Ancient Greek sanctuaries were not just sites of worship—they were bustling hubs of activity, drawing crowds from across the Greek world.
As historian François de Polignac observed, “The sanctuary was a nodal point in the articulation of territory, economy, and social exchange” (La naissance de la cité grecque, 1984). Panhellenic sanctuaries such as that of Apollo at Delphi and Delos as well as Zeus at Olympia became magnets for a wide array of visitors: worshipers, athletes, tourists, merchants, dignitaries, and philosophers all mingled within their sacred precincts, turning these holy sites into dynamic centers of commerce, culture, and social interaction.
There were also local sanctuaries that served the regional population. Unlike the sanctuary at Delphi, which stood within the town, Olympia, similar to other large sanctuaries, was situated several miles from the city—Elis, in this case—that governed it.
The Panhellenic Olympic Games and their accompanying religious festival are estimated by historians, based on ancient accounts, to have attracted around 45,000 visitors to the Sanctuary of Zeus at Olympia in the fourth century BC. The games lasted five days, and many of the visitors—if not all—remained at Olympia for the duration of the events. Consequently, they had to manage their practical needs for nearly a week.
The Eleans, who administered the games, oversaw preparations months in advance. They cleared the roads, ensured a supply of water from the Alpheios River, and organized the scheduling of sacrifices and contests. Xenophon, in Anabasis (V.3.7), describes the elaborate procession of sacrifices and the order maintained by the officials. Temporary housing, markets, and even makeshift tribunals were established to handle disputes, demonstrating a highly organized logistical system.
Research on ancient Greek sanctuaries
Until recent decades, studies of ancient Greek sanctuaries focused primarily on the architecture, the importance of the deities worshiped, and the study of offerings and remains of animals sacrificed. However, there was very little research on the practical aspects of how these religious sites operated, and, more importantly, on what the visitors to the sanctuaries actually experienced.
For example, very little is known about who administered a sanctuary, who tended the facilities, what accommodations were offered to visitors, how large crowds were managed during festivals, whether there were security measures, who oversaw the revenues, and other practical details that could shed light on the everyday life of ancient Greeks.
Fundamental questions about the everyday needs of visitors to Greek sanctuaries—whether for worship or business—were largely overlooked. Scholars continue to ask: Where did visitors sleep? Where were bathroom facilities located? Were there services for those who brought children? How were horses and carts accommodated? And what and where did people eat?
Logistics at Greek sanctuaries
Classics professors Judith Barringer, Ph.D., Gunnel Ekroth, Ph.D., and David Scahill, Ph.D., editors of the book Logistics in Greek Sanctuaries (2025)—which explores research on how ancient Greek sanctuaries operated—co-organized a conference of the same name in Athens, Greece, in 2018. Other scholars from a range of disciplines, including archaeology, zooarchaeology, history, law, epigraphy, religion, and anthropology, contributed to the book, as well.
One passage in the book summarizes how past research focused on the architecture, ceremonies, deities worshiped, chronologies, and sacrificial and voting remains of sanctuaries but largely ignored how they were managed and what people did there beyond worship: “We want to know how ancient people lived, not only what they created.”
The book is a compilation of papers in which researchers investigate sanctuaries from the perspective of both the human visitor and sanctuary personnel, drawing on the limited archaeological record available for these aspects. The aim is to present the everyday, real-life experiences of these people—a subject that has not been thoroughly explored.
Travel and crowd management
To facilitate visitors, sanctuaries worked to provide efficient communication and transport networks. Delphi, for example, maintained regular contact with cities across the Mediterranean. Envoys traveled with offerings and inquiries along established routes protected by sacred truces. The logistical coordination of these journeys—often crossing hostile territories—required diplomatic negotiation and precise timing.
Crowd management in major ancient Greek sanctuaries was also crucial, especially as natural events such as floods or earthquakes could take a toll on the facilities, particularly during major festivals and ritual events.
In her paper, the archaeologist Laura Gawlinski investigates sanctuary “time management” in cases of natural disasters and day-to-day operations. She provides information on the use of informers to monitor visitors, the regulation of access to equipment such as offering boxes, and the deployment of temporary markers to organize space. Although nuanced, this information offers a valuable glimpse into the daily life of a Greek sanctuary.
Traveling to a sanctuary was often intentionally arduous, time-consuming, costly, and occasionally dangerous. Jenny Wallensten’s paper examines the moment of arrival and entry, including whether visitors were free to enter at will and how their movements were regulated within the sanctuary.
Wallensten guides the sanctuary visitor from the entrance toward the focus of their journey: the temple’s inner area and the cult statue within. Given the great variety of sanctuary layouts, she provides a diachronic overview of the visitor’s experience.
Edward Harris and Jan-Mathieu Carbon research sanctuary personnel and their responsibilities in maintaining order and upholding legal and religious norms. They also take a wide view, considering several aspects of this topic: excluding those disqualified from entering a sacred precinct, maintaining order inside sanctuaries, regulating offerings, and ensuring the accountability of religious officials.
In several instances, enforcement of regulations required the intervention of security officials. Published sanctions, in the form of inscribed laws or signs, might have served as deterrents in smaller sanctuaries. Both forms of enforcement were essential for communicating the expected norms of behavior.
Water and sanitation
The crucial question of water and sanitation—and how sanctuaries provided for these needs—is the focus of the following contributors. Water was an essential resource at sanctuaries, not just for human consumption but also for the use of animals, cleaning, toilet facilities, and bathing.
In contrast to previous studies that focused on water infrastructure in terms of its religious significance—such as rituals of purification, cleaning cult images, and healing—Patrik Klingborg discusses the utilitarian needs for water at Greek sanctuaries.
Klingborg’s study of the archaeological and written evidence for drinking, food preparation, washing, cleaning, and gardening, combined with estimates of the quantities required for various purposes, demonstrates that these practical needs likely demanded far larger volumes of water than activities with religious significance.
Sanitation in ancient Greek sanctuaries is the subject of Monika Trümper’s work. She examines the archaeological evidence for sanitation provisions in extra-urban Greek sanctuaries in the Eastern Mediterranean. There is ancient evidence concerning the concepts and tools of sanitation in sanctuaries, and whether—and how—two major human bodily needs—urination and defecation—as well as washing and bathing, were accommodated.
Clearly identifiable, purpose-built bathroom structures were first introduced in the fourth century BC, but they became more common only in the late Hellenistic and particularly the Roman Imperial periods. Current research suggests that bathing facilities were far more prevalent than latrines, although sanctuary visitors surely urinated and defecated far more frequently than they bathed.
Accommodation and dining in ancient Greek sanctuaries
Several ancient Greek sanctuaries attracted visitors who stayed for days, often far from their homelands. Islands such as Delos and Samothrace, as well as mainland sanctuaries like Delphi, drew pilgrims, worshipers, priestly personnel, and refugees seeking the protection of the god. Accommodation was therefore necessary not only for visitors but also for sanctuary staff.
Ekroth discusses the types of lodging available at the time—hotels, tents, or houses—and who provided them, whether the sanctuary itself or private individuals. She also considers how these accommodations related to the sanctuary proper and the extent to which their management was a concern for sanctuary administration.
Additionally, she explores whether religious personnel or regular visitors ever stayed inside the temple itself, within sacred space. Because material remains and written sources are limited, Ekroth draws on modern parallels to reconstruct a fuller picture of ancient accommodations and the infrastructure required to host large crowds.
Similarly, Scahill investigates the archaeological evidence for spaces used for dining. He examines criteria for dining infrastructure and analyzes a selection of buildings—including restaurants and banquet halls with courtyards—along with associated furniture such as benches, tables, and even beds. This allows him to explore who dined where, when, and how.
Variations in building types and furniture arrangements raise questions about the dining experiences of worshipers. What provisions were necessary for dining? Where were such buildings located within sanctuaries relative to temples and altars? The variety of building types and furniture layouts suggests that arrangements for worshipers were carefully considered in the design process, while also raising questions about the flexibility of these spaces over the lifetime of a building’s use.
Markets in ancient Greek sanctuaries
Visitors who stayed for extended periods in Greek sanctuaries needed to obtain various commodities, and many sanctuaries appear to have had organized markets with standardized weights and measures.
Two essays discuss the wares, animals, and food and drink available for purchase in sanctuaries, as well as the regulations governing sales. Thanks to refined analyses of faunal remains and organic residues in containers, it is now possible to investigate aspects of the life and subsistence of sanctuary visitors during feast days, including what was eaten, in what quantities, and the roles of dried foods (e.g., figs, cheese, dried fish) brought by visitors versus freshly prepared food.
Annalisa Lo Monaco examines the nature, supply, and demand in these markets: what food was offered for sale, how transactions were regulated, what prices were set, the origins of the food, and how goods were handled. Literary and epigraphic documentation, together with archaeological evidence, illuminate consumption patterns of vegetables, fish, meat, and liquids.
Famous sanctuaries attracted an influx of consumers to Greek cities. In addition to regular religious events, some sanctuaries also hosted fairs at certain times of the religious calendar. These markets not only provided a service but also created demand for pilgrims’ needs, including food and drink, animals for sacrifices, and artifacts to offer to the gods.
Véronique Chankowski’s careful examination of the Samos decree regarding the market at the Heraion of Samos, considered alongside other epigraphic evidence from the Aegean islands and Asia Minor, sheds light on the commercial activities that took place in the temple and its surroundings.
These activities had to follow specific regulations because of the sacred status of the sanctuary, which typically prescribed certain behaviors, yet cities and sanctuaries also allowed adjustments to encourage commerce, depending on the god’s popularity and the site’s appeal.
Sanctuary finance
Principal religious festivals attracted visitors on a daily basis. Food and water needed to be provided for these visitors, and religious personnel were required to oversee daily affairs, such as oracular consultations or ministrations at altars. Workers and other craftsmen were necessary to maintain altars and buildings and produce votive objects. All of this required funding, and some sanctuaries were indeed large financial operations, generating revenue from leasing land, making loans, and supporting various “industries.”
Sanctuaries also served as financial centers, where precious metals, votive offerings, and civic funds were stored and managed. Pausanias (V.15.1) describes the elaborate arrangement of treasuries built by various city-states along the route to the Sanctuary of Zeus at Olympia.
Similarly, the Delphic oracle accumulated immense wealth in the form of dedications from across the Greek world. These were stored in treasuries built by individual poleis—such as the Athenian Treasury or the Treasury of the Siphnians—which required careful recordkeeping and secure storage.
When large sanctuaries expanded their operations and sources of income grew, expenses increased as well. Epigraphic records allow researchers to assess the impact of this expansion and understand the logistical challenges faced by such sanctuaries. Jeremy McInerney’s examination of two Delian inscriptions, IG XI.2 154 and ID 98, reveals that the increased complexity of the Sanctuary of Apollo at Delos’ operations highlights key features of the Delian accounts.
Elites who served as ambassadors for Delos received extraordinarily high compensation for their service, and as an economic agent, Delos profited the wealthy. Yet the general populace also shared in the sanctuary’s wealth through a steady stream of small, unskilled jobs that brought modest financial rewards, meaning the sanctuary of Delos reflected the economic inequalities characteristic of the Hellenistic Greek world.
The managers and treasurers oversaw financial operations, reporting annually to civic or sacred authorities. They kept records to ensure transparency and continuity—vital for maintaining trust in a religious institution so dependent on collective contributions. As historian Leopold Migeotte notes, “The sanctuaries were laboratories of economic rationality within the sacred sphere” (L’économie des cités grecques, 2002).
Personnel and the leather trade
Evidence of workers in ancient Greek sanctuaries includes inscribed accounts, tools, debris from marble, metal, and ceramic working, kilns, and smelting pits. We also know about itinerant workers and laborers from various locations engaged in special projects, and both written accounts and archaeological evidence provide information on repairs, especially temple reconstruction after major natural disasters.
Inscriptions from Delos detail the employment of hundreds of workers involved in temple maintenance and harbor operations. These inscriptions include specifications for wages, materials, and work schedules—reflecting administrative sophistication comparable to modern project management. The Delian accounts (IG XI 2, 161) demonstrate that the sanctuary functioned as both a religious and economic enterprise, with logistical records tracking even minor items such as rope, nails, and timber shipments.
For major sanctuaries, coordinating labor was crucial, particularly during construction or festival seasons. Judith Barringer examines what is known—or can be surmised—about workers’ dwellings.
Sanctuaries also engaged in financial activities as producers of goods distributed and used beyond the sacred area. An example is leather: sacrificial rituals provided raw material for leather-making and supported the temple economy as a source of revenue. Leather originating from sacrificial ritual was perceived as special, higher-quality leather, guaranteeing both its commercial and symbolic value.
Although skins from sacrifices frequently appear in epigraphical material related to sacrifice, scholars have rarely examined the role of skins and leather production in sanctuaries. Petra Pakkanen addresses this theme, showing that major sanctuaries hosting large-scale public sacrifices systematically provided this by-product for leather production and that skins were handled within sanctuaries for regulated trade.
Examples such as Halaesa, a Greek colony in Sicily, and the sanctuary of Herakles by the Ilissos River in Classical Athens, illustrate the connection between tanning establishments and sanctuaries.
