Astronomy, topography and landscape at Akragasâ Valley of the Temples

(1)

Available

online

at

ScienceDirect

www.sciencedirect.com

Original

article

Astronomy,

topography

and

landscape

at

Akragas’

Valley

of

the

Temples

Robert

Hannah

a

_,

_Giulio

_Magli

b,∗

_,

_Andrea

_Orlando

c

a_University_of_Waikato,_Hamilton,_New_Zealand

b_Politecnico_di_Milano,_Piazza_Leonardo_da_Vinci_32,₂₀₁₃₃_Milan,_Italy

c_Catania_{Astrophysical}_Observatory_(OACT/INAF),_Laboratori_Nazionali_del_Sud_(LNS/INFN),_Institute_of_Sicilian_{Archaeoastronomy}_(IAS),_Catania,_Italy

a

r

t

i

c

l

e

i

n

f

o

Articlehistory:

Received17September2016

Accepted15November2016

Availableonline16January2017

Keywords: Greektemples Sicily Agrigento/Akragas Cardinalorientation Stellarorientation Lunarorientation

a

b

s

t

r

a

c

t

TheissueoftheorientationofGreekTempleshasbeenthesubjectofmuchdebatesincetheendofthe19th

century.Infact,althoughageneraltendencytoorientationwithinthearcoftherisingsunisundeniable,

speciﬁcpatternsandthetruemeaningremainobscure.Withtheaimofsheddinglightonthisproblemwe

presenthereanew,complete,high-precisionsurveyofthetemplesofAkragas,theso-calledValleyofthe

TemplesUNESCOsite.Ourresultsincludealltemples–oneofwhichwasessentiallystillunpublished–

andshowthatverydifferentreasonsinﬂuencedthechoicesoforientation–somesymbolic,butothers

muchmorepractical–beyondthegeneralruleoforienting‘totherisingsun’.Inparticular,thetemplesof

thecentralterrace–includingtheworldfamoustempleofJupiter–wereorientedinaccordancewiththe

town’sgrid,whilearigorousorientationtothecardinalpointsisevidencedfortheAesculapiussanctuary.

Finally,fortwotempleshaving‘anomalous’orientations,astellarandalunarproposalrespectivelyare

made.

1. Introduction

TheancientGreeksbuilthundredsofmagniﬁcenttemplesover thecourseofseveralcenturies,fromthe7thcenturyBConward

[1].Leavingasideregionalandchronologicaldistinctionsinthe lay-outandinthecolumnorders,thesesacredbuildingswerealways basedonthesameconception:animposingrectangular construc-tionadornedwithcolumnsonthefac¸ade.Althoughinmanycases thepresenceofcolumnedporticoesonallsidesmadetheview ofthestructureenjoyablefromalldirections,themainprinciple alwaysremainedthesame:aGreektemplewasmeanttooccupy anaturalplacewithanobviouslyman-madefeature,anditwasto beadmiredfromtheoutsideonly.

Admissionwasreservedtopriestsandtotheprivilegedfew,and publicriteswerecelebratedoutside,infrontofthetemple,whichin manycaseswasequippedwithanaltarandaplateia(religious occa-sionsincludedfestivals,processionsandlongrituals).Theinterior ofthetemplewas,strictlyspeaking,thehomeofthegod.Thegod’s domesticwelfare(hence,thebeautyanddecorumofthebuilding, correctinsertioninthelandscape,regulargivingofofferings)was

∗ Correspondingauthor.

E-mailaddresses:[email protected](R.Hannah),[email protected]

(G.Magli),[email protected](A.Orlando).

fundamentaltoassurebenevolenceandprotectiontothe commu-nity.Thecultimage,locatedinthecentralplaceofthetemple,was inmanycasesanout-and-outmasterpiece,likethefamous ivory-and-goldstatuesofZeusatOlympiaandofAthenaintheParthenon inAthens.

ThepositioningofGreektempleshasbeenthesubjectof inter-estingscholarlyresearch.Forinstance,aconnectionbetweenthe terrain onwhich thetemple iserected anda related deity has beensuggestedbyRetallak[2].Therelationshipwiththelandscape asawholewasfirstsuggestedbyScully[3].Hisworkpioneered researchontheArchaeologyoftheLandscape,pursuingtheidea thatlandscapeandtemplesformedanarchitecturalunitthatwas characterized in accordance with the specific god worshipped. Occasionally,thechoiceoftheterrainand/orofthelandscapewas exploitedtoachieveaspecificorientation,whileinothercasesthe templearchitectureinitselfcreatedthesacredlandscape[4].In anycase,thematterofunderstandingthespecificorientationof theGreektemplesdeservestobedealtwithonitsown.

TheorientationofaGreektempleispreferablydeﬁnedasthe directionofthemainaxisfrominside lookingout,which isthe directioninwhichthestatueofthegodwasinprinciplelooking, aswellasbeingthedirectionalongwhichthesunwould illumi-natethefac¸ade,which,aswehaveseen,wasthesceneforritesand celebrationstakingplaceoutsidethetemple.Themajorityofthese monumentsfacetheeasternhorizon,mostlywithinthearcofthe

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2016.11.016

(2)

investigatingpossiblegroupingsforpatrondeities–havenotbeen successful.Mattersarecomplicatedbythefactthatthecalendars inuseinGreektownswereluni-solar,sothatalignmentsbasedon feastdayswouldnothavebeencalendricallyeffectiveinrelationto thetimingoftheritualscarriedoutannuallyinfrontofthetemple (presumablyatdawn).

Theorientationalsoappearssomewhatunusualwhenonelooks atcomparablefamiliesofmonuments,forinstancetheItalic tem-ples(templesofthepeoplesinhabitingcontinentalItalybeforethe Romanconquest,liketheSamnites)whichareorientedtothesun ascendinginthesky,andtheEtruscantemples,whicharemostly orientedtothesunascending ordescendinginthesky,that is, betweenthewintersolsticesunriseandthewintersolstice

sun-set[16,17].Gonzalez-GarciaandBelmonte[18]havearguedthat

whileGreektemplesinthesameregionmaydifferamong them-selveswithregardtoorientation,nonethelesstheorientationsasa wholecorrelatebetterwiththoseoftemplesfromother,culturally relatedregions,e.g.thetemplesinSicilycomparedwiththoseof SouthItaly.

Finally,itshouldalsobenotedthatsolarorientationscannotbe distinguishedfrom–eventually–stellarorientationsoccurringat thesamedeclination.ThusallGreektemplesorientedtotherising sunalsohappentobebroadlyorientedtowardstheconstellations inwhichthesunwasrisingattheepochofconstruction,andcan onoccasionbeaccuratelyorientedtospeciﬁcstarsofsuch con-stellationsaswellastootherstarsthathadthesamedeclination.

Fig.1.OrientationoftheGreektemplesofSicily.

BasedondatabyAveniandRomano[14].

water’scourse,atthemouthofwhichtheportwasconstructed. From the very beginning, under the tyranny of Phalaris (570–554BC),thecitywascharacterizedbyaregularurbanlayout, dominatedbytheAcropolisontheAthenaRockandborderedby therib-hillwhichstartedtohousemonumentalsanctuaries;inthe centralareaweredwellingsandpublicbuildingsinaccordancewith anorthogonalgridlayout;thenecropoliswaslocatedoutsidethe citywalls.InthelastdecadesofthesixthcenturyBC,Akragaswas surroundedbymassivewalls12kmlong,with9gates.Thecolony reachedfameandpowerunderthetyrantTheron(488–471BC), whodefeatedtheCarthaginiansatHimerain480BC,andduringthe yearsofthedemocracy(471–406BC)establishedbythe philoso-pherEmpedocles.Itisinthisperiodthattheextraordinaryseriesof Dorictemples,todaycomprisedintheUNESCOarchaeologicalsite calledtheValleyoftheTemples,wasbuilt.

Thereareasmanyastentemplesinthecomplex.Welistthemin thefollowingusingthetraditionalnames[19]whichareofcurrent usein allpublications onthesite;itishowever fundamentalto recallthatonlythetemplesofHeracles,JupiterandDemeter(and thesanctuaryofAesculapius,whichisextramoenia)reallybelong tothesedeities:

• templeofOlympicJupiter(Fig.2):thisisthelargestDoric tem-pleinthewesternMediterranean.Thetemplewas,however,left unﬁnishedandlatercollapsed,perhapsduetoanearthquake.It isbuiltonahugestand(56.30×113.45meters)andwasreached throughacrepidomaofﬁvesteps.Themostrelevantarchitectural peculiaritycomprisesthe stonegiants(the Telamones),which wereprobablyplacedineachintercolumniation.Thetemplewas

Fig.2.Akragas,ValleyoftheTemples.TheareaoftheTempleofOlympicJupiter,

(3)

Fig.3.Akragas,ValleyoftheTemples.TempleoftheDioscurides.

foundedtocommemoratetheBattleofHimera(480BC),wonby AkragasandSyracuseagainsttheCarthaginians,anditis men-tionedbybothDiodorusandPolybius;

• templeoftheDioscurides(Fig.3):theDorictemplewashexastyle with13columnsonthelongsides(13.40×31meters);todayonly areconstructedcornercanbeseen.Theattributioniscompletely unknown;

• templeL(Fig.4):adjacenttothetempleoftheDioscurides,it wasleftunﬁnishedbutthefoundationsexcavatedintherockare clearlyvisible,togetherwithblocksatthenortheastcorner,and

Fig.5. Akragas,ValleyoftheTemples.TempleofConcordia.

numerousdrumsofcolumnsscatteredinthebuildingarea.The attributioniscompletelyunknown;

• templeofConcordia(Fig.5):thisisthebestpreservedtemplein Agrigento.Thetemplestandsonapedestalwithacrawlspace insidethat correctsthenaturalinclinationoftheground.Itis hexastylewithaperistyleof6×13columnsona stylobateof 39.42×16.92meters,whichisaccessedbyacrepidomaoffour steps.Exceptionallypreservedarethearchitraveswithfriezeof triglyphsandmetopes,thegeison,and,onthefacades,the tym-panum.ProbablyalmostcontemporarywiththetempleofJuno, withwhichitsharesmanycharacteristics,itsattributionis com-pletelyunknown;

• templeofHeracles(Fig.6):thisisprobablytheoldestoftheDoric templesofAkragas,datingtotheendofthe6thcenturyBC.It standsonamightypedestal,hasaperistyleof6×15columns (stylobateof67.04×25.28meters),whichisaccessedbythree steps.TheattributionisbasedonapassagebyCicerowho men-tionsatemplededicatedtotheheroandplacednotfarfromthe agora,whichshouldlikelybeinthisarea;

(4)

Fig.7.Akragas,ValleyoftheTemples.TempleofAesculapius.

• templeofAesculapius(Fig.7):thistempleislocatedoutsidethe citywalls,southoftheHilloftheTemples,onasubstrateof sedi-mentationclay.TheDorictemplehasaporticoinantis(withtwo columnsbetweenthedoors),andsizeof21.70×10.70meters.It wascomprisedinavastsanctuaryeasilyaccessiblefromthesea. AsanctuarytoAesculapiusismentionedbyPolybiuswhoplaced itoutsidethewallsofthecity,sotheattributionlookscertain;

Fig.8. Akragas,ValleyoftheTemples.TempleofVulcan.

Fig.9.Akragas,ValleyoftheTemples.TempleofJuno.

• templeofVulcan(Fig.8):thetempleisperipteral,Doric, hex-astyle,with13columns onthelongsides.Fewremnantsare preservedofthebuilding:twostretchesofcrepidomawithfour steps and two columns. The temple was built extending an archaicprecinct.Theattributioniscompletelyunknown; • templeofJuno(Fig.9):thistempleislocatedattheeasternend

ofthehillonahighbase.Probablydatingtothemiddleofthe5th centuryBC,itishexastylewithaperistyleof6×13columns;the stylobatemeasures38.15×16.90meterswhilethecrepidomais offoursteps.TheattributiontoJuno(Hera)ispurelyhypothetical; • templeofDemeterandPersephone(Fig.10):thetemplebuilding wasincorporatedintheMiddleAgesintotheNormanchurch ofSanBiagio.ItwasaDorictemplewiththecellaprecededby aporticoinantis.Attributionisﬁrmlybasedonarchaeological material.

AtleasttwofurthertemplesexistedinAkragas,butnotinthe Valley.TheywerelocatedontheAcropolis,whichcorrespondsto thecentreofthemoderntown.One,theso-calledTempleofAthena, isburiedandpartlyvisiblebelowtheChurchofSt.Maryofthe Greeks.Theremainsofthesecondliealmostcertainlybelowthe medievalCathedralnearby.

(5)

Table1

AstronomicaldatafortemplesintheValleyoftheTemples,Akragas.

Temple Az(◦) Hor(◦) Dec(◦) Coordinates SolarDates Stars Jupiter 78◦₃₀ ₂◦₀₈ ₊₁₀◦₁₅ ₃₇◦₁₇₂₆_N

13◦₃₅₀₄_E

April16 Hamal(AlphaArietis) Discourides 82◦₅₄ ₂◦₃₀ ₊₇◦ ₃₇◦₁₇₂₉_N

13◦₃₅₅₄_E

April7 EpsilonDelphini L 77◦₅₄ ₂◦₄₈ ₊₁₁◦₀₉ ₃₇◦₁₇₃₀_N

13◦3555E

April19 Hamal(AlphaArietis) Concordia 89◦36 1◦08 +0◦46 37◦1702N

13◦₃₅₃₂_E March22 Bellatrix(EpsilonOrionis) Heracles 90◦₃₀ ₁◦₅₅ ₊₀◦₃₄ ₃₇◦₁₇₂₅_N

13◦₃₅₁₁_E

March22 Bellatrix(EpsilonOrionis) Aesculapius 89◦₅₇ ₃◦₃₆ ₊₂◦₀₅ ₃₇◦₁₇₅₇_N

13◦3518E

March26 Spica(AlphaVirginis) Vulcan 87◦05 2◦22 +3◦35 37◦1735N

13◦₃₅₄₃_E March29 Betelgeuse(AlphaOrionis) Juno 82◦₂₄ ₁◦₄₂ ₊₆◦₅₂ ₃₇◦₁₇₁₉_N

13◦₃₅₆₀_E

April7 EpsilonDelphini Demeter(front) 125◦ ₀◦ _–27◦₃₂_(Lunar_–26◦₅₃₎ ₃₇◦₁₇₅₇_N

13◦₃₆₁₂_E

– Adhara(EpsilonCanisMajoris) Demeter(back) 305◦ 2◦38 +28◦45(Lunar+29◦22) –

3. Theorientationsofthetemples:surveymethodsand results

TheorientationsoftheAkragastemplesaredealtwithin[5]

and,morerecently,in[13,14].Asweshallsee,however,notallthe publisheddataarereliable,andnotallthetempleshavebeen con-sidered(furtherdetailsbelow).Wehave,therefore,re-measuredall thetempleswithahigh-precisionopticaltheodoliteduring ﬁeld-workwhichlastedoneweek,from1to8August2015(Table1).

ThegeologyofAgrigentoisquitecomplex[20],andtheupper town is subject to submergence and landslides, largely due to modernman-madefactors.ThegeologicalsituationoftheValley appearstobemorestable,butinanycase long-termgeological activity(whichmightaffectorientations)isnotexpectedtohave occurred,althoughdramaticevents,suchasearthquakes,cannotbe excluded[21].Agrigentobelongstoanactiveseismicarea,which wasnonetheless–asfaraswecanknowonthebasisof histor-icalrecords–onlymarginallyaffectedbythegreatearthquakes registeredinSicily;theallegedearthquakesometimesinvokedas thecauseofthecollapseofthetempleofJupiterisnothistorically proven.Sowetendtoexcludethatthepresentorientationofthe templesmighthavebeenaffectedbyinterveningnaturalcauses.

Almostalltempleshavebeenvisitedandmeasuredtwiceon differentdays.Northwascalibratedateachmeasureusinga long-distanceGPSmeasurefromthetheodolitestationtoarecognizable feature(acornerofaskyscraper)ofthemoderntownofAgrigento (atdistancesofabout2.5km).

Thenominalaccuracyofthetransitinstrumentthatweused isoptimal,below1.However,thisaccuracyreferstothedirection, whichisbeingmeasured.Errorscanarisebecauseonehastobesure thatthedirectionmeasuredreallyistheazimuthofthetemple,and insomecasesthecornerscannotbeindividuatedprecisely,while inothersthesidesarepartlycoveredbyhugeamountsofsand and/ortrees.Inallmeasureswealwaysusedoneortwopolessetin thefarcornerandinthemiddleoftheside,opticallyalignedwith theinstrument(Fig.11).Allowing∼20cm oferrorinthechoice ofthemeasureddirection,weactuallyestimatethattheerrorof ourmeasurescanbereasonablyassumedtobe±15_._This_value_is

anyhowbelowtheerrorthatthebuildersmightreasonablyhave committedintracingtheiralignments,especiallyiftheyusedthe sun.

Of course we also accurately measured the visible horizon –deﬁnedasthevisibleheightfromthecentreoftheentrancetothe temple–foreachtemple.Again,thenominalaccuracyisbelow1, butitshouldbenotedthatinthecaseofthetempleslocatedonthe

centralterracethemeasurewaspossibleonlywithgreatdifﬁculty, owingtointerveningmodernfeatures,sothatthecalculated decli-nationsforsuchtemplesareonlyapproximate.However,aswe shallsee,italsoappearsthatthesetempleswerenotastronomically orientedanyway(Section4).

Theconsistency ofallmeasureswascross-checked withthe readingsofaprofessionalSUUNTOcompass-clinometer;the com-passreadingswerecorrectedformagneticdeclinationusingthe calculatorkindlyprovidedbyNOAA(http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/

geomag-web/#declination) (magnetic anomalies are not to be

Fig.11.Akragas,ValleyoftheTemples,measuringthenorthsideoftheTempleof

(6)

Fig.12. PlanofancientAkragas(town’swallinblack).(1)TempleofJupiter,(2)TempleofDioscurides,(3)TempleL,(4)TempleofConcordia,(5)TempleofHeracles,(6)

TempleofAesculapius,(7)TempleofVulcan,(8)TempleofJuno,(9)TempleofDemeter,(10)‘FountainSanctuary’,(11)Agora.

expectedatAkragas).Ourcorrectedcompassreadingsarefully con-sistentwithtransitreadings,asthelatterallfallwithinthenominal errorbandofthecorrespondingcompassreadings(±½◦_).

Finally, we performed a cross check of the data also using GoogleEarth.Thecompassoverlaytooloftheprogramwasused forazimuthsandtheelevationproﬁletoolwasusedforhorizon readings;again,allthedataareconsistentwithin±½◦_.

TheresultsofthecampaignaregiveninTable1.Asa compari-sonwiththeliterature,itcanbenoticedthatourresultsdiffer,in somecasesconsiderably,fromthoseofSaltobtainedwitha mag-neticcompass.Itisdifﬁculttoexplainthisdiscrepancysince–as mentioned–wealsoperformedcompassreadings,andtheyturned outtobeconsistentwithourtransitdata.However,Saltmentions thepresenceofsteelfences,whichobligedhimtoperformsome ofhismeasuresonmaps.TherearefencesinAkragas,encircling manyofthetemplesandrestrictingaccesstothepublic;ofcourse theyhavenoeffectontransitreadingsbuttheydisturbmagnetic readingsiftakenfromoutside.Ourmagneticreadingsdonot suf-ferfromthisproblembecauseweweregrantedfullaccesstothe insideperimeterandcellasofallthetemples.

AnothersetofpublisheddataisthatbyAveniandRomanowho workedwithatheodolite.Inthiscaseitcanbenoticedthatour resultsinazimuthsagreerelativelyclosely.Ontheotherhand,our resultsindeclinationsdifferconsiderably.Wecalculated declina-tionsusingtheprogramGETDECkindlyprovidedbyCliveRuggles, whichtakesintoaccountatmosphericeffects,butthisisnotenough toexplain thedifferencewiththeAveniandRomanodata.It is unfortunatelyimpossibletofullycomparetheresultsbecausethese twoauthorsdidnotgivehorizonheights;however,a fewtrials thatwehavemadewiththeirdataseemtoshowthattheysimply assumedaﬂathorizonforalltemples,somethingthatisdeﬁnitively untrue.

Foreachtemple,wereportazimuth,horizon,declination,GPS position,theﬁrstsolardatesandthebrightstars,whicheventually correspondtosuchdeclinationinthecenturyofconstruction.

4. Discussion

4.1. Thetemplesofthecentralterrace:Jupiter,Dioscourides, TempleL

Akragaswasplannedonthebasisonanorthogonalstreetgrid planintheGreekstyle,with‘meridian’roads(plateai)crossedat rightanglesbylongitudinalstreets(stenopoi)(Fig.12).Wehave accuratelymeasuredthestreet gridplan;ourresultis thatthe gridisorthogonalwithaverygoodaccuracy,andthestenopoiare orientedat78◦ 15.Thisorientationisprobablytopographicalas itisroughly orthogonaltotheslopeoftheAkragashill.In par-ticular,astenoposcrossedthehilllongitudinallyheadingtowards thecentralsacredarea,whichhousesthecircularsanctuaryofthe chthonicdeities,thetempleoftheDioscourides,templeLand,to theleftoftheroad,thetempleofJupiter.Thereistherefore lit-tle(if any) doubtthat one of thelargesttemples of theGreek world, theAkragas temple of Jupiter– azimuth 78◦ 30 – was orientatedtopographicallyinaccordancewiththestreetgrid (curi-ously,thedeclinationassociatedtothetempleiscompatiblewith thestarAlpha Arietis, butAries waspossiblyrelated toJupiter onlymuchlater,andwiththeidentiﬁcationwiththeEgyptianGod Amun).

ThesametopographicalcriterionholdsforTempleL–azimuth 77◦ 54 – which fronted theroad directly, occupyingthe hori-zonofanypersondescendingthehill.Thisdidnotoccurforthe nearbytempleoftheDioscourides,which formedinsteadasort ofscenographyforthespacefrontingTempleL.Itisprobablyfor thisreasonthattheDioscouridestemplewasskewedclockwise, withanazimuthof82◦54.However,thistemplesharesthesame declinationas theJunotemple,whose orientationcertainly has nothingtodowiththetopography ofthetown(see discussion below).Itmaythereforebethatbothorientationshavethesame origin(foracomparisonwiththetopographyofnearbySelinunte see[22]).

(7)

Fig.13.Akragas,ValleyoftheTemples,ConcordiaTemple,thesunrisingin

align-mentwiththeaxisofthetempleon24March2015.

4.2. Equinoctiallyorientedtemples:ConcordiaandHeracles

AmongthethreetempleslocatedontheAkragas‘rib’,thetwo westernmostones,ConcordiaandHeracles,areorientedcardinally, withthefronttodueeast,withverygoodprecision(½◦withinour accuracyof15,sothemaximalerrorcommittedbythebuilders certainlydidnotexceed

¾

◦_).

Itisofcoursetemptingtothinkthatthesetemplesmighthave beenorientatedtotherisingsunattheequinoxes.Anon-trivial horizonraisesthedeclination(fromzero)foreachoneofthem,but forConcordiaandHeraclesthisdeviationisverysmall(declinations respectively0◦46,0◦34)givingdatesveryclosetotheequinoxes, aswealsoveriﬁeddirectlyonsite withtherisingofthesunin alignmentwiththetempleon24March2015(Fig.13).

4.3. ThesanctuaryofAesculapius

ThesanctuaryofAesculapius,locatedrightbelowtheriboutside thecitywalls,isorientedtothecardinalpointswithanastonishing precision:ourmeasure furnishes 89◦ 57. Thetemple is deﬁni-tivelynot,however,orientedtotherisingsunonthedaysofthe equinoxes,sincethenon-trivialhorizonraisesthedeclinationto 2◦ 25andthesolardatesarelaterthanthespringequinox(and correspondinglyearlierthantheautumnequinox).Ontheother hand,thetempleorientationtothecardinalpointsissoaccurate thatitleadsustobelievethatthemainaimoftheorientationwas nottoorienttowardstherisingsunonspeciﬁcdaysoftheyears. Weproposehereinsteadtheideathatitwasdeliberatelyoriented cardinally.Astronomywasthere,ofcourse,inthedeterminationof trueeast(or,morelikely,oftruenorth)andsymbolismwas cer-tainlythereaswell,withthechoiceoforientingasquaresacred

buildingwiththesidesalongthecardinaldirections.However,the builders–whowereofcourseawarethatthesunrisesattrueeast ontheequinoxesonlyifthehorizonisﬂat–werenotinterestedin thislastphenomenon.

4.4. ThetempleofVulcan

TheTempleofVulcan(azimuth87◦05),inspiteofitsrelatively largedeviationfromtrueeast,isprobablytobeascribedtothe familyoftemplesorientatedalongthisdirection.Infactthe topo-graphicalsettingofthetempleisquitespecial:thetemplesitsona separatehillwiththenarrowColimbetravalleypassingbehind.The templecontains–andisbuiltover–anarchaicbuildingoriented alongthelineofmaximalslopeofthehill∼80◦_,_while_the_project

oftheenlargedmonumentwasskewedtowardsthecardinal direc-tionsasmuchaspossiblewithrespecttotheexistingtopographical constraint.

4.5. TheTempleofJuno

Thismagniﬁcenttemplesitsattheeasternmostendoftherib, andissustainedbyanenormousartiﬁcialterrace.Theattribution toJunoisonlytraditional,asnoarchaeologicalmaterialsupporting anyattributionhaseverbeenfoundthere.

Tobeginthestudyofthistemple,weveriﬁedaccuratelyand withoutanypossibledoubtthefollowingfact:placingthevery samebuildingwithacardinal orientationwaspossiblewithout anygeologicalortopographicalobstructionandovertheverysame terrace.

Thereforetheremustbeadifferentreasonwhythistempleisnot orientedequinoctially,asthetwowhichfollowalongtherib– form-inganinternationallyrenowned,spectacularsequence–instead are,asdiscussedabove.Theazimuthofthetempleis82◦24.We proposeherethepossibilitythatthistemplewasorientedtothe stars.

Inthe5thcenturyBC,thefrontofthetempleveryneatlyfaces theregionoftheskywherearelativelyfaintconstellation Delphi-nus(theDolphin)wasrising(itsbrighteststarisofmagnitude3.8). Asisobvious,itisimpossibletospeakabouttheazimuthofrising ofanentireconstellation,sothisassertionneedsadetailed expla-nation.Delphinusoccupiesasmallportionofthesky,whichcanbe individuatedbyasmall‘quadrilateral’offourstars.Duetotheirhigh magnitude,wemustofcourseconsiderthesestarsattheir mini-malvisibleheightduetoextinction,whichaccordingtoThom’srule (visibleheight=magnitudeindegrees)isnotlessthanabout4◦.In theAkragasskyof,say,450BCthesefourstarswerevisibleinthe regionofazimuthsbetween80◦45and83◦15,withtheunique otherrelevantstaroftheconstellation,Epsilon,at86◦.Wehave thereforeaverygoodmatchwiththeJunotempleinthecenturyof itsconstruction.

Owingtothelackofarchaeologicalmaterial,theattributionof thetempleiscompletelyunknown.TheorientationtoDelphinus thatwearetentativelyproposingcouldmakesenseespeciallyifa dedicationtoApollo–agodwhoiscurrentlyabsentfromanyother templeinAkragas–couldbesuggestedbyfutureresearchor exca-vations.Delphinusisindeedoneoftheconstellationsconnectedto Apollonianmythology.Accordingtoarecentproposal,itwaseven usedasamarkerfortheseasonofthepilgrimagetoDelphi[11], althoughthefaintnessoftheconstellationcastsdoubtsonits prac-ticalcalendricaluse[4]andother,brighterconstellations,Lyraand Cygnus,weremoretightlyconnectedwiththisGod[11].

4.6. TheTempleofDemeterandPersephone(SanBiagio)

ThetempleisofDoricstyle,andbelongstotheﬁnalphaseof theArchaicperiod(480–470BC).Itisverywellpreservedbecause

(8)

hugeretainingwallsonthesouthsideandanaccurateexcavation andlevelingoftherockonthenorthside.Theareawasaccessed fromthetownthroughalargeroadpartlyexcavatedintherockas well,whichisstillperfectlyvisibletoday.

During theexcavationsof 1925a votive deposit wasfound, formedbyalargeamountofobjects.Inparticular,thereweremany fragmentsoftwofemalebustsofterracotta,oneofwhichcouldbe reconstructedinitsintegrityandwasidentifiedasPersephone.As aresultofthisdiscovery,thetempleisattributedtotheEleusinian divinities.TheattributiontoDemeterandPersephoneisalso con-firmedbythepresenceof twosmallcircularaltars:one,witha diameterof2.53meters,isfilledinandtheother,withadiameter of2.70meters,hasacentralwell(bothros),whichwasfoundfilled withritualofferings,i.e.brokenkernoi,orritualvesselsofDemeter. Thesealtarsarelocatedinthe‘corridor’formedbetweentherock cuttothenorthandthesideofthetemple.

Thefrontofthetemplecouldbeaccesseddirectlybya stair-way,whichcrossesthetown’swallsthroughaposternandleads toastrangebuildinglocatedoutsidethewalls.Itisaprotohellenic (7thcenturyBC)sanctuaryprobablydedicatedtochthonicdeities, whosearchitecturalelementsareintegratedwiththenatural fea-turesofthesite,asisoftenfoundintheholyshrinesofthegods oftheearth(forexampleatEleusis,inLykosouraorinEnna).The sanctuaryconsistsofarectangularbuildinguponthecliff(below thetempleofDemeterandPersephone),onwhichtherearetwo communicatinghypogea,whichwereﬁlledwithvotiveofferings. Athirdgallerywasusedasanaqueducttosupplywatercollected fromanearbysourceinthebasinofthebuilding,whichwas there-foreasortoffountain-sanctuary.

ThetempleofDemeterandPersephonewasmeasuredbyNissen

[5];forreasonswedonotknow,ithaspassedunnoticedinmore recentworks.Nissenwasaveryconscientiousscholarandhisdata areusuallyreliable,butnotinthiscase.Infact,wediscoveredthat theazimuthgivenbyNissen,whichisclosetothatoftherising sunatthewintersolstice,isindefectbyasmuchas4degrees.As aconsequence,theazimuthofthetemplefallsbelowthearcofthe risingsun.Tooursurprise,then,wediscoveredthatthetempleis theonlyoneintheValleywhosedeclination(–27◦ 32)isnotin thesolarrange,1_and_adds_to_the_very_few_Sicilian_temples_whose

declinationhasthisproperty.

Itcanbenoticedthatthebuildingcouldhavebeenbuiltinthe sameplacebutskewedsome4degreestowardstheeast,inorderto alignwithwintersolsticesunrise,withoutanypracticalproblem.

1 _In_fact_it_is_the_unique_non-solar_temple_in_the_whole_of_Akragas,_since_we

man-agedtomeasuretheazimuthofthebasementoftheAthenatempleontheAcropolis

tobe∼110◦_(a_solar_azimuth)._The_horizon_there_is_not_measurable.

factisalreadywellknownfromstudiesonVenusalignmentsin theMayanworld[23],butinanycaseweveriﬁeditindependently –usingthesoftwareStarryNightPro7–inallthe8-yearVenus cyclesofthe5thcenturyBC.

Wethen re-analysedtheorientationtakingintoaccountthe possibilityofalunaralignment.Lunardeclinationsareaffectedby parallaxbyabout½◦(seee.g.Ruggles[24]):thefrontofthe tem-ple–againusingtheprogramGETDEC–yieldsalunardeclination –26◦ 56.Thisvaluelookstoofarfromthemajorlunarstandstill (at∼–29◦₎_to_be_considered_signiﬁcant_per_se,_{although–as}_is_well

known–lunarstandstillsareverydifﬁculttobedetermined pre-ciselyand,asweshallnowsee,wedoproposethatthetemplewas orientedtotheMoon.Thereasonstemsfromthefactthatitisvery likelythatprocessionalriteswerecarriedoutinthisplace.Therites involvedboththefountain-sanctuaryandthetempleuphill,andwe canimaginenocturnalprocessionscomingupfromthesanctuary andreachingthetemple,infrontofwhich,however,thereisnot –andthereneverhasbeen–enoughspacetohouseworshippers. Itisthereforeconceivablethatthepeople,aftertheascent,crossed thecorridorbetweenthenorthsideofthetempleandthehill (per-hapsthrowingvotiveofferingsinthebothros)andgatheredinthe vastesplanadelocatedatthebackofthetemple(recallthatthis esplanadehasbeenconstructedartiﬁcially,andwithhugeeffort,at thesametimeasthebuilding).Somotivated,wevisitedthe tem-pleagainandmeasuredaccuratelythehorizontothenorth-west fromthefacadeofthemedievalchurchandthereforefromtheback sideofthetemple.Thishorizonisverystriking,sinceitisoccupied bythehillwheretheacropolisofAkragasoncestood.In partic-ular,thetowerofthemedievalcathedral,almostcertainlybuilt overthemaintempleontheacropolis,isclearlyvisibledirectlyin frontofthetemple.Measuringthehorizonwetookintoaccountan estimatedaveragefortheheightofthemodernbuildings,andthe resultsindeclinationare+28◦44uncorrectedbyparallax,witha lunardeclination+29◦22.Thisresultisimpressivelyclosetothe maximallunardeclinationwhichinthe5thcenturyBC(duetothe slightvariationoftheobliquity)wasaround28◦50.

Asmentionedabove,preciselunarextremesazimuthsarevery difﬁculttoindividuate.However,thefullmoonneartothewinter solsticeintheyearsclosetothestandstillattainsanazimuthwhich isalwaysveryclosetothemaximalone[24].Allinall,then,we proposealunarconnectionforthecomplexofSanBiagio,afact whichwouldﬁtwellwiththereligiousconnectionsofthewater cultintheMediterraneanbasin.

5. Conclusions

OurresultsshowthattheorientationoftheGreektemplesof Sicilycouldbeaffectedbydifferentconsiderations,sothatthere

(9)

is no ‘golden rule’ to explain it. In particular, the long sought ‘day=god’ruleappearstoberather asuperimposedideawhich is probably due to a misleading parallel with (some)Christian churches.AtleastinthecaseofthetemplesofAkragas,avarietyof differentreasonsplayedarole.

Firstofall,thepre-existingurbanlayoutinﬂuencedthe orienta-tionofthetemplesofthecentralterrace,includingthehugeproject ofthetempleofJupiter,whichhasthesameazimuthofthestenopos leadingtothecentralterrace.Theresultingdeclinationalsopoints tothestarsoftheconstellationAries,butarelationofthisasterism withJupitermayoccuronlylater;actually,practicallyallthe tem-plesdopointalsotorelevantstarsatthetimeoftheirconstruction, butastellarexplanationseemstobe(tentatively)feasibleonlyfor theJunotemple,whichwasintentionallyskewedtothenorthof eastwithrespecttotheeasterly,equinoctialorientationoftheother twotemplesofthesamehill,themagniﬁcentConcordiaTempleand theTempleofHeracles.

Secondly, morphological aspects of the terrain could be as importantassymbolicalones,asveryprobablyoccurredforthe templeofVulcan.Ontheotherhand,symbolicreasonscouldbe moredifﬁculttoincorporatethanexpected:inparticular,ourdata clearlyshowthatthesanctuaryofAesculapiuswasdeliberately orientedtothecardinalpoints–withthefronttotrueeast– irre-spectivelyofthehorizonandthereforeindependentlyfromthedate whenthesunwouldhaveriseninalignmentwithit.

Finally,there arecasesin whichorientationwasclearly and deliberatelysoughtinspiteofanytopographicaldifﬁculty:besides theabove-mentionedtemple ofJuno, thisholds for thetemple ofDemeter.Theorientationofthelatter–whichwasessentially unpublishedbeforethepresentstudy–appearstobe understand-ableifframedinasettingofotherbuildings:the‘sacredfountain’ locatedoutsidethecitywallsbutconnectedthroughapostern,and thehugeartiﬁcialesplanadetothebackofthetemple. Consider-ingthe‘anomalous’(non-solar)orientationofthetemplewithinits (naturalandhuman-built)landscapeallowedustoproposealunar explanationforit.

Acknowledgements

Thepresentworkhasbeendevelopedwithintheconvention forscientiﬁccooperationexistingbetweenthe‘EnteParcoValledei Templi’andtheFDSLaboratoryfortheCommunicationofScienceat thePolitecnicodiMilano.TheauthorswishtothankGiuseppe Par-rello,DirretorediEnteParco,andDr.GiuseppePresti,Responsabile diEnteParco,fortheircontinualcooperationandsupport.

References

[1]A.W.Lawrence,GreekArchitecture,5thed.,YaleUniversityPress,Londonand NewHaven,1996.

[2]G.J.Retallack,Rocks,views,soilsandplantsatthetemplesofancientGreece, Antiquity82(2008)640–657.

[3]V.Scully,TheEarth,theTemple,andtheGods:GreekSacredArchitecture,rev. ed.,YaleUniversityPress,NewHaven,1979.

[4]B.Castro,I.Liritzis,A.Nyquist,Oracularfunctioningandarchitectureofﬁve ancientApollotemplesthrougharchaeastronomy:novelapproachand inter-pretation,NexusNetw.J.18(2)(2015)373–395.

[5]H.Nissen,DasTemplum:AntiquarischeUntersuchungen,Weidemann,Berlin, 1869.

[6]F.C.Penrose,OntheOrientationofGreekTemples,BeingtheResultsofSome ObservationsTakeninGreeceandSicilyintheMonthofMay,1898,Proc.Royal Soc.Lond.65(1899)370–375.

[7]R.Koldewey,O.Puchstein,DiegriechischenTempelinUnteritalienundSicilien, A.Asher&Co,Berlin,1899.

[8]W.B.Dinsmoor,ArchaeologyandAstronomy,Proc.Am.Philos.Soc.80(1939) 95–173.

[9]E.Boutsikas,PlacingGreekTemples:anarchaeoastronomicalstudyofthe ori-entationofancientGreekreligiousstructures,Archaeoastronomy21(2009) 4–19.

[10]E.Boutsikas,C.Ruggles,Temples,Stars,andRitualLandscapes:the Poten-tialforArchaeoastronomyinAncientGreece,Am.J.Archaeol.115(2011) 55–68.

[11]I.Liritzis,B.Castro,DelphiandCosmovision:Apollo’sAbsenceattheLandof theHyperboreansandtheTimeforConsultingtheOracle,J.Astron.Hist.Herit. 16(2013)184–206.

[12]I.Liritzis,H.Vassiliou,AstronomicalorientationsofancienttemplesatRhodes andAtticawithatentativeinterpretation,Mediterr.Archaeol.Archaeometry2 (2002)69–79.

[13]A.M.Salt,E.Boutsikas,KnowingWhentoConsulttheOracleatDelphi,Antiquity 79(305)(2005)564–572.

[14]A.F.Aveni,G.Romano,TempleOrientationsinMagnaGraeciaandSicily,J.Hist. Astron.31(2000)S51–S57.

[15]A.M.Salt,TheastronomicalorientationofancientGreektemples,PlosOne4 (11)(2009)1–5.

[16]A.F.Aveni,G.Romano,OrientationandEtruscanRitual,Antiquity68(1994) 545–563.

[17]G.BagnascoGianni,S.Bortolotto,G.Magli,AstronomyandEtruscanRitual:The CaseoftheAradellaReginainTarquinia,NexusNetw.J.15(2013)445–455.

[18]A.C.Gonzalez-Garcia,J.A.Belmonte,Sacredarchitectureorientationacross theMediterranean:Acomparative statisticalanalysis,Mediterr.Archaeol. Archaeometry14(2)(2014)95–113.

[19]P.Marconi,Agrigento,VallecchiEditore,Firenze,1929.

[20]V.Cotecchia,F.Fiorillo,R.Pagliarulo,A.Reina,CaratterigeologicidellaValle deiTempli(Agrigento),in:ProceedingsofIConvegnoGruppoNazionaledi GeologiaApplicata‘Lacittàfragile’.Taormina,1995,pp.10–18.

[21]V.Cotecchia,F.Fiorillo,L.Monterisi,R.Pagliarulo,SlopeinstabilityintheValley ofTemples,Agrigento(Sicily),GiornalediGeologiaApplicata1(2005)91–101.

[22]R.Hannah,G.Magli,A.Orlando,Theroleofurbantopographyinthe orienta-tionofGreektemples:thecasesofAkragasandSelinunte,Mediterr.Archaeol. Archaeometry16(4)(2016)213–217.

[23]I.Sprajc,VenusorientationsinancientMesoamericanarchitecture,in:C.L.N. Ruggles(Ed.),Archaeoastronomyinthe1990s,GroupDPublications, Lough-borough,1993.

[24]C.L.N.Ruggles,AstronomyInPrehistoricBritainAndIreland,YaleUniversity Press,NewHaven&London,1999.

Astronomy, topography and landscape at Akragasâ Valley of the Temples