Bernard Knapp - The Archaeology of Community on Bronze Age Cyprus Politiko Phorades in Context

The Archaeology of Community on Bronze Age Cyprus: Politiko "Phorades" in ContextAuthor(s): A. Bernard KnappSource: American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 107, No. 4 (Oct., 2003), pp. 559-580Published by: Archaeological Institute of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40024323 .Accessed: 06/04/2011 11:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aia. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Archaeological Institute of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toAmerican Journal of Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aia

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40024323?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aia

The Archaeology of Community on Bronze Age Cyprus: Politiko Phorades in Context

A. BERNARD KNAPP

Abstract The study of human communities is central to a social

archaeology. Reviewing evidence from several published and unpublished sites on prehistoric Cyprus, and in particular from the recently concluded excavations at Politiko Phorades, this article considers the concept of "community" and how it may be relevant to archaeology. Having established this relevance, the focus then falls on the socially and spatially remote mining community, which represents the work- and living-space of people drawn together by the imperatives of time and labor. Do the expediency and impermanence that characterize such communities in the modern world find echoes in the prehistoric past? It is suggested that the concept of place was instrumental in structuring Bronze Age communities, and that the smelting site at Phorades formed part of a nested, regional community with a distinct social organization and communication networks linked to other regional and supra-regional polities.*

If we can accept the culturally patterned assemblage of family members within a household as material culture . . . , then it becomes obvious that a whole range of data normally in the domain of the ethnologist should also be considered from the material perspective. The same applies to the disposition of these family units into aggregates called communities. One definition of an archaeological assemblage is simply the material remains of a community. However, we must remember that communities are composed of peo-

ple. In reality, the community and the archaeological assemblage are one. The living component of the as- semblages, subassemblages, and artifacts identified in archaeology may only be ignored at our peril.1 Archaeologists have long studied households,

regions, cultures, civilizations, and world systems but only very recently have they focused specifically on the concept of community,2 including the mining community.3 Canuto and Yaeger's volume on the archaeology of New World communities represents a recent watershed in these developments.4 Over the past decade, the study of human communities has also attained some prominence in Euro- pean social anthropology,5 Latin American ethnography,6 social geography,7 and anthropological theory generally.8 The all-encompassing study of landscape and place9 also incorporates, quite naturally, the study of community.10

A social archaeology of the 21st century, whether practiced in the Anglo-American or European tradition, must take account of the concept of community in order to move beyond binary constraints -

contrasting the local and global, the natural and ideational, processual and postprocessual - and to see how our understandings of locality, community, and region help to construct concepts of identi-

* The original version of this study was presented in a symposium, Archaeological Approaches to Locality and Community, or-

ganized by Emma Blake at the 2001 annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology (New Orleans, Louisiana) . I am grateful to Emma Blake for inviting me, and to the British Academy and the University of Glasgow Faculty of Arts for the financial support that enabled me to attend the meetings. I also wish to thank several people who read and commented on earlier drafts of this paper: Fokke Gerritsen (University of Amsterdam) , Michael Given and Peter van Dommelen (Uni- versity of Glasgow), Lisa Kealhofer (Santa Clara University), PriscillaKeswani (independent scholar), Sturt Manning (Uni- versity of Reading), Lynn Meskell (Columbia University), Emma Blake (University of Michigan) , and several anonymous referees. I also thankjay Noller and Sturt Manning for providing additional information on, respectively, the geomorphological and AMS dating aspects. Sturt Manning also produced figs. la-Id; Michael Given prepared figs. 2 and 3. Finally, without the dedication, hard work, and ideas of my colleagues Va- siliki Kassiandiou (University of Cyprus) , Michael Donnelly (independent scholar) , Paul Duffy (Glasgow University Archaeo-

logical Research Division/ GUARD) , Jay Noller (Oregon State University) , and Sven van Lokeren (University College Lon- don) in excavating Phorades, there would be no data to interpret in terms of an archaeology of communities. Most of the people mentioned here could be seen as at least partly culpa- ble for the ideas I have presented in this study, but not necessarily for the way I have expressed them.

'DeetzW^ 11. 2 E.g., Wilk and Ashmore 1988; MacEachern et al. 1989;

Schwartz and Falconer 1994; Kolb and Snead 1997; Maxham 2000; Gerritsen 2003.

3 Douglass 1998; Knapp 1998, 3-8. 4 Canuto and Yaeger 2000. 5Lovelll998. 6 Low 2000. 7Pred 1986; Soja 2000. 8 Gupta and Ferguson 1997; Amit 2002; Robin and Roths-

child 2002. 9 Ashmore and Knapp 1999; Anschuetzetal. 2001;Thomas

2001. 10 E.g., Blul996.

American Journal of Archaeology 107 (2003) 559-80 559

560 A. BERNARD KNAPP [AJA107

ty and to shape historical processes of formulating place. This article uses a case study from prehistoric Cyprus to consider how communities may form and endure, and whether and how locality or community may be read as material expressions of social relationships (see the quote from Deetz above). No less important, it seeks to transcend divisions between Old and New World archaeology.

First I present an overview of evidence from a recent excavation on Cyprus11 in order to assess a specific archaeological problem: how and why did industrial and agricultural communities arise during the Bronze Age in the peripheral foothills of Cy- prus 's Troodos Mountains? How can a detailed eval- uation of their social and spatial setting inform an archaeology of community, and at the same time help us to reconstruct patterns of regional settlement on prehistoric Cyprus? Having raised these issues and introduced the local situation on Cyprus, I review the concept of community more generally and archaeological approaches to that concept specifically, drawing upon recent and related studies in both the New World and Old. I move on to examine the construct of the mining community and then discuss how we might develop a more nuanced archaeology of community. I emphasize the expediency and impermanence that characterize socially and spatially remote mining communities, and discuss how such recent or contemporary communities may find echoes in the prehistoric past.

Using the concept of the "imagined community"12 I then discuss the Cypriot case study in its local and regional context. I argue that place was instrumental in structuring Bronze Age industrial landscapes, and that the archaeological site of Politiko Phorades formed part of a broader, self-contained regional community with a distinct social organization and communication networks linked to other regional and interregional politico-economic entities.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Among the 14th-century B.C. cuneiform archives found at the site of Amarna in Egypt were several letters sent from the king of Cyprus (Alashiya) to the Egyptian pharaoh. From them we learn unequiv-

ocally that copper was produced locally on Cyprus, and in quantities sufficient to merit regal attention and intervention.13 Another earlier, 18th-century B.C. cuneiform text from Mari (on the Euphrates River, Syria) mentions "mountain copper" from

Alashiya,14 which arguably refers to copper-ore de-

posits in the Troodos Mountains of Cyprus. The

mining, production, and export of Cypriot copper peaked during the Late Bronze Age (about 1600- 1200 B.C.), a time of settlement growth, unprecedented prosperity, and developing social complexity. Along the Cypriot coast arose urban centers with notable public buildings and harbors, their wealth

stemming from widening trade contacts in the eastern Mediterranean.15 Cyprus 's most lucrative export at this time was copper, traded in oxhide-shaped ingots weighing about 65 pounds each. Such in-

gots are widely regarded as an internationally ac-

cepted unit of trade during the Late Bronze Age; they have been found at a number of sites throughout the eastern Mediterranean and as far west as

Sicily and Sardinia.16 The Uluburun shipwreck, discovered off the southern coast of Turkey,17 carried almost 1 1 tons of copper in the form of these same oxhide ingots, some of which are now argued to be consistent with production from Cypriot copper ores,18 albeit not from any single ore deposit.19 Because the ship was also carrying a quantity of Cyp- riot pottery, including lamps and other manifestly unused items (and thus stock en route to a mar-

ket), Cyprus must have been a major port of call for the Uluburun ship before disaster struck.

This historical scenario is well known among Mediterranean archaeologists,20 while the oxhide

ingots represent the end product of a complex industrial process involving the mining, smelting, and

casting of copper. Until very recently, however, ar-

chaeologists working on Cyprus concerned themselves chiefly with the finished products of this process: the ingots themselves or the objets d 'art crafted from them. The spatial scale and social organization that lay behind the unprecedented levels of economic development during the Late Bronze

Age has received some attention in the literature.21

And, while the prescriptive settlement system proposed almost 40 years ago22 has to some extent been

11 Knapp, Donnelly, and Kassianidou 1998; Knapp etal. 1999,2001,2002.

12Isbell 2000, see further below. 13Moran 1996. 14Sassonl996, 18. 15 Knapp 1986. 16Muhlyetal. 1988.

17Pulakl998. 18 Gale 2001, 125. 19Hauptmann et al. 2002, 18-9. 20Muhly 1982; Knapp 2000. 21Muhly 1982; Merrillees 1992; Keswani 1993; Webb and

Frankel 1994. 22 Catling 1962.

2003] THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF COMMUNITY ON BRONZE AGE CYPRUS 561

tested on the ground,23 only recently has it become the object of theoretical and quantitative attention.24 Despite this work, however, almost everything we know about regional settlement systems, or about the industrial and agricultural processes and social practices that lay behind them, is conjectural, or reconstructed on the basis of later evidence. Beginning in 1992, the Sydney Cyprus Survey Project (SCSP) set out to change that situation.

THE SYDNEY CYPRUS SURVEY PROJECT AND THE EXCAVATIONS AT POLITIKO PHORADES

One primary aim of SCSP25 was to examine the

ways in which human communities emerged and

developed in the northern Troodos foothills of Cy- prus. We pursued this aim by classifying sites and settlements with reference to their chronological placement, internal organization, and their spatial and functional relationships with other activity areas in the survey region. For reasons explained at length in the final publication,26 we defined a settlement as

any "site" containing material remains in close association with architectural features spread over 1 ha or more, or including several distinct structures. "Pre- historic" sites without architecture presented more

specific problems:27 slag heaps, lithic scatters, and industrial installations, for example, might be re-

garded as sites, but not as settlements. Another main concern of SCSP was to consider

how settlement location and patterns were related to metallurgical and agricultural resources. Based on evidence of known mining regions and historical or prehistoric mining communities on Cyprus,28 we expected to find two key components of the settlement hierarchies proposed in the literature: industrial sites (smelting areas, slag heaps, mines) and the agricultural villages that supported them.

During the course of the survey, project geomor- phologist Jay Noller (Oregon State University) ob- served a large quantity of slag and furnace material

eroding out of the bank of a dry creek bed, enough cultural material to indicate an industrial installa- tion. The site, now designated Politiko Phorades,

proved to be a small copper-smelting workshop.29 Radiocarbon dates, well-stratified pottery, and the

geological setting all place Phorades in an early phase of the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1700-1500 B.C.). Pale-

oenvironmental analysis, including detailed geomorphological mapping and stratigraphical study of soils and sediments, reveals an approximately 15,000 year record of environmental change in the

Kouphos River valley, where Phorades is situated. One of the key stratigraphic sections of the ancient

Kouphos River sediments is a stream-bank expo- sure that includes the Phorades site materials. In this exposed section, Phorades materials overlie river channel sediments dated to about 2000 B.C. by soil-carbonate morphology and radiocarbon dates on detrital charcoal.

The Late Cypriot pottery recovered from Phorades (White Slip I and II [early], Monochrome, Plain White Wheelmade and Plain White Handmade, Red Lustrous Wheel Made, Black Slip, Red Slip Wheel- made, Base Ring I) was found almost exclusively within the site's clearly stratified metalworking levels; the limited amount recovered provides a further indicator of the specialized nature of this site. The dearth of coarse wares and the presence of what may be considered nonutilitarian fine-ware, or elite pottery styles (e.g., White Slip, Base Ring, Black Slip, Red Lustrous, one possible Aegean import) suggest that

somebody at Phorades had access to what we usually regard as higher-status goods (typically seen in fu-

nerary contexts). An anomalous and intrusive coni- cal boulder, with a small deposit of calcined bone found at its base, suggests other activities, but whether these were ceremonial30 or simply commensal in nature is a matter of debate.

Currently there are six radiocarbon determinations from Phorades, with six more under way. These six samples give a range of ages; one sample in particular is much older than the rest (OxA-9972), while another is significantly younger (OxA-7013) (see fig. la). In both these extreme cases, the labo-

ratory measurement errors are large and the sam-

ples fall toward the technical limits for possible dating, making these samples less reliable than the others. The other four dates offer a more coherent

picture, with calibrated age ranges from the start of the second millennium B.C. through the end of the 16th century B.C. (fig. lb). Such a range of ages might well be argued to display the real and vary- ing ages of tree rings in charcoal employed for

smelting ores (with OxA-9932 perhaps the inner

23E.g.,Swiny 1981; Manning and Conwell 1992; Rupp 1993, in press; Manning et al. 1994.

24 E.g., Keswani 1996; Knapp 1997. 25 Given et al. 1999; Given and Knapp 2003. 26 Given and Knapp 2003, 26-9. 27 Cf. Bintliffetal. 1999.

28 Constantinou 1992. 29

Knapp, Donnelly, and Kassianidou 1998; Knapp et al. 1999, 2001, 2002. Detailed presentation and discussion of all the data outlined here will appear in Knapp et al. (forthcoming) .

30Karageorghis 1992, 212.


Fig. la. Phorades radiocarbon determinations. Calibrated probability distributions determined by OxCal (Bronk Ramsey 1995) using the INTCAL98 calibration dataset (Stuiver et al. 1998). The lines under each probability distribution show the first, second, and third standard deviation confidence ranges respectively. (Prepared by Sturt W. Manning)

rings of a longer-lived tree). The more recent ages in such a set would then provide termini post quos relatively close to the real age of human use. Three of the determinations lie close to each other (OxA- 8521, OxA-9818, OxA-9817), and offer a relatively coherent "phase" most likely placed within the time

range of about 1700-1500 B.C. (see figs, lc and Id). An array of evidence demonstrates that Phorades

was a primary copper smelting workshop. All the

slags recovered derive from large, "plano-concave" cakes, a type previously unknown on Cyprus.31 Dur-

ing the 1998 season we found a small piece of matte, an intermediate product in the smelting process and thus extremely rare in archaeological excavations. Matte would have had to undergo further treatment before being converted into black copper, which itself would have to be refined further

in order to produce metal of the purity found in some copper oxhide ingots.32 The presence of matte demonstrates beyond doubt that Phorades was a primary smelting workshop. Secondary smelting and refining may have taken place at the site, some- where in the surrounding mining region, at intermediate production centers like Athienou,33 or in the coastal towns from which the ingots of copper were exported.34

Over three field seasons we recovered more than 3.5 tons (some 20,000 pieces) of slag, along with almost 6,000 fragments of furnace rims, walls, and

bases, as well as 50 nearly complete tuyeres (clay "pipes" that force air into smelting furnaces) and over 600 fragments of diverse tuyere types. The metalworkers at Phorades used river-channel de-

posits to construct an artificial bank where they

31Kassianidoul999. 32 Gale 1989; Knapp 2000; cf. Hauptmann etal. (2002, 19),

who point out that the copper in these ingots was highly po-

rous with concentrations of copper oxide inclusions. 33Dothan and Ben-Tor 1983. 34Muhly 1982, 1989; Knapp 1989, 1997.


Fig. lb. Analysis of the central group of four determinations excluding significantly older OxA-9972 and younger OxA-7013. Dates lie ca. 2000-1500 B.C. OxA-9932 is clearly older than the other three dates. Data from OxCal using INTCAL98. (Prepared by Sturt W. Manning)

went about their work. Slag, the waste product of the smelting process, was piled against the creek's bank, eventually forming a small heap. The size and composite nature of the cobble bank suggest a sequence of activities as opposed to a single phase, while the discovery of numerous tiny snail shells within the bank, all postdating its construction, may be taken as one indicator that these industrial operations were conducted seasonally. If so, the smelting of copper at Phorades arguably would have taken place during down time in the agricultural calendar, a common situation for the production of metals, both ancient and modern (discussed further below). Phorades has all the features we would expect to find in an industrial in- stallation, but almost nothing indicative of a living community. Nonetheless, those who "worked" Pho- rades had to belong to some social structure that would have provided housing and subsistence; almost certainly such a community was situated on the arable land nearby.

The Location and Function of Phorades Proximity to mineral deposits, fuel, water, and

refractory clay were among the most important physical factors that dictated where to establish an ancient smelting workshop. Because the ore, the flux, and the fuel are equally available in the direct vicinity of the mines around Phorades, the workshop's location may have been chosen in part because of the creek, which would have provided the clay and water required for construction of the furnaces. A spring near the site also would have provided drink- ing water for the workers even during the hottest months. The most likely source of the ores smelted at Phorades was the gossan at Kokkinorotsos ("red rock"), which lies about 800 m northwest of the site. (A gossan is an iron-rich, often distinctively red mineral deposit typically found directly above rich deposits of copper sulfides.)

The amount of slag found at Phorades points to a moderate level of production and suggests a limited manufacture of copper for local consumption,


Fig. lc. Analysis model of the three approximately contemporary determinations assuming they represent a phase of activity or resource use at the site. Beginning of the phase defined as "First"; end of the phase as "Last." Dates lie between ca. 1700 and ca. 1500 B.C. See fig. Id. Data from OxCal using INTCAL98. (Prepared by Sturt W. Manning)

perhaps with some surplus entering a network where metal was exchanged for pottery and other

goods. We believe that Phorades was only one of many such smelting sites in the Troodos foothills, each

supported by one or more agricultural communities (two other relevant sites are discussed below but most others will have been destroyed by 20th-

century mining operations). Metalsmiths may have

enjoyed a high status throughout the Early-Mid- dle Bronze Age and into the beginning of the Late Bronze (ca. 2500-1600 B.C.). As the Late Bronze

Age progressed, and as copper production became more centralized, metalsmiths seem to have become

increasingly specialized, sponsored or perhaps dominated by regional or local elites. If so, the seasonal activities apparent at sites like Phorades would have changed later to a full-time enterprise.

The Phorades excavations force us to reconsider not

just an unprecedented array of archaeometallurgical developments, but also site and community con- stellations of the Late Bronze Age on Cyprus: industrial sites, agricultural villages, and rural sanctuaries, on the one hand, and the inland towns and coastal distribution centers to which they were linked, on the other.35 Based on SCSP's intensive survey and

spatial analyses of the region surrounding Phorades, we can reconstruct the basic components of this Bronze Age industrial community as follows:36 the ore itself would have come from mines on the gossan ridge (Kokkinorotsos) just northwest of the site and would have been prepared near the ore bodies located there. The actual site of Phorades may have extend- ed about 100 m farther west, and thus closer to the mines: in this largely eroded landscape, we have re-

35Keswani 1996; Knapp 1997. 36Knappetal. 2001, 2002.


Fig. Id. Correlation plots showing the relationship between likelihood of length of time between First and Last as defined in fig. lc versus the calendar date for the start of the phase (First) and the end of the phase (Last) . The white-gray areas indicate the most likely result; the red to black areas the least likely. Top, the analysis determines a date for the start of the phase ca. 1700-1600 B.C., with the late 17th century B.C. the most likely. Bottom, the analysis determines a date for the end of the phase in the 16th century B.C., with a date early in the mid 16th century B.C. the most likely. These dates are termini post quos for actual human use of the wood. Data from OxCal using INTCAL98. (Prepared by SturtW. Manning)

cently noted concentrations of crushed gossan lying in situ alongside the current stream channel. These are some of the key locational and material elements of a self-contained metallurgical production center,

one that had all the essential raw materials, technol-

ogy, and communications necessary for small-scale, localized production, itself integrated into a broader social, economic, and habitational system.


What can a community-based approach add to these observations? Having demonstrated the existence of a Late Bronze Age copper-sulfide smelt-

ing workshop at Phorades, we now need to establish the social and organizational context in which this method of production was adopted, and attempt to understand not just the economic organization but also the wider community and regional structure in which it was embedded. In order to consider these factors, I proceed first by examining how social scientists have conceptualized community, and how such a concept may be relevant to archaeology, including our understanding of Phorades.

CONSTRUCTS OF COMMUNITY

What is a community, and what is the most effec- tive way of conceptualizing community in archaeo-

logical terms? Isbell37 and Yaeger38 have summa- rized in part the diverse anthropological sources from which most archaeologists have drawn their intellectual inspiration. The community tradition-

ally has been regarded as an empirical entity to be discovered and described by ethnographers, a natural territorial unit of human organization linking culture and society.39 Such communities are usual-

ly characterized as sharing residence or space, and

bearing a collective consciousness, knowledge, and

experiences. Typically the community is reckoned to be a fundamental social institution, internally homogeneous and externally bounded, in which all cultural, biological, and social reproduction took place.40

Alternatively, however, communities are also rec-

ognized as being dynamic, historically contingent, even "imagined."41 The people who belong to any individual community are necessarily involved in various social relations that serve to structure and define its nature, its economic base, and its political discourses - both within and beyond the actual

community.42 Cheney,43 for example, shows how

migrant 19th-century miners in Australia sought to stabilize family and community ties in the face of

impermanence. Earlier ethnographic work by Wolf and Mintz44 revealed how rural, supposedly isolat-

ed communities were involved in a "contingent history . . . bewilderingly ramified throughout a vast world system."45 Social scientists today, like archae-

ologists, no longer assume any degree of homogeneity or solidarity within a community; instead they examine the wider social configuration as well as the individual people who make up the communi-

ty.46 Communities therefore should be seen as social constructs, not necessarily tied to a specific place, and providing an important source of iden-

tity for their inhabitants.47 And yet communities undeniably have a strong

association with a "sense of place,"48 the most fundamental form of identity, contestation, and em- bodied experience, where self, space, and time become inseparably intertwined.49 The "construction" of place serves to create and reproduce the

relationships between people and their landscapes; communities - as the prime space in which the social and material conditions of life are developed and transformed - are particularly important in this

regard.50 Those who live within a community are

closely attached to the surrounding landscape and environment. Often they mark their occupational or ideational space in distinctive and patterned ways,51 for example, with respect to their household, or to their modes of subsistence, production, and

consumption.52 Through such patterned and daily activities, values, and beliefs (their habitus), the

people who live in communities build, modify, and

reshape their physical surroundings in order to

preserve memory and experience, to rationalize the

meanings bestowed on the landscape, and to provide their community with a meaningful sense of time and space. Because many of these factors are

directly accessible to archaeology, we can study communities by examining more broadly their land-

scape setting, which served both to frame and to define community identity, as well as individual identities within the community.

Archaeological Constructs of Community How do archaeological concepts of community -

often simply equated with "site" or "settlement" -

37 Isbell 2000, 243-8. 38 Yaeger 2000, 124-6. 39 E.g., Redfield 1955; Bell and Newby 1971. 40 Cf. Steward 1950; Arensberg 1954. 41 Anderson 1991. 42 E.g., Rodman 1992; Moore 1994; Urban 1996; Low 2000;

Ashmore 2003. 43 Cheney 1992. 44 Wolf 1982; Mintz 1974.

45 Isbell 2000, 247. 46Following Giddens 1984; Dobres and Robb 2000; Meskell

2002. 47Yaeger 2000, 124. 48Feld and Basso 1996; Low 1996. 49 Casey 1996, 36-8. 50Bruckand Goodman 1999, 13. 51 Ashmore and Knapp 1999. 52 Anschuetz et al. 2001, 182-3.


relate to this paradigm? The study of "household"

archaeology sparked the current interest in communities: several papers from the 1988 Chacmool Conference on Households and Communities5* reflect this development but tend to understand commu-

nity simply as reflecting a supra-household dimen- sion within a fixed locality.54 Kolb and Snead, using data from Hawai'i and New Mexico,55 sought to provide a more explicit archaeological definition of

community as a territorially discrete, usually con-

tiguous, natural unit of interacting individuals who control land and labor and share membership in the community as a result of common residential and subsistence interests. The result is a shared cultural landscape - a "place" that forms the basis of a community's identity, and a descriptive account of ideal human types and the "activity areas" they create. The main problem with this approach is that it offers little scope for considering the role of human intention or agency, and fails to explain how communities were constructed, developed, or

changed through time. Isbell56 outlines a distinction between two ap-

proaches to community-based studies exemplified in the papers from The Archaeology of Communities?.51 the "natural" community and the "imagined" com-

munity. The first approach, that of the natural com-

munity, is essentialist in concept and views local

groups as sharing territory, cultural values, economic interests, and worldviews. Such an overarching, universal notion of community is closely related to

ethnographic community studies that formed the basis both of 20th-century American anthropolo- gy58 and of most European social anthropology practiced during the same era.59 The second approach, that of the imagined community as conceived by Isbell and other contributors to the Canuto and

Yaeger volume,60 might be named after Benedict Anderson's "imagined communities"61 but it is only linked tangentially to that concept. For Anderson, not just communities but entire nations are formed

by ideological connections through space and time, or by imagined links and mythic relations to place. Yaeger discusses two levels of communities, the lo-

cal and the regional, in terms of certain "practices of affiliation" - ceremonial and ritual activity, house construction and orientation - that define commu-

nity membership (and differentiate it from others), enforce group identity, and open up the commu-

nity as a potential resource for use in social negotiations.62 The appeal of the "imagined community" concept lies in its dynamism and intransience, and in its application to much smaller social groups. In such a community, people make informed choices, pursue goals and alternatives that are at times in- tentional, at other times unintentional, and establish personal as well as community identities - all circumscribed and configured by practice.63

The detailed and closely focused discussions in the Canuto and Yaeger volume should serve to re-

invigorate both New and Old World archaeologists' interest in studying how people and place are inte-

grated socially, and how the community fosters a sense of shared identity. Isbell 's dichotomy between natural and imagined communities is not played out as clearly in the volume's chapters as he suggests, especially with respect to the self-promoting activities of individual agents. Nonetheless both Isbell 's notion of the imagined community and Yae-

ger's concept of differing local and regional com-

munity levels are taken up below in an attempt to

interpret the role of a prehistoric Cypriot mining community within its regional context.

Moving beyond the New World, archaeological studies seeking to engage the concept of commu-

nity - some less well attuned than others to anthro-

pological constructs - have been conducted in

Europe,64 the Mediterranean,65 and the Middle East.66 Equally important for the present study is the corpus of research related to mining communities.67

The theoretical model of a "community area"

developed in Czech archaeology68 has been used to study prehistoric farming communities in Bohe- mia. This community area model presumes the existence of individual communities with spatially- restricted "activity areas" (e.g., habitation, storage, pasture, mortuary) in delimited but not necessari-

53MacEachernetal. 1989. 54 E.g., Lekson 1989; Sullivan 1989. 55 Kolb and Snead 1997. 56 Isbell 2000. 57 Canuto and Yaeger 2000. 58 E.g., Murdock 1949; Arensberg and Kimball 1965. 59 E.g., Firth 1936; Kuper 1996. 60 E.g., Pauketat 2000; Yaeger 2000. 61 Anderson 1991.

62Yaeger 2000, 125-6. 63Bourdieu 1977, 1990. 64E.g., Kuna 1991; Neustupny 1991, 1998; Gerritsen 2003. 65 E.g., Gilmore 1987 (ethnography); Dyson 1992; Donlan

and Thomas 1993. 66 E.g., Schwartz and Falconer 1994; Verhoeven 1999. 67

E.g., Bulmer 1975; Cheney 1992; Douglass 1998; Knapp, Pigott, and Herbert 1998.

b8 Neustupny 1991.


ly contiguous tracts of territory. Neustupny's study focuses on the definition and quantification of ac-

tivity areas and the work carried out in such areas; it also seeks to reconstruct the landscape in which all these community activities took place. Kuna sees each community as sharing a common territory with

specialized activity areas;69 the focus is not on an

archaeological site but on off-site activities, the environment, and settlement structures, all of which

provide a "continuum of information" on specific functions or activities. Behind Kuna's prehistoric community area lies the implicit notion that the

landscape - continuously inhabited or exploited by a local population - was divided into spatially reg- ular segments corresponding to basic economic or social units. In his case study, Kuna seeks to identi-

fy prehistoric households at several sites, enumer- ate the number of households within a habitation area, relate various habitation areas to the commu-

nity area and determine the size of that area, and

finally to consider how the size of community areas

changed through time. The theoretical potential and empirical relevance of the community area model revolves around the notion of nested activity areas within each community, an idea that is taken

up and expanded in this study. Unfortunately, we learn all too little about the "structured human activities" that may have coordinated the nested social and economic units in these settlement zones and community areas.

In a much broader study, Gerritsen considers several major transformations in the landscape and hab- itats of the Meuse-Demer-Scheldt region in northwest Europe between the Bronze Age and the Ro- man period.70 Communities are conceptualized as

dynamic entities based on a collective identity and marked by symbolic boundaries.71 Gerritsen argues that, in premodern societies, communities are defined and constructed both by actors that transform the landscape and in turn by the ways that the or-

ganization of the landscape gives form to the sense of community identity. In particular, the relatively open and loose territorial ordering of the landscape during the Middle Bronze Age gives way to more fixed and formalized relationships - defined by symbolically formed, ancestrally focused burial communities - in the Urnfeld period (Early Iron Age). By the fifth century B.C. (Middle-Late Iron Ages), a

change in these burial practices suggests a transfor-

mation in the way that local communities were defined, with symbols of community now likely involv-

ing farmsteads, arable land, and cult places. By the Roman era, more fixed settlement structures, at times nucleated and enclosed, took on the main

symbolic role of communities. Gerritsen 's study offers an informed discussion on the nature of archae-

ological communities, as well as the sociocultural

practices that facilitate their construction and re-

production through time. Most importantly for the

present study, his concept of local communities is

very firmly grounded in a long-term, regional and

landscape perspective. Below I attempt to establish a more nuanced con-

cept of community in archaeology, building upon the ideas presented above and employing the Cyp- riot case study to anchor and expand upon some notions inherent in this concept. First, however, I discuss the construct of the mining community, one that is equally integral to my own interpretation.

The Mining Community Methodologically, it is important to bear in mind

the differences between the static site or fixed settlement pattern analysis, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the more dynamic and flexible en-

tity that is a human community (see following sec-

tion) . In so doing, we must recall that mining communities have existed throughout historic times as well as in prehistoric periods, and have been studied at length by historical archaeologists, prehisto- rians, anthropologists, and social historians.72

The concept of the mining community I seek to

integrate here is based on diverse prehistoric, his-

toric, and contemporary manifestations. In so do-

ing, it is necessary to distinguish clearly between

20th-century corporate mining ventures and preindustrial, or informal, mining activities.73 On the one hand, it might be argued that although we

could expect similarities in some aspects of loca-

tion, interaction, and behavior, the differences in

factors of production, consumption, and transport -

not to mention ideology - make problematic any direct analogy between a prehistoric and historical or contemporary mining community. On the other

hand, the case for using analogical reasoning in

archaeology has been argued repeatedly74 and its

validity demonstrated with respect to relational

analogies (e.g., the "direct historical approach"),

69 Kuna 1991, 332-3. 70 Gerritsen 2003. 71 Following Cohen 1985, 1986. 72 See various papers in Knapp, Pigott, and Herbert 1998.

73MacMillan 1995; Knapp 1998. 74 E.g., Hodder 1982, 16-27; Wylie 1982, 1985; Verhoeven

1999, 67-9.


where multiple, continual, and preferably contextual similarities between the origin and subject of the analogy are provided. Alternatively, where there exist a number and variety of cases in which multi-

ple types of representative data are shown to be associated with certain types of patterned behavior, we may also rely cautiously on analogy. Following on from such contextual reasoning, it is hard to

disagree with Speth's sentiments in a recent review article of two earlier studies on community dynamics in the American southwest:

Suffice it to say that archaeologists who eschew the use of ethnographic insights in archaeological interpretation may as well quit, because without reference to the living realm there is no "stress," no "mobility," no "alliance," no "aggregation," no "exchange," and no "hierarchy" in the archaeological record, just piles of artifacts [emphasis added] .75

The study of mining communities76 offers a con- structive example of analogical reasoning, not least because of recent attempts to examine, contrast and compare, and articulate prehistoric and historic case studies.77 The distinctive nature of any mining community, past or present, derives at least

partly from the dynamic between working and liv-

ing in a place structured around a single com-

modity, industry, or technology. The location of

underground mines, which in turn dictates the location and layout of a mining community, is fixed

by the nature of minerals and ore bodies. In the

contemporary world, such factors curtail the movement of people, demand labor specialization, and ensure a large degree of reliance on the mining company.78 Local factors also influence the dynamics of modern mining: for example, rapid turn- over in the community, or perceived ethnic and status affiliations, may diminish social solidarity.79 Such communities were often expedient and im-

permanent, with workers of diverse origins and ethnicities drawn together by the need to work. When ore bodies became exhausted, the mining community would scatter to new strikes or new

opportunities. In the modern mining community, therefore, spatial mobility was common while social mobility was not: rarely did a miner rise to a

higher occupational stratum.

Turning to the more remote past, archaeologists increasingly find robust evidence for smaller-scale,

occasionally kin-based mining communities in prehistoric or preindustrial societies, most of which relied on seasonal and nonspecialist labor.80 Thus both recent and ancient mining communities may be temporary or seasonal in nature, but for some- what different reasons. From prehistory through the Medieval period, mining often was carried out by farmers, peasants, or other part-time laborers, chiefly during periods when they were unable to engage in their main livelihood. These miners came to-

gether as a community at certain times of the year to mine or smelt metallic ores, in some cases under

pressure or force from social elites, in other cases to satisfy their own everyday (usually agricultural) needs. Shennan's fleldwork in central Europe indicates that individual Bronze Age mining communities had limited numbers of inhabitants with no

significant degree of internal differentiation.81

European Bronze Age copper mining, moreover, is

argued to have been mainly a winter activity. Simi-

larly, mining expeditions during Egypt's Middle

Kingdom (ca. 2040-1650 B.C.) occurred primarily when the Nile River had flooded and farming was

impossible.82 In Thailand, sound evidence exists for prehistoric mining in which seasonal and

ephemeral, community-based production for local

consumption was the norm.83 We cannot assume, however, that prehistoric

miners and metal producers operated exclusively on a limited, local scale, not least because trans-

ported metals were valuable commodities in high demand over vast regions (e.g., copper, and then iron throughout the ancient Mediterranean world from ca. 2500 B.C.-A.D. 500). Bronson's work in southeast Asia, furthermore, indicates that many historically known, small-time producers of metal were commercial smelters who sold at least a por- tion of their output beyond the local community.84 Many documented preindustrial miners or metalworkers in southeast Asia worked in communities with multiple furnaces and a notable level of co-

operation not only in mining and producing fuel, but also in building and maintaining equipment as well as housing.

Whatever the scale of the operations or the period in question, at the very least we can postulate that the social organization of a small mining com-

munity would have been fluid, often temporary (sea-

75Speth2000, 146. 76 E.g., Thompson 1982; Bulmer 1975; Tenfelde 1992. 77Knapp, Pigott, and Herbert 1998. 78 Bulmer 1975, 61. 79 Bulmer 1975, 69. 80Various case studies in Knapp, Pigott, and Herbert 1998;

Young et al. 1999. 81Shennan 1991, 1993. 82 Shaw 1998. 83 Pigott 1998. 84Bronson 1992, 104-5.


sonal), and clearly expedient.85 Another variation on this theme is the 19th-century mining camp in California and Nevada,86 more a collection of strang- ers than a community of kin or friends. By the end of the 19th century, these camps were made up of men born and raised in mining or former mining towns in California and Nevada, who followed gold or silver rushes from one field to another. Douglass described this phenomenon as "a community without a locus": could such an expedient and imper- manent scenario account, in some cases, for the scant evidence and material variability of mining communities in the archaeological record?

Mining communities generally exhibit physical isolation and a dispersed settlement system. Wheth- er they always demonstrate, as in modern situations, the economic predominance of mining, occupational homogeneity and isolation, sharply segregat- ed family and gender roles, or ideological conflict between miners and managers,87 are issues that may be assessed empirically, given certain types of archaeological data and a social approach to their interpretation. Hardesty's documentary-based research into the records of 19th- through early 20th- century mining communities on the American frontier, for example, revealed that most households comprised a small group of unrelated males living under one roof and sharing domestic chores.88 The material evidence from these same communities indicated domestic cycles that changed throughout the time that various dwellings within a village were occupied. In material terms, the main indica- tors of household variability in these American min-

ing communities were architecture, artifact assem- blages, and site layout, where house floor area was used to estimate the size of the community. How can such factors help us to understand better the material record or social organization of ancient

mining communities? How do they relate to an ar-

chaeology of community?

Toward a Nuanced Archaeology of Community One of the difficulties in establishing an archae-

ology of community is the disjunction between a social concept (community) and the material real-

ity, however extensively interpreted, of a site, settle-

ment, or settlement pattern (compare the concept of the household with the actual structure89) . Al-

though this complex issue cannot be resolved here, the attempt to link the concept of community -

imagined or otherwise - to the patterned archaeo-

logical record is not only valid but essential if we wish to understand better and present possible inter-

pretations of the prehistoric past. Very few archaeologists working today would

adopt a timeless vision of community relations that denied historical context and conditions. Those who maintain that applying modern terms or norms to prehistoric data or data patterns creates an eth-

nocentric, modernist view of past communities and their inhabitants fail to realize that archaeologists cannot view the past directly, and that oftentimes

they create alternative, if not irreconcilable views of the past.90 Archaeological reality and interpretation dictate that we (subjectively) assign categories, group data, and use a mutually intelligible termi-

nology. If the site or settlement area refers to the

preserved archaeological record, the community denotes the living reality of the past.91 To bridge the gap between the material record of the settlement area and the more abstract notion of a prehistoric community, we need to understand how the

activity areas of the community were structured, and to interpret those structures in ways that have mean-

ing for living societies.92 The adoption of the com-

munity concept as a means to understand the material remains of past sites and settlements thus im-

pels archaeologists to define and explain human

activities, and their spatial correlates, in terms of the structured behavior of a living society.

Community consists of the networks of relationships between people as they interact in day to day life. The social and human form of a community creates and is created by landscape and material items. Be- cause of the dialectic between communities and the physical world the shape of a community as it once existed is revealed in its use of space.93

When people establish, elaborate, or modify com-

munity relations, their actions are influenced by social and cultural structures that affect their rela-

tionship with the material world. The shared set of unconscious mental dispositions (like Bourdieu's

habitus) that configures many small communities'

perceptions and actions are nested within what may be termed a local imagined community. The members of such a community share a "deep horizontal

85 See Hardesty 1998; Lawrence 1998; Simmons 1998. 86 Douglass 1998. 87 Buhner 1975, 85-8. 88 Hardesty 1992, 1998. 89 Wilk and Ashmore 1988.

90Preucel 1991, 14; Knapp 1996b, 151. 91 Cf. Schiffer 1972; Binford 1983, 45-55. 92Neustupny 1991, 330. 93 Cheney 1992, 40.


sense of comradeship,"94 an identity constructed and based on social practices occurring within a shared space. Each community develops its own

cognitive map, stemming from the inhabitants' dai-

ly activities and beliefs, to give meaning and ar-

rangement to the world, and to transform physical space into a remembered and meaningful place.95 Within the local community, diverse relationships, ranging from kin and descent to marriage and cli-

ent-patron ties, are embedded in a loosely structured social network.96

Beyond the local community, groups of neighboring farmsteads, industrial and ceremonial sites, and larger, multifunctional centers may form a su-

pra-local level of social integration. Situating the

agricultural, industrial, or ceremonial aspects of the rural community within the larger regional context makes it possible to assess not only how local, everyday practice affects larger-scale social or politico- economic currents or groupings, but also how the

diversity of places in the landscape actively configures and helps to formulate community identity. The local community, then, is nested within what Isbell termed a "regional imagined community"97 -

a larger polity that is socially and economically con- stituted from affiliated local groups.

With respect to mining communities, it is cru- cial to consider how other social factors - beyond seasonality, isolation, economic orientation, and household makeup - may influence community location, inter-community links, and daily practices. For example, how were community life, subsistence, and the physical settlement interrelated? The social life of a community is enacted within material conditions constantly reworked according to different people's needs and their interpreta- tions of material reality. Although natural and eco-

logical factors certainly set some community param- eters, within these bounds community patterns are created and reflected by material goods and space.98 The daily practices of the people living or working in a community not only provide necessary suste- nance, they also help to give meaning and memory to a physical space, and thus imbue it with a sense of place.

Mining villages or industrial installations, regard- less of location or time period, often were constructed rapidly and simply to satisfy economic or political needs. At times, such places emerged from ag-

ricultural villages in cycles of boom and bust, when

villagers and farmers become miners and industrial pawns. At other times, production centers arose in isolated settings close to mineral or other resources in demand but devoid of good arable land. Here, miners (or charcoal producers, or potters) may have formed an expedient, seasonal, "commu-

nity without a locus," whose living space was situated elsewhere within the wider regional communi-

ty. The cycles of mining and agriculture in many mining regions99 suggest that we must concentrate not just on mining as an economic activity, but also on the social practices and subsistence needs of the people who made up the mining community. Within these small mining localities or communities, social organization was seldom fixed, while

mining itself was typically expedient and often of a seasonal nature. Nevertheless, mining as a political or economic activity had the capacity to establish social relations between individuals that tran- scended the local community threshold and in some cases transformed regional community relations.

The concepts of local and regional imagined communities, as outlined by Yaeger and Isbell and

developed further here, may be examined more

dynamically by analyzing the social and material

patterns inherent within the mining community. Treated together, as I have sought to do throughout the preceding sections, these concepts help to

provide a fuller and richer, even if still tentative

interpretation of the prehistoric, Late Bronze Age smelting site of Politiko Phorades in its local and

regional context.

PHORADES IN ITS COMMUNITY CONTEXT

An archaeological concept of community involves

not just a specific physical space (a site) but also

certain components of interaction and "practices of affiliation"100 that engage the locality or commu-

nity in social or politico-economic negotiations with-

in a broader, often hierarchical system of place. From what has survived, namely a remnant slag heap with an abundance of unprecedented archaeomet-

allurgical data, Phorades cannot be regarded as a

settlement in terms of the criteria established by SCSP. Rather it functioned primarily as an industri-

al site where ores were smelted: no architectural remains were identified and the closest known,

possibly contemporary site (Aredhiou Vouppes, see

94Yaeger 2000, 126. 95 Anschuetz et al. 2001, 161. 96Gerritsen 2003, 111-3. 97 Isbell 2000, 258.

98 Cheney 1992, 40. "E.g., Given and Knapp 2000. 100Yaeger 2000.


Fig. 2. Map of the Sydney Cyprus Survey Project area, showing modern towns and villages as well as Bronze Age sites or concentrations of material, including those discussed in the text. The map of the survey area also shows the transects covered, the rivers of this region, and the 500 m contour line. (Prepared by Michael Given)

below) lies about 2 km distant. Nonetheless, the miners or metalsmiths who worked at Phorades, in an agriculturally barren area, had to have subsistence support, either from the village in which they lived or from local farmsteads. All these elements -

industrial, agricultural, habitational - were embedded within and formed essential parts of the wider, regional community.

In terms of agricultural sites within this proposed regional community, SCSP identified two other concentrations of Late Bronze material in proximity to Phorades (fig. 2) . Neither of these sites has been excavated. The first concentration, Aredhiou Kola- dhes, produced a very sparse scatter of Late Cypri- ot-Archaic sherds (a 500-700 year time span) , and probably represents the remnants of a severely erod-

ed tomb group or, less likely, a farmstead. The second concentration, Aredhiou Vouppes, is situated on the banks of the Aloupis River drainage, where the agricultural plain meets the igneous (metal- bearing) foothills. The finds from Vouppes, scattered over some 2 ha, were made up exclusively of Mid- dle-Late Bronze Age pottery, pithoi (storage jars), a

typical Late Cypriot style "wall bracket" fragment, and some groundstone implements. The 22 pithos fragments include some very large examples equiv- alent to Keswani's Groups II and III.101 The remain- der of the pottery (10 Plain ware sherds, one sherd each of Black Slip Wheelmade and White Painted Wheelmade I/II wares) are all Late Cypriot in date.102 On the one hand, the bulk of this material

suggests a floruit for Vouppes sometime in the Late

101 Keswani 1989. 102Knapp et al. 1994, 337-8.


Cypriot II period (or Protohistoric Bronze Age/ ProBA 2), about 1400-1200 B.C., and thus some 100 years later than the material from Phorades. On the other hand, Vouppes also produced one sherd from a Red Polished bowl of Middle Cypriot date

(or Prehistoric Bronze Age/PreBA 2), raising the

possibility that Vouppes might also be earlier than, as well as contemporary with, Phorades. Without excavation, however, no further conclusions may be drawn on its chronological emplacement: despite the fact that archaeological survey can stand alone as a coherent and viable data source,103 survey ar-

chaeology is not a definitive science. The nature of the material from Vouppes, however,

does enable us to say something further about the

possible role of this site within its regional setting. The pithoi fragments from Vouppes derive from stor-

age vessels of various sizes, including some very large examples. In the final publication of SCSP,104 we

argue at length for the likelihood that Vouppes was an (officially managed?) agricultural support village provisioning one or more mining or industrial sites in its immediate vicinity. Webb and Frankel have identified a similar, Late Bronze Age agricultural village and production center at Analiondas Paliokli- chia, some 10 km southeast of Vouppes}05 Surface finds collected at Palioklichia consisted of over 1,000 pithos fragments and about 200 querns, rubbers, and

grinders, indicating that grain was the primary com-

modity produced at the site. The output from Palioklichia could well have supported workers from a mining community or communities in or near the ore bodies at Mathiati, Sha, and Lythrodondas. We

may surmise that such agricultural settlements formed one basic component of a Late Bronze Age regional community system and were intricately involved in the sociopolitical and economic matrices of that time. The farmers who resided in village communities like Vouppes and Palioklichia, in other words, would have provided food for the mining enterprise, and in addition may have produced a surplus of

grains or olive oil to be redistributed up the line to

secondary or primary (coastal) centers.106 Two possible Bronze Age exceptions to the pat-

tern suggested for Phorades and Vouppes involve sites that are, respectively, about four centuries earlier

(Ambelikou Aletri) and three centuries later (Apli- ki Karamallos) than Phorades. Both sites, each in dif-

ferent ways, contrast strikingly with Phorades. The

very limited and fragmentary remains from a small- scale rescue excavation conducted in 1942 at the Middle Cypriot I (PreBA 1) site at Ambelikou Aletri

may indicate a very early mining village. Two areas were excavated (the larger approximately 20 x 10 m, the smaller approximately 5 x 5 m), and 10 trial trenches were dug.107 The area excavations produced some fragmentary wall sections and what

appear to be two complete, subrectangular build-

ings.108 The soundings produced a few stone foun- dations and fragmentary walls as well as a lot of de- bris.109 Of equal interest and more important for

dating the site were the groundstone tools and

pottery recovered from ancient workings within the modern mining shafts (about 250 m distant from Aletri) then being explored by the Hellenic Com-

pany of Chemicals and Manures (now Hellenic

Copper Mining Ltd) . The Red Polished III sherds, 19th century B.C. in date, came from approximately 19 m deep inside the Stoa 2 shaft and 2 m deep inside the Kekleimenou 1 shaft (reachable only from within Stoa 2). Although no formal excavations were conducted in the mining shafts, these artifacts were clearly in situ. Thus it seems certain that at this very early date, marketable seams of qual- ity ore were being recovered with very focused ef- fort, deep inside the mines near Ambelikou.

The second site, Apliki Karamallos, was discovered by a mining engineer from the Cyprus Mines

Corporation, which was engaged in opencast ex-

plorations of the South Hill near the modern vil-

lage of Apliki. Rescue excavations were conducted

immediately after the discovery in 1938 and were followed by more extensive excavations the follow-

ing summer.110 Both undertakings in the neck of the South Hill111 demonstrated a 13th-12th centu-

ry B.C. date for the site112 and provided not only sound evidence for primary smelting activity but also abundant pottery finds, structural remains, stone tools (pestles, rubbers, and querns), spindle whorls and loom weights, and two charred fiber baskets containing grain. Helbaek later concluded that the variety of plant remains recovered from the

Apliki excavations would have been difficult to cul- tivate on the "steep rocky slopes of the immediate

surroundings which to-day [sic] show no traces of

terracing."113 All of this evidence suggests that Ap-

103 Cherry 1983. 104 Given and Knapp 2003, 179-82. 105 Webb and Frankel 1994. 106Keswani 1993, 1996; Knapp 1997. 107Merrillees 1984, 3-4 and figs. 1-4. 108 Merrillees 1984, 4, fig. 2.

109Merrillees 1984, 3-4 and figs. 3-4. 110 Du Plat Taylor 1952; Muhly 1989, 306-10. 111 Du Plat Taylor 1952, fig. 2 and pl. XXIV. luSee also Manning et al. 2001. 113 Helbaek 1962, 185-6.


liki was indeed a miners' community that included not only living space for the miners who worked there but many of the accoutrements of daily life. If Helbaek's interpretation is valid, however, these miners still had to rely in part on agricultural support villages for their subsistence.

Evaluating the disparate types of evidence from the mining and smelting sites of Ambelikou Aletri, Politiko Phorades, and Apliki Karamallos, spread over a period of some 700 years, presents an interesting challenge in the context of a discussion on Bronze Age industrial and agricultural communities. The finds from Ambelikou are quite limited and at most indicate a few structures that may have served either to facilitate production (storage or work rooms) or to shelter those working deep inside the shafts at Stoas 1 and 2 and Kekleimenou 1 . The finds from Apliki, in contrast, demonstrate that miners were living next door to the industrial area where they worked, even if they may have had to import some of their food supplies. Keswani's suggestion that House A at Apliki may have served as an official residence in a broader and closely controlled regional context114 would indicate that a more complex pattern of community relations had developed by the end of the 13th century B.C., when copper production had reached its Bronze Age apogee on the island, and when several different, mainly coastal urban polities may well have exercised differen- tial types of control over that production.

In comparison with Apliki Karamallos and Ambe- likou Aletri, Politiko Phorades stands apart, with no architectural remains and little evidence beyond pottery and a few faunal remains to tell us anything about the people who worked at the site. Neither Ambelikou nor Apliki offer evidence that contra- dicts the regional community pattern proposed here, but they do suggest a more diverse and dynamically evolving pattern through time. The re-

gional pattern proposed in this study can be tested

by further survey work in or near the igneous zone of the Troodos Mountains.115 In contrast, Apliki has now been destroyed entirely by modern mining operations, and along with Ambelikou lies in the Turk-

ish-occupied area of northern Cyprus, which at this time cannot be revisited or explored more fully.

SCSP found a notable concentration of archaeo-

metallurgical sites on the slopes of the Kokkinorotsos

gossan (fig. 3) . The evidence consists of at least two

other slag heaps (probably later in date than the material from Phorades) , and a large slag scatter with an exposed section showing layers of roasting con-

glomerate, furnace lining, and furnace floor. Ex- tensive geomorphological study has shown that a check dam some 100 m southwest of Phorades is pre- Roman in date;116 if it were contemporary with Pho- rades, we have good evidence for links between water resource management, agricultural activities, and smelting during the Bronze Age. All of these diverse components of a regional community system demonstrate that people have exploited and modified the landscape around Kokkinorotsos for

nearly four millennia. Much of that activity focused on extracting the area's copper ore resources, which not only altered the environment but also nurtured the social and economic structures that configured this community's relationship with the wider world.

With respect to transportation and communication within and beyond this regional community, Phorades, Vouppes, and Palioklichia may all have fallen within the ambit of a western coastal center such as Toumba tou Skourou,117 an eastern center such as En- komi or Hala Sultan Tekke,118 or some still unidenti- fied local polity (see further below). These sites are readily accessible from the Politiko region, whether following modern roads or the natural trans-

port corridors leading northeast and southeast.

Peltenburg argues that the coastal center of Enko- mi in particular may have established, during the Late Cypriot I (ProBA 1) period, a "security system" of fortified sites:119 those along the northeastern flanks of the Troodos were designed to help pro- cure copper, while those along the southern flanks of the Kyrenia Mountains were designed to pre- vent north coast sites from obtaining copper. Some

support for this notion exists in the architectural similarities between the Late Cypriot I (ProBA 1) fortresses at Enkomi and Ayios Sozomenos Glyka Vrysis Nikolidhes, but no fortress along the southern

Kyrenia range has yet been excavated, and there is no clear evidence to link any of them to Enkomi. Given their proximity, it seems equally plausible to

postulate a link between the Kyrenia fortresses and Toumba tou Skourou. Moreover, based on a detailed

analysis of a suite of Late Bronze Age material in sites to the north and northwest of Phorades, Keswani and Knapp suggest that the orientation of sites like

Vouppes and Phorades within the Politiko-Mitsero

114 Keswani 1993, 77. 115 Now under way, see Given et al. 2001, 2002. 116 Given and Knapp 2003, 140-1.

117 See Vermeule and Wolsky 1990. 118 See Dikaios 1969-1971; Astrom 1976. 119 Peltenburg 1996.


Fig. 3. GIS-derived map (Maplnfo) indicating the spread and diversity of archaeometallurgical remains (slag heaps, adits, smelting site) in the Sydney Cyprus Survey Project's Special Interest Area 7, or Kokkinorotsos (whose contour lines are also shown) . (Prepared by Michael Given)

(SCSP) region cannot be determined definitively, and that the entire region may have fallen within two or more overlapping or competing spheres of

political influence and exchange, one focused on Toumba tou Skourou or the northwest, another focused on Enkomi or other sites in the east and southeast.120

In terms of the differing, nested levels of a re-

gional community, the site of Phorades itself seems to have formed only a single, industrial component, one in which group identity revolved around the

mining and smelting enterprise. The social life of the miners would have been integrated within material conditions constantly reworked to address the needs and meet the demands of that enterprise. The lifetime of Phorades, at least to judge from the

pottery and the radiocarbon dates, was probably one

century or less. If we are correct in assuming that

the production of copper ores during the Bronze

Age was dispersed throughout the Pillow Lavas of the Troodos foothills, and that most of the industrial sites involved would have been worked only as

long as the ores were readily accessible and fuel

readily available, we might envision each one - perhaps even Apliki and Ambelikou - as a "communi-

ty without a locus," albeit more in the metaphysical rather than in a strict spatial sense.121 In turn, such a scenario would help to explain the scant evidence for prehistoric mining sites or communities in the

Cypriot archaeological record. The social organization of these small industrial sites would have been fluid, seasonal, and/or temporary, and fully expedient in terms of the dictates of regional or island- wide elites who in turn acted on demand from

neighboring polities in the Mediterranean.

120Keswani and Knapp 2003. 121 As intended by Douglass (1998).


CONCLUSION At least three steps are needed to develop fur-

ther an archaeology of communities: 1. to engage studies of place in examining the

relationship between locality and community;122 2. to refine and elaborate the concept of the imag-

ined community;123 and 3. to examine more closely and understand more

fully the association among people, locality, community, and material culture as the outcome of specific social and historical processes.

The primary advantage of the imagined commu-

nity concept, in any of its possible ramifications, is that it forces archaeologists to consider imagined connections within regional space, if not an imagined or mythic relation to a particular place. This

concept also should inspire the study of historical

development and historical change, themselves embedded in human intentions and strategies, political relations, and cultural differences - whether between places or within a specific social space. A community is made up of social factions, gen- dered agents, and individual people involved in

promoting, resisting, or suppressing various agen- das. The archaeological concept of an imagined community makes clear the active role of material culture - from artifacts to dwellings to regional land-

scapes - in constructing identities, negotiating social relations, affirming power relations, and en-

abling social reproduction. More specifically, an archaeology of community,

and in particular the concept of an imagined com-

munity, enables us to situate Phorades more firmly in its regional context and in the broader, Late Bronze Age landscape of Cyprus. Phorades and its

agricultural support village Vouppes formed part of a wider, regional community, perhaps a harbinger of the Iron Age town and kingdom of Tamassos, whose remains are located on the western perime- ter of the modern village of Politiko. Neither SCSP nor any previous archaeological investigations, how-

ever, have uncovered evidence for a Late Bronze

Age town center in the Politiko area. Intensive sur-

vey by SCSP revealed a veneer of Late Bronze Age pottery spread across the broad plains immediately to the west and north of Politiko; this phenomenon might well indicate the manuring of fields sur-

rounding a still undiscovered site in this region.124 There are, moreover, some notably rich tombs of Middle Bronze Age date at Politiko Lambertis and

Chomazoudhia,125 as well as some Late Bronze Age remains at Politiko Ayios Iraklidhios Tomb 6 (see fig. 2).126 Site and settlement patterning in and around this sector of the SCSP area thus suggests that a

larger polity, the focus of the proposed broader re-

gional community, may lie very near if not beneath the modern village of Politiko.

An archaeology of community also enables us to

suggest that, at Phorades itself, the shared mentali-

ty that structured the metalworkers' perceptions and actions were situated within a socially distinct

imagined community, whose membership revolved around issues associated with the economic preeminence of mining, spatial isolation, and

perhaps some degree of economic or political conflict between the miners and the managers. In

turn, this local imagined community was embedded within the wider regional community (in SCSP terms, Special Interest Area 7) with all its attendant agricultural and industrial practices of affiliation (fig. 3). This regional community was

clearly more complex, spatially extensive, and multifunctional than the individual, local communities nested within it.

The social and spatial relationships between a

mining site like Phorades, its agricultural catchment area (including Vouppes) , other industrial sites (various workings in and around Kokkinorotsos) , and the wider regional community will vary with respect to the organizational level and scale of production. Industrial sites like Phorades fulfilled the regional community's basic needs for raw materials and certain finished products. But when external demand accelerated the production of copper beyond local or regional capacities, as seems to have been the case during the successive phases of the Late Bronze

Age on Cyprus, mining sites and their community networks soon became integrated into supra-regional trading networks. These developments brought exotic goods, migrant labor, and new ide-

ologies into the mining region, all of which led to

new social uses of space as well as changes in the

social structure of the regional community.127 In

combination, these factors helped to support the

unprecedented technological and social developments that propelled Cyprus into the status of an

urban, state power, and a major purveyor of copper to the Bronze Age Mediterranean world.

The individual mining sites and their associated

communities, set within a landscape both industri-

122 Blake 2001. 123 As defined by Isbell (2000). 124 Given and Knapp 2003, 269-70, color pl. XLVII.

125Masson 1964, 202-4. 126Karageorghis 1965. 127 Knapp 1986, 1997, 46-63.


al and agricultural in nature, profoundly influenced the creation and maintenance of social identities. In turn, the people of the community worked, lived in, and exploited this landscape, and in that process imbued it with economic, ideological, and

personal significance. In such a fashion, the landscape mirrored the community and reaffirmed the

community's social, cultural, and historical links with its surroundings. Because the smelting of copper most likely took place during down time in the agricultural calendar, we can understand better how the rhythms of agricultural and metallurgical production became interlinked in the life cycles and memories of the people who inhabited this landscape. The regional focus of the Sydney Cyprus Survey Project, in combination with the excavations at Politiko Phorades, has enabled us to view a prehistoric industrial site nested in a local agricultural community, in turn embedded within the wider regional community, a space which served both as a medium for and as the outcome of human activity.

For it is still the case that nobody lives in the world in general The banalities and distractions of the way we now live lead us, often enough, to lose sight of how much it matters just where we are and what it is like to be there.128

DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY

UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW

GLASGOW Gl 2 8QQ SCOTLAND

[email protected]

128Geertz 1996, 262.

Works Cited

Astrdm, P. 1976. Hala Sultan Tekke. Vol. 1, Excavations 1897-1971. SIMA 45 (1). Goteborg: P. Astroms.

Amit, V., ed. 2002. Realizing Community: Concepts, Social Relationships and Sentiments. London: Routledge.

Anderson, B. 1991. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. 2nd ed. London: Verso.

Anschuetz, K.F., R.H. Wilshusen, and C.L. Scheick. 2001. "An Archaeology of Landscapes: Perspectives and Di- rections." Journal of Archaeological Research 9:157-207.

Arensberg, CM. 1954. The Community Study Meth- od." American Journal of Sociology 60:109-27.

Arensberg, CM., and S.T. Kimball. 1965. Culture and Community. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.

Ashmore, W. 2003. Decisions and Dispositions: Social- izing Spatial Archaeology." American Anthropologist 104:1172-83.

Ashmore, W., and A.B. Knapp, eds. 1999. Archaeologies of Landscape. Oxford: Blackwell.

Bell, C, and H. Newby. 1971. Community Studies: An In-

troduction to the Sociology of the Local Community. New York: Praeger.

Binford, L.R. 1983. Working at Archaeology. New York: Academic Press.

BintliffJ.L., P. Howard, and A. Snodgrass. 1999. "The Hidden Landscape of Prehistoric Greece." JMA 12:139-68.

Blake, E. 2001. "Archaeological Approaches to Locality and Community." Symposium abstract, 66th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, New Orleans.

Blu, K.I. 1996."'Where Do You Stay At?': Homeplace and Community among the Lumbee." In Senses of Place, edited by S. Feld and K. Basso, 197-227. Sante Fe: School of American Research Press.

Bourdieu, P. 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cam- bridge Studies in Social Anthropology 16. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

. 1990. The Logic of Practice. Cambridge: Polity. Bronk Ramsey, C 1995. "Radiocarbon Calibration and

Analysis of Stratigraphy: The OxCal Program." Radio- carbon 37 :425-30.

Bronson, B. 1992. "Patterns in the Early Southeast Asian Metals Trade." In Early Metallurgy, Trade and Urban Cen- ters in Thailand and Southeast Asia, edited by I. Glover, P. Suchitta, andj. Villiers, 63-1 14. Bangkok: White Lotus.

Briick, J., and M. Goodman. 1999. "Introduction: Themes for a Critical Archaeology of Prehistoric Settlement." In Making Places in the Prehistoric World, edited by J. Briick and M. Goodman, 1-19. London: UCL Press.

Bulmer, M.I.A. 1975. "Sociological Models of the Min- ing Community." Sociological Review 23:61-92.

Canuto, M.A., andj. Yaeger, eds. 2000. Archaeology of Com- munities: A New World Perspective. London: Routledge.

Casey, E.S. 1996. "How to Get from Space to Place in a Fairly Short Stretch of Time: Phenomenological Prole- gomena." In Senses of Place, edited by S. Feld and K Bas- so, 13-52. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.

Catling, H.W. 1962. "Patterns of Settlement in Bronze Age Cyprus." OpAth 4:129-69.

Cherry, J.F. 1983. "Frogs Round the Pond: Perspective on Current Archaeological Survey Projects in the Mediterranean Regions." In Archaeological Survey in the Mediterranean Area, edited by D.R. Keller and D.W. Rupp, 375-416. BAR-IS 155. Oxford: British Archae- ological Reports.

Cheney, S.L. 1992. Uncertain Migrants: The History and Archaeology of a Victorian Goldfield Communi- ty." Australasian Historical Archaeology 10:36-42.

Cohen, A. 1985. The Symbolic Construction of Community. London :Tavistock.

, ed. 1986. Symbolising Boundaries: Identity and Di- versity in British Cultures. Manchester: University of Manchester Press.

Constantinou, G. 1992. "Ancient Copper Mining in Cy- prus." In Cyprus, Copper and the Sea, edited by A. Ma- rangou and K. Psillides, 43-74. Nicosia: Republic of Cyprus.

Deetz, J. 1977. "Material Culture and Archaeology - What's the Difference?" In Historical Archaeology and the Importance of Material Things, edited by L. Fergu-


son, 9-12. Society for Historical Archaeology, Special Publication 2. Chelsea, N.Y.: Society for Historical Archaeology.

Dikaios, P. 1969-1971. Enkomi: Excavations 1948-1958. 3 vols. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.

Dobres, M.A., andj. Robb, eds. 2000. Agency in Archaeol- ogy. London: Routledge.

Donlan, W, and C.G. Thomas. 1993. "The Village Com- munity of Ancient Greece: Neolithic, Bronze and Dark Ages." Studi Micenei ed Egeo-Anatolici 21:61-71.

Dothan, T, and A. Ben-Tor. 1983. Excavations atAthienou, Cyprus. Qedem 16. Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeolo- gy, Hebrew University.

Douglass, W.A. 1998. "The Mining Camp as Communi- ty." In Social Approaches to an Industrial Past: The Ar- chaeology and Anthropology of Mining, edited by A.B. Knapp, V.C. Pigott, and E. Herbert, 97-108. London: Routledge.

Du Plat Taylor, J. 1952. "A Late Bronze Age Settlement at Apliki, Cyprus." Antiquaries Journal 32:133-67 '.

Dyson, S.L. 1992. Community and Society in Roman Italy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Feld, S., and K.H. Basso, eds. 1996. Senses of Place. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.

Firth, R. 1936. We, the Tikopia. London: George Allen and Unwin.

Gale, N.H. 1989. "Archaeometallurgical Studies of Late Bronze Age Copper Oxhide Ingots from the Medi- terranean Region." In Old World Archaeometallurgy, edited by A. Hauptmann, E. Pernicka, and G.A. Wag- ner, 247-68. Der Anschnitt 7. Bochum: Deutschen Bergbau-Museums .

. 2001. "Archaeology, Science-Based Archaeolo- gy and the Mediterranean Bronze Age Metals Trade: A Contribution to the Debate." EJA 4:113-30.

Geertz, C. 1996. "Afterword." In Senses of Place, edited by S. Feld and K. Basso, 259-62. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.

Gerritsen, F. 2003. Local Identities: Landscape and Commu- nity in the Late Prehistoric Meuse-Demer-Scheldt Region. Amsterdam Archaeological Series 9. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam Press.

Giddens, A. 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley: University of Califor- nia Press.

Gilmore, D.D. 1987. Aggression and Community: Paradoxes ofAndalusian Culture. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Given, M., V. Kassianidou, A.B. Knapp, and J. Noller. 2002. "Troodos Archaeological and Environmental Survey Project: Report on the 2001 Season." Levant 34:25-38.

Given, M., and A.B. Knapp. 2000. "The Sydney Cyprus Survey Project and the Archaeology of Mining." In Acts of the Third International Congress of Cypriot Studies, edited by G.C. Ioannides and S.A. Hadjistellis, 281-7. Nicosia: Society of Cypriot Studies.

. 2003. The Sydney Cyprus Survey Project: Social Ap- proaches to Regional Archaeological Survey. Monumenta Archaeologica 21. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, UCLA.

Given, M., A.B. Knapp, I. Evans, E. Gibson, T. Ireland, V. Kassianidou, J. Noller, H. Saunders, L. Sollars, N. Ur- win, K. Winther-Jakobsen, and S. Zesimou. 2001. "Troodos Archaeological and Environmental Survey Project: First Preliminary Report (June-July 2000)." Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus:425-40.

Given, M.J.M., A.B. Knapp, and N. Meyer. 1999. "The Sydney Cyprus Survey Project: An Interdisciplinary Investigation of Long-Term Change in the North Cen- tral Troodos, Cyprus." JFA 26:19-39.

Gupta, A., and J. Ferguson, eds. 1997. Culture, Power, Place. Durham: Duke University Press.

Hardesty, D.L. 1992. "The Miner's Domestic Household: Perspectives from the American West." In Towards a Social History of Mining in the 19th and 20th Centuries, edited by K. Tenfelde, 180-96. Munich: Beck.

. 1998. "Power and the Industrial Mining Com- munity in the American West." In Social Approaches to an Industrial Past: The Archaeology and Anthropology of Mining, edited by A.B. Knapp, V.C. Pigott, and E.W. Herbert, 81-96. London: Routledge.

Hauptmann, A., R. Maddin, and M. Prange. 2002. "On the Structure and Composition of Copper and Tin Ingots Excavated from the Shipwreck of Uluburn." BASOR 328:1-30.

Helbaek, H. 1962. "Late Cypriot Vegetable Diet at Apli- ki." OpAth 4: 171-86.

Hodder, I. 1982. The Present Past: An Introduction to An- thropology for Archaeologists. London: Batsford.

Isbell, W.H. 2000. "What We Should Be Studying: The 'Imagined Community' and the 'Natural Communi- ty'." In Archaeology of Communities: A New World Perspec- tive, edited by M.A. Canuto and J. Yaeger, 243-66. London: Routledge.

Karageorghis, V. 1965. "A Late Cypriot Tomb at Tamas- sos." Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus:ll-29.

. 1992. Miscellanea from Late Bronze Age Cy- prus. 1. On 'Baetyls' in Cyprus." Levant 24:212.

Kassianidou, V. 1999. "Bronze Age Copper Smelting Technology in Cyprus - The Evidence from Politico Phorades." In Metals in Antiquity, edited by S.M.M. Young, A.M. Pollard, P. Budd, and R.A. Ixer, 91-7. BAR-IS 792. Oxford: Archaeopress.

Keswani, PS. 1989. "The Pithoi and Other Plain Ware Vessels." In Vasilikos Valley Project III. Kalavasos-Ayios Dhimitrios II: Ceramics, Objects, Tombs, Specialist Studies, by A. South, P. Russell, and P. Schuster Keswani, 12- 21. SIMA 71 (3). Goteborg: Paul Astroms.

. 1993. "Models of Local Exchange in Late Bronze Age Cyprus." BASOR 289:73-83.

. 1996. "Hierarchies, Heterarchies, and Urban- ization Processes: The View from Bronze Age Cyprus." JMA 9:21 1-49.

Keswani, P.S., and A.B. Knapp. 2003. Bronze Age Bound- aries and Social Exchange in Northwest Cyprus." Of A 22:213-23.

Knapp, A.B. 1986. "Production, Exchange and Socio- Political Complexity on Bronze Age Cyprus." OJA 5:35-60.

. 1989. "Copper Production and Mediterranean Trade: The View from Cyprus." OpAth 18:109-16.

, ed. 1996a. Near Eastern and Aegean Texts from the Third to the First Millennia BC. Sources for the History of Cyprus 2. Altamont, N.Y.: Greece/Cyprus Research Center.

. 1996b. "Archaeology without Gravity: Postmod- ernism and the Past." Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 3:127-58.

. 1997. The Archaeology of Late Bronze Age Lypnot Society: The Study of Settlement, Survey and Landscape. Occasional Paper 4. Glasgow: University of Glasgow, Department of Archaeology.


. 1998. "Social Approaches to the Archaeology and Anthropology of Mining." In Social Approaches to an Industrial Past: The Archaeology and Anthropology of Mining, edited by A.B. Knapp, V.C. Pigott, and E.W. Herbert, 1-23. London: Routledge.

. 2000. "Archaeology, Science-Based Archaeolo- gy and the Mediterranean Bronze Age Metals Trade." EJA 3:31-56.

Knapp, A.B., M. Donnelly, and V. Kassianidou. 1998. "Excavations at Politiko Phorades - 1997." Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus: 247-68.

Knapp, A.B., S.O. Held, I.Johnson, and P.S. Keswani. 1994. "The Sydney-Cyprus Survey Project - Second Preliminary Season (1993) ." Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus:329-43.

Knapp, A.B., V. Kassianidou, and M. Donnelly. 1999. "Excavations At Politiko Phorades - 1998." Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus:125-46.

. 2001. "Copper Smelting in Late Bronze Age Cyprus: The Excavations at Politiko Phorades." NEA 64:204-10.

. 2002. "Excavations at Politiko Phorades: A Bronze Age Copper Smelting Site on Cyprus." Antiquity 76:319-20.

Knapp, A.B., V. Kassianidou, M. Donnelly, P. Duffy, and J. Noller. Forthcoming. The Excavations at Politiko Pho- rades (1996-2000): The Archaeology and Archaeometal- lurgy of a Bronze Age Smelting Site. Philadelphia: INSTAP Academic Press.

Knapp, A.B., V.C. Pigott, and E.W. Herbert, eds. 1998. Social Approaches to an Industrial Past: The Archaeology and Anthropology of Mining. London: Routledge.

Kolb, M.J., and J.E. Snead. 1997. "It's a Small World After All: Comparative Analyses of Community Orga- nization in Archaeology." AmerAnt 62:609-28.

Kuna, M. 1991. "The Structuring of Prehistoric Land- scape." Antiquity 65:332-47.

Kuper, A. 1996. Anthropology and Anthropologists: The Modern British School. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.

Lawrence, S. 1998. "Gender and Community Structure on Australian Colonial Goldfields." In Social Approaches to an Industrial Past: The Archaeology and Anthropology of Mining, edited by A.B. Knapp, V.C. Pigott, and E.W. Herbert, 39-58. London: Routledge.

Lekson, S.H. 1989. The Community in Anasazi Archae- ology." In Households and Communities: Proceedings of the 21st Annual Chacmool Conference, edited by S. MacEachern, DJ.W. Archer, and R.D. Garvin, 181-5. Calgary: Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary.

Lovell, Nadia, ed. 1998. Locality and Belonging. London: Routledge.

Low, S.M. 1996. "Spatializing Culture: The Social Pro- duction and Social Construction of Public Space." American Ethnologist 23:861-79.

. 2000. On the Plaza: The Politics of Public Space and Culture. Austin: University of Texas Press.

MacEachern, S., DJ.W. Archer, and R.D. Garvin, eds. 1989. Households and Communities: Proceedings of the 21st Annual Chacmool Conference. Calgary: Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary.

MacMillan, G. 1995. At the End of the Rainbow: Gold, Land, and People in the Brazilian Amazon. New York: Colum- bia University Press.

Manning, S.W., and D.H. Conwell. 1992. "Maroni Valley Archaeological Survey Project: Preliminary Report

on the 1990-1991 Field Seasons." Report of the Depart- ment of Antiquities, Cyprus: 27 1-83.

Manning, S.W., D.L. Bolger, A. Swinton, and MJ. Pont- ing. 1994. "Maroni Valley Archaeological Survey Project: Preliminary Report on 1992-1993 Seasons." Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus: 345-67.

Manning, S.W., B. Weniger, A.K. South, B. Kling, P.I. Kuniholm, J.D. Muhly, S. Hadjisawas, D.A. Sewell, and G. Cadogan. 2001. "Absolute Age Range of the Late Cypriot IIC Period on Cyprus." Antiquity 75:328-40.

Masson, O. 1954. Kypnaka I. Recherches sur les antiq- uites de Tamassos." BCHS8: 199-238.

Maxham, M.D. 2000. "Rural Communities in the Black Warrior Valley, Alabama: The Role of Commoners in the Creation of the Moundville Landscape." AmerAnt 65:337-54.

Merrillees, R.S. 1984. "Ambelikou-Aletri: A Prelimi- nary Report." Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus:l-13.

. 1992. The Government of Cyprus in the Late Bronze Age." In Acta Cypria 3: Acts of an International Congress on Cypriote Archaeology, edited by P. Astrom, 310-29. SIMA-PB 120. Jonsered: P. Astrom's.

Meskell, L. 2002. Private Life in New Kingdom Egypt. Prin- ceton: Princeton University Press.

Mintz, S. 1974. Caribbean Transformation. Chicago: Aldine. Moore, H.L. 1994. A Passion for Difference. Cambridge:

Polity. Moran, W.L. 1996. "Akkadian Documents from Amar-

na." In Near Eastern and Aegean Texts from the Third to the First Millennia BC, edited by A.B. Knapp, 21-5. Sources for the History of Cyprus 2. Altamont, N.Y.: Greece/ Cyprus Research Center.

Muhly, J.D. 1982. The Nature of Trade in the Late Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean: The Organiza- tion of the Metals' Trade and the Role of Cyprus." In Early Metallurgy in Cyprus, 4000-500 BC, edited byJ.D. Muhly, R. Maddin, and V. Karageorghis, 251-66. Nico- sia: Pierides Foundation.

. 1989. "The Organisation of the Copper Indus- try in Late Bronze Age Cyprus." In Early Society in Cy- prus, edited by E.J. Peltenburg, 298-314. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Muhly, J.D., R. Maddin, and T. Stech. 1988. "Cyprus, Crete and Sardinia: Copper Oxhide Ingots and the Metals Trade." Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus: 281-98.

Murdock, G.P. 1949. Social Structure. London and New York: Macmillan.

Neustupny, E. 1991. "Community Areas of Prehistoric Farmers in Bohemia." Antiquity 65:326-31.

, ed. 1998. Space in Prehistoric Bohemia. Prague: Institute of Archaeology, Academy of Sciences.

Pauketat, T. 2000. "Politicization and Community in the Pre-Columbian Mississippi Valley." In The Archaeology of Communities: A New World Perspective, edited by M.A. Canuto andj. Yaeger, 16-43. London: Routledge.

Peltenburg, E.J. 1996. "From Isolation to State Forma- tion in Cyprus, c. 3500-1500 B.C." In The Development of the Cypriot Economy: From the Prehistoric Period to the Present Day, edited by V. Karageorghis and D. Michaelides, 17-44. Nicosia: Bank of Cyprus, Univer- sity of Cyprus.

Pigott, V. 1998. Prehistoric Copper Mining in the Con- text of Emerging Community Craft Specialization in Northeast Thailand." In Social Approaches to an Indus-

580 A.B. KNAPP, THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF COMMUNITY ON BRONZE AGE CYPRUS

trial Past: The Archaeology and Anthropology of Mining, edited by A.B. Knapp, V.C. Pigott, and E. Herbert, 205-25. London: Routledge.

Pred, A.R. 1986. Place, Practice and Structure: Social and Spatial Transformation in Southern Sweden. Cambridge: Polity.

Preucel, R.W., ed. 1991. Processual and Postprocessual Ar- chaeologies: Multiple Ways of Knowing the Past. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper 10. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Pulak, C. 1998. "The Uluburun Shipwreck: An Over- view." IJNA 27:188-224.

Redfield, R. 1955. The Little Community: Viewpoints for the Study of a Human Whole. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Robin, C, and N.A. Rothschild. 2002. "Archaeological Ethnographies: Social Dynamics of Outdoor Space." Journal of Social Archaeology 2:1 59-72.

Rodman, M.C. 1992. "Empowering Place: Multilocality and Multivocality." American Anthropologist 94:640-56.

Rupp, D.W. 1993. "The Early Prehistoric Period in West- ern Cyprus: Recent Investigations." Echos du Monde Classiquen.s. 12:159-71.

. In press. Evolving Strategies for Investigating an Extensive Terra Incognita in the Paphos District by the Canadian Palaipaphos Survey Project and the Western Cyprus Project." In Archaeological Field Survey in Cyprus: Past History, Future Potentials, edited by M. Iacovou. Studies of the British School at Athens. Lon- don: British School at Athens.

Sasson, J.M. 1996. "Akkadian Documents from Mari and Babylonia (Old Babylonian Period)." In Near Eastern and Aegean Texts from the Third to the First Millennia BC, edited by A.B. Knapp, 17-9. Sources for the History of Cyprus 2. Altamont, N.Y.: Greece/Cyprus Research Center.

Schiffer, M.B. 1972. "Archaeological Context and Sys- temic Context." AmerA w£ 37:156-65.

Schwartz, G.M., and S.E. Falconer, eds. 1994. Archaeolog- ical View from the Countryside: Village Communities in Early Complex Societies. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Insti- tution Press.

Shaw, I. 1998. "Exploiting the Desert Frontier: The Lo- gistics and Politics of Ancient Egyptian Mining Expe- ditions." In Social Approaches to an Industrial Past: The Archaeology and Anthropology of Mining, edited by A.B. Knapp, V.C. Pigott, and E. Herbert, 242-58. London: Routledge.

Shennan, SJ. 1991. "The Excavation of an Early Bronze Age Settlement at St Veit-Klingberg, Land Salzburg, Austria: An Interim Report." The Antiquaries Journal 69:205-24.

. 1993. "Commodities, Transactions, and Growth in the Central-European Early Bronze Age." Journal of European Archaeology 1 (2):59-72.

Simmons, A. 1998. "Bedroom Politics: Ladies of the Night and Men of the Day." In Social Approaches to an Indus- trial Past: The Archaeology and Anthropology of Mining, edited by A.B. Knapp, V.C. Pigott, and E.W. Herbert, 59-80. London: Routledge.

Soja, E.W. 2000. Postmetropolis: Critical Studies of Cities and

Regions. Oxford: Blackwell. Speth, J. 2000. Aggregation, Abandonment, and Com-

munity Dynamics in the American Southwest." Reviews in Anthropology 29:141 -69 .

Steward, J.H. 1950. Area Research: Theory and Practice. Social Science Research Council, Bulletin 63. Wash-

ington, D.C.: Social Science Research Council. Stuiver, M., P.J. Reimer, E. Bard, J.W. Beck, G.S. Burr,

K.A. Hughen, B. Kromer, G. McCormac, J. van der Plicht, and M. Spurk. 1998. "INTCAL98 Radiocar- bon Age Calibration, 24,000-0 cal BP." Radiocarbon 40:1041-83.

Sullivan, L.P. 1989. "Household, Community, and Soci- ety: An Analysis of Mouse Creek Settlements." In House- holds and Communities: Proceedings of the 21st Annual Chacmool Conference, edited by S. MacEachern, D.J.W. Archer, and R.D. Garvin, 317-26. Calgary: Archaeo- logical Association of the University of Calgary.

Swiny, S. 1981. "Bronze Age Settlement Patterns in South- west Cyprus." Levant 13:51-87.

Tenfelde, K., ed. 1992. Towards a Social History oj Mining in the 19th and 20th Centuries. International Mining His- tory Congress, Bochum, 3-7 Sept 1989. Munich: Beck.

Thomas, J. 2001. "Archaeologies of Place and Land- scape." In Archaeological Theory Today, edited by I. Hodder, 165-86. Cambridge: Polity.

Thompson, E.T. 1932. "Mines and Plantations and the Movement of Peoples." American Journal of Sociology 37:603-11.

Urban, G. 1996. Metaphysical Community. Austin: Univer- sity of Texas Press.

Verhoeven, M. 1999. An Archaeological Ethnography of a Neolithic Community: Space, Place, and Social Relations in the Burnt Village at TellSabiAbyad, Syria. Istanbul: Neder- lands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul.

Vermeule, E., and F.Z. Wolsky 1990. Toumba tou Skourou: A Bronze Age Potter's Quarter on Morphou Bay in Cyprus. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Webb, J., and D. Frankel 1994. Making an Impression: Storage and Surplus Finance in Late Bronze Age Cy- prus." JMA 7:5-26.

Wilk, R.R., and W. Ashmore, eds. 1988. Household and

Community in the Mesoamerican Past. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

Wolf, E.R. 1982. Europe and the People Without History. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Wylie, A. 1982. "An Analogy by Any Other Name Is Just as

Analogical: A Commentary on the Gould-Watson De- bate." Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1:382-401.

. 1985. "The Reaction Against Analogy. Advanc- es in Archaeological Method and Theory 8:63-1 1 1 .

Yaeger, J. 2000. The Social Construction ot Communi- ties in the Classic Maya Countryside: Strategies of Af- filiation in Western Belize." In The Archaeology of Com- munities: A New World Perspective, edited by M.A. Canu- to and J. Yaeger, 123-42. London: Routledge.

Young, S.M.M., A.M. Pollard, P. Budd, and R.A. Ixer, eds. 1999. Metals in Antiquity. BAR-IS 792. Oxford:

Archaeopress.

Bernard Knapp - The Archaeology of Community on Bronze Age Cyprus Politiko Phorades in Context

Documents

archaeology of community

social archaeology

study of community

conditions of use

relevant archaeology

archaeology ofcyprus

jstor archive

noncommercial use