Bibliotheca Isiaca, IV, 2020, p.
00-00
A Statuette of Isis from Amphipolis in Context1
Lindsey A. Mazurek
(University of Oregon)
Résumé
Cet article porte sur une statuette en marbre aujourd’hui exposée
au Musée archéologique de Kavala (inv. n° L195). Initialement publiée
en 2013, cette figurine représente une femme drapée que Dimitri
Damaskos avait alors identifiée à Isis. Mon objectif est de remettre
cet objet dans son contexte local, macédonien et méditerranéen et de
voir s’il nous permet d’affiner notre compréhension des cultes isiaques
et de la culture matérielle à l’époque hellénistique. J’examine ainsi
la statuette dans son cadre historique, mais aussi du point de vue de
l’histoire de l’art, en fournissant des commentaires préliminaires sur
son identification, sa date et son utilisation. Le monument se situe
entre le milieu du iie et le ier s. a.C. et figure parmi les premières
images de la déesse produites dans la région. Il présente des rapports
stylistiques et formels avec des œuvres insulaires contemporaines et
suggère ainsi une nouvelle forme d’interconnectivité dans l’Amphipolis
hellénistique, faisant apparaître une communauté cultuelle et
artistique plus cosmopolite que ce qui avait été autrefois imaginé.
Mots-clés
Sculpture hellénistique - Macédoine - Amphipolis - Isis -
Knotenpalla
Introduction: Sculpture and Cult at
Hellenistic Amphipolis
This essay examines a partially preserved statuette
from Amphipolis, now in the Archaeological Museum of
Kavala1. Following Dimitri Damaskos, I argue that this
statuette represents the goddess Isis dressed in a knotted
costume and date it to the latter half of the Hellenistic
period. Though the epigraphic and historical aspects of
Macedonian Isiac cults have been studied at length2, the
cults’ sculpture, particularly of the Hellenistic period,
has not been investigated as thoroughly.
The statuette is in many ways unique and thus
presents a challenge to art historical study. It is the
earliest image in the round related to Egyptian cult
from Amphipolis, and among the earliest images of
an Isiac deity in Macedonia. Though the statuette is
unremarkable in terms of material, technique, size, or
style, its particular iconography does not copy closely any
1/  Kavala Archaeological Museum, inv. no. L195. See Damaskos
2013, cat. 95.
2/  Dunand 1973, 52-71; Bommas 2000; Bommas 2002; Egelhaaf-
Gaiser et al. 2003; Steimle 2004; Steimle 2006; Steimle 2008; Veymiers
2009b; Christodoulou 2009.
Summary
This essay examines a marble statuette now on display in the
Kavala Archaeological Museum (inv. no. L195). First published in
2013, the statuette depicts a draped female that Dimitri Damaskos
identified as Isis. My goal is to set this object in its local, Macedonian,
and Mediterranean context and consider how it may advance our
understanding of Isiac cult and material culture in the Hellenistic
period. In this essay, I set this statuette in its art historical and historical
context and provide preliminary comments on its identification, date,
and use. The statue dates to the mid-2nd to the 1st cent. BCE and
is among the first images of the goddess produced in the region.
Based on its stylistic and formal connections with contemporaneous
island examples, I argue that this statuette suggests a new vector
for connectivity in Hellenistic Amphipolis, pointing towards a more
cosmopolitan cultic and artistic community than has been previously
suggested.
Keywords
Hellenistic sculpture - Macedonia - Amphipolis - Isis - Knotenpalla
known statue from the Eastern Mediterranean. Further,
no Isiac sanctuary has been discovered at Amphipolis,
though epigraphic evidence (discussed below) indicates
that the cults were active here as early as the 3rd cent.
BCE. Consequently there is little material that can
serve as comparanda that might offer insight into key
questions of date, meaning, and use.
In order to understand this object more fully, it is
necessary to contextualize the statuette on multiple
fronts: as an artistic product, as a historical artifact, and
as part of Isiac cult’s spread across the Mediterranean.
In an article on Isiac cult at Amphipolis, Richard
Veymiers focuses on inscribed objects to argue for a
close connection between the early Amphipolis cult
community and other Macedonian cult centers, as well
as Egypt3. While Veymiers’ arguments are correct, the
statuette suggests that the Amphipolis community may
have also looked to the same models used in the Aegean
islands and across the Mediterranean for inspiration
3/  Veymiers 2009b.
86 Lindsey A. Mazurek
Fig. 1. Marble statuette of Isis in the Knotenpalla
from Amphipolis. Mid 2nd cent. BCE. Kavala
Archaeological Museum, inv. no. L195. Ph. by Stefanos
Stournaras, © Ephorate of Kavala and Thasos.
as they decided how to visualize a new goddess.
Consequently, its design has significant implications
on our understanding of Isiac cult’s early history in
Macedonia.
The Statuette
Discovered by Dimitri Lazarides in 1957 in the plot
of Ioannis Konstantinides, the white marble statuette
preserves only the bottom half of the body (figs. 1-2)4.
Broken at the natural waist, the head, arms, feet, plinth
are missing. The statuette stands about 35 cm tall and
depicts a female standing in a contrapposto stance, with
her weight on the left leg and right leg bent. She wears
three distinct pieces of draped clothing. Closest to the
skin, the figure wears a thin chiton that flows to the
plinth, with delicate drapery folds whose fine texture
4/  The precise location of the Lazarides plot is not known (D.
Damaskos, pers. comm. 6/17).
Fig. 2. Side view of the marble Isis statuette. Kavala
Archaeological Museum, inv. no. L195. Ph. by Stefanos
Stournaras, © Ephorate of Kavala and Thasos.
has been abraded. Over the chiton, she also wears a light
mantle that ends just around the ankles. Completing
the ensemble is a heavy hip mantle, rolled at the top and
draped across her thighs, that hangs down the left side.
While the stone has not been tested scientifically,
it appears to be a white, large-grained marble typical
of local Macedonian stone. As is characteristic of
Hellenistic sculpture produced in Macedonia, there
is very little evidence of drilling. Instead, most of the
surface is worked with a chisel to render drapery in a
linear fashion. The sculptor, however, took care to
render the three separate garments clearly, allowing the
viewer to see the chiton through the mantle in a series
of fine lines under the right knee, for example. While
the front of the statuette is carved with some care,
including areas of light drilling in the drapery folds and
some texture and tension between the three garments,
the sculptor left the back mostly unfinished. Fine rasp
marks are visible on the surface, and little indication of
any anatomy underneath the drapery appears, resulting
in a single plane of representation.
 A Statuette of Isis from Amphipolis in Context 87

Though the area above the waist is lost, the statuette

preserves the lower part of the torso. A central wide
fold in the drapery runs downward from the area of
the break down to the hip mantle. Around this fold, a
nested set of diagonal folds extends from the lost upper
torso down to the hips. Beneath the bottom of the hip
mantle, there is evidence of two garments delineated by
a horizontal hem. The thicker garment, probably part of
a mantle, features naturalistic renderings of the drapery,
echoed by the finer folds in the chiton underneath.
These features in the drapery, particularly the central
fold, lead Damaskos to reconstruct the costume as a
mantle knotted between the breasts over a chiton, a
variation on one of Isis’ characteristic costumes.

Identification and Comparison

The statue’s costume, particularly its large central
fold that hangs down from the center of the chest,
suggests that it should be identified as an image of the
goddess Isis. Though the body above the waist is not
preserved, the triangular pattern of drapery folds visible
above the hip mantle’s rolled band is characteristic of a
particular type that Johannes Eingartner has called the
Knotenpalla. In these images, Isis wears a large knotted
mantle over a chiton. There is considerable variety in Fig. 3. Marble statue of Isis of Mt. Kynthos from
the placement of the knot and other aspects of how the Sarapieion C, Delos. © D-DAI-ROM-62.1990.
garments are draped and tied5, but nearly all examples
share a similar pattern: a cascading set of drapery folds
that fall from the area of the chest, caused by the way
the knot bunches the mantle. This statue type is the
emphasized Isis’ own assimilation with Greek aesthetics
most commonly used method for representing Isis in
and culture9.
Greece and elsewhere in the Mediterranean6.
Because the Amphipolis statuette wears a hip
The precise meanings and origins of this costume
mantle, a feature not found in most Knotenpalla statues,
are complex. The Knotenpalla has its roots in pharaonic
it is difficult to date this statuette precisely. In his
Egyptian art, but underwent some form of mediation
catalogue, Damaskos looks south to the Aegean islands
and adaptation before it spread throughout the
for comparanda, a region where several Hellenistic
Mediterranean. Though the form of the costume
small-scale marble statuettes of Isis in the Knotenpalla
remained generally consistent, each region must have
have been found. On Delos the type seems to have been
had its own vectors of transmission. For Greece,
in use by the third quarter of the 2nd cent. BCE, though
Dimitri Plantzos has argued that Ptolemaic portraits
some examples may have been produced earlier. The
of queens popularized the type early in the Hellenistic
closest comparandum for the Amphipolis statuette is an
period7. Consequently, for many Hellenistic-period
over life-sized statue of Isis from Sarapieion C on Delos,
viewers living in Greece, it is likely that the Knotenpalla’s
often referred to as the Isis du Cynthe (hereafter the “Isis
pharaonic history was less significant than its more
of Mt. Kynthos”) in scholarly literature. This image
general associations with the Ptolemies and their plays
depicts the goddess in a subtler version of a similar
on foreignness8. These allusions may have helped Greek
costume (fig. 3)10. Though worn from its many years
viewers build a sense of connection with Egypt and

9/  Nagel 2015, 199-201, 205-211.

5/  Tran tam Tinh 1990, sections 1, 2a-f, with accompanying plates.
6/  Eingartner 1991, 8-12.
7/  The origins of the costume are contested. Several scholars
have tried to untangle the costume’s early history in pharaonic
Egyptian iconography, including Bianchi 1980; Malaise 1992; Malaise
1994; Eingartner 1991, 10-12; Albersmeier 2002, 91-92; Albersmeier
2005. Plantzos 2011, however, suggests that Greek audiences may not
have been interested in the costume’s pharaonic history, but rather
associated the costume with Isis and Ptolemaic queens. Also in this
vein, see Albersmeier 2004 and Bianchi 2007.
8/  Mazurek 2016a, 72-80. Nagel 2015, 202-204, argues that the
knot emphasizes Isis’ transculturality.
10/  Statue of the so-called Isis of Mt. Kynthos, standing in situ in
Sarapieion C. About 2.5 m tall. See Marcadé 1969, pl. LVII; Hermary
1996, 81, cat. 30. Marcadé 1969, 429, dates the statue on the basis of
its dedicatory inscription (ID 2044 = RICIS 202/0247) to 128/127 BCE,
but Damaskos 1999, 99, n. 157 (with accompanying bibliography),
argues for a date of 129/128 BCE based on revised dates for Ammonios’
tenure as epimelete and Euthymachos’ priesthood (mentioned in the
same inscription) suggested in Bringmann & Steuben 1995, 89. Bricault
1996b prefers the traditional date for Euthymachos’ priesthood (and
thus the statue’s dedication) of 128/127 BCE based on the name’s
placement in the inscribed list of Delian priests (ID 2610 = RICIS
202/0203). Bricault has cross-referenced these priests throughout
88 Lindsey A. Mazurek
standing exposed to the elements, there are several
noticeable parallels. The Delos statue depicts the Isis
standing in a contrapposto stance, with a thin mantle
over a chiton delineated by a horizontal hem that hits
at the center of the shin. Over these two garments
she wears a heavy and narrow mantle draped across
the hips and tops of the thighs. Despite the statue’s
abraded surface, indications of nested chevron folds
surrounding a central vertical fold are still visible above
the hip mantle. This characteristic pattern, along with
the statue’s association with a platform at the rear of a
naos clearly connected to Isis11, identifies the image as
the goddess in the Knotenpalla.
Because this statue represents Isis in the Knotenpalla
wearing the hip mantle, a version of the costume not
known elsewhere in the Hellenistic period, it offers
the best comparison for the Amphipolis example. The
two statues are not close enough to describe them
as copies, however, and a more nuanced reading is
required. There are significant stylistic and technical
differences, including the precise arrangement of the
folds, the relative size of the hip mantle, and methods
of representing the drapery. The Isis of Mt. Kynthos
depicts a more deeply carved and ideal version of
female drapery, a more baroque sculptural technique
used throughout Delian sculpture12. The Amphipolitan
example, on the other hand, is rendered more simply,
with fewer details and less interest in the interplay
between light and shadow. Still, the use of the hip
mantle is unusual for the Knotenpalla, though it appears
frequently in other representations of Isis, particularly
Isis lactans13. Rather than copies, the two seem to follow
a similar model of representing Isis that was not widely
used in the Hellenistic period14.
Remarkably, there are several examples of Isis and
Isis-Tyche from the 2nd cent. CE that combine the
hip mantle with the Knotenpalla costume. These may
have drawn from a similar model as the Amphipolis
statuette. One example from Salamis on Cyprus depicts
Isis or Isis-Tyche with a knot between the breasts and a
mantle draped over the left elbow, which also preserves
remnants of a cornucopia fig. 5)15. In this example,
however, the pattern of drapery above the hip mantle
is not similar enough to draw a direct comparison:
Delian prosopography and is able to propose several fixed points that
reconcile his dating with other inscriptions from the site.
11/  Mylonopoulos 2016, 122-123.
12/  Marcadé 1969, 494-495, on some of the characteristic traits of
Hellenistic sculpture from Delos.
13/  Isis lactans often has a piece of drapery pulled across her lap in
a manner reminiscent of a hip mantle, though in many cases this is the
same mantle knotted between the breast and worn hanging over the
back like a cape, as in the case of the examples from Perge (Antalya
Archaeological Museum, inv. nos. A3279+A3070, 2nd cent. CE; see Tran
tam Tinh 1973, I, 53-54, no. A-A, figs. 15-16) and Messene (Messene
Archaeological Museum, inv. no. 13545, 2nd cent. CE; see Themelis
2011, 106-108, figs. 17a-e).
14/  It is also possible that other examples of this type existed but
have yet to be found.
15/  Still in situ in the gymnasium. See Karageorghis & Vermeule
1964, no. 16, pl. XXIII, 1-2.
the edge of the fabric, indicated by its fringe, and the
central vertical fold of fabric created by the knot is less
pronounced than in the Amphipolis statuette. Further,
in the Salamis example, the hip mantle rises above the
left knee and reveals part of the thigh, which is covered
in the Amphipolis example. The vague similarities
between the Salaminian and Amphipolitan examples
underscore the much closer connections between the
Isis of Mt. Kynthos and the Amphipolitan statuette.
The connection between the hip-mantle and
Knotenpalla in these later images raises the possibility
that the Amphipolis statuette refers formally to
images of Tyche or perhaps even represented Isis-
Tyche specifically. Though there is no indication of a
cornucopia preserved in the Amphipolis statuette, the
gathered fabric and hanging edge of the drapery along
the left leg appears frequently in Hellenistic (and later)
images of Tyche. In a 1st cent. BCE or 1st cent. CE
statue found at Ancona, Tyche wears a similarly rolled
hip mantle gathered on the left side, with a small curtain
of drapery hanging along the left leg16. This pattern of
drapery generally corresponds to the garments that
the Amphipolis example wears, though again the
relationship between these two statues is general and
does not indicate a copy-prototype relationship.
The connection with Tyche is even more interesting
given the relative prevalence of Isis-Tyche statuettes
dressed in the Knotenpalla on Hellenistic Delos. Though
the Delian examples share the free and more naturalistic
manner of rendering the drapery seen in the Isis of Mt.
Kynthos17, they lack the mantle draped across the hips
found in the Amphipolis statuette. In all cases, the
statuettes are small scale, and while their archaeological
contexts are not secure, it is likely they served as votives
or cult images in one of Delos’ sanctuaries or a domestic
structure. Delos Museum A2255, which Damaskos cites
as a possible point of comparison, features a thin chiton
and a large heavy mantle knotted between the breasts,
producing a simpler garment with fewer planes, and no
hip mantle (fig. 4)18. Delos Museum A378 depicts Isis
dressed in the same costume, but with a raised right
arm, probably to hold a different kind of attribute, and
no hip mantle19. While these statuettes are not helpful
for dating the Amphipolis statuette, they attest to the
16/  Fot. Soprintendenza Archeologica di Ancona, inv. no. 16289.
Preserved height: 1.3 m. See Guerrini 1987, 242, fig. 18, and Favaretto
& Traversari 1993, fig. 33. The statue is dated on technical grounds, but
Guerrini argues that the statue is a generalized copy of a 2nd cent.
BCE statue from Samothrace (initially published in Lehmann 1950,
129, pl. XXV). Because of significant differences in the pattern of
drapery folds, I do not find the parallel compelling.
17/  There are also two bases found in Sarapieion C that
preserve dedications to Isis Tyche Protogeneia: RICIS 202/0283
(Delos Museum, inv. no. E413; 115/114 BCE), RICIS 202/0284 (Delos
Museum, inv. no. E462; 115/114 BCE). Epithets are not common in the
sanctuary’s epigraphy.
18/  Marcadé 1969, 430, n. 8, pl. LVII. It is possible but unclear
whether this statuette comes from Sarapieion C. See further Hermary
1996, 172, cat. 76, and Zapheiropoulou 1998, cat. 188.
19/  Marcadé 1969, 429-430, pl. LVII.
 A Statuette of Isis from Amphipolis in Context 89
Fig. 4. Marble statuette of Isis-Tyche from Delos.
Delos Archaeological Museum, inv. no. A2255.
After Zapheiropoulou 1998, no. 188.
version of Isis dressed in the Knotenpalla’s popularity on
Delos.
In his study of the island’s Hellenistic sculpture,
J.  Marcadé cites these two as examples of a “Greek”
mode of representing Isis, but also suggests the
existence of Egyptian models in wood for some of the
less “canonical” images of Isis. For example, he cites
Delos Museum A5370 as a potential copy of an imported
Egyptian statue20. This statue uses the Knotenpalla
costume and a central drapery fold, cascading chevron
20/  Delos Museum, inv. no. A 5370: Marcadé 1969, 431-432, pl.
LVII. Marcadé 1969, 431, also references the imported Egyptian
statuette Delos Museum, inv. no. A 379, which is made of Egyptian
stone and must have been imported after an initial use period in
Egypt. See further Marcadé 1969, 409.
Fig. 5. Marble statue of Isis-Tyche from the gymnasium
of Salamis on Cyprus. © D-DAI-ROM-74.473.
folds over the lower body, and part of a knot centered
over the stomach instead of the breasts. While the left
knee is bent, the body is positioned frontally, with no
sense of weight shifted onto either leg. Clearly, the
image refers to the contrapposto seen in the other statues
but does not execute the posture fully, perhaps evidence
that Delian sculptors are experimenting with Egyptian
subjects and finding appropriate ways to represent them
in more familiar media21.
Based on these comparisons, I argue that the
Amphipolis statuette and the Delian cult statue allude
to a similar type of image, perhaps even a particular
type or version of Isis-Tyche, whose popularity during
21/  On this phenomenon in terracotta figurine production, see
Barrett 2011, 109-118, 421-425.
90 Lindsey A. Mazurek

the Hellenistic period seems to have been limited in

comparison to the Isis-Tyche without a hip mantle.
Still, none of these comparisons are exact, and future
excavations may reveal better comparanda that would
clarify these typologies and their significance.

Date and Use

Because its best comparanda (the Delian statues
and statuettes of Isis and Isis-Tyche, particularly the
Isis of Mt. Kynthos) date to the Hellenistic period, the
Amphipolis example should date to this general period,
as Damaskos has suggested22. It may be possible to
date the image more precisely to the second half of the
Hellenistic period. The lack of good comparanda for the
Amphipolis statuette from other sites strengthens its
connection with the Isis of Mt. Kynthos, and the two may
have been produced and used in the same time period.
The dedicatory inscription for the Isis of Mt. Kynthos
has been preserved and dates that image securely to the
120s BCE23. If we consider how the Isis of Mt. Kynthos
was used and certain technical features of the
Amphipolis statuette, however, a date into the 1st cent.
BCE remains possible24. Though the area of Sarapieion
C where the Isis of Mt. Kynthos was displayed belongs
to an earlier phase, the allée des sphinx and most of the
South Terrace of Sarapieion C was not constructed until
about 90 BCE25. This indicates the cult was still active
and continued to engage in construction and sculptural
dedication. More importantly for our purposes, this
suggests that the sanctuary’s cult sculpture, including
the Isis of Mt. Kynthos probably continued to be used
into the 1st cent. BCE and could have helped popularize
the type of Isis in the Knotenpalla with a hip mantle in
this period.
Further, none of examples from the Eastern
Mediterranean can be dated securely prior to the 2nd
Fig. 6. Marble statuette of Isis in the Knotenpalla from
cent. BCE. From Rhodes, we have three small statuettes the Sanctuary of Isis in Rhodes. Rhodes Museum, inv.
representing Isis in the Knotenpalla that date to the no. G2765. After Fantaoutsaki 2011, 57, fig. 13.
Hellenistic period, and scholars have proposed dates
or comparisons that would locate them generally to
the 2nd cent. BCE or later (fig. 6)26. Most of these dates
have been determined by comparison with examples
from Cyrene or Delos, which may have skewed these
arguments towards these well-known and well-dated
22/  Damaskos 2013, 99. groups of sculpture. When taken in concert with the
23/  See supra, n. 10. Isis of Mt. Kynthos’ lifespan, these Rhodian examples
24/  I thank François Queyrel for this observation.
25/  Siard 2003; Siard 2009.
may further support an argument for a date for in the
26/  Fantaoutsaki 2011, fig. 13 (Rhodes Archaeological Museum, last half of the Hellenistic period for this image.
inv. no. G2675); Gualandi 1976, no. 160, fig. 199 (Rhodes Arceological Turning to the question of use, it is unlikely that this
Museum, inv. no. E425). Fantaoutsaki 2011, 56, n. 46, compares the image acted as a portrait. Both Isis and her devotees
Rhodian statuette to an example from Cyrene that Gualandi 1976, 166,
dates to the end of the 2nd cent. BCE based on comparison with Delos
use the knot costume, though in the early Hellenistic
Museum, inv. no. A2255 and the statue of Isis of Mt. Kynthos from period the type is used mostly for images of the
Sarapieion C, discussed above. A third with no context (Rhodes, Palace goddess. During the Hellenistic period, the costume
of the Grand Master, inv. no. G58) has not been published, but I viewed appears in two examples, both from Smyrna27. There
it on display in April 2014. Museum displays dated this example to the
2nd cent. BCE. All the Delian statuettes are given general Hellenistic
dates: Marcadé 1969, 431-432, pl. LVII, (Delos Museum, inv. no. A378);
Marcadé 1969, 430, pl. LVII, and Zaphiropoulou 1998, 281, cat. 188
(Delos Museum, inv. no. A2255). It is worth noting here the perhaps 27/  Ashmolean Museum, inv. no. G 1171 (RICIS 304/0203, dated
outsized influence that the Delian corpus has played in the study of to the end of the 2nd cent. or beginning of the 1st cent. BCE; Pfuhl &
Isiac sculpture in the Hellenistic period and in the study of Hellenistic Möbius 1977, no. 878, pl. 131; Walters 1988, pl. 1c), and British Museum,
sculpture more generally. inv. no. SC. 639 (RICIS 304/0202, dated to the beginning of the 2nd
 A Statuette of Isis from Amphipolis in Context 91
are not enough known examples of this type with
secure context, however, to determine definitively
whether mortal women used the Knotenpalla regularly
in portraiture in the 2nd cent. BCE28. Women frequently
used divine costumes and types as part of their self-
representations, and Hellenistic female portraits tend
to display little of the individuation necessary to clearly
divide portrait from ideal image29. The few examples
with secure archaeological context, however, suggest
that female portraits dedicated in Isiac sanctuaries of the
3rd and 2nd cents. BCE tended to follow Greco-Roman
norms of portraiture. For example, the portrait statue of
Diodora set up in Sarapieion C on Delos, dated securely
to the 130s BCE, relies on the pudicitia format used
throughout the Mediterranean: instead of employing
an identifiable Isiac garment, Diodora wears a simple
chiton and mantle pulled close to her body to emphasize
her close relationship with normative modes of Greek
femininity.30 Further, the Amphipolis statuette’s small
scale (pres. height 0.35 m) makes identification as a
portrait even less likely. While ideal sculptures are
often rendered at a small scale, freestanding portraits
are usually carved at anywhere from 2/3 to full life size31.
Consequently, Damaskos’ identification of the image as
an ideal image of Isis should stand.
As an ideal image, however, it is impossible to
determine with certainty whether the Amphipolis
statue acted as a votive or as a cult image in its own
right. Indeed, since nearly every ideal image in the round
could receive cultic veneration, Ioannis Mylonopoulos
has doubted whether this is a useful distinction to
make32. Its small size, however, does not preclude its
use as a primary recipient of veneration, particularly in
a potential domestic context. As an object, the statuette
may have also served as a way to disseminate or allude to
a valued version of a cult image. In her study of female
cent. BCE; Pfuhl & Möbius 1977, no. 376, pl. 61; Walters 1988 pl. 1b;
Eingartner 1991, no. 98, pl. LXII). These types of funerary reliefs do
not appear before the 1st cent. BCE in Athens, though the large size
of this corpus may not be representative of the type’s use in antiquity.
The type reaches the height of its popularity in the 3rd cent. CE. See
Walters 1988, 67-89 (relying primarily on stylistic analysis for dating),
Eingartner 1991, and the relevant entries in Moock 1998. Based on
this evidence, I have argued that it is likely the Knotenpalla does not
become a popular part of Greek Isiac devotees’ self-representation
before the Roman period, but the evidence is too scant to support
a strong chronological division (see Mazurek 2016a, 65-102). On this
theomorphic mode of representation, see also Malaise & Veymiers
2018.
28/  Though the evidence is very scant and analysis preliminary,
it does not seem like the dedicatory practices for portraits in Isiac
sanctuaries were different than those in more normative sanctuaries.
For a preliminary study of Sarapieion C, see Brun-Kyriakidis 2016.
29/  Connelly 2007, 85-115; Dillon 2010, 60-102. Wrede 1981,
44‑64, examines male and female examples across the Mediterranean
produced in the Roman period.
30/  See Dillon 2010, 87-92; Brun-Kyriakidis 2016, 70, 82.
31/  Funerary reliefs can depict the deceased at a smaller scale
appropriate to the rest of the monument. In Macedonia, these images
are normally rendered in lower relief with little drilling on a flat stele.
See Kalaitzi 2016, 58-82. One notable exception is an Ionian-style
naiskos monument found at Pella (Kalaitzi 2016, 200, cat. Pella 70, fig.
Pella 70a, 70b, with accompanying bibliography).
32/  Mylonopoulos 2016, 108-110.
ideal sculpture, Rachel Kousser has argued that one
of the primary purposes of Hellenistic statuettes and
figurines is to provide new, more creative adaptations of
known types suitable for local audiences33. Perhaps the
Amphipolis statuette operated in this vein by alluding
to a particular type of Isis in the Knotenpalla that held
particular importance to part of the Amphipolitan cult
community.
Isis in Macedonia
Already in the mid 2nd cent. BCE, Isiac cults
had spread throughout the major urban centers of
Macedonia. During the Hellenistic period, a regional
network of Isiac cults thrived, with nodes in Amphipolis,
Thessalonike, Beroia, Thasos, Dion, and, just outside
Macedonia’s borders, Gonnoi to the south and Maroneia
to the east34. The region’s Isiac communities seem to have
embraced Isis and Sarapis enthusiastically, constructing
public and private shrines and relying on particularly
close ties with Egypt35. During the late Hellenistic and
early Imperial periods, an influx of new Isis devotees
from Delos broadened the cultic communities in
Macedonian port cities, particularly in Thessalonike36.
The epigraphic evidence, however, does not provide
direct evidence for transmission of this sculptural type
from Delos to Macedonia. Rather, it is better to assume
that there existed a more complex relationship between
these emerging cultic communities.
While archaeologists have yet to identify an
Isiac sanctuary at Amphipolis, epigraphic evidence
indicates the city adopted Isiac cult as early as the 3rd
cent. BCE, placing the site among the earliest-known
Isiac communities in Greece. The earliest evidence is
a funerary stela with an inscription commemorating a
Greek female priestess of Isis and dates to the very early
Hellenistic period37. As reconstructed by L. Robert,
33/  Kousser 2008, 34-40.
34/  Based on epigraphic evidence, the cults of Isis and Sarapis
are established at Beroia (RICIS 113/0301: 2nd cent. BCE) Dion (RICIS
113/0213-0214: 3rd cent. BCE), Thasos (RICIS 201/0102: 3rd cent. BCE;
RICIS 201/0101: 2nd cent. BCE), Gonnoi (RICIS 112/0801: 2nd-3rd
cents. BCE), Maroneia (RICIS 114/0201: 2nd cent. BCE [Maroneia
Lapidarium, inv. no. 146]) during the early to mid. Hellenistic period.
The sanctuary at Thessalonike, founded in the Hellenistic period as
well (RICIS 113/0503, which describes Philip V’s regulation of the
sanctuary’s treasury, dates to 187 BCE), lasts into the high Imperial
period. The statuette from Veria discussed above, along with a marble
plaque depicting a sistrum in relief (RICIS 113/0301: 2nd cent. BCE
[Archaeological Museum of Veria L313]) and a marble footprint relief
(Tzanavari 1993, 1673, fig. 1; RICIS 113/0303: 1st cent. BCE) indicates
that there was a cultic community active at Beroia during the mid-
to-late Hellenistic period, though no sanctuary has yet been found.
On Isiac priests active in this area during the Hellenistic period, see
Christodoulou 2009, esp. 327-330, 335-430, 344, fig. 4.
35/  Bommas 2002, 127-129, relying particularly on P.Oxy. 1380.
36/  Martzavou 2010, 187-189, suggests that some of these Delians
may have gone to Amphipolis. RICIS 119/0908, which records a
crown given to Aulus Anthestius in 67/66 BCE in recognition of his
excellent service as trierarch, provides a more direct link between the
Anthestii known from the Isiac cults of Delos and the cult community
at Amphipolis. See Veymiers 2009b, 485-489.
37/  Kavala Archaeological Museum, L770. See RICIS
113/0901 = Veymiers 2009b, 476-478, figs. 4-5, and 512, App. 1. On the
92 Lindsey A. Mazurek

followed by R. Veymiers, the inscription reads ≤H≥rathsçw Though the statuette reconciles well with the
ô Nikçandrou ô &içereia t)hj ô E(isisj38. Krateso is a common known history of Isiac cult in Hellenistic Amphipolis,
female name found throughout Hellenistic Greece, and it has little in common with the only other Hellenistic
the priestess named here is probably of Greek origin39. statuette of Isis from Macedonia. Two terracotta
More importantly, this inscription indicates the statuettes from Beroia depict Isis in the Knotenpalla
existence of a sanctuary active at Amphipolis in the costume. The first, which dates to the 1st cent. CE,
early Hellenistic period40. A now-lost base, dedicated depicts the goddess in the Knotenpalla costume and
to Sarapis, Isis, and Philip (very likely Philip V) from is missing only the left arm (fig. 7)46. A second, more
around 200 BCE suggests that at least one sanctuary fragmentary statuette preserves the head, the legs, the
to the Egyptian gods in Amphipolis may have been back, and the base (fig. 8)47. The two are quite similar,
patronized by the Macedonian kings41. It is possible that and Tsakalou-Tzanavari suggests that the two could
the statuette under discussion was associated with the have come from the same worn mold48. In both, Isis
cult group active in this sanctuary, but it is not possible stands on a small base and wears a large plain crown
to link them conclusively. Isiac sanctuaries from around over a simple classicizing hairstyle. She wears a heavy
the Hellenistic Mediterranean, including Sarapeion A on mantle, knotted between the breasts in a characteristic
Delos, frequently included small niches for the display X pattern, over a chiton that is barely indicated. The
and veneration of small- and mid-scale divine images42. drapery folds are heavy and doughy, but follow a regular
The sanctuary at Amphipolis may have had similar pattern of cascading chevrons arranged around a central
types of display contexts to hold the statuette under vertical fold that characterize the Knotenpalla type.
discussion, whose roughly finished back suggests display The connection between this example and the
against a wall or in a niche. Amphipolis one, however, are quite general. The
Other dedications indicate an active Isiac cultic two share only the most basic characteristics of the
community existed into the latter half of the Hellenistic Knotenpalla, and the Beroia examples lack the hip
period when the statuette was made. A marble naiskos mantle that makes the Amphipolis statuette unusual.
stele was found reused in as a drain cover in a room to
the south of the atrium of Basilica Δ in Amphipolis’
Acropolis. Alongside a relief depicting Herakles
reclining upon his lion skin on a rock is a dedication
to Sarapis, Isis, and Herakles by Lysistratos, son of
Apollodoros43. Veymiers argues that the letter-forms
suggest a date prior to Aemilius’ Paullus’ invasions in
168 BCE. Another partial inscription, a marble base
reused in the gymnasium’s palaestra, seems to refer
to Sarapis, Isis, and Anubis and dates to the 2nd or
1st cent. BCE44. Though these are likely only a small
handful of the dedications to the Egyptian gods that
were dedicated at Amphipolis in the Hellenistic period,
these inscriptions describe an active cult community or
communities whose dedicatory patterns seem to reflect
close connections with other Macedonian cult sites and
the Antigonid kings who ruled the region45.

reconstruction of R. Veymiers argues that the letter forms suggest the

inscription should not predate the 2nd quarter of the 3rd cent., a date
that Bricault accepts in RICIS Suppl. III, 143.
38/  Veymiers 2009b, 476-478. Another woman named Krathsçw
appears in roughly contemporaneous dedications at the Isiac sanctuary
of Thessalonike (RICIS 113/0548-0549).
39/  Veymiers 2009b, 476.
40/  Christodoulou 2009, 329; Veymiers 2009b, 478. Fig. 7. Terracotta statuette of Isis in the Knotenpalla
41/  RICIS 113/0902 = Veymiers 2009b, 478-481, fig. 3, 513, App. from Beroia. Veria Archaeological Museum, inv. no.
2. It is not clear whether this inscription refers to the same sanctuary P4069. After Tsakalou-Tzanavari 2002, pl. 82, no. 276.
where Krateso would have served as a priestess. The cult community
at Thessalonike came under royal control in the early Hellenistic
period: RICIS 113/0503; Voutiras 2005, 281.
42/  Bruneau & Ducat [1965] 2005, 267-272; Kleibl 2009, 90-93,
211-218. 46/  Veria Archaeological Museum, inv. no. Π4069. See Tzanavari
43/  Amphipolis Archaeological Museum, inv. no. L111. See RICIS 1993, 1671-1676, fig. 2; Tsakalou-Tzanavari 2002, 174-176, 263, n° 276,
113/0906 = Veymiers 2009b, 481-484, figs. 6-7, App. 3. pl. 82.
44/  Amphipolis Archaeological Museum, inv. no. E20. See RICIS 47/  Veria Archaeological Museum, inv. no. Π4092. See Tsakalou-
113/0909 = Veymiers 2009b, 485, App. 4. Tzanavari 2002, 506, no. 277, pl. 82.
45/  Veymiers 2009b, 511. 48/  Tsakalou-Tzanavari 2002, 174.
 A Statuette of Isis from Amphipolis in Context 93

Fig. 8. Terracotta statuette of Isis
in the Knotenpalla from Beroia.
Veria Archaeological Museum,
inv. no. P4092. After Tsakalou-
Tzanavari 2002, pl. 82, no. 277.
There is no reason to argue for
an especially close connection
between the two images. Unlike
the inscriptions Veymiers
analyzed, which suggest a close
interrelationship between cult
communities in the region49,
these examples, though few,
suggest Macedonian cult
communities had some choice
in how they represented
the goddess. Again, future
excavations could reveal more
examples that might nuance or
alter the relationship between
these three examples, but
as the evidence stands, the
Amphipolis statuette points
to a closer aesthetic and
iconographic relationship with
Aegean Isiac communities.
Conclusions:
The Amphipolis Statuette in Context
In this essay, I have argued that the statuette from
Amphipolis represents Isis or Isis-Tyche and dates
to the Hellenistic period, though a date in the mid to
late Hellenistic period seems more likely. Set within
its historical and art historical context, this statuette
integrates with several key features of cultic activity
at the site. From a historical perspective, the statue
reinforces our understanding of Amphipolis as an active
and vibrant cultic community in the latter half of the
Hellenistic period. Many Hellenistic inscriptions related
to Egyptian cults from Amphipolis mention Isis50, and
it is not surprising that a marble image of her would be
found at this site.
Set within its Mediterranean context, this statuette
indicates that the cult community participated in a
network of religious and artistic connectivity that
included the Aegean islands. Though modern scholarship
has perhaps over-emphasized the importance of
Delian sculpture in the Hellenistic period due to its
exceptional preservation, Delos still provides the best
comparandum for the Amphipolis statuette’s unusual
hip mantle. Looking south to the Mediterranean sets
the Amphipolis statuette alongside other mid-to-late
Hellenistic marble statuettes of Isis and Isis-Tyche in
the Knotenpalla. These connections may indicate that
these early Isiac communities, though spread across
the Mediterranean basin, are sharing general types and
methods of representing Isis.
The statuette’s material also demonstrates another
key feature of artistic production in the region.
Rather than importing an image from elsewhere,
the Amphipolis community adapted this type to
local materials and techniques. Consequently, the
statuette suggests that during the mid-2nd or 1st cent.
BCE, at least one sculptural workshop in the region
produced small-scale statuettes that follow the general
patterns of representing Isis observable throughout
the Mediterranean. The statuette’s iconographic and
technical idiosyncrasies, however, may indicate that
these artisans felt comfortable adapting and improvising
on this known type.
The Veria statuettes, which date to a similar period
but takes a different approach to the Knotenpalla
costume, emphasizes the similarities between the
Amphipolitan and Aegean examples further. Much of
the region’s sculpture has been lost, and it is impossible
to draw definite conclusions about how and where
different communities in Hellenistic Macedonia chose
to represent Isis. Still, the present evidence indicates
that Amphipolitans employed a form of Isis Knotenpalla
favored by some in the Aegean islands. Though it is
not yet possible to say where the type originated51,
the iconographic and stylistic similarities between the
Amphipolis, Delian, and Rhodian examples suggest
that the Amphipolis community may not have chosen
not to imitate the cult images of its closer neighbor
but rather to employ a sculptural type popular across
the Mediterranean. Because of the very small number
of early Hellenistic images of Isis known from this
region, future excavations and research may shift
our understanding, but we can go forward with our
studies of Isiac sculpture in Hellenistic Greece with
the assumption that Isiac cult served as a vector of
connectivity even at this early stage. Most importantly,
the statuette indicates that adopting the Knotenpalla is
elective. At this early stage in the cult’s history, cultic
communities are still figuring out who Isis is and
negotiating around what she should look like.

49/  Bommas 2002 has also used Macedonia as an example for

regionalism in Isiac cult.
50/  In addition to the 3rd and 2nd cents. BCE inscriptions
discussed above, see RICIS 113/0907 = Veymiers 2009b, 489-490, figs.
9-10, App. 6 (1st cent. BCE, dedication to Sarapis, Isis, and Anubis by
a man named Pantaretos, son of Dalon [Amphipolis Archaeological
Museum, inv. no. L 172]), and Veymiers 2009b, 492-493, fig. 13, App. 7 =
RICIS Suppl. II 113/0911 (1st cent. BCE, dedication to Sarapis, Isis, and 51/  I plan to explore the type’s early history and spread in a future
Anubis [Amphipolis Archaeological Museum, inv. no. L770]). essay.