upon entering Asclepius’ precincts; at Corinth, the visitor, who entered through a
gateway in the east wall, was immediately confronted with a water basin set in a small
porch before reaching a long altar. Here we find a structure that would have served as
an offering-box for coins, athe ̄sauros, which was a typical feature of Asclepiea but
existed in many other sanctuaries too (Dignas 2002:21–3, 30–1; Kaminski 1991).
Exclusive to sanctuaries of healing deities was a type of building calledabaton(‘‘the
inaccessible place’’) orenkoime ̄te ̄rion(‘‘the place where one sleeps’’), where those
asking for a cure spent the night and were attended to by priests and the god himself.
At Corinth, this was a complex building with an eastern part on the same level as the
temple and a stairway descending to the level of a roofed court and fountain. The
south wing included a small bathing area from where steps descended to a rectangular
basin. The rooms below were fitted with couches and tables. Such rooms – as
elsewhere – served as dining rooms for visitors and religious officials. At Epidaurus,
theabatonwas a large rectangular building on the south side of the precinct. In the
developed sanctuary there was also a ‘‘banqueting hall’’ characterized by several
rooms arranged round a large central courtyard, for either a few – privileged – visitors
or larger groups. In order to accommodate the artistic and athletic contests that
existed already in the fifth century, a theater and a stadium were built during a second
phase of construction at the end of the fourth century. The immense seating space of
the theater, for 13,000–14,000 spectators, reflects the number of worshipers.
A further aspect of sanctuaries of Asclepius, attested in written sources rather than
through archaeological evidence, is the ‘‘sacred grove’’ (hieron alsos), which at
Epidaurus may have been synonymous with the entire precinct (Pausanias 2.27.1
and 7). A cult regulation from Kos prohibits the cutting of cedar wood in thetemenos
(LSCG150), and one of Asclepius’’ patients at Epidaurus was surprised by a sacred
snake in the god’s sacred grove (Herzog 1931 no. 44¼LiDonnici 1995: C1).
However, sacred land around the immediate precinct is attested for many sanctuaries,
and several cult regulations state that pilgrims were not allowed to cut trees for
firewood, or to pasture animals within the precinct (e.g.LSCG37, Attica, end of
fourth century BC;LSCG65, lines 78–80, 150, Andania, first century BC).
The reciprocal relationship between physical aspects of sanctuaries and their ‘‘daily
life’’ can be seen best through votive offerings (Van Straten 1990). Sacred precincts
were filled with objects dedicated to the deity, whether free-standing statues on
pedestals or benches, hanging from thetemenoswall, from trees, or displayed in
various other ways. They could be protected from the open air inside the temple,
displayed for worshipers to look at, or stored away in a separate treasury (building).
Old or damaged objects were often buried in pits or could even be melted down and
recast into new cult equipment (IGii^2 839;LSCG41). Once dedicated, however, all
votives remained the property of the god and could not leave the sanctuary. Some
sanctuaries were so full of votives that this became a problem. Plato (Laws909e–
910a) complains about ‘‘cluttered precincts,’’ and several inscriptions deal with ways
to avoid votives spilling into the paths within the sanctuary (Rhodes,LSS107),
ruining architectural elements (Miletus,LSS123) or blocking the cult image from
view (Athens,LSCG43). Regulations such as these reveal that sanctuaries were the
opposite of serene, empty, or static space. The impression of constant rearrangement
and landscaping is enhanced by references to the construction of new and the repair
of old buildings.
168 Beate Dignas