53 The
identification of some of these figures as representing the
Fig. 3
mythological character of Baubo seems quite secure, since these

figurines appear to make allusion to her role in the Eleusinian mysteries. The type first
found at Priene, which juxtaposes a face on the abdomen and groin of a woman, most
clearly reflects the Eleusinian tradition preserved in the texts.54 The large majority of
52
Baubo figurines are an eclectic group of female Greco-Egyptian figurines. My catalog of these is by no
means comprehensive; it attempts rather to illustrate some of the most common variations that were
found in Greece. Numerous examples have been found in Egypt. For examples of these, see especially
Perdrizet 1924, nos. 337-347. Most examples range in date from Late Hellenistic to Roman periods. The
earliest examples of which I am aware (2.12 and 2.15) date to the 4th century B.C.
53
A concise description of the different types of Baubo figurines may be found in LIMC III, 1986, pp. 8790, s.v. Baubo (T. Karaghiorga-Stathacopoulou).
54
The details of the story rely upon three late accounts. Eusebius and Clement of Alexandria both allude
to the myth, connected to the Eleusinian Mysteries, that upon lifting her garment in order to surprise
Demeter into laughing, Baubo somehow revealed beneath her peplos the infant Iacchos. See Praeparatio
evangelica 2.3.31-35; Protrepticus 2.20.1-1.21. 2 . A unique set of terracotta figurines found at Kertsch seem
to illustrate this myth remarkably well. One figurine shows a nurse wrapped in a himation; the other
depicts the same nurse with her himation opened to reveal both a small infant in her arms and her own
expansive abdomen. For these figurines, see Peredolskaja 1964, pl. 7.1 and 7.2. The more detailed account
of Arnobius (Adversus nationes, 5.25-27) seems most closely connected to the Priene type of Baubo
figurine. According to Arnobius, when Baubo lifted her garment, Baubos exposed genitalia seemed to
121
Baubo figurines are not of this type, however, but merely represent a nude woman,
sometimes squatting or kneeling, and sometimes lifting her legs wide apart, often
gesturing to, or touching, her genitalia (Figs. 3-8). It is this last type of Baubo figurine
that I consider here.
The connection of these figurines with Baubo appears to be based on the
assumption that all indecent female figurines must be
associated with the one known myth in which a crude female
gesture is celebrated.55 The likelihood that these figurines were
intended to illustrate this myth is not very great, however, for a
number of reasons. First, in the stories that tell of Baubos
actions at Eleusis, she is generally represented as the nurse of
Fig. 4
Demeter; that is, she is an old woman. The physical appearance

of these figurines, with large breasts and round bellies, could potentially be explained
as representing Baubo in her old age. As mentioned above, figures representing elderly
women, especially in the guise of nurses, often do have large bellies and pendulous
breasts. A strong argument against this interpretation, however, is the fact that none of
the Baubo figurines appears old; their faces are invariably round and unlined (see Figs.
3, 5-8). Second, although these figurines are shown in a revealing posture, their pose
does not in any way reflect the crude gesture that Baubo herself was said to make in the
myth. Ancient accounts of the story say that Baubo raised her garment to reveal what
was underneath there is no mention of full nudity or a squatting position.56
look like an infants face. The iconography of the Priene figurines would seem to allude to this mystical
belief. For a fairly recent discussion of these texts and the nature of Baubo herself, see Olender 1985.
55
The crude gestures that Athenian women made during the Thesmophoria and other festivals of
Demeter are often thought to be connected in some way to the actions of Baubo at Eleusis. See, for
example, Foley 1994, p. 73, especially notes 30 and 31. Millingen (1843, pp. 72-97) first identified this type
of figurine as Baubo based on an unusual example in which a nude woman sits with spread legs upon
a large pig and holds a musical instrument (Berlin-DDR, Staatl. Mus. TC 4875, illustrated in Millingen
1843, pl. E). Karaghiorga-Stathacopoulou (LIMC III, 1986, p. , no. , s.v. Baubo) places this figurine in its
own category and regards it as exceptional.
56
Dunand (1984, p. 264) argues against the identification of these figurines as Baubo for the same reason.
He points out that there are some figurines that do display the exact gesture mentioned in the texts, in
122
Given the obvious problems with interpreting these figurines as Baubo, some
scholars have offered alternative suggestions. One of the most likely is that they served
as apotropaic charms against the evil eye.57 This interpretation
does indeed have some good evidence to support it. It has been
shown that obscene gestures in general, and representations of
both male and female reproductive organs specifically, have been
used as protective symbols to ward off evil in many different
58
Fig. 5
cultures. In addition, a small number of these figurines have

elements that strongly suggest such an interpretation. One example portrays a nude
woman in a posture very similar to those of the Baubo type: her leg is raised in the air
and with her hand she touches her genitals. The only difference is that she is shown
squatting on a large eye. Another squats in the typical Baubo pose, but has an eye
painted clearly in the center of the wreath that she wears on her head.59
A third interpretation, and the one most relevant to this
dissertation, is that these figurines were childbirth votives. I
have already commented upon the unusual physical
characteristics of these figurines and rejected the idea that the
Fig. 6
large breasts and round bellies could be interpreted as

signifying old age. A logical alternative is that they were
which they lift their garments just high enough to reveal their genitalia, but these most likely reflect the
cult of Isis rather than that of Demeter. For an example of this type of figurine, see Dunand 1984, pl. 3.2.
57
Although not the first to suggest this interpretation, Perdrizet was one of its principal proponents. See
Perdrizet 1924, p. 125, and Perdrizet 1911, pp. 41-43.
58
This phenomenon has been examined in depth by Pierre Gravel. He suggests that the reason why
sexually explicit gestures and symbols were universally considered effective against the evil eye was that
the evil eye itself originated with the fear of loss of fertility. See Gravel 1995.
59
Perdrizet 1911, fig. p. 43; Perdrizet 1924, nr. 345, fig. 124. See Cole (2004, p. 109) for the Hippocratic
belief that the eye was connected to the uterus through an inner channel in the woman's body.
Interestingly, these examples seem to graphically illustrate Gravels argument that the evil eye is a
symbol of the vulva at the moment of crowning. See Gravel 1995, pp. 93-100.
123
intended to represent pregnancy. 60 Indeed, not only do the physical traits suggest
pregnancy, but the position of the figurines in a squatting pose, with legs spread apart,
are highly suggestive of the act of childbirth itself.61 If we understand these figurines as
graphic representations of childbirth, then it is possible to reinterpret the gesture of the
hand touching the genitalia. Rather than simply drawing the viewers eyes to
indecent parts of female body, this gesture may indicate the figures attempt to
facilitate birth.62 In least one example (2.14, Fig. 6) childbirth is almost certainly being
represented. In this example, the figure is shown in a full squatting position, with legs
wide apart, and her left hand on her knee to steady herself. This pose is a realistic
portrayal of a traditional birthing position used in many cultures.63 Not all examples of
Baubo-type figurines can as easily be associated with childbirth, however. Some of the
Baubo figurines, such as 2.6 (Fig. 7), are not shown in the typical squatting pose, but
hold both legs high in the air. For such examples, the symbolism of birth is not as
readily apparent to modern viewers. Nevertheless, such a posture has traditionally been
interpreted as a birthing symbol in other cultures.64
60
This was the interpretation given to these figurines by both Graindor (1939, p. 105) and Weber (1914, p.
165). Perdrizet (1911, p. 43) likewise admitted the possibility of this interpretation for some of the
figurines. For additional citations, see Dunand 1984.
61
Besques (1971, p. 70, no. D440; p. 91, no. D534) interprets 2.7 and 2.12 as representing women in the act
of childbirth. Schefold views 2.14 (Fig. 6) as a pregnant figure. See Schefold 1955.
62
A Roman relief that very explicitly depicts childbirth shows the parturient woman seated on a birthing
stool making a similar gesture to facilitate birth. For this relief, see French 1986, p. 76-78 and pl. III.
Interestingly, some Baubo figurines do not show the figure touching her genitals at all, while others do
not even explicitly show the genitalia (2.3, 2.4 (Fig. 5), 2.5, and 2.7). For these figurines, it seems that the
object was not to show obscenity; the most logical interpretation of such figurines is that they illustrate
pregnancy or childbirth.
63
Gravel (1995, p. 76) describes this posture in detail: First, to allow for the delivery, a womans legs and
thighs have to be spread apart, with knees bent. Given the anatomy of human beings, this posture is
universal. Secondly, to give birth, she has to be either prone or in a squatting position; the latter is by far
the most frequent in the history of parturition in the world, with the woman often supported by two
individuals flanking her and holding her arms. See also Kirchoff 1977.
64
Gravel includes several examples of female figures with both legs raised high as a variant of the
parturient woman symbol. This symbol is found in widely diverse areas such as Nepal, Turkey, France,
and Czechoslovakia. Illustrations of these are found in Gravel 1995, figs. 17.4, 18.1, 18.2, 20.6 and 20.8. In
his fig. 18.2, the connection of this symbol with childbirth is clearly shown.
124
Additional details suggest that the Baubo figurines were intended to illustrate
childbirth. Several examples wear contorted facial expressions.65 These figurines always
sit in a natural squatting position, with both hands raised to their cheeks and their lips
pulled back. This facial expression may well represent a birthing grimace, which occurs
naturally during labor.66 Another example, 2.1, has red paint preserved on the genital
region, possibly representing the blood of childbirth.
Despite Dunands complaint that the various interpretations offered for the
Baubo figurines (as representing the myth
of Baubo, as amulets against the evil eye,
or as childbirth votives) each only explain
particular aspects of the figurines, I see no
reason why these interpretations must be
Fig. 7
mutually exclusive.67 Indeed, when
Fig. 8
viewed together, they form a convincing argument that the

underlying principle of the figurines is that of fertility.
Although these figurines most likely do not represent Baubo in her guise as the
old nurse who makes Demeter laugh, they nevertheless may well represent Baubo.
Maurice Olenders 1985 article on Baubo in Revue de LHistoire des Religions shows that
the character of Baubo, through the syncretism of Hellenistic religion, took on a number
of new associations, one of which was an association with fertility and human
reproduction. In the Orphic Hymn to Hecate, Baubo becomes assimilated with Hecate,
65
2.3 and 2.15 (Fig. 8) both have this expression. A third figurine of the same type, not included in the
catalog, is illustrated in Winter 1903, p. 458 no. 5.
66
For the birthing grimace as a common iconographical feature of childbirth figures from many different
cultures and periods, including figurines of the Aztec childbirth goddess Tlacolteotl, see Gravel 1995, pp.
86-88. For illustrations of the birthing grimace portrayed in art, see Kirchoff 1977, figs. 22-24. See also
Gravel 1995, fig. 17.8, which provides an excellent photograph of a woman in the midst of labor, who
displays the exact expression that these Baubo figurines have. Perhaps another depiction of the birthing
grimace may be seen in Hegmon and Trevathan 1996, p. 749, fig. 3.
67
Dunand 1984, p. 265.
125
who was herself a childbirth goddess.68 In addition, some of the Baubo figurines display
Baubo in her traditional obscene pose on the shoulders of a phallic figure (either a
Satyr or a Silenus).69 This combination suggests the pairing of male and female
reproductive elements: the phallic demon with its female counterpart.70 If, indeed, these
figurines did represent Baubo, it was not in her role in the the familiar Baubo myth, but
rather as an embodiment of the more general concept of female fertility.
As symbols of fertility, the Baubo figurines could have served as protective
amulets against the evil eye.71 The fact that at least two figurines of this type show an
explicit connection with an eye symbol suggests that in at least some instances, these
figurines were thought to have apotropaic capabilities. Indeed, it is clear that even some
of those that lacked explicit connections with the evil eye were intended to be used as
amulets, since they had loops on the back that enabled them to be suspended and
possibly worn.72 An additional argument for their use as amulets is revealed by the fact
that similar Baubo-type figures were used as amulets in other media, particularly
bronze and glass.73
The fact that some, if not necessarily all, of these Baubo figurines were probably
used as amulets to ward off the evil eye in no way negates the possibility that they
might have also been used as childbirth votives or charms. Indeed, I would argue that
68
An Orphic hymn to Hekate addresses Hekate as Baubo, toad. PGM I2, IV, 2715, p. 158. This
interesting passage has lead scholars to speculate that, not only had the Orphics assimilated Baubo with
Hekate, but they had also assimilated Hekate with the Egyptian goddess Heke-t, whose sacred animal
was the frog. The frog, in Egyptian art, itself symbolized reproduction and fertility. No doubt it was the
squatting, spread-legged position of frogs and toads that made them ideal symbols of childbirth and
fertility, not just in Egypt, but in many cultures. In northeastern France and in other areas of Europe, for
instance, the womb was often represented as a toad, and both barren women and pregnant women
dedicated votives in the shape of a toad. See Glis 1991, p. 60. An example of a votive toad is illustrated in
his plates. For the syncretism of Baubo and Hecate, see Olender 1985, p.46.
69
See Perdrizet 1924, nos. 341-342, pl. 84.
70
LIMC III, 1986, p. 89 s.v. Baubo (T. Karaghiorga-Stathacopoulou).
71
Gravel (1995, p. 6) writes: ...the most remarkable mode of the Evil Eye complex system of belief is one
that probably has far greater significance than is given to it: virtually all amulets, all gestures, all imprecations
that protect against the Evil Eye are sexual in character (emphasis his).
72
Examples that had either loops or holes for suspension include: 2.2, 2.4, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.12.
73
Discussed below, pp. 225-226. Deonna interpreted these as talismanic amulets intended to assure
fcondit et protection. See Delos XVIII, p. 361.
126
the very same apotropaic powers that made them ideal as charms against the evil eye
would likewise render them extremely useful for childbirth.74 One is simply a more
specific example of the general principle. The use of charms against the evil eye was
intended not merely to avert curses placed upon one person by another, but was (and in
many areas still is) used to avert potential harm from ever-present supernatural forces.75
During pregnancy and childbirth, women and their infants were considered extremely
vulnerable to hostile supernatural forces and entities, including the evil eye, and the use
of amulets during childbirth is well attested.76 That the same amulet could be used both
generically to ward off the evil eye and specifically to protect against dangers
connected with childbirth is understandable, since both would employ the apotropaic
power of sexual symbols.77 These Baubo figurines undoubtedly were ideal childbirth
amulets; not only did they possess apotropaic powers by displaying symbols of female
reproduction, but by depicting a woman in labor, they could also serve as proxies for
the women who wore them.78 Thus, in addition to warding off evil spirits, such amulets
could also receive any harm that was intended for the parturient woman.79
74
A similar interpretation has been offered for Egyptian faience figures with loops for suspension. See
Pinch 1994, pp. 106 and 128.
75
For a discussion of how the evil eye might befall anyone who is perceived as having good fortune, see
Gravel 1995, pp. 7-9. The envy or praise of something possessed by another, or even the open boasting of
ones own resources are all ways in which to invite the disaster of the evil eye.
76
Regarding a belief in the evil eye and its connection with childbirth in early 20th century Greece,
Lawson (1910, p. 11) writes: it is chiefly in the critical hours of life, at marriage and at the birth of
children, that the fear of the evil eye is lively and the precautions against it more elaborate. Such
precautions included the use of protective amulets. For childbirth amulets in ancient Greece, see above,
pp. 79-80; for a fuller discussion of the vulnerability of motherhood and infancy to supernatural forces,
see pp. 18-19.
77
Simons 1973, p. 24; Johns 1982, pp. 61-75; Bonfante 1989, pp. 544-545. The apotropaic use of sexual
symbols was not limited to the ancient world; Gravel (1995) provides many modern examples in which
people make use of images of the genitalia or other sexual symbols to ward off evil. In addition to an
apotropaic function, sexual symbols may also, as Zeitlin (1982, p. 145) has suggested, have had a
prostropaic function that actually stimulated fertility.
78
The use of amulets representing a woman in labor during childbirth has extremely old origins. There
are Chalcolithic figurines from Cyprus that show a woman in labor who wears around her neck an
amulet of a figure with its legs spread wide in imitation of her own pose. For illustrations and a useful
discussion of these figurines, see Karageorghis 1991, pp. 8-10, nos. 4 and 5, and pl. 2.
79
Strengthening the idea that Baubo figurines were used as popular amulets and talismans is the
discovery of an unpublished handmade Baubo figurine in the sanctuary of Demeter at Corinth (Corinth
Museum no. MF72.138). Though rather crude in its execution, this figurine is readily identifiable as a
127
Obese Types (2.16-2.21)

The figurines that I have classified as obese types are undoubtedly the most
difficult group to interpret for the simple reason that the iconography is so ambiguous.
They may represent pregnancy, or may be attempts to illustrate obesity; the artists
intentions are not always clear. The interpretation of some of these figurines varies
considerably. In general, I have included those figurines whose abdomen was not only
large, but round and firm, as these were the most likely to represent pregnancy.
One standard obese type included here is represented by 2.21 (Fig. 9). This type,
in which a nude female figure stands with hands on hips,
appears with some frequency at Smyrna.80 Each of these
figurines has a protruding stomach, though the size of the
abdomen varies considerably. It is difficult to know
whether any of these figurines was intended to depict
pregnancy. Some have taut, round abdomens and small
Fig. 9
breasts that may indicate youth and pregnancy, while

others have larger, more pendulous breasts and sagging or wrinkled abdomens, most
likely indicating old age or obesity.81 The difficulty in the interpretation of these
figurines is compounded by the fact that all but one are missing their heads, thereby
removing the aid of facial features to help determine age, and all are devoid of context.
It is conceivable that the coroplasts at Smyrna intended merely to represent the female
form in all of its variations, in different stages of development (from youth to old age)
and as it appeared in certain conditions (pregnancy, obesity, gauntness, illness).
Baubo type by the combination of nudity, squatting position, and grimacing facial features. This is the
only hand-made Baubo figurine of which I am aware, but other examples, either unpublished or misidentified, may well exist.
80
Several examples of these are published in Besques 1971, pp. 166-167, nos. D1142-1148 and pls. 230-231.
81
For those that may represent youth/pregnancy, see Besques 1971, nos. D1142-1144. These figurines are
interpreted without hesitation as pregnancy figurines by Danielle Gourevitch. See Gourevitch 1988, p. 42.
For those that may portray old age/obesity, see Besques 1971, nos. D1145-1148.
128
Certainly other examples of figurines from Smyrna explored these themes.82 If, indeed,
these figurines illustrated the range of the female form, then 2.21 is the most likely of
these to represent pregnancy, since the abdomen of this figurine is very large, round,
and firm.
A second type, in which a nude female figure takes a modest stance, covering her
breasts with her arms while leaving her round abdomen exposed, is illustrated by 2.17
(Fig. 10). It is uncertain how many figurines belong to this type; the number was most
likely quite small. There appears to have been at least one other
figurine nearly identical to 2.17.83 Both of these figurines have been
interpreted as representing pregnancy.84 2.19 has a similar stance, but
is somewhat different in its focus. The abdomen here is smaller and
Fig. 10
less stretched than in 2.17, and it is therefore less securely identified as

illustrating pregnancy. Indeed, the excavator of this figurine
interpreted it as an obese old woman.85

The same interpretation was given to 2.20, an unusual
figurine that was, like 2.19, found at the sanctuary of Athena
Cranaia at Elatea. The disproportionately large head and
exceptional facial features led Paris to interpret this as a caricature
of an obese woman.86 I would argue, however, that the roundness
and smoothness of the abdomen is more suitable for representing
Fig. 11
pregnancy. A third figure from this sanctuary, 2.18, though
82
For examples of figurines representing the female form in old age or illness, see Besques 1971, pl. 231233.
83
For citations, see the list of comparanda for Appendix I, 2.17.
84
Although Schne offered no interpretation, Dumont and Chaplain (1890, p. 239) and Besques (1971, p.
36) believed that they illustrated pregnancy, as did Waldstein (Argive Heraeum II, p. 30), who used 2.17 as
comparanda for interpreting 2.22 as a pregnancy figurine.
85
Paris 1892, p. 280.
86
Paris 1892, p. 280.
129
similar, was probably intended to represent obesity. The slightly folded shape of the
abdomen and the stance with out-stretched arms resemble those of the obese figurines
identified by Dorothy Thompson as representing hetairai.87
By far the most unusual figurine included in the obese types is 2.16 (Fig. 11). This
figurine depicts a nude woman with a large round abdomen. She stands with drapery
over the left shoulder, her left hand on her hip to hold back the drapery. In her right
hand she tips a phiale in the act of pouring a libation. Laumonier believed that the
figurine represented an obese woman and that the function of the figurine was
somehow prophylactic in nature.88 As in the case of 2.20, I would suggest that the
shape of the abdomen is more reflective of pregnancy than of obesity, but this is the
only example that I have seen of a figurine that represents a nude pregnant woman in
the act of pouring a libation.
Unique Types (2.22-2.35)

The figurines included in this section do not derive from a
common type, but are unique examples whose iconography
suggests that they were intended to illustrate pregnancy. Some,
such as catalog numbers 2.22, 2.25, 2.31, 2.32, and 2.34, are clothed
figures whose large abdomens are quite apparent despite their
garments. All of these have been interpreted
as illustrating pregnancy. Regardless of this
identification, it is possible that 2.25 (Fig. 12)
Fig. 13
87
88
represents not pregnancy but a comic actor in
Fig. 12
a padded garment. The stance is similar to that of other actor
Thompson 1954, pp. 90-91 and pl. 21.

Delos XXIII, p. 259.
130
figurines, and identical pieces have been interpreted as representing comic actors.89 The
identification of the other clothed figurines as showing pregnancy is probably correct.
In the case of 2.31 (Fig. 14), the enormous protruding abdomen scarcely leaves room for
any other interpretation. The two figurines from Tsakona in Lakonia, one of which is
illustrated in Fig. 13 (2.34), clearly indicate pregnancy, despite their poor state of
preservation. Both of these figurines stand with their hands placed upon their large
abdomens in a gesture that is nearly synonymous with
pregnancy.90
Among the nude examples, 2.26 (Fig. 15) is the most
uncertain. This is the only articulated doll figurine included
among the pregnancy figurines, and the iconography is unclear.
The illustration shows that it does indeed have a more rounded
abdomen than usual for this type.91 Nevertheless, both the
abdomen and the breasts are quite small, and
Fig. 14
the abdomen does not present the smooth, unfolded profile typical in
pregnancy. Although Blinkenberg offers no solid interpretation of
this figurine, he does note that it is quite similar to a doll found in the
Calydonian sanctuary to Artemis Laphria, which was interpreted as
pregnant.92 Unfortunately, I have been unable to find the
Calydonian example or assess its iconography. If the Calydonian
Fig. 15
example does indeed clearly reflect pregnancy, then the possibility of
89
See Appendix I, 2.38 and comparanda listed there. For an identical example found in the Kabeirion at
Thebes, see Kabirenheiligtum V, p. 179 no. 338. Additional comparanda are cited in Kabirenheiligtum V, p.
120, n. 607.
90
Admittedly, this gesture is sometimes also used in figurines of satyrs or large-bellied dwarves. In the
case of the two figurines from Tsakona, however, I would argue that pregnancy is most definitely
intended. The female sex of these figures is indicated not only by the presence of breasts, but also in the
fact that they seem to be clothed; most large-bellied male figurines tend to be depicted in the nude.
91
Lindos I, pl. 112 no. 2387; the rounded and slightly enlarged abdomen of this figurine is clear in both the
frontal and side views. It may be compared to a typical doll type illustrated in Lindos I, pl. 112 no. 2388.
92
Lindos I, p. 578.
131
interpreting the Lindos example as a childbirth votive is improved somewhat. Another

figurine of this type, found in the sanctuary of Demeter at Corinth, shows a similarly
enlarged abdomen, but Merker interprets this figurine not as representing pregnancy,
but obesity, perhaps as a parody of the more standard type.93
Also to be considered here is 2.27 (Fig. 16), a nude seated figurine of the type
frequently referred to as hierodouloi. These figurines, which appear to be closely
related to the articulated dolls mentioned above, have
often been interpreted as being associated with fertility or
sexuality.94 The link between this type of figurine and
fertility is made explicit in 2.27, in which a square hole is
carved into the abdomen of the figure. The meaning of this
hole can be derived from two better preserved examples
recently sold on the art market.95 These figurines, like 2.27,
had a square hole cut into the torso, so that the abdomen
could be removed like a lid to reveal a hollow space within
the figure. Inside this cavity was found the tiny figurine of
a fetus. I am not aware of any other Greek figurines that
illustrate pregnancy in such a way. Since all of these have
Fig. 16
been divorced from their original contexts, the interpretation of such figurines is quite
difficult. The fact that hierodouloi figurines in general seem to have been used primarily
as votives suggests that these figurines were also votives. It may well be that they
served a function similar to that which Gloria Merker suggested for the numerous
articulated dolls found in the sanctuary of Demeter and Kore at Corinth: ...it is
93
Corinth XVIII, p. 53, no. C115. Merker (Corinth XVIII, p. 53 and n. 215) also interpreted the doll from
Lindos as an obese type representing a hetaira.
94
Thompson (1963, pp. 87-95) interpreted them as representing temple servants or possibly temple
prostitutes.
95
Hesperia Arts Sale Catalog, November 27, 1990, New York, no. 50. See also Dasen 2004, pp. 135-138.
132
perhaps not too farfetched to suggest that in the Demeter sanctuary at least some of the
dolls were dedicated by girls of marriageable age to Aphrodite, and rather than
symbolizing the toys of childhood dedicated before marriage to the quintessential bride
Kore, they symbolized the about-to-be-achieved sexual maturity of the girls.96 Such
figurines, then, may have been used both to inform the girls about the reproductive
roles of their bodies, and as dedications in sanctuaries as a request for fertility at the
time of marriage.97
Much more difficult to interpret is 2.29 (Fig.
17), which consists of the upper torso of a nude
female figurine.98 Broken just below the navel, the
abdomen is not exceptionally large, but does
protrude noticeably. This is an unusual example
primarily because of the incised lines that form a
sort of grid over the entire abdomen. If the
Fig. 17
abdomen were flat, one might interpret these lines

as a crude rendering of the abdominal muscles. As
it is, however, the meaning of these lines is unclear. Based on the roughness of the
workmanship and the odd incisions, Davidson suggested that this figurine was perhaps
intended as a joke or was used for some magical purpose.99 I have included the figurine
here as a possible childbirth votive because of the rendering of the abdomen and the
fact that both the breasts and the abdomen were emphasized with pellets to indicate
96

A similar argument has been made recently by Joan Reilly regarding terracotta figurines representing
nude female torsos. She argued that these figurines, far from representing dolls or toys, were used as
anatomical votives and were dedicated in sanctuaries of healing gods by prepubescent girls as requests
for help in successfully attaining sexual maturity. See Reilly 1997.
98
I would like to thank Dr. Nancy Bookidis for allowing me to examine this figurine.
99
Corinth XII, no. 13.
97
133
nipples and navel.100 Such a figurine could have been used, like the Baubo figurines, as a
sort of talisman or amulet during pregnancy, or may even have been manipulated
magically for either the protection or the harm of the pregnant woman. The use of
magical dolls is attested in the Classical and later periods in ancient Greece, and
pregnancy, as well as infancy and the time of labor, was a period when one was
considered especially vulnerable to magical attacks.101
The last six figurines, 2.23, 2.24, 2.28, 2.30, 2.33, and 2.35 are the strongest
candidates for pregnancy figurines. Unfortunately, the poor preservation of 2.23 makes
the interpretation difficult. According to Picard and
Ducrey, this is a terracotta plaque in very high relief rather
than a figurine in the round.102 From their description and
illustrations, it also seems possible that this is a figurine
whose back was left unworked. Only the torso is
preserved. Picard and Ducrey viewed the figure as
standing rather than seated, and thought that the lower
half of the figure was probably clothed. After a careful
evaluation of the iconographical evidence, they interpreted
Fig. 18
it as a pregnant woman rather than representing obesity or

a dwarf or other comic figure. I agree with this interpretation. The abdomen of the
figure is round and full, and she originally stood with her hands on her expansive belly,
a posture commonly adopted during pregnancy. The protective gesture of the hands
over the abdomen is not only a realistic representation of pregnancy, but also
100
A similar treatment of the nipples and navel may be seen on a much later and more exaggerated
figurine from Smyrna, which itself may well indicate pregnancy, despite its publication as a jeune fille
lymphatique. See Besques 1971, p. 132 no. D883 and pl. 163b.
101
For the use of magical voodoo dolls in Greece, see Jordan 1988; Dugas 1915; Preisendanz 1933, pp.
163-164. The fact that this figurine was discovered in a well could possibly be significant; while many
ordinary figurines are found in wells, it was also common to throw voodoo dolls or metal strips inscribed
with incantations into wells, graves, cisterns and other deep pits where they would be closer to chthonic
deities.
102
Ducrey and Picard 1969, p. 819.
134
symbolically significant for a pregnancy votive. The figurine could easily represent
either the votary herself in her vulnerable state of pregnancy as she seeks protection
and aid, or the goddess, in the guise of a mother who offers such protection.
A similar interpretation may be applied to 2.24 (Fig. 18), a plinth-like Geometric
figurine found at Kavousi. Again, only the torso is preserved. This figurine depicts a
nude female whose hands are raised to touch or cup the breasts, and whose abdomen
extends outward from the body, probably indicating
pregnancy. The genitalia are exaggerated and
emphasized. One may interpret the small protrusion
within the genitalia as a detailed rendering of the female
anatomy, as Alexiou did, or as the crowning head of an
infant.103 In either case, the figurine is most certainly
connected with female fertility and reproduction: the
hands raised to the breasts, the abdomen swollen with
Fig. 19
pregnancy, and the emphasis on the reproductive organs

(possibly at the moment of crowning) all point to the
concept of fertility and motherhood.

A Corinthian figurine, 2.30 (Fig. 19), although not interpreted as a pregnancy
figurine by the excavator, should be considered as such. The entire upper body is
preserved, from the head to the lower abdomen. The figure was most likely in a
standing position. The arms are held out from the sides of the body, and the face has a
grinning expression. Although no breasts are visible, the abdomen is expansive. The
most likely interpretation for this figurine is that it represents a parturient woman in the
midst of labor. The odd, grinning expression is probably a variation of the birthing
grimace.104 The unusual stance of the figure is most readily explained as a traditional
103
104
Alexiou 1956, p. 11. Price (1978, pp. 85-86) interprets this figurine as illustrating childbirth.
See above, n. 24 for discussion of the birthing grimace.
135
birth posture, in which the parturient woman is supported on either side by

attendants.105 This figurine, therefore, was probably the central figure of terracotta
childbirth group.
Two other figurines from Corinth, both unfortunately unpublished, may also
have illustrated pregnancy.106 The first, found in the Potters Quarter, consists of the
torso of a crudely handmade figurine of a nude figure.107 No breasts are indicated, but
the preserved genitalia appear to be female. The large abdomen juts
out in an odd sort of point, and the navel is indicated by a large
attached pellet. It is extremely tempting to consider this a pregnancy
figurine. Unfortunately, the identification must remain uncertain due
to the crude workmanship and fragmentary nature of the figurine.
Many other handmade figurines of similarly rough workmanship
were found in the potter's quarter. A number of these figurines,
clearly male, also had large protruding abdomens, which Stillwell
108
interprets as a comic feature.
Fig. 20
Therefore we cannot be certain of the
identification of this figure as a pregnancy figurine. The second Corinthian figure is

equally difficult to interpret.109 This
figurine is clearly female, and the greatly
exaggerated abdomen is stretched taut,
suggesting pregnancy. Nevertheless, we
cannot identify this as a pregnancy figurine
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
with certainty, since the buttocks are also
105
Kirchhoff provides illustrations of women from several different cultures using this posture. See
Kirchhoff 1977, especially figs. 16 and 30.
106
I would like to thank Dr. Nancy Bookidis for allowing me to study these objects.
107
Corinth Museum KT 16-11.
108
See, for example, Corinth XV, ii, p. 52, cat. no. 2 (KT16-5). I suspect that the reason that this example
was not included in the publication was due to its fragmentary condition and the assumption by Stillwell
that all of these figurines were male.
109
Corinth Museum MF 76-27.
136
exaggerated, possibly suggesting that this figurine was intended to be humorous in

nature, or at least obscuring the intention of the coroplast in making the figurine.
Among the most secure pregnancy figurines are the handmade figurines from
the sanctuary of Eileithyia Inatia, Crete (2.33, Fig. 20) and the figurines now housed in
the Kanellopoulos museum (2.35, Figs. 21 and 22). All of these figurines are identical in
style, with flat heads and applied pellets for eyes. They depict standing women with
large abdomens making various gestures with their hands. The sex of these figurines is
indicated not only by the presence of breasts, but by the
flared base, which may have been intended to indicate
the hem of a skirt.
The last figurine, 2.28 (Fig. 23), from the cave of
the Nymphs at Pitsa, also seems to indicate pregnancy.
The abdomen of the figurine is large and round, and
since the arms are held to the sides, it is clear that this
was intended to be the focal point of the figurine.
Fig. 23
Comedic Types (2.37-2.38)

There are, no doubt, many examples of round-bellied comedic female figurines
that could have been included in this discussion. Rather than cataloging these
extensively, I have chosen to present here a sampling of the different forms. The three
figurines included in the catalog were chosen because they were considered at the time
of excavation to represent caricatures of pregnant women.110 It seems more probable,
however, that they merely represented comic actors in their female roles on stage.
110
Sometimes this identification was given with some misgivings, however. The fact that Stephani (1865,
p. 161) called 2.37 schwangere Alte and that Reinach (1892, p. 116) described 2.38 by saying La vielle
est figure enceinte, suggests that they were not entirely certain how to interpret these figurines. This
uncertainty is also found in the description of a fourth example, not included in the catalog above, that
was found at Olynthos. Robinson (Olynthus IV, p. 70, no. 364) described this figurine as a grotesque
draped old woman (enceinte), a description similarly vague in its combination of old age and possible
pregnancy.
137
Webster includes at least six other Greek figurines that correspond to 2.36 (Fig. 24) in
his catalog of Old and Middle Comedy monuments, and he identifies the masks worn
by these figurines as a standard hetaira type.111 The identification of this type of female
figurine as representing comic actors is strengthened by the discovery
of similar figurines among two groups of comic statuettes in an
Athenian grave.112 The series of figurines from this grave were the first
known instance in which a large number of comic actor figurines were
found together; as a discreet collection, they provide a good
illustration of the types of characters that appeared in Athenian
Middle Comedy.113
Fig. 24
Since these figurines were most likely intended to represent
comic actors in female roles, we must question whether their large abdomens were
intended to signify pregnancy. Merker, discussing several examples of this type found
in the sanctuary of Demeter at Corinth, interprets them as comic actors portraying
pregnant brides.114 This interpretation is certainly possible, though it is not the only
possible interpretation. A number of ancient plays do have scenes in which childbirth
takes place; nevertheless, the action nearly always occurs offstage, and neither pregnant
nor parturient women are common characters in surviving comedies.115
111
OMC3, p. 88, figurines type AT 74, mask type XC.

These figurines are now in the possession of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Inv. nos. 13.225.13-28.
For further references, see Bieber 1961 p. 45 n. 45.
113
See Bieber 1961, pp. 45-47 for a description of the entire corpus of figurines from this grave. Compare
Biebers figure 186 and 192 to 2.37 and 2.38 respectively.
114
115
Plays in which childbirth occurs: Plautus, Aulularia 692-3; Terrence, Adelphoe 486-7; Terrence, Andria
473. These three plays use the same theatrical ploy, in which an off-stage female character cries out in the
throes of labor. In each of these instances, the play was borrowed from a Menandrian original, suggesting
that this devise appeared in 4th century Greek dramas. I know of only one extant comedy in which a
pregnant woman appears on stage. In Aristophanes Lysistrata (lines 742-755) a female character feigns
pregnancy and labor as an excuse to leave the Acropolis. But even in this instance, it is a fake pregnancy;
the woman is quickly revealed as an impostor who has a helmet under her garments.
112
138
The great, round bellies of these figurines, which led early excavators to interpret
them as representing pregnancy, might also be explained as the traditional padding
worn by comic actors.116 Figurines and vase paintings depicting comic actors show that
old and young female characters, as well as male characters,
could wear such padding.117 As Bieber astutely notes, not
only was the padding an integral part of the comic actors
costume, but often the same actor would play several
different roles, both male and female, during the same play.
Though the masks and outer garments could be changed
quickly between roles, it would have been too difficult to
remove or add the padding every time the sex of the
character changed.118 Additionally, the padding on female
characters would have had the same humorous effect as it
would for their male counterparts, namely to make them
119
unattractive and ridiculous.
Fig. 25
Since padding, especially on
the stomach and buttocks, was a standard feature of comic actors regardless of role, it is
quite possible that the large paunches found on these comedic figures is merely
indicative of the costume.
Summary: Pregnancy Figurines as Childbirth Votives

116
For the origins of this padding, see Webster 1970, pp. 28-35.
See Bieber 1961, figs. 162-165, 185, and 193, which illustrate that actors in female roles (both young and
old) could have large round abdomens. For male roles, see figs. 135-158, 169-179, 187-191, and 194-198.
For vase paintings see Trendall 1967. Especially interesting is plate 13b, left. A male figure on the far left
wears a short chiton and a garment covering his head, which he also pulls over his face in a gesture
strikingly similar to that of 2.37 (Fig. 25). This gesture draws attention to his large, round belly (as it also
does for 2.37). A more recent discussion of comic figures in vase paintings may be found in Taplin 1993.
118
Bieber 1961, p. 41.
119
That most female characters in comedies would be portrayed in such a light is not surprising,
especially since comic female characters tended to be of lower class, such as prostitutes and vendors, or
naturally ridiculous, such as lecherous old women. On the generally unflattering representation of female
characters in the works of Aristophanes, see Finnegan 1995, particularly pp. 12-14.
117
139
Although the most common figurines, those of the Baubo type, were frequently
discovered in graves, there were at least a few examples that came from a religious
context, suggesting their use as votives. Three Baubo figurines, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 were
found in the sanctuary of Athena Cranaia at Elatea.120 Interestingly, several other
possible pregnancy figurines of the obese type also came from this sanctuary, including
2.18, 2.19 and 2.20. It is tempting to view this collection of artifacts as evidence for the
use of pregnancy figurines as childbirth votives. The identification of many of these
figurines as illustrating pregnancy is rather dubious, however, and their presence in this
sanctuary may ultimately be coincidental.121
The best evidence for the use of pregnancy figurines as childbirth votives comes
from the cave of Eileithyia at Inatos on Crete. The salvage excavations conducted at this
site in 1962 revealed that the cave enjoyed great popularity as a fertility shrine during
the Geometric period. Inside were found numerous examples of Geometric pregnancy
figurines (collectively described in the catalog as 2.33), as well as other fertility
figurines, including those that depicted the acts of childbirth and intercourse.122 The
votive deposit from this cave argues strongly that the cult was focused on human
fertility and reproduction. This is further supported by later literary evidence that
indicates that there was a sanctuary of Eileithyia at Inatos.123 It is unfortunate that this
cave was looted in the 1960s, robbing many of the finds of their proper context. Two
figurines from the Kanellopoulos museum in Athens (2.35) almost certainly originated
from this shrine; they are identical in style to those from the cave. Without a proper
context, however, their identification as childbirth votives must remain speculative.
120
Paris 1892, p. 279.

Additional evidence for the use of Baubo figurines as votives may come from the handmade Baubo
figurine discovered in the sanctuary of Demeter at Corinth (Corinth museum no. MF72.138) discussed
above, n. 37. This figurine will be published by Susan Langdon in an upcoming volume (Corinth XVIII) on
the Archaic figurines from the Demeter sanctuary. I would like to thank Dr. Nancy Bookidis for allowing
me to study this object.
122
See pp. 155 and 171-172.
123
See above, p. 47.
121
140
The two pregnancy figurines from the sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus at Tsakona
(2.34) may confidently be classified as childbirth votives. Although Catling interpreted
this sanctuary as one that received worship primarily by men, the presence of
numerous handmade terracotta figurines representing various elements of human
fertility seems to indicate that the cult was also strongly associated with human
reproduction. It is likely that the figurines of ithyphallic males and of females
displaying genitals that were excavated in this sanctuary were dedicated as requests for
fertility.124 The two pregnancy figurines examined here may have been used either for
the same purpose or as dedications in thanks for pregnancy.
Several other pregnancy figurines were dedicated in scattered sanctuaries
throughout the Greek world. Among them, the Geometric figurine from Kavousi (2.24)
is a good candidate for a childbirth votive. The figurine was found in a Geometric peak
sanctuary on Crete, and the pregnancy that is implied by the rounded stomach is
strengthened by the exaggerated genitalia and the figurines posture of touching the
breasts, perhaps here used as a symbol of motherhood or fertility.125 We cannot say for
certain whether the figurine represents a goddess, or the abstract concept of female
fertility, or the dedicant herself. That this figurine represents or alludes to female
reproductive fertility, however, is quite certain, and the fact that it was discovered
within a sanctuary makes its use as a childbirth votive likely. Similarly, 2.22 was
discovered in the Argive Heraeum, which led Waldstein to postulate that it had been
dedicated to Hera as a childbirth offering.126 Given Heras importance in marriage and
her frequent connection with childbirth, the interpretation of this figurine as a
124
For the sanctuary, see above p. 61; for further discussion of the figurines and worship at the sanctuary,
see below, pp. 174-175.
125
That a mothers breasts could serve as a symbol for motherly love in Greek culture is suggested by a
various literary passages such as Il. 22.90, in which Hecuba bares her breast to Hector as part of her
entreaties to try to change his mind about joining battle with Achilles, and Euripides, El. 1206, in which
Clytemnestra exposes her breast to Orestes in a plea for him to spare her life by reminding him of the
close bond between them. For a useful survey of the motif of the bared breast in Classical art, see Cohen
1997.
126
Argive Heraeum II, p. 30.
141
childbirth votive is quite reasonable. 2.28 was found in the cave of the Nymphs at Pitsa.
Although this is the only figurine of its type in the cave, its use as a childbirth votive is
quite likely, since the Nymphs were frequently associated with marriage and childbirth.
2.26 was found in the sanctuary of Athena at Lindos, but since the iconography of this
figurine is unclear, it cannot be identified as a childbirth votive with any certainty.
A final figurine, 2.23, may with some hesitation be considered as a childbirth
votive. This representation of a pregnant woman was discovered at the site of Lato,
Crete. Despite the fact that it was discovered at a kiln rather than in a sanctuary setting,
the excavators interpreted it as an object intended to be a votive to Eileithyia.127 As
Ducrey and Picard point out, epigraphical evidence shows that Eileithyia enjoyed great
popularity at Lato in the Hellenistic period, though it is worth noting that earlier
evidence for the worship of Eileithyia at Lato is slim.128
Despite the fact that comedic types similar to 2.36, 2.37, and 2.38 have been
discovered in sanctuary contexts, I find it extremely unlikely that they were used as
childbirth votives. Even if, as Merker has suggested, these figurines did illustrate
pregnancy by representing comic actors portraying pregnant brides, it seems unlikely
that a woman seeking fertility or protection during birth would choose to dedicate such
an unflattering votive that carried with it the suggestion of illegitimate birth. 129
In conclusion, it seems that very few figurines depicting pregnancy were
dedicated as childbirth votives. The number of figurines that unambiguously depict
pregnancy is indeed very small, and the number of those that were found in sanctuaries
is smaller still. The fact that so few were found in sanctuaries strongly suggests that,
with the exception of the cave of Eileithyia Inatia on Crete, pregnancy figurines were
not commonly among the votives that women dedicated for childbirth purposes. This
127
Ducrey and Picard 1969, p. 822.

Ducrey and Picard 1969, p. 822 and n. 1. For epigraphical evidence for the cult of Eileithyia at Lato, see
Homolle 1879, p. 293; Baur 1902, p. 36.
129
128
142
does not mean, however, that women did not use them during pregnancy or childbirth.
Baubo figurines, as discussed above, may well have been employed in the womans
home as amulets or protective devices against evil spirits during labor itself. It is
possible that some of the unique figurines that seem to represent pregnancy could have
likewise been used at home for a similar purpose as protective charm to ward off
evil, or even as a talisman intended to absorb any harm or danger that might threaten
the parturient woman. Figurines used for such purposes may not generally have been
considered appropriate gifts to the gods.
Childbirth Figurines and Childbirth Groups
Although figurines depicting the act of childbirth are common in other cultures,
childbirth figurines are rare in Greece.130 A survey of Greek figurines reveals two main
types that appear to portray birth scenes: those that illustrate a female figure, often
nude, in the kneeling position, and childbirth groups showing a parturient woman with
one or more assistants.
The Interpretation of Kneeling Figurines as Representing Childbirth

The debate over how to interpret kneeling figures in Greek art
was begun very early, and has persisted in scholarship to the present
day.131 The discovery near Sparta in the late 1800s of a marble group
consisting of a kneeling female figure flanked by two small figures on
Fig. 26
either shoulder (2.40, Fig. 29) sparked the discussion.132 At the heart of
the argument is the question of whether Greek women in antiquity
130
For illustrations of Aztec Tlacolteotl figurines, see Kirchhoff 1977, figs. 22 and 23.
An excellent survey of this debate, with an overview of the relevant evidence, may be found in Stoop
1960, pp. 24-41.
132
Marx 1885, p. 179; Wolters 1892, p. 214.
131
143
adopted a kneeling position during childbirth. The kneeling position, in which the
parturient woman rests the majority of her weight on her knees and relies upon some
other form of support for her upper body, is nearly a universal birthing position. Given
a choice, women often naturally assume this position during birth, sometimes
alternating it with a four-legged position in which they rest their weight evenly on their
hands and knees. In early modern Europe, women adopted a kneeling birthing position
while using the seat of a chair to support their upper bodies.133 In many African tribes,
the kneeling position is used in combination with a rope or pole that the women grasp
in order to support their upper bodies.134 This position is well known from antiquity, as
well. Numerous Egyptian reliefs and figurines depict women giving birth in a kneeling
position, usually with the help of assistants to lend them support.135
Given the overwhelming proof for the use of this posture in other cultures,
evidence for a kneeling birthing position in ancient Greece is remarkably slim. Most
representations of birth scenes on funerary monuments and in vase paintings depict the
parturient woman either seated on a birthing chair or lying in a bed.136 Even the term
for a parturient woman in Greece, lekho, appears to have its roots in the concept of
"lying down."137 Those who argue for the use of the kneeling birthing position in
Greece, therefore, have been forced to rely upon scanty literary evidence. The most
convincing of this evidence is a passage in the Homeric Hymn to Delian Apollo describing
Letos birth of Apollo.138
And as soon as Eilithyia the goddess of sore
travail set foot on Delos, the pains of birth seized Leto,
and she longed to bring forth; so she cast her arms
133
Gelis 1991, p. 123.

Kirchhoff 1977, figs. 18 and 19; Lefber and Voorhoeve 1998, p. 28.
135
Two excellent examples are illustrated in Kirchhoff 1977, figs. 5 and 6.
136
See below, pp. 235-256.
137
Loraux (1995, p. 25) derives the root of lekho from *legh, "to lie down." See also Chantraine 1999, s.v.
lekhetai.
138
Homeric Hymn to Delian Apollo 113-117; Translation by H.G. Evelyn-White.
134
144
about a palm tree and kneeled on the soft meadow

while the earth laughed for joy beneath. Then the
child leaped forth to the light, and all the goddesses
raised a cry.
This reference provides a surprisingly realistic portrayal of childbirth in the kneeling

position, even describing Letos use of palm tree to support her upper body during
labor.139 In a second passage, Pausanias describes a statue of Eileithyia, located in the
agora of Tegea, that the locals called Auge on her knees.140 According to Pausanias,
the statue commemorates the labor of Auge, the mother of Telephos, who fell on her
knees and so gave birth to her son at the place where is the sanctuary of Eileithyia.141
As Stoop notes, this passage is interesting for two reasons: not only is childbirth in the
kneeling position described, but a statue of a female figure in the kneeling position is
connected with Eileithyia, the goddess of childbirth.142 From this legend, it appears
that, at Tegea, there may have been some conflation between Auge, who gave birth to
Telephos, and Eileithyia, the goddess of childbirth. It is quite likely that, in places where
the Telephos myth enjoyed popularity, such as at Tegea and at Pergamon, Auge herself
was worshipped as a minor childbirth divinity.143
On the strength of these two passages, it is often assumed that the minor
divinities Damia and Auxesia were childbirth goddesses, since a passage from
Herodotus describes their cult statues at Aegina as kneeling.144 It is entirely possible
that this identification is correct. Based on the similarity of their cult practices to that of
Demeter and Kore, and on a story in which statues of the goddesses helped to restore
139
The text reads: "ajmfi; de; foivniki bavle phvcee, gou`na d j e[r eise leimw`ni malakw`/..."
Pausanias 8.48.7.
141
"pesei`n te ej" govnata kai; ou{tw tekei`n to;n pai`da e[nqa th`" Eijl eiquiva" ejsti; to; iJerovn" (W.H. S. Jones,
trans.)
142
Stoop 1960, p. 26.
143
For Auge as a minor childbirth divinity, see p. 32.
144
Herodotus 5.82; Baur (1902, p. 9) automatically assumed that Damia and Auxesia were childbirth
goddesses based upon Herodotus description of their statues. Stoop (1960, p. 26 and n. 2) likewise
favored this interpretation.
140
145
fertility to the fields, it seems that Damia and Auxesia were linked to vegetation and
crop fertility.145 It is a short leap to make the connection between fertility of the fields
and fertility of humans, and it is entirely conceivable that these goddesses were
worshipped for fertility of all sorts. Nevertheless, given that the relevant evidence is so
scanty, the identification of these goddesses as childbirth divinities is not secure. The
description of their statues as kneeling, therefore, does little to clarify the present
argument, unless it were possible to prove that the kneeling posture was only used in
Greek culture to illustrate childbirth.146
There are at least two other likely interpretations for figures adopting a kneeling
posture in Greek art, however. In addition to childbirth, a kneeling figure may reflect an
attitude either of prayer, or one of mourning. Although the question of whether the
Greeks prayed to their gods in a kneeling position has vexed scholars for generations,
there seems to be good evidence that this practice, although not the typical gesture of
worship, was used occasionally in Greece.147 As early as 1910, Walter collected a group
of Greek votive reliefs depicting votaries who are shown kneeling before a deity.148
More recently, Mitropoulou and van Straten each independently examined a wide
range of evidence for a kneeling posture used in prayer.149 The literary and
archaeological evidence that they examined suggests that, although rare, worshippers
occasionally did kneel as a form of prayer or supplication to the gods. It is known from
literary evidence that kneeling and beating the ground were common elements in the
145
A useful discussion of the cult of Damia and Auxesia and the relevant sources may be found in Frazer
1913, vol. 3, pp. 266-267. See also a brief discussion by Simon 1986, p. 201.
146
The fact that Herodotus goes to some pains to explain the posture of these statues suggests that the
kneeling position was indeed quite unusual. Herodotus explanation does not connect the divinities to
childbirth, however, but provides an etiological story of how the statues fell on their knees when the
Athenians attempted to carry them away. Herodotus story may indicate that the kneeling position was
not generally recognized as a childbirth posture, and thus suggest that the cult was not, in fact, normally
worshipped for childbirth. Alternatively, the story may merely reflect Herodotus own ignorance of the
nature of the cult or of contemporary childbirth practice.
147
For references to the rather large body of literature on this topic, see van Straten 1974, p. 159 n. 3.
148
Walter 1910, pp. 229-243.
149
Mitropoulou 1975; van Straten 1974.
146
worship of chthonic deities, leading Walter to suggest that the votives depicting
kneeling votaries were dedicated exclusively to chthonic divinities.150 Van Straten has
argued convincingly, however, that the practice was more focused on those gods who
would answer personal prayer, and that the act of kneeling before these gods was
generally reserved for prayers of great urgency or need.151 Interestingly, in the votive
reliefs that depict kneeling worshippers, the kneeling figures were almost without
exception female, suggesting that this rather unusual gesture of worship was more
commonly used by women than by men.152 It is important to note that in nearly all of
the votive reliefs, the votary, whether male or female, knelt with arms extended toward
the divinity or raised in a clear gesture of supplication. Terracotta figurines of kneeling
worshippers tend to use the same gestures.153
In mourning, too, a kneeling posture was sometimes adopted. Geometric vases
often include kneeling figures in scenes of prothesis and ekphora.154 Later lekythoi also
depict figures kneeling before tombs, a practice that is attested in literary references as
well.155 In most instances, mourning women are shown clothed, often tearing at their
unbound hair with one hand and clutching a partially covered breast with the other.156
Marble statuettes depicting kneeling women have been found on Paros, Mykonos, and
150
Walter 1910, p. 241. For the practice of kneeling in the worship of chthonic divinities, see Homeric
Hymn to Pythian Apollo 332-340; Homer Il. 9.568-571; Polybius 15.29.9; Aeschylus, Sept. 78-180; Cole 2004,
pp. 114-117. Mitropoulou preferred to see the practice as being adopted from the East, where kneeling
before the gods was a common form of worship. Mitropoulou 1975, pp. 91-92.
151
van Straten 1974, pp. 176-184.
152
Mitropoulou published only three examples of a male votary in the kneeling posture. See Mitropoulou
1975, p. 20, nos. 17, 20, and 30B. This scant evidence, when combined with literary references, suggests
that the practice of beseeching the gods on bended knee was looked upon with some disdain and was
considered more appropriate for women than for men (see, for example: Plutarch, Superstit. 3.166; Diog.
Laert. 6.37-8; van Straten 1974, pp. 174-175).
153
For terracotta figurines of clothed kneeling figurines interpreted as worshippers, see Thompson 1963,
p. 97 and especially pl. LXII.
154
See, for example, Ahlberg 1971, figs. 2, 8, 13, 18, 23, 32-37, 39, 43, 47, 48.
155
For a list of lekythoi with this scene, see Mitropoulou 1975, p. 22. Literary references for the act of
kneeling before a tomb, either as a sign of respect for the deceased or in supplication, include: Sophocles,
El. 453; Euripides, Hel. 63-70; Euripides, El. 510; Euripides, Tro. 1305-1307.
156
Stoop 1960, p. 33. For the bared breast as a sign of mourning, see Havelock 1982. Examples of this
gesture from various periods of Greek art may be seen in Collignon 1911, figs. 3, 142-144.
147
elsewhere.157 These sculptures usually show a clothed woman either with her hands
clasped before her or with one hand on her breast and the other raised to her head.
Early scholars tended to view these figures as representations of Eileithyia in the act of
labor.158 A more convincing argument, given the fact that the figures are clothed and
that the hands are positioned near the head or breast, is that they are depictions of
mourners that originally formed part of a funerary monument.159
In examining Greek female kneeling figurines, then, it is clear that one must
consider at least three possible interpretations for the posture: that the figure is praying
or supplicating a god, that she is mourning, or that she is giving birth. With this in
mind, I now turn to those kneeling figurines and statuettes that have been interpreted
as depicting childbirth and consider whether the interpretation is correct.
In a publication of floral figurines, Stoop
carefully examined a number of examples of
kneeling female figures. These figurines, primarily
of South Italian origin, possessed several traits that
led Stoop to argue in favor of identifying them as
Hera Eileithyia in the act of childbirth, including
nudity, the presence on some of the figurines of
small winged figures (or genii), and the presence of
floral motifs. 160 Each of these traits deserves to be
Fig. 27
examined in greater depth in order to assess its

importance for interpreting the figurines.
157
Paros: Athens NM 1872 (Walter 1910, p. 244, fig. 150); Mykonos: Paris Louvre 2711.
The statuette from Mykonos, especially, has received much debate. See Lenormant 1832; Baur 1902,
pp. 33 and 44; for further citations, see Michon 1911, p. 305 n. 2-3.
159
Collignon 1911, pp. 205-206; Michon 1911, pp. 302-306; Walter 1910, pp. 240-241.
160
Stoop 1960, p. 35.
158
148
The six figurines of this type (2.41-2.46, Figs. 26-28) all portray a nude female in a
kneeling position, often atop a large flower. In each case, the nudity of the figure is
highlighted by drapery that billows or hangs behind the figure and acts as a sort of
frame in which her body is displayed. The nudity of these figures is an important
iconographical clue. It enables us to rule out the other possible interpretations
mentioned above, namely that these figures were mourners or worshippers. As one
would expect, nearly all examples of votive and funerary kneeling figures are clothed.161
The nudity of these figurines most likely reflects a different intention on the part
of the artist, but what that intention was is difficult to discern. We may rule out any
possibility that the coroplast intended a realistic portrayal of childbirth. It is true that a
parturient woman who adopts a kneeling position is more hindered by clothing than
one who adopts a seated or reclining position, making it more likely that her clothing, if
any, it would be minimal. Nevertheless, the bodies of these female figurines show no
indication of pregnancy; their breasts are small, and their abdomens are flat. In
addition, the position of the figurines, with their knees close together, is unsuitable as a
birthing position. In a kneeling posture, the knees need to be spread apart to provide
greater stability and to allow for the passage of the child.162
Though clearly these figurines do not present a realistic representation of
childbirth, we must still consider whether an idealized representation was intended.
These figurines have most frequently been identified as illustrating goddesses rather
than mortals, an identification that seems likely. The iconography of the drapery
161
We must note that nudity cannot absolutely rule out these possible interpretations. While one would,
as a general rule, expect to see mourners and worshippers clothed, I know of at least one instance in
which a nude woman is depicted in an attitude of worship. A 6th century red figure cup (Athens Agora
Museum P24102) portrays a nude woman kneeling on one knee to place a wreath onto the flames of an
altar. An excellent illustration of this cup may be found in Lewis 2002, fig. 3.9. See also Appendix I, 2.16,
in which a nude woman pours a libation.
162
Representations of childbirth in a kneeling position from all different cultures and periods illustrate
this clearly. For a sampling, see Kirchoff 1977, figs. 3 (prehistoric Nesazio), 6 (Egyptian) 18, 19 (modern
Zulu) and 24 (Mayan). Interestingly, Kirchoff (1977, fig. 9b) also includes an illustration of one of the
South Italian figurines in question (2.44). Kirchoff unquestioningly accepts the interpretation of this
figurine as Eileithyia giving birth, despite the lack of realism.
149
billowing behind them seems to suggest divine rather than mortal status, as does the
presence, in at least four examples, of winged figures.
If we accept that these figurines depict divinities rather than humans, then the
identification of them as childbirth goddesses in the act of childbirth is not impossible.
Representations of goddesses in the act of childbirth are, as I discuss below, invariably
idealized.163 Since no realistic portrayals of divine birth appear in Greek art, it is entirely
possible that the figurines of a nude, kneeling goddess may have depicted an idealized
divine birth.
Indeed, it is on these grounds that many scholars have interpreted the terracotta
figurines as imitations of cult statues of Eileithyia in the act of childbirth. This argument
depends upon several literary passages that describe the cult statues of Eileithyia. We
have already seen one key passage, in which Pausanias says that the cult statue of
Eileithyia at Tegea is called by locals "Auge on her
knees."164 This provides the argument that Eileithyia was
sometimes depicted on her knees in a birthing position. To
show that it was not unusual that Eileithyia might be
depicted in the nude, scholars
point to a second passage, in which Pausanias lists several
cult statues at Bura, located in the northern Peloponnese.
The ancient author writes: "They have a shrine of Demeter,
one of Aphrodite and Dionysus, and one of Eileithyia. The
statues are in Pentellic stone by Eukleides of Athens, and
Demeter has clothes."165 The fact that Pausanias goes out of
Fig. 28
his way to mention that the statue of Demeter is clothed has
163
See pp. 235-242.

Pausanias 8.48.7.
165
Pausanias 7.25.5.
164
150
often been interpreted as proving that the other statues that he mentions in this list were
depicted nude.166 The two passages together seem to suggest that the cult statues of
Eileithyia in some instances depicted the goddess nude and in the act of childbirth. As
tempting as this argument is, however, it relies on faulty information. The second
passage does not, as it first seems, prove that the cult statue of Eileithyia at Bura was
nude. Rather, Pausanias' comment merely indicates that the cult statue of Demeter at
Bura was draped in real clothing, unlike the other cult statues he mentions, which most
likely featured carved garments that were part of the original statue.167 Therefore, while
it is possible that these nude kneeling figurines represent a goddess in childbirth, one
cannot conclusively argue that they replicate cult statues of Eileithyia.
The interpretation of these figurines as childbirth figures is not the only possible
interpretation, however. If we look through the repertoire of Hellenistic terracottas, we
see that nude kneeling goddesses do appear in one other figurine type, depicting the
birth of Aphrodite. In fact, there are striking
similarities between the two types. Figurines
showing the birth of Aphrodite depict the
nude goddess kneeling in exactly the same
posture on an open shell. Her hands are often
raised to her face and she sometimes holds a
mirror or other toilet implement.168 As Stoop
Fig. 29
notes, there seems to be considerable

166
Stoop 1960, p. 31 and n. 1.

For the practice of weaving and dedicating cloth garments to be worn by cult statues, see Mansfield
1985, pp. 442-505, especially p. 471. Interestingly, at least one passage in Pausanias indicates that in other
cities, the adornment of cult statues of Eileithyia with cloth garments did occur. Pausanias (7.23.5-6) says
that the cult statue of Eileithyia in Aigion is covered with a woven cloth. A second passage (1.18.5) states
that "the Athenians are the only people whose wooden images of Eileithyia are draped to the ends of
their feet." Mansfield considers this last passage dubious evidence, however, since the description could
just as easily apply to wooden korai whose garments were part of the statue. For a discussion of votive
garments given to childbirth divinities, see below, pp. 221-224.
168
For this type, see Winter 1903, vol. 2, pp. 202-203; an excellent example is illustrated in Besques 1971,
pl. 61 no. D293.
167
151
confusion between the two types: "highly stylized waves are scarcely distinguishable
from equally stylized petals; the veil or mantle behind the figure becomes, by sheer
billowing, shaped like a shell..."169 The conflation of these types can be clearly seen in
2.42 (Fig. 28). Here, the female figure holds a mirror and touches her face like
Aphrodite; yet she is surrounded by a veil, not a shell, and instead of a wave motif,
there are stylized flower petals.
The merging of the two schemes becomes even more confused when we consider
the secondary figures often included in these two figurine types. In both types the
central figure tends to be accompanied by attendants or assistants rendered on a smaller
scale. In the case of the Aphrodite figurines, this is clearly Eros. For the other type,
however, the identification of these figures is less clear. Sometimes there is just one of
them (as in 2.41 and 2.42, where he appears very much like Eros, winged and hovering
over the central figure as he holds up the billowing cloak behind her); in other examples
(such as 2.44 and 2.46), there are two (without wings), seated or leaning on her
shoulders. Such figures could perhaps be interpreted as Erotes, since Eros was often
conceived of in the plural. They need not necessarily be associated with Eros at all,
however. It is just as likely that they were viewed as minor local daemons, perhaps the
Genetyllides, who assist in birth.170
It is interesting that a very similar composition is found in the 6th century marble
statuette group discovered near Sparta (2.40, Fig. 29). In this group, unfortunately in
poor condition, a nude female figure kneels with two smaller male figures on either
side. The small figures are each only partially preserved; nevertheless one can discern
their general stance. The figure on the right stands close beside her and holds his hand
near his mouth. The figure on the left, almost entirely missing, leans against her, with
his left hand held low on her abdomen. Baur interpreted these two figures as "male
169
170
Stoop 1960, p. 37.

For the Genetyllides as minor childbirth divinities, see p. 36.
152
assisting demons" of childbirth.171 There is some merit to the interpretation. As Baur

points out, the left figure, who reaches down to hold his hand over the abdomen, may
well be massaging the parturient woman. Artistic representations of the goddess
Eileithyia often show her making a similar gesture, and literary sources indicate that
massage was a common means of easing the birth and the pains of labor.172 The gesture
made by the right figure of this group is less certain. Price suggested that he holds his
hand over his mouth as an occult sign.173 A more convincing argument was provided by
Pingiatoglu, however, who interpreted the figure as a flute player, and suggested that
he plays the flute as a calming influence for the woman in labor.174
It is impossible to know whether the identity of the marble group from Sparta is
the same as that of the figurines from South Italy. It is tempting, given the similarities
between them, to assign them to a similar tradition or cult. At any rate, the two smaller
figures appear to have a similar function in both groups. In both 2.44 (Fig. 27) and 2.46,
the small figures lean against the shoulder of the kneeling woman in a somewhat
protective stance, and the right figure leans forward over her shoulder to lightly touch
her breast.
Given the complicated and even conflicting iconography of these kneeling
figurines, it is unlikely that the divinity depicted in them will ever be identified with
certainty. Indeed, as Stoop points out, it is entirely possible that the same figurine type
could be used in the cult of several different goddesses.175 The marble figurine from
Sparta may well represent Eileithyia herself, or possibly Artemis. The figurines from
South Italy may, as Stoop suggests, belong to the cult of Hera or Hera Eileithyia, given
171
Baur 1902, pp. 43-44.

For representations of Eileithyia, see Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 13-29. The Eileithyiai are sometimes shown
massaging or laying their hands on the head of Zeus in scenes depicting the birth of Athena.
173
Price 1978, p. 141.
174
Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 135, no. 1. I have been unable to see this statue group in person; nevertheless, from
the published illustrations and photographs, it does appear that the right figure holds an object to his
mouth rather than just his hand.
175
Stoop 1960, p. 37.
172
153
the importance of her cult in the region.176 At least some of them may, on the other
hand, represent Aphrodite, since there is such a strong tendency to conflate these
images with other representations of her.177
Regardless of the exact cult with which these figurines are associated, and
despite the confusion of imagery, the iconography itself does seem to suggest that they
were connected with childbirth or fertility. While no one feature conclusively points to
this interpretation, the combination of the posture of the figures on their knees, their
nudity, their frequent association with floral motifs (as symbols of fertility), and the
presence of assisting daemones suggest that they represent a female divinity giving
birth.178
One further element of these figurines needs to be considered. At least two of the
examples from South Italy (2.44 and 2.46) were not figurines in their own right, but
rather served as the base of a thymiaterion or incense burner. The cup of the incense
burner, usually in the shape of a large flower with a depression in the center, was
molded separately from the base and later joined either by a thick stem of clay (as in
2.46) or by a small metal pin (as in 2.44, Fig. 27).179 The floral element of such thymiateria
often breaks off at the stem where the fabric is thin, leaving little trace of its existence.180
Stoop suggested that we should read in these two figurines the meaning behind
an entire series of thymiateria in the shape of a female bust topped by a flower. These
thymiateria, common in South Italy, share a number of iconographical elements with the
kneeling figurines discussed above. Among the most important similarities are the
176
Stoop 1960, p. 35.

For interpretations of these figurines as Aphrodite, see Himmelmann Wildschlz 1957. The fact that
the female figure holds a dove in at least two instances (2.44 and 2.46) would argue in favor of this
interpretation.
178
Even the conflation with images of Aphrodite does not negate this interpretation. Aphrodite, too,
acted as a childbirth goddess, and it is easy to see how representations of her in this guise could meld
with representations of her kneeling on a shell. For Aphrodite as a childbirth divinity, see pp. 24-25.
179
Stoop 1960, pp. 4-5.
177
154
presence on some thymiateria of a winged figure who sits on the shoulder, nudity, and a
veil that sometimes billows outward behind the bust.181 Based on these similarities,
Stoop argued that the identification of these abbreviated thymiateria should be the same
as those that show the entire kneeling figure. "It is but one step from this whole figure
to the abbreviated forms... and it seems reasonable to assume that the same person and
the same idea were expressed in all of them."182
The argument that these thymiateria were connected with childbirth, though
unprovable, is appealing. The practice of burning incense in the sanctuary of Eileithyia
is recorded by Pausanias for at least two cities in Greece.183 The exact occasion for the
burning of incense is not made clear in these texts, but in the case of Corinth, it appears
that the incense was burned for Eileithyia as a part of her daily worship by her
priestesses rather than as part of a childbirth ritual performed by a grateful worshipper.
It is not unreasonable to assume a connection between the burning of incense and the
desire for fertility of the female members of the community as a whole. This connection
seems likely in the case of Elis. Pausanias writes:
In the front part of the temple, for it is built in two parts, is an altar of
Eileithyia and an entrance for the public; in the inner part Sosipolis is
worshipped, and no one may enter it except the woman who tends the
god, and she must wrap her head and face in a white veil. Maidens and
matrons wait in the sanctuary of Eileithyia chanting a hymn; they burn all
manner of incense to the god, but it is not the custom to pour libations of
wine.184
180
The stump of clay that served as a stem is still visible on the head of 2.46. See Stoop 1960, pl. 2.1.
Stoop 1960, pp. 7-9 and pls. 3 and 4.
182
Stoop 1960, p. 36.
183
Corinth: Pausanias 2.35.11; Elis: Pausanias 6.20.2-3. Note, however, that in Elis, although the incense is
burned in the sanctuary shared by Eileithyia and Sosipolis, the incense is stated as being burned for
Sosipolis. The burning of incense may also be alluded to in a fragment by Callimachus (Anth. Pal. 6.146),
in which Eileithyia's temple is referred to as "fragrant" (eujwvdh").
184
Pausanias 6.20.3.
181
155
An elegy by Ovid suggests that incense was offered to Eileithyia by individuals who
sought her help. Concerned about his mistress' health after an abortion, Ovid prays to
Eileithyia for help, offering her both votive gifts and incense.185 If worshippers did
indeed burn incense within the home or within the temple of Eileithyia after the birth of
a child, then it is tempting to view these thymiateria as childbirth votives depicting the
goddess of fertility and reproduction.186
Childbirth Groups
A second type of figurine that may have been used as childbirth votives consists
of a group of figures depicting a parturient woman along with one or more assistants.
These are handmade groups that appear to have been peculiar to Cyprus during the
Archaic period. The best preserved of these show the parturient woman either kneeling
or seated on the ground. She is nearly always supported
from behind by an
assistant who grasps her
beneath her arms.187
Several examples also
depict a third woman,
Fig. 30
acting in the role of

midwife, who assists in
the delivery of the baby (Figs. 30 and 31).

Given the importance of the cult of Aphrodite in
Fig. 31
Cyprus, it has been suggested that these votives were

185
Ovid, Am. 2. 13.

Baur (1902, p. 28) writes: "It was indeed customary to burn incense in the house where a woman had
given birth to a child, because she was considered unclean."
187
This arrangement, with an assistant standing behind and supporting the parturient woman, is
recommended by Soranus (Gynec. 2.5.70a), who suggests that, when a birthing stool is not available, the
parturient woman may sit upon the assistant's lap.
186
156
dedicated to her as childbirth votives.188 Though the context of most of these figurines is
not known beyond the identification of the site from which they came, at least three
examples were discovered in a sanctuary context.189 It is worth noting, too, that three
other examples came from Golgoi, one of the major centers of Aphrodite's cult on the
island.190
Explicit childbirth groups of this sort do not appear to have enjoyed widespread
popularity outside of Cyprus, though they may have been emulated in a few isolated
Greek sanctuaries. It is quite possible that terracotta childbirth groups of this type were
dedicated in the cave of Eileithyia Inatia on Crete, whose votive deposits were quite
similar to Cypriote figurines.191 In addition, a fragmentary
figurine from Corinth (1.30), which I have included among
the pregnancy figurines in the preceding chapter, was
probably originally part of a similar childbirth group.
Kourotrophos Figurines
In addition to figurines explicitly representing
pregnancy and birth, several other figurine types should
be considered as possible childbirth votives. Among the
most popular are the kourotrophos figurines. The
kourotrophos type encompasses a wide range of
variations, but in essence is a terracotta group comprised
of one or more adults and children.192 The most common
variety depicts a single female adult with a small child or
Fig. 32
188
Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 91-92. She provides a detailed list of these terracotta groups on p. 91, n. 243.
Karageorghis 1998, p. 78 and nos. 1-3. Karageorghis (1977, pp. 219-222) identifies the sanctuary as that
of the "Great Mother," possibly a precursor to Aphrodite.
190
Bennett 1980, pp.136 and 309; for the figurines, see Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 91 n. 243, e.
191
For the similarity of the votives to those from Cyprus, see Price 1978, pp. 86-87 and n. 37.
192
A detailed list of types and where they are found is provided by Price 1978.
189
157
infant. She may be seated, holding the child on her lap or standing with the child beside
her, in her arms, or on her shoulder (Fig. 32). She is occasionally shown with more than
one child (Fig. 34). When depicted with an infant, she usually cradles it in her arms,
though variations in which she nurses the baby are also known (Fig. 35).193 Examples of
male kourotrophoi also exist, though they are somewhat less
common. Unlike the female kourotrophos figurines, which tend to
be generic representations, images of male kourotrophoi are
usually of specific divine or mythological
characters that are known for watching over
the upbringing and education of children.194
Particularly common are representations of
male dwarves, sometimes called comasts,
who are often depicted with small children
Fig. 34
195
(Fig. 33).
Fig. 33
In her extensive study of the kourotrophoi as they appear in
all art forms (including sculpture, painting, and relief, in addition to

the more common figurines), Price has shown that the type originated
in Cyprus, and that it probably entered the Greek repertoire of artistic
motifs in the prehistoric period (Figs. 36 and 37).196 The type is longlasting, enduring well into the Roman period.197 Kourotrophos
figurines achieved their greatest popularity in the Archaic and
193
Fig. 35
Kourotrophos figurines shown nursing an infant in fact appear quite early. Examples dating to the 7th
century B.C. have been found in the votive deposit in the cave of Eileithyia Inatia (illustrated here in Fig.
36). For this sanctuary, see above, p. 47.
194
See Price 1978, pp. 70-72. Frequent types include Silenos or Hermes with the young Dionysus.
195
Price 1978, p. 76; Bell 1981, p. 129 no. 48. It has recently been suggested that these representations of
dwarves, with or without children, were intended to ensure and protect fecundity. For this interpretation,
see Dasen 2000; for a discussion of dwarves and sexual potency in general, see Shapiro 1984.
196
Price 1978, pp. 199 and 221. Price includes Minoan and Mycenaean examples in her study.
197
For Roman and Late Antique examples, see Price 1978, figs. 26 and 31. Price discusses general
chronological trends of the type on pp. 221-223.
158
Classical periods, and have been found in contexts of those dates throughout the Greek
world. In Hellenistic and later periods, though the figurines continued to be popular,
they seem to have lost all religious meaning and tended instead to take the form of
popular genre pieces.198
Kourotrophos figurines are primarily found
in two contexts: sanctuaries and graves. The
sanctuaries in which these figurines are found are,
predictably, those of gods who specialize in
childbirth and childcare. There are several
sanctuaries in which considerable numbers of
Fig. 36
kourotrophos figurines were found. These include

the sanctuary of Athena Lindia on Rhodes,199 the
Argive Heraion,200 a sanctuary at Olous, Crete,201 the Athenian Acropolis,202 the

Artemision at Ephesus,203 the Thesmophorion at Bitalemi,204 and the Artemision at
Thasos.205 Surprisingly, terracotta kourotrophos figurines were not always found in
large numbers in sanctuaries of the most common kourotrophos deities. Demeter seems
to have received them only in certain sanctuaries, despite the fact that her cult had a
very strong kourotrophic element.206 Though the type is known at Corinth, for example,
198
Price 1978, p. 223; Burr 1934, p. 31 no. 5. Types depicting elderly women as the nurses and care-takers
of children were a popular genre of kourotrophos figurine.
199
Approximately one hundred kourotrophos figurines were excavated in this sanctuary. See Lindos I,
pls. 96, 102-104, 108, 136, 138-140; Price 1978, p. 154.
200
Argive Heraeum II, p. 3; Price 1978, pp. 144-145.
201
Dedicated perhaps to Athena Lindia or Artemis Britomartis; Price 1978, p. 88.
202
Price 1978, pp. 106-107. Price argues that these votives were dedicated in a minor Kourotrophion near
the Propylaia.
203
Price 1978, p. 29 nos. 165-172.
204
Orsi 1906, columns 703-6 and 709-10, and figs. 529-531 and 538-9; Orlandini 1966, p. 32 and pl. 9.1-2;
Orlandini 1968, p. 39 and fig. 22; Kron 1992, pp. 628-629 and fig. 7.
205
Price 1978, p. 164.
206
For Demeter as kourotrophos goddess, see p. 34.
159
the Demeter and Kore sanctuary received only two kourotrophos figurines.207 Similarly,
the sanctuary of Demeter at Knossos only had one kourotrophos figurine.208 In general,
the kourotrophos type seems to have been a popular votive to Demeter primarily in
Italy and Sicily.209
The meaning of these figurines depends in part upon the identification of the
figures. Some kourotrophos figurines clearly represent
a divine or mythological mother and child group, such
as Aphrodite and Eros, or Isis and Horus. Most,
however, lack any attributes or identifying
characteristics, and it is difficult to know whether it is
Fig. 37
the goddess or the votary who is represented. One

possible clue to the identification of the female figure
is the fact that many of the Archaic kourotrophos figurines wear a polos, a feature that
is often interpreted as indicating divine status.210 In addition, many kourotrophoi are
seated on a throne in a manner similar to figurines that are usually interpreted as
goddesses. Other examples, however, seem to depict a tenderness or affection between
the woman and child that would seem more appropriate for a mother than for a
goddess.211 Among these we might include examples in which the woman is shown
nursing an infant.212 Thus, it seems quite likely that among the kourotrophos figurines,
207
See Price 1978, p. 143. Merker (Corinth XVIII, iv pp. 70-71) notes that the Demeter and Kore sanctuary
at Corinth had very few kourotrophos figurines or other votives typically connected with childbirth or
fertility, such as infant figurines.
208
This is a 4th century B.C. example of a woman holding a child on her shoulder. See Coldstream 1973, p.
66, no. 60.
209
For the popularity of the kourotrophos figurines in Magna Graecia, see Price 1978, pp. 170-186;
Bonfante 1984 and n. 162.
210
For the polos as a symbol of divinity, see Bell 1981, pp. 81-82. Price (1978, p. 220) acknowledges that
the polos is usually seen as a symbol of divinity, though she also argues that, at least originally, it may
well have been worn by mortal worshippers as a matronly ornament.
211
Price (1978, fig. 29) illustrates a fine example from Olynthos, in which a young child tenderly kisses the
kourotrophos.
212
Some kourotrophos figurines of a woman suckling a child have been interpreted as representing a
goddess with a divine or heroic child. (See, for instance, Price 1978, p. 35 no. 293, which has been
interpreted as a nymph suckling Dionysus.) This identification is given because the kourotrophos figure
160
several combinations of divine and mortal might be shown: a goddess and her divine
offspring, a goddess holding the mortal child of a votary, or the votary herself with her
child.
As with most of the figurine types examined here, the kourotrophos figurines
may have been dedicated for any number of different reasons. They may have been
appropriate dedications to mark a special occasion in the life of a child, or offerings
placed in a sanctuary in order to request the divinity's continued protection and
guidance, or even to request the healing of a child. They may also have served as
childbirth votives.213
Since the sanctuaries in which these objects are found are usually those of
childbirth and childcare divinities, any one of these reasons for dedication could apply.
It is impossible to say for certain that any of these were childbirth dedications.
Certainly, scholars have interpreted them as such. Charles Waldstein, who published
the finds from the Argive Heraion, believed that the Archaic kourotrophos figurines
found in the sanctuary were dedications representing human mothers and their infants
to Hera as goddess of childbirth.214 In addition, a certain type of kourotrophos figurine,
in which Aphrodite reclines nude on a couch and suckles Eros, was interpreted by Baur
as a childbirth dedication to Aphrodite.215
wears an ivy wreath on her head and sits on a rock. Most figurines of this type lack specific attributes,
however, and more than likely represent mortal women nursing their own infants. Contrary to the
argument made by Bonfante (1997) that the image of nursing was considered uncivilized and repulsive
by the Greeks, it appears that, in the religious context of childbirth votives, nursing whether
representing the goddess or, as I have argued here, the votary herself could be portrayed in a very
positive light.
213
Eileithyia received kourotrophos figurines in her cave sanctuary at Tsoutsouros, Crete, along with
other votives pertaining to childbirth and human fertility. In addition, a Classical Attic terracotta and a
Hadrianic marble statuette, both of which depict a female figure holding a child in one arm and holding
her other hand palm-up, have been convincingly interpreted as representing Eileithyia in her dual guise
as kourotrophos and childbirth goddess. See Price 1978, p. 56, no. 623, p. 61, no. 654, and figs. 46 and 47.
214
Argive Heraeum II, p. 13. For a discussion of the Argive Heraeum as a center of childbirth worship, see
Argive Heraeum I, p. 8.
215
Baur 1902, p. 42, n. 55; for the type, see Price 1978, p. 47, section c, and pp. 161-162 and n. 91 for
examples from Naucratis.
161
Baurs interpretation is interesting in that it assumes that even kourotrophos

figurines that depict divine relationships such as Aphrodite and Eros may have served
as childbirth dedications rather than merely being genre pieces. Perhaps strengthening
this interpretation is the fact that when the goddess can be identified, she is usually one
of those who were worshipped for childbirth and childcare. A votive that shows the
goddess in her role as divine mother may well have been considered an appropriate gift
for childbirth, as it would remind the goddess to take on a motherly role towards the
mortal child that she helped bring into the world.
Indeed, it is this underlying conceptthe concern for the childthat likely
motivated the dedication of most of these figurines.216 Whether it depicted the goddess
with her own offspring in the role of a divine mother, the goddess holding the mortal
child (and thus extending her protection to it), or the mortal mother herself who wished
to present her child to the goddess, a kourotrophos figurine clearly communicated the
idea that the goddess should watch over the child. Kourotrophos figurines dedicated as
childbirth votives, then, could readily convey three messages to the divinity at once: an
expression of thanks for a successful pregnancy and birth; acknowledgment of having
presented the child to the goddess, and a reminder to the goddess to continue to look
after the child throughout childhood.217
Seated Children Figurines

A popular figurine type widely known throughout the Mediterranean is that of
the so-called crouching child or temple boy, in which a young child is portrayed
seated on the ground or on a low base. The standard posture for the child consists of
216
Price (1978, p. 220) believed the desire for the protection and guidance of children was the primary
focus of the kourotrophos figurines, both those that were dedicated in sanctuaries and those that were
placed in graves. Concerning the chthonic nature of the kourotrophos cult, she writes: The
Kourotrophos is concerned with life both in its beginning pregnancy, child-birth and child-careand
in its endthe dead, the soul and its further fortune in the other world (Price 1978, p. 200).
217
For the idea that a new wish may be requested of a god at the time of dedicating a votive in thanks for
a prayer already answered, see van Straten 1981, pp. 72-73.
162
one leg raised in a vertical position, while the other leg is typically placed horizontally
on the ground with the foot tucked close to the body (Fig. 38).218 Male examples, which
comprise the large majority of this type, are usually shown nude or wearing a pilos or a
cap. Occasionally an amulet is worn around the neck or slung over one shoulder.
Female examples generally tend to be clothed in a long chiton.
The type appears to have developed first in Cyprus in the 6th century B.C.,
possibly based on Egyptian
prototypes, and later
spread throughout Greece
and Etruria.219 Cypriote
examples are frequently
rendered as limestone
statuettes, whereas in the
Fig. 38
Greek world representations of this type are made more commonly of terracotta.
Previous discussions of these representations have tended to include both terracotta
figurines and stone statuettes; here, I focus solely on the terracotta figurines. Stone
statuettes of the seated child type are included in the general discussion of statues and
statuettes below.
Terracotta figurines of the seated child type appear to have been particularly
popular in Classical and Hellenistic times, though they continued to be used to a lesser
extent into the Roman period.220 They are found in a number of contexts in Greece,
including domestic and funerary contexts, though most have been excavated in
sanctuaries.221
218
For a classification of the different variations on this type, see Price 1969b, pp. 98-104.
Price 1969b, p. 96; Beer 1987; Beeri 1994.
220
Price 1969, pp. 98-104.
221
Price 1969, pp. 104-106. For an example recently published from a funerary context, see Graepler 1997,
p. 228 no. 258.
219
163
The interpretation of these figurines is somewhat difficult, given their rather

generic nature. The posture of the seated child figurines, in which a child sits on the
ground with one knee raised, appears to have been a nearly universal pose for children
in Greek art. As Price and others have noted, this posture is used for representations of
children in all media, from small-scale figurines to vase paintings to architectural
sculpture.222 The use of this posture in these figurines was more than likely intended to
convey to the viewer the youth of the figure rather than more specific information about
the subject being represented.223 It is tempting in the case of figurines of this sort, in
which only minor variations in appearance occur, to interpret all representations as
conveying the same meaning. To assume this would be a mistake, however. I would
argue, in the case of these seated children figurines, that it was exactly because they
were so generic in representation that they were appropriate for a wide range of
circumstances and were able to convey an equally wide range of meanings.224
Numerous interpretations have been offered for these figurines: that they
represent divine children such as Dionysus, Attis, or Eros; that they represent divine
attendants such as Horus or Harpocrates; that they are apotropaic figures; that they are
children attendants of a sanctuary; that they are votaries presenting gifts; that they are
childbirth dedications offered in gratitude for the birth of a child; that they represent
deceased children.225 All of these interpretations have merit, and I believe that it is quite
possible that each of them correctly explains at least some of the existing
222
For the use of this posture in vase paintings, see Price 1969, pp. 97-98 and n. 34 and 35; in architectural
sculpture, see Lullies 1960, pl. 113 (crouching youth from the east pediment of the Temple of Zeus at
Olympia).
223
Indeed, that this posture was used as an indicator of youth may well have been a direct result of its
origins. As Price (1969, p. 95) has noted, the posture seems to have originated in Egyptian culture and is
remarkably similar to the hieroglyph for youth, which depicts a nude figure in the same pose.
224
Celina Beer, in examining stone sculptures of the same type, argues strongly that these representations
of children were polysemic, and that their intended purpose may well have varied from culture to
culture. I think it is equally likely that the purpose of these representations, both in stone and in
terracotta, varied according to circumstance even within the context of a single culture. See Beer 1987.
225
These and other interpretations are collected in Price 1969, p. 107. For the interpretation that they were
childbirth dedications see, particularly, Westholm 1955.
164
representations of this type. Some of the crouching children figurines probably do

represent divine children such as Dionysus, Eros, or Harpocrates.226 Certain types,
particularly representations of older children who hold attributes such as boxes or
wreaths, may well have been intended to show votaries offering their gifts to the
gods.227 The interpretation of these figurines as mortal children who have died is a
reasonable explanation for examples found in funerary contexts, particularly in the
graves of children.228
Some were certainly offered as votives. In her study of these figurines, Price has
demonstrated that they are most often found in sanctuaries of divinities, both female
and male, that are connected with childbirth and childcare, including Demeter,
Eileithyia, Artemis, Aphrodite, Asklepios, Athena, and Apollo.229 They are frequently
found in conjunction with other types of dedications that have been closely associated
with fertility and children.230 In addition, marble statuettes of children in similar
postures provide some epigraphical evidence to suggest that they were dedicated by
parents for their children.231 From this combined evidence, Price has provided a
convincing argument for the interpretation of these figurines as votives representing
mortal children that were dedicated by parents.232
The reason why parents might dedicate figures of their children are numerous.
They may mark a special occasion in the childs life or a land-mark in the childs
226
See, for example, Broneer 1947, p. 246, pl. lxv, 29 (Dionysus); FdD V, p. 205, fig. 898 (Eros). On the type
of Harpocrates, see Tam Tinh, Jaeger, and Poulin 1988, nos. 108, 112b, 136b, 131a-132, and 134-146.
227
Price 1969, p. 107. Standing figurines of boys holding various objects have often been interpreted as
votaries or participants in cult activity. See, for example, Corinth XVIII, iv, pp. 61 and 188; Daumas 1998,
pp. 40-42. These generally appear to represent slightly older boys than the seated figurines, however.
228
Price 1969, pp. 109-110.
229
Price 1969, pp. 104-106.
230
At Lindos, for example, large numbers of seated child figurines were found in the Athena sanctuary
along with approximately 100 kourotrophos figurines and at least three infant-in-cradle figurines. For the
seated child figurines at Lindos, see Lindos I, pls. 111, 112, and 136; some of the figurines from Lindos may
be found in the Istanbul Archaeological Museum. For these figurines, see Mendel 1908, pp. 99-102.
231
See pp. 217-218.
232
Price 1969, pp. 104-109.
165
growth.233 They might be offered to a divinity for healing purposes.234 They may be
intended to procure the help or protection of the divinity for their child, thus invoking
the kourotrophic aspect of the divinity. The fact that some figurines depict the children
wearing amulets strengthens this interpretation.235 While the amulet could simply be a
realistic detail added by the coroplast, it seems to me that it also served to emphasize
the child's vulnerability and need for protection. These figurines might also represent
requests for offspring. The fact that most are male may reflect the general preference
and desire for male children. Such requests for fertility and offspring might have been
made in conjunction with the wedding ceremony, as suggested by Gloria Merker.236
Figurines of this sort may also have been used as thank offerings for fertility or a
successful childbirth. The likelihood that at least some of these figurines were connected
with fertility and birth is strengthened by the fact that many of them seem to represent
infants and toddlers rather than older children, rendering other interpretations that they
are votaries or temple servants improbable.237 In addition, the fact that these figurine
types appear in sanctuaries primarily associated with fertility and childbirth, such as
sanctuaries of Eileithyia, is significant.238 For, although Eileithyia was certainly
considered a kourotrophic divinity, her principle function revolved around human
fertility and birth. Thus, the small clay images of infants and children found in her
sanctuaries were most likely dedicated by parents who eagerly sought the goddesses
233
For example, Anth. Pal. 6.55 describes a dedication of a rooster and a cake to Apollo to mark the
occasion of a young boys first haircut.
234
Beer 1987, pp. 25-29.
235
See, for example, Corinth XVIII, iv, p. 68, nos. C236 and C237. This detail was quite popular on
Cypriote examples. See Price 1969, p. 102; di Cesnola 1885, pl. CXXXI.
236
Corinth XVIII, iv, p. 70. For terracotta or stucco dolls as part of a bride's trousseau in Renaissance Italy,
see Musacchio 1999, p. 137.
237
For a discussion of the age of children represented in these figurines at Corinth, see Corinth XVIII, iv,
p. 69.
238
See, for instance, Baur 1902, p. 51 and Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 127 for votives of this type dedicated in the
sanctuary of Eileithyia on Paros; Price (1969, pp. 104-105) mentions several Eileithyia sanctuaries in which
crouching children votives were found. It is worth noting, however, that all of the examples that she
mentions are marble statuettes rather than terracottas. Examples of crouching children figurines have also
been found in caves sacred to Pan and the Nymphs at Aspri Petra and at Delphi (a bronze example from
the Corycian cave). See Clara Rhodos I, p. 100, fig. 82; Rolley 1984, pp. 264-265, no. 5.
166
help in obtaining offspring, much like the numerous foil plaques depicting infants
found in modern Greek churches.239
Infant in Cradle Figurines

A similar interpretation may apply to a second figurine type that depicts an
infant lying in a cradle (Fig. 39). These figurines are usually moldmade, and consist of a
rectangular cradle in which a naked infant lies.240 The infant is usually positioned on its
back, with the legs bent at the knees and spread apart, revealing the genitals. The hands
are variously placed at the hips, along the sides, or on the abdomen. The type probably
originated in Rhodes, where examples have been found at Lindos (Fig. 40) and at
Kameiros.241 The popularity of these figures seems to have been more restricted than
the seated child figurines; they are mainly found in Asia Minor and
Eastern Greece during the Classical and Hellenistic periods.242
Examples of this type are known from Lesbos, Smyrna, Myrina, Assos,
and Troy.243
These figurines, too, have been found in both sanctuary and
funerary contexts, making their interpretation more challenging.244 At
Fig. 39
Lindos, three examples were excavated within the sanctuary of
239
Lawson (1910, p. 59) noted that although these tamata could be dedicated either before or after the
prayer was granted, the former was more common.
240
For the type, see Winter 1903, II, p. 271, nos. 3 and 5. For the appearance of the cradle, some of which
are pierced for suspension, see Lindos I, p. 691.
241
Lindos: Lindos I, p. 691, nos. 2935-2937; Mendel 1908, p. 102, nos. 1307 and 1308. Kameiros: Higgins
1954, I, nos. 155-157.
242
Winter (1903, II, p. 271) also cites scattered examples from mainland Greece and Magna Graecia. To
my knowledge, no comprehensive study has been done on these figurines as a type. Further research
would help to clarify their origins and distribution.
243
Lesbos: Lamb 1934, pl. 25.3. Smyrna: two examples published in Besques 1971, p. 166, nos. D1138 and
D1139, plate 229 g and i. Myrina: two examples in the Istanbul Archaeological Museum, Mendel 1908, p.
394, nos. 2711 and 2712. Assos: one example, Mrogenda 1990, p. 44 no. 21. Troy: one unpublished
example, inventory number TC259.
244
At least two of the figurines published by Higgins were from funerary contexts of Classical date at
Kameiros. See Higgins 1954, vol. 1, pp. 72-73, nos. 155 and 157, and p. 24 for the contexts of these
figurines. The figurine from Assos also came from a Classical grave. Mrogenda 1990, p. 44 no. 21.
167
Athena, along with numerous other figurines that suggest that the goddess of this
sanctuary was worshipped as a childbirth or kourotrophic divinity.245 A single example
from Troy came from a dump deposit that most likely comprised votive debris from the
sanctuary of Athena Ilias.246
The purpose of this type, like the seated children figurines discussed above, most
likely varied by region and context. Nevertheless, certain characteristics may help us to
derive a general sense of their use. Given the fact that the infant figurines are never
shown with an attribute that would help to
identify them as a specific deity or hero, or to
place them within the context of a familiar
myth, it seems likely that they were intended
to represent mortal infants rather than divine
or heroic ones. Furthermore, it seems
Fig. 40
significant that they only depict male infants,

and that the nudity and the position of the
infants with their legs spread apart appears to have intentionally emphasized their
gender.
Given these traits, the interpretation of these figurines as childbirth votives
seems quite likely, at least when they appear within a sanctuary context. The extreme
youth of the children represented in the figurines would presumably have restricted
their use. Unlike the seated children figurines, which may well have been dedicated by
a parent at any stage of childhood, the infant-in-cradle figurines were probably
dedicated either to ensure fertility or during the first year of the childs life as a thank
245
Lindos I, p. 691, nos. 2935-2937; Price 1978, p. 154 and n. 39.

The unpublished figurine, inv. no. TC259, was excavated in 1990 in the area of D9, located to the
southwest of the sanctuary of Athena Ilias. For the identification of material from this area as votive
dump from the Athena sanctuary, see Wallrodt 2002. Price (1978, p. 59) notes that Athena Ilias was
sometimes represented holding a torch, a common attribute of childbirth and kourotrophos deities. If
Athena Ilias was worshipped in this sense, it was most likely a secondary aspect of her cult. At Ilion she
was primarily a civic goddess.
246
168
offering for successful birth. This age specificity may, in fact, explain why these
figurines appear to have been less popular than the seated children type. A votive
peddler could sell the seated child figurines to parents for any number dedicatory
purposes, while the infant-in-cradle type was perhaps too specific to make it
worthwhile to produce in large numbers. The fact that the infant-in-cradle figurines are
gender specific also suggests that they may have been dedicated as a request for
offspring, specifically a male heir.
Swaddled Infant Figurines

Figurines of swaddled infants were less common in Greek sanctuaries than in
Italic shrines, where they have been found in large numbers.247 Figurines of this type,
usually depicting a small infant with its arms at its sides, wrapped tightly in swaddling
bands, are found occasionally in Greek cities, especially in Magna Graecia (Fig. 41).248
Baur interpreted terracotta figurines of swaddled twins found at Olympia, Thebes, and
Kyzikos as childbirth offerings, despite the fact that they had previously been
interpreted as representing the Dioscuroi.249
The swaddled infant type of figurine never
seems to have become popular in Greece. The
reason for this may perhaps lie in the limited use
of swaddling clothing itself. Although ancient
Fig. 41
sources mention the practice in Greece, swaddled

247
See, for instance, Comella and Stefani 1990, pp. 41-42 and pls. IId-e (three examples); Comella 1982, pp.
18-22, pls. 4-6 and p. 171-172 (eighteen examples); DErcole 1990, p. 125, pls. 42-44 (twenty-one examples);
Coarelli 1986, p. 141, pl. 92 (sixteen examples); Comella 1978, p. 21, pl. 6 (17 examples); Pensabene et. al.
1980, p. 215. All of these sites also produced large numbers of other votives associated with fertility and
birth, including terracotta uteri, kourotrophoi, and anatomical votives.
248
Winter 1903, p. 271, no. 13 (from Myrina), no. 14 (from south Italy); Palaiokrassa 1983, no. E86 and pl.
16 (in the sanctuary of Artemis Mounichia in Attica); Neutsch 1956, pp. 442-443, fig. 156 (sanctuary of
Hera, Lucania). The last example is clearly an instance of a Greek cult receiving Italic votives, however.
For the cult and worship at this shrine, see Price 1978, pp. 179-181. For additional figurines from South
Italy, see Bell 1981, p. 208 no. 697 and bibliography listed there.
249
Marx 1885, p. 83; Baur 1902, p. 48.
169
infants are rarely depicted in art.250 Based on this evidence, Mark Golden has suggested
that the practice of swaddling infants was not widespread in Greece, or may have been
used only for a brief period of time after birth, perhaps simply the first forty or sixty
days of the childs life, as Soranus indicates.251 If the latter suggestion were the case,
however, then one might expect greater numbers of swaddled infant figurines to be
dedicated as childbirth votives, since a terracotta figurine of an infant in swaddling
clothes would presumably provide an instantly recognizable symbol not only of the
newborn baby itself, but also of the successful birth that allowed him to enter the world.
The fact that these figurines were not popular childbirth votives may be
accounted for in two possible ways. Either it confirms the suggestion made by Golden
that the practice of swaddling infants was not, in fact, widespread in Greece, or it
indicates that the Greeks preferred to dedicate childbirth votives that represented other
subjects than swaddled infants.
There is strong evidence to suggest that swaddling clothes were, in fact used on
newborn infants, but only for a short time immediately following birth, as the passage
from Soranus suggests. Although images of swaddled infants are rarely depicted in
vase paintings, votive reliefs, or terracotta figurines, there is one medium in which they
are found with considerable frequency, at least in Attica. Swaddled infants are not
uncommon on Classical Attic funerary reliefs, where they are often depicted in the arms
of a nurse, servant, or female family member who stands near the deceased mother.252
Clairmont interprets the presence of these very small infants on funerary reliefs as
evidence that the deceased woman died in childbirth or not long after giving birth.253
This interpretation makes sense both in terms of the emotional impact of the reliefs
250
Literary sources on swaddling include Hesychius, s.v. spavrgana; Photios s.v. sparganovmata; Plato,
Laws 7.789 E; Aeschylus, Cho. 750-760; Soranus, Gyn. 2.14-15.83-4, 42.111; Plutarch, Lyc. 16.3.
251
Golden 1990, pp. 17-18.
252
A list of Attic funerary reliefs depicting small babies and swaddled infants may be found p. 244 , n. .
253
Clairmont 1993. This interpretation is provided in his descriptions for the individual reliefs.
170
(where the presence of the now motherless infant adds to the pathos of the mothers
early death) and as regards the literary evidence that tells us that swaddling clothes
were limited to the first forty days or so of a child's life. In other words, the depiction of
a swaddled infant on the funerary reliefs would have instantly given the viewer a
precise time frame for the death of the mother; it occurred before her baby was old
enough to be out of swaddling clothes.
If the use of swaddling clothes was restricted to the first month of a newborn's
life, this may explain why swaddled infants appear so infrequently as the subject of
childbirth votives. In my discussion of childbirth rituals I suggested that most childbirth
dedications were made not immediately after birth, but after the lengthy period of ritual
impurity that followed birth.254 This period of ritual impurity lasted approximately forty
days, corresponding neatly with the period when Soranus says the infant would be
wrapped in swaddling clothes. It is entirely possible, therefore, that by the time a
childbirth votive was dedicated in the sanctuary, the infant had already ceased to be
dressed in swaddling clothes.
Finally, if we look at the use of infant and child figurines as a whole, we see that
the number of infant figurines (whether swaddled or in a cradle) was, in fact, very
small. Figurines of seated children far out number them. It would seem, therefore, that
the relative lack of swaddled infant figurines appears to reflect a larger trend in which
parents who sought to dedicate votive representations of their children preferred to use
images of older babies or young children rather than those of newborn infants, even on
the occasion of childbirth.
Numerous factors may have contributed to this preference. It may have been
simply a matter of convenience for those who made and sold votive figurines; it was
easier to make a more generic type that depicted a young child, which could be used by
254
For a discussion of ritual impurity and the dedication of childbirth votives after this time, see pp. 86-
92.
171
votaries for any number of different reasons, than to make more occasion-specific
votives that pertained only to childbirth and infancy.255 Or it may well be that the
dedicants themselves preferred the votives that depicted older children. The reasons for
this, again, were undoubtedly complex, and varied on an individual basis. I offer here
one possible explanation: that the figurines representing children more adequately
expressed the parents wishes at the time of dedication. The first visit to the sanctuary
after birth would have marked a number of important events, including the birth itself,
the lifting of ritual impurity on the household, and the end of the most dangerous
period for both the mother and the newborn child. At that time, the parents may well
have wished to make a dedication that would serve a dual purposenot only to thank
the god for granting a safe childbirth, but also to keep an image of the child before the
divinity, to remind the god to continue to watch over him or her throughout childhood.
Embracing couples
Figurine groupings representing embracing couples
(sumplevgmata) were found in the cave of Eileithyia Inatia.256 It is
unfortunate that the objects from this sanctuary have never been
published.257 Prices description of the deposit, though sketchy, is
the most complete published account of the votives so far. Her
records indicate that groups of erotic couples comprised a large
percentage of the figurine types found in this sanctuary.258 There
are at least two examples for which photographs exist. A figurine
255
Fig. 42
The process by which figurines came to be dedicated in a Greek sanctuary is still poorly understood.
For an excellent discussion of the issue, see Corinth XVIII, iv, pp. 325-326.
256
Faure 1964, p. 90.
257
I was unable to study the finds from this sanctuary in person, despite the permission of Stylianos
Alexiou to see them.
258
Price 1978, pp. 86-87.
172
group of an embracing couple was published in the initial report of the excavation (Fig.
42).259 In this photograph, we see two figures standing face to face with arms wrapped
around each other. The legs and lower torsos of the figures are broken off, so the
original position in which they were meant to be seen is uncertain. It is likely that the
vertical position in which they are shown in the photo is correct.260 A second group,
apparently affixed to the inside of a shallow vessel, depicts a seated couple, with arms
around one another (Fig. 43).261 These two terracotta figurine groups are very crudely
made, and in both cases, they lack details that might have aided in their interpretation.
They could be interpreted variously as either embracing or having sexual intercourse.
Perhaps the distinction is not necessary to make; it is easy to see how the generic
representation of an embrace could stand for the more specific act of procreation.
Such votives may well have taken on a different significance depending on
where they were dedicated. Figurines of this type dedicated in a sanctuary to Hera or
Aphrodite may have been connected with marriage, and could have been seen as
representing either the dedicant in the act of consummating marriage or as a
representation of divine marriage. If dedicated to
Demeter, such votives could even have been used for
initiation ceremonies, to mark a young girls
transition to a marriageable age. The fact that large
numbers of these figurines were dedicated to
Eileithyia in her cave at Inatos suggests that they
were also sometimes used in connection with fertility
and birth, and probably were dedicated as requests
259
Fig. 43
Alexiou 1963, pp. 310-311 and plate 361a. This same figurine group is illustrated in Daux 1965, p. 886,
fig. 10.
260
Price (1978, p. 86) describes the erotic couple figurines from this cave as being situated in a standing
position.
261
This group is illustrated in Davaras 1976, p. 85 fig. 47.
173
for offspring.
Ithyphallic Figurines
Ithyphallic figurines are not uncommon in the Greek world. Numerous handmade examples were found in the potters workshop at Corinth, and more refined
moldmade examples of satyrs and other ithyphallic figurines are found at many sites.262
The possible meanings attached to such figurines are numerous and might include
fertility, obscenity, humor, or apotropaic functions.263 In most instances, there is no
concrete way to link such figurine types with ideas of fertility, though they are
frequently interpreted in this way.264 Sometimes the combination of figurine types at a
certain sanctuary can strengthen the interpretation. This is the case at the Kabeirion at
Thebes, where figurines of satyrs were accompanied by numerous representations of
dwarves and children (including nine examples of the seated child type), strongly
suggesting that the cult was connected with fertility and birth.265
A similar interpretation may be applied to the figurines discovered in the
sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus in Laconia.266 Excavations revealed a considerable
number of handmade Archaic terracotta figurines, many of which illustrated aspects of
human fertility. One of the most popular figurine types consisted of ithyphallic males
262
For the type, see Winter 1903, p. 215, nos. 4-8. For examples of the type, see Lindos I, p. 561, nos. 23192329, and pl. 108; Higgins 1954, vol. I, nos. 159-165, pl. 31; Bell 1981, p. 129 no. 50. For those from the
potter's workshop in Corinth, see Corinth XV, ii, pp. 51-54 (class VI figurines: handmade grotesque
figures). Although only figurine no. 8 is specifically mentioned as ithyphallic, the photograph of no. 3 (pl.
7) clearly shows it to be likewise. Most of the other class VI figurines are too fragmentary to have that part
of the body preserved; nevertheless, many of them stand in a similar spread-legged position and at least
one other of them (no. 2), like no. 3, lifts his protruding abdomen specifically to draw attention to the
pubic area.
263
It has been argued that many of these concepts were interconnected, and that displays of obscenity
and the grotesque were often understood to have an apotropaic function. See Burkert 1985, pp. 103-105.
264
Merker, for instance, has interpreted the votive satyr figurines in the sanctuary of Demeter and Kore at
Corinth as pertaining to fertility. See Corinth XVIII, iv, p. 79.
265
Kabirenheiligtum V, p. 32. For the connection between dwarves and fertility, see n. 195.
266
Catling 1990a and b; Cavanaugh et al. 1996, pp. 190-191, pls. 11-13. For this sanctuary, see above, p. 61.
174
shown sitting or squatting, and wrapping their arms around an erect phallus (Fig. 44).267
It is significant that also found in this sanctuary were numerous female figurines in
which the genitalia were prominently displayed (discussed below), as well as two
examples of pregnancy figurines (2.34).268 The large numbers of ithyphallic figurines,
combined with the presence of other fertility figurines at this sanctuary, strongly
suggests that, in this instance, they were linked to the desire for fertility.
Based on the other types of votives discovered in this sanctuary, Catling
interpreted the sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus as one that was visited predominantly by
male worshippers.269 If this interpretation is correct, then this sanctuary may well
present a unique opportunity to see an expression of male fertility ritual. We know from
literary and inscriptional evidence that men, just as women, appealed to the gods to
resolve questions of fertility and progeny.270 Zeus, as the father of countless gods and
heroes, was an exceptional example of male fertility and, therefore, a likely choice of a
divinity to assist men in matters of offspring.271
Female Figurines Displaying Genitalia

Female figurines displaying genitalia are much rarer than
ithyphallic male figurines. The fifteen examples from the sanctuary of
Zeus Messapeus form an unusually large collection of this type. These
figurines, like the ithyphallic figurines discussed above, were all handmade and are very crude in form (Fig. 45). Their posture, with arms and
Fig. 44
267
There were thirty-two examples of this type from this site. See Cavanaugh et al. 1996, p. 190 no. 63.
Fragmentary examples of phalloi were also found. See Cavanaugh et al. 1996, p. 191 no. 68.
268
Cavanaugh et al. 1996, p. 190, no. 61 (female figures displaying genitalia fifteen examples), and no.
62 (pregnant figurines).
269
Catling 1990b, p. 34.
270
Euripides, Ion, 404-424; for inquiries concerning fertility made at the oracle at Dodona by men, see
Parke 1967, nos. II.7, II.8, II.9, and II.11.
271
Zeus was occasionally even included among the divinities of childbirth. See above, p. 38.
175
legs spread, allows the genitals to be exposed prominently. Though figurines in which
the female genitalia are displayed have often been interpreted as being apotropaic in
function, I would argue that these figurines were intended to graphically symbolize
human fertility. Since figurines displaying both male and female reproductive elements
were found at this sanctuary, as well as two figurines illustrating pregnancy, the
interpretation of these figurines as fertility votives seems to provide the best
explanation.
Fig. 45
176
Conclusions: The Use of Figurines as Childbirth Votives

From the survey above, we may draw some general conclusions about the use of
figurines as childbirth votives. Erotic figurine types, including erotic groups and
figurines in which the male or female genitalia were displayed, may in some instances
have been dedicated in the desire to increase human fertility. The sanctuary of
Eileithyia Inatia on Crete and the sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus in Laconia, in which
large numbers of erotic figurine types were found, seem to have included human
fertility as a major focus of worship. Some figurines, such as the ithyphallic male
figurines in the sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus, may well represent male requests for
fertility. In addition to the erotic figurines, a small number of hierodouloi figurines that
had a special cavity in the abdomen to hold a miniature fetus (2.27), may also have been
dedicated as fertility requests. I have suggested that these figurines were dedicated by
young women at the time of marriage in order to assure that the union would be
fruitful.
Figurines representing pregnancy and childbirth are relatively rare in ancient
Greece. In the centuries spanning the Geometric through the Hellenistic periods, only a
small number of pregnancy and childbirth figurines have been identified. The most
common types of figurines representing pregnant or parturient women are those that
either parody pregnancy (such as comedic figurines) or those that exaggerate childbirth
(such as the Baubo figurines). It is not clear that either of these types of figurines were
used as childbirth votives. In the case of the comedic figurines, I have argued that this is
quite unlikely. The Baubo figurines may have occasionally been used as childbirth
votives, since a small number of them were found in sanctuary contexts. Given the fact
that many of them were designed to be suspended, however, it seems that they were
primarily used as apotropaic devices or charms rather than as votives. If they were used
177
during pregnancy and childbirth, as I have suggested above, they probably served as
talismans to ward off danger.
Of the small number of figurines that do depict pregnant or parturient women,
very few portray these conditions in a realistic manner.272 Those that can be identified
most securely as votives seem to cluster particularly in the Geometric and early Archaic
period, and tend to consist of crude handmade figurines. These include the numerous,
unpublished pregnancy figurines found in the Geometric material from the cave of
Eileithyia Inatia at Tsoutsouros on Crete (2.33), similar handmade Archaic figurines
found at the sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus at Tsakona in the Argolid (2.34), a large
plinth-like Geometric pregnancy figurine from a rural shrine at Kavousi (2.24), the
Archaic handmade childbirth groups from Cyprus (see above, p. 154), a 7th century
terracotta pregnancy plaque from Lato, Crete (2.23), and a standing pregnancy figurine
from the Argive Heraeum (2.22). Few explicit examples are dated to the Classical
period. A small late 6th century or early 5th century B.C. example from Corinth (2.30),
which was probably part of a childbirth group, appears to be the latest example of the
handmade types. A standing figurine from the cave of the Nymphs at Pitsa (2.28) may
be included here as the only votive from this period found in good context that
accurately depicts pregnancy.
Although the Hellenistic period produced more numerous examples of realistic
pregnancy figurines, many are known only from museum collections (2.21, 2.31, 2.32).
Without the context in which they were found, it is impossible to determine whether
these figurines were intended to serve as childbirth votives or whether they were
merely genre pieces portraying the human form in its most extreme conditions. Also
produced in the 3rd and 4th centuries B.C. were the figurines of nude women kneeling on
the calyx of a large flower. These figurines may have been dedicated in south Italian
272
Cf. Fig. 50.
178
sanctuaries as childbirth votives, as discussed above (pp. 146-153). It is important to

note, however, that the representation of childbirth presented in these figures is very
much idealized.
From the limited evidence available, then, it appears that after the Archaic
period, figurines explicitly depicting pregnancy or childbirth were rarely dedicated as
childbirth votives. The reason for this may be attributed to any number of different
factors. These include: 1) a general lack of respect for the female role in human
reproduction in Greek culture; 2) the viewpoint that pregnancy and childbirth are not
aesthetically pleasing (a factor particularly appealing for explaining the lack of explicit
votives in the Classical period, given the emphasis in Classical art on representing the
ideal human form); 3) a hesitancy to depict such liminal states as pregnancy and
childbirth, both of which are not only dangerous times but also spiritually polluting,
and 4) a purely practical reasonthat it was not so much the state of pregnancy nor the
act of childbirth that was desired, but the end result: a child. Thus the votive would not
depict the means by which this was obtained, but the result itself.
Though each of these factors undoubtedly contributed to the trends discussed
above, the last deserves further consideration. While we know from literary sources that
young mothers wished to thank the gods for a safe pregnancy and an easy labor, an
easy pregnancy and quick labor are incidental if the child itself is stillborn, malformed,
or sickly. 273 Pregnancy would have been deemed successful only if it resulted in a
healthy child. It is logical, therefore, that parents would dedicate votives depicting not
pregnancy or the act of birth, but the most desired result, a child.
Given the conclusions drawn above, it is quite surprising that infant figurines
never attained great popularity in Greece, as they did in other parts of the
273
For the fears associated with giving birth and the gratitude shown to the gods who relieved those
fears, see above, pp. 14-21; for the belief that miscarriages and "monstrous" births was a sign of divine
displeasure, see above.
179
Mediterranean. Swaddled infant figurines and infant-in-cradle figurines are

occasionally found in Greek sanctuaries, but they are few in number. Far more common
are figurines that represent seated children and kourotrophos figures. Both of these
types were long lasting, and have been found throughout the Greek world in large
numbers. Since they are found not only in sanctuaries, but also in graves, it is likely that
these figurine types served a variety of functions. When they were used as votives, they
were usually dedicated to gods of childbirth and childcare, and were probably
dedicated for related reasons. Figurines of seated children may well have been
dedicated as votives to request offspring (rather than as thank offerings after birth),
since the great majority of them are male, reflecting the cultural preference for male
children.
Figurines portraying children and kourotrophoi may have been preferred over
infant figurines as a matter of practicality. Votives were often multi-functional, and
those that were more generic in their representation could more readily serve a variety
of purposes. A childbirth votive could easily be expected to convey multiple meanings
to the gods, serving to express the parents gratitude for the success of the birth, to mark
the occasion of the presentation of the infant to the god, and to convey the desire for
continued protection of the child. Given the complex layers of meaning that a votive of
this sort could have, parents may well have considered the kourotrophos and seated
child figurines more useful in expressing their wishes than those figurines whose
iconography was specifically related to pregnancy, birth, or infancy.
180
Votive Reliefs
Carved figural reliefs, though an extremely popular type of votive in many parts
of Greece, rarely seem to have been dedicated as childbirth votives. Using the criteria
established above (p. 97), I have cataloged fifteen possible examples. The dates of these
reliefs, often established on stylistic grounds, range from the end of the 6th century B.C.
to the 4th century A.D. Most are Classical or Hellenistic in date, however, with only one
example dating earlier than the 5th century B.C. (3.3) and one example later than the 2nd
century B.C. (3.6). These reliefs are also scattered over a wide geographical area. Of the
fifteen reliefs, two are from Attica (3.2 and 3.5, both from Athens), two from the
Peloponnese (3.6, from Hippola, 3.7 from Lakonia), two from Thessaly (3.13, from
Echinos, 3.14, from Steleia near Tricca), one from Asia Minor (3.15, Sigeion), one from
the Propontis (3.3, near Calchedon), and six from the Cyclades (3.1, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.12, all
from Delos, and 3.11, from Paros). One relief lacks provenance (3.4).
One of the greatest problems with using reliefs to reconstruct religious activity is
the poor contexts in which they are often found. In general, few reliefs are uncovered
through proper excavation. Frequently, they are discovered as isolated finds or reused
in later structures. In these instances, the original context can sometimes be
reconstructed, depending on where they have been found and whether they have been
inscribed. Most frustrating of all are those that are known only from private collections,
since the context in which they were used is entirely lost. The interpretation of these
reliefs is dependent solely upon iconographical clues, which are rarely straightforward.
Before examining the reliefs themselves, therefore, a brief discussion of context is in
order.
180
Context
Only a small number of the votive reliefs considered here have been excavated
from secure sanctuary contexts. The most important of these come from a small rural
sanctuary on the southern peak of Mt. Kynthos, on the island of Delos.274 This sanctuary
was established in the 5th century B.C., but did not reach its height until the 2nd century.
This was never a large sanctuary; it consisted only of a terrace surrounded by a temenos
wall, a small temple, and an altar. Excavations near the temple in the 1920s produced a
cache of votive reliefs, most in fragmentary condition. Four of the better preserved
examples have been included in this chapter (3.1, 3.8, 3.9, 3.12). Although it is likely
that many of the others were also used as childbirth votives, they were not sufficiently
preserved to enable conclusions to be drawn about them. The reliefs from this sanctuary
are securely connected with childbirth ritual. The sanctuary itself has been identified as
that of Artemis Lochia on the basis of both literary evidence and the iconography of the
reliefs themselves.275 It is worth noting that this sanctuary is the only site to produce
several reliefs that have been identified as childbirth votives.
All the other reliefs discussed in this chapter are isolated examples. One
example, 3.5, was found in a clear sanctuary context. It was excavated from a minor
shrine of Artemis Kalliste in the Kerameikos of Athens. This shrine was identified as a
childbirth sanctuary due to a number of female antatomical votives discovered in the
area.276 We may with some misgivings include in this list a small fragment of a relief
found on Paros (3.11), whose context is known only as "sanctuary of Eileithyia (?)."
274
For this sanctuary, see above, p. 49.

The evidence for identifying this site as a sanctuary of Artemis Lochia, see p. 54.
276
For the sanctuary of Artemis Kalliste in Athens, see p. 66.
275
181
Far more problematic are those reliefs that have been discovered by accident or
found in a reused context. The earliest of the reliefs, 3.3, was a chance find, discovered
on the east coast of the Bosphoros, near the site of Calchedon. Unfortunately, the precise
details of the discovery were not recorded. Three other reliefs (3.6, 3.14, and 3.15) were
found reused in later churches. Despite the fact that they have been divorced from their
original contexts, we can often reconstruct their use. In the case of 3.6, a very rough
relief dated stylistically to the 4th century A.C., a dedicatory inscription enables us to
identify it as a votive to Eileithyia. A poorly preserved relief now in the Volos Museum,
3.14, was found by Kastriotis in a church in Steleia, Thessaly. Panagiotes Kastriotis
found another votive relief, not cataloged here, depicting Artemis, Apollo, and Leto, in
the same church. The proximity of both of these reliefs to a nearby sanctuary located on
the acropolis of Paliokastro may indicate that they had originally been dedicated
there.277 Among the most interesting of the reliefs is 3.13, which represents in unusual
detail a mother presenting her child to Artemis. This relief was recently excavated near
the south slope of the ancient city of Echinos, apparently in a domestic area of the city.
The shape and iconography of the relief indicates that it was a votive dedicated to
Artemis, and it is a reasonable assumption that the relief was originally dedicated in a
nearby sanctuary of this goddess, especially since statues of women and children were
also found near the relief.278
A number of reliefs that are important to this study lack provenance. Some, such
as 3.4 and 3.7, were originally part of private collections and are now housed in various
museums. 3.10, currently stored in the Delos Archaeological Museum, is unusual in that
277
Kastriotis 1903, pp. 40-41.

Dakoronia 1980, pp. 238-240. To my knowledge, the sanctuary itself has not been located. The statues
found in the area, only briefly mentioned in the report by Dakoronia, are of considerable interest, as they
may well have been childbirth votives, too.
278
182
it appears to have been a stray find whose circumstances of discovery either were never
properly recorded or were subsequently lost. Given their lack of context, in most cases,
the information that such reliefs may add to the discussion of childbirth votives is
minimal, though in the case of 3.7, a dedicatory inscription identifies it as a votive to
Eileithyia.
Reliefs Depicting Pregnancy

Among the various votive reliefs found in the sanctuary of Artemis Lochia on
Delos was 3.1 (Fig. 46), a poorly
preserved and fragmentary relief
that depicts a female worshipper
offering an animal sacrifice to
Artemis.279 This relief played an
important role in the identification
of the shrine as a childbirth
sanctuary, since the exceptionally
Fig. 46
wide torso of the female
worshipper was interpreted by Demangel and Plassart to indicate pregnancy.280 Based

primarily upon the iconography of 3.1 and a passage in Euripides' Iphigeneia at Taurus,
which mentions a sanctuary of Artemis Lochia on Mt. Kynthos, both scholars assumed
that this sanctuary was the focus of childbirth and fertility worship.281 Interestingly, this
279
Athough only the lower body of the goddess is preserved in this relief, the identification of her as
Artemis is likely, given the fact that she is shown in a short hunting chiton and that other reliefs from this
sanctuary clearly depict Artemis or have dedicatory inscriptions in which her name is partially preserved.
280
Demangel 1922, p. 78; Delos XI, pp. 300-302. Bruneau was less certain of this interpretation. Bruneau
1970, p. 191.
281
Euripides, I.T. 1097-1099; Demangel 1922; Delos XI, pp. 304-305.
183
relief was the only one found in the sanctuary whose iconography explicitly made
reference to fertility or pregnancy, though the poor state of preservation of these reliefs
in many cases would make such an identification impossible.
To support the
interpretation of the female
figure in 3.1 as pregnant,
Plassart cited as comparanda a
similar relief found on the
Athenian Acropolis (3.2, Fig.
47).282 This relief, like the one
from Delos (3.1), depicts a scene
of animal sacrifice performed in
the presence of a goddess.
Here, though, the goddess is
Athena, and instead of a single
Fig. 47
female worshipper, there is an

entire family. As early as 1902, Baur pointed out that the woman in the Athenian relief
was shown wearing a chiton which noticeably protrudes at the waist. As a result of this
observation, Baur interpreted 3.2 as a childbirth votive, dedicated to Athena as a
kourotrophos and childbirth divinity, an identification which others adopted as well.283
I have had the opportunity to examine both 3.1 and 3.2 in person, and indeed, despite
their poor preservation, the abdomen of the female figure in each case does appear
282
Delos XI, p. 302.

Baur 1902, p. 48. Lehmann-Hartleben (1926) suggested that the choice of animal to be sacrificed was
also significant for interpreting this relief, as pigs are often associated with chthonic cult. Palagia (1995)
rejects this interpretation, but her suggestion that it represents a family at the Apaturia is equally
283
184
larger and more rounded than usual. From a purely iconographical point of view, then,
the possibility does exist that these figures were intended to represent pregnant women.
The sacrificial scene that comprises the subject of these reliefs is also consistent
with what we know of the religious practices of pregnant women in Greece. Although
pregnancy was recognized as a time of considerable spiritual and physical
vulnerability, there was no taboo against pregnant women appearing in public.284 In
fact, there is good evidence to suggest that it was considered both normal and proper
for women to visit shrines throughout their pregnancy and to offer animal sacrifices
similar to those depicted on the reliefs.285 Given the limited evidence at hand, it is
indeed possible that these reliefs depict pregnant figures.
If this interpretation is correct, there are some interesting points to consider. The
first is that there are extraordinarily few of these reliefs. To my knowledge, 3.1 and 3.2
are the only two votive reliefs to depict pregnant women (excluding those that
represent women in the act of childbirth, which are discussed below). This does not
mean that we should automatically dismiss the possibility that they are explicit
childbirth votives. As I have indicated in the preceding section, votive figurines
representing pregnancy are also rare, but some examples do exist.286 Nevertheless, the
fact that only two such votives have ever been found, even within those sanctuaries that
would have been frequented by pregnant women, deserves further attention.
One possible reason that votives of this type are even more rare than pregnancy
figurines may have to do with the usual pattern of dedicating votives within Greek
tenuous.
284
The only possible instance of this is found in Censorinus (11.7) which suggests that, from the time of
conception to the fortieth day of pregnancy, Greek women were not allowed in sacred areas. As Parker
(1983, pp. 48-49) notes, however, this practice would be difficult to enforce, as many women would not be
aware of their pregnancy during the first 40 days. See Parker.
285
See pp. 72-75.
286
See pp. 132-136.
185
sanctuaries. While small, inexpensive gifts could be offered to the gods when a
worshipper sought divine aid, it was customary to present larger, costlier gifts in thanks
after the prayer had been granted. Thus, a woman praying for fertility could dedicate a
small figurine showing the desired state of pregnancy, but a large marble votive relief
might be considered inappropriately expensive for an initial gift. Indeed, it seems that
even those who could afford to make such lavish preliminary offerings were rarely
inclined to do so. It is more likely that these reliefs were dedicated as true ex-votos, as
offerings of thanks after the fulfillment of one's prayer. If this were the case, then the
size and expense of the reliefs would be perfectly suitable, but the choice of
iconography is rather unusual. If these reliefs were dedicated as thank-offerings for a
successful birth, we would not expect them to represent the female worshipper still
pregnant. In this context, it is not surprising that there are very few large-scale votives
that illustrate the state of pregnancy. Indeed, it is far more unusual that any might exist
at all.
Also extraordinary is the fact that the artists who carved them chose to represent
pregnancy in a very subtle manner. The women in these reliefs are shown in a normal
setting, properly clothed and performing an ordinary activity. This is considerably
different from the terracotta figurines examined above, in which pregnant female
figures are often depicted nude and with very large, protruding abdomens to draw
attention to their condition. Here, the status of pregnancy is so subtly indicated that it
has led us to question whether this was the artists' intention at all. This is surely
significant. For, if these are childbirth votives offered by pregnant women to request a
safe childbirth, one might reasonably assume that the pregnancy of the female
worshipper would be emphasized as the focal point of the relief.
186
Perhaps, though, this assumption needs to be reconsidered, especially in regard

to the Athenian example (3.2). I have already discussed how a single figurine dedicated
to a divinity could serve several functions at once: to give thanks for a prayer granted,
to commemorate an important event, and to request the god's further assistance.
Perhaps these two extraordinary reliefs were likewise intended to serve multiple
purposes. A husband and wife may well have regarded the fertility of their marriage in
much the same manner that they would regard the fertility of the fields or the success of
the family business: all are signs of general prosperity and good fortune granted by the
gods. A dedication like 3.2 could easily serve several functions at once: to thank the
divinity for the general prosperity and good fortune enjoyed by the family, to offer
thanks more specifically for the fertility of the marriage, and, at the same time, to
remind the divinity to continue to look favorably upon the fortunes of the family. If,
then, these two reliefs do depict the female worshippers in a state of pregnancy, the
most likely interpretation of them is that they were dedicated as thank offerings for
prosperity and fertility rather than exclusively as childbirth votives.
Reliefs Depicting Childbirth

In comparison to
the pregnancy reliefs, the
childbirth reliefs are far
more problematic, in
terms of both their context
and their iconography.
Only three reliefs are
Fig. 48
187
included in this group. The first, 3.3 (Fig. 48), was a chance find near the city of
Calchedon, dated to the end of the 6th century B.C. It is extremely unfortunate that its
context is unknown, as the iconography of the relief has been the subject of considerable
debate. The relief has been variously interpreted as either a votive depicting the birth of
Athena from the head of Zeus or as a funerary stele set up for a woman who died in
childbirth.
The decoration, in very low relief and not well preserved, consists of five figures.
In the center is a seated figure, facing right, whose gender is uncertain. On either side
stands a woman who places her hands on the seated figure in a gesture of support and
comfort. At the edges of the relief on each side stands a smaller female figure, who faces
the central scene. The figure on the left holds out both hands towards the seated figure,
while the one on the right raises her right hand to her head.
The iconography of this relief is well suited for a birth scene. The fact that the
central figure is seated and serves as the focus of attention, and the presence of women
who assist this figure are features that are nearly universal in childbirth scenes in all
periods of Greek art.287 It is very difficult to go beyond this identification of a generic
birth scene in order to determine the specific event that is represented, however. The
iconographical clues in most cases could be applied to either of the two prevailing
interpretations, and the inscription that ran above the figural decoration is so badly
preserved that it can be restored to support either view.
Reinach, who initially published the relief, viewed the scene as illustrating the
birth of Athena and argued that it was originally a votive dedicated to Eileithyia in her
role as childbirth goddess.288 Several scholars have followed in this interpretation, most
287
288
See below, pp. 225-245.

Reinach 1901.
188
recently Pingiatoglu, who offers the following restoration suggested by Peek:

NIKOGENEIA TAIS ELEUQIAIS EME KATEQHKEN.289 A number of details support
this identification; the most notable is that the scene is nearly identical to contemporary
representations of the birth of Athena on black figure pottery.290 In particular, the
arrangement of Zeus seated in the center and flanked by two standing female figures
(usually interpreted as the Eileithyiai) who lay their hands upon him to assist in the
childbirth, is particularly common.291 Though most representations of this myth focus
upon Athena springing from her father's head, Reinach explained the goddess' absence
in this relief by suggesting that the artist chose to depict the moment before the birth
occurred. The absence of Athena is also attested in several black figure vases. 292 The fact
that one of the assistants is depicted massaging the head of the seated figure also fits
well with the identification of the subject as the birth of Athena.
In the 1950s, Jeffrey reinterpreted the relief, suggesting that it belonged to the
type of funerary monument that depicts women who died in childbirth.293 Jeffrey
restored the inscription to read: : [?ELIKOS EMI SHMA O DEINA (c. 11) EME
KATEQHKEN.294 This interpretation is also supported by iconographical details. The
fact that the seated figure clings to the arms of one of the assistants, for example, is
suggestive of a scene of death in childbirth rather than the birth of Athena. Most vase
paintings of the birth of Athena show Zeus in a stoic position, often holding a staff or a
thunderbolt in his hands, whereas this gesture is common in later funerary stelai
289
Lechat 1901, p. 417; Mendel 1914, p. 227 no. 524; Cook 1940, p. 667; Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 137.
For examples of these scenes, see pp. 226-227.
291
See, for example, Fig. 63.
292
For this variation of the birth of Athena, see Penkova 1984, p. 986 nos. 334-342.
293
Jeffrey 1955, pp. 81-83. On burial monuments depicting death in childbirth, see below, pp. 232-240.
294
Jeffrey 1955, p. 81.
290
189
depicting scenes of death in childbirth.295

The different sizes of the figures in the relief are also of interest. Pingiatoglu
notes that the two figures that stand beside the throne are larger than the others, and
suggests that their larger stature is indicative of their status as divinities. This need not
be the case, however, for servants and slaves were frequently shown in smaller scale
than their masters.296 The size difference of the figures on this relief therefore is
probably indicative of a difference in social status among mortals rather than the
difference between divinities and humans. The presence of servants in a scene of
childbirth is common, but I know of no representations of mortals (either as servants or
as worshippers) in artistic representations of the birth of Athena.
The presence of servants is, in fact, in keeping with the setting in which the scene
appears to take place. Jeffrey noted several elements in the relief that seemed to indicate
a domestic setting, including the presence of a wall on the right side of the relief and a
hand mirror hanging in the background.297 Similar elements indicate an interior setting
on other funerary stelai of the same genre.298
Finally, as Jeffrey herself noted, the gesture of the hand raised to the head, made
by the small figure on the right side of the relief, is usually interpreted as a sign of
mourning. This posture appears with frequency on funerary monuments, and a number
of stelai and lekythoi that commemorate death in childbirth have a figure to one side
who touches his hand to his forehead. Although, as Pingiatoglu and others have
observed, this gesture could occasionally be used to indicate either surprise or an
295
See Figs. 63-76.

For this difference on death-in-childbirth reliefs, see, for instance, Figs. 70-72.
297
Jeffrey 1955, p. 82.
298
Cf. a stele in the Arthur M. Sackler Museum (no. 1905.8). On the architectural details in this stele, see
Stewart and Gray 2000.
296
190
attitude of worship, neither of those meanings seems likely here.299 In scenes of the birth
of Athena, the divinities that witness the event are often shown in an attitude of
surprise, but never in this form. Most often, the figures hold their hands up and open,
as if startled. The interpretation of this gesture as one of worship is also unlikely, since
in vase paintings the only witnesses to the birth of Athena are other divinities.
The iconographical evidence, then, seems somewhat more appropriate for a
funerary stele than for a votive relief. It is quite possible, in fact, that its similarity with
representations of the birth of Athena is due to the popularity of this myth in art at the
time that the relief was created. The local artists who carved the relief as part of a
funerary monument may well have been inspired by contemporary representations of
the birth of Athena in other media.
The only difficulty in conclusively labeling this relief as a funeral stele is
presented by the fact that the subject matter is unique for Archaic funerary monuments.
Other examples depicting death in
childbirth do not appear until the 4th
century B.C. It is not impossible, as
Jeffrey states, that the Archaic artists of
Calchedon were more experimental in
their approach to subject matter than
their mainland counterparts, but it does
seem somewhat unusual that the theme
of death in childbirth appeared nowhere
else in Greek funerary art for roughly
299
Fig. 49
Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 137. See also Kontoleon 1970, pp. 1-21.
191
two hundred years.

Another relief depicting childbirth, 3.4 (Fig. 49), is also problematic. The
provenance of this relief, currently housed in the New York Metropolitan Museum of
Art, is unknown, and like the relief from Calchedon discussed above (3.3), the
iconography is unique. In the center is a woman, slumped in her chair, with clothing
disheveled, presumably immediately after having given birth. To the right is a servant
or family member who supports the head of the seated woman and cradles the
newborn baby in her arm. At the left of the relief, only partially preserved, stands a
female divinity and traces of a second divinity, both in larger scale than the other
figures. The preserved female divinity holds a small torch in her left hand, clearly
indicating divine status. There is no inscription to identify the deities; they have been
300
variously interpreted as Asklepios and Hygeia or Artemis andFig.
Eileithyia.
Given the
49
attribute of the torch and the focus of the scene, the latter identification is more likely.
This relief is exceptional in that it combines standard elements of funerary
monuments within a clearly votive context. The slumped posture and disheveled
appearance of the new mother and the presence of a female assistant who holds the
newborn child are common elements of the death-in-childbirth stelai and lekythoi.301
These details are not exclusive to funerary monuments, however. There is at least one
vase painting, depicting the death of Semele, in which the same posture and unkempt
appearance are used to indicate that Semele died in the midst of childbirth.302 Even in
this instance, however, the image does not portray a successful birth, but a birth in
which the mother died. This relief is therefore unique in using these iconographical
300
Asklepios and Hygeia: Richter 1954, p. 44 no. 67; Eileithyia and Artemis Lochia: Mitropoulou 1977, p.
45 no. 66.
301
See pp. 232-240.
302
See pp. 239-240, Fig. 76.
192
details within the context of a successful birth. The physical presence of the divinities is
also an unusual feature. Though this depiction is certainly in keeping with literary
references that imply that the attendance of the gods at the time of birth was desired, I
know of no other artistic representations of divine participants at a human birth.303
The authenticity of the relief has recently been questioned. Pingiatoglu argued
that certain details, such as the bared breast of the new mother and the hand-held torch,
were cause for suspicion.304 The torch type with a short handle is, as Pingiatoglu
commented, unusual for a divine attribute; most representations of childbirth
goddesses depict a torch with a handle that reaches to the ground. I would also agree
that, although the bared breast is common in contemporary scenes of childbirth, it is
more appropriate for a woman who died in childbirth than for a grateful votary whose
childbirth was successful.305 Given these iconographical peculiarities, the uniqueness of
the theme, and the fact that this relief has no recorded provenance, Pingiatoglus
suspicions about this relief seem well-founded.
One final relief may be mentioned here, though only in passing. Illustrated in
Greek Medicine by Eustace Phillips is a surprisingly graphic relief of childbirth (Fig. 50).
The image is of a parturient woman, fully nude, in a squatting position on a birthing
stool. She is depicted at the moment of crowning, when the infant's head first becomes
visible. She is supported on either side by an assistant, one of whom places her hand on
the woman's abdomen, perhaps massaging it. A midwife, depicted at the lower left,
prepares to catch the baby as it emerges. Another assistant at the lower right prepares
the birthing implements: a basin and oil for the baby's bath. Phillips' caption for this
303
Cf. Euripides, Hipp. 165; Anth. Pal. 6.146; Anth. Pal. 6.271; Anth. Pal. 6.273; Callimachus, Hymn to
Artemis 20-25.
304
Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 140 no. 7. See also Vedder 1988, p. 178 n. 81; Stewart and Gray 2000, p. 262 n. 27.
305
For the bared breast as a symbol of distress or defeat, see Cohen 1997.
193
relief describes it only as "a fifth-century BC relief showing a birth." 306 I have been
unable to discover any additional information about this artifact. If it is genuine, this is
by far the most explicit childbirth representation in all of Greek art. The details of the
relief, such as the crowning baby, the squatting position of the parturient mother on the
birthing chair, the position of the midwife,
and the various implements used in birth are
unique in classical Greek art. Indeed, it is
hard to imagine in what context such a relief
would have been used. Though Roman
tombs frequently depict accurate birth scenes
in such detail, classical Greek funerary reliefs
do not.307 And, although some Greek votive
figurines depict birth groupings and
Fig. 50
parturient women with a considerable
degree of accuracy, none appears in the Classical period, when depictions of female
nudity were rare.308
Scenes of Sacrifice
A number of reliefs depict generic sacrifice scenes similar to those found in many
Greek sanctuaries (3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, and 3.9). Standard elements of these reliefs include
one or more worshippers standing before an altar, behind which appears the divinity.
306
Phillips 1973, fig. 3. The same image is illustrated in Siegerist 1961, p. 316 fig. 8.
For Roman birth scenes, see, for example French 1986, pl. 1 (terracotta relief from the Isola Sacra,
Ostia), pl. 2 (an ivory plaque from Pompeii) and pl. 3 (a marble relief from the Silvestro Baglioni
collection). For Greek funerary monuments, see pp. 232-240.
308
Accurate depictions of childbirth in Greek votives include Baubo figurines (mostly Hellenistic in date),
and terracotta Cypriot childbirth groups (Archaic period).
307
194
Two of these reliefs, 3.7 and 3.6, are unfortunately too fragmentary to preserve the
figure of the divinity, but in both cases, inscriptions record that the relief was dedicated
to Eileithyia. Three other reliefs, 3.5, 3.8, and 3.9, may be assigned to Artemis on the
basis of iconographical evidence and the location in which they were found. In each of
these reliefs, the goddess is shown wearing a long chiton and holding a torch, an
attribute well attested for Artemis; the identification of the goddess in each of these
cases is strengthened by other votives found in the same area that preserve the name of
the goddess in dedicatory inscriptions. In the case of 3.8 and 3.9, other reliefs found in
the same sanctuary on Delos identify the goddess as Artemis Lochia. One relief, 3.5, was
excavated in the Athenian Kerameikos near several female anatomical votives with
dedicatory inscriptions to Kalliste.309 The identification of this name as an epithet of
Artemis is assured by a passage in Pausanias that mentions a sanctuary of Artemis
Kalliste in the area.310
The interpretation of these reliefs as childbirth votives in most cases is
determined by the nature of the goddesses to whom they were dedicated. The fact that
they were dedicated to Eileithyia and to Artemis Lochia makes their connection to
childbirth quite likely. The
identification of 3.5 (Fig. 53) as a
childbirth votive is the least secure. This
relief, dedicated to Artemis Kalliste, has
been interpreted as a childbirth votive
by Philadelpheus, who regarded the
presence of several female anatomical
Fig. 51
309
310
These votives (1.5 and 1.53) are discussed above.

Pausanias 1.29.2.
195
votives in the area as evidence that this cult of Artemis was focused on female concerns,
including fertility and childbirth.311
A number of different configurations of worshippers are shown on these reliefs.
Children are present on several examples. The 4th
century A.D. relief from Hippola (3.6) and one of
the reliefs from Delos (3.8, Fig. 51) each have three
children accompanying the adult worshippers, and
in a Lakonian relief (3.7, Fig. 52), a small figure at
the far right of the relief, though depicted as a
miniature adult wearing the same clothing and
Fig. 52
standing in the same pose as the larger figures, is probably intended to represent a child
rather than a servant. Despite the presence of children on most of the reliefs, only two of
them seem to depict family groupings. In the case of the Kalliste relief (3.5, Fig. 53), the
worshippers consist of an adult male and an adult female without children. These
figures most likely represent a married couple. The fact that no children are portrayed
on this relief led Rousselle to interpret it as a dedication offered as an appeal to Artemis
for fertility.312 The relief from Delos (3.8, Fig. 51) depicts an entire family, in which a
couple is shown with their three small children, who watch their parents pray to
Artemis but who do not participate in the activity themselves. Unlike the reliefs to
Artemis that I have just discussed, those that were dedicated to Eileithyia represent
only female figures and children, rather than families. The Lakonian relief, inscribed to
Eileithyia (3.7, Fig. 52) has two adult female figures and one female child, and in the
relief from Hippola (3.6), a single adult female leads three children to the altar.
311
312
Philadelpheus 1927; see also Roussel 1927.

Roussel 1927.
196
It is tempting, on the basis of these reliefs, to try to draw a distinction in the types
of worshippers who frequented the sanctuaries of these two goddesses. We might
assume that Artemis, as a more mainstream Olympian divinity, would be the focus of
family worship, while a lesser goddess such as Eileithyia would receive the exclusive
worship of women. Such a distinction is undoubtedly false, however. These four reliefs
in themselves do not constitute a sample large enough to draw inferences of this sort; in
addition, other reliefs do not support such conclusions. For instance, the sanctuary of
Artemis Lochia on Delos, from which 3.8 came, seems to have received worship from
female worshippers acting alone as well as families (3.1, Fig. 46).313
The reliefs depicting scenes of
sacrifice should be interpreted in much the
same way as the pregnancy reliefs discussed
above, which were probably a more specific
variation of this rather generic votive type.
Such reliefs would have been useful for any
number of
occasions,
Fig. 53
including the
increase of the family through the birth of a child, and
would be an appropriate thank offering to the divinity
while serving as a constant reminder to the god to
Fig. 54
continue to keep the family in his or her care.314
313
It must be noted, however, that many of the reliefs from this sanctuary are in very fragmentary
condition, and may have originally contained other figures.
314
We might compare similar reliefs found at Brauron that depict families with small children making
sacrifices to Artemis and to the Apolline triad. On these, see Kondis 1967, especially pl. 104 and 105.
197
Other Scenes of Worship

In addition to scenes of sacrifice, at least four other reliefs depict scenes of
worship. These reliefs are extraordinarily difficult to interpret, however, since most are
fragmentary and poorly preserved. The best preserved of the group is 3.10 (Fig. 55), a
relief found on Delos during early exploration of the island, and whose exact findspot is
no longer known. The decoration consists of only two figures: a female worshipper, in
small scale, on the right, and a larger female divinity standing on the left. The goddess
leans her right arm on a pillar; in her left hand she holds a torch.
The iconography of the goddess is consistent
with that of Artemis, though Eileithyia could also be
represented holding a torch. Since sanctuaries of both
goddesses existed on Delos, we cannot conclusively
assign the relief to either.315 Nor is it possible to
securely identify this as a childbirth votive, though
the probability of this identification is quite strong,
given the fact that both Artemis and Eileithyia were
worshipped in this capacity on the island. The scene
represented in the relief, though quite generic, is also
suitable for a childbirth votive.316 It is possible that
such scenes of worshippers and divinities were
315
Fig. 55
The relief itself has been dated to the 5th century B.C. on stylistic grounds. If this date is correct, then
the relief may well have come from the sanctuary of Artemis, which was first established around this
time, rather than from the sanctuary of Eileithyia, which is first mentioned in a late 4th century B.C.
inscription. For both of these sanctuaries, see above, pp. 49-52.
316
We may compare, for example, the relief decoration on a votive stele from the city of Gonnoi. That
stele, inscribed to Artemis Euonymos, shows a similar scene in which a female worshipper stands before
the goddess. Gonnoi II, no. 167.
198
regarded as simplified versions of sacrifice scenes, in which the relationship between

the worshipper and divinity is made the focus.
We might interpret another relief, 3.11 (Fig. 56) in a similar light, since it was
found on the island of Paros, where there was an important sanctuary of Eileithyia. In
this case, the imagery has been pared down even further. The relief, in very
fragmentary condition, appears to depict a single female figure. She is portrayed in an
unusual frontal position, shown looking directly at the viewer. Her right hand is raised,
palm forward. Although the identification of the
figure is not certain, the gesture of the raised hand is
better suited
for a
worshipper
than for a
Fig. 56
goddess.317
This relief may only tentatively be considered a

childbirth votive. Although the exact place and
Fig. 57
circumstances of its discovery are unknown, this relief may have come from the
Eileithyia sanctuary; its context was recorded simply as "Eileithyia sanctuary (?)." It is
worth noting that the sanctuary of Eileithyia on this island had numerous rock-cut
niches that could easily have accommodated a relief of this size.318 Although speculative
due to the poor preservation of the relief, it is possible that the figure in this relief
originally held a small child or infant in her other arm. If this were the case, 3.11 may
have served a function similar to that of the terracotta kourotrophos figurines that were
317
Pingiatoglu suggests, in fact, that this figure may represent the goddess rather than her worshipper.
See Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 123.
199
so popular in childbirth sanctuaries.319

One of the numerous relief fragments from the sanctuary of Artemis Lochia on
Delos (3.12, Fig. 57) illustrates an unusual scene. A female figure is shown holding a
large torch in her right hand and, bending over, she leans against an object that is often
identified as the trunk of a palm tree. If she were standing upright, the figure holding a
torch could easily be interpreted as Artemis. The unusual posture calls for further
examination, however. The most likely explanation is that this relief is in some way
related to the myth of the birth of Apollo. In early versions of this story, Leto grasps a
palm tree during her delivery.320 It is possible, as Pingiatoglu suggests, that this relief
represents the birth of Apollo by Leto, and served as a visual reminder of Artemis' role
as midwife.321 This theme would certainly be congruent with the cult of Artemis as a
childbirth divinity. Yet, this interpretation is not entirely convincing. Though
corresponding with literary sources that describe Leto's use of a palm tree during birth,
3.12 lacks a number of iconographical clues that usually accompany birth scenes in
Greek art. Other depictions of this myth tend to illustrate the goddess seated in a chair,
as is standard in most representations of mythical birth scenes.322 The fact that the
goddess is depicted alone during her travail is also unusual; most birth scenes include
at least one other female figure assisting in the birth.323 Given the importance of Artemis
318
For the sanctuary of Eileithyia at Paros, see pp. 45-46.

For the type, see pp. 150-155. Although no kourotrophos figurines were found in the sanctuary of
Eileithyia at Paros, several examples of terracotta figurines of the seated child type were dedicated there,
as well as a marble relief of the same type. See Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 127.
320
Homeric Hymn to Apollo, 113; Theognis, El. 1.6.
321
322
Artistic depictions of Leto seated on a birthing chair contradict the Homeric Hymn to Apollo , which
mentions that Leto gave birth in a kneeling position. On the kneeling birthing posture, see pp. 136-149. It
may be that the Classical artists who illustrated this myth chose to depict Leto's birth in a seated position
rather than kneeling because it was considered somewhat more dignified, or possibly because this was
more in keeping with contemporary practices. Compare with scenes of death in childbirth on 4th century
B.C. funerary stelai and lekythoi, all of which depict the parturient woman on a chair or bed. These are
discussed above, pp. 232-239.
323
Compare, for example, an Eretrian pyxis (Fig. 66) in which Leto is shown surrounded by numerous
319
200
in this myth, one might expect this goddess to be represented on the relief in her role as
divine midwife. If she did originally appear in this relief, however, she would have
been shown standing in front of Leto on a part of the relief no longer preserved, since
this is the only space possible for an additional figure.324 Most scenes of childbirth tend
to depict assistants and midwives standing very close to the parturient woman, often
touching or supporting her from behind; the depiction of Artemis standing to one side
rather than actively helping in the birth would have presented quite an awkward scene.
Presentation of the Child to the Gods

Among the most interesting and important reliefs to be examined here is a
marble votive relief that was excavated in 1979 on a plot of land near the south slope of
the Acropolis of Echinos in Northern Greece (3.13, Fig. 58). Dated stylistically to end of
the 5th century B.C., it is unique in its depiction of a specific ritual associated with
Fig. 58
other goddesses.
324
Even if, as Pingiatoglu suggests, this shrine on Mt. Kynthos was sacred to both Leto and Artemis, it is
unlikely that a relief depicting Leto in labor would have failed to represent Artemis in the role of
midwife. Pingitatoglu 1981, pp. 117-118.
201
childbirth: the presentation of the newborn child to the gods.325 The relief depicts six
figures in all. At the far right is Artemis, standing before her altar and holding a torch in
her right hand. A quiver is just visible behind her right shoulder. Approaching the altar
is a string of worshippers, led by a young temple assistant who prepares to slaughter a
very small bull.326 Behind the assistant is an adult female worshipper, who carries a
small child in her extended arms. The child leans forward and reaches out to Artemis.
Further to the left is a female servant who carries a tray of food offerings on her head
and a vessel in her right hand. At the far left is a veiled adult female, who raises her
hand toward the goddess in a gesture of worship.
This relief has been interpreted as a childbirth votive illustrating the first
presentation of the infant to the goddess after birth.327 The clothes hanging in the
background may well be, as Dakronia and Gounaropoulou suggest, those articles that
new mothers dedicated as childbirth offerings to Artemis.328 The authors also noted that
the food offerings carried by the servant in the relief have connotations of fertility.329
These include an apple, a pomegranate, small cakes, a myrtle branch, and a cluster of
grapes. Such items, as symbols of fertility, were likely offerings to celebrate a successful
birth.330
The fact that it is a child represented in this relief rather than a newborn infant is
somewhat perplexing. It is possible, of course, that what is represented here is not the
presentation of a newborn after birth, but perhaps a similar ritual performed for an
325
On this practice, see pp. 91-94.

The animal represented here appears to be a bull, as it has horns, but its disproportionately small size
makes one wonder whether the artist simply ran out of room or whether he had intended to convey a
calf.
327
Dakoronia and Gounaropoulou 1992; Cole 1998, pp. 34-35.
328
Dakoronia and Gounaropoulou 1992, p. 222. On the dedication of clothing for childbirth, see pp. 212215.
329
Dakoronia and Gounaropoulou 1992, p. 221.
330
The practice of offering food and drink in thanks for childbirth is discussed below, pp. 220-224.
326
202
older child or toddler. There is no way to tell for certain; the details that suggest that
this is a childbirth relief, namely the clothing hanging in the sanctuary and the foods on
the offering tray, cannot conclusively prove this identification. Yet, there is a danger in
placing too much emphasis on the age of the child as well. The identification of the age
of figures in Greek art based upon iconography is notoriously difficult, particularly
when it comes to children.331 According to Sourvinou-Inwood, before approximately
430 B.C., children were frequently represented in Attic art as miniature adults. After
this time, artists became increasingly interested in more naturalistic representations of
children, and began to adopt standard conventions for depicting children as distinct
from adults.332 Recent studies have attempted to address this issue with considerable
success.333 Beaumont distinguished three broad periods of childhood represented in
Classical Attic art: infancy (from birth to three years of age), young childhood (roughly
from the ages of three to seven), and older childhood (from the time of schooling for
boys at around seven years of age to the time of puberty at around thirteen or
fourteen).334 Her findings indicate that these three broad periods reflect general Greek
thinking on the phases of childhood, and that, although people undoubtedly made finer
distinctions among the different ages of children in everyday life, these major phases
were the way that Classical Athenian artists chose to represent children in art.335
Although Beaumont is quick to point out that trends in the artistic representation of
children undoubtedly had both regional and chronological variations, her conclusions
331
Concerning age differentiation among repesentations of children in Greek art, Hamilton despairingly
remarks: "close study of the choes on display in Eleusis and at the National Museum at Athens
convinced me that there is no objective way to differentiate ages among small children: 'fat baby' is more
a matter of style than of social realism." Hamilton 1991, p. 72, n. 32.
332
Sourvinou-Inwood 1988, p. 38.
333
Beaumont 1994; Clairmont 1993; Golden 1990, p. 18; Sourvinou-Inwood 1988.
334
Beaumont 1994.
335
Beaumont 1994, pp. 92-4.
203
concerning the broad chronological stages of childhood development may be safely

applied to most Greek art from at least the Archaic and Classical times.
I have suggested above that figurines used for childbirth purposes more
frequently depicted older babies or toddlers rather than newborn infants because
parents preferred the more generic representations.336 This indeed may be the case with
3.13 as well.337 It is also possible, however, that this pattern of representation in
childbirth votives is a result of the fact that Greek artists rarely made a distinction
between newborn infants and an older babies/toddlers.338 In artistic terms, the
representation of a baby or toddler at any stage of development may have been enough
to indicate to the Greek viewer the idea of "baby." 3.13 may therefore depict the initial
presentation of the infant in the first few months of life using iconography that a Greek
audience may have read simply as "baby," but that signifies to modern viewers an older
child.
Several other reliefs show similar
scenes of the presentation of a child to the
gods. The exact nature of these reliefs is
uncertain, however, and their use as childbirth
votives is unlikely, despite the subject that
they depict. A mediocre relief discovered
reused in a church in Thessaly (3.14, Fig. 59)
Fig. 59
336
p. 162.
One would not expect a swaddled infant to be portrayed here, as the presentation of the infant to the
gods would likely have occurred after the time when swaddling clothes were no longer used.
338
An exception to this may be found in Classical Attic tombstones, which quite frequently depict
newborn infants in swaddling clothes. In these instances, though, there may well have been a need to
make a clear distinction between newborn infant and older child. It is often thought that the presence of
these infants in swaddling clothes on tombstones was intended to indicate that the deceased died very
soon after childbirth.
337
204
depicts a female figure in large scale, seated and draped. A small child leans upon her
knees and gazes up at her. Two other figures stand to the left, one male and one female.
Kastriotis interpreted the large seated figure as a mother and the other figures as her
children, and suggested that this relief was originally dedicated to Eileithyia as a
childbirth votive.339 It seems to me that this scene would be better interpreted as an
adult couple presenting their child to a seated goddess. Despite the iconography, the
use of such a relief as a votive is not certain. An unusual funerary relief from Icaria with
a similar scene, in which several family members seem to "present" a small child to a
seated female figure, was interpreted by Kontoleon as the gravestone of a young child.
He explained the unusual iconography of these reliefs as illustrating the most important
moment in the life of a small child, namely the presentation of the child to a
kourotrophic divinity.340
Fig. 60
One other example (3.15, Fig. 60) should be mentioned here, as it sheds light
upon the interpretation of such scenes. It was found reused in a church in Sigeion. In
the center is a seated female figure, facing right. She is approached by several female
figures, two on the left and one on the right. One woman carries a swaddled infant in
each arm, another woman carries a third infant in swaddling clothes. The third woman,
probably a servant, carries a large basket and gabled box. This relief was originally
339
Kastriotis 1903, pp. 40-41.
205
thought to be votive in nature, depicting the presentation of infant triplets and offerings
to a seated goddess. More recently, however, it has been shown that this relief formed
part of a trapeza that held a funerary stele.341 Although the representation is somewhat
different than the other scenes that depict the presentation of a child to the gods, it does
suggest that such scenes can appear on funerary monuments, and serves as a reminder
that great care must be taken in using iconography alone to interpret reliefs.
Summary
It appears that some families did dedicate reliefs as childbirth votives, though
this type of offering does not seem to have been particularly common, except in the
sanctuary of Artemis Lochia on Delos, where they were found in abundance. It is
possible that other reliefs that were dedicated as childbirth votives have failed to be
identified as such because the iconography of many of these reliefs is rarely explicitly
associated with childbirth. Of the fifteen reliefs examined here, only two depict what
are thought to be pregnant worshippers (3.1, 3.2). The three reliefs that show scenes of
childbirth (3.3, 3.4, and the extraordinary uncataloged relief discussed on p. 194, fig. 50)
are all highly problematic, and none may be confidently interpreted as a childbirth
votive. Only one relief definitely depicts a specific ritual performed after childbirth, the
presentation of the child to the gods (3.13). The great majority of reliefs offered as
childbirth votives show generic scenes of sacrifice or worship. It is quite possible that
these votives were intended as thank offerings for the good fortunes of the family in
general, of which fertility was an important part.
340
341
Kontoleon 1970, pp. 19-21.

Clairmont 1993, I, no. 12.
206
Statues and Statue Bases

Statues are among the most common votives found in Greek sanctuaries; carved
from marble or cast in bronze, these votives varied in size from larger-than-life colossai
to small statuettes. Many of these popular votives no longer survive in the
archaeological record, or exist only in fragmentary form, since they were often recycled
so their materials could be reused. Nevertheless, based on surviving examples and from
epigraphical records (often in the form of surviving statue bases) it is often possible to
deduce their presence in sanctuaries.
Numerous bases dedicated to Eileithyia and Artemis
indicate that statues were a common votive gift to the
goddesses of childbirth. It is likely that these statues depicted
a wide range of themes. Nevertheless, because so many of the
statue bases lack both context and iconographical
information, and since few of the statues themselves survive,
I have restricted my discussion to a single type of sculpture,
for which good evidence exists.342 These statues are generally
slightly less than life-size, and depict young children, from
approximately ten years of age to infants, in a variety of
postures.343 Boys are usually shown nude, either standing or
seated on the ground with one leg raised in a posture
Fig. 61
identical to that of the seated child figurines discussed
342
Many statue bases with dedicatory inscriptions to Eileithyia are included in Pingiatoglus catalog of
inscriptional evidence. See Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 120-123 and 153-169.
343
Although the determination of age through iconography is always problematical, the fact that many of
these figures tend to have full, round cheeks, chubby limbs, and large heads suggests that the artist
intended to portray a very young child. For a discussion of the representation of childhood in Greek art,
see Beaumont 1994. A very thorough discussion of these statues is provided by Vorster 1983.
207
above.344 The representations of girls are more variable. Though all are clothed, usually
wearing a thin chiton, they are shown in an assortment of poses. Many of the statues
portray young girls standing and holding an animal, often a bird or rabbit (Fig. 61).
Others are seated on the ground in a posture similar to that adopted by the boys (Fig.
62). These sculptures were particularly popular in Attica, and range in date from the 5th
century B.C. to Roman times, though most date to the late Classical and early
Hellenistic periods. These statues are mainly found in sanctuary contexts or with
inscriptions that would suggest their use as votive dedications, particularly to divinities
of healing and childbirth.345 I discuss below some of the larger concentrations of these
statues from sanctuaries of childbirth divinities.
Numerous, mostly fragmentary, examples of marble statues of young girls were
discovered in the course of excavations of the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron from
1948-1962.346 They generally depict the girls standing and holding a small animal; their
faces are, in general, very youthful in appearance, with full cheeks and slight smiles,
though some statues do appear to depict older children (Fig. 75). Despite the fact that
these statues do not depict the girls actively participating in ritual, they are usually
referred to as dedications representing the arktoi, the participants in the arkteia who
dressed as bears and danced in honor of Artemis.347 In addition to the many statues of
344
See pp. 161-162.

Numerous examples of these statues were dedicated to Asklepios and Amphiaraos, and even larger
numbers were dedicated to childbirth or kourotrophos divinities. In addition to the main concentrations
of statues discussed in detail here, smaller numbers were dedicated in various sanctuaries of Apollo,
Artemis, and Demeter. For a useful summary of the major find-spots, see Vorster 1983, pp. 48-84.
346
These finds are only partially published. See Orlandos 1958, pp. 36-37 and figs. 38 and 39; Orlandos
1959, pp. 16-17 and figs. 15-17; Orlandos 1960, pp. 23-24 and figs. 32 and 33; Daux 1959, p. 595; Daux 1960,
pp. 665-666; Daux 1961, pp. 639-640.
347
Orlandos 1958, p. 36. Vorster 1983, cat. nos. 91a, 92, 93, 137, 172, and 173.
345
208
girls, several statues and statuettes of young boys were also found at Brauron.348 These
are often explained as dedications to Artemis in her role as a kourotrophos.349
At Thespiae, numerous Hellenistic statues were found reused as building
material in the walls of the Byzantine fortress. According to de Ridder's publication of
these finds, at least thirteen fragmentary examples of young boys were discovered, and
four examples of girls.350 Although the statues had been removed from their original
context, it is quite likely that they represent votives for Artemis.351 Large numbers of
statue bases dedicated to that goddess under the epithets Eileithyia and Lochia were
also reused in the Byzantine fortress, including ten bases whose inscriptions suggest
that they held statues of children.352
The sanctuary of Eileithyia at Paros also seems to have received a number of
children statues. Most of these statues no longer survive, though several fragments now
in the Paros museum likely came from this sanctuary.353 Of the many statue bases that
were recovered from the Eileithyia sanctuary, however, three examples bore dedicatory
inscriptions that indicated that the statue was dedicated for the sake of a child.354 As
348
One statue mentioned in Orlandos 1960, pp. 23-24; several marble statuettes illustrated in Orlandos
1960, p. 29 fig. 38.
349
Kahil 1965, p. 22.
350
Boys: de Ridder 1922, nos. 12-21 and no. 32; girls: nos. 52-55.
351
De Ridder, following Svoronas, interpreted them as children of Asklepios. See de Ridder 1922, p. 224;
Svoronas 1909. Pingiatoglu (1981, p. 104 n. 274) and Plassart (1926, pp. 411-412) convincingly argue that
when one regards the assemblage as a whole, the large number of dedicatory inscriptions to Artemis and
the types of statues found (including numerous statues of adult women) suggest that they were
dedications to Artemis rather than to Asklepios.
352
Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 103-104; Plassart 1926, nos. 30-35, 37 and IG VII, 1871-1872. The formula of these
inscriptions is usually: "(names of parents) dedicated (name of child) to Artemis Eileithyia."
353
At least one marble head of a young girl came from this sanctuary (Paros museum no. 224). See
Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 124 no. 27. Baur (1902, p. 51) notes the existence of two unpublished marble statues of
squatting boys from the sanctuary of Eileithyia. Several other statuary fragments from Paros might have
come from the Eileithyia sanctuary, but their provenance is uncertain due to poor recording techniques of
the original excavators. See Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 134; Vorster 1983, p. 279, n. 281. In the storeroom of the
Paros museum I saw a very worn relief, with no recorded provenance, that depicted a nude male child in
the typical seated child posture. This may well have been the minature marble copy that Baur
mentions.
354
Paros museum nos. 297 (IG XII 5, 189), 262 (IG XII 5, 187 ) and 335 (IG XII 5, 195). Two other examples,
incompletely preserved, are restored with similar dedications. See Paros museum no. 336 (IG XII 5, 196)
209
most of the bases found in this sanctuary were too

fragmentary to fully restore the inscriptions, it is
impossible to determine how many of them originally
held children statues. It is worth noting, though, that
the small size of the bases and the shape of the
cuttings would lend themselves well to statues of
children. These small statues would also have fit
nicely into the many deep niches that were cut into the
rock face around the sanctuary.355
Fig. 62
Less securely identified are four marble statues of young girls discovered near
the Ilisos in Attica in 1878.356 These are dated stylistically to the 3rd century B.C.357 Two
of the statues are standing, the other two are seated on the ground (Fig. 62). Three of the
girls hold animals, while the fourth, an infant, raises her arms in a gesture that is often
employed in Greek depictions of babies. No dedicatory inscriptions survive to aid in
their interpretation, but epigraphical evidence attests that a sanctuary of Eileithyia
existed in the area, leading most scholars to interpret them as dedications to
Eileithyia.358 As Vorster has noted, however, this identification is by no means secure,
since the place where these statues were found does not correspond with literary
descriptions of the sanctuary of Eileithyia.359
and IG XII 5, 209 (no museum no.).

355
These niches are illustrated in Pingiatoglu 1981, pl. 1.1.
356
The statues are currently on display in the National Museum, NM nos. 693-696.
357
Karousou 1957, p. 80 and n. 1.
358
For the sanctuary, see above p. 50. For the identification of these statues as childbirth votives to
Eileithyia, see Karousou 1992, p. 73; Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 61-65. Burkert (1966, pp. 4-6) and Price (1978, p.
104, 124 and n. 123-126) both interpreted them as representing arrephoroi who served in the cult of
Eileithyia. Svoronas (1917, pp. 87-89) accepted them as votives to Eileithyia but believed they represented
daughters of Asklepios.
359
Vorster 1983, pp. 72-73.
210
Interpretation
Given the rather generic iconography of the children sculptures, it is difficult to
interpret them with any degree of certainty. Early scholars often classified them as
representations of mythological or divine characters.360 More recent scholarship on the
subject has rejected this interpretation in favor of viewing them as representations of
mortal children.361 Given the lack of divine attributes, this interpretation seems far more
likely.362
The reason for the dedication of the children statues is equally difficult to
ascertain, since they are rarely found with their inscribed bases or in their original
context. At least four good possibilities exist: 1) they commemorate the child's
participation in an important ritual; 2) they were dedicated to commemorate the child's
service to the divinity in some cult duty; 3) they were dedicated to the god for the
health or protection of the child; 4) they were childbirth votives given in thanks for
successful birth. Each of these possible explanations deserves further consideration.
Sculptures of young girls have been frequently interpreted as dedications made
to mark the child's participation in a particular ritual or rite of passage, in large part due
to the rich collection of children sculptures from Brauron. The many statues of girls
found in the sanctuary of Artemis were interpreted by the excavator as dedications to
commemorate their participation in the arkteia, and this interpretation has been widely
accepted.363 Indeed, the identification of sculptures of young girls as arktoi became so
standard that it influenced the interpretation of similar sculptures at other sites. As
360
Most notably, Svoronas argued that they should be seen as the children of Asklepios. See Svoronas
1909; Svoronas 1917.
361
Vorster 1983, p. 249; Rhfel 1984, pp. 216-221.
362
Vorster (1983, p. 49) argues convincingly that the objects and animals that the children hold, which
have often been interpreted as attributes of a particular divinity, are in fact merely intended to represent
children's playthings, since they also frequently appear on children's tombstones.
363
Orlandos 1958, pp. 36-37; Orlandos 1959, pp. 16-17; Orlandos 1960, pp. 23-24; Daux 1959, p. 595; Daux
1960, pp. 665-666; Daux 1961, pp. 639-640; Karousou 1957; Kahil 1965, p. 22.
211
Christiane Vorster has noted, however, this interpretation greatly oversimplifies the
evidence.364 Not only does it leave unexplained the reason why statues of young boys
were also found at Brauron, but it also does not adequately fit the iconographical
evidence of the girl sculptures. Although the age at which girls participated in the
arkteia is somewhat uncertain, it is generally assumed that the function of the ritual was
to prepare prepubescent girls for the roles that they would adopt as wives and
mothers.365 The sculptures at Brauron, however, mostly seem to depict very young
children, including some examples of infants. More importantly, the sculptures do not
portray the girls wearing the krokotos, the distinctive saffron-colored robe that was the
costume of the arktoi, as described in literature and represented in vase paintings.366
Instead, they depict girls dressed in everyday attire, wearing a chiton and sometimes a
mantle.367 Given all of these factors, it is difficult to interpret the statues at Brauron as
exclusively representing arktoi.
Sculptures of children from some sites do commemorate cult participation. At
the sanctuary of Artemis Ortheia at Messene, three statue bases record the dedication of
such statues to Artemis.368 Two of the bases have inscriptions similar to those found at
other sites, stating simply that the parents have dedicated an image of their daughter to
the goddess.369 The third base bore an inscription stating that Demonikos and his wife
Timarchis, daughter of Damarchidas, both of whom had served the goddess, dedicated
a statue of their daughter Mego. The epigram on the base then explained that Mego had
364
Vorster 1983, p. 57.

For the age of the arktoi, see Aristophanes, Lys. 442; Schol. Arist. Lys. 645; Suda s.v. a[r kto" h{
Braurwnivo"; Deubner 1932, p. 207 and n. 4; Sourvinou-Inwood 1988.
366
Kahil 1965.
367
Vorster 1983, pp. 62-63.
368
SEG XXIII, nos. 220, 221, and 222; Themelis 1994, p. 115.
369
SEG XXIII, nos. 221 and 222.
365
212
carried the xoanon of Artemis and had touched her torch to the altar of Ortheia.370
Themelis paired sculptural remains found in the sanctuary with this base. The life-size
statue depicts a young girl dressed in a chiton, standing and holding the xoanon in her
left hand.371 Similarly, a small number of sculptures of young boys was found at
Eleusis; these depict boys wearing himations and holding piglets and torches or
bundles of twigs.372 Unlike the Brauron sculptures, and indeed, unlike most of the
examples under discussion, the iconography of these statues is very specific to the ritual
that was observed. Given the evidence at hand, therefore, we may conclude that while it
is possible that some of the statues of children were dedicated to commemorate cult
participation in important rituals, the lack of specific iconography and inscriptional
evidence for most examples gives no indication that they were dedicated for this
purpose.
A similar argument may be made for the explanation that the sculptures
represent children acting as cult servants. The consecration of children for temporary
service at a temple was not uncommon; the best-known example is the arrephoroi, young
girls who served in the cult of Athena prior to the celebration of the Panathenaic festival
at Athens.373 Indeed, from seventeen statue bases found on the Athenian acropolis, we
know that proud Athenian parents did celebrate their daughter's participation as
arrephoroi by setting up statues of them.374 None of the statues belonging to these bases
has been found, but it is quite likely, as Vorster argues, that the statues, like those at
Eleusis, would have depicted the girls with specific attributes to indicate their status as
370
SEG XXIII, no. 220. See Themelis 1994, p. 115 and n. 23 for additional bibliography.
Themelis 1994, p. 116-117 and figs. 19 and 20.
372
Vorster 1983, p. 77.
373
For the arrephoroi, see Pausanias 1.27.3; Harpocration s.v. ajrrhforei'n; Mansfield 1985, pp. 260-274 and
additional citations there.
374
IG II/III2, 3465, 3466, 3461, 3470-3473, 3482, 3486, 3488, 3496, 3497, 3516, 3515, 3528, 3555, 3554, 3556,
4247; Mansfield 1985, pp. 296-301.
371
213
arrephoroi. 375 The four statues of girls found in Agrai, which are thought to be from a
nearby sanctuary of Eileithyia, have sometimes been interpreted as cult servants of
Eileithyia.376 Epigraphical evidence attests to young cult servants, called hersephoroi, for
this sanctuary.377 The interpretation of the statues as hersephoroi is quite dubious,
however. It is uncertain whether the statues originated from this sanctuary of Eileithyia
in the first place, but assuming that they did, the fact that one of the statues depicts an
infant who was far too young to have served as a cult assistant makes this explanation
unlikely.
A far more probable explanation is that the statues were dedicated to the gods in
order to seek divine protection for the child. There is good evidence for this
interpretation. The practice of dedicating votives in order to place people and even
animals under the care of a divinity is well known from literary and epigraphical
sources.378 Votives actually depicting the person to be protected were most effective,
since their presence in the sanctuary served as a constant reminder to the divinity.379
One epigram in the Palatine Anthology actually mentions this practice in regards to the
protection of a child. In the epigram, a mother dedicates an image of her child to
Dionysus as a request for his help in its growth and upbringing.380 This interpretation
fits very well with the evidence of the sculptures. Not only does it explain the lack of
375
Vorster 1983, pp. 78-79. According to literary accounts, the arrephoroi wore a distinctive white garment;
it is likely that the sculptures of the arrephoroi would have worn this ritual attire as well. For evidence for
the white dress of the arrephoroi, see Mansfield 1985, pp. 271-272.
376
Burkert 1966, pp. 4-6; Price 1978, p. 104, 124 and n. 123-126.
377
IG II2, 5099; Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 158 no. E36. For a discussion of the generic meaning of the words
arrephoroi, errhephoroi, and hersephoroi as female cult servants in Athenian cults, see Mansfield 1985, pp.
268-270.
378
See, for example, Anth. Pal. 6.147; Versnel 1981, p. 8; van Straten 1981, pp. 103-104.
379
For votives as tangible reminders of the human/divine relationship, see van Straten 1981, pp. 72-74;
Vorster 1983, p. 252.
380
Anth. Pal. 6.355.
214
specific attributes and their everyday dress, but it also explains the wide range of ages
of the children represented.381
This conclusion, proposed by Vorster, is the best overall explanation of the
statues. 382 Nevertheless, she is perhaps too hasty in her assumption that none of the
statues were dedicated as childbirth votives. While we may discount statues depicting
older children, those depicting infants and even very small children may well have been
dedicated to mark the child's birth. It is not insignificant that the sanctuaries where the
greatest numbers of these sculptures were dedicated were those of childbirth divinities.
Indeed, far more of these sculptures appear in sanctuaries of childbirth divinities than
in sanctuaries of purely kourotrophic divinities.383 Nor can we rule out the possibility
that those that were dedicated in healing sanctuaries were dedicated for childbirth,
since healing divinities also received childbirth worship.384
Also of interest is the wording of some of the inscriptions on the statue bases. A
number of statue bases that likely held children statues are inscribed with the phrase
uJpe;r tw'n paidivwn or a similar phrase.385 This phrase, which is perhaps best translated as
"for the sake of the child," is unfortunately quite vague. Nevertheless, it is significant
that similar phrases have been found on definite childbirth votives. Three inscriptions
381
It also might explain why many of the statues seem to depict very young children. Infant and child
mortality rates were high in antiquity, and young children were perceived as being extremely vulnerable
to a host of physical and supernatural dangers. See above, pp. 18-21.
382
Vorster 1983, passim.
383
For childbirth divinities: seventeen examples dedicated to Artemis Lochia at Thespiae; five bases
dedicated for children to Eileithyia at Paros; four sculptures (possibly) dedicated to Eileithyia at Agrai;
and numerous sculptural fragments to Artemis at Brauron, whose cult (as Vorster herself admits) was
more clearly connected with childbirth than child care. See Vorster 1983, p. 60. To this list we may add
several other statue bases from various locations dedicated to Eileithyia and Artemis Eileithyia whose
inscriptions indicate that they had originally held children statues. For these, see Pingiatoglu 1981, nos.
E33, E34, E39, and E75. We may compare these numbers with the scattered examples from shrines of
kourotrophos divinities: eight examples dedicated in various sanctuaries to Apollo; one to Kephissos; and
three to Demeter at Eleusis. See Vorster 1983, p. 84, nos. 44, 45, 67, 75, 86, 97a, 116, 117, 152, 154, 155, 169.
384
See pp. (childbirth divinities).
385
See, for example, several statue bases from Paros: uJpe;r tw`n paidivwn (IG XII 5, 195), uJpe;r Feidivou (IG
XII 5,187); uJpe;r Puqwvnakto (IG XII 5, 189).
215
dedicated to Asklepios by women in thanks for the birth of their children, preserved on
the cure stele at Epidauros use the phrase peri; paivdwn.386 Another Epidaurian cure
record for childbirth thanks the god uJpe;r genea'.387 The same phrase is used for a
painted votive stele dedicated to the nymphs on Mt. Ossa.388 Yet another Epidaurian
childbirth inscription praises Asklepios uJper tevknwn, and a painted votive stele
dedicated to Artemis Eulochia gives thanks ajnti; tevknwn.389
Summary
In conclusion, although there is no direct evidence to prove that statues of
children were dedicated as childbirth votives, the fact that they were dedicated in large
numbers to childbirth divinities and that the inscriptions associated with them use
wording similar to known childbirth votives would suggest that at least some of these
sculptures were dedicated in thanks for a successful birth. The generic iconography of
these sculptures would enable them to be dedicated for any number of different
purposes, including birth. As with the terracotta figurines of children described above,
the depiction of the child as an older baby or young child rather than as a newborn
infant need not necessarily rule out a statue's dedication as a childbirth votive. Parents
who dedicated images of their children after birth would undoubtedly wish to express
both thanks for the successful birth and a desire that the divinity continue to watch over
the growth of that child. The representation of a small child or toddler could readily
convey both meanings.
386
Edelstein & Edelstein 1945, T.423 case nos. 31, 39, 42. Translations of these inscriptions are given in full
above, pp. 110-111.
387
Edelstein and Edelstein 1945, T.423 case no. 2.
388
Wace and Thompson 1908/1909, p. 245 no. 4. Discussed below, p. 233.
389
Edelstein & Edelstein 1998, T.423 case no. 34; Gonnoi II, no. 173.
216
Other Objects
In addition to the common votive types discussed above, numerous other objects
could serve as offerings to the gods. Jewelry, clothing, and other personal belongings
were frequently dedicated as votives. In this section I explore the evidence for many of
the humblest and most personal gifts given to the gods. Though these objects are often
poorly represented in the material record, they undoubtedly were among the most
popular given to childbirth divinities.
Jewelry
Jewelry and other personal items were common votive gifts dedicated by
women. Though such gifts could be given on a number of different occasions, it is quite
likely that they were frequently dedicated during periods of transition in womens
lives, including marriage and childbirth.390 Dedications of jewelry to Eileithyia, though
rarely preserved in the archaeological record, are recorded in inscriptions. The Delian
temple inventories, for instance, record numerous offerings of bracelets, earrings,
necklaces, and rings stored in the Eileithyiaion.391 Necklaces may well have been
favorite items for women to dedicate to Eileithyia, not only because they were personal
objects readily at hand that held a personal significance for the worshipper herself, but
also because of the possibility that Eileithyia might find them a gift worthy of her help.
In the Homeric Hymn to Delian Apollo, Eileithyia is bribed by Iris with the gift of a
necklace to help Leto deliver her twins.392
390
Simon 1986, p. 200; Morgan 1993, pp. 24-25.

Hamilton 2000, pp. 213-214.
392
Homer, Hymn to Delian Apollo 104.
391
217
Decorative pins, often identified as dress pins or hairpins, have been found as
votive offerings in the sanctuaries of numerous divinities.393 These may well have
accompanied the dedication of articles of clothing, but there is considerable evidence
that they were also dedicated as votive offerings in their own right. Undoubtedly these
pins could have been dedicated for any number of different reasons, but at least some
were dedicated for childbirth. An epigram in the Palatine Anthology states that a bridal
pin was offered along with a diadem to Eileithyia in gratitude for the safe delivery of a
child.394 Among the numerous pins found in the sanctuary of Artemis Ortheia at Sparta
was a 7th century B.C. dress pin inscribed with a dedication to Eileithyia, suggesting that
she was worshipped along with Artemis for childbirth at this sanctuary.395 Pins have
likewise been found at the sanctuary of Athena Pronaia at Delphi, where Eileithyia was
also worshipped.396 Dress pins were common dedications to the minor divinities Damia
and Auxesia in Aegina, as evinced by epigraphic evidence.397 Herodotus relates an
etiological story to explain why these gifts were so popular among women at Argos and
Aegina.398 He associates these votives with an incident in which the sole survivor of an
Athenian battle against the Aeginetans and Argives returned to Athens to report the
devastating loss, and was stabbed to death by the distraught widows with their dress
pins. According to Herodotus, after this incident, Athenian women no longer wore
dress pins, but the Aeginetans and the Argives passed a law that dress pins would be
393
Some sanctuaries have produced extraordinarily large numbers of pins, including the Argive
Heraeum, the sanctuary of Artemis Ortheia at Sparta, and the sanctuary of Hera at Perachora. For
citations for these and other sanctuaries in which pins have been found, see Kilian 1978, p. 219 and n. 1;
Jacobsthal 1956, pp. 96-105.
394
Anth. Pal. 6.274.
395
For this pin, see: Kilian 1978, p. 220 pl. 6.1. See also Pausanias 3.17.1 and Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 53. Two
bronze gaming die were also dedicated to Eileithyia in this sanctuary. On these, see below, p. 229.
396
FdD II.v, p. 46 and fig. 56, p. 80, and fig. 86. See also FdD V.i, p. 115 and figs. 411-415. For the worship
of Eileithyia in this sanctuary, see p. 57.
397
See IG IV 1588 and Jacobsthal 1956, pp. 97-100.
398
Herodotus 5.88.
218
the major type of dedication made by women at their sanctuaries. Although an

interesting tale, it is unlikely, as Christopher Simon remarks, that Aeginetan and Argive
customs would have been so strongly influenced by a local Athenian event.399 It is far
more likely that dress pins were dedicated to Damia and Auxesia as childbirth
offerings, given the nature of these goddesses as fertility and childbirth divinities.400
Clothing
Although the practice of dedicating clothing in sanctuaries was not limited to the
occasion of childbirth, literary evidence suggests that articles of clothing or personal
attire were frequently dedicated for this purpose.401 Several epigrams in the Palatine
Anthology record the practice of dedicating garments, headdresses, sandals, veils and
other items to Eileithyia, Artemis, Aphrodite, and Hera as thank offerings for successful
birth.402 Artemis, in particular, seems to have received frequent offerings of clothes. In
her sanctuaries at Miletus and at Syracuse she was worshipped as Artemis Kithone (or
Chitone); inventory lists from a sanctuary at Miletus record numerous articles of
clothing and personal belongings that may well have been dedicated to this goddess in
connection with childbirth.403
399
Simon 1986, p. 201.

For the worship of Damia and Auxesia as childbirth divinities, see p. 33.
401
Numerous divinities received clothing as votive offerings. For a useful list of sanctuaries and divinities
for which there is evidence for this practice, see Gnther 1988, pp. 232-233. For various occasions on
which clothing might be dedicated, see Simon 1986, pp. 203-205.
402
Anth. Pal. 6.200-202, 6.270-272. In most instances, the dedicant is the new mother herself, but
interestingly, at least one of these epigrams (6.271) mentions a dedication of sandals and a robe given by
both parents to thank Artemis for the birth of a son.
403
For Artemis Kithone/Chithone, see Callimachus, Hymn to Artemis 225-227; Athenaeus 14.629e; Steph.
Byz. s.v. Citwvnh; Cole 2004, pp. 218-225. For the 2nd century B.C. inscription found at Miletus, see: Didyma
II, nos. 424-478 (SEG XXXVIII no. 1210). Gnther (1988, pp. 234-237) has suggested that these clothes were
dedicated to Artemis Kithone. For the worship of Artemis Chitone in connection with childbirth, see
Schol. Call. Hymn to Zeus 77. For a possible conflation of Artemis Kithone and Artemis Lochia in a Roman
Imperial dedicatory inscription from Miletos, see SEG XXXVIII, 1214.
400
219
The best evidence for the practice of dedicating clothing to Artemis, however,
comes from her sanctuary at Brauron.404 Literary sources indicate that it was customary
at Brauron to dedicate clothing to Artemis for successful childbirth and to Iphigeneia on
behalf of those who had died in childbirth.405 There is both inscriptional and
archaeological evidence for this practice as well. Copies of temple inventory lists from
the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron were found on the Athenian acropolis.406 These
inscriptions record numerous dedications of clothing made by female worshippers
within the sanctuary.407 Although no remains of the garments themselves survive, the
excavations at Brauron have revealed the foundations for the racks where these
garments most likely were displayed.408
The popularity of dedicating clothing to Artemis is also apparent on the marble
votive relief from Echinos discussed above, which depicts a new mother presenting her
child to Artemis (3.13). In this relief, the background decoration shows that the
sanctuary of the goddess was filled with garments, prominently displayed. These
garments were probably intended to represent childbirth dedications displayed in the
sanctuary of Artemis, since the relief itself was dedicated to Artemis in her combined
role as childbirth goddess and kourotrophos.
Personal dedications of clothing might also have been used to adorn the cult
statue of the childbirth goddess to whom they were dedicated.409 That cult statues of
Eileithyia were draped with dedicatory offerings of clothing or veils is suggested by
Pausanias description of the cult statue of Eileithyia at Aigion.410 This practice is also
404
For the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron, see above, pp. 48-49.

Schol. Call. Hymn to Zeus 77; Euripides, I.T. 1464.
406
IG II2 1514-1531.
407
Linders 1972.
408
Kondis 1967, pp. 173-175 and pl. 106.
409
For a useful discussion of the practice of clothing cult statues in general, see Romano 1988, pp. 129-133.
410
Pausanias 7.23.5-6.
405
220
evident in one of the epigrams of the Palatine Anthology: The head-kerchief and waterblue veil of Amphareta rest on thy head, Ilithyia; for them she vowed to thee when she
prayed thee to keep dreadful death far away from her in her labour. 411 Several of the
garments listed in the temple inventory lists for the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron are
also described as adorning or draping statues.412
The practice of dedicating clothing for childbirth has continued in some areas
even into modern times. According to Lawson, some contemporary Greek villagers set
out offerings to the Nereids to protect themselves from these harmful entities during
the vulnerable time of childbirth and confinement. Such offerings could include items of
clothing from the bridal trousseau, most likely the finest garments that the dedicants
possessed.413
One particular item of clothing deserves special attention as a possible childbirth
votive: the zone, a belt or girdle worn by Greek women. Like most personal items, zonai
were popular dedications during transitional periods in a womans life, especially for
marriage and childbirth.414 In several epigrams of the Palatine Anthology, zonai are
dedicated to Artemis and Aphrodite. Those given to Artemis are specified as being
childbirth dedications in gratitude for a safe delivery.415 For both marriage and
childbirth, the dedication of these belts most likely had a symbolic significance. In each
of these cases, the idea of loosening the belt served as a form of sympathetic magic
411
Anth. Pal. 6.270. Dedicated garments were often used to dress the cult statue. For this practice, see
Mansfield 1985, pp. 442-505.
412
Linders 1972, p. 11-12; Giuman 1999, pp. 53-77.
413
Lawson 1910, p. 140.
414
For the dedication of belts before marriage, see: Pausanias 2.33.1; Suda s.v. lusivzwno gunhv; Schmitt
1977. Van Straten identifies the scene on an Attic red-figure lekythos, in which a woman is shown
untying her belt before the figure of Artemis, as an illustration of the dedication of a zone. Van Straten
1981, pp. 90-91 and fig. 30. Given Artemis' close connection with childbirth, it is quite possible that this
vase illustrates the dedication of a zone in thanks for successful childbirth.
415
For Artemis: Anth. Pal. 6.59, 201, 202, 272; for Aphrodite: Anth. Pal. 6.210.
221
through which the womb itself was opened.416 Dedications of this sort may well have
had a practical aspect as well, however, since special belts may have been worn during
pregnancy in order to support the weight of the expanding uterus.417 The wearing of
zonai during pregnancy is well attested in ancient literature.418 These belts, as symbols of
physical maturity and maternity, would have made excellent childbirth votives.419
Amulets, Charms, and Other Magical Objects

As discussed above, the use of magic was common during childbirth, and
magical objects, particularly amulets and charms, most likely played a large role in
these practices.420 Numerous objects may have served as childbirth amulets or magical
aids in birth, including certain stones and gems, combinations of special plant and
animal products, foreign or unusual objects believed to have useful properties, or even
everyday objects that might work through sympathetic magic to ease and facilitate
birth. It is conceivable that some of these objects may have been dedicated in
sanctuaries as childbirth votives to commemorate a successful birth, despite the fact that
literary sources remain mute on the subject. This is not surprising, since childbirth
amulets themselves are rarely mentioned in the ancient texts.421 Given this absence of
literary evidence, we are forced to rely on archaeological and inscriptional evidence to
416
Simon 1986, p. 205. The magical ideas of loosening and binding associated with childbirth are
discussed above, pp. 81-83. For the epithet Lysizonos, used particularly in conjunction with Artemis, see above.
King (1983, p. 121) points out that the importance of the zone as a symbol of the opened womb lies not
just in childbirth but also in the transitions of menarche and defloration; Artemis Lysizonos oversees all
of these events.
417
Glis (1991, pp. 79-80) records the use of special maternity belts in early modern France. Similar
supportive belts also exist today.
418
For the idea that a pregnant woman is keeping her child under her zon , see: Aeschylus, Cho.1000, and
Aeschylus, Eu. 608; for the removal of the zone immediately before birth, see Pindar, Ol. 6.37-44.
419
Cole notes that the temple inventory list from Miletos, which most likely records dedications to
Artemis Kithone, included a very large number of zonai. Cole 1998, p. 39; Cole 2004, pp. 218-225.
420
See pp. 83-85.
421
For the general absence of references to such magical and medico-magical objects in literature, even in
the medical texts where one might expect them to be mentioned, see above, p. 84.
222
determine what sorts of amulets and magical objects, if any, were dedicated for
childbirth.
Baubo amulets, consisting of small pendants of glass or bronze that depict a nude
squatting female figure, are among the most likely candidates for explicit birth charms.
These amulets are very similar in style to larger-scale terracotta Baubo figurines whose
iconography connects them with birth, as I have argued above.422 Like the terracotta
figurines, many of which were either pierced or had suspension holes, these small
amulets were intended to be attached or suspended, and may well have been worn by
parturient women as protective charms during birth. Unfortunately, there is no clear
evidence that such objects were ever dedicated as childbirth votives. While examples
have been found in Egypt, Greece, and Asia Minor, I am not aware of any that have
come from a sanctuary context.423 Despite their birth iconography, these amulets do not
appear to have been common childbirth votives; indeed, they seem to have been far less
popular in general than their terracotta counterparts, though their relatively small
numbers may be due at least in part to the chances of preservation and discovery.
Most amulets used for childbirth were probably more generic in nature,
consisting of certain types of gemstones or other stones that were valued for special
properties that seemed to link them to childbirth. Literary sources mention the use of
jaspar, aetites, and a whitish stone called the "Samian Stone" to prevent miscarriage and
to provide aid in childbirth.424 These types of amulets are occasionally found in
422
See pp. 118-124.

From Egypt: Perdrizet 1911, p. 41 nos. 65-67 and pl. 24. From Greece: Delos XVIII, p. 361 no. 180 and
figs. 436-437. From Asia Minor: Stupperich 1993, p. 18 and pl. 11.4. The last example was excavated from
a grave at Assos. I have also seen an unpublished example of a glass Baubo amulet from the Dardanos
tumulus on display in the anakkale Museum in Turkey.
424
On the use of jaspar to ease delivery, see Dioskourides, De Materia Medica 5.142. Because aetites often
contain a small concretion that may resemble a fetus in the womb, they have very frequently been used as
magical aids during pregnancy and birth. See Theophrastus, De Lapidibus 5; Dioskourides, De Materia
Medica 5.160; Pliny, NH 36.149-151; Aelian, NA 1.35; Waegeman 1987, pp. 162-3; Bromehead 1947; and
423
223
sanctuary contexts. Jaspar, for instance, appears twice in the Parthenon inventory lists.
One example was specified as a ring seal dedicated by a woman named Kleito; the other
a seal of Artemis Brauronia, whose cult was strongly connected to childbirth worship.425
Sealstones made of jasper or chalcedony were also dedicated at the Athenian
Asklepieion.426 Such items may well have been dedicated as childbirth votives, though it
is impossible to securely identify them as such. It is quite likely, however, that most
childbirth amulets would be entirely unrecognizable in the archaeological record. Few
families could afford a fine piece of jaspar or a rare stone such as an aetite; most
childbirth amulets probably contained more ordinary materials that either were not
preserved in the archaeological record, including those made of organic materials, or
whose unremarkable appearance tends to escape the notice of excavators.
In addition to amulets, other objects may have been used as magical aids during
birth. The most common of these are keys. Keys are frequently discovered in
sanctuaries, and are mentioned in sanctuary inventory lists.427 As with most of the
objects under discussion here, there are numerous possible reasons for their presence in
a sanctuary. Some undoubtedly were functional, used to open the doors on sanctuary
buildings.428 Others may well have been dedicated as votive gifts.429 There is evidence
to suggest that at least some of the keys that were dedicated as votives had a symbolic
significance linked with childbirth. That is, they may have been dedicated as a symbol
Glis 1991, p. 68. On the "Samian Stone," see Pliny, NH 36.40.152. Eichholz (1971, vol. 10, p. 121, note b)
suggests that this was probably kaolinite (china clay) in a compacted form.
425
Harris 1995, p. 51, no. 37 and p. 53, no. 46. For the connection of Artemis Brauronia to childbirth
worship, see pp. 48-49.
426
See IG II2, 1532B, line 16; IG II2, 1534A, lines 122 and 124; Aleshire 1989, pp. 120 and 243.
427
See, for example, Olympia IV, pp. 190-191 no. 1204; Perachora I, p. 190 and pl. 86.28 (identified as a
sword-hilt. Simon re-interprets as a key. See Simon 1986, p. 353); FdD V.i, p. 214, nos. 757-758 and p. 215,
fig. 941; Aleshire 1989, p. 155; Harris 1995, pp. 266-267.
428
For the role of priestesses as holders of the temple keys, see Mantes 1990, pp. 28-65.
429
The most useful recent discussions of keys as votive gifts are van Straten 1981, pp. 99-100 and n. 175
and Simon 1986, pp. 353-360. For modern dedications of votive keys and their symbolic connection with
224
for "opening" the womb during the birth. 430 Keys that were dedicated as childbirth
offerings may well have served as amulets or charms during the actual birth before
their dedication. A late Roman author, Festus, provides the most direct evidence for the
use of keys as childbirth votives in antiquity. He records that it was customary for
women to dedicate keys in sanctuaries as a thank offering after a successful childbirth.431
Although Festus wrote in the 4th century A.D., as with so many late authors, it is likely
that his information was derived from earlier sources, and may well reflect a custom
that was common in Greece as well as in Rome. Keys have been found in Greek
sanctuaries that are typically associated with childbirth divinities, including sanctuaries
of Artemis, Hera, and the nymphs.432 Furthermore, as Simon has noted, it may be of
some significance that the figure of Iphigeneia, who served as a local childbirth divinity
at Brauron, was said to have held the office of kleidouchos in the sanctuary of Artemis.433
Personal Belongings
Personal belongings and ordinary household items occur with great frequency in
sanctuaries of all sorts. As objects that were both readily available and individually
meaningful to the dedicant, personal belongings made ideal votive gifts. Naturally, in
most instances it is impossible to determine why such objects were dedicated, but some
sexuality, fertility, and birth, see Kriss-Rettenbeck 1972, pp. 120 and 292.
430
For belief in the need magically or symbolically to "open" the womb, and the likely use of keys to do
this during birth, see above, p. 83.
431
Festus, De verborum significatu 39, 56.
432
Keys have been found in the sanctuaries of Artemis at Kalapodi (Felsch et al. 1980, pp. 97-98, fig. 85)
and at Pherai (possible examples published in Kilian 1975, pl. 93.11-13). They appear to have been
popular votives to Hera, who received large numbers of keys in her sanctuary at Foce del Sele (ZancaniMontuoro 1965-66, pp. 152-158); examples were also found in her sanctuaries at Argos (Argive Heraeum II,
p. 324, nos. 2715, 2716, and 2722) and possibly also at Perachora (Perachora I, p. 190 and pl. 86.28; for this
object as a key, see Simon 1986, p. 353). Keys excavated in the Corycian cave were probably dedicated to
the nymphs in connection with childbirth. For these, see Rolley 1984, p. 279 no. 68 h-i.
433
Simon 1986, p. 358 and n. 10. For Iphigeneia as a local childbirth divinity, see above, p. 35.
225
examples, particularly those that are inscribed, afford us with an indication of the types
of private belongings that were occasionally offered for childbirth.
Bronze mirrors are frequently found as votive offerings in Greek sanctuaries,
particularly in sanctuaries of female divinities and in sanctuaries where private
dedications were common.434 There is limited evidence to suggest that they were at least
occasionally dedicated as childbirth votives. A bronze mirror inscribed as a votive
offering to Eileithyia was found at Delphi.435 Similar examples, unfortunately without
context, may be seen at the Kanellopoulos museum in Athens and at the museum at
Karlsruhe.436 At least some of the many mirrors listed among the temple inventory lists
of the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron may also have been childbirth dedications.437
Weaving and spinning implements, as well as examples of textiles, appear to
have been common votive gifts dedicated by women for all sorts of purposes, including
the major life changes of marriage and childbirth.438 As objects intimately associated
with the daily lives and handiwork of the female dedicants, these gifts undoubtedly had
a very personal meaning for the women who offered them.439 The temple inventory
records for the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron record numerous examples of spindles,
spindlewhorls, loomweights, distaffs, epinetra, spun wool, and textiles, both finished
434
Simon 1986, pp. 218-222.

Inscribed jArcivppa jEluqivai. See Daux 1959a, p. 472 no. 5 and fig. 7.
436
In the Kanellopoulos Museum: Inscribed Phila dedicated (this) to Eileithyia. See Brouskari 1985, p.
78. In the museum of Karlsruhe: Inscribed ELEUTHIAS EMI. For this example, see Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 66
and citations there.
437
Linders 1972, pp. 27-28.
438
Textiles could also be given in thanks after an adolescent girl had successfully survived the potentially
dangerous time of her first menstruation. See Cole 1998, pp. 36-37.
439
The significance of a mother's woven garments is highlighted in Euripides' account of the story of Ion.
Creusa is able to identify Ion as her son because she recognizes the clothes, necklace, and wreath that he
had worn as an infant in his cradle. See Euripides, Ion 1411-1431, 1489-1496. Weaving and spinning
equipment served as symbols of female activity in other cultures as well. A Sumerian text records a ritual
performed at birth that included giving gender-appropriate symbols to the new infants. Female infants
received a spindle, and male infants received weapons. For this practice, see Pringle 1983, p. 132.
435
226
and unfinished.440 Items associated with spinning in particular may have been regarded
as appropriate gifts to Eileithyia, who, according to Pausanias, was sometimes referred
to as "the good spinner, connecting her to the fates.441 Perhaps it was in this role, as the
goddesss who watched over the fates of the parturient women and their newborn
infants, that the goddess received gifts of spinning equipment. Herodotus likewise
mentions a custom at Delos in which girls who were ready to marry wound a lock of
their hair around a spindle as a dedication at the tomb of the Hyperborean maidens,
who may well have been worshipped as minor childbirth divinities.442 As Simon has
mentioned, the important role of cloth production in the lives of Greek women would
have made such equipment an appropriate symbol for the transition from girl to adult
woman either at marriage or after the birth of her first child.443
Other personal items that were probably dedicated for childbirth include gaming
die. Two examples, inscribed as dedications to Eileithyia, were found in sanctuary of
Artemis Ortheia at Sparta.444 Similar examples have been found at the Menelaion at
Sparta, possibly dedicated to Helen in her role as a minor childbirth divinity.445
Animal Sacrifices and Food Offerings

Animal sacrifices and offerings of food were among the most common ways that
Greek women and families sought to thank the gods for successful birth. Such offerings
alone may have sufficed as an expression of thanks, or they may have been made in
440
Linders 1972.
Pausanias 8.21.3.
442
Herodotus 4.34. For the Hyperborean maidens as possible childbirth divinities, see above, p. 34.
Interestingly, spindles are also mentioned in some of the fragmentary treasury records of the
Eileithyiaion at Delos. For these, see Hamilton 2000, p. 191.
443
Simon 1986, p. 268.
444
Kilian 1978, pp. 221-222 and pls. 6 and 8.
445
Wace et al. 1908-1909, p. 143, pl. 8.13 and p. 146-147, pls. 9.11-12; For the possibility that Helen was
worshipped as a minor childbirth divinity in the Argolid, see above, pp. 32-33.
441
227
addition to the dedication of a more permanent childbirth votive. Baur suggests that
pigs and hens may have been especially popular victims for childbirth divinities, but it
is quite likely that all sorts of animals were sacrificed.446 Sacrifice scenes depicted in
votive reliefs indicate that bulls, goats, and pigs could all be sacrificed in association
with childbirth.447
Specialized food offerings may also have been dedicated on this occasion. Fruits
and vegetables that were particularly symbolic of fertility may have been selected as
appropriate offerings. In the Delian inventory records, silver and gilded replicas of
apples and cucumbers appear in the inventory list for the Eileithyiaion, possibly serving
as permanent reminders of the most common types of food offerings.448 These fruits and
vegetables may have been considered especially appropriate, given their association
with fertility.449 Apples also appear as food offerings to Artemis on a relief from
Echinos, along with other gifts symbolic of fertility, including grapes, pomegranates,
honey-cakes, and a myrtle branch.450
Various types of cakes or bread also featured prominently in the worship of
divinities of procreation, childbirth, and fertility.451 According to Hesychius, certain
breads dedicated to Artemis were called lochia; these were offered upon the occasion of
childbirth, as their name implies. 452 In addition to thanking the goddess for a successful
childbirth, they were also intended to ensure the continued growth of the newborn
446
Baur 1901, pp. 71-73.

See pp. 195-198, particularly 3.2, 3.8 and 3.13.
448
For the most recent treatment of the Delian inventory lists, see Hamilton 2000, p. 214.
449
Apples and cucumbers are also mentioned in a fragmentary poem by Praxilla of Sicyon, probably in
reference to the offerings left out during the Adonia in celebration of Adonis as a god of fertility. For a
translation and discussion of the poem and the significance of the cucumber as a symbol of fertility, see
Balmer 1996, p. 55 and note 10. For the apple's connection to Aphrodite and sexuality, see PirenneDelforge 1994, pp. 410-412.
450
For this relief, see above, p. 202, 3.13 and fig. 58. For the identification of the food offerings depicted in
this relief and their associations with fertility, see Dakoronia and Gounaropoulou 1992.
451
For the importance of cakes in Greek religion in general, see Kearns 1994.
447
228
child.453 An offering of this sort, in honor of childbirth, occurs in Euripides Ion. Xuthus,
after appealing to the oracle of Apollo at Delphi for children, and after learning from
the oracle that he already has an illegitimate son, Ion, immediately sets off to perform
the sacrifice that he neglected to make in honor of his birth.454 We learn from the chorus
several lines later that this includes not only an animal sacrifice, but also a pelanon, or
cake-offering.455
Painted Votive Stelai

Painted stelai are a class of votive peculiar to Northern Greece, particularly in the
region of Thessaly.456 At the Thessalian city of Gonnoi, painted stelai were dedicated in
great numbers as childbirth votives during the Hellenistic period.457 The limited
excavations conducted by Arvanitopoulos in early 1900s on the northwest hill below the
acropolis of Gonnoi uncovered over 300 examples.458 The excavations revealed only
minor traces of the architectural features of the sanctuary itself. Among the remains
were parts of a wall, the fragmentary foundation of a small building, rock cuttings for
stelai, and stamped rooftiles.
The stelai from this sanctuary may be securely identified as childbirth votives
due to the dedicatory inscriptions preserved on many of them. The inscriptions indicate
that the stelai were given to Artemis under several different epithets, nearly all of which
452
Hesychius s.v. lovcia; Hesychius s.v. a[grwsti".

See Matthews 1996, pp. 277-281. He interprets a reference to lochia in the writings of Antimachus of
Colophon as bread dedicated to Artemis in connection with childbirth. For their connection with the
growth of children, see especially p. 281.
454
Euripides, Ion, 653: qu`saiv q j a{ sou pri;n genevqli j oujk ejq uvsamen.
455
Euripides, Ion 706-8. For the general practice of offering breads and cakes to the gods, see Brumfield
1997. That a pelanon or cake-offering could serve as a votive gift, see Jameson 1956.
456
Painted decoration on stelai was quite common in Thessaly. For painted funerary stelai of the region,
see von Graeve 1979.
457
For this sanctuary, see above, pp. 54-55. Pingiatoglu provides a very useful discussion the sanctuary
and the stelai from this site. See Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 107-112. The stelai range in date from the end of the
453
229
pertain to her role as childbirth goddess. Among the epithets used in the inscriptions
were: Lochia (23 times), Eulochia (once), Genetaira (3 times) or Geneteira (2 times),
Eileithyia (27 times), Euonymos (once), and Eleia (once).459 For the most part, they take
the form of standard dedicatory inscriptions: that is, they list the name of dedicant in
the nominative, followed often by the patronymic, the name of the goddess in the
dative, and often the addition of either ajnevqhken (dedicated) or eujxamevnh (praying).
The stelai themselves, made of marble or limestone, were almost certainly
originally painted with decorative scenes, none of which survive.460 The absence of the
painted decoration on these stelai is a great loss; there is no doubt that it would have
greatly aided our understanding of the iconography associated with childbirth votives.
Only one stele dedicated to Artemis had carved relief decoration.461 The relief, broken at
the top, depicts Artemis standing to the right; in her left hand she holds a torch and by
her side stands a deer. A female worshiper approaches from the left. In her right hand
she holds an oinochoe. Her left hand is raised above her head; the object that it held is
now missing, but given her stance, it was probably an offering basket. As discussed
above, sacrificial scenes like this one have been found on several reliefs dedicated as
childbirth votives; it is quite likely that many of the painted stelai would have shared a
similar iconography.462
Despite the loss of the painted decoration, the inscribed dedications on the stelai
allow us to make a few observations about childbirth worship at Gonnoi. All of the
4th century B.C. to the 1st century B.C.

458
Arvanitoupoulos 1911, pp. 317-320.
459
Most are published in Gonnoi II, nos. 161-196. Pingiatoglu adds three additional fragmentary examples
from the Volos Museum, all dedicated to Artemis Eileithyia. See Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 108 n. 284.
460
For a useful summary of the evidence suggesting that these stelai were painted, see Pingiatoglu 1981,
pp. 109-110.
461
Gonnoi II, no. 167.
462
Comparanda for the oinochoe and offering basket appear on the relief from Echinos (3.13), discussed
above.
230
stelai in which the name of the dedicant has been preserved were dedicated by
women.463 This is of interest, since it seems to indicate a different pattern of worship
from other well-known childbirth sanctuaries, such as the sanctuary of Eileithyia at
Paros, in which inscribed dedications indicate that it was common for childbirth votives
to be offered by couples or even families. In addition, the names of the dedicants and
their patronymics are frequently known from local tombstones and other local
inscriptions.464 This, coupled with the fact that the stelai themselves were a local type of
votive, would suggest that the sanctuary drew its worshippers from nearby cities and
towns. From the available evidence, therefore, it would seem that the sanctuary of
Artemis at Gonnoi was a local center of childbirth worship visited primarily (perhaps
even exclusively?) by women of the surrounding region.
Although Gonnoi is the only site from which such a large collection of votive
stelai have been found, isolated examples of similar childbirth votives have been
discovered elsewhere in northern Greece. A votive stele dedicated to Artemis Lochia
was discovered in Phthiotic Thebes; a similar stele dedicated to Artemis Eileithyia was
found near Arethusa.465 A votive stele, now missing its painted decoration, was found in
a small cave shrine of the Nymphs on Mt. Ossa.466 This stele bears the inscription:
JOreiavsin Enpedovkleia Filodameiva pe;r genea'. The use of the phrase pe;r genea' to
indicate that the votive was dedicated for offspring is unique, but is probably best
understood as the equivalent of the more common phrase uJpe;r tw;n paidivwn, which is
found on numerous votives dedicated to childbirth divinities.467
463
Gonnoi I, p. 148.
Discussed individually in the final publication of the site; see Gonnoi II, nos. 161-196.
465
For these stelai, see Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 169, nos. E107 and E108.
466
Wace and Thompson 1908-1909, p. 245 no. 4.
467
See pp. 217-218.
464
231
The Iconography of Birth

In the first chapter of her book The Experiences of Tiresias, Nicole Loraux explores
the connection in Greek thought between childbirth and warfare, noting in particular
the similarities in the ways that the Greeks expressed death in childbirth and death in
warfare both in literature and in art. At one point in her discussion she makes the
causual observation that there existed in Greece a "censorship that everywhere in the
Greek world forbids representations of the moment of birth.468 The concept that Greek
society rejected the representation of childbirth, particularly the moment of crowning, is
of considerable significance when considering the types of objects used as childbirth
votives. To understand why Greek women dedicated the types of objects that they did,
we must have an understanding not only of societal attitudes towards fertility,
pregnancy, and childbirth, but also of the acceptability of portraying such subjects in
art. The focus of this section is to review when and where illustrations of childbirth and
pregnancy occur in Greek art outside of a votive context, in order to create a frame of
reference in which to place the childbirth votives.
Divine Birth Scenes

Not surprisingly, scenes of the birth of the gods are by far the most common
representations of birth in Greek art. Tales of divine and heroic births were always
popular in Greece, and, in a culture whose art was dominated by mythological
references, these scenes frequently found their way into art. Many examples depict the
"birth" of a divinity from a natural or primordial element, such as Aphrodite arising
from the sea or Erichthonius being handed up by Ge. I have excluded images of this
nature from the following discussion, as they are so far removed from the natural act of
childbirth that they can lend little assistance to our understanding of the representation
468
Loraux 1995, p. 24.
232
of birth. I have chosen instead to focus on those myths in which a divine child was born
directly from the body of a parent divinity. These myths include the birth of Athena, the
birth of Dionysus, and the birth of Apollo.
Birth of Athena
The birth of Athena from the head of Zeus is among the most popular
mythological themes found in Archaic and Classical art. The earliest representations
date to the 7th century B.C.469 The subject achieved its greatest popularity during the
Archaic period, where it appeared on numerous black figure vases, and continued to a
lesser degree in the 5th century B.C.
Illustrations of the myth may be
grouped into four general categories,
representing: 1) the moment before
birth; 2) the moment of birth; 3) the
Fig. 63
moment just after birth; and 4) a
slightly later time after birth.470 Only the first two of these are of interest to the present
discussion.
Illustrations of the moment before birth, when Zeus is "laboring," are less
common than those of the birth itself. They often depict Zeus seated on a throne and
assisted by the Eileithyiaie, who stand on either side of Zeus and lay their hands upon
him to assist in the birth.471 There is no indication of the impending birth other than the
469
A relief pithos from Tenos, c. 680 B.C., is the earliest example. See Cassimatis 1984, p. 988 no. 360.
Shield bands from Olympia also date to the end of the 7th and beginning of the 6th centuries B.C. See LIMC
II, 1984, p. 988 nos. 361-362, s.v. Athna (H. Cassimatis). More recently, a fragmentary 7th century B.C.
relief pithos from Ceos has tentatively been identified as representing a similar scene of the birth of
Athena. See Caskey 1998.
470
Schneider 1880, pp. 8-9. Cassimatis similarly identifies four categories, but differentiates the last two
according to whether Athena is depicted as miniature or full-grown. See LIMC II, 1984, p. 985, s.v. Athna.
Cook (1940, pp. 662-663) identifies five categories, based on the presence of either Eileithyia or
Hephaistos.
471
For examples of this group, see LIMC II, 1984, p. 986 nos. 334-342, s.v. Athna (H. Cassimatis); Cook
1940, p. 663 pl. L and fig. 474.
233
presence of the Eileithyiai (Fig. 63). Zeus is depicted enduring his labor in an attitude of
stoic calm, his back straight, his hair and clothing neatly in place, and his usual
attributes of a staff or thunderbolt in his hands.
Far more common are illustrations of the moment of birth, when Athena springs
forth from the head of Zeus. These are often
more complicated scenes, with Zeus seated
amidst a gathering of divinities who witness the
divine birth. As Cook notes, many examples
make reference to Hephaistos' role in the myth
Fig. 64
by depicting him wielding the axe that he uses
to split Zeus' head to enable the birth of the goddess (Fig. 64).472 In most cases, however,
the figure of Hephaistos is secondary to the central scene, which usually focuses on the
seated figure of Zeus, assisted by the Eileithyiae (Fig. 65). As with the preceding group,
Zeus is shown serenely sitting upon his throne while the miniature form of Athena
emerges from the top of his
head.
The Attic cup illustrated in Fig.
64 is
quite unusual in indicating
Zeus'
reaction to the birth by depicting
the
god with his arms raised in
alarm
Fig. 65
or pain.473
472
Cook 1940, pp. 663-681.

Cf. the relief pithos from Tenos, however, in which Zeus is also depicted raising his arms. See LIMC II,
1984, p. 988 no. 360, s.v. Athna (H. Cassimatis).
473
234
Birth of Apollo
The birth of Apollo appears only rarely in Greek art. Indeed, it is significant that
of the few examples that have been thought to illustrate this myth, only one may be
identified with any degree of certainty.474 The most likely representation of the myth is
found on a 4th century B.C. polychrome pyxis from Eretria (Fig. 66). On the body of the
pyxis, groups of female figures (presumably divinities) flank a central scene in which a
woman sits upon a chair and leans one
arm against a palm tree. To the left of
this figure stand two female assistants.
The first supports the seated figure by
placing her hands on the seated woman's
wrists. The second places her hands on
the arm and shoulder of the first
standing figure. To the right of the palm
tree stands Athena, who leans against a
spear and rests her shield on the ground
before the seated woman.
Fig. 66
The scene does indeed appear to

represent childbirth; the loosened strands of hair and the slightly bowed head of the
seated figure are suitable for a woman in labor.475 The assistants who serve to support
and steady her also fit well with this interpretation. The presence of female divinities
would suggest that this scene illustrates the birth of a divinity. Although most of the
474
In addition to the examples illustrated above (Figs. 66 and 67) one may add a 4th century B.C. redfigure crater from Olynthus (Thessaloniki Museum no. V 75, 129), which depicts a figure on a kline near a
palm tree. Pingiatoglu regards this as a possible representation of the birth of Apollo. Pingiatoglu 1981,
pp. 22-23 and pl. 9. The poor preservation of the vessel renders this interpretation extremely uncertain,
however. Due to its fragmentary nature, I have chosen not to include this example, particularly since the
key figure reclining on the kline is not preserved.
475
Soranus (2.6.1) provides a rational explanation for the benefits of loosening the clothing and hair of
parturient women, a practice that, he notes, women already did for superstitious reasons.
235
female figures on the vessel lack identifying attributes, Athena's identity is clear. The
presence of Eros sitting upon the knee of one of the other figures would suggest that she
represents Aphrodite. Finally, the parturient woman has been credibly identified as
Leto, based upon the presence of the palm tree, which figures prominently in the birth
story of Apollo.476
A fragmentary Classical relief now in the Louvre (Fig. 67) has also been
interpreted as representing Leto and the infant Apollo after the birth.477 Only the lower
right corner of the relief is preserved. At the
right edge is the trunk of a large palm tree,
beneath which an adult female figure sits in
a chair. She is dressed in a chiton and
himation, and leans in a relaxed pose with
her arm upon the back of the chair. At the
base of the tree trunk lies a small male figure
wearing a short chiton.
Birth of Dionysus
Fig. 67
The rebirth of Dionysus from Zeus'

thigh appears in Greek art by the 6th century
B.C., though the motif did not reach the peak of its popularity until the middle of the 5th
century, when it was depicted in a number of red figure vase paintings.478 Though these
scenes are less standardized than those of the birth of Athena, the artists' treatment of
476
Homeric Hymn to Apollo 117; Theognis, El. 1.6.

Mitropoulou (1977, p. 56 no. 98) notes that Waywell, in an unpublished dissertation, interprets this
relief as the birth of Apollo.
478
A Corinthian pyxis from the 7th century B.C. was originally thought to be the earliest representation of
this myth. For full bibliography and discussion of this vase, see Cook 1940, p. 80 n. 2 and fig. 23. Red
figure examples: Cook 1940, pp. 80-83, n. 2 and figs. 24-25 and pl. xiii, 3; LIMC III, 1986, pp. 478-479 nos.
666-667 s.v. Dionysos (A. Veneri and C. Gaspari). As Cook (1940, pp. 83-86 n. 4) notes, the theme of the
rebirth of Dionysus gained in popularity in the Roman period, particularly for children's sarcophagi,
since the symbolism was considered particularly appropriate.
477
236
birth are quite similar. The central figures consist of Zeus, often seated on a rock or
throne, and the infant Dionysus, who is shown in the process of emerging from Zeus'
thigh.
One of the simplest representations of the myth is found on a red-figure lekythos
now in the Boston museum (Fig. 68). On the left, Zeus, unclothed, sits upon a rock. He
lowers his head in concentration as he uses his hands to aid in the birth of the infant,
whose head is just visible as it crowns from the
center of his thigh. To the right, Hermes observes
the birth, waiting to take the newborn infant to the
nymphs who will rear him. It is interesting to note
that, although Zeus' active participation in the birth
is unusual in this painting, the artist nevertheless
chose to represent him in a manner consistent with
other divine birth scenes, in which the laboring
deity maintains a calm demeanor and unruffled
appearance.
Fig. 68
A South Italian volute crater (Fig. 69)
provides a more complex scene, in which Zeus gives birth to his son in a natural setting
surrounded by a group of other divinities. Here, as in images of the birth of Athena,
Eileithyia plays an active role in the birth. She does not tend to Zeus, however, but
rather reaches out to assist Dionysus as he emerges from Zeus' thigh. Zeus himself is
shown in a very passive role; he reclines in a relaxed posture better suited to one who is
drinking at a symposium than one suffering the cruel pangs of labor. His hair and beard
are neatly arranged, and he wears a festive wreath on his head.
237
Conclusions about Mythological Birth Scenes

It is clear from the brief survey above that scenes of divine birth are highly
idealized. Even when literary sources mention the pain encountered by gods during
birth, artistic representations usually ignore this aspect.479 Neither the posture nor the
demeanor of the gods gives indication of pain or distress; the parturient deity is usually
portrayed sitting upright or in a relaxed pose, rather than slumped over in pain. Gods
who give birth do not grimace or sway; indeed, their appearance during birth does not
differ in any significant way from representations of them in other myths. Their hair
and clothing are neatly arranged, they are appropriately attired, and their bodies never
vary from the classical ideal.
Ordinary scenes of female divinities giving birth, such as Hera's birth of
Hephaistos or Aphrodite's birth of Eros, are practically nonexistent.480 Artists chose to
focus instead on the births that were truly extraordinarythose that clearly and
unequivocally differentiated the gods from humans by the unusual circumstances and
manner in which they occurred, such as
Athena's miraculous birth from the head of
Zeus and the birth of Dionysus from the thigh
of Zeus.481
Finally, in considering mythological
birth scenes, we must consider the moment of
birth that the artist chose to represent. What
we find, contrary to Loraux's statement, is that
in many scenes of mythological birth, it is
Fig. 69
precisely the moment of birthwhen the new
479
See, for instance, Homeric Hymn to Delian Apollo, 3.90.

The only exception is Leto's birth of Apollo. Zeitlin (2002, p. 213, n. 46) has suggested that it was
because Apollo's parturition and birth were so ordinary that they were rarely depicted in Greek art.
481
For a recent discussion of these unusual births, see Boardman 2004.
480
238
child emerges into the light of daythat the artist has chosen as his focus. It is highly
significant, however, that this moment is depicted only in the most extraordinary of
birth scenes, when the child emerges not from the womb of a female divinity, but from
the male body. I know of no representations of divine
births that explicitly show the child emerging from the
female womb.
Scenes of Mortal Birth
Although illustrations of mortal women during
pregnancy and childbirth are extremely rare in Greek
art, an unique set of funerary stelai and lekythoi do
Fig. 70
depict this theme. Most of the monuments of this type

have been found in Attica, although examples are also
known from northern Greece, Rhodes, and from Egypt.
They range in date from the 4th to the 3rd centuries B.C.482
These monuments, which were recognized as depicting
labor scenes as early as the end of the 19th century, have
been the subject of considerable discussion over the past
Fig. 71
few decades.483
In the standard relief scenes, the central figure is a woman seated on a couch (or
occasionally on a chair or throne), and leaning back in an attitude of distress or
482
A full list of the well-preserved examples of such monuments may be found in Demand 1994, pp. 123126. She provides a list of partial or fragmentary examples on p. 123, n. 14. Perhaps to be added to this list
is a perplexing 6th century B.C. relief fragment from Chalchedon which was once thought to represent the
birth of Athena, but which is now often taken to be part of a funerary stele depicting a woman dying in
childbirth (Appendix I, 3.3).
483
For the initial interpretation, see Wolters and Frederichs 1885 and Wolters 1892. A sampling of recent
scholarship includes Vedder 1988; Demand 1994, pp. 121-140; Demand 1995; Stears 1995; Stewart and
Gray 2000.
239
exhaustion. Her hair is usually shown loose, falling limply about her face (Figs. 71-74).
The central figure often wears only a thin chiton that is unbelted, and therefore reveals
the contours of her breasts and abdomen. In some cases she is nude except for a thin
fabric draped over her lap. She is usually supported by a female figure that stands
behind her, and sometimes is assisted by other female figures as well. Several
iconographical clues indicate that this is a childbirth scene, most particularly the
unbound hair and the loosened clothing, both of which correspond to ancient
descriptions of childbirth.484 Interestingly, none of these funerary reliefs includes a
swaddled infant in the image, though a 5th century votive relief in the Metropolitan
Museum that employs precisely the same childbirth
imagery does depict a standing servant holding the
infant, making the connection with childbirth more
clear.485 The fact that no infant appears on these
funerary monuments suggested to Stewart and Gray
that neither the mother nor the infant survived.486 The
opposite may in fact be true; the appearance of the
infant on a funerary monument may indicate that the
tomb was shared by both.487 There is a class of
funerary stelai, found in Attica in large numbers, that
484
Fig. 72
For ancient sources pertaining to the practice of loosening clothing and hair during childbirth, see pp.
81-83. For the epithet Lysizonos used for childbirth divinities, see p. 46.
485
For the votive relief, see Appendix I, no. 3.4. The authenticity of this relief has recently been
questioned, however. See Stewart and Gray 2000, p. 262, n. 27.
486
Stewart and Gray 2000, p. 260, n. 17.
487
We may compare these reliefs to the famous Hediste painted stele, in which a swaddled infant
appears. The inscription on the Hediste stele relates that both the mother and her newborn child died
immediately after birth. For the Hediste stele, see below, pp. 246-247.
240
depicts a seated woman and a servant holding a swaddled infant.488 Clairmont

interprets them as the tombs of women who died in childbirth.489 I would suggest that
the presence of the infant indicates that the tomb belongs to both mother and child.
Similar iconography is used for a set of 17th century English tombs that commemorate
death in childbirth. Each of these tombs depicts both mother and infant; the
accompanying inscription informs us that the infant died as well.490
Although these reliefs have been
universally accepted as representing
childbirth scenes, some scholars have
recently suggested that the monuments
belonged to midwives rather than women
who died in childbirth.491 This
reinterpretation has not received
widespread following, however.492 Indeed,
in addition to the iconographical clues
within the reliefs themselves, which focus
primarily upon the seated woman rather
than the midwife, there is considerable
Fig. 73
external evidence to suggest that these
488
Clairmont 1993, 1.125, 1.660, 1.691, 1.714, 1.819, 2.640, 2.719, 2.725, 2.727, 2.730, 2.749, 2.759, 2.761, 2.770,
2.771, 2.778, 2.780, 2.780a, 2.783, 2.786, 2.789, 2.795, 2.796, 2.806, 2.810, 2.815, 2.849, 2.868a, 2.870, 2.880,
2.881, 2.893a, 2.894, 2.909, 2.919, 3.703, 3.745, 3.746, 3.751, 3.822, 3.842, 3.866, 3.869, 3.875, 3.882, 3.885,
3.889, 3.919, 3.932, 3.933, 4.670, 4.671, 4.680, 4.710, 4.755, 4.770, 4.850, 4.910, 4.920, 4.930.
489
See individual entries in Clairmont 1993.
490
Hurtig 1983.
491
Most noticeably: Demand 1994, pp. 121-140; Demand 1995. Clairmont interprets most of the
monuments of this type as belonging to women who died in childbirth, but oddly interprets Malthakes
grave stele as commemorating a midwife. Clairmont 1993, no. 2.457.
492
Arguments against the interpretation of these monuments as belonging to midwives may be found in
Stewart and Gray 2000, p. 261 n. 26; Grmek and Gourevitch 1998, pp. 316-17 and n. 33.
241
monuments commemorated women who died in childbirth. Pausanias (2.7.3), in

describing some tombs near Corinth, mentions a funerary monument of a woman who
died in childbirth:
After the tomb of Lycus, but on the other side of the Asopus, there
is on the right the Olympium, and a little farther on, to the left of the road,
the grave of Eupolis, the Athenian comic poet. Farther on, if you turn in
the direction of the city, you see the tomb of Xenodice, who died in
childbirth. It has not been made after the native fashion, but so as to
harmonize best with the painting, which is very well worth seeing.
Although it is possible that Pausanias identification of this tomb as belonging to a
woman who died in childbirth was based upon an inscribed epigram that explained the
manner of her death, the fact that he specifically mentions the painting on the tomb
suggests that the image on the monument was critical to its identification. More explicit
evidence is supplied by a 4th century B.C. epigram, which describes the appearance of a
womans tombstone:
Unhappy Mnasylla, why does it stand on
thy tomb, this picture of thy daughter Neotima
whom thou lamentest, her whose life was taken
from her by the pangs of labour? She lies in her
dear mothers arms, as if a heavy cloud had
gathered on her eyelids and, alas, not far away her
father Aristoteles rests his head in his right hand. O
most miserable pair, not even in death have ye
forgotten your grief.493
This description goes far in explaining the imagery used
in these monuments. Admittedly, the deceased in this
Fig. 74
493
instance is not the woman who died in childbirth, but her
Anth Pal. 7.730.
242
mother. Nevertheless, the description is clearly of the type of monument that depicts a
woman who died in birth.494 In comparing the description provided by this epigram to
existing monuments (Figs. 73 and 74), we see that in many cases, the parents of the
deceased woman actually do appear in the relief scenes, either assisting her in her labor
or mourning her death.495
Other epigrams celebrate the courage with which the deceased faced the pain of
death in childbirth, or highlight the pathos of the fact that she did not live to see her
new child grow.496 A surviving painted funeral stele from the 2nd century B.C. combines
a painted scene of the deceased woman, Hediste, lying in bed after having given birth
to a child (shown on the stele as a swaddled infant held in a nurses arms), with an
explicit epigram commemorating her death:
The Fates spun on their spindles then for Hediste their painful
thread, when the bride went to meet the pains of labor. Miserable one! She
will not embrace her infant, or wet the lips of her baby with her breast, for
one light [day] looked down on both, and then Fortune coming to both
alike carried the two away to one tomb.497
Admittedly, the image on this stele differs from those discussed above in that Hedistes
monument does not depict her in the midst of labor, but lying on the childbed which is
494
Demand (1994, p. 130) uses this epigram, which indicates that the primary deceased was not the one
who died in childbirth, to argue against the interpretation of these stelai as commemorating death in
childbirth. I would argue that, despite the fact that in this particular instance the tomb belonged to the
mother rather than the woman who died in childbirth, this is one of the instances in which a stock scene
on a stele could be employed in an unusual way to suit the family who purchased it. Far from indicating
to me that most of these stelai did not convey the concept of death in childbirth, I would argue that this is
the exception that proves the rule. Though the owner of the tomb is a different character in the scene, the
concept conveyed in the image is nevertheless death in childbirth. The inscription on the tomb in this
instance would serve to clarify a scene that most passers-by would have interpreted as the tomb of a
woman who died in childbirth.
495
Fig. 73 depicts the funerary monument of Plangon; the inscription states that she is the daughter of
Tolmides, who is presumbably the man shown mourning his daughters death. The woman standing is
most likely then Plangons mother, who assisted her in childbirth and witnessed the death of her
daughter.
496
Anth. Pal. 6.348, 7.163-6, 7.168, 7.463, 7.528, 7.583, 7.729, 7.742; For a 4th century B.C. tombstone from the
Athenian Kerameikos, see: IG II, 32, no. 1907; Peek 1955, no. 548; for a 1st century A.C. epigram from Kos,
see Peek 1932, pp. 235-7, no. 14; Sherwin-White 1978, p. 311.
497
Peek 1955, no. 1606.
243
also her deathbed. Nevertheless, it provides irrefutable proof that funerary monuments
depicting death in childbirth were available in Greece at the time when the majority of
these funeral reliefs were made.
A very close parallel to
the Greek burial monuments
depicting a woman in childbed
is found in the form of a unique
15th century Italian funerary
relief (Fig. 75). In the center of
Fig. 75
the scene is a woman seated on a

bed. She is shown in a state of collapse, supported by assistants and gently aided by an
elderly woman who stands before her and holds her arm. Her thin garment is loose and
disheveled, and her hair hangs loose. In the far right corner, a wet nurse is seated on the
floor holding a swaddled infant. Around the bed stand an array of distraught female
figures that dramatically pull their hair and weep. The relief was part of the tomb of
Francesca Pitti and her child, set up in the church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva in
Rome by her husband, Giovanni Tornabuoni, in A.D.1477. From a private letter written
by her husband in the same year, we learn the story of her death: that she died in
childbirth after a difficult labor, and, in an attempt to save the unborn infant, the
doctors performed a Caesarian section only to find that the infant had died as well.498
This relief, though separated from the classical Greek examples by over 1,700 years and
far more explicit in its representation of emotional distress, nevertheless employs the
same iconographical details to indicate death in childbirth: the collapsed posture, the
loosened clothing and unbound hair, and the support of assistants and midwife.
498
Musacchio 1999, pp. 29-30.
244
These funerary reliefs, which are the only non-votive Greek monuments that
clearly depict mortal women in childbirth, are extraordinarily important for
understanding the accepted iconography of birth in Greek art. They contrast markedly
with the highly idealized representations of divine birth. In the funerary reliefs, the
artists chose to highlight exactly those elements that are absent from the divine birth
scenes: they focus on the pain and distress of childbirth, and tend to depict the event in
a realistic manner. By emphasizing the disheveled appearance of the parturient woman,
her slumped and defeated posture, and the distress exhibited by those who attend the
birth, the artists who created the funerary reliefs clearly portray childbirth as a time of
crisis. The setting of these scenes is realistically represented as taking place within the
home, and the laboring woman is usually shown surrounded by an entourage of
assistants comprised of close relatives, young female household members or slaves, and
a midwife.499 The parturient woman herself is also realistically portrayed. She is usually
shown in an attitude of distress, and her thin garment often draws attention to her
breasts and slightly rounded abdomen, exactly those areas of her body that pertain to
impending motherhood.
Despite the realism of these reliefs, however, it is clear that the artists sought to
avoid certain graphic elements of birth. Only a seated birthing position seems to have
been acceptable in these reliefs; none portrays women giving birth in a kneeling or
squatting position. Nor were the artists interested in representing the minutae of the
birthing process. The specialized equipment for birth, such as implements, tools, basins
and cloths never appear on the reliefs. Most importantly, unlike Roman reliefs that
depict midwives reaching between the legs of the parturient woman to draw out the
infant, the Greek reliefs avoid all reference to the infant emerging from the mother's
499
See, for example, Stewart and Gray 2000, p. 259.
245
body.500 Although the laboring women on these reliefs are often shown in a state of
partial undress, the area of the groin tends to be discreetly draped.
Death of Semele
There is one representation that bridges the depictions of human and divine
births, and as a consequence provides interesting insights into the iconography used for
birth scenes in Greek art. A 4th century Apulian volute krater in the Tampa Museum of
Art depicts the death of Dionysus mortal mother, Semele (Fig. 76).501 Semele, while
pregnant with Zeus illegitimate son, Dionysus, is tricked by Hera into asking Zeus to
reveal his true form to her. When Zeus appears to her in the form of a lighting bolt,
Semele perishs.502
There is considerable evidence to suggest that the death of Semele was regarded
as a death in childbirth. Although the birth of Dionysus from Zeus thigh is known as
early as the 6th century B.C., where it appears in vase paintings, the earliest written
500
French 1986, pp. 76-78 and pls. 1 and 3.

Tampa Museum of Art no. 87.36.
502
Apollodorus, Lib. 3.4.3. For additional sources forFig.
this76
myth, see LIMC III, 1986, p. 417 s.v. Dionysos (A.
Veneri and C. Gaspari).
501
246
accounts of the myth indicate that Semele gave birth to Dionysus.503 A lost 4th century
B.C. play by Timotheus of Miletus about this myth was entitled The Birth-Pangs. In
addition, Dionysus was occasionally referred to as born from the fire, meaning the
lightening flash of Zeus when he revealed himself to Semele.504
The vase from the Tampa Museum of Art reflects this tradition of Semele's death
occurring in connection with her birth of Dionysus (Fig. 76). Semele occupies the central
position of the panel on the shoulder of the krater. She is seated with a female figure on
either side to support her. Her hair falls loosely to her shoulders, and she is nude except
for an amulet tied to her chest with crossed bands. Additional figures, both male and
female, are arranged around this central scene. These figures all look upon Semele and
raise their hands in an expression of surprise or fear. Above the entire scene is a
decorative semi-circle that apparently indicates the sky or clouds; from this semi-circle
descends a lightning bolt.
In this scene, the artist has combined the usual representations of mortal and
divine births. This image is suitable for a vase-painting because it depicts a
mythological event; nevertheless, the iconography that the artist used more closely
resembles that found on the funeral stelai than on other vase paintings. In particular,
the artist has placed Semele in the same posture as the women depicted on the funeral
stelai. She leans back into the arms of her attendants, and her head lolls to the side in an
attitude of pain and defeat. The reason for this choice of iconography is obvious like
the other mortal women depicted on the stelai, Semele, too, is dying even as she gives
birth.
What is remarkable about this vase painting is what it reveals about artistic
choices pertaining to birth scenes. This volute-krater is, to my knowledge, the only
vessel on which a mortal woman is shown giving birth. Although there are numerous
503
504
Homer, Il. 14.387; Hesiod Theog. 940-942.

P. Oxy. 2687 = Loeb series, Greek Lyric V, p. 319, no. 926, frag. d.
247
myths of mortal women giving birth to divine or heroic offspring within the Greek
mythological corpus, the only one of these to appear in Greek art is the story of a
woman whose death is linked with the birth of her child. It is, I believe, significant that
this image, like the funerary stelai that provide the only other explicit depictions of
mortal births, depicts an unsuccessful birth.
Summary
The pattern of birth iconography that emerges from this brief survey is quite
striking. Birth scenes appear frequently in ancient Greek art, but the vast majority of
these are depictions of divine births. These are almost exclusively focused upon the
most extraordinary births of the gods, especially those myths in which the child is born
from a male parent. The representation of birth in these scenes is highly idealized.
Scenes of mortal birth, in contrast, are rare in Greek art, seeming to become popular
only for short period during the 4th century B.C. These appear predominantly on
funerary reliefs, and they invariably focus upon birth as a time of crisis and pain. All of
the extant representations of mortal births, including the vase painting of Semele, depict
unsuccessful birth scenes, in which the mother, and sometimes both mother and infant,
died as a result of the birth.
With this pattern in mind, it is necessary, finally, to return to Lorauxs statement
that Greek art avoids the representation of the moment of birth. This survey confirms
the general validity of that statement, with one important modification. The emergence
of the child is not represented in Greek art, except in mythological scenes of birth in
which the child is born from the body of a male divinity. This exception is significant;
from it we may conclude that it was not the concept of birth itself that was taboo, nor
even the emergence of the newborn child. Rather, it seems that it was the emergence of
the child from the female body that was considered particularly unsuitable for
representation in art.
248
Indeed, the general unacceptability of depicting the female form in childbirth

serves to explain the odd fact that the only mortal births that are illustrated in Greek art
are unsuccessful ones that result in death. The reason behind these depictions becomes
clear when we accept that the artistic focus of each of these scenes is not on the birth
itself, but rather on the suffering of the woman as she dies in labor. The birth
iconography is employed only to provide the viewer with the context for the death.
Thus, it was not the birth that the artists wished to celebrate, but the manner of death.
The act of natural childbirth in itself held no appeal for Greek artists; it was the concept
of a noble death, in which the woman died while fulfilling her highest civic and social
duty, that led to the creation of these otherwise anomalous scenes of mortal birth.
Votives and the Iconography of Birth

The lack of interest in (if not an actual taboo against) portraying scenes of natural
childbirth in Greek art provides a cultural context for the childbirth votives. My
conclusions about the depiction of childbirth in Greek art may be summarized as
follows: 1) that childbirth is an acceptable theme in art only if it represents a
mythological or divine birth, or if it represents an unsuccessful mortal birth (i.e., death
in childbirth); 2) that the moment of birth is an unacceptable theme in art. The only
exception is the depiction of divine births in which the child emerges from something
other than a female body; and 3) that Greek art generally does not tend to depict the
female form (either divine or mortal) in an obvious state of pregnancy.
Although most of the votives examined in this study conform to the conclusions
arrived at above, there are a small number of votives that explicitly depict the female
form in a state of pregnancy or childbirth. The existence of these votives is surprising,
and deserves further consideration. Given the taboos associated with childbirth,
249
particularly the fact that childbirth itself was prohibited in Greek sanctuaries, and the
general tendency not to show successful mortal childbirth in Greek art, how do we
explain these explicit childbirth votives?
The depiction of pregnancy in childbirth votives, though somewhat surprising,
may be explained by the fact that pregnancy itself was not taboo. Pregnant women went
to sanctuaries on a regular basis, and no restrictions seem to have been placed on their
presence in other public settings. The fact that Greek art in general does not depict the
state of pregnancy is, therefore, likely to be more a reflection of societal ideals about the
female form in art than of any religious taboo. This is confirmed by the later Hellenistic
figurines that portray pregnant women as curiosity of the female form, much like illness
or old age. But even during the height of the Classical ideal, in sanctuaries that
particularly focused on human fertility, the depiction of the pregnant human form
seems to have been acceptable, though never particularly popular.
The depiction of childbirth in a sanctuary setting, where the act of childbirth
itself was one of the strictest taboos of Greek culture, is much harder to explain. These
figurines, which illustrate normal birth from the female womb, are dramatically
different from the idealized scenes of divine birth examined above. This observation
naturally leads one to ponder the question: when all of Greek art avoids the
representation of normal birth in realistic way, why would this theme be depicted in a
sanctuary setting?
This question may be answered at least in part, I believe, by examining when and
where these explicit childbirth votives are found. The votives that clearly depict scenes
250
of birth are few in number, and consist exclusively of figurines.505 Of these, the single
largest group that depicts birth consists of the Baubo figurines. These figurines were
widespread throughout the Greek world in Hellenistic and Roman times. As their
findspots indicate, however, they do not appear to have been used with any regularity
as votives. I have argued instead that they most likely functioned as apotropaic charms.
If this interpretation is correct, the birthing imagery on these figurines is not only
appropriate, but serves as the actual source of the apotropaic power of the object.
A second relatively large group of figurines that depict birth are the south Italian
figurines of a nude female figure kneeling on a flower. These figurines are highly
idealized, however, and almost certainly depict a goddess. Divine birth scenes were
common in Greek art, as we have seen, and the presence of these figurines in
sanctuaries should come as no surprise. Other isolated examples may well have also
depicted goddesses rather than mortals. I include among these the Geometric figurine
from Kavousi (2.24) and a marble figurine group from Sparta (2.40). I have suggested
that a fragmentary figurine from Corinth (2.30) may have been part of a childbirth
group, but this identification must remain uncertain due to the very fragmentary
condition of the figurine.
The only places where explicit childbirth groups seem to have been dedicated
with any frequency were the sanctuary of Eileithyia Inatia on Crete and in various
locations on Cyprus connected with the cult of Aphrodite. It is no accident, I believe,
that these unusual figurines are found in regions of the Greek world where there was a
strong non-Greek element to the cult of a female goddess.506 Indeed, not only are there
505
The three reliefs discussed above (pp. 188-195) that appear to depict birth scenes are all problematic.
None may be identified with certainty as childbirth votives, and the iconography of each is so
controversial that I have chosen to exclude them from the present discussion.
506
The name Eileithyia may not be of Indo-European origin; it may come directly from a pre-Greek (i.e.,
Minoan) goddess of childbirth. Willetts 1962, p. 169; Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 11. For the worship of Eileithyia
251
stylistic similarities between the Cretan and Cypriote figurines themselves, but
similarities between the Cretan goddess Eileithyia and Cypriote Aphrodite.507 It is quite
possible, therefore, that the dedication of childbirth figurines in these areas reflects a
similar non-Greek or proto-Greek tradition, in which there was no taboo against birth
or its portrayal in a religious setting.
on Crete, see Antimachus of Colophon Frag. 99 (Matthews 1996, p. 266); Homer Od. 19.188, Strabo 10.4.8;
Pausanias 1.18.5 and Karo 1930, pp. 156-7.
507
Callimachus states that Eileithyia, rather than Aphrodite, was sometimes considered the mother of
Eros. Callimachus, Hymn to Delos, 257. The iconography of the South Italian incense burners discussed
above likewise seem to indicate a general synthesis of these cults. See pp. 146-150 and cat nos. 2.41-2.46.
For similarities between the Cretan cult of Eileithyia and the cult of Aphrodite in general, see also: Baur
1901, p. 493; Faure 1964, p. 93. For more specific similarities with Cyprus, see Price 1978 p. 86, n. 37.
252
Conclusions
The pattern of childbirth rituals
The evidence examined in this study suggests that a regular and predictable
pattern of ritual was associated with female fertility in ancient Greecea pattern that is
difficult to trace in the androcentric literature of that culture. Nevertheless, it is one that
must have comprised an important element of the private lives of the Greeks,
particularly for the women who oversaw these rituals. It is a familiar pattern, seen in
many other cultures, both past and present.508
A married woman who wished to appeal for help in matters of fertility would
likely first visit local shrines or cult sites of childbirth gods. These sites may have
included large public sanctuaries such as the Argive Heraeum, the sanctuary of Artemis
at Brauron, or the sanctuary of Athena Pronaia at Delphi, where childbirth worship was
simply one aspect of the worship conducted there. They might also have included
small, informal shrines that, though common in antiquity, are difficult to identify in the
archaeological record. Most were undoubtedly very simple, consisting merely of a
sacred enclosure associated with some natural feature, such as a spring or cave, and
they were often located outside of the city, particularly on hills or mountains. These
small rustic shrines were unlikely to receive large, expensive votives. Most of the
votives probably consisted of items that had belonged to the women themselves, many
of which leave no trace in the archaeological record. As we have seen, clothing, veils,
food, cuttings of hair and other ephemeral gifts were common dedications for
childbirth. The resulting evidence in the archaeological record would possibly be
enough to suggest a sanctuary, and maybe a sanctuary primarily visited by women, but
253
the true focus of the sanctuary in most cases would not be evident. No doubt most of
the minor shrines of this nature have not been discovered; traces of their presence may
be inferred mainly through scattered finds, such as a lone boundary stone attesting the
presence of a shrine to Hera-Eileithyia at Thorikos, or an altar found at Marathon
inscribed with the words Artemidos and Eileithyion.509
After praying at a local site, if the worshipper did not become pregnant, she
might travel to a more specialized sanctuary of a divinity known for granting aid for
fertility and childbirth. Indeed, such pilgrimages might have been encouraged by
family members, and may have formed an underlying social expectation; as part of a
womans duty to produce legitimate heirs for her husband, a barren woman of
sufficient means may well have been expected to make such pilgrimages to demonstrate
that she was doing her best to fulfill her role as a wife. The majority of pilgrimages
probably consisted of travel to the nearest sanctuary that specialized in childbirth and
fertility. The inscriptions from the sanctuary of Artemis at Gonnoi suggest exactly this
pattern of regional worship.510 Occasionally, pilgrimages of greater distances were
undertaken for matters of fertility and birth, as the cure records from the sanctuary of
Asklepios at Epidauros suggest.511 A woman who undertook such a pilgrimage may
well have performed a ritual that was intended to impart the fertility of the place (or of
the divinity) to her own body. Such rituals might entail drinking or immersion in sacred
waters, touching special stones or statues or cult objects, and the dedication of
preliminary offerings in the hope of an answer to her prayers.
508
See, for example, Jacobson 1980.

For the boundary stone at Thorikos, see: Pingiatoglu 1981, no. E60; for the altar at Marathon, see Baur
1902, p. 14 and his citations.
510
See p. 58.
511
See pp. 113-114.
509
254
Once pregnant, the expectant mother very likely made use of amulets intended
to protect herself and her unborn child from any number of dangers (physical, spiritual,
and supernatural) that might cause the pregnancy to end prematurely or with unhappy
results. Given ancient Greek beliefs regarding the mothers ability to affect the
appearance and nature of the growing fetus by her thoughts or actions, a careful
woman may have taken pains to avoid certain situations, thoughts, sights, smells,
foods, or activities that might damage or harm her offspring.512 Periodic visits to local
shrines and sanctuaries were made throughout the pregnancy. If the pregnancy was a
particularly difficult one, the pregnant woman may well have made a second
pilgrimage to the shrine or sanctuary of a childbirth divinityprobably to the specific
divinity to whom she attributed her fertility, though she need not necessarily have
limited her religious devotions to just one divinity or sanctuaryin order to seek help
with the pregnancy. Women who were unable to make such a pilgrimage themselves
may have sent a servant or family member to the shrine with a small dedication to
make a prayer or vow on her behalf. Late in the pregnancy, the expectant mother may
have sought to relieve her anxieties about the approaching labor with yet another visit
to the sanctuary (or sanctuaries), this time to request help during the childbirth itself. At
this time, she may have performed a ritual intended to attract divine powers of birth by
making a physical connection with sacred objects.513
At the time of labor, the parturient woman took precautions both practical and
ritualistic in nature to ease the delivery. Such precautions included the use of special
amulets, loosening her hair and undoing or removing all knots from her garments, the
512
For this belief, see Soranus I,39; Aristotle, Pol. VII, 18 1335b.
Ethnographic examples of such rituals include practices such as dedicating half of a ribbon and
keeping half for herself as a birth charm, or exposing the garment she intended to wear during labor to
513
255
use of magical charms to ward off or absorb dangers or pollution, and possibly the
recitation of prayers or incantations. Immediately after birth, the mother and infant
alike would undergo special purification rites and practices, including bathing,
observing a period of physical and ritual seclusion, and possibly including other
measures such as removal of polluted objects from the house, the burning of incense
or torches, and the sacrifice of certain animals. Approximately a week after the birth, the
infant was accepted as a member of the household during the ritual of the amphidromia.
Forty days after the birth, the ban of ritual impurity was lifted from the
household, and the woman resumed her daily routine. At this time she made her final
visit to the sanctuary of the divinity to whom she attributed her fertility and safe labor.
This visit, marking the end of a successful reproductive cycle, was the occasion for
making larger, more expensive votive gifts as a means of showing gratitude to the
divinity, and may have been a time of celebration within the extended family. If this
ritual was the first public appearance of the woman after birth, it may also have served
to mark the official end of the ritual impurity caused by birth and to introduce the
infant to the community and to the gods.
The final visit to the sanctuary in order to make a dedication in thanks marks the
end of the reproductive ritual cycle as I have defined it. But for the female dedicant and
her newborn child, it also signified the beginning of a new ritual cycle invoking the
continued care and protection of the divinity for the child. The deities who had granted
fertility and a successful birth were also the ones to whom the new mother would turn
for protection of her child from spiritual and physical dangers, and for continued
guidance during the childs upbringing and education. These same deities would watch
the sacred powers of the site by dipping it in a spring or touching it to a stone or statue. Gelis 1991, pp.
73-76.
256
over the child until he or she was old enough to undergo the rites of transition to
adulthood, and sometimes beyond.514 If the child happened to be female, she would
undoubtedly turn to the same deities who had helped her mother and who had
overseen her own childhood, once she herself reached childbearing age.515
The pattern outlined above is a simplified account of the private rituals that were
performed for fertility and childbirth. It does not take into consideration the many
regional and temporal variations that inevitably existed. Nor does it give an account of
the other family members who participated in some of these rituals, which are
discussed below. What it does present is an overview, a broad picture of the rhythm of
reproductive rituals that punctuated the daily lives of women in ancient Greece.
Participants in childbirth rituals

Available evidence suggests that women often conducted worship on their own
for fertility and childbirth purposes. Fertility rites such as bathing in special springs,
and the rituals and incantations performed during labor were, unsurprisingly, the
exclusive domain of women. Indeed, certain sanctuaries and statues of Eileithyia were
prohibited to men.516 The votive stelai from Gonnoi list only female names as dedicants,
as do the Delian inscriptions recording votives given to Eileithyia.517 Many of the
514
See Anth. Pal. 6.242 for worship of childbirth divinities at the transition to adulthood and a request for
continued protection throughout life. Similarly, a first century B.C. epitaph of a Coan woman who died in
childbirth laments the mothers death before celebrating her childrens important rites of passage and
appeals to Kore to look after the children who survive her. Peek 1932, pp. 235-7, no. 14.
515
The close relationship between families and the childbirth and kourotrophic divinities who watched
over them is suggested by one familys dedication of a sanctuary to Eileithyia and Artemis at Lindos.
Pingiatoglu1981, no. E32. Likewise, the well-known Xenocratia relief in the National Museum provides
similar evidence for continued reliance on these divinities throughout childhood. The relief was
dedicated to numerous kourotrophic and birth divinities by Xenocratia in thanks for the upbringing and
education of her son. For this relief, see Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 137 no. 5 and additional citations there.
516
Pausanias 2.35.8; Pausanias 7.23.7; Baur 1902, p. 23; Price 1978, p. 141.
517
Gonnoi II, nos. 161-196; Hamilton 2000, pp. 213-214.
257
dedications made at the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron were womens gifts.518

Epigrams also mention childbirth dedications to Artemis and Eileithyia made by
women.519 Among the childbirth votives that were dedicated by a woman acting
independently, personal items such as jewelry and clothing were by far the most
common. This comes as no surprise, as it fits the general pattern that archaeologists
have identified for female dedications throughout Greece. Female anatomical votives
and other small inscribed plaques likewise indicate that they were dedicated by
women.520 It is reasonable to assume, though there is no literary or epigraphical
evidence to confirm it, that the many terracotta figurines found in childbirth sanctuaries
were also dedicated primarily by women.
What is surprising, though, is the fact that some of the larger and presumably
more expensive childbirth votives were also dedicated privately by women. The
numerous painted votive stelai from Thessaly provide the clearest evidence for this, as
the names recorded on them are exclusively female.521 Statue bases dedicated to
Eiliethyia also sometimes record only a female dedicant.522 And, if we assume a
correlation between iconography and ritual practice, then reliefs depicting a solitary
female worshipper likewise confirm that these votives were sometimes dedicated by the
expectant mother alone. Thus, there is strong evidence to suggest that independent
worship by women at childbirth sanctuaries was common. To imply that this was the
only pattern of worship would be misleading, however. Available evidence suggests
518
Linders 1972.
Anth. Pal. 6.59; 6.
520
See pp. (catalog of anatomical votives) and IG XII 5, 190-194.
521
See above, pp. (other objects as votives).
522
Among the statue bases dedicated to Eileithyia at Paros (discussed above, pp.), at least two list a
womans name alone as dedicant. IG XII 5,187; IG XII 5,197. For other bases and stelai dedicated by a
female worshipper, see Pingiatoglu 1981, no. E16, E38, E42, E53, E71, E90-E93, E101, E107, E108.
519
258
that childbirth worship could often include the husband as well as the wife, and
perhaps occasionally even involved members of the extended family.
A number of votives indicate that they were given by both parents. Many statue
bases record the names of both mother and father.523 At least one epigram also
mentions explicitly the separate gifts that a husband and wife dedicated to Artemis in
thanks for her help in the birth of their child.524 Votive reliefs most frequently depict
couples and families, and, as I have suggested above, it is quite likely that these were
dedicated as offerings intended to celebrate and to encourage the continued support of
a divinity in granting fertility and prosperity to the family.
Despite the suspicion and distain that literary sources suggest was the usual
male reaction to female childbirth rituals and cults, there is ample evidence to suggest
that Greek men, like their wives, were concerned about fertility and reproduction, and
sought the aid of the gods in ensuring the successful continuation of their families.525
Like the women, men, too, appealed to the gods for fertility and children. Interestingly,
although women usually turned to goddesses such as Artemis, Eileithyia, and the
nymphs, men appear to have addressed their concerns to male gods such as Apollo and
Zeus.526 Men also made sacrifices immediately after the birth during the time of ritual
impurity when their wives could not leave the house, accepted the children into the
family during the amphidromia, and riotously celebrated the arrival of their children by
hosting a grand feast on the dekate, the tenth day after birth. As we have seen, they may
have often accompanied their wives and children to the sanctuary to dedicate the final
523
See, for example, IG XII 5, 189 and 199; Plassart 1926; Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 103-4 and nos. E74 and E85.
Anth. Pal. 6.271.
525
Aristophanes, Nu. 52.
526
Apollo: Eur. Ion ; Zeus: I suggested above that the pattern of votives in the sanctuary of Zeus
Messapeus in the Argolid reflects male concerns with fertility. Men also put questions concerning fertility
and paternity to the oracle of Zeus at Dodona. See . Anatomical votives suggest that healing gods such
as Asklepios were worshipped by both men and women for fertility issues.
524
259
thank offering after birth. It would seem, then, that men, particularly in their role as
head of the house, held important complementary roles in the rituals that were
associated with birth.
The final dedication of a thank offering for birth was an occasion for celebration
that may well have involved members of the extended family. It is possible that some
childbirth votives were donated by members of the extended family on behalf of the
couple. Susan Cole explains the presence and relatively large size of the figure of an
older woman on one relief (3.13) as reflecting the patronage of a family member
(perhaps the mother-in-law?) in dedicating the relief.527
Patterns of votives
As the most tangible evidence for the pattern of rituals discussed above, the
votives dedicated for childbirth comprise a large portion of this study. I wish now to
examine some of the broad regional and temporal patterns of dedication apparent from
these objects.
Some types of dedications seem nearly universal. Personal objects were
widespread throughout all periods and regions, and were probably always the most
common votives given to birth divinities. As a whole, figurines and anatomical votives
likewise enjoyed widespread and extensive use, though certainly the popularity of
specific types had regional variation.
Other votive types seem to have been more restricted to certain regions or time
periods. Painted votive stelai appear to have been peculiar to the region of Thessaly.
Unsurprisingly, statues of children are most commonly found in those regions, such as
Attica and Paros, where sources of fine marble were readily available. These statues
260
seem to become popular only in Classical and Hellenistic times, no doubt reflecting the
general trend, discernable in all media of the time, in which artists demonstrated a new
interest in depicting children in art.
The distribution of explicit childbirth votivesthose votives that explicitly depict
pregnancy or birthalso reflects strong regional patterns that can inform us about
variations in practices and beliefs throughout the Greek world. Though Greek artists in
general avoided naturalistic depictions of pregnancy or birth, I have argued above that
we should interpret this reluctance not as reflecting a religious taboo against depicting
the liminal state of birth, but rather a cultural bias against the aesthetics of depicting the
female body in anything other than the ideal form. The fact that explicit childbirth
votives are found almost exclusively on Crete and on Cyprusareas where there
existed a strong non-Greek element of worshipsuggests that in cities where there was
significant cultural fusion, the local characteristics of childbirth votive tradition
overrode the Greek aversion to depicting such scenes in art.
Summary
The process of childbirth had tremendous significance within the lives of Greek
women. The ability to produce a child was the single achievement that marked a
woman's transition into the status of full womanhood; through childbirth a woman
made her greatest contribution to the welfare and continuation of the polis. The social
value placed upon birth in Greek society is visible in the numerous rituals that
accompanied every state of the reproductive process. These rituals served to create and
maintain a solid sense of identity for the community as a whole, to form a network of
regular female interaction within a society that greatly restricted women's social
527
Cole 1998, p. 35.
261
freedom, and to provide a model of the ideal female role within both the family and the
wider community.528 In large part because of the importance placed upon successful
reproduction, childbirth became the focus of women's most intense emotions, ranging
from fear to hope. Knowledge of the personal experience of childbirth is largely lost to
us as a result of the general disinterest that Greek authors had in such matters. The
votive gifts presented to the gods in acts of private worship provide our best surviving
evidence for this most important aspect of women's lives in ancient Greece.
528
Cole 2004, passim.
262
Appendix I: Catalog
This catalog consists of the objects that required detailed individual anaylsis for
the purposes of my study. Entries are organized by type of votive and, within each
type, by iconographical subject. For each entry I include as much of the following
information as is available: provinence, date, museum number, description, and
bibliographic sources. For a small number of entries whose identification is disputed, I
also provide information regarding comparanda. Illustration numbers, when given,
indicate figures within the chapters.
Anatomical Votives
Vulvae
1.1
Vulva.
Athenian Asklepieion
Athens, Akr. M. 3690: Walter 1923, no. 243; van Straten 1981, no. 1.14.
1.2
2
Vulvae (2) mentioned in inventory lists IG II 1532-1537 and 1539. Dedicated in
Athenian Asklepieion from mid 4th century BC to end of 3rd century BC.
van Straten 1981, nos. 1.25-1.31.
1.3
Vulva.
Sanctuary of Zeus Hypsistos, Athens (?)
Inscription: jOlumpia;" JUfivstw/|eujchvn.
London, BM 804: Smith 1892, vol. I no. 804; IG II 4800; van Straten 1981, no. 8.14.
1.4
Vulva.
Roman imperial period.
Inscription: Dii; JUfivstw/ Davfni"|euch;n ajnevqhke.
Boston, M.F.A. 08.34 b: Comstock and Vermule 1976, p. 146 no. 235; van Straten
1981, no. 8.15.
1.5
Two marble reliefs depicting vulvae.
Athens, Sanctuary of Artemis Kalliste
263
Fig. 1
Philadelpheus 1927, p. 160 nos. 5-6, fig. 4; Travlos, 1988, p. 322 fig. 424; van
Straten 1981, no. 5.2.
1.6
Vulva (?), gold.
Ephesos, Sanctuary of Artemis
Marshall 1911, no. 924, pl. IX; van Straten 1981, no. 38.27.
1.7
Vulva. Fragmentary marble relief.
Sanctuary of Aphrodite and Eros on the Acropolis
Broneer 1935, p. 140 no. 14, fig. 31; van Straten 1981, no. 4.2.
1.8
Vulva (?) attached to a marble pigeon.
Daphni, sanctuary of Aphrodite
4th century B.C.
Inscription: Falakrivwn jAfrodivtei|ajnevqhken.
Athens, N.M. 1592; IG II2 4577; van Straten no. 11.1.
1.9
Vulva.
4th century B.C.
Inscription: Pamfivlh jAfrodivtei.
Athens, N.M. 1594: IG II2 4576; van Straten 1981, no. 11.2.
1.10
Vulva.
Inscription: jAfrodivtei.
Athens, N.M. 1595: Peek 1942, p. 51; van Straten 1981, no. 11.3.
1.11
Vulva
4th century B.C.
Inscription: Filoumevnh jAfrodivtei carizomev|nh: ejpainei`te oiJ pariovnte".
Athens, N.M. 1821: IG II2 4575; van Straten 1981, no. 11.4.
1.12
Vulva.
4th century B.C.
Inscription: Dwria;"| jAfrodivtei ajnevqhken.
Athens, N.M.2730: IG II2 4635 and Peek 1942, p. 51; van Straten 1981, no. 11.5.
264
1.13
Vulva.
Athens, N.M. 1596: van Straten 1981, no. 11.6.
1.14
Vulvae (fragments).
Travlos 1937, p. 31 fig 8; van Straten 1981, nos. 11.7 and 11.8.
Uteri
1.15
Possible uterus.1
Corinth Asklepieion
van Straten 1981, no. 15.118.
1.16
Oval terracotta plaque with a relief of a uterus with a lateral appendage. 2
Kos Asklepieion
van Straten 1981, no. 30.10; Meyer-Steineg 1912, p. 22, pl. IV 1.
1.17
Uteri mentioned as votives in the Isideion in inscription IG 1442 A, 55.
Delos, sanctuary of Isis
145/4 B.C.
The inscription reads: uJstevra" ajrgura`~ duvo, ajnavqhma jArtemou`~.
van Straten 1981, no. 25e.
Torso
1.18
Small terracotta female torso.
Kos Asklepieion
The swollen state of the abdomen indicates either pregnancy, according to
Hollnder (1912, p. 267 fig. 159) or dropsy, according to Meyer-Steineg (1912, p.
17, pl. I,3). 3
Breasts
1.19
Pair of female breasts.
4th century B.C.
Inscription: Fivlh jAsklhpiw`i
2
IG II 4407; van Straten 1981, no. 1.8.

1
The identification of this votive as a uterus is disputed. For a discussion, see van Straten 1981, p. 124.
Identification as uterus is based on its similarity with Italic examples. For the appearance and
interpretation of this votive, see van Straten 1981 p. 132.
3
Van Straten ( 1981, p. 131) preferred to intepret this votive as illustrating pregnancy.
2
265
1.20
Female breast.
1st-2nd century A.C.
Inscription: JHrw; jAs|klhpiw`/ eujchvn.
2
Athens, Epigr. M. 8418; IG II 4504; van Straten 1981, no. 1.9.

1.21
Female breast.
Probably 2nd century A.C.
Inscription written from right to left on the breast itself: JEkavlh"|ajnavqema.
2
Athens, Epig. M. 3513: IG II 4522; van Straten 1981, no. 1.10.
1.22
2
Female breasts (10 single, 3 pairs) mentioned in inventory lists IG II 1532-1537.
and 1539. Dedicated in Athenian Asklepieion from mid 4th century B.C. to end of
3rd century B.C.
van Straten 1981, nos. 1.25-31.
1.23
2
Female breasts (2 single) mentioned in IG II 4511.
c. 114 - 116 A.C.
1.24
Female breasts.
Piraeus Asklepieion
Im Museum des Piraeus zwei Blcke mit weiblichen Brsten
Bieber 1910, p. 5 n. 2; van Straten 1981, no. 10.3.
1.25
Single female breast, terracotta.
Corinth Asklepieion
Corinth XIV, no. 20, pl. 34.
1.26
Corinth Asklepieion
1.27
Pair of female breasts, terracotta.
4
For retrograde lettering, see Koumanoudis 1877, p. 281 no. 13.
266
Corinth Asklepieion
1.28
Corinth Asklepieion
1.29
Corinth Asklepieion
1.30
Corinth Asklepieion
1.31
Female breast, terracotta.
Corinth Asklepieion
1.32
Corinth Asklepieion
1.33
Corinth Asklepieion
1.34
Corinth Asklepieion
1.35
Corinth Asklepieion
1.36
Female breast, marble.
Eleusis, Asklepieion
Inscription: jIsia;"| JAsklh|piw`/ eujchvn.
267
Lost?: IG II 4505; van Straten 1981, no. 12.1.

1.37
Female breast, marble.
Kos, Asklepieion
1.38
Female breasts (2 single).
Oropos Amphiareion
Mentioned in inscription IG VII 303. This inscription consists of a decree, dated
202/199 B.C. regulating the melting down of gold and silver votive offerings,
and includes a list of the destroyed votives.
Petrakou 1968, p. 188; LSCG 70; van Straten 1981, no. 16.3.
1.39
Female breast.
Sanctuary of Amynos at Athens
4th century B.C.
Inscription: JHdeiva jAs|klhpi|w`i.
2
Athens, N.M.: Krte 1893, p. 241 no. 6, fig. 3; Travlos 1988, p. 78 fig. 101; IG II
4422; van Straten 1981, no. 2.3.
1.40
Female breast.
Sanctuary of Zeus Hypsistos, Athens
2nd - 3rd century A.D.
Inscription: jOnhsivmh euvch;n|Dii; JUfivstw/.
2
London, B.M. 807: Smith 1892, I, no. 807; IG II 4802; Travlos 1988, p. 571 fig.
716b; van Straten 1981, no. 8.5.
1.41
Female breast.
2nd - 3rd century A.C.
Inscription: Eijsia;" JUfivstw/|eujchvn.
London, B.M. 800: Smith 1892, I, no. 800; IG II 4804; Travlos 1988, p. 571 fig. 716e;
1.42
Female breast.
Inscription: Eujtuci;" JUfivstw/ euj|chvn.
London, BM 799: Smith 1892, I, no. 799; IG II 4803; Travlos 1988, p. 571 fig. 716h;
268

1.43
Female breast.
Inscription: Eujtuciva| JUfeivstw/|eujchvn.
2
Berlin, St. M.: Beschreibung 718; IG II 4809; Hollnder 1912, p. 217 fig. 127; van
Straten 1981, no. 8.8.
1.44
Female breast.
Inscription: Eu[praxi"|eujchvn.
2
Berlin, St. M.: Beschreibung 719; IG II 4810; van Straten 1981, no. 8.9.
1.45
2nd century A.C.
Inscription: Dionusiva JUfivstw/|eujchvn.
Athens, Agora M. : Kourouniotes and Thompson 1932, p. 196 fig. 59; IG II 4783;
Travlos 1988, p. 572 fig. 717; van Straten 1981, no. 8.10.
1.46
Female breast.
Inscription: JUfivstw/ Gamikh;|eujchvn.
Thompson 1936, p. 154, fig 4a; van Straten 1981, no. 8.11.
1.47
Female breast.
Fragmentary, with traces of an inscription
Thompson 1936, p. 154, fig 4b; van Straten no. 8.12.
1.48
Katakekaumene, exact provenance unknown
A.D. 206/7
Inscription: qew`/ JUfivstw/ ejphkovw/.
1.49
Pair of female breasts, relief.
Cyprus, exact provenance unknown
269
Inscription: qew`/ JUfivstw/ ajnevqh|ken Provktuo" eujxamev|nh.

Paris, Louvre AM 668: Perdrizet 1896, p. 361 no. 1; Masson 1971, p. 331 No. 11,
fig. 19; van Straten 1981, no. 51.6.
1.50
Marble stele with relief depicting a pair of female breasts, the lower half of a leg,
facing right, and a pair of eyes.
Aivatlar, Sanctury of Artemis Anaeitis
A.D. 236/7
Inscription: qea`/ jAnaeivti kai; Mhni; Tiavmou|Tuvch kai; Swkravth" kaiv jAm|mian" kaiv
Trovfimo" oi} jAm|mivou kai; Filhvth kai; Swkrativa|aiJ jAmmiavdo" pohvsante" to;
iJe|ropovhma eiJlasavmenu mhtev|ran jAnaeitin uJpe;r tevknwn kai;|qremmavtwn
e[sthsan.| jEtou" tkav mhno;" Xandivkou~.
Leiden, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden S. 309: Lane 1971, p. 23 No. 35; Diakonoff
1979, p. 144 no. 6, fig. 10; van Straten 1981, no. 42.1.
1.51
Katakekaumene, exact provenance unknown
c. 210-240 A.D.
Inscription: jArtevmidi jAnaeivti kai; Mhni; Tiavmou jAle|xavndra uJpe;r
tw'n|mastw`n eujch;n|ajnevsthsen.
Lane 1971, no. 74; Diakonoff 1979, p. 152 no. 33, fig. 9; van Straten 1981, no. 47.1.
1.52
One female breast.
Katakekaumene, exact provenance unknown.
A.D. 147/8
Inscription: Mhni; Labana`/ kai; Diiv.
1.53
Pair of female breasts, marble relief.
Athens, Sanctuary of Artemis Kalliste
3rd century B.C.
Inscription: JIppostravth|Kallivstei.
2
Philadelpheus 1927, p. 159 no. 3, fig. 3; IG II 4667; Travlos 1988, p. 322 fig 424;
1.54
Female breast, marble relief.
Athens, Sanctuary of Artemis Kolainis5
5
No shrine to Artemis Kolainis has been found at Athens, but a cult to this goddess is known. For
evidence of a cult of Artemis Kolainis at Athens, see van Straten 1981, p. 116. For the epithet and its likely
connection with childbirth, see above, p. 24.
270
Roman Imperial period

Inscription: Kallistravth| jArtevmidi Kole|nivdi ejphkovw/|eujchvn.
Athens, in domo privata: IG II2 4860; van Straten 1981, no. 6.1.
1.55
Female breast on a plaque. Limestone.
Crete, Eleutherna (Prins)
Inscription: Sethriva| jArtevmidi dunathra`/ eujchvn.
Rhethymnon Mus. 139: ICret. II, XII 24; van Straten 1981, no. 34.1.
1.56
Pair of female breasts, fragmentary marble relief.
Athens, Sanctuary of Aphrodite and Eros on the Acropolis (?)6
1st century A.C.
Inscription: ---N| ......NPWKOIS.7
2
Athens, Epigr. M. 8420: IG II 4729; van Straten 1981, no. 4.5.
1.57
Marble plaque depicting female breasts.
Fig. 2
Paros, exact find spot uncertain (Originally from private collection).
Roman period.
Inscription: {Wra Difavnou|Eijliquiva/ eujchn.
Paros, Mus. no. 307: IG XII 5, 198 with photograph; Pingiatoglou 1981, p. 123, no.
23; Hollnder 1912, p. 217 fig. 129; van Straten 1981, no. 32.1.
1.58
Pair of female breasts, marble.
Paros, exact find spot uncertain (Originally from private collection).
Inscription: JEpikravtha Eijleu(q)uva eujchvn.
Now lost: IG XII 5, 193; Pingatoglou 1981, p. 123 no. 24; Baur 1902, p. 488.
1.59
Female breast on a plaque, broken on all sides, marble.
Sanctuary of Eileithyia, Paros
Paros M. 544; Pingatoglou 1981, p. 124, no. 25.
1.60
Female breast on a plaque, marble.
Athens, exact provenance unknown.
6
This votive was found on the South slope of the Acropolis. Whether it originally belonged to the
sanctuary of Aphrodite and Eros on the North Slope or to a small sanctuary of Aphrodite (as yet
unfound) on the South slope is uncertain. For evidence that Aphrodite was worshipped on the south
slope see: Beschi 1967-68, pp. 418, 420.
7
In line 3 of the inscription, Svoronos reads ---ni tovkoi", implying a connection with
childbirth. van Straten, however, favors the reading of IG II2 given above.
271
Traces of inscription.
Athens, Epgr. M. 2524: van Straten 1981, no. 9.3.
1.61
Pair of female breasts on a plaque.
Pergamon, exact provenance unknown.
1.62
Katakekaumene.
Keil and von Premerstein 1911, p. 94 no. 6; van Straten 1981, no. 43.5.
1.63
Female breast.
Golgoi, Cyprus, exact provenance unknown
Myres 1914, no. 1676; van Straten 1981, no. 50.11.
1.64
Pair of female breasts; below them a grape-like growth (or an internal organ?)
di Cesnola 1877, p. 158, no. 8; Myres 1914, no. 1227: Hollnder 1912, p. 300 fig.
192; van Straten 1981, no. 50.12.
1.65
Katakekaumene
A.D. 125/6
Inscription: ejkolavsqh jAmmia;"|oiJpo; Mhtro;" Filei?do"|ij" tou;" mastouv"...
Steinleitner 1913, p. 39 no. 12; van Straten 1981, no. 44.4.
1.66
Vulva, marble relief.
Thessaly, Demetrias
Volos, Mus. E 467: Arndt 1893, no. 3399; van Straten 1981, addenda 19 bis.
1.67
Pair of female breasts on a rectangular plaque.
Paros, exact provenance unknown
Paros M. 557; Pingiatoglou 1981, p. 124, no. 26.
Figurines
Baubo Figurines
2.1
Terracotta Baubo figurine.
272
2nd or 1st century B.C.

Delos, found north of the analemma of the theater, in 1912
Delos Museum A 2504
Terracotta figurine of nude squatting woman. Missing head, left shoulder, and
part of legs. She squats with legs apart and knees raised. With her right hand she
indicates her genitalia. Her abdomen is large. A small hole pierces the anus. The
genital area of this figurine was painted red. Laumonier interprets this figurine
as a grotesque obese woman, portrayed for "prophylactic" purposes.
Delos XXIII, p. 259 no. 1206, pl. 90.
2.2
Provenance unknown
France, Muse de Besanon
Nude female figure in squatting position. Her right hand touches her genitalia,
while the left hand, not visible, probably went behind the leg. Her body is large,
with a round abdomen and chubby face. Her face is framed on either side with
three locks of hair that fall to the shoulders. On the top of her head is a thick
wreath. The back of the figurine is left unfinished. A clay loop on the back at the
level of the nape of the neck shows that it was intended to be suspended.
Dunand 1984, pp. 263-268.
2.3
Elatea, sanctuary of Athena Cranaia
Nude female figurine in a squatting position. Her legs are spread apart, and her
elbows rest on her knees. She holds her head in her hands. Her breasts are large
and her round abdomen protrudes prominently. The top of her head is missing,
but much of her face is preserved. Her chubby features are pulled into a grimace.
Paris 1892, p. 279 no. 3, and pl. 11.3.
2.4
Fig. 5
Nude female figurine in a squatting position. Her legs are spread apart, clearly
showing her large breasts and round abdomen. Her right hand is held up to her
face, while the left arm is twisted back awkwardly, and, according to Paris, her
left hand holds an indistinct round object against her shoulder. The head is
pierced from one side to the other to allow the figurine to be suspended.
Paris 1892, p. 279 no. 4.
2.5
Nude female figurine in a squatting position. Her legs are spread apart, clearly
showing her large breasts and round abdomen. Both arms are held in near the
body. She is positioned on a small socle that was molded along with the figurine.
Paris 1892, p. 279 no. 5.
273
2.6
Fig. 7
Late Hellenistic example from Clazomenae
Louvre CA 872
Baubo figurine, whole. The figurine sits with both legs raised high towards her
head. Her large pendulous breasts, round abdomen, and genitalia are all clearly
visible. The head is pierced to enable the figurine to be suspended. Besques
suggests that it was used as an amulet.
Besques 1971, p. 123 no. D 822 and pl. 151b. LIMC III, p. 88 no. 3.
2.7
Late Hellenistic example, possibly from Troy
Exact provenance uncertain
Louvre MNB 2001
Baubo figurine, missing lower part of legs but otherwise whole. The nude
figurine sits with her two hands under her thighs. Loop for suspension. Besques
identified this figurine as representing childbirth.
Besques 1971, p. 91 no. D534 pl. 116 b; LIMC III, p. 88 no. 6.
2.8
Late Hellenistic example from Clazomenae
Louvre CA 4947
Baubo figurine, seated with legs raised high in the air. Missing both legs, the
right arm, and the left hand. The breasts are large and pendulous, and the
abdomen is extremely large. Suspension loop on the head.
Besques 1971, p. 178 no. D1265 and pl. 249 d; LIMC III, p. 88 no. 4.
2.9
Late Hellenistic example from Tarsus
Louvre T 463
Fragment of Baubo figurine, missing upper body from waist up. She squats on a
base with her thighs open. With her right hand she touches her genitals. The
abdomen is large and round.
Besques 1971, p. 299, no. D 2450 pl. 373 c; LIMC III, p. 88 no. 7.
2.10
Fig. 4
Late Hellenistic example from Tarsus
Louvre T 462
Fragmentary Baubo figurine. Missing head and most of both legs. The figure
kneels with her thighs apart and touches her genitals. Large breasts and
abdomen.
Besques 1971, p. 299, no. D 2449.
2.11
274

Clazomenae
Louvre CA 4941
Baubo figurine with legs spread and hands under thighs. The breasts and
abdomen are relatively small for this type. Suspension loop at back.
Besques 1971, p. 178, no. D 1266, pl. 249f.
2.12
Terracotta Baubo figurine, squatting.
2nd half of 4th century B.C.
Greece, exact provenance unknown
Louvre CA 481
Baubo figurine, whole. The figurine squats, with her thighs slightly apart, and
rests her chin on her hands. Her large breasts, round abdomen, and genitals are
clearly visible. Suspension hole on head. Identified by Besques as an amulet
depicting a woman in labor.
Besques 1971, p. 70, no. D 440 pl. 94 d.
2.13
Fig. 3
NY Carlsberg Glyptothek E 680, Inv. 333rrr
Baubo figurine, complete. The figure sits with thighs spread apart and the right
leg raised. With the right hand she touches her genitals.
Schmidt 1911, p. 80 and pl. 42, fig. 115.
2.14
Fig. 6
1st century B.C.
private collection in Basle
Baubo figurine, well preserved. The figure squats with legs wide apart. With her
right hand she touches her genitals. With her left hand she holds onto her left
knee for support. Her abdomen and breasts are large. Interpreted by Schefold as
a pregnant figurine.
Schefold 1955, pp. 218-223, figs. 3-5.
2.15
Fig. 8
4th century B.C.
private collection in Basle
thought to come from a tomb in the Taranto area
Baubo figurine, in squatting, spread-legged position, nude. Breasts and round
abdomen are prominent. Her hands are raised to her cheeks and her head is
slightly bent forward, with a grimacing expression. On her head she wears a
pilos.
Schefold 1955, pp. 218-223, figs. 1 and 2.
Comparanda: Winter II, p. 458 no. 5.
Obese Figurines
275
2.16
Terracotta figurine of nude woman.
Fig. 11
nd st
2 -1 cent. B.C.
Delos, NW of the house of Dionysus
Delos Museum A 96
Terracotta figurine of nude standing female figure with round belly. Missing
head and feet. She stands with her right leg slightly forward, with drapery over
the left shoulder. The left hand is on her hip, holding back the drapery, while the
right hand is at her side holding a phiale. Laumonier interprets this figurine as a
grotesque obese woman, portrayed for "prophylactic" purposes.
Delos XXIII, p. 259 no. 1205, pl. 90.
2.17
Fig. 10
Athens, exact provenance unknown
Berlin Antiquarium 6889
Terracotta figurine of nude woman with large belly and pendulous breasts,
which she partially covers by crossing her arms. Schne believes that the restored
head probably does not belong to the original figure, but offered no further
interpretation of the figurine; Dumont and Chaplain believed it represented a
pregnant woman.
Schne 1892, p. 67, no. 142 and pl. 36; Dumont and Chaplain 1890, p. 239 and pl.
23.1. Comparanda: There appear to have been several examples of figurines
nearly identical to this one. See Froehner 1891, p. 60 no. 270 for a description of a
figurine like this from Tanagra; this may or may not be the same figurine
published in Besques 1971, p. 36 no. D198 and pl. 44 (Louvre CA473). See also
Winter 1908, p. 456 no. 5.
2.18
Sanctuary of Athena Cranaia, Elatea
Fragment of standing nude figurine with large breasts and abdomen. Missing
head, both hands, the entire left leg and the lower part of the right leg. The right
arm is raised toward the head; the left is bent and the hand was originally held
out.
Paris 1892, p. 279 no. 1 and pl. 11.1.
2.19
Figurine of standing female figure, nude. Most of the head is missing, as is the
lower part of her legs below her knees. Both hands are drawn up to her left
cheek. Her large, sagging breasts are almost completely obscured by her arms.
Large abdomen and exaggerated posterior. The posterior is pierced with "un trou
obscne." Paris interprets it as an old obese woman (vieille femme). I suspect that
the pierced hole was intended for a support rather than to be obscene.
Paris 1892, p. 280 no. 6, pl. 11.6.
2.20
276

Fragment of nude grotesque figurine representing an obese or pregnant woman.
Missing both legs and most of the left arm. The head of this figurine is
disproportionately large, and the features are those of a caricature. The right
hand is held up to the right cheek. The left arm probably held an object on the
left shoulder. Although the breasts are small, the abdomen protrudes noticeably.
Paris interprets it as an old obese woman (vieille femme).
Paris 1892, p. 280 no. 7, pl. 11.7.
2.21
Fig. 9
Smyrna
Hellenistic
Preserved is torso from shoulders to just below the knees. The figure stands with
legs together and hands on hips. Her abdomen is large and round.
Laumonier 1946, p. 315 no. 12 and pl. 14.3.
Comparanda: Besques 1971, pp. 166-167, nos. D1142-1148 and pls. 230-231.
Unique Figurines
2.22
Terracotta figurine of pregnant woman.
Argive Heraeum
National Museum no. 25961
Handmade standing female figurine with protruding abdomen. Head, arms, and
feet broken away. No breasts are indicated. The legs of this figurine were formed
separately and attached by inserting them into an opening in the bottom of the
figurine created by the gap of the chitons hem. The legs themselves are broken
off just above the bottom of the hem, and the legs are spread apart slightly. The
arms were probably held out to the front. Waldstein interprets this as
representing a pregnant woman, given as a votive offering for a successful
childbirth.
Argive Heraeum II, p. 30 no. 124 and fig. 52; Waldstein 1892, p. 20 and pl. 8, no.
19; Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 143 no. 8.
2.23
Terracotta plaque of pregnant woman.
3rd quarter, 7th century B.C.
Lato, Crete
Terracotta plaque, badly damaged. In high relief is shown the torso of a female
figure. The breasts and abdomen are quite large, which led Ducrey and Picard to
interpret this figure as a pregnant woman. The plaque is broken at the shoulders
and below the abdomen. Hands and part of forearms missing. The left arm has
been reattached. The two hands of the figure were originally positioned on the
abdomen, as is evident by the traces where they attached. A sinuous roll runs
above the abdomen below the breasts. The top of one motif in relief shows a sort
of stylized lotus flower. The figure is painted black except a band of white above
the belly. Picard and Ducrey argue that the figure is standing, not seated, and
277
that the roll below the breasts indicates that the figure is clothed on at least part
of her body.
Ducrey and Picard 1969, pp. 819-822, no. 557 and figs. 31-32; Price 1978, p. 87 n.
41. Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 142, no. 5.
2.24
Terracotta figurine of pregnant woman.
Fig. 18
Geometric period
Kavousi, Crete, rural "Peak Shrine"
Plinth-like figurine of pregnant woman, missing head. From Alexiou's
illustration, it appears that the figurine stops just below the pelvis. Both hands
are raised to touch the breasts, and the abdomen is clearly rounded to show
pregnancy. The genitalia are prominently displayed.
Price 1978, p. 85-6 and n. 32; Alexiou 1956, p. 11.
2.25
Terracotta figurine of standing woman.
Fig. 12
3rd century B.C.
Lindos, small deposit on the acropolis
Female figurine, missing head but otherwise whole. She stands on a circular
base, clothed in a long chiton, with both arms wrapped in a himation that comes
to her knees. Her left hand rests on her hip, while the right hand is held up to her
chest (and seems to pull the neck of her himation down into a v). Despite being
fully clothed, her round belly is quite visible beneath the folds of her garment.
Blinkenberg interprets as showing pregnancy.
Lindos I, no. 3048.
Comparanda: Kabirenheiligtum V, no. 338, pl. 26.
2.26
Terracotta "doll," possibly pregnant?
Fig. 15
c. 525-400 B.C.
Lindos, large deposit on the acropolis
Nude terracotta "doll" fragment possibly shown as pregnant. Preserved is the
torso, the lower part of which terminates in a tenon that was pierced to attach
movable legs (now missing). The shoulders were also pierced to attach movable
arms, now missing. The head is missing, broken off at the neck. The molded
body is realistically portrayed. The abdomen protrudes slightly but noticeably.
Blinkenberg provides no clear interpretation, but compares this artifact to a doll
found in the Calydonian sanctuary to Artemis Laphria that was interpreted as
pregnant.
Lindos I, no. 2387.
Comparanda: For the doll found in the sanctuary of Artemis Laphria, see
Kongelige Danske videnskabernes selskab. Historisk-filologiske meddelelser XIV.3, p. 39
fig. 65.
2.27
Terracotta hierodoulos figurine with hollow abdomen.
1st century B.C.
probably from Myrina
278
Fig. 16
Louvre CA1493
Fragmentary nude seated hierodoulos figurine. Missing head. The figure wears a
large medallion between her breasts and thick-soled sandals. As with many
figurines of this type, no provision was made for arms. A square hole is cut into
the abdomen of the figurine. Better preserved examples recently found on the art
market inform us of the function of this hole: the abdomen was intended to open
like a lid to reveal a tiny terracotta fetus in the abdominal cavity.
Besques 1971, p. 133 no. D893, pl. 164b.
Comparanda: for the well preserved examples found on the art market, see
Hesperia Arts Auction, Nov. 27, New York, 1990, no. 50; Dasen 2004 fig. 5; for the
general type, frequently found at Myrina (without removable abdomen or fetus),
see Mendel 1908, p. 378 no. 2640 (from Myrina).
2.28
Fig. 23
Cave of the Nymphs, Pitsa
Fragment of nude, standing female figure. Preserved portions include the torso
from the shoulders to the upper thighs, and the arms. The figure stands with
arms held loosely at the sides. The breasts are small, but the abdomen is large
and taut. Van Straten (1981, p. 99 n. 172) interprets this figurine as illustrating
pregnancy.
Orlandos 1965, p. 206 and fig. 229 center.
2.29
Fig. 17
th
Late 5 century B.C.
Corinth, well deposit
Corinth Museum MF3896
Torso of hand made female figurine, preserved from shoulders to lower
abdomen. Crude figure with large protruding breasts and oval abdomen with
incised lines dividing it into six sections. Pellets applied to represent nipples and
navel. Rough back. The figure is pierced vertically by a hole. No provision is
made for arms, which are merely flat stumps at the shoulder. Davidson suggests
that this figurine was made either as a joke or for magical purposes.
2.30
Fig. 19
th
th
Late 6 or early 5 century B.C.
Corinth, found in trial excavation at Penteskouphia in 1911.
Corinth Museum MF3456
Hand made nude female figure with distended abdomen. Both arms held out
wide from the body. The head is slightly raised. Hair falls in waves around the
face; grinning expression. No breasts are visible.
2.31
Terracotta figurine of round-bellied woman.
279
Fig. 14
Smyrna
Late Hellenistic
Louvre CA 5148
Standing female figure with large round abdomen, wearing plain garment and
himation fastened at shoulders. Head missing. Besques interprets this figurine as
pregnant.
Besques 1971, p. 166 no. D1140.
2.32
Terracotta figurine of round-bellied woman.
Smyrna
Late Hellenistic
Louvre CA 5147
Standing female figure with round abdomen, wearing plain garment and
himation. Head and lower half of body missing. Besques identifies this figurine
as pregnant.
Besques 1971, p. 166 no. D1141, pl. 230c.
2.33
Terracotta pregnancy figurines.
Fig. 20
Cave of Eileithyia Inatos, Tsoutsouros, Crete
Heraklion Museum
Geometric-Archaic
Unpublished
Numerous handmade terracotta figurines of pregnant women were discovered
along with many other types of figurines in the cave of Eileithyia at Inatos during
a salvage excavation conducted by the Greek Archaeological Service in 1962.
These figurines remain unpublished. I have found only a single photograph of
one of these figurines. The figurine is shown standing, with one hand resting at
her side or on her hip. The head is flat and disk-like. The eyes are indicated by
pellets and the nose protrudes in a sharp ridge. The figurine may have been
intended to represent a clothed figure, if the flare at the base of the figurine may
be interpreted as the hem of a garment. The breasts and large abdomen are
indicated by irregular plastic protuberances. For brief descriptions of the
excavation and the artifacts, see Price 1978, pp. 86-87; Faure 1964, pp. 90-94.
2.34
Fig. 13
Sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus, Tsakona, Lakonia
Archaic
Two handmade terracotta figurines of pregnant women were inventoried during
the excavation of the sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus in 1989. Both figurines,
identical in stance, are in fragmentary condition. The preserved sections of both
figurines include the torso and arms. Each of these figures stands upright with
both hands placed protectively upon her expansive abdomen. The figurine
pictured on the left (inventory number N415 SF 140) has a small curve that
indicates the breasts.
Cavanaugh et al. 1996, p. 190, no. 62.
280
2.35
Figs. 21 and 22
Crete
Protogeometric or Geometric
Kanellopoulos Museum 1077 and 1078
Two nearly complete handmade figurine of standing pregnant women. One
(1077) stands with one hand supporting the small of her back and the other
raised. The figurine has an enormous protruding abdomen, and the breasts are
indicated with small attached protuberances. The other (1078) stands with both
hands raised in the air. These figurines are identical in style to the figurines from
the cave of Eileithyia Inatia at Tsoutsouros (2.33). They have disk-shaped heads,
eyes designated by clay pellets, and a flaring base which may have been
intended to represent the hem of a gown. Given these similarities, it is quite
likely that they originally came from this sanctuary. Brouskari mentions the
figurines, but does not describe or illustrate them. She makes no mention of the
fact that they represent pregnant figures.
Brouskari 1985, p. 18.
Comedic Figurines
2.36
Terracotta comedic figurine.
Fig. 24
th
4 century B.C.
Tomb 1, Great Bliznitza, S. Russia
Leningrad, Hermitage Museum BB92 (868 FF)
Terracotta comedic figurine of woman, standing with himation wrapped around
body. She raises the himation to her face, but does not fully cover her wide grin
with it. Her expansive belly shows through the cloth of her garments. Stephani
interprets this figurine as a comic or crude figure showing a pregnant woman.
He argues that a figurine showing pregnancy, a taboo subject, would have
served an apotropaic function in a grave. Webster and Peredolskaja both
interpret it as a comic actor figurine.
Stephani 1865, pp. 192-194 and pl. 6.6; OMC3, AT 74a, p. 88; Peredolskaja 1964, p.
6 and pl. 2.1.
2.37
Fig. 25
th
4 century B.C.
Grave 4, Great Bliznitza, S. Russia
Leningrad, Hermitage Museum BB166
Terracotta comedic figurine, complete. The woman stands, wearing a chiton and
a himation that is pulled up over her head. With her right hand she pulls the
himation over her face, hiding all but her eyes and nose. Her right hand is also
swaddled in the himation, and is bent at the elbow. Her large round belly
protrudes from the folds of her himation. Stephani interprets this figurine as
"schwangere Alte"an old pregnant woman. Waldstein also considers the figure
281
to be pregnant.8 Peredolskaja interprets the figurine as Demeter in her guise as a

nurse.
Stephani 1869, pp. 161-172, pl. 3, no. 11; Peredolskaja 1964, pp. 6, 17-18 and pl.
4.1. Comparanda: a very similar example from the 4th century B.C. was
discovered in house A9 at Olynthos.9 For additional examples of this figurine
type, see Peredolskaja 1964, p. 18 n. 97.
2.38
Terracotta comedic figurine of woman. Reinach records Stephani's interpretation
of her as pregnant, despite the fact that the illustration does not reflect this.
Reinach 1892, p. 116 and pl. 69, no. 7; Stephani 1865, p. 194.
Comparanda: Paris 1892, p. 280 no. 8 and pl. 11.8.
Childbirth figurines
2.39
Terracotta figurine of kneeling woman.
Lato, Crete, possibly from a small sanctuary near Lato
Heraklion Museum 1494
Terracotta figurine of kneeling woman, nude. The breasts are abraded; the head,
both arms, and lower right leg are missing. The abdomen appears to be flat.
Demargne interprets this either as a figurine of a dedicant who was appealing for
help in labor or a representation of a goddess who presides over labor. The
precise find spot of this figurine is unknown. At the beginning of his 1929 article,
Demargne states that the Archaic figurines that he is publishing no doubt all
come from quelque petit sanctuaire situ en dehors de la ville (p. 382), but he
admits on p. 401 that he is unsure whether this figurine came from the same
place as the others.
Demargne 1929, pp. 401-402, no. 41, and pl. 26.4.
2.40
Marble group of kneeling woman with two genii.
Fig. 29
Magula, near Sparta
Sparta Museum 364
Marble statuette group of nude kneeling female flanked on either side by a
smaller figure. Both of the small figures are fragmentary. The better preserved,
complete except for the legs, raises a hand to his mouth. The other figure is
entirely missing except for the left arm, which is held over the abdomen of the
large female figure. There has been much debate over the interpretation of this
group, particularly concerning the better-preserved small figure. Price follows
Baurs interpretation in suggesting that the gesture of the hand over the mouth
has an occult meaning. I prefer Pingiatoglus interpretation that the figure is
playing the flute.
8
9
Argive Heraeum II, p. 30.

Olynthos IV, no. 364, pl. 38.
282
Marx 1885, p. 179 and pl. 6; Baur 1902, p. 43; Tod and Wace 1906, pp. 171-172 and
figs. 50-51; Michaud 1971, p. 878 fig. 165; Stoop 1960, p. 32 and n. 3; Price 1978, p.
141; Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 135 no. 1.
2.41
Nude female statuette, kneeling on flower.
National Museum, Stockholm Antik Skulptur no. 1712
Nude female terracotta figurine, kneeling on the calyx of a stylized flower. The
arms, now missing, were raised as in 2.42 below. A small winged figure floating
above her holds up drapery behind her. Stoop interprets this figurine as Hera or
Hera Eileithyia. Very similar to 2.42.
Stoop 1960, p. 36.
2.42
Nude female figurine, kneeling.
Fig. 28
Context unknown
Louvre CA 641
Nude female figurine, kneeling on a circular base decorated with stylized waves
or petals. In her left hand is a mirror; the right hand is held near her face. Behind
her, a small winged and crowned Eros figure holds up drapery as a backdrop.
Stoop 1960, p. 36 n. 2.
2.43
Nude female figurine, kneeling on a lily.
Athens
National Museum NM 5719
Nude female figurine, kneeling on the calyx of a lily set onto a circular stand.
Drapery billows behind her back and rests partly on her thighs. Her arms are
raised from the elbow. Both hands are missing, but they probably originally held
either attributes, such as a mirror and comb, or the edge of the drapery. Stoop
interprets as Hera or Hera Eileithyia.
Stoop 1960, p. 37; Winter 1903, p. 202, no. 7.
2.44
Nude female figurine, kneeling, with two genii.
Fig. 27
Heraion on the Sele; a stray find near the sanctuary
Figurine of nude kneeling woman. A long veil covers her head and falls along
both sides of the body. The left shoulder is slightly forward, the hand holds the
veil aside. On the right, she gathers the folds between the crook of her arm and
her body. Her right hand holds a bird. Two small nude figures appear on her
shoulders. The one on her right lightly touches her breast. The thymiaterion cup
in the form of a flower that once rested on the head is now missing. Stoop
interprets this figurine as Hera or Hera Eileithyia. This is the best preserved of
several such examples found in the area.
Stoop, 1960, p. 6 and pl. 1; Zancani Montuoro and Zanotti-Bianco 1951, I, pl. 6.
2.45
Figurine of nude woman, kneeling.
Lindos, Acropolis
Fig. 26
283
Istanbul Arch. Museum

Figurine of nude kneeling woman on an oval base. A long veil covers her head
and falls along both sides of the body. The legs are shown in profile, while the
head and upper torso are twisted slightly towards the front. Her left hand is
raised to hold the veil aside. On the right, she gathers the folds between the
crook of her arm and her body, with her hand resting awkwardly on her hip.
Stoop interprets this figurine as Hera or Hera Eileithyia. The deposit in which
this figurine was found was not recorded by Blinkenberg.
Stoop 1969, pp. 6-7; Lindos I, p. 698 and pl. 137, no. 2966; HimmelmannWildschtz 1957, p. 11.
2.46
Figurine of nude woman, kneeling.
Paestum
Figurine of nude kneeling woman. A long veil covers her head and falls along
both sides of the body. Genii on shoulders very similar to 2.6 above. Stoop
interprets it as Hera or Hera Eileithyia.
Stoop 1969, p. 5 and pl. 2.1.
Reliefs
Pregnancy reliefs
3.1
Fragmentary relief showing sacrifice made by worshipper.
Fig. 46
Delos, Sanctuary of Artemis Lochia
Delos Museum A3154
This is a very fragmentary relief, joined from three pieces. At the far left, a male
assistant drags an animal to the right, toward a cylindrical altar in the center of
the relief. Between this figure and the altar stands an adult female worshipper
wearing a chiton, himation, and veil. She faces to the right and raises her right
hand in a gesture of prayer. The upper right half of the relief is missing, but the
lower portion preserves the legs of a third figure standing to the right of the
altar. This figure wears a knee-length chiton. The frontal stance of this figure, and
the fact that the altar separates it from the worshipper suggests that this is the
divinity, probably Artemis, wearing a short hunting chiton. The unusually thick
midriff of the female worshipper in this relief lead Plassart (Delos XI, p. 302) to
identify this figure as pregnant.
Delos XI, pp. 300-302 and fig. 248, Bruneau 1970, p. 191; Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 115116, no. 2.
3.2
Votive relief depicting worshippers sacrificing to Athena.
Fig. 47
Athenian Acropolis
Acropolis Museum 581
Fragmentary relief. At the left stands Athena, wearing a helmet and depicted in
larger scale than the other figures. Before her stand a group of worshippers. At
284
the front is a small boy who holds a disk in one hand (perhaps pouring a
libation?).10 Beside him is a large sow that will be offered to the goddess. An
adult male is preserved from the waist down, followed by a small girl who holds
out her hand in a gesture of worship. She is followed by an adult female,
preserved from the shoulders down, who seems to make a similar gesture. Baur
and others have noted that the adult female figure appears to have an
exceptionally large abdomen and, consequently, have suggested that she is
pregnant. Palagia rejects this view and suggests that it represents a family at the
Apaturia.
Staes 1886, pp. 181-182, pl. 9; Baur 1901, p. 48; Lehmann-Hartleben 1926; Palagia
1995.
Childbirth Reliefs
3.3
Childbirth relief (?)
Fig. 48
Chance find on the eastern shore of the Bosphoros, near Calchedon
3rd quarter of the 6th century B.C.
Istanbul Archaeological Museum 1136
The relief, broken on the bottom, depicts five figures. In the center is a seated
figure, facing left. On either side of this figure stands a woman, each of which
touches the figure in a gesture of support or comfort. The woman on the left
places her hands on the shoulders of the seated figure, while the woman on the
right touches the back and head. At the edges of the scene on either side is a
standing female figure in a smaller scale than the central group. The figure on the
left holds her arms outward; the one on the right raises her right hand to her
forehead. The scene itself takes place in a domestic setting. A wall is depicted on
the right edge of the relief and, according to Jeffrey, a mirror hangs in the
background. Above the figural decoration is a poorly preserved inscription that
reads IKOS EME KATEQHKEN. This relief has been the subject of
considerable debate, and has been interpreted as either a votive depicting the
birth of Athena by Zeus or a funerary relief of a woman who died in childbirth.
Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 136 no. 4; Jeffrey 1955, pp. 81-83; Kontoleon 1970, p. 13 and
n. 3, pl. VIII.2.
3.4
Votive relief of childbirth scene and divinities.
Fig. 49
5th century B.C.
Provenance unknown
MMA 24.97.92
Marble relief depicting woman after childbirth accompanied by divine and
human assistants. On left is standing female divinity (whose identification is
disputed) and traces of another divinity (of which only the left hand and traces of
the body are preserved). The preserved goddess wears a chiton and chlamys,
and rests her weight on her right leg. In her left hand she holds a small torch
10
A thorough discussion of this disk may be found in Lehmann-Hartleben 1926. He suggests that this was
a votive offering.
285
with a handshield. On the right of the relief are two women. The central figure
sits slumped on a stool facing left, her head leaning to the right in an attitutude
of exhaustion. She wears a long Doric chiton and himation that covers the back of
her head. Behind her and to the right stands the second woman, holding an
infant in a shawl in her left arm. Her right hand touches the seated woman. She
wears a long belted Doric chiton and chlamys. The identification and
authenticity of this relief is disputed.
Demand 1994, pp. 87-88 and n. 4; Richter 1954, no. 67, pl. LVb, fig. 67;
Mitropoulou 1977, p. 45 no. 66, fig. 104; Stoop 1960, pp. 30 and 32; van Straten
1981, p. 100 and fig. 43; Pingiatoglou 1981, p. 140 no. 7; Vedder 1988, p. 178 n. 81.
Reliefs Depicting Sacrifice Scenes

3.5
Relief of worshippers and Artemis.
Fig. 53
Sanctuary of Artemis Kalliste, Athens
3rd century B.C.
A goddess stands on left holding a large torch in both hands, facing right. To the
right are two smaller figures, a man and a woman, who raise their right hands.
Between them and the goddess is a square altar. At the far left behind the
goddess are two large pithoi. In the cornice of the relief is engraved the name of
the dedicant.
Roussel 1927; Philadelpheus 1927, p. 158 no. 1.
3.6
Marble relief depicting worshippers; inscribed to Eileithyia.
Stray find from a church near Hippola (modern Nomia)
4th century A.C.
A relief of rough workmanship whose state of preservation is unknown. The
initial report of this relief is provided by Weil. According to his description, an
adult female stands before a burning altar. Behind her are three children, the
oldest standing nearest to her. Inscribed in the upper border is: Dama..li
jEleuqivai ajnevqhke. Above the heads of the children are the illegible remains of
letters.
Weil 1876, p. 162; IG V, i, no. 1276; Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 156 no. E26.
3.7
Relief depicting worshippers; inscribed to Eileithyia.
Fig. 52
th
th
5 or 4 century B.C.
Lakonia
British Museum no. 188
Fragment of a votive relief. Preserved is the right side of the relief. In the center,
two adult female figures are shown standing in profile, facing left. They wear
chitons and himations, and each holds in her right hand a circular object,
probably a wreath. They appear to be approaching an altar, just visible at the left
edge of the relief. At the far right, following the two women, is a female figure of
much smaller proportions. She stands in precisely the same posture as the first
286
two women, and holds a wreath in her right hand. Despite the fact that this
figure is represented in an identical manner to the first figures, it is probably
intended to represent a female child rather than a servant. An inscription on the
bottom border reads: ELEIQUIAI EUCAN. This relief, originally part of the
Inwood collection, came to the British Museum in the 1800s.
Smith 1892, III, p. 238, pl. 28; Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 60-61, p. 157 no. E30, and pl.
14.
3.8
Relief depicting sacrifice to Artemis.
Fig. 50
Delos, sanctuary of Artemis Lochia
Delos Museum A3153
Dated variously to the 4th century B.C. (Delos XI) or the 2nd century B.C. (Bruneau)
At the far left stands Artemis, wearing a long chiton and holding a torch in her
right hand. To her right is a cylindrical altar on a square base, behind which is a
boy, presumably a temple assistant, who faces to the right and leads a goat to the
altar. Further to the right stand the worshippers, depicted on a slightly smaller
scale than the goddess. An adult couple stands facing to the left and raising their
right hands toward the goddess in a gesture of worship. Two very young
children, a boy and a girl, stand at the feet of the couple, and appear to be
squabbling over the possession of an object which the girl holds tightly to her
chest. A third child, an older girl, stands to the far right near her mother. This
relief is frequently interpreted as representing a couple offering a sacrifice to
Artemis as a request for fertility.
Delos XI, p. 299 and fig. 247; Bruneau 1970, p. 191 no. 1; Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 113114 and pl. 17.1
3.9
Relief of Artemis with torch standing before a temple and altar.
Fig. 54
Delos museum A3158
A partially preserved relief, joined from two fragments. At the far right of the
relief is a small temple with four columns (or possibly two columns in antis), a
Doric frieze and acroteria. To the left of this faade stands a female figure,
poorly preserved, who faces the temple holding a large torch in her hand. Before
the temple is part of a palm tree. A second fragment preserves part of an altar,
which originally stood in the center of the relief. A very poorly preserved figure
of a man, possibly a priest or temple assistant, stands before the altar. One may
assume that the female figure on the left, which is considerably larger than the
figure at the altar, is Artemis. The worshippers, now missing, would have
approached the altar from the right.
Delos XI, no. 254; Demangel 1922, p. 82 fig. 15; Bruneau 1970, no. A3158, pl.1.
Reliefs Depicting Other Scenes of Worship
3.10
287
Votive relief of worshipper and goddess.

Fig. 55
th
5 century B.C.
Find context unknown
Delos Museum A3193
The relief, which is joined from six fragments, depicts a standing female divinity
on the left, and a female worshipper on the right. The divinity stands in threequarter view with her right elbow resting on a pillar. In her raised left hand she
holds a small torch with a hand-shield. The worshipper, depicted in much
smaller scale, faces the deity and raises her right hand in a gesture of prayer.
Mitropoulou 1977, p. 64 no. 127; Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 140 no. 8; Delos XXXIV, pp.
48-49, no. 25.
3.11
Fragmentary votive relief of female figure.
Fig. 56
Paros, sanctuary of Eileithyia (?)
Roman period
Paros Museum 550
Upper right corner of a votive relief depicting a female figure. Preserved is
border on the top and parts of the left and right sides of the relief, as well as the
head and right arm of the figure, who is depicted in an unusual frontal position.
Her right arm is raised in a gesture of worship.
Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 123 no. 22 and pl. 21.1.
3.12
Relief of female figure with torch.
Fig. 57
Delos Museum A3157
A very fragmentary and worn relief; only the upper left-hand corner is
preserved. An adult female figure wearing a top-knot hairstyle stands with her
head bent and supports herself by leaning with her left hand against a tree (or
perhaps a column?). In her right hand she holds a large torch. Many details are
missing due to the poor preservation of the surface of this relief.
Delos XI, p. 303, fig. 255; Bruneau 1970, p. 191; Demangel 1922, p. 84, fig. 17;
Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 115 no. 4 and pl. 16.1; Price 1978, pp. 151-152.
Reliefs Depicting the Presentation of a Child to the Gods
3.13
Relief depicting the presentation of a child to Artemis.
Fig. 58
Echinos, excavated near the southern slope of the Acropolis
Late 5th century B.C.
A rectangular marble relief, well preserved. There are five figures on the relief.
At the far right stands Artemis, holding a torch in her right hand and leaning on
a pillar. Her left hand originally also held an attribute, now missing. She wears a
quiver, barely visible behind her left shoulder. Between Artemis and her
worshippers is an altar, towards which a young boy leads a calf (?). Advancing
from the left are three worshippers. The first is an adult woman holding in both
hands a small child who reaches out to the goddess. Behind her in low relief is a
288
smaller female figure, probably a servant, who carries a tray of food offerings
balanced on her head, and in her right hand she holds a vessel. At the far left is a
larger draped female figure who holds a small box in her left hand and makes a
gesture of adoration with her right hand. In the background above the heads of
the worshippers is a line of garments depicted in low relief, presumably
indicating that these are displayed in the sanctuary where this ritual takes place.
This relief has been interpreted as a childbirth votive depicting not only a
sacrifice offered in thanks for a successful childbirth, but also the formal
presentation of an infant to the goddess.
Dakoronia and Gounaropoulou 1992; Cole 1998, pp. 34-35; Morizot 2004.
3.14
Relief of seated woman, two standing figures, and a child. Fig. 59
Steleia, Thessaly, reused in a church
Volos Museum L 467
Relief, poorly preserved and broken on the left. A figure standing at the far left is
now missing. In the center are two standing figures, both leaning towards the
right slightly. Though their faces are now missing, the short chiton of the left
hand figure suggest that this is a male; the right-hand figure, a female, wears a
long chiton and himation. At the far right is a seated female figure on a throne in
much larger scale. She wears a chiton and himation pulled over her head. At her
knee is a small child, who reaches up to her with both hands. Kastriotis
interpreted this as a votive to Artemis Eileithyia in thanks for a successful birth
and suggested that it had originally been dedicated in a nearby sanctuary on the
acropolis of Paliokastro.
Kastriotis 1903, pp. 40-41, pl. 9; Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 142-143, no. 6.
3.15
Relief of women and infants.
Fig. 60
Sigeion, reused in a church
2nd quarter of the 4th century B.C.
British Museum 789
Broken at top. At the far left, a young servant woman in three-quarter view
moves to the right and carries in her left hand a shallow basket at shoulder level
and in her right hand, a gabled box. Before her walks a second woman, also
facing right, who caries in her arms a swaddled infant. In the center of the relief
is a female figure seated on a throne, facing right. With her left hand she pulls on
her himation, while her right hand rests on her lap. Further to the right, a fourth
woman stands before the seated figure, facing left. In her right hand she holds a
swaddled infant, and her left hand is held out towards the central figure. At the
far right stands a fifth woman, facing left. In her left hand she also holds a
swaddled infant. Her right hand is raised to her chin in a gesture of mourning,
and her head is slightly bowed. This object was originally thought to be the base
of a sculpture, and was considered votive in nature. Smith suggested that it
represented Eileithyia seated on her throne, with four worshippers: three
presenting their infants to the goddess, and the fourth bearing votive gifts.11 Most
recent scholars have rejected this identification, interpreting the relief as part of a
11
Smith 1892, no. 789.
289
trapeza that supported a funeral stele.12 This latter interpretation is almost

certainly correct, given the iconographical similarities of this relief to a trapeza
found in Piraeus on which the bedding for the stele is preserved.13
Smith 1892, I, p. 362, no. 789; Baur 1902, p. 47; Pingiatoglu 1981, p. 143; Clairmont
1993, I, no. 12.
12
Most recently, Clairmont 1993, I, no. 12. He provides a bibliography of older references, p. 16.
Piraeus Museum 3364. Clairmont 1993, I, no. 15. In this trapeza, although no infants are represented, the
central figure of the seated woman as well as the servant with basket and box are nearly identical to that
of 3.15. In addition, the two remaining figures use similar gestures.
13
290
Bibliography
Abbreviations
Argive Heraeum = C. Waldstein, The Argive Heraeum, 2 vols., Cambridge
1902-1905.
Argive Heraion I = C. Pfaff, The Architecture of the Classical Temple of Hera,
Athens 2003.
Clara Rhodos I = A. Maiuri and G. Jacopich, Rapporto generale sul servizio
archeologico a Rodi e nelle isole dipendenti dall anno 1912 all anno 1927,
Rhodes 1928.
Corinth XII = G. Davidson, Minor Objects, Princeton 1952.
Corinth XIV = C. Roebuck, The Asklepieion and Lerna, Princeton 1951.
Corinth XVIII.iv = G. S. Merker, The Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore:
Terracotta Figurines of the Classical, Hellenistic, and Roman Periods,
Princeton 2000.
Delos XI = A. Plassart, Les sanctuaires et les cultes du Mont Cynthe, Paris
1928.
Delos XVIII = W. Deonna, Le mobilier dlien, Paris 1938.
Delos XXIII= A. Laumonier, Les figurines de terre cuite, Paris 1956.
Epidaure I = P. Kavvadias, Fouilles de Epidaure, Athens 1893.
FdD II = R. Demangel, Le sanctuaire dAthena Pronaia: Topographie du
sanctuaire, Paris 1926.
Gonnoi I = B. Helly, La cit et son histoire, Amsterdam 1973.
Gonnoi II = B. Helly, Les inscriptions, Amsterdam 1973.
291
Kabirenheiligtum V = B. Schmaltz, Terrakotten aus dem Kabirenheiligtum:

Menschenhnliche Figuren, menschliche Figuren und Gert, Berlin 1974.
Lindos I = C. Blinkenberg, Les petits objects, Berlin 1931.
Minos I = Evans, A. 1921. The Palace of Minos I: The Neolithic and Early and
Middle Minoan Ages, London.
LSCG = Sokolowski, F. 1969. Lois sacres des cits grecques (cole Franaise
dAthnes, Travaux et Mmoires 18), Paris.
Olympia IV = A. Furtwngler, Die Bronzen und die brigen kleineren Funde
von Olympia, Berlin 1890.
Olynthus IV= D. Robinson, The Terracottas of Olynthus found in 1928,
Baltimore 1931.
OMC3= Webster, T. B. L. 1978. Monuments Illustrating Old and Middle
Comedy (BICS Supplement 39), 3rd ed., London.
Perachora I = H. Payne, The Sanctuaries of Hera Akraia and Limenia:
Architecture, Bronzes, Terracottas, Oxford 1940.
PGM I2= Preisendanz, K. 1928. Papyri graecae magicae, 2nd ed., Leipzig.
Syll.3 = Dittenberger, W. 1915-1924. Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum, 4
vols., 3rd ed., Lipsiae.
Thera I = Hiller von Grtringen, F. Die Insel Thera in Altertum und
Gegenwart, mit Ausschluss der Nekropolen, 1899, Berlin 1899.
292
Adamson, P. B. 1985. Some Rituals Associated with Parturition in

Antiquity, Folklore 96, pp. 176-183.
Ahlberg, G. 1971. Prothesis and Ekphora in Greek Geometric Art, Gteborg.
Aleshire, S. 1989. The Athenian Asklepieion: the People, their Dedications, and
the Inventories, Amsterdam.
Aleshire, S. 1991. Asklepios at Athens: Epigraphic and Prosopographic Essays
on the Athenian Healing Cults, Amsterdam.
Alexiou, S. 1956. JIero;n para; to; Kabou'si JIerapevtra", Kretika Chronika
10, pp. 7-19.
Alexiou, S. 1963. Cronika; (Krhvth, Tsouvtsouro"), ArchDelt 18.2, pp. 31011.
Alexiou, S. 1968. Guide to the Archaeological Museum of Heraclion, Athens.
Ammerman, R. M. 1990. The Religious Context of Hellenistic Terracotta
Figurines, in The Coroplasts Art: Greek Terracottas of the Hellenistic
World, J.P. Uhlenbrock, ed., New Rochelle, pp. 37-46.
Arndt, P. 1893. Photographische Einzelaufnahmen antiker Sculpturen nach
Auswahl, Munich.
Arvantopoullos, 1911. jAnaskafai; kai; [Ereunai ejn Qessaliva/, Prakt, pp.
280-356.
Aubert, J. 1989. Threatened Wombs: Aspects of Ancient Uterine Magic,
GRBS 30, pp. 421-449.
Balmer, J. 1996. Classical Women Poets, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
Bates, B. and A. N. Turner. 2003. Imagery and Symbolism in the Birth
Practices of Traditional Cultures, in The Manner Born: Birth Rites in
293
Cross-Cultural Perspective, L. Dundes, ed., Walnut Creek, Calif., pp.

87-97.
Baur, P. 1899-1901. Eileithyia, Philologus, suppl. 8, Leipzig, pp. 451-512.
Baur, P. 1902. Eileithyia, University of Missouri Studies I, no. 4, pp. 1-90.
Beaumont, L. 1994. Constructing a Methodology for the Interpretation of
Childhood Age in Classical Athenian Iconography, Archaeological
Review from Cambridge 13, pp. 81-96.
Beckman, G.M. 1978. Hittite Birth Rituals: An Introduction. (Sources from the
Ancient Near East I, Fasc. c), Malibu.
Beer, C. 1987. Comparative Votive Religion: The Evidence of Children in
Cyprus, Greece, and Etruria, in Gifts to the Gods, Proceedings of the
Uppsala Symposium 1985 (Boreas 15), T. Linders and G. Norquist,
eds., Uppsala, pp. 21-29.
Beer, C. 1994. Temple Boys: A Study of Cypriote Votive Sculpture, Pt. I: Catalog
(Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology CXIII), Jonsered.
Bell, M. 1981. The Terracottas (Morgantina Studies I), Princeton.
Bennett, C. G. 1980. The Cults of the Ancient Greek Cypriotes, (diss.
University of Pennsylvania).
Berman, L. 1999. Catalogue of Egyptian Art: The Cleveland Museum of Art,
N.Y.
Beschi, L. 1967-1968. Il monumento di Telemachos fondatore dell
Asklepieion Ateniese, ASAA 29-30, pp. 381-436.
Besques. S. 1971. Catalogue raisonn des figurines et reliefs in terre-cuite grecs,
etrusques, et romaines, III: poques hellnistique et romaine en Grce et
Asie Mineure, Paris.
294
Bhatia, S. 1981. Traditional Childbirth Practices: Implications for a Rural

MCH Program, Studies in Family Planning 12, pp. 66-75.
Bieber, M. 1910. Attische Reliefs in Cassel, MDAI(A) 35, pp. 1-16.
Bieber, M. 1961. The History of the Greek and Roman Theater, 2nd ed.,
Princeton.
Blum, R., and E. Blum. 1970. The Dangerous Hour: The Lore of Crisis and
Mystery in Ritual Greece, London.
Blunt, J. E. 1878. The People of Turkey: Twenty Years Residence among
Bulgarians, Greeks, Albanians, Turks, and Armeians, by a Consuls
Daughter and Wife, 2 vols., London.
Boardman, J. 1961. The Cretan Collection in Oxford: The Dictean Cave and Iron
Age Crete, Oxford.
Boardman, J. 1985. Greek Art, New York.
Boardman, J. 2004. Unnatural Conception and Birth in Greek
Mythology, in Naissance et petite enfance dans l'antiquit: Actes du
colloque de Fribourg, 28 novembre 1er dcembre 2001, V. Dasen, ed.,
Gttingen, pp. 103-112.
Bonfante, L. 1989. Nudity as a Costume in Classical Art, AJA 93, pp. 543570.
Bonfante, L. 1997. Nursing Mothers in Classical Art, in Naked Truths:
Women, Sexuality, and Gender in Classical Art and Archaeology, A.
Koloski-Ostrow and C. Lyons, eds., London, pp. 174-196.
Bousquet, J. 1963. Inscriptions de Delphes, BCH 87, pp. 188-208.
295
Bremer, J. 1998. The Reciprocity of Giving and Thanksgiving in Greek

Worship, in Reciprocity in Greece, C. Gill, N. Postlethwaite, and R.
Seaford, eds., Oxford, pp. 127-138.
Bromehead, C. N. 1947. Aetites or the Eagle-stone, Antiquity 21, pp. 1622.
Broneer, O. 1932. Eros and Aphrodite on the North Slope of the
Acropolis in Athens, Hesperia 1, pp. 31-55.
Broneer, O. 1933. Excavations on the North Slope of the Acropolis in
Athens, 1931-1932, Hesperia 2, pp. 329-417.
Broneer, O. 1935. Excavations on the North Slope of the Acropolis in
Athens, 1933-1934, Hesperia 4, pp. 109-188.
Broneer, O. 1947. Investigations at Corinth, 1946-7, Hesperia 16, pp. 233247.
Brouskari, M. 1985. The Paul and Alexandra Canellopoulos Museum, Athens.
Brumfield, A. 1997. Cakes in the Liknon: Votives from the Sanctuary of
Demeter and Kore on Acrocorinth, Hesperia 66, pp. 147-172.
Bruneau, P. 1970. Recherches sur les cultes de Dlos lepoque hellnistique et
lepoque impriale, Paris.
Bruneau, P., and J. Ducat. 1983. Guide de Dlos, Paris.
Burkert, W. 1966. Kekropidensage und Arrephoria, Hermes 94, pp. 1-25.
Burkert, W. 1985. Greek Religion, J. Raffan, trans., Cambridge, Mass.
Burr, D. 1934. Terracottas from Myrina in the Museum of Fine Arts,
Boston (diss. Bryn Mawr College).
Cartault, A. 1892. Terres cuites antiques trouves en Grce et en Asie Mineure,
Deuxime collection Camille Lecuyer, Paris.
296
Caskey, M. 1998. A Relief Pithos from Koresia, Kea, in Keva-Kuvqno":

Istoriva kai Arcaiologiva, Praktika; tou' Dieqnou;" Sumposivou KevaKuvqno", 22-25 Iounivou 1994, L. G. Mendoni and A. J. Mazarakis
Ainian, eds., Athens, pp. 477-486.
Cassar, P. 1964. Medical Votive Offerings in the Maltese Islands, The
Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and
Ireland 94, pp. 23-29.
Cassimatis, H. LIMC II, 1984, pp. 985-990 and 1021-1023 (La naissance d'
Athna).
Catling, H.W. 1990a. Zeus Messapeus near Sparta: An Interim Report,
Lakonikai Spoudai 10, pp. 276-295.
Catling, H.W. 1990b. A Sanctuary of Zeus Messapeus: Excavations at
Aphyssou, Tsakona, 1989, BSA 85, pp. 15-35.
Cavanagh, W. and J. Crouwel 1988. Laconia Survey 1983-1986, Lakonikai
Spoudai 9 , pp. 77-88.
Cavanagh, W., J. Crouwel, R. W. V. Catling, and G. Shipley. 1996.
Continuity and Change in a Greek Rural Landscape: The Laconia Survey
II: Archaeological Data (Annual of the British School at Athens,
Supplement 27), London.
Chantraine, P. 1999. Dictionnaire tymologique de la langue grecque: histoire
des mots, Paris.
Chatzidakis, J. 1886. Eijleiqua" sphvlaion ejn Krhvth/, Parnassos 10, pp. 339342.
Chidambaram, V. C., J. W. McDonald, and M. D. Bracher. 1985. Infant
and Child Mortality in the Developing World: Information from the
297
World Fertility Survey, International Family Planning Perspectives

11, pp. 17-25.
Clairmont, C. W. 1993. Classical Attic Tombstones, Kilchberg.
Clinton, K. 1988. Artemis and the Sacrifice of Iphigeneia in Aeschylus
Agamemnon, in Language and the Tragic Hero: Essays on Greek
Tragedy in honor of Gordon M. Kirkwood, P. Pucci, ed., pp. 1-24.
Clinton, K. 1993. The Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore at Eleusis, in Greek
Sanctuaries, New Approaches, N. Marinatos and R. Hgg, eds.,
London, pp. 110-124.
Coarelli, F. 1986. Fregellae, II: Il santuario di Esculapio, Rome.
Cohen, B. 1997. Divesting the Female Breast of Clothes in Classical
Sculpture, in Naked Truths: Women, Sexuality, and Gender in
Classical Art and Archaeology, A. Koloski-Ostrow and C. Lyons, eds.,
London, pp. 66-92.
Cohen, N. 1996. Notice of Birth of a Girl, in Classical Studies in Honor of
D. Sohlberg, R. Katzoff, ed., Ramat Gan, pp. 384-398.
Coldstream, J. N. 1973. Knossos: the Sanctuary of Demeter (BSA supplement
8), Oxford.
Cole, S. 1984. The Social Function of Rituals of Maturation: the Koureion
and the Arkteia, ZPE 55, pp. 233-244.
Cole, S. 1988. The Uses of Water in Greek Sanctuaries, in Early Greek
Cult Practice: Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium at the
Swedish Institute at Athens, 26-29 June, 1986, R. Hgg, N. Marinatos,
and G. Nordquist, eds., Stockholm, pp. 161-165.
298
Cole, S. 1998. Domesticating Artemis, in The Sacred and the Feminine in

Ancient Greece, S. Blundell and M. Williamson, eds., London, pp. 2743.
Cole, S. 2004. Landscapes, Gender, and Ritual Space: The Ancient Greek
Experience, Berkeley.
Collignon, M. 1911. Les statues funraires dans lart grec, Paris.
Comella, A. 1978. Il materiale votivo tardo di Gravisca, Rome.
Comella, A. 1982. Il deposito votivo presso lAra della Regina, Materiali del
Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Tarqinia IV, Rome.
Comella, A. and G. Stefani. 1990. Materiali votivi del Santuario di Campetti a
Veio: Scavi 1947 e 1969, Rome.
Comstock M. B. and C. C. Vermeule. 1976. Sculpture in Stone: the Greek,
Roman, and Etruscan collections of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston,
Boston.
Cook, A. B. 1940. Zeus, 3 vols., Cambridge.
Cormack, J. M. R. 1946. Inscriptions from Beroea, BSA 41, pp. 105-114.
Cosi, D. M., ed. 2001. L'arkteia di Brauron e i culti femminili: materiali della
Giornatadi approfondimento organizzata dal Seminario avanzato sul
terma Il politeismo, promosso dall' insegnamento di Storia dell religioni
del mondo classico (A. A. 1999/2000): 5 Iuglio 2000, Bologna.
DErcole, M. C. 1990. La stipe votiva del Belvedere a Lucera. Corpus delle stipi
votive in Italia III regio II2, Rome.
Dakoronia, F. 1980. ID v jEforeiva proi>storikw'n kai; klasikw`n ajrcaiothvtwn
(Oikovpedo I. Kafhv), ArchDelt 35, pp. 238-240.
299
Dakoronia, F. and L. Gounaropoulou 1992. Artemiskult auf einem neuen

Weihrelief aus Achinos bei Lamia, Mitteilungen des Deutschen
Archologischen Instituts (Athenische Abteilung 107), Mainz, pp. 219227.
Daremberg, C. and E. Saglio. 1875. Dictionnaire des antiquits grecques et
romaines, Paris.
Dasen, V. 2000. Squatting Comasts and Scarab-Beetles, in Periplous:
Papers on Classical Art and Archaeology presented to Sir John Boardman,
G. R. Tsetskhladze, A. J. N. W. Prag and A. M. Snodgrass, eds.,
London, pp. 89-97.
Dasen, V. 2004. Femmes tiroir, in Naissance et petite enfance dans
l'Antiquit: Actes du colloque de Fribourg, 28 novembre 1er dcembre
2001, V. Dasen, ed., Gttingen, pp. 127-144.
Daumas, M. 1998. Cabiriaca: Recherches sur liconographie du cult des Cabires,
Paris.
Daux, G. 1958. Chronique des fouilles en 1957, BCH 82, pp. 808-814.
Daux, G. 1959a. Chronique des fouilles en 1958, BCH 83, pp. 589-780.
Daux, G. 1959b. Inscriptions de Delphes, BCH 83, pp. 466-495.
Daux, G. 1961. Chronique des fouilles en 1960: Brauron, BCH 85, pp.
638-641.
Davaras, C. 1976. Guide to Cretan Antiquities, Park Ridge, N.J.
300
Dawkins, R. M. 1908-1909. Excavations at Sparta, 1909: The Sanctuary of

Artemis Ortheia, BSA 15, pp. 5-22.
Day, L. P. 1984. Dog Burials in the Greek World, AJA 88, pp. 21-32.
de Waele, F. J. 1933. The Sanctuary of Asklepios and Hygieia at Corinth,
AJA 37, pp. 417-451.
Dean-Jones, L. 1991. The Cultural Construct of the Female Body in
Classical Greek Science, in Womens History and Ancient History, S.
Pomeroy, ed., Chapel Hill, pp. 111-137.
Dean-Jones, L. 1994. Womens Bodies in Classical Greek Science, Oxford.
Demand, N. 1994. Birth, Death, and Motherhood in Classical Greece,
Baltimore.
Demand, N. 1995. Monuments, Midwives, and Gynecology, in Ancient
Medicine in its Socio-Cultural Context: Papers Read at the Congress Held
at Leiden University, 13-15 April 1992, P. van der Eijk, H.
Horstmanshoff, and P. Schrijvers, eds., Amsterdam, pp. 275-290.
Demand, N. 2004. The Attitudes of the Polis to Childbirth: Putting
Women into the Grid, in Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and
Rome, M. Golden and P. Toohey, eds., Edinburgh, pp. 253-263.
Demangel, R. 1922. Fouilles de Dlos: un sanctuaire dArtmis
Ilithye,BCH 46, pp. 58-93.
Demargne, P. 1929. Terres-cuites archaques de Lato, BCH 53, pp. 382429.
Deubner, L. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, III, 1908, p. 436 (Charms and
Amulets, Greek).
Deubner, L. 1932. Attische Feste, New York.
301
Deubner, L. 1952. Die Gebrache der Griechen nach der Geburt,

Rheinisches Museum fr Philologie, pp. 374-377.
di Cesnola, L. P. 1877. Cyprus: Its Ancient Cities, Tombs, and Temples, New
York.
di Cesnola, L. P. 1885. A Descriptive Atlas of the Cesnola Collection of Cypriote
Antiquites in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Boston.
Dickie, M. 1995. The Fathers of the Church and the Evil Eye, in
Byzantine Magic, H. Maguire, ed., Washington, D.C.
Diakonoff, I. 1979. Artemidi Anaeiti anestesen, BABesch 54, pp. 139- 188.
Dillon, M. 1997. Pilgrims and Pilgrimage in Ancient Greece, New York.
Dillon, M. 2002. Girls and Women in Classical Greek Religion, London.
Dougherty, M. 1978. Southern Lay Midwives as Ritual Specialists, in
Women in Ritual and Symbolic Roles, J. Hoch-Smith and A. Spring,
eds., New York, pp. 151-164.
Ducrey, P., and O. Picard. 1969. Recherches Lat, BCH 93, pp. 792-822.
Dugas, C. 1915. Figurines denvutement trouves Dlos, BCH 39, pp.
413-23.
Dumont, A., and J. Chaplain, 1890. Les ceramiques de la Grce propre, II,
Paris.
Dunand, F. 1984. Une Pseudo-Baubo du Muse de Besanon,
Hommages Lucien Lerat 55, H. Walter, ed., Paris, pp. 263-268.
Edelstein, E., and L. Edelstein, 1945. Asclepius: A Collection and
Interpretation of the Testimonies, Baltimore.
Edwards, M. L. 1998. Women and Physical Disability in Ancient Greece,
The Ancient World 29, pp. 3-9.
302
Eichholz, D. 1965. Theophrastus, De Lapidibus, Oxford.

Eichholz, D. 1971. Pliny, Natural History, Loeb Classical Library.
Ekroth, G. 2003. Inventing Iphigeneia? On Euripides and the Cultic
Construction of Brauron, Kernos 16, pp. 59-118.
Ervin, M. 1959. Geraistai Nymphai Genethliai and the Hill of the
Nymphs, Platon 11, pp. 146-159.
Faraone, C. 2003. Playing the Bear and the Fawn for Artemis: Female
Initiation or Substitute Sacrifice? in Initiation in Ancient Greek
Rituals and Narratives: New Critical Perspectives, D. Dodd and C. A.
Faraone, eds., London, pp. 43-68.
Farnell, L. R. 1896. The Cults of the Greek States, 5 vols., Oxford.
Faure, P. 1956. Grottes crtoises, BCH 80, pp. 95-103.
Faure, P. 1964. Fonctions des cavernes crtoises (cole Franaise DAthenes
Travaux et Mmoires, XIV), Paris.
Felsch et al. 1980. Apollon und Artemis oder Artemis und Apollon?
Bericht von den Grabungen im neu entdekten Heiligtum bei
Kalapodi 1973-1977, AA 1980, pp. 38-123.
Finnegan, R. 1995. Women in Aristophanes, Amsterdam.
Foley, H. P. 1994. Background: The Eleusinian Mysteries and Womens
Rites for Demeter, in The Homeric Hymn to Demeter: Translation,
Commentary, and Interpretive Essays, H.P. Foley, ed., Princeton, pp.
65-75.
Forsn, B. 1996a. Griechische Gliederweihungen: Eine Untersuchung zu ihrer
Typologie und ihrer religions- und sozialgeschichtlichen Bedeutung
303
(Papers and Monographs of the Finnish Institute at Athens, IV),

Helsinki.
Forsn, B. 1996b. The Sanctuary of Zeus Hypsistos and the Date and
Construction of the Pnyx III, in The Pynx in the History of Athens:
Proceedings of an International Colloquium Organized by the Finnish
Institute at Athens, 7-9 October, 1994, B. Forsn and G. Stanton, eds.,
Helsinki, pp. 47-56.
Frazer, J. 1913. Pausanias Description of Greece, 6 vols., London.
French, V. 1986. Midwives and Maternity Care in the Greco-Roman
World, in Rescuing Creusa: New Methodological Approaches to Women
in Antiquity (Helios n.s. 13, no. 2), M. Skinner, ed., Lubbock, Tex.,
pp. 69-84.
French, V. 1988. Birth Control, Childbirth, and Early Childhood, in
Civilization of the Ancient Mediterranean: Greece and Rome, III, New
York, pp. 1355-1362.
Froehner, W. 1891. Catalogue des terres cuites grecques: Collection J. Grau,
Paris.
Furtwngler, A. 1878. Die Chariten der Akropolis, AM 3, pp. 181-202.
Garland, R. 1990. The Greek Way of Life: From Conception to Old Age, Ithaca.
Gaster, M. 1908. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, II, 1908, pp. 652-659
(Birth, Jewish).
Glis, J. 1984. History of Childbirth: Fertility, Pregnancy, and Birth in Early
Modern Europe, R. Morris, trans., Paris.
Girardon, S. 1993. Ancient Medicine and Anatomical Votives in Italy,
University of London Institute of Archaeology Bulletin 30, pp. 29-40.
304
Giuman, M. 1999. La dea, la vergine, il sangue: archeologia di un culto

femminile, Milan.
Golden, M. 1990. Children and Childhood in Classical Athens, Baltimore.
Golden, M. 2004. Mortality, Mourning, and Mothers, in Naissance et
petite enfance dans l'antiquit: Actes du colloque de Fribourg, 28
novembre 1er dcembre 2001, V. Dasen, ed., Gttingen, pp. 145-158.
Goodburn, E. A., R. Gazi, and M. Chowdhury. 1995. Beliefs and Practices
Regarding Delivery and Postpartum Maternal Morbidity in Rural
Bangladesh, Studies in Family Planning 26, pp. 22-32.
Gourevitch, D. 1988. Grossess et accouchement dans liconographie
antique, Histoire et Archologie, Dossiers 123, pp. 42-48.
Graepler, D. 1997. Tonfiguren im Grab: Fundkontexte hellenistischer
Terrakotten aus der Nekropole von Tarent, Munich.
Graindor, P. 1939. Terres cuites de lEgypte grco-romaine, Antwerp.
Grandjean, Y., and F. Salviat. 2000. Guide de Thasos, Paris.
Gravel, P. 1995. The Malevolent Eye: An Essay on the Evil Eye, Fertility, and
the Concept of Mana, New York.
Greenwalt, W. S. 1988. The Marriageablility Age at the Argead Court:
360-317 B.C., CW 82, pp. 93-97.
Grmek, M., and D. Gourevitch. 1998. Les maladies dans lart antique, Fayard.
Grmek, M. D. 1989. Diseases in the Ancient Greek World, Muellner, M., and
L. Muellner, trans., Baltimore.
Gross, R. Encyclopedia of Religion, 1987, pp. 227-231 (Birth).
Gnther, W. 1988. Vieux et inutilisable dans un inventaire indit de
Milet, in Comptes et inventaires dans la cit grecque, Actes du colloque
305
international dpigraphie tenu Neuchtel du 23 au 26 septembre 1986

en lhonneur de Jacques Trheux, D. Koepfler, ed., Geneva, pp. 215237.
Hamilton, R. 1991. Choes and Anthesteria: Athenian Iconography and Ritual,
Ann Arbor.
Hamilton, R. 2000. Treasure Map: A Guide to the Delian Inventories, Ann
Arbor.
Harris, D. 1995. The Treasures of the Parthenon and Erechtheion, Oxford.
Hart, N. 1998. Beyond Infant Mortality: Gender and Stillbirth in
Reproductive Mortality before the Twentieth Century, Population
Studies 52, pp. 215-229.
Hartland, E. S. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, II, 1908, pp. 635-643
(Birth, Introduction).
Havelock, C. M. 1982. Mourners on Greek Vases, in Feminism and Art
History: Questioning the Litany, N. Broude and M. D. Garrard, eds.,
New York, pp. 45-61.
Hegmon, M. and W. R. Trevathan. 1996. Gender, Anatomical
Knowledge, and Pottery Production: Implications of an
Anatomically Unusual Birth Depicted on Mimbres Pottery from
Southwestern New Mexico, American Antiquity 61, pp. 747-754.
Higgins, R. A. 1954. Catalogue of the Terracottas in the Department of Greek
and Roman Antiquities, British Museum, London.
Himmelmann-Wildschlz, N. 1957. Zur knidischen Aphrodite,
Marburger Winkelmann program 1957,pp. 11-23.
306
Hoffner, H. A. 1969. Birth and Name Giving in Hittite Texts, JNES 27,
pp. 198-203.
Hogarth, D. G. 1908. Excavations at Ephesus, London.
Hollnder, E. 1912. Plastik und Medizin, Stuttgart.
Hollinshead, M. B. 1985. Against Iphigeneias Adyton in Three Mainland
Temples, AJA 89, pp. 419-440.
Homolle, T. 1879. Convention entre trois villes Crtoises, BCH 3, pp.
290-315.
Homolle, T. 1899. Inscriptions de Delphes, BCH 23, pp. 374-388.
Hurtig, J. W. 1983. Death in Childbirth: Seventeenth-Century English
Tombs and Their Place in Contemporary Thought, The Art Bulletin
65, pp. 603-615.
Jacobson, D. 1980. Golden Handprints and Red-painted Feet: Hindu
Childbirth Rituals in Central India, in Unspoken Words: Womens
Religious Lives in Non-Western Cultures, N. A. Falk and R. M. Gross,
eds., San Francisco, pp. 73-93.
Jacobsthal, P. 1956. Greek Pins and their Connections with Europe and Asia,
Oxford.
Jacoby, F. 1954. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, Leiden.
Jameson, M. H. 1956. The Vowing of a Pelanos, AJP 77, pp. 55-60.
Jamot, P. 1895. Vnus a la coquille, Monuments et Memoires publis par
l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres: Fondation Piot II, pp. 171184.
Jayne, W. 1962. The Healing Gods of Ancient Civilizations, New York.
Jeanmaire, H. 1939. Couroi et couretes, Lille.
307
Jeffrey, L. H. 1990. The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece, Oxford.

Jeffrey, L. H. 1955. Further Comments on Archaic Greek Inscriptions,
BCH 50, pp. 67-84.
Johansen, H. F. and E. W. Whittle, 1980. Aeschylus: The Suppliants,
Copenhagen.
Johns, C. 1982. Sex or Symbol: Erotic Images of Greece and Rome, London.
Johnston, S. I. 1995. Defining the Dreadful: Remarks on the Greek ChildKilling Demon, in Ancient Magic and Ritual Power (Religions in the
Graeco-Roman World, vol. 129), M. Meyer and P. Mirecki, eds.,
Leiden, pp. 361-387.
Jordan, D. R. 1988. New Archaeological Evidence for the Practice of
Magic in Classical Athens, in Praktika of the 12th International
Congress of Classical Archaeology 4, Athens, pp. 273-277.
Kahil, L. 1965. Autour de lArtemis Attique, AntK 8, pp. 20-33.
Kahil, L. 1983. Mythological Repertoire of Brauron, in Ancient Greek Art
and Iconography, W. G. Moon, ed., Madison, pp. 235-238.
Karageorghis, J. 1977. La grande desse de Chypre et son culte: travers
liconographie de lpoque nolithique au VIme s. a.C., Paris.
Karageorghis, V. 1991. The Coroplastic Art of Ancient Cyprus I: ChalcolithicLate Cypriote I, Nicosia.
Karageorghis, V. 1998. The Coroplastic Art of Ancient Cyprus V: The CyproArchaic Period, Small Female Figurines, part A., Handmade/Wheelmade
Figurines, Nicosia.
Karaghiorga-Stathacopoulou, T. LIMC III, 1986, pp. 87-90 (Baubo).
Karousou, S. 1957. JH tuflh; [Arkto", ArchEph, pp. 68-83.
308
Karousou, S. 1992. National Museum: Illustrated Guide to the Museum,

Athens.
Kastriotis, P. 1903. To; ejn Trivkkh/ jAsklhpiei'on, Athens.
Kauffmann-Samaras, A. 1988. Mre et enfant sur les lbts nuptiaux
figures rouges attiques du Ve s. av. J.C., in Ancient Greek and
Related Pottery, H. A. G. Brijder, ed., Amsterdam, pp. 286-299.
Kavvadias, P. 1900. To; JIero;n tou' jAsklhpiou' ejn jEpidauvrw/, Athens.
Kearns, E. 1989. The Heroes of Attica (BICS Supplement 57), London.
Kearns, E. 1994. Cakes in Greek Sacrifice Regulations, in Ancient Greek
Cult Practice from the Epigraphical Evidence, R. Hgg, ed., Stockholm,
pp. 65-70.
Keil, J., and A. Premerstein. 1911. Bericht ber eine zweite Reise in Lydien,
Wein.
Kilian, I. 1978. Weihungen an Eileithyia und Artemis Orthia, ZPE 31,
pp. 219-222.
Kilian, K. 1975. Fibeln in Thessalien von der mykenischen bis zur archaischen
Zeit (Prhistorische Bronzefunde XIV.ii), Munich.
King, H. 1983. Bound to Bleed: Artemis and Greek Women, in Images of
Women in Antiquity, A. Cameron and A. Kuhrt, eds., Detroit, pp.
109-127.
King, H. 1994. Producing Woman: Hippocratic Gynecology, in Women
in Ancient Societies: An Illusion of the Night, L. Archer, S. Fischler,
and M. Wyke, eds., New York, pp. 102-115.
309
King, H. 1995. Self-help, Self-knowledge: In Search of the Patient in

Hippocratic Gynaecology, in Women in Antiquity: New Assessments,
R. Hawley and B. Levick, eds., New York, p. 135-148.
King, H. 1998. Hippocrates' Woman: Reading the Female Body in Ancient
Greece, New York.
Kirchhoff, H. 1977. The Womans Posture during Childbirth: From
Prehistoric Times to the Present, Organorama 14, pp. 14-19.
Kondis, I. D. 1967. Artemis Brauronia, ArchDelt 22, pp. 156-206.
Kontoleon, N. 1961-1962. JH gevnnhsi" tou' Diov", Kretika Chronika 15-16,
pp. 283-293.
Kontoleon, N.M. 1970. Aspects de la Grce prclassique, Paris.
Krte, A. 1893. Bezirk eines Heilgottes, MDAI(A) 18, pp. 231-256.
Kossatz-Deissmann, A. LIMC VII, 1994, pp. 718-726 (Semele).
Kotansky, R. 1991. Incantations and Prayers for Salvation on Inscribed
Greek Amulets, in Magika Hiera: Ancient Greek Magic and Religion,
C. Faraone and D. Obbink, eds., New York, pp. 107-137.
Koumanoudis, S. 1877. jEpigrafai; ejk tw'n peri; to; jAsklhpiei'on tovpwn,
Athenaion 6, pp. 265-282.
Kourouniotes, K., and H. A. Thompson. 1932. The Sanctuary of Zeus
Hypsistos, Hesperia 1, pp. 193-200.
Kriss-Rettenbeck, L. 1972. Ex Voto: Zeichen Bild und Abbild im christlichen
Votivbrauchtum, Zurich.
Kron, U. 1992. Frauenfeste in Demeterheiligtmern: Das Thesmophorion
von Bitalemi, AA 107, pp. 611-650.
Laget, M. 1982. Naissances: Laccouchement avant lge de clinique, Paris.
310
Lalonde, G. 2001. Christianized Pagan Cult: Doubts about Haghia

Marina Theseiou, (paper, San Diego 2001) abstract in AJA 105, p.
303.
Larson, J. 2001. Greek Nymphs: Myth, Cult, Lore, Oxford.
Lamb, W. 1934. Antissa, BSA 32, pp. 41-67.
Lane, E. 1971. Corpus Monumentorum Religionis dei Menis I (EPRO 19),
Leiden.
Lang, M. 1977. Cure and Cult in Ancient Corinth: A Guide to the Asklepieion,
Princeton.
Larson, J. 2001. Greek Nymphs: Myth, Cult, Lore, Oxford.
Laumonier, A. 1946. Terres-cuites d'Asie Mineur, BCH 70, pp. 312-318.
Lawson, J. C. 1910. Modern Greek Folklore and Ancient Greek Religion: A
Study in Survivals, Cambridge.
Lechat, H. 1901. Bulletin archologique, REG 14, pp. 409-479.
Lefber, Y. and H. W. A. Voorhoeve, 1998. Indigenous Customs in Childbirth
and Child Care, Antwerp.
Lefkowitz, M. 1981. Heroines and Hysterics. London.
Lehmann-Hartleben, K. 1926. Athena als Geburtsgttin,Archiv fr
Religionswissenschaft 24, pp. 19-28.
Lenormant, C. 1832. Statue de Gaea, Annali dell Instituto, pp. 65-67.
Lveque, P. 1985. Les cultes de la fcondit/fertilit dans la Grce des
cits, in Archaeology and Fertility Cult in the Ancient Mediterranean,
A. Bonanno, ed., Amsterdam, pp. 242-256.
Lewis, S. 2002. The Athenian Woman: An Iconographic Handbook, London.
311
LiDonnici, L. 1995. The Epidaurian Miracle Inscriptions: Text, Translation and

Commentary, Atlanta.
Linders, T. 1972. Studies in the Treasure Records of Artemis Brauronia found in
Athens (Acta Instituti Atheniensis Regni Sueciae 4.19), Stockholm.
Linders, T. 1994. Sacred Menus on Delos, in Ancient Greek Cult Practice
from the Epigraphical Evidence, R. Hgg, ed., Stockholm, pp. 71-79.
Lloyd-Jones, H. 1983. Artemis and Iphigeneia, JHS 103, pp. 87-102.
Loraux, N. 1995. The Experiences of Tiresias: The Feminine and the Greek Man,
Princeton.
Loudon, I. 1991. On Maternal and Infant Mortality 1900-1960, Social
History of Medicine 4, pp. 29-73.
Lullies, R. 1960. Greek Sculpture, New York.
Lupu, E. 2005. Greek Sacred Law: A Collection of New Documents, Leiden.
Lyons, D., 2002. The Scandal of Womens Ritual, (paper, UrbanaChampaign 2002).
Maffre, J. J. and F. Salviat. 1976. Travaux de lEcole Franaise en 1975:
Artemision, BCH 100, pp. 774-785.
Maffre, J. J. and F. Salviat. 1978. Travaux de lEcole Franaise en 1977:
Artemision, BCH 102, pp. 821-829.
Mansfield, J. M. 1985. The Robe of Athena and the Panathenaic Peplos,
(diss. University of California, Berkely).
Marcad, J. 1953. Recueil des signaturs de sculpteurs grecs, Paris.
Marinatos, N. 1996. Cult by the Seashore: What Happened at Amnisos?
in The Role of Religion in the Early Greek Polis, R. Hgg, ed.,
Stockholm, pp. 135-139.
312
Marinatos, S. 1949. jAnaskafai; Baqupevtrou jArcanw'n (Krhvth"), Prakt

1949, pp. 100-109.
Marinatos, S. 1950. Mevgaron Baqupevtrou, Prakt 1950, pp. 242-257.
Marinatos, S. 1951. jAnaskafh; megavrou Baqupevtrou (Krhvth"), Prakt 1951,
pp. 258-272.
Marshall, F. 1911. Catalogue of the Jewellery, Greek, Etruscan, and Roman in
the British Museum, London.
Marx, F. 1885.Marmorgruppe aus SpartaAM 10, pp. 177-199.
Masson, O. 1971. Kypriaka IX: Recherches sur les antiquits de Golgoi,
BCH 95, pp. 305-334.
Matthews, V. 1996. Antimachus of Colophon: Text and Commentary, Leiden.
Mendel, G. 1908. Catalogue des figurines grecques de terre cuite,
Constantinople.
Mendel, G. 1914. Catalogue des sculptures grecques, romaines et byzantines, II,
Constantinople.
Meyer-Steineg, T. 1912. Jenaer medizin-historische Beitrge II: Darstellungen
normaler und krankhaft vernderter Krperteile an antiken Weihgaben,
Jena.
Michon, E. 1911. Les marbres antiques de Dlos conservs au Muse du
Louvre, BCH 35, pp. 288-349.
Milchhoefer, A. 1879. Antikenbericht aus dem Peloponnes, AM 4, pp.
123-176.
Millingen, J. 1843. Baubo, Annales de l'institut de correspondance
archologique XV, pp. 72-97.
313
Mitropoulou, E. 1975. Kneeling Worshippers in Greek and Oriental Literature

and Art, Athens.
Mitropoulou, E. 1977. Corpus I: Attic Votive Reliefs of the 6th and 5th
Centuries B.C., Athens.
Modi, J. J. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, II, 1908, pp. 660-662 (Birth,
Parsi).
Mogk, E. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, II, 1908, pp. 662-3 (Birth,
Teutonic).
Morgan, C. 1993. The Origins of Panhellenism, in Greek Sanctuaries, New
Approaches, N. Marinatos, and R. Hgg, eds., London, pp. 18-44.
Morizot, Y. 2004. Offrandes Artmis pour une naissance: Autour du
relief d' Achinos, in Naissance et petite enfance dans l'Antiquit: Actes
du colloque de Fribourg, 28 novembre- 1er dcembre 2001, V. Dasen, ed.,
Gttingen, pp. 159-170.
Mourgoulieff, J. Etudes critiques sur les monuments antiques reprsentant des
scnes daccouchement.
Mrogenda, U. 1990. Figrliche Terrakotten, in Ausgrabungen in Assos
(Asia Minor Studien 2), . Serdaroglu, R. Stupperich, and E.
Schwertheim, eds., Bonn, pp. 35-53.
Musacchio, J. M. 1999. The Art and Ritual of Childbirth in Renaissance Italy,
London.
Myres, J. L. 1914. Handbook of the Cesnola Collection of Antiquities from
Cyprus, New York.
Neils, J., and J. H. Oakley. 2003. Coming of Age in Ancient Greece: Images of
Childhood from the Classical Past, New Haven.
314
Neutsch, B. 1956. Archologische Grabungen und Funde in Unteritalien

1949-1955, AA 71, pp. 442-443.
Nilsson, M. P. 1925. A History of Greek Religion, F. J. Fielden, trans., Oxford.
Novaro-Lefvre, D. 2000. Le culte d' Hra Prachora, REG 113, pp. 4268.
Oakley, J. H., and H. Sinos, 1993. The Wedding in Ancient Athens, Madison,
Wisc.
Olender, M. 1985. Aspects de Baub: Textes et contexts antiques, Revue
de LHistoire des Religions 202, pp. 3-55.
Orlandini, P. 1966. Lo scavo del Thesmophorion di Bitalemi e il culto
delle divinit ctonie a Gela, Kokalos 12, pp. 8-35.
Orlandini, P. 1968. Gela: Topografia dei santuari e documentazione
archeologica dei culti, Rivista dellIstituto Nazionale dArcheologia e
Storia dellArte 15, pp. 20-32.
Orlandos, A.K. 1958. jAnaskafaiv (Braurwvn), Ergon 1958, pp. 30-39.
Orlandos, A.K. 1965. Pitsa, EAA 6, pp. 200-206.
Orsi, P. 1906. Gela,Monumenti antichi 17, cols. 703-710.
Osborne, R. 1985. Demos: The Discovery of Classical Attika, Cambridge.
Palagia, O. 1993. The Pediments of the Parthenon, Leiden.
Palaiokrassa, L. 1989. Neue Befunde aus dem Heiligtum der Artemis
Munichia, MDAI(A) 104, pp. 1-40.
315
Palaiokrassa, L. 1991. To; JIero; th'" jArtevmido" Mouniciva", Thessalonike.

Papademitriou, J. 1963. The Sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron, Scientific
American 208, 11-119.
Pariente, A. 1990. Chronique des Fouilles en 1989, BCH 114, pp. 734-736.
Paris, P. 1892. late: la ville, le temple dAthna Cranaia (Bibliothque des
coles Franaises dAthnes et de Rome 60), Paris.
Parke, H.W. 1967. The Oracles of Zeus, Oxford.
Parker, R. 1983. Miasma: Pollution and Purification in Early Greek Religion,
Oxford.
Parker, R. 1998. Pleasing Thighs: Reciprocity in Greek Religion, in
Reciprocity in Greece, C. Gill, N. Postlethwaite, and R. Seaford, eds.,
Oxford, pp. 105-126.
Peek, W. 1930. Der Isishymnus und verwandte Texte, Berlin.
Peek, W. 1932. Zu griechischen Epigrammen, Philologus 87, pp. 229-241.
Peek, W. 1942. Attische Inschriften MDAI(A) 67, pp. 1-217.
Peek, W. 1955. Griechische Vers-Inschriften, Berlin.
Penkova, E. LIMC II, 1984, pp. 955-1050 (Athena).
Pensabene, P., et. al. 1980. Terracotte votive dal Tevere (Studi Miscellanei 25),
Rome.
Perdrizet, P. 1911. Bronzes grecs dEgypte de la collection Fouquet, Paris.
Perdrizet, P. 1924. Les terres cuites dEgypte de la collection Fouquet, Nancy.
Peredolskaya, A. A. 1964. Attische Tonfiguren aus einem sdrussischen Grab
(AntK Beiheft 2), Olten.
Perlman, P. 1989. Acting the She-bear for Artemis, Arethusa 22, 111-133.
Petrakou, V. 1968. JO jWrwpo;" kai; to; JIero;n tou' jAmfiaravou, Athens.
316
Petrocheilou, A. 1984. The Greek Caves, Athens.

Philadelpheus, A. 1927. Le sanctuaire dArtmis Kallist et lancienne rue
de lacadmie, BCH 51, pp. 155-163.
Phillips, E. D. 1973. Greek Medicine, London.
Pinch, G. 1994. Magic in Ancient Egypt, Austin.
Pinches, T. G. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, II, 1908, pp. 643-645 (Birth,
Assyro-Babylonian).
Pingiatoglou, S. 1981. Eileithyia, Wrzburg.
Pirenne-Delforge, V. 1994. L'Aphrodite grecque, Athens.
Plassart, A. 1926. Inscriptions de Thespies, BCH 50, pp. 383-462.
Platon, N. 1956. Cronikav, Kret. Chron. 10, pp. 405-422.
Pomtow, H. 1912. Die Kultsttten der anderen Gtter von Delphi
Philologus 71, pp. 30-100.
Preisendanz, K. 1933. Die griechischen und lateinischen Zaubertafeln,
APF 11, pp. 153-164.
Price, T. H. 1969. The Crouching Children and the Temple Boys, BSA 64,
pp. 95-111.
Price, T. H. 1978. Kourotrophos: Cults and Representations of the Greek
Nursing Dieties, Leiden.
Pringle, J. 1983. Hittite Birth Rituals, in Images of Women in Antiquity, A.
Cameron and A. Kuhrt, eds., Detroit, pp. 128-141.
Redfield, J. 1982. Notes on the Greek Wedding, Arethusa 15, pp. 181-201.
Reilly, J. 1989. Many Brides: Mistress and Maid on Athenian Lekythoi,
Hesperia 58, pp. 411-444.
317
Reilly, J. 1997. Naked and Limbless: Learning about the Feminine Body
in Ancient Athens, in Naked Truths: Women, Sexuality, and Gender in
Classical Art and Archaeology, A. Koloski-Ostrow and C. Lyons, eds.,
Reinach, S. 1901. Un bas-relief indit au Muse de Constantinople, REG
14, pp. 127-137.
Reinach, S. 1892. Antiquits du Bosphore cimmrien, 2nd ed., Paris.
Richardson, J. 1974. The Homeric Hymn to Demeter, Oxford.
Richter, G. 1954. Catalogue of Greek Sculptures in the Metropolitan Museum of
Art, Cambridge, Mass.
Robertson, N. 1983. Greek Ritual Begging in Aid of Womens Fertility
and Childbirth, TAPA 113, pp. 143-169.
Robertson, N. 1983. The Riddle of the Arrhephoria, HSCP 87, pp. 241288.
Rolley, C. 1984. Autres objets de mtal, in LAntre Corycien II (BCH
Supplement IX), Paris, pp. 261-280.
Romano, I. 1988. Early Greek Cult Images and Cult Practices, in Early
Greek Cult Practice: Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium at
the Swedish Institute at Athens, 26-29 June, 1986, R. Hgg, N.
Marinatos, and G. Nordquist, eds., Stockholm, pp. 127-134.
Rotroff, S. 1988. The Artifacts from Well G5:3 and Some Conclusions
concerning the Deposit, (paper, Washington, D.C. 1988).
Rouse, W. 1902. Greek Votive Offerings: An Essay in the History of Greek
Religion, Cambridge.
Roussel, P. 1915-1916. Les cultes gyptiens Dlos, Paris.
318
Roussel, P. 1927. Remarques sur le bas-relief de Kalliste, BCH 51, pp.

164-169.
Rousselle, A. 1992. Body Politics in Ancient Rome, in A History of
Women in the West, I: From Ancient Goddesses to Christian Saints,
Cambridge, Mass., pp. 296-336.
Rubensohn, O. 1900. Archologische Gesellschaft, 1900, Februar AA, pp.
18-21.
Rubensohn, O. 1901. Paros II, AM, pp. 157-222.
Rhfel, H. 1984. Kinderleben im klassischen Athen, Mainz am Rhein.
Sakellarakis, J. A. 1983. Herakleion Museum: Illustrated Guide to the Museum,
Athens.
Salviat, F. 1959. Dcrets pour pi fille de Dionysios: desses et
sanctuaires Thasiens, BCH 83, pp. 362-397.
Schachter, A. 1981. The Cults of Boeotia, 4 vols. (BICS supplement 38),
London.
Schfer, J., S. Alexiou, P. Brize, et al. 1992. Amnisos: nach den
archologischen, historischen und epigraphischen Zeugnissen des
Altertums und der Neuzeit, Berlin.
Schefold, K. 1955. Zwei tonstatuetten von Kreissenden in Privatbesitz,
AA 69, pp. 218-223.
Schelmerdine, S. 1995. The Homeric Hymns, Newburyport, Mass.
Schmidt, V. 1911. De Graesk-Aegyptiske Terrakotter, Copenhagen.
Schneider, R. 1880. Die Geburt der Athena, Wien.
Schober, A. 1933. Der Fries des Hekateions von Lagina, Baden bei Wien.
Scholz, H. 1937. Der Hund in griechisch-rmischen magie und Religion, Berlin.
319
Schne, R. 1872. Griechische Reliefs aus athenischen Sammlungen, Leipzig.

Schulze, H. 1998. Ammen und Pdagogen: Sklavinnen und Sklaven als Erzieher
in der antiken Kunst und Gesellschaft, Mainz.
Sealey, R. 1990. Women and Law in Classical Greece, Chapel Hill.
Sered, S. S. 1994. Husbands, Wives, and Childbirth Rituals, Ethos 22, pp.
187-208.
Shapiro, H. A. 1984. Notes on Greek Dwarves, AJA 88, pp. 391-392.
Sherwin-White, S. 1978. Ancient Cos, Gttingen.
Shiffman, J. 2000. Can Poor Countries Surmount High Maternal
Mortality? Studies in Family Planning 31, pp. 274-289.
Siegerist, H. E. 1961. A History of Medicine, II: Early Greek, Hindu, and
Persian Medicine, Oxford.
Simon, C. G. 1986. The Archaic Votive Offerings and Cults of Ionia
(diss. University of California, Berkeley).
Simons, G. L. 1973. Sex and Superstition, London.
Smith, A. H. 1892. A Catalogue of Sculpture in the Department of Greek and
Roman Antiquities, British Museum, 3 vols., London.
Smithson, E. 1974. A Geometric Cemetery on the Areopagus: 1897, 1932,
1947, Hesperia 43, pp. 325-390.
Sourvinou-Inwood, C. 1988. Studies in Girls' Transitions: Aspects of the
Arkteia and Age Representation in Attic Iconography, Athens.
Stears, K. 1995. Dead Womens Society, in Time, Tradition, and Society in
Greek Archaeology: Bridging the Great Divide, N. Spencer, ed.,
320
Steinleitner, F. 1913. Die Beicht im Zusammenhange mit der sakralen

Rechtsphlege in der Antike, Munich.
Stephani, L. 1865 Erklrung: einiger im Jahre 1864 im sdlichen Russland
gefundenen Gegenstnde Compte-rendu de la commission impriale
archologique pour lanne 1865, pp. 3-222.
Stewart, A. 1997. Art, Desire, and the Body in Ancient Greece, Cambridge.
Stewart, A., and C. Gray. 2000. "Confronting the Other: Childbirth, Old
Age, and Death on an Attic Tombstone at Harvard," in Not the
Classical Ideal: Athens and the Construction of the Other in Greek Art, B.
Cohen, ed., Leiden, pp. 248-274.
Stol, M. 2000. Birth in Babylonia and the Bible: its Mediterranean Setting,
(Cuneiform Monographs 14), Groningen.
Stoop, M. W. 1960. Floral Figurines from South Italy, Antwerp.
Stupperich, R. 1993. Dritter Vorbericht ber die Grabung in der WesttorNekropole von Assos im Sommer 1991, in Ausgrabungen in Assos
1991, . Serdaroglu and R. Stupperich, eds. (Asia Minor Studien 10),
Bonn, pp. 1-36.
Strubbe, J. H. M. 1991. Cursed Be He That Moves My Bones, in Magika
Hiera: Ancient Greek Magic and Religion, C. Faraone and D. Obbink,
eds., New York, pp. 33-59.
Svoronas, I. 1917. jAsklhpiaka; mnhmei'a kai; kionolatreiva ejn jAqhvnai",
ArchEph 56, pp. 78-104.
Svoronos, J. N. 1908-1937. Das Athener Nationalmuseum, Athens.
Talbot, D. A. 1915. Womens Mysteries of a Primitive People, Ibibios of
Southern Nigeria, London.
321
Taplin, O. 1993. Comic Angels and Other Approaches to Greek Drama through
Vase-Paintings, Oxford.
Temkin, O. 1991. Soranus Gynecology, Baltimore.
Themelis, P. G. 1982. Brauron: Fhrer durch das Heiligtum und das Museum,
Athens.
Themelis, P. G. 1991. jAnaskafe;" th'" jArcaiologikh'" JEtaireiva" 1991
(Messhvnh), Ergon 1991, pp. 28-35.
Themelis, P. G. 1994. Artemis Ortheia at Messene. The Epigraphical and
Archaeological Evidence, in Ancient Greek Cult Practice from the
Epigraphical Evidence: Proceedings of the Second International Seminar
on Ancient Greek Cult, organized by the Swedish Institute at Athens, 2224 November 1991, R. Hgg, ed., Stockholm, pp. 101-122.
Threpsiades, J. 1935. jAnaskafikai; e[reunai ejn Kastevlla/ tou' Peiraiw'",
Prakt 1935, pp. 159-195.
Thompson, D. B. 1954. Three Centuries of Hellenistic Terracottas,
Hesperia 23, pp. 72-107.
Thompson, D. B. 1963. Troy: The Terracotta Figurines of the Hellenistic Period
(Supplementary Monograph 3), Princeton.
Thompson, H. 1936. Pynx and Thesmophorion, Hesperia 5, pp. 151-200.
Tod, M. N., and J. B. Wace. 1906. Catalogue of the Sparta Museum, Oxford.
Tran Tam Tinh, V. 1973. Isis Lactans: Corpus des monuments Greco-Romains
dIsis allaitant Harpocrate, Leiden.
Tran Tam Tinh, V., B. Jaeger, and S. Poulin, LIMC IV, 1988, pp. 415-445
(Harpocrates).
322
Travlos, J. 1937. jAnaskafai; JIera'" JOdou', Prakt 1937, pp. 25-41.

Travlos, J., and K. Kourouniotis 1938. jAnaskafai; JIera'" JOdou', Prakt
1938, pp. 28-34.
Travlos, J., and K. Kourouniotis 1939. jAnaskafvh; JIera'" JOdou', Prakt
1939, pp. 39-41.
Travlos, J. 1988. Bildlexikon zur Topographie des antiken Attika, Tbingen.
Trendall, A. D. 1967. Phlyax Vases (BICS Supplement 19), 2nd ed., London.
Turfa, J. 1994. Anatomical Votives and Italian Medical Traditions, in
Murlo and the Etruscans: Art and Society in Ancient Etruria, R. De
Puma and J. Small, eds., Madison, Wisc., pp. 224-240.
Tyree, E. L. 1974. Cretan Sacred Caves: Archaeological Evidence (Diss.,
University of Missouri at Columbia).
Vallois, R. 1966. Larchitecture hellnique de larchitecture dlienne, Paris.
van Straten, F. T. 1974. Did the Greeks Kneel Before Their Gods?
BABesch 49, pp. 159-189.
van Straten, F. T. 1981. Gifts for the Gods, in Faith, Hope, and Worship:
Aspects of Religious Mentality in the Ancient World, H. S. Versnel, ed.,
Leiden, pp. 65-151.
Vatin, C. 1965. Dlos prmycnienne, BCH 89, pp. 225-230.
Vedder, U. 1988. Frauentod-Kregertod im Spiegel der attischen
Grabkunst, MDAI(A) 103, pp. 161-191.
Veneri, A. and C. Gasparri. LIMC III, 1986, pp. 414-514 (Dionysos).
Versnel, H. S. 1981. Religious Mentality in Ancient Prayer, in Faith,
Hope, and Worship: Aspects of Religious Mentality in the Ancient World,
H. S. Versnel, ed., Leiden, pp. 1-64.
323
von Graeve, V. 1979. Die bemalten Grabstelen von Demetrias, in La

Thessalie: Actes de la Table-Ronde 21-24 Juillet 1975, Lyon, (Collection de
la Maison de lOrient Mditerranen 6, srie archologique 5), B. Helly,
ed., Lyon, pp. 111-137.
Vorster, C. 1983. Griechische Kinderstatuen, Cologne.
Vukanovic, T. P. 1980. Swaddling Clothes for the Unmarried and for
Herdsmen, Folklore 91, pp. 111-114.
Wace, A. J. B., and M. S. Thompson 1908-1909. A Cave of the Nymphs on
Mount Ossa, BSA 15, pp. 243-247.
Wace, A. J. B. et al. 1908-1909. The Menelaion, BSA 15, pp. 108-157.
Waegeman, M. 1987. Amulet and Alphabet: Magical Amulets in the First Book
of Cyranides, Amsterdam.
Waldstein, C. 1892. Excavations of the American School of Athens at the
Heraion of Argos, Boston.
Wallace, S. 2003. The Perpetuated Past: Re-use or Continuity in Material
Culture and the Structuring of Identity in Early Iron Age Crete,
BSA 98, pp. 251-277.
Wallrodt, S. 2002. Ritual Activity in Late Classical Ilion: the Evidence
from a Fourth Century B.C. Deposit of Loomweights and
Spindlewhorls, Studia Troica 12, pp. 179-196.
Walshe, W.G. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, II, 1908, pp. 645-646 (Birth,
Chinese).
Walter, O. 1910. Kniende Adoranten auf atischen Reliefs, Jahreshefte des
sterreichischen archaeologischen Instituts 13, Beiblatt, pp. 229- 243.
324
Walter, O. 1923. Beschreibung der Reliefs im kleinen Akropolismuseum in

Athen, Wien.
Walter, O. 1937. Die Reliefs aus dem Heligtum der Echeliden in NeuPhaleron, AE 76, pp. 97-119.
Webster, T. B. L. 1970. Greek Theater Production, London.
Weil, R. 1876. Aus Lakonien, AM 1, pp. 151-166.
Westholm, A. 1955. The Cypriote Temple Boys, OpAth II, pp. 75-77.
Willetts, R. 1958. Cretan Eileithyia, CQ 8, pp. 221-23.
Winter, F. 1903. Die Typen der figrlichen Terrakotten, 2 vols. (Die antiken
Terrakotten III), Berlin and Stuttgart.
Witt, R. E. 1971. Isis in the Graeco-Roman World, London.
Wolters, P., and C. Friederichs. 1885. Die Gipsabgsse antiker Bildwerke in
historischen Folge erklrt, Berlin.
Wolters, P. 1892. Boiwtikai; ajrcaiovthte", ArchEph 1892, pp. 212-239.
Zancani Montuoro, P., and U. Zanotti-Bianco. 1951. Heraion alla foce del
Sele, 2 vols., Rome.
Zancani-Montuoro, P. 1965-1966. Ledificio quadrato nello Heraion alla
Foce del Sele, ASMG 6-7, pp. 23-195.
Zeitlin, F. 1982. Cultic Models of the Female: Rites of Dionysus and
Demeter, Arethusa 15, pp. 129-157.
Zeitlin, F. 2002. Apollo and Dionysos: Starting from Birth, in Kykeon:
Studies in Honour of H.S. Versnel, H. Horstmanshoff, H. Singor, F.
van Straten, and J. Strubbe, eds., Leiden, pp. 193-218.
325

Childbirth Votives and Rituals in Ancient Greece PDF

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Childbirth Votives and Rituals in Ancient Greece PDF

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI

May 17, 2005

This work and its defense approved by:

Childbirth Votives and Rituals in

2007 by Susan Jennifer Wise. All rights reserved.

Social and Religious Considerations

Chapter II: Rituals

Rituals During Pregnancy

Rituals During Birth

Rituals Following the Birth

Chapter III: Votives

Anatomical Votives (cat nos. 1.1-1.66)

Figurines (cat nos. 2.1-2.46)

Reliefs (cat. nos. 3.1-3.15)

Statues and Statue Bases

The Iconography of Birth

Fig. 1: Marble anatomical votive of female genitalia, Sanctuary of Artemis

Plutarch, Superstit. 3.166; Diogenes Laertius 6.37-38; Lyons 2002.

I have sought to overcome these difficulties by adopting a multi-disciplinary

In order to appreciate the significance of childbirth rituals, it is necessary first to

Social and Religious Considerations

The Social and Civic Importance of Parenthood

The Fear of Pain and Death in Childbirth

Baur 1902, pp. 89-90.

Photius, Lex., s.v. rJavmno".

unique to Greeceindeed, it is attested for numerous cultures, both ancient and

Divinities connected with fertility and childbirth (alphabetically arranged)

Aphrodite (Kolainis, Genetyllis, Kourotrophos, Kolias): Aphrodite could, on occasion, be

Artemis (Eileithyia, Eulocheia, Geneteira, Hekate, Kithone, Lochia, Lysizonos, Mogostokos,

SEG 3.400; Price 1978, p. 137.

Gonnoi II, no. 175-179; Aeschylus, Supp. 670-675.

Athena (Kourotrophos, Meter, Lochia ): Although often more of a kourotrophic goddess

Herodas, IV, 82 ff.

Farnell 1896, vol. 2, p. 441.

Demeter (Kourotrophos, Epilysamene): Demeter seems to have been worshipped as a

Eileithyia (Eukoline, Kourotrophos, Mogostokos): As numerous sources attest, the primary

Eumenides:94 In at least a few instances, the Eumenides appear to have been

Genetyllis, Genetyllides, Gennaides, or Genethliai: The name of these minor childbirth

Hekate (Eukoline, Genetyllis, Artemis-Hekate, Kourotrophos): It is not surprising that

Helen: According to Pausanias, Helen dedicated a shrine to Eileithyia at Argos while

Aristophanes, Vesp. 804; Hesychius s.v. Fulavda.

Baur 1902, pp. 68-69.

found in Thessaloniki mentioning an altar of Isis Lochia, see IG X 2, 1, 97.

Suidas s.v. Tritopavtore".

Eulochia ( Eujlociva): of good birth, or helping in birth.An epithet most frequently

Hesychius s.v. jEleuqwv.

Geneteira or Genetaira ( Genevteira): giver of birth. Sometimes applied to Eileithyia and

Gonnoi II, pp. 168-172; Pindar, Nem. 7.1.

Lochia (Lociva) or Locheia (Loceiva) or Lexo (Lecwv): of childbirth. Most commonly an

Given the multitude of divinities in the Greek pantheon that could be

Identifying Childbirth Sanctuaries

A Word About Circular Argumentation

Secure Childbirth Sanctuaries

Sanctuary of Eileithyia on Paros185

Cave of Eileithyia Inatia at Tsoutsouros, Crete190

Pingiatoglu 1981, pp. 120-134.

Sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron, Attica195

Euripides, I.T. 1464.

Probable Childbirth Sanctuaries

Sanctuary of Eileithyia at Agrai, Attica207

Sanctuary of Artemis Lochia, Delos212

Kondis 1967, pl. 104a.

This small sanctuary, located on Mt. Kynthos, was excavated in 1920 by