The Temple of Aphaia () is an Ancient Greek temple located within a sanctuary complex dedicated to the goddess Aphaia on the island of Aegina, which lies in the Saronic Gulf. Formerly known as the Temple of Jupiter Panhellenius, the Doric temple is now recognized as having been dedicated to the mother-goddess Aphaia. It was a favourite of Neoclassical and Romantic artists such as J. M. W. Turner. It stands on a c. 160 m peak on the eastern side of the island approximately 13 km east by road from the main port.The main port and the main city are named Aegina, after the island. The Temple of Aphaia is 9.6 km east of this city. The sanctuary is also 29.5 km southwest of the Acropolis of Athens, which is visible across the gulf on a clear day.
Aphaia (Greek ) was a Greek goddess who was worshipped exclusively at this sanctuary. The extant temple of was built over the remains of an earlier temple of , which was destroyed by fire . Elements of this older temple were buried in the infill for the larger, flat terrace of the later temple, and are thus well preserved. Abundant traces of paint remain on many of these buried fragments. There may have been another temple in the 7th century BC, also located on the same site, but it is thought to have been much smaller and simpler in terms of both plan and execution. Significant quantities of Late Bronze Age figurines have been discovered at the site, including proportionally large numbers of female figurines (kourotrophoi), indicating – perhaps – that cult activity at the site was continuous from the 14th century BC, suggesting a Minoan connection for the cult.Pilafidis-Williams argues that the character and relative proportions of the finds leads to the conclusion that the deity worshipped was a female fertility/agricultural goddess. The last temple is of an unusual plan and is also significant for its pedimental sculptures, which are thought to illustrate the change from Archaic to Early Classical technique. These sculptures are on display in the Glyptothek of Munich, with a number of fragments located in the museums at Aegina and on the site itself.The important Bronze Age archaeological site of Kolona is northwest of Aegina (the main city) along the coast, and a museum is located at this site. The museum at Aegina was the first institution of its kind in Greece, but most of the collection (other than a collection of bas relief panels from Delos) was transferred to Athens in 1834 (EB), where it can be seen in the National Archaeological Museum of Athens. The museum on the site contains a restoration of the Early Archaic temple entablature and pediment, as well as copies of elements of the pedimental sculpture of the Late Archaic temple set into restored sections of the pediment.
Exploration and archaeology
The periegetic writer Pausanias briefly mentions the site in his writings of the 2nd century AD, but does not describe the sanctuary in detail as he does for many others.Description of Greece 2.30.3 On Aegina as one goes toward the mountain of Pan-Greek Zeus, the sanctuary of Aphaia comes up, for whom Pindar composed an ode at the behest of the Aeginetans. The Cretans say (the myths about her are native to Crete) that Euboulos was the son of Karmanor, who purified Apollo of the killing of the Python, and they say that Britomaris was the daughter of Zeus and Karme (the daughter of this Euboulos). She enjoyed races and hunts and was particularly dear to Artemis. While fleeing from Minos, who lusted after her, she cast herself into nets cast for a catch of fish. Artemis made her a goddess, and not only the Cretans but also the Aeginetans reverence her. The Aeginetans say that Britomaris showed herself to them on their island. Her epithet among the Aeginetans is Aphaia, and it is Diktynna on Crete. The temple was made known in Western Europe by the publication of the Antiquities of Ionia (London, 1797). In 1811, the young English architect Charles Robert Cockerell, finishing his education on his academic Grand Tour, and Baron Otto Magnus von Stackelberg removed the fallen fragmentary pediment sculptures. On the recommendation of Baron Carl Haller von Hallerstein, who was also an architect and, moreover, a protégé of the art patron Crown Prince Ludwig of Bavaria, the marbles were stolen and sold the following year to the Crown Prince, soon to be King Ludwig I of Bavaria. Minor excavations of the east peribolos wall were carried out in 1894 during reconstruction of the last temple.
Systematic excavations at the site were carried out in the 20th century by the German School in Athens, at first under the direction of Adolf Furtwängler. The area of the sanctuary was defined and studied during these excavations. The area under the last temple could not be excavated, however, because that would have harmed the temple. In addition, significant remains from the Bronze Age were detected in pockets in the rocky surface of the hill. From 1966 to 1979, an extensive second German excavation under Dieter Ohly was performed, leading to the discovery in 1969 of substantial remains of the older Archaic temple in the fill of the later terrace walls. Ernst-Ludwig Schwandner and Martha Ohly were also associated with this dig, which continued after the death of Dieter Ohly until 1988. Sufficient remains were recovered to allow a complete architectural reconstruction of the structure to be extrapolated; the remains of the entablature and pediment of one end of the older temple have been reconstructed in the on-site museum. Parts of the entablature and some columns of the temple have been restored during 1956-1960.
Phases of the sanctuary
The sanctuary of Aphaia was located on the top of a hill c. 160 m in elevation at the northeast point of the island. The last form of the sanctuary covered an area of c. 80 by 80 m; earlier phases were less extensive and less well defined.
Bronze Age phase In its earliest phase of use during the Bronze Age, the eastern area of the hilltop was an unwalled, open-air sanctuary to a female fertility and agricultural deity. Bronze Age figurines outnumber remains of pottery. Open vessel forms are also at an unusually high proportion versus closed vessels. There are no known settlements or burials in the vicinity, arguing against the remains being due to either usage. Large numbers of small pottery chariots and thrones and miniature vessels have been found. Although there are scattered remains dating to the Early Bronze Age such as two seal stones, remains in significant quantities begin to be deposited in the Middle Bronze Age, and the sanctuary has its peak use in the LHIIIa2 through LHIIIb periods. It is less easy to trace the cult through the Sub-Mycenaean period and into the Geometric where cult activity is once more reasonably certain.
Late Geometric phase Furtwängler proposes three phases of building at the sanctuary, with the earliest of these demonstrated by an altar at the eastern end dating to c. 700 BC. Also securely known are a cistern at the northeast extremity and a structure identified as a treasury east of the propylon (entrance) of the sanctuary. The temple corresponding to these structures is proposed to be under the later temples and thus not able to be excavated. Furtwängler suggests that this temple is the oikos (house) referenced in a mid-7th-century BC inscription from the site as having been built by a priest for Aphaia; he hypothesizes that this house of the goddess (temple) was built of stone socles topped with mudbrick upper walls and wooden entablature.Ohly disputes that there is sufficient evidence for this oikos structure. The top of the hill was slightly modified to make it more level by wedging stones into the crevices of the rock.
Archaic phase (Aphaia Temple I)
Ohly detected a (stone socle and mudbrick upper level) peribolos wall enclosing an area of c. 40 by 45 m dating to this phase. This peribolos was not aligned to the axis of the temple. A raised and paved platform was built to connect the temple to the altar. There was a propylon (formal entrance gate) with a wooden superstructure in the southeast side of the peribolos. A 14 m tall column topped by a sphinx was at the northeast side of the sanctuary. The full study and reconstruction of the temple was done by Schwandner, who dates it to before 570 BC. In his reconstruction, the temple is prostyle-tetrastyle in plan, and has a pronaos and – significantly – an adyton at the back of the cella.
As is the case at the temples of Artemis at Brauron and Aulis (among others), many temples of Artemis have such back rooms, which may indicate a similarity of cult practice.Hollinshead disputes that there is sufficient evidence for the presence of an adyton in this temple, and she questions whether similarity of form among temples of Artemis must indicate similarity of cult practice. This feature was not retained in the late Archaic temple, so its centrality to the cult practice is open to question. The cella of the temple of Aphaia had the unusual feature of having two rows of two columns supporting another level of columns that reached the roof. The architrave of this temple was constructed in two courses, giving it a height of 1.19 m versus the frieze height of 0.815 m; this proportion is unusual among temples of the region, but is known from temples in Sicily. A triglyph and metope frieze is also placed along the inside of the pronaos.Schwandner wants this placement to refute the idea that triglyphs are meant to represent the ends of wooden beams. These metopes were apparently undecorated with sculpture, and there is no evidence of pedimental sculpture. This temple and much of the sanctuary was destroyed by fire around 510 BC.
Late Archaic Phase (Aphaia Temple II)
Construction of a new temple commenced soon after the destruction of the older temple. The remains of the destroyed temple were removed from the site of the new temple and used to fill a c. 40 by 80 m terrace within the overall sanctuary of c. 80 by 80 m. This new temple terrace was aligned on north, west, and south with the plan of the new temple. The temple was a hexastyle peripteral Doric order structure on a 6 by 12 column plan resting on a 15.5 by 30.5 m platform; it had a distyle in antis cella with an opisthodomos and a pronaos.The use of the 6 by 12 plan of the Late Archaic period soon gave way to the Classical period preference for the proportions of the 6 by 13 plan and similar. All but three of the outer columns were monolithic. There was a small, off-axis doorway between the cella and the opisthodomos. In similar design but more monumental execution than the earlier temple, the cella of the new temple had two rows of five columns, supporting another level of columns that reached to roof. The corners of the roof were decorated with sphinx acroteria, and the central, vegetal acroterion of each side had a pair of kore statues standing one on either side, an unusual feature. The antefixes were of marble, as were the roof tiles.
Dates ranging from 510 to 470 BC have been proposed for this temple. Bankel, who published the complete study of the remains, compares the design features of the structure with three structures that were near contemporaries:
The Athenian Treasury at Delphi The Doric Temple in the Marmaria area of Delphi The temple of Artemis at Delion on Paros