How can we describe temples and cultic sites? What are some examples of cultic sites that have stood out in your research?
Temples and cultic sites can be tricky to define. I remember Colin Renfrew (1985, The Archaeology of Cult) wrote several books on this, listing around 18 characteristics that help identify a ritual site — but we’re not always lucky enough to find all of them. From what I’m reading now, I’d say a cultic site is any place that hints at religious activity. It’s not necessarily tied to an official religion, but to personal belief. Dr. Jason Silverman, in one of his papers, calls it “supernatural social capital”, which I find very fitting. For example, if we find traces of burned animal bones, it might point to a ritual. It’s not enough evidence to say it was a temple, but we could consider it a cultic site, depending on the context and how much evidence there is. The same goes for figurines — especially the common ones of pregnant women, which might seem ordinary, but the iconography is linked to Phoenician goddess Astarte, who was worshipped along the Southern Levantine coast.
I find favissae really interesting — these pits filled with objects. Some scholars think they were refuse pits, while others believe that people used them to hide valuable items during conflict, and then never returned for them. But many believe they were ritual pits, found not only in the Southern Levant but also across the ancient Near East and into the Roman period. People might have buried figurines or valuable objects as offerings to a deity. I read one idea that really struck me: these figurines could have been offerings made after childbirth, buried as a way of giving thanks for a healthy baby.
When I started this research, I decided not to focus on temples alone, as their number is relatively small, and their functions are not always clearly understood. Instead, I consider it essential to examine a broader range of cultic sites, as they offer valuable insights into the lived religious and economic experiences of different social groups. While temples appear to have been primarily associated with elites and played a significant economic role (managing resources, labor and production on a large scale), the common people likely practiced their beliefs at home or in informal settings. That’s why I find it important to study cultic sites more broadly — they give us insight into how religion was lived and experienced beyond formal structures.
What methods are you using to visualise and reconstruct ancient cultic sites, and how are they helping your research?
Using buildings from previous periods to meet contemporary needs has always been common in history for practical and economical reasons, reducing the need for new materials and labor. When Cyrus the Great conquered Babylon in 539 BCE, he designated several key cities in the Levant as official Achaemenid capitals, ensuring the capital of socioeconomic elites. In the edict known as Cyrus Cylinder, he allowed deported people to return to their homelands and temples to practice their religious beliefs freely. This also happened in the Southern Levant. When a site is well documented with stratigraphy, we can see that many buildings from the Iron Age underwent a phase of reconstruction in the Persian Period. In some buildings, rooms which were not in use anymore were walled up, entrances were closed, and parts continued to be used. This shows us how they modified structures to suit their needs. Unfortunately, very few temples have survived, so we don’t know yet how this worked for the temples – it was a common practice in the Persian Period.
Currently, I am working on understanding the components of these buildings, the materials used and how they were constructed. I use a methodology called architectural energetics (McCurdy & Abrams 2019, Architectural Energetics in Archaeology), which helps estimate the number of people and time required to build something. This is crucial for our project. I am also working on understanding the environmental situation of the Southern Levant, including what materials were available from nearby quarries and how exchange between sites and commercial areas worked.
Another tool I am using is a database where I am compiling all this information, which will be useful in the future to access to specific data from sites. Ideally, I would like to merge this information into GIS, which would help the team in the future, for example, to easily access information such as economic routes and commercial areas.
What are some of the main challenges you face when studying material culture from ancient civilizations, and how do you navigate or overcome them in your research?
The main challenge is that not that many sites have survived until today due to natural decay, looting and illegal excavations. Many of these sites have also been disturbed by the later occupations – Hellenistic and Roman – which mostly destroyed what was there before them. Excavations made in the 20th century did not have the methodologies we have now, so we often lack proper stratigraphical methods. It became really difficult to recognize what is Persian and what is not. Another significant issue is the tendency to classify buildings based on a very small amount of material evidence. For example, a building is classified as administrative because there are some ostraca or administrative documents; or a building is classified as a temple because there are figurines and an altar. Not all sources understand that these objects can also be found in other contexts. The language of the sources and the little amounts of information given in reports also create a challenge.
In her research, Dr. Lucia Cerullo brings to light the untold stories of everyday people whose lives echo through ancient ruins. Stay tuned for our next interview, where we continue our journey through ancient civilizations. In the upcoming post, we’ll meet Filippo Pedron, a doctoral researcher exploring the Persepolis archives and what they reveal about labor, power, and informal taxation in the Achaemenid world.