DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.8944#0092
190
ARTHUR J. EVANS
been built up the whole theory of a Mycenaean cult of Sacred Thrones.
All that has been said in these pages is certainly in favour of the view that
the cult objects of the Mycenaeans were of the aniconic class. The thing
actually worshipped was the tree or pillar possessed by the divinity. But,
as pointed out above in the case of the pictorial representations seen on the
signet rings, the anthrojDomorphic figures of divinities are introduced beside
their aniconic equivalents. Sometimes the divinity is placed beneath the
sacred tree. On the fellow ring to that on which this theory of throne-cult
has been based, the Goddess sits beside her shrine. On a Cypro-Mycenaean
cylinder she sits upon it. Were the present representation a throne we
should expect to see, as in fact we find on another signet, the divinity upon
it.1 But in truth the idea of a divine throne belongs to a period of more
advanced anthropomorphic cult. The ideas that underly the cult of baetylic
stones and sacred trees show that these material objects did not so much
Fig. 64.—Goddess seated before Pillar Shkine, on Gold Signet Ring, Mycenae (■;).
serve as a resting place for airy spiritual forms, but themselves absorbed and
incorporated their essence; they are e/ii/ri^ot \ldoi. As the idea of the
visible anthropomorphic divinity encroaches on the earlier notions, it is these
pre-existing baetylic shapes that serve at first as seats and supports for it.
Among these the throne has no place. It is rather the omphalos, the altar,
the tomb, or the shrine itself, that became the seat.
A gold signet-ring now in the Berlin Museum (Fig. 64) gives a variant
form of the same design as the above. In this case the pillar shrine is raised
on a kind of base and the Goddess herself sits with her back against it,
holding up a mirror-like object and receiving the adoration of a female
votary. Here we are left in no doubt as to the sacred character of the sup-
1 See the signet ring, Fig. 51 above.
ARTHUR J. EVANS
been built up the whole theory of a Mycenaean cult of Sacred Thrones.
All that has been said in these pages is certainly in favour of the view that
the cult objects of the Mycenaeans were of the aniconic class. The thing
actually worshipped was the tree or pillar possessed by the divinity. But,
as pointed out above in the case of the pictorial representations seen on the
signet rings, the anthrojDomorphic figures of divinities are introduced beside
their aniconic equivalents. Sometimes the divinity is placed beneath the
sacred tree. On the fellow ring to that on which this theory of throne-cult
has been based, the Goddess sits beside her shrine. On a Cypro-Mycenaean
cylinder she sits upon it. Were the present representation a throne we
should expect to see, as in fact we find on another signet, the divinity upon
it.1 But in truth the idea of a divine throne belongs to a period of more
advanced anthropomorphic cult. The ideas that underly the cult of baetylic
stones and sacred trees show that these material objects did not so much
Fig. 64.—Goddess seated before Pillar Shkine, on Gold Signet Ring, Mycenae (■;).
serve as a resting place for airy spiritual forms, but themselves absorbed and
incorporated their essence; they are e/ii/ri^ot \ldoi. As the idea of the
visible anthropomorphic divinity encroaches on the earlier notions, it is these
pre-existing baetylic shapes that serve at first as seats and supports for it.
Among these the throne has no place. It is rather the omphalos, the altar,
the tomb, or the shrine itself, that became the seat.
A gold signet-ring now in the Berlin Museum (Fig. 64) gives a variant
form of the same design as the above. In this case the pillar shrine is raised
on a kind of base and the Goddess herself sits with her back against it,
holding up a mirror-like object and receiving the adoration of a female
votary. Here we are left in no doubt as to the sacred character of the sup-
1 See the signet ring, Fig. 51 above.