Minoan Foundation Deposits in Crete During the Neopalatial Period

MINOAN FOUNDATION DEPOSITS IN CRETE DURING THE

NEOPALATIAL PERIOD.

ANA WAGNER, B.A.

Classics

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts in Classics

Faculty of Humanities, Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario

© Spring 2014

BREVIS A NATURA VITA NOBIS DATA EST

AT MEMORIA BENE REDDITAE VITAE SEMPITERNA

A brief life has been allotted to us by nature, but the memory of a well-spent life is imperishable. Cicero, Philippics 14.12.

In memory of Isabel Wagner Wagner, a woman who lived her life to the fullest, and inspired us to do the same.

ii

Abstract

One theme of research and discussion which has been gaining consideration among

Aegean prehistorians in the past two decades is the phenomenon of foundation deposits,

or deposits directly associated with the foundations of a structure. While some

scholarship mentions Minoan foundation deposits in the Neopalatial period, the focus is

primarily to identify such deposits, regardless of their date. The objective of the paper

will be to analyze the Minoan tradition of establishing foundation deposits, focusing on

deposits from the Neopalatial period in Crete, in order to study how, if at all, the evidence

for foundation deposits changes throughout this period. The paper will provide basic

definitions and establish a methodology, which will provide clear guidelines that will be

employed when analyzing the data on assemblages or material culture from previous

excavations. The aim of this study is to contribute to the understanding of Minoan

foundation deposits and building practices, and to Minoan society and culture in general.

iii

Acknowledgements

First and foremost, I thank my family: my parents, Fernando Wagner and Ana Rule,

for their undying and unconditional support and love. You are both an inspiration to me

every day, and I would not be where I am today without you! To my brother, Fernando

(yes, you!) for making me the tough cookie I am today, and for showing me what true

passion and happiness looks like. I admire you more than you will ever know. To the rest

of my family, too many to name (you know who you are!) for cheering me on from afar.

To everyone in the GRS Department at the University of Victoria who taught me

and inspired me to pursue this amazing field of study, I am forever grateful for your

guidance and encouragement. To the Classics Department at Brock University, where I

have found a home I am most unwilling to leave, and my friends and colleagues, who

added the fun and hours of laughter. Anna, you brighten up the dreary days, and Barb, the

department would be complete chaos without you. To the profs at Brock who pushed us

to be better professionals, academics, and scholars. Dr. Elizabeth Greene, graduate school

was not as terrifying due to your excellent guidance, especially that first semester! Dr.

Carol Merriam, thank you for your guidance and encouragement during the PhD

application process. Dr. Fanny Dolansky, thank you for the wonderful conversations. Dr.

Carrie A. Murray, my second reader, thank you for all your guidance and support.

Last, but certainly not least, I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. R. Angus K.

Smith, for guiding me throughout the past two years, for turning me into a sherd nerd at

Gournia, for reading countless proposals, applications, and drafts, and for never losing

your patience with me. You rock.

iv

Table of Contents

Dedication…………………………………………….……………………………………………..ii

Abstract…………………………………………….……………………………………………….iii

Acknowledgements…………………………………………….…………………………………..iv

List of Figures…………………………………………….…………………………………….vi-vii

Chapter 1: Introduction…………………………………………….………………………...1-2

Chapter 2: Methodology………………………………………….……………………..3-7

Chapter 3: Discussion of Minoan Sites and the Evidence for Foundation Deposits......8-37

Chapter 4: Analysis…………………………………………………………………...38-48

Chapter 5: Conclusions……………………………………………………………….49-50

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………….51-54

Figures……………………………………………………………………………….55- 69

Tables………………………………………………………………………………....70-71

v

List of Figures

Fig. 1- Plan of Phaistos Palace (modified from Girella 2010: Fig. 1).Fig. 2- Feasting Deposit below Room 50 of Phaistos Palace (Levi 1976: Fig. 623)Fig. 3- MM IIIA Deposit from Phaistos, Room 50 (Girella 2007-2008: Fig. 2)Fig. 4- Room 50 at Phaistos view (http://www.grisel.net).Fig. 5- Cups from LM IA Deposit in Room 50 at Phaistos (Levi 1976: Fig. 630).Fig. 6- Rectangular Cist in Room 50 (Levi 1976: Fig. 627). Fig. 7- LM IA Deposit from Room 50 at Phaistos in situ (Levi 1976: Fig. 629).Fig. 8- Casa Sud Della Rampa, Phaistos (La Rosa 2002: Fig. 47). Fig. 9- Room XCI Excavation Drawing. Phaistos (modified from La Rosa 2002: Fig. 49). Fig. 10- Room XCI Deposit from Phaistos in situ (La Rosa 2002: 56). Fig. 11- Room XCIII Excavation Drawing from Phaistos (modified from La Rosa 2002: Fig 49).Fig. 12- Room XCIII Deposit from Phaistos (La Rosa 2002: Figs. 51-52).Fig. 13- Second Deposit from Room XCIII (Trench 905), Phaistos (La Rosa 2002: Fig. 53).Fig. 14- Trench 905 Deposit from Room XCIII, Phaistos (La Rosa 2002: Fig. 54).Fig. 15- Plan of Neopalatial Ayia Triada (McEnroe 2010: Fig. 9.40).Fig. 16- Map of Corridor 74, indicating foundation deposit location, Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: Fig. 10.2).Fig. 17- Foundation Deposit from Corridor 74, Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: Fig. 10.2).Fig. 18- Edificio Ovest Semi-ovoid cup type, Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: 156, after Puglisi 2006: 208).Fig. 19- Edificio Ovest Conical cup with everted rim type, Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: 156, after Puglisi 2006: 208). Fig. 20- Edificio Ovest Straight-Sided cup types, Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: 156, after Puglisi 2006: 208).Fig. 21- Edificio Ovest carinated cup type, Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: 156, after Puglisi 2006: 208).Fig. 22- Edificio Ovest Bridge-Spouted Jar type, Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: 156, after Puglisi 2006: 208).Fig. 23- Distribution of Bridge-Spouted Jar types in Ayia Triada and Phaistos (from Girella 2010: Fig. 85). Fig. 24- Map of Neopalatial Knossos (McEnroe 2010: Fig. 7.2).Fig. 25- Decorative Motifs from the Gypsades Well Upper Deposit Group, Knossos (Hatzaki 2007: Fig. 5.12).Fig. 26- Gypsum Fragment From DVII.20, Knossos (Macdonald 1990: Fig. 6).Fig. 27- LM IB Cup-Rhyton and loomweight from DVII.20 (Macdonald 1990: Fig. 8).Fig. 28- The East and West Repositories, Knossos (Hatzaki 2009: Fig. 2.1). Fig. 29- Selection of artefacts and ecofacts from the Temple Repositories at Knossos (Hatzaki 2009: Fig. 2.2)

vi

7

Fig. 30- Area plan for Acropolis Trial Excavations, Knossos (Catling et al. 1979: Fig. 1).Fig. 31- Isometric Reconstruction of the MM III House (Catling et al. 1979: Fig. 7).Fig. 32- Position of foundation Deposit in Room 1, Acropolis Houses, Knossos (Catling et al. 1979: Fig. 14). Fig. 33- Conical Cups from Foundation Deposit, Acropolis Houses, Knossos (Catling et al. 1979: Fig. 45).Fig. 34- Unexplored Mansion Plan, Knossos (modified from McEnroe 2010: 9.2) Fig. 35- “Milk Jug” type, Knossos (Popham 1984: Pl. 143.15).Fig. 36- Corridor E Foundation Deposit, Unexplored Mansion, Knossos (Popham 1984: Pl. 137).Fig. 37- Corridor E Foundation Trench. Unexplored Mansion, Knossos (Popham 1984: Pl. 26d). Fig. 38- Plan, Archanes Tourkogeitonia (McEnroe 2010: Fig. 8.14). Fig. 39- Reconstruction of Staircase at Archanes, Areas 6, 8, 9 (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997: Fig. 14).Fig. 40- Stone Square Slab at Base of the Wall, Archanes (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997: Drawing 16).Fig. 41- Conical Cups in situ, Archanes (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997: Fig. 75).Fig. 42- Plan of Palaikastro (Knappett and Cunningham 2003: Fig. 1).Fig. 43- Plan of Building 6 at Palaikastro (MacGillivray et al. 1998: Fig. 1).Fig. 44- Plan of Building 6 Rooms R1 and R3, Palaikastro (Knappett and Cunningham 2003: Fig. 5).Fig. 45- Section of Room R1, Foundation Deposit, Palaikastro (Knappett and Cunningham 2003: Fig. 4). Fig. 46- Bridge-Spouted Jar from Foundation Deposit, Palaikastro (Knappett and Cunningham 2003: Fig. 33).Fig. 47- Bridge- Spouted Jar from Room C, Palaikastro (MacGillivray et al 1999: Pl. CId).Fig. 48- Goblets in situ in Foundation Deposit from Building 5, Palaikastro (MacGillivray et al 1999: Pl. CIIIc).

viivii

1

Minoan Foundation Deposits in Crete During the Neopalatial Period.

Chapter 1: Introduction

The study of Bronze Age Greece began a little over 120 years ago, led by pioneers

Heinrich Schliemann and Sir Arthur Evans, excavating at sites such as Mycenae and

Knossos, respectively. In the last century, our knowledge of the societies of Bronze Age

Greece, the Minoans, Cycladic peoples, and the Mycenaeans, has grown exponentially.

Initially, early investigators tried to characterize and contrast the material culture of

different ethnic groups, especially with aspects that could be related to the Homeric

vision of Greek Prehistory. This led to a history of different groups that was viewed as a

“linear upward progress towards ‘civilization’” (Shelmerdine 2008: 2). Our perspectives

on these societies have since changed, and archaeologists now address a range of social

and political questions concerning the prehistoric societies of the Bronze Age Aegean

with a rich array of theories and approaches, in order to gain a better understanding of

these societies.

Wagner Foundation Deposits

2

One theme of research and discussion which has been gaining consideration among

Aegean prehistorians in the past two decades is the phenomenon of foundation deposits,

or deposits directly associated with the foundations of a structure. These deposits are well

published in the ancient Near East, such as in Ellis’ 1968 book, and in Egypt as seen in

Weinstein’s 1973 work. Scholarship relating to foundation deposits on Crete includes C.

Boulotis’ 1982 article, O. Pelon’s 1986 work, and La Rosa’s 2002 article. While some of

these volumes make mention of Minoan foundation deposits in the Neopalatial period,

the focus is primarily to identify such deposits, regardless of their date.

The objective of the paper will be to analyze the Minoan tradition of establishing

foundation deposits. The paper will focus on ceramic deposits from the Neopalatial

period in Crete, in order to study how, if at all, the evidence for foundation deposits

changes throughout this period. The paper will provide basic definitions and establish a

methodology, which will provide clear guidelines that will be employed when analyzing

the data on assemblages or material culture from previous excavations.

The aim of the collection and re-analysis of data for Minoan Neopalatial foundation

deposits from past scholarship, and the evaluation and interpretation of the evidence, is to

contribute to the understanding of Minoan foundation deposits and building practices,

and to Minoan society and culture in general.


3

Chapter 2: Methodology

This paper will describe and analyze the structure and content of known Minoan

foundation deposits on Crete from the Neopalatial Period. This will be accomplished

through a survey of the artifactual and contextual evidence, with a focus on pottery

deposits. In archaeology, many distinguishing elements of a special occasion, such as

singing, clothing, and movement are lost, but the consciousness of performing a special

act can be reflected in the way objects are buried, which can often provide information on

the purpose of the deposit, and help reconstruct the event. The purpose of the study is

therefore to determine whether there are any chronological or regional features among the

deposits, which may in turn be interpreted as signs of ritualized practices, and contribute

to the understanding of the purpose of Minoan foundation deposits. The published works

available on this material will be re-analyzed for the purpose of providing a survey of the

evidence for the deposits from the Middle Minoan (hereafter MM) IIIA period to the end

of the Late Minoan (hereafter LM) IB period.

The study will include a sample of evidence from both Palatial and non-Palatial

sites, but in order to provide a more concise body of data with which to work, it will not

include evidence from mortuary contexts. The sites and deposits will be selected based on

the quality of the data in the publication, as well as its accessibility.

TERMINOLOGY

The term 'foundation deposit' is used in Aegean archaeology to describe a large

number of single-deposition buried contexts, including what scholars may interpret as


4

votive objects (MacGillivray et al. 1999: 465). This survey will be restricted exclusively

to primary deposits comprising one or more complete vessels placed directly beneath the

footings of walls, or just below floors or thresholds, most often in foundation trenches or

specially-made cists. Although the term ‘building deposit’ might be more apt since it

denotes the inclusion of all objects intentionally incorporated into architecture, whether

or not they are found literally in the foundations of buildings, this paper will use the more

common label of ‘foundation deposit’ in keeping with most modern literature.

Foundation deposits have been widely interpreted as the intentional, ritualistic

deposition of artifacts, associated with libations to the gods, and with feasting. Inasmuch

as ritual deposits are meaningful, the precise significance may be impossible to

reconstruct by archaeologists, and thus we rely on the burial of artifacts, one of the most

visible aspects of a ritual ceremony. Since foundation deposits are often associated with

feasts, this study will additionally make note of foundation deposits that may also be

feasting deposits.

When analyzing the evidence for foundation deposits, one must recognize that not

all material evidence may indicate such a deposit, and therefore the evidence must be

examined closely to determine whether the remains are the result of other formal and

ritual activities, or merely debris. The main distinction between other types of deposits

and foundation deposits is that the deposits directly associated with architecture —

foundation deposits — can be used to date and reconstruct aspects of the builder’s

practice, while those underneath floors or open spaces could be dedications for any

number of reasons, and are not necessarily related to architectural change (MacGillivray


5

et al 1999: 465).

Feasting deposits that are also foundation deposits provide evidence for “foundation

banquets.” The deposits necessitate the direct consumption of food and drink, the

remnants of which — vessels and animal bones — were buried in foundation deposits,

referring to a specific action (Girella 2008: 169). Although definitions for a feast range

from “a sensory, sacralized, and social occasion extending beyond the nutritive

consumption of food and drink by a group of people” (Fox 2012: 1) to “a prime arena and

instrument” of political action by individuals and social groups pursuing economic and

political goals (Dietler 2001: 104), this survey will use Wright’s definition of feasting: the

formal ceremony of communal eating and drinking to celebrate significant occasions.

This definition encompasses both the special aspect of a feast, noting its association with

a specific occasion, such as the construction or renovation of a building, and also the

social and political aspects that it may involve, associating political and social action with

the occasion (Wright 2004: 13).

The Neopalatial chronological period, from the MM IIIA period to the LM IB

period, was chosen since it has been considered the apex of Minoan civilization,

following the destruction of the first palaces, with population increases and grand

building operations. Foundation deposits can be extremely useful chronological

indicators for a wall’s erection or a floor’s creation, and by inference the associated

building’s initial construction, or modification.

WHY INCLUDE FEASTING DEPOSITS?

The reorganization of palatial society after the MM IIB destructions implies not


6

only a physical reconstruction of the buildings, but also the re-establishment of social

relationships (Girella 2007a: 143). Drinking and feasting rituals, therefore, became one of

the main instruments in the Neopalatial period for elites needing to mobilize people for a

project requiring a large communal effort. These communal banquets became “work-

party feasts,” where large groups of people gathered to work on a specific project and

were then treated to a meal. The traces of this special type of communal feasts, which are

buried as foundation deposits, can be labeled “foundation feasts,” and reveal that one of

the purposes of a banquet was to celebrate the inauguration of new or restored buildings,

or parts of them, and one of the purposes of a foundation deposit was the ritualized

disposal of the remains of such feasts. These deposits provide evidence for a socio-

political event, and their association with foundation deposits therefore directly links the

event to the foundation of the building, which may provide insight into Minoan building

practices or rituals.

TYPES OF EVIDENCE CONSIDERED

The survey will collect information on ceramic evidence that presents consistent

patterns of form and decoration, of assemblage, and of context and deposition. In addition

to the ceramic evidence — which will constitute the greater part of the study — wherever

it is present, this survey will also note the presence of ecofactual evidence such as faunal

remains and floral evidence. Other materials that may be germane to a specific deposit,

such as faience artifacts, will also be included. These materials provide further

information concerning the context of the deposit, and may aid in reconstructing the

event.


7

The survey of evidence will include deposits that consist of at least one complete

vessel with a clear context in the foundations of an architectural feature. Where an

assemblage is described as a foundation deposit in more than one work, this assemblage

will be taken into consideration and may be included as a sample of previously defined

foundation deposits. In this situation, it is possible that either the exact content or context

of the assemblage may not be as specific, in which case the assemblage will be included

solely if it is the only data of a possible foundation deposit available for that site or time

period, with no other clearly marked foundation deposits available in the excavation

reports or other literature.

The deposits will be analyzed by region: first by archaeological site, and then in the

broader regional context. The shape of the vessels will be prioritized, and whenever the

information is available, the decoration and fabric will also be included in the discussion.

The science of archaeology is destructive by nature, and therefore one must rely on

the original excavator to produce detailed excavation reports and data in order to study

evidence that has been previously excavated. Poorly published sites, or inaccessible site

publications will therefore not be considered in this study due to limited financial and

time constraints.


8

Chapter 3: Discussion of Minoan Sites and the Evidence for Foundation Deposits

This project will investigate 25 ceramic foundation deposits from 6 major sites:

Phaistos, Ayia Triada, Kommos, Knossos, Archanes, and Palaikastro, both in a Palatial,

and non-Palatial contexts.

PHAISTOS — PALATIAL CONTEXT

The Minoan archaeological site of Phaistos (Fig. 1) is located in the Mesara plain in

South-central Crete, on the East end of the Kastri hill. The site was first identified by

Thomas Abel Brimage Spratt in the Mediterranean Survey of 1853, which surveyed the

topography, settlements and monuments of Crete (Spratt 1865: 23-25), and was first

excavated by the Italian Archaeological School under Federico Halbherr and Luigi

Pernier at the beginning of the 20th century (Watrous et al. 2004: 3). The Palace at the

site is the second largest of Crete.

Although a thorough study of feasting and foundation deposits at Neopalatial

Phaistos has yet to be conducted, there is ample evidence to suggest that these practices

occurred throughout the site. Since a survey of all the deposits at the site is beyond the

scope of this paper, I will focus on five well-known examples, in order to analyze the

content and context of these deposits.

Room 50

At Phaistos, the excavations in Room 50 began after a project to replace the


9

alabaster floors in the room surprised the restoration team with the discovery of several

unexcavated Neopalatial levels beneath the floors. The remains of a large banquet were

uncovered underneath the threshold, under one of the first alabaster slabs that was to be

replaced, next to a stylobate supporting two columns (Levi 1976: 405). This deposit (Fig.

2), dating to the beginning of the MM IIIA period, consists of a ceramic assemblage

comprised of hundreds of vessels, found scattered under moist soil, buried together with

sheep/goat bones, fish bones, olive stones, coal residue, ashes, and a few pieces of

charred wood (Levi 1976: 405-406). The ceramic assemblage comprised an unknown

number of conical cups, semiglobular cups, straight-sided cups, plates, small jugs

(“brocchette”), bowls, lamps, and braziers (Fig. 3; Girella 2010: 57-58). Although in his

2007 publication Girella mentions that the assemblage contains “hundreds of conical

cups,” in his study of ceramic deposits (2010), he only mentions 14 of these, and provides

no indications of how representative these samples are of the full assemblage (Girella

2007a: 143; Girella 2010: 57).

This deposit, aside from being a feasting deposit, is also considered a foundation

deposit — directly associated with the initial construction of the Neopalatial Palace

building (Levi 1976: 405-406). Foundation deposits comprised of feasting vestiges such

as this one “stress the communal participation of the people involved in the construction

of the building,” as is evidenced by the large number of similar undecorated serving

vessels represented in this deposit by the hundreds of conical and other types of cups

(Girella 2007a: 143).

The MM IIIA deposit dates to the initial construction of Room 50 and may also


10

indicate an attempt to rebuild the Palace structure immediately after its destruction in the

MM II period (La Rosa 1995: 889). Levi believes that this is the case since the deposit

contains residues of libations and sacrifices that would have been made at the

inauguration of the room before the deposit was sealed by the alabaster slabs (Levi 1976:

405). Following a seismic episode at the end of this phase, the structure required further

construction at the start of the LM IA period (La Rosa 1995: 888, 890).

The remains of a similar foundation deposit, dating to this new construction phase

during the LM IA period, were also discovered in Room 50. Although located in the same

room, this deposit is to the east of the MM IIIA deposit, on the other side of the stylobate,

below a floor of beaten lime and sand mixed with pebbles (Fig. 4; Levi 1978: 407). This

deposit consists of 120 conical cups, two bridge-spouted jars, one tripod cooking pot, as

well as remains of animal bones, and olive stones (Fig. 5; Levi 1976: 407-408). These

remains were purposefully stored in a rectangular cist (Fig. 6) and deposited beneath

Room 50, marking a second construction of the Neopalatial Palace at Phaistos (Fig. 7).

The deposition of this material in such close spatial relationship to the previous MM IIIA

deposit suggests a meaningful liturgical and spatial continuity, could indicate that that the

placement of both deposits at that particular location was significant and deliberate.

PHAISTOS — TOWN CONTEXT

The archaeological site of Phaistos beyond the Palace also includes a few deposits

that have been identified as foundation deposits. Two of these have been recently

identified below Rooms XCI and XCIII of the Casa a Sud della Rampa, or House South


11

of the Ramp (Fig. 8; La Rosa 2002: 654 and 649).

Room XCI was first excavated in 1965 by D. Levi, who remarked in the excavation

report that below the floor level, he discovered an olletta (bridge-spouted jar?) placed

vertically, with a conical cup (“skouteli”) with an orlo sagomato (moulded rim?) over it

as a lid, both placed above a paved floor, and “practically leaning against the south

wall” (Figs. 9 and 10; La Rosa 2002: 35). Unfortunately, Levi’s excavation reports are

confusing and incomplete; the information presented, therefore, must be carefully

analyzed for any conclusions to be drawn. La Rosa also notes the poor quality and lack of

detail of the excavation reports and notebooks, citing the excavation notebook of Dr. E.

Meola from September 18, 1965, which simply states that upon a stucco floor “lie some

broken dishes and other vessels” (La Rosa 2002: 28). Based on further examination,

Girella identified these broken sherds as additional conical cups (number unknown), a

plate, and a scuttle; an archaeozoological assemblage, represented by bones of sheep/

goat, completes the deposit (Girella 2007: 144).

Having examined the vessels and their stratigraphic location, Levi concluded that

based on their shape and decoration, the vessels may date to anywhere between MM I

and MM III (La Rosa 2002: 35). Although La Rosa does not provide a possible date for

the deposit, Girella dates the deposit to the mature MM IIIA period based on a stylistic

evaluation of the ceramics (Girella 2007-2008: 67).

In 2000, excavations of the area next to Levi’s excavation (within the same trench)

allowed La Rosa and his team to attempt to stratigraphically understand the area better.


12

Based on his study, La Rosa concluded that these two vessels were deposited in a small

trench, likely sealed over (La Rosa 2002: 36). Although the deposit itself is small, the

vessels were carefully deposited in a specific location as close to the south wall as

possible; the deposit was then sealed, and a stucco floor was placed above. While La

Rosa believes that the deposit had a ritual purpose on the basis of the careful deposition

of the vessels, there is too little evidence, and it is far too incomplete, to prove this theory

(La Rosa 2002: 47). Based on the context of the deposit, therefore, it is acceptable to

identify this deposit as a foundation deposit, although it is uncertain whether it was

associated with feasting or any other type of ritual activity.

Room XCIII, the westernmost room of the structure, also contained two deposits,

which La Rosa states were added in the last phase of the complex (Fig. 11; La Rosa 2002:

31). La Rosa identifies the first deposit in trench 904, directly below a stucco floor (906)

next to the northeastern wall of the room, in a trench with a diameter of 20 cm and a

depth of circa 10 cm (La Rosa 2002: 31). The trench contained two decorated bowls with

projecting rims (Fig. 12), placed one on top of the other, and sealed by a stucco floor (La

Rosa 2002: 31). Although, as previously mentioned, the lack of specificity in the original

excavation reports does not allow for a secure date for the deposit, the careful deposition

of the two vessels in the trench adjoining the northeastern wall allows the deposit to be

considered a foundation deposit. La Rosa speculates that the vessels may have been

produced in the advanced MM II stage and may have been deposited in the trench during

the MM IIIA phase (La Rosa 2002: 31).

The second deposit, in trench 905, is on the opposite end of the room next to the


13

western wall of the room, and has a diameter of 76 cm and a depth of approximately 64

cm (La Rosa 2002: 33). La Rosa states that this deposit is unique at Phaistos in terms of

the deposition of the vessels and the careful manner in which the foundation trench was

filled, stating that the trench yielded “the most remarkable testimony” of a bridge-spouted

jar and conical cup inside a trench (Fig. 13 and 14; La Rosa 2002: 33). The vessels in the

trench were placed, inverted and over one another, on a level floor, and were carefully

filled with small stones (La Rosa 2002: 35).

The anomalous depth of the trench seems to have been on purpose, in order to

associate the deposit and subsequent floor to the enlargement of the structure, since the

base of the trench is associated stratigraphically to the foundations of the contiguous wall,

(Girella 2007-2008: 67; La Rosa 2002: 33-35). Although La Rosa does not specifically

identify this deposit as a foundation deposit, it is clear from the context that the deposit

can be classified as one.

A stylistic evaluation by Girella of the ceramics from both the XCI and XCIII

deposits and from the area surrounding them provides a secure date to a mature MM IIIA

stage (Girella 2007-2008: 67). All three of these deposits have been interpreted as a

deliberate act marking the enlargement of the house during this mature MM IIIA time

period; thus, the dating of the deposits allows for a secure date for the house expansion

(Girella 2007-2008: 67). In addition, the archaeological data from the surrounding area

indicated the presence of a building operation during the MM IIIA phase, when both

rooms underwent construction and renovation, mainly to enlarge the dwelling (Girella

2007-2008: 67). The date of this construction allows one to draw a clear connection


14

between these deposits and the renovation of the rooms, helping to classify these deposits

as foundation deposits.

AYIA TRIADA

The archaeological site of Ayia Triada is located on the western part of the Mesara

plain, approximately three kilometers west of the Palace at Phaistos. The site, due to its

impressive size and luxury, had been previously identified as a Palace, although it is more

likely that the settlement at Ayia Triada is composed of three parts: an upper town which

consists of at least three wealthy villas (A, B, and C; Fig. 15) around an open court, a

lower court, and a lower town with smaller houses (Watrous 1984: 132). The

archaeological evidence suggests that the villas were constructed at the start of the

Neopalatial period in MM IIIA (Girella 2007b: 248).

A small deposit from Corridor 74, on the east end of Villa B at Ayia Triada, can be

identified as a foundation deposit (Fig. 16). Below the LM IA floor of the corridor, the

stratigraphy shows a clear sequence of a thick burnt level mixed with ashes and bones,

sealed by part of a large wall oriented north-south and, slightly to the East, the foundation

deposit placed directly on the rock. The deposit comprises a small set of vessels: two

bridge-spouted jars, one saucer, one brazier, and six handleless cups (Fig. 17; Girella

10.2). The deposit dates to an advanced phase of MM IIIA, judging from comparanda at

Phaistos and the absence of dark-on-light patterned pottery (Girella 2007-2008: 66). This

‘foundation deposit’ on the rock is connected with the life of the north-south wall, and the

date suggests an important, even if modest, building operation at the site (Girella 2007b:


15

248).

Another possible foundation deposit is identified in the Edificio Ovest (the West

Building) below Room B, in the north end of Villa A. The deposit contained a bridge-

spouted jar, as well as sherds from nine other vessels, and dates to the MM IIIB period

(Girella 2010: 156; Girella 2013: 127). The sherds have been reconstructed as nine

identifiable cups, and divided by Girella into three different categories. The first category,

represented by five different vessels, is composed of handleless cups, or skoutelia. Two

cups are semi-fineware painted semi-globular or semi-ovoid cups (Fig. 18), two are semi-

fineware conical cups, one with a painted rim, and one is an everted-rim cup/bowl, with a

painted rim (Fig. 19; Girella 2010: 156).

The second category is comprised of cups with handles, and is represented by two

cups. One is a straight-sided cup with a slightly everted rim, with spruzzature (‘floral

spray’ decoration?), and the second cup is a straight-sided cup, decorated with horizontal

bands (fasce orizzontali) (Fig. 20; Girella 2010: 156, 218-219). The last category consists

of carinated cups. This category includes two cups, both semifine, and with a painted rim

(Fig. 21; Girella 2010: 156, 235).

Lastly, the deposit contains the bridge-spouted jar, which is of fine material, ovoid

in shape, and is decorated with a dark slip (Fig. 22). There are only two known vessels of

this ovoid bridge-spouted jar shape at Ayia Triada, and the shape is nonexistent in

Phaistos, perhaps signifying the importance of the vessel in the deposit (Fig. 23; Girella

2010: 263).

Unfortunately, no further information is provided in current published scholarship


16

concerning this deposit, and the precise context of the deposit is not well known (Girella

2013: 127, table 10.1). It is possible that this deposit may be a collapsed floor, and not a

foundation deposit (Girella 2007b: 235), but more information is necessary in order to

determine the context and function of this deposit.

KOMMOS

The archaeological site of Kommos has been excavated and studied for over thirty

years, since excavations began in 1976 (Shaw 2006). It is situated on the shores of the

Libyan Sea, which borders the largest plain in Crete, the Mesara. The site was largely

unsettled until the Minoan Palatial culture emerged during the MM IB period, when

extensive settlement began at Kommos (Shaw 2006: 18). The site includes a well-known

Minoan harbour, monumental Minoan palatial buildings, and a Minoan town.

At Kommos, there are several deposits that Betancourt has identified as

“special” (Betancourt 1990). Most of these date to the transitional phase between MM III

and LM IA, and were composed of intact or whole vases on an MM III floor, covered by

rubble used to level the area for later construction (Betancourt 1990: 46). This set is

comprised of nine deposits, from two main areas in the site: the Southern Hilltop Area

and the Central Hilltop Area. Eight of the nine deposits are from the Central Hillside Area

(Betancourt 1990: 47).

The deposit in the Southern Hilltop Area is in Room 28, and consists of three

conical cups, one small bowl, one semi-globular cup, and one bridge-spouted jar, all on

top of a floor, with rubble above. The complete vessels in the deposit are dated to the LM


17

IA period, while the sherds in the rubble surrounding the vessels range from MM III to

LM IA (Betancourt 1990:50).

In the Central Hillside Area, there were foundation deposits in Space/Room 1 of the

Rampa del Mare, Room 8, Room 9, Room 15, Room 44, Room 48, and Room 51. None

of these deposits contained large bowls, amphorae, cooking dishes or trays, large jars, or

jugs; such a limited range of shapes leads Betancourt to rule out the possibility of these

deposits being merely household debris (Betancourt 1990:46-47). Moreover, the limited

range of vessel shapes and the recurring pattern in these rooms suggests some sort of

special activity, which can lead to their interpretation as foundation deposits (Betancourt

1990: 47).

The Rampa del Mare was a road surface at the edge of a cliff west of the Central

Hillside Area. The deposit from this space was incomplete, since the context was not

completely excavated laterally, so the deposit was likely not entirely uncovered

(Betancourt 1990: 130). The deposit consisted of five upside down conical cups and one

upside down bridge-spouted jar, which were lying over a surface composed of rubble that

lay over the roadway. The vessels were covered with more rubble on top, in order to level

the area for construction. The ceramic material from both below the vessels and over

them was “a little earlier” than the whole vases, which “represented the very latest

pottery in use before the area was covered” during the transitional MM III/LM IA period

(Betancourt 1990: 131).

The deposits from Rooms 8 and 9 were small, and are not discussed in detail. The

deposit from Room 8 consisted of one conical cup, one small cup, and one rhyton, all


18

deposited directly on a floor. The vessels were also covered with rubble, much like those

from the Rampa del Mare, and the sherd material from this rubble is likewise slightly

earlier than the whole vessels (Betancourt 1990: 51). The deposit from Room 9 was

similar to that of Room 8 and included three complete vessels: a rhyton and two conical

cups (Betancourt 1990: 131). As in the previous deposit, these vessels were covered with

rubble containing fragments of ceramic vessels, which were mostly from MM III,

although some sherds dated to the MM III/LM IA transitional period.

Room 15 yielded a deposit with ten complete vases on top of a floor. These

included four conical cups, one small bowl, one bell cup, two bridge-spouted jars, and

two rhyta (Betancourt 1990:131). Three of the four conical cups were of the transitional

MM III-LM IA and later style, with straight thick walls and a conical shape. Betancourt

notes that the other vessels were in a style that was difficult to date more closely, though

most of them were probably contemporary with the conical cups (Betancourt 1990: 132).

The sherds in the rubble showed a greater range, dating from earlier than MM III to the

transitional MM III/LM IA period. The contrast between the shapes of the sherds and

those of the complete vessels, however, is important to note, as the sherds included all

common shapes from normal household debris such as trays and pots, cooking dishes,

amphorae, cups, bowls, jars, etc, while the complete vases consisted only of small

drinking vessels, bridge-spouted jars, and rhyta (Betancourt 1990: 132). Based on this

contrast, Betancourt states: “one must conclude that the deposit was a specialized

assemblage of vases” (1990: 132).

Room 44 was one of the rooms in the late MM settlement where the excavations


19

suggested two architectural levels, since the pottery in these two levels was very closely

related (Betancourt 1990: 136; Shaw 1982: 172). The pottery suggests a cleaning

operation after some calamity, with the rubble being used to raise the floor to a higher

surface and level it, then a deposition of ten complete vases on that surface, and then a

filling in of the room with more rubble (Betancourt 1990: 136). Betancourt notes that

very little time could have elapsed between the two phases present in the room, since the

sherds associated with both phases were in an identical style (Betancourt 1990: 136). The

vessels on the created surface were six conical cups, two bridge-spouted jars, one rhyton,

and one small jar, and were mostly in the conservative light-on-dark tradition (Betancourt

1990: 47). Again, the shapes of the complete pots were very different from the normal

range of household pottery found at Kommos, consisting of drinking cups, small

containers, and a rhyton, indicating a special function for this deposit (Betancourt 1990:

137).

Room 48 was excavated in two parts, northern and southern, although both parts

represent the same unit (Betancourt 1990: 139). The deposit had seven whole vases,

upside down on an irregular surface, with higher rubble around the deposition of the pots,

providing the appearance of a pit (Shaw 1982: 173). The vessels in the pit were three

conical cups and four bridge-spouted jars. Among the sherds were pieces of a bull’s head

rhyton from MM IIB or early MM III, decorated with floral and abstract ornament

(Betancourt 1990: 139). Given the scattered nature of the rhyton sherds, the sherds should

not be considered as part of the deposit of whole vases, although the presence of a rhyton

amongst the debris should be noted since this type of vessel does not occur in the fill of


20

any of the other special deposits (and is rare in the foundation deposits themselves).

Lastly, Room 51, at the southern limits of the excavated portion of the Central

Hillside Area, contained two superimposed surfaces. The first surface contained a conical

cup and a bridge-spouted jar on the floor of the room, and dated to the MM III period.

The upper surface contained six complete pots: one conical cup, one oversized straight-

sided cup, one small tripod cooking pot, two bridge-spouted jars, and one rhyton. The

straight-sided cup has a red-fired slip that is typical of the LM I period at Kommos, and

its metallic shape, with a small imitation rivet at the handle, is also typical LM I rather

than MM III at the site (Betancourt 1990:140). The other whole vases can be dated

stylistically to the MM III, or to the transitional MM III/LM IA period. Stratigraphically,

they were likely from the transitional period (Betancourt 1990: 141).

These special deposits all contain complete vases from the MM III/LM IA

transitional period with fill either from the same date, or slightly earlier. They are

considered foundation deposits, due to the ritualistic nature of their deposition underneath

a major architectural element. They seem to have been the last vessels deposited before

the settlement was rebuilt during a massive rebuilding operation in this area, which might

explain the high number of the deposits and the similarities in their contents and context.

KNOSSOS — PALATIAL CONTEXT

The archaeological site of Knossos is one of the best known Minoan sites (Fig. 24).

The site, situated on a hill less than five km from the modern site of Heraklion, was first

discovered by an antiquarian, Minos Kalokairinos (Haughton 2009: 68). The first


21

systematic excavations, carried out in the 1900s by an Englishman named Arthur John

Evans, revealed the majority of the main Palace structure, a large area of the Minoan city,

and various cemeteries (Haughton 2009: 69). In addition to being the first Minoan Palace

site excavated, the Palace at Knossos is also the grandest monument in the history of

Minoan Crete (McEnroe 2010: 69). Unfortunately, excavation methods at the turn of the

20th century were not as thorough as they are now; thus, much of the early information

from the excavations has been lost, creating numerous problems in the understanding of

the site’s stratigraphy, chronology, and overall history.

Faced with methodological and terminological problems affecting the definitions of

the Neopalatial ceramic sequence at Knossos, Eleni Hatzaki re-examined all the known

deposits, based on a study of fabrics, wares, forms, and the available stratigraphic

evidence (Hatzaki 2007: 158). As a result of her study, Hatzaki developed three main

pottery groups and ceramic phases that can be identified at Knossos from the early

Neopalatial to the Postpalatial period; in her study she also identified several foundation

deposits among the groups.

The three main groups identified by Hatzaki are KS 178 (MM IIIB), Gypsades Well

Upper Deposit (LM IA), and SEX North House (LM IB). The KS 178 group was named

after a deposit which consisted of over 80 intact vessels stratified above bedrock and

below an LM IA level. The Gypsades Well Upper Deposit group was named after a

secondary deposit found stratified above a KS 178 deposit, which contained most of the

classic forms and decorative motifs of the ceramic group, such as straight-sided reed

cups, Vapheio cups, and various closed-shaped vessels with running or retorted spirals


22

(Fig. 25; Hatzaki 2007: 175). Lastly, the SEX North House group demonstrates clear

stylistic similarities dating to the LM IB time period, and is less dependent on

stratification above LM IA or below LM II (Hatzaki 2007: 187).

South-West Area

One foundation deposit, excavated by the British School at Athens under the

direction of Hood in 1987, belongs to Hatzaki’s LM IA Gypsades Well Upper Deposit

group, and was located in the south-west area of the Palace. The deposit contained a

“substantial fill with mature but uninspiring LM IA pottery” which sloped down to the

south up to, and under the well-preserved Wall Delta (Macdonald 1990: 84). The

foundations of the wall were comprised of cut blocks, thrown into the bottom of a cut

which removed some of a previously recorded MM IIA deposit of pottery, clay sealings,

faience, and earth floor. The pottery in this later LM IA trench, therefore, provides a

terminus post quem for the construction of Wall Delta (Macdonald 1990: 84). Since many

of the other deposits in the Gypsades Well Upper Deposit group are considered to be the

result of a seismic destruction connected to the LM IA eruption of Thera, and considering

that no evidence of burning was found amongst the debris, both Macdonald and Hatzaki

speculate that Wall Delta was built up after an earthquake, against and parallel to a more

substantial wall, Kappa, presumably in order to strengthen Wall Kappa to withstand

future earthquakes (Hatzaki 2007: 172; Macdonald 1990: 84).

In addition to this LM IA foundation deposit, a second deposit was discovered to

the west, in DVII.20, next to the Corridor of the Procession in Room 20 (Macdonald


23

1990: 85). Prior to excavation, the area contained a gypsum door-jamb base marking the

position of a door (Macdonald 1990: 85). The floor associated with this door-jamb base

has not survived in the archaeological record, except for a fragment of a gypsum slab

found next to it which may have once been part of the floor (Fig. 26; Macdonald 1990:

85). A hollow, dug into an MM IB deposit, was discovered immediately north of this

door-jamb base, which contained a spiral-decorated cup-rhyton and two clay, melon-

shaped loom-weights (Fig. 27; Macdonald 1990: 85-86). Below this deposit, a line of

white gypsum was discovered, which was identified as the remnants of a floor

(Macdonald 1990: 85).

In terms of the ceramics, the decoration of the cup-rhyton is “merely” LM I, but the

shape itself is likely LM IB (Macdonald 1990: 87). The rest of the deposit, which Evans

discovered during a series of “test excavations,” chiefly comprised of “ordinary crockery

in use among the humbler inhabitants of the building” (Evans 1930: 276). Evans notes

that “the graceful tufts of grass or reeds formed a favourite kind of decoration for cups

and other vessels,” and that practically all of the decorative designs found in the

Gypsades Well, including many combinations of spirals and disks, were represented in

this deposit (Evans 1930: 276). He also notes that among the forms represented were

elegant ‘fruit-stands’ with high pedestals and a bossed center to their bowls, but does not

include any further information on the other shapes (Evans 1930: 276). Based on this

evidence and his own excavations, Macdonald postulates that after the earthquake, the

cup-rhyton was added to the “destruction pottery” in order to make the deposit a

foundation deposit (Macdonald 1990: 87).


24

Although there is little scholarship on the subject of re-appropriating ‘destruction

pottery’ into foundation deposits, Macdonald’s theory seems logical. It is possible that a

ritual ceremony occurred after the earthquake, and the vessel that was used in the

ceremony, the cup-rhyton, was subsequently added to the assemblage. The assemblage

would have then been covered over by the new floor, transforming the ‘destruction

pottery’ into a foundation deposit. Macdonald’s theory may not apply to every scenario;

the proximity of this deposit, however, to the door-jamb and the floor which would have

laid above it, qualify it as a foundation deposit.

Temple Repositories

A second deposit in this group that may be termed a foundation deposit is the

Temple Repositories. The deposit of the Repositories — two large stone-lined cists on the

West wing of the Palace (Fig. 28)— contained a variety of objects, including the well

known faience “Snake Goddess” figurines (Fig. 29). The deposit included a mixture of

locally produced vessels and several imports from both other Cretan regions and

overseas, totaling sixteen jugs, eleven bird vases, five jars, and fourteen amphorae, as

well as non-ceramic finds such as the faience ‘tall cups’ with floral decoration, and other

faience items (Girella 2008: 170). While the precise structure of the deposit remains

unclear due to Evans’ inexact notes, it is certain that the Temple Repositories formed a

structured deposit, with the uppermost layer consisting of ceramic vessels, and the

faience objects grouped together at the bottom of the cists (Herva 2005: 216). Although

some of the ceramic vessels were produced in the earlier KS 178 ceramic phase, the non-


25

ceramic finds suggest that the deposit was sealed in LM IA (Hatzaki 2007: 173).

Although this deposit may appear quite different from other foundation deposits,

which are usually associated with ceramic vessels (typically conical cups and pouring

vessels) set either below or near the base of a wall, Hatzaki argues that if the Temple

Repositories was a foundation deposit, “the scale and exceptionalism of the assemblage is

in accordance with the monumentality of the building, its subsistence supremacy, and its

ideological domination” (2009: 28). Furthermore, by reversing the order in which the

artifacts were recorded, Hatzaki provides a picture of the deposition event. The head of

the Snake Goddess followed by arms, robes, and other figurines were first thrown into the

East Repository. Next, the tall faience cups, which could suggest some form of feasting,

were added to the deposit. While these cups may not seem typical to feasting behaviour,

judging from their luxury material, they are still considered serving vessels, and thus fit

into the category of feasting materials — albeit of a very exclusive type.

The marine shells, which total over 6,000 in number, were deposited immediately

afterwards, and Hatzaki proposes that the shells suggest the presence, at least

symbolically, of a huge number of participants (Hatzaki 2009: 26). The shells in the

deposit comprise both seashells, some of which (480 total) have been decorated, and also

faience seashells, suggesting that the collection of such a large number of marine shells is

not random or accidental (Hatzaki 2009: 27). Hatzaki argues that if — following Gesell’s

estimate for space, and Shaw and Lowe’s proposed dimensions of the Central Court —

the Central Court at Knossos could have held 6,206 people, this number would be

remarkably close to the 6,340 marine shells in the deposit (Hatzaki 2009: 27). She


26

concludes that the presence of the shells provide ecofactual testimony for the use of the

Central court involving a large number of individuals, in this case participating in the

deposition of objects in the cists; the participants would either each deposit their shell, or

be represented by a proposed few in depositing the shells (Hatzaki 2009: 27-29).

The intentional deposition of such an array of artifacts could have been linked to

the inauguration or the completion of building work, marking either the beginning or the

end of a cycle in the building’s long use, and thus the religious and administrative

paraphernalia and agricultural commodities “suggest that the ultimate aim was to sustain

the social, political, economic, and religious relations of the palace” (Hatzaki 2009: 28).

Although there are several foundation deposits in the Palace at Knossos, many of

these lack proper archaeological data, making them difficult to analyze. For example, it is

difficult to ascertain whether or not two of the deposits included in this study (which have

been identified by scholars as foundation deposits), namely those from the south-west

area of the Palace, are indeed foundation deposits. Although Macdonald describes both of

these deposits as foundation deposits, there is very little information regarding the vessels

(Macdonald 1990: 84). While the first deposit can be termed a foundation deposit due to

its location in the foundation under Wall Delta, there is no information about the shapes

of the pottery, although we may assume that the vessels would have been characteristic of

the Gypsades Well Upper Deposit group due to the assertion that the deposit contained a

substantial fill of LM IA pottery (Macdonald 1990:84).

The second deposit, meanwhile, provides information about the single vessel in the

deposit, but is not very clear on the context of the deposit. Based on Macdonald’s


27

assertion that this is an LM IB foundation deposit due to its association with a doorjamb,

one can assume that that the vessel was discovered underneath the threshold of the

building. Furthermore, Macdonald notes that the vessel was deposited into an earlier

ceramic deposit of “ordinary crockery” from the LM IA period (Evans 1930: 276;

Macdonald 1990: 87). He postulates that perhaps these earlier sherds, initially a

destruction deposit, were repurposed into part of the foundation deposit, along with the

cup-rhyton and loomweights, when these newer items were deposited in the debris

(Macdonald 1990: 87). It is possible, and perhaps a simpler explanation, that the debris

from the destruction deposit was utilized in order to form a pit surrounding the

foundation deposit, such as is seen in Room 48 at Kommos. Since the exact context of the

foundation deposit is unclear, however, it is difficult to form conclusions with any degree

of certainty.

This assemblage of the Temple Repositories may be the only well-recorded

foundation deposit from Knossos in recent literature. While this deposit is seemingly

quite different from other foundation deposits, there are many similarities. For example,

similar to the LM IA foundation deposit in Room 50 at Phaistos, this assemblage was also

deposited in a subterranean cist, built with stones, and covered over with stone slabs. The

deposit is also reminiscent of the foundation deposit in room 48 at Kommos, although the

cists were composed of different materials. While the material in the Repositories is

much wealthier than that from other deposits, there are some similarities in the content:

the repositories include cups, ritual items (snake goddesses) and what Hatzaki has

identified as the equivalent to the conical cup — the marine shells (Hatzaki 2009: 27-29).


28

There is merit to regarding the deposit as a foundation deposit, although Hatzaki’s

argument that each shell represents a participant of a feast, and that the Temple

Repositories is thus a feasting deposit, is not quite convincing. As La Rosa has

demonstrated, a series of seismic episodes occurred during the MM IIIA-B periods,

which led to reconstructions during LM IA (La Rosa 1995: 889). The earthquakes may

have provided unrest and required the palace to carry out construction and festivities in

order to sustain the political, social, economic, and religious role of the Palace, as is seen

through the wealth of the deposit, the presence of the figurines, and the inclusion (if one

believes Hatzaki’s theory concerning the marine shells) of the people of Knossos.

KNOSSOS — TOWN CONTEXT

The Acropolis Houses

In 1975, the owner of a plot of land on the Acropolis of Knossos applied for

permission to deep-plough the land in order to convert it to an olive-grove. He was given

approval, with the direction that ploughing should initially be shallow so that the area

could be evaluated afterwards. Unfortunately, the driver of the ploughing machine

misunderstood his instructions and ploughed deeply. The remains of archaeological

buildings and material which lay close below the surface were seriously damaged. In the

autumn of that same year, the British School undertook trial excavations on the Acropolis

at Knossos, which were meant as a “rescue operation” in order to assess the damage to

the site.

The site lies 136 to 138 meters above sea level, within grid square D.7 of the


29

Archaeological Survey of the Knossos Area (Fig. 30; Catling et al. 1979: 4-5). To the

east, the site overlooks the Palace at Knossos and the lower Gypsades Hill. Catling et al.

calculate that the excavation area is approximately 600 metres away from the Central

Court at the Palace (Catling et al. 1979:4).

Hector and Elizabeth Catling, assisted by David Smyth, excavated some houses on

the Acropolis at Knossos (Fig. 31), which although severely damaged, contained some

excellent Neopalatial pottery deposits (Catling et al. 1979). The pottery from these

excavations was published as MM IIIA and IIIB (Catling et al. 1979: 78). Since this

publication, however, the material has been re-analyzed, and some scholars have

reassigned deposits A–D as either all MM IIIA, or all MM IIIB (Hatzaki 2007: 186). In

keeping with Hatzaki’s conventions, all of these deposits date to the KS 178 group, and

therefore to MM IIIB, with the exception of the foundation deposit underneath the floor

of a house in Room 1, below Deposit F, which dates to the SEX North House Group, or

LM IB (Hatzaki 2007: 186).

The foundation deposit uncovered at the Acropolis Houses was discovered as

Deposit F, although it was underneath the main LM IA floor deposit in Room 1. In the

excavation reports, the deposit is categorized as both under Deposit F and also as

“unnumbered,” categorized only under “construction horizon for LM I building” (Catling

et al. 1979: 67). The deposit consists of thirteen miniature conical cups, placed upside

down, underneath the floor of Room 1 (Fig. 32). Unfortunately, these were noted as

“minor objects” and were not fully categorized (Catling et al. 1979: 66). Only two of the

vessels are given any attention in the publication. The first is noted as one of a group of


30

six miniature conical cups (Fig. 33B). The height of the cup is 2.5 cm, with a diameter is

of 3 cm. The vessel is described as very roughly made, of brownish-buff clay, and “fired

soft” (Catling et al. 1979: 67). The second vessel is described in a second group of seven

miniature conical cups, with a height of 2.5 cm and a diameter of 4 cm (Fig 33A). The

technique is also described as very roughly made.

Deposit F, originally assigned to LM IA, is so far one of only three fully published

well-stratified deposits from Knossos assignable to the SEX North House Group (Hatzaki

2007: 186). The excavation report is inconclusive as to the date of the ceramic vessels of

the deposit, which may reasonably be ascribed to the LM IA period, since Catling et al.

note that there was “a considerable quantity of pottery of MM III type in the make-up of

the floor, but the date of the level is [clearly LM IA] from several fragments of decorated

LM IA pottery” (1979: 19).

The relationship of the site to the known areas of the Minoan settlement at Knossos

is of considerable interest, as there is no evidence that the south-east of the Acropolis was

occupied any earlier than MM III. Moreover, the sequence of pottery reported from the

excavation suggests an intensive occupation from MM IIIA until some time before the

end of LM IA, when the site was abandoned (Catling et al. 1979: 72).

The Unexplored Mansion

Another deposit located outside the Knossos Palace proper has been identified in

Corridor E of the “Unexplored Mansion” (Fig. 34). This structure, which is ironically

“neither unexplored nor a mansion,” is located approximately 230 m from the Palace, at


31

the foot of the hill to the West, and connected by a bridge to the Little Palace (McEnroe

2010: 95). The building includes a cult center, living quarters, and storage areas, and

although scholars debate its primary function — ranging from a house to a workshop —

most scholars, such as Hatzaki and McEnroe, consider it an annex to the Little Palace

(McEnroe 2010: 95).

A ceramic deposit was discovered in Corridor E, dating to the period of the

Gypsades Well Upper Deposit group, or LM IA (Hatzaki 2007: 172). The corridor, which

seems to have been unpaved, contained a foundation trench along the south wall (shared

with the Pillar Crypt), at the east end of the corridor (Popham 1984:14). The trench

included a miniature brazier, three small, round-mouthed “milk” jugs with single handles,

each approximately eight cm in height (Fig. 35), as well as six miniature conical cups,

approximately two to three cm in height and three and a half to four cm in rim diameter

(Hatzaki 2007: 173; Popham 1984: 14). The deposit also contained two regular conical

cups, four and a half cm in height and eight cm in diameter, as well as two scollop-shaped

lamps (Fig. 36). All the vessels are red-buff, fairly fine clay, roughly shaped on the wheel

(Popham 1984: 14).

The location of the deposit, placed in a foundation trench, clearly marks this

assemblage as a foundation deposit (Fig. 37). The nature of the vessels, including their

relatively miniature size and their fine material, allows this foundation deposit to also be

classified as a votive deposit (Popham 1984: 14). This deposit, while it may be classified

as both a foundation and a votive deposit, has not been classified by scholars as a feasting

deposit, although many of the vessel shapes are found in feasting deposits. This is likely


32

due to the miniature size of the vessels, and the lack of any other archaeological finds

along the deposit, such as animal bones.

The deposits associated with the town at Knossos include those of the Acropolis

Houses and of Corridor E. The foundation deposit in the Acropolis Houses consisted

solely of miniature conical cups which were placed upside down, indicating that these

vessels were purposefully deposited. The date of the deposit is debated, although it is

likely LM IA (Catling et al. 1979: 72). Like the assemblage in the Acropolis Houses, the

deposit from Corridor E of the Unexplored Mansion also contains miniature vessels, and

likely dates to the LM IA period, or Gypsades Well Upper Deposit group (Hatzaki 2007:

172). The deposit, discovered in a foundation trench next to the South Wall, can be

identified with confidence as a foundation deposit (Popham 1984: 14). The deposit may

also be identified as a votive deposit, due to the miniature vessels of fine material, which

may have been offerings (Popham 1984: 14). Although Hatzaki notes that miniature

vessels are the norm at Knossos, this deposit also includes regular-sized conical cups and

a brazier (Hatzaki 2009: 28). In terms of its content, although at a much smaller scale, the

deposit resembles the Room 50 MM IIIA deposit from Phaistos: both deposits include

small jugs, conical cups, braziers, and lamps.

ARCHANES

Archanes is an archaeological site in central Crete, “shaded by Mount

Juktas” (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997: 27). The site spreads out around the


33

mountain, much like the modern town. S. Xanthoudidis first noted the importance of the

site in 1912, and soon afterwards Arthur Evans declared that the building excavated at

Tourkogeitonia in Archanes must have been a “summer Palace for the kings at

Knossos” (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997: 22-29). In 1964, Sakellarakis

excavated trial trenches, which yielded the first evidence of a “palatial” structure at the

site. Since then, Yannis Sakellarakis and Efi Sapouna-Sakellaraki have excavated the site

with the Greek Archaeological Society (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997: 22).

A foundation deposit was discovered in the staircase structure of the building in

Tourkogeitonia, formed by Areas 6, 8, and 9 (Figs. 38 and 39; Sakellarakis and Sapouna-

Sakellaraki 1997: 96). Area 6 was the east flight of the staircase, which ran north-south,

Area 8 was the landing at which the staircase turned west, and Area 9 was the west flight,

running south-north, in the same fashion as the famous grand staircase at Knossos

(Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997: 96). In the north part of the west wall of

Area 9, at the base of the wall (Fig. 40), was a large stone square slab which was filled

with 15 handleless conical cups (Fig. 41; Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997: 97;

Gillis 1990: 141). Above this area there were also several vessels, such as ordinary

amphorae and cooking pots (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997: 97).

Unfortunately, Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki’s 1997 report contains little

detail on the assemblage, and previous reports in which this assemblage may be

mentioned were unobtainable. Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki do suggest,

however, that the stone slab and its contents were “certainly related to some ritual,”

which other scholars, such as Weiner, have identified as a foundation deposit


34

(Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997:97; Weiner 2011: 363).

PALAIKASTRO

The Minoan archaeological site of Palaikastro is located on the far eastern coast of

Crete. The site was continually occupied from the Early Minoan period throughout the

LM II and until the LM IIIB period (MacGillivray and Driessen 1989). The site was

originally excavated between 1902 and 1906 by R. Bosanquet and R.M. Dawkins from

the British School at Athens, and subsequently by Hugh Sackett and Mervyn Popham

from 1962 to 1963. Sackett and MacGillivray began a third campaign in 1986, which is

ongoing (MacGillivray and Sackett 2010: 572).

The settlement is arranged in extensive town blocks (Fig. 42), several of which

contain one central four-columned hall with an impluvium, and have rooms with public

access that have been interpreted as shops (MacGillivray and Sackett 2010: 576). The

absence of a central administrative building (to date) has prompted excavators to suggest

that such a building may lie unexcavated to the south of the current excavations

(MacGillivray and Sackett 2010: 574).

At Palaikastro, several foundation deposits have been uncovered. The nature of

most of these deposits is quite similar, and for this reason, only three deposits will be

analyzed in depth, as a representative sample of the foundation deposits at the site.

One of the earliest Neopalatial deposits at the site comes from Building 6 Room

R1. Building 6 (Fig. 43) itself was constructed in the MM IIIA period, based on evidence

from excavation trials and floor deposits in the basements of several rooms; the earliest


35

level found below the structure, however, belongs to the MM II period (Knappett and

Cunningham 2003: 111). During trial excavations of the building, a bridge-spouted jar

(Fig. 46) was discovered, placed as a foundation deposit below Wall 719a (Fig. 44;

Knappett and Cunningham 2003: 111).

The excavation reports note that the MM IIB fill, comprised of stones and sherds,

was uncovered immediately below floor level, and that the bridge-spouted jar below the

wall was upright, set atop a pile of sherds, with a pithos sherd as lid (Fig. 45; Knappett

and Cunningham 2003: 111-113). The report also notes that the spout of the jar was not in

alignment with the wall but pointed about 35 degrees east of north (Knappett and

Cunningham 2003: 113). The jar was set at a depth of 10.85 m above sea level, in a

cutting beneath the foundation course of the earliest wall-line (MacGillivray et al. 1999:

465). Directly above this deposit was a clay floor, on which a destruction deposit was

discovered (Knappett and Cunningham 2003: 114).

The vessel (Fig. 46) is described as ninety percent complete, forming 27 fragments,

with the spout and handles missing. Compared to other bridge-spouted jars at the site, this

vessel is described as “not unlike those from Building 6 Room R1/3 in its convex-

concave profile,” although the vessel does not have the same differentiated rim nor offset

base as the other three jars (Knappett and Cunningham 2003: 148). Notwithstanding the

fact that the handles are not preserved, Knappett and Cunningham note that they appear

to be of a different type than the handles of the other three bridge-spouted jars found in

the building (Knappett and Cunningham 2003: 148). Athough the date of the bridge-

spouted jar has been considered to date either to MM IIB or MM IIIA, it was clearly


36

deposited in the foundation trench during the renovations of the room during the MM

IIIA period (Knappett and Cunningham 2003).

Two other typical foundation deposits from Palaikastro include that of Room C in

Building 6, and in Building 5. In Room C, a bridge-spouted jar of the MM IIIB period

was uncovered (Fig. 47), intact and upside down, at a depth of 10.25-10.36 m. The vessel

was in the northwest corner of the room, and was set against the foundation of the west

wall (MacGillivray et al. 1999: 466). Combined with the previous deposit in Room R1,

these two deposits provide a representative sample of the over nine foundation deposits

uncovered in Building 6 (Knappett and Cunningham 2013).

Excavations in Building 5 turned up a small compartment composed of mudbrick

walls surviving up to a meter high (MacGillivray et al. 1999: 466). Beneath the floor, set

against the Southwest Wall, was a foundation deposit consisting of four small LM IB

goblets (Fig. 48). These vessels were set upside down in a cutting approximately 10 cm

below the floor level. Although these vessels are not described in detail in the current

publications, their context and their function as part of a foundation deposit are very well

established.

At Palaikastro, there are a number of deposits from Buildings 5 and 6, of which

only a few representative samples have been detailed. The bridge-spouted jar in the

foundations of wall 719a is manufactured at the end of the Old Palace Period, and may be

the oldest deposit in Building 6, permitting us to date the construction of this section of

the building, referred to as the Minoan Hall complex, to the very beginning of the MM


37

IIIA (Knappett and Cunningham 2003: 111). The majority of the deposits are associated

with the MM IIIB rebuilding phase of the same building and are mostly comprised of

bridge-spouted jars and small drinking vessels (MacGillivray et al. 1999: 465-6). The

deposit in Building 5, which dates to the LM IB period, is most likely associated with the

alterations of the building during this period (MacGillivray et al. 1999: 467).


38

Chapter 4: Analysis.

The previous chapter laid out samples of the ceramic assemblages that have been

identified as foundation deposits by scholars. The samples focused on two major Palaces,

those of Knossos and Phaistos, sites associated directly with the Palaces, and two towns.

For example, Ayia Triada was directly associated with the Palace at Phaistos, and the

Acropolis Houses are associated with the Palace at Knossos. The towns include Archanes

and Palaikastro.

This chapter will compare and analyze the deposits within each site, and also across

multiple sites, by synthesizing the data that has been gathered. The analysis will be

further subdivided into Palatial and non-Palatial contexts, and the deposits within these

will also be compared.

PHAISTOS AND AYIA TRIADA

The two deposits of Room 50 at Phaistos are noteworthy due to their close

proximity. Although both foundation deposits were located in the same room and were

both feasting deposits, there were some differences between the assemblages and their

architectural contexts. The MM IIIA assemblage was comprised of several vessel shapes

and types, including three different types of cups, as well as plates, bowls, and an incense

burner, whereas the LM IA assemblage was less individualizing, and comprised of fewer

shapes: one type of cup, one type of jar, and one cooking vessel. Unfortunately, the exact

numbers of vessels in the MM IIIA deposit are unknown, although reports indicated that


39

there were at least one hundred conical cups and a large number of straight-sided and

semiglobular cups, as well as some plates, bowls, and incense burners. The LM IB

assemblage, whose numbers were better recorded, contained 120 conical cups which

comprised over ninety-seven percent of the deposit; the other two percent included

bridge-spouted jars and a cooking vessel. In terms of their architecture, while the MM

IIIA deposit was believed to be of great importance due to its prominent position

underneath the threshold of the room, an entire subterranean structure was created in

order to house the LM IA deposit, also highlighting its importance.

The most noticeable similarity between the two deposits in Room 50 was perhaps

the presence of at least one hundred conical cups in each of the deposits, along with other

serving vessels. This, along with the inclusion of animal bones and olive stones in the

deposits, validated the theory that both deposits were associated with feasting activities.

The three deposits from the House South of the Ramp at Phaistos came from two

separate rooms — Room XCI and Room XCIII. Each of these deposits comprised fewer

vessels than we have previously encountered in the Palatial contexts, with a maximum of

four vessels, as opposed to the hundreds of vessels previously discussed. The positioning

of the vessels with one vessel placed on top of the other, acting rather like a lid, in

conjunction with the placement of the deposit in the foundation of a structure, signify the

importance of these rather small deposits, and displays a more careful positioning of the

vessels than in the Room 50 deposits from Phaistos.

It can also be observed that conical cups and bridge-spouted jars were present in

both Palatial and non-Palatial contexts. The three deposits in the House South of the


40

Ramp were very similar: all three dated to the mature MM IIIA period, all had two

vessels meticulously arranged, and comprised small deposits. Unlike the foundation

deposits from the Palace at Phaistos, it was difficult to define these deposits as

representative of a feast due to the small number of vessels.

In addition to the deposits from the site of Phaistos, several deposits from the site of

Ayia Triada, which has long been associated with the Palace at Phaistos, can also be

analyzed. One deposit at Ayia Triada came from Corridor 74 in Villa B. Although

information on this assemblage was relatively new, the deposit, below a thick burnt level

and placed directly on a rock next to the north-south wall, can be considered a foundation

deposit due to its location, which was undisturbed until excavated. Although the vessels

were regular household items such as cooking and serving vessels, their position,

prominently placed on top of the rock above the burned destruction layer and covered by

a floor, indicated that they were meant as a foundation deposit. Furthermore, the deposits

coincide with a building operation, which was evident throughout the site during the MM

IIIA period (Girella 2007b: 248).

The second deposit from Ayia Triada also consisted of regular household items,

namely a bridge-spouted jar and three types of cups. Unlike the previous deposit, it was

not certain if this deposit was a foundation deposit (although Girella identified it as such),

or a destruction deposit, given the lack of information on its context. It is worth including

in this comparison in order to emphasize that without a proper context, it is very difficult

to differentiate between destruction deposits and purposeful deposits such as foundation

deposits. As can be noted, the types of vessels represented in foundation deposits can be


41

common household items, and therefore the context of the deposit, associating the vessels

with a construction operation, is what defines them as such. Both deposits from Ayia

Triada contained a total of ten vessels, and consisted of a minimum of one bridge-spouted

jar and five handleless cups.

The deposits associated with Phaistos, whether Palatial, such as those of Room 50,

or non-Palatial, such as those in the House South of the Ramp and at Ayia Triada, show

distinct similarities and differences. First, it is evident that the scale of the foundation

deposits is much larger in the Palatial context. The assemblages in the Palace included

over one hundred vessels, averaging 120 vessels, whereas those of the non-Palatial

contexts included no more than ten vessels, averaging five vessels per deposit. For

example, at Phaistos the LM IA Palatial deposit in Room 50 consisted of 123 vessels,

whereas the MM IIIA deposit in Room XCI at Phaistos consisted of four vessels.

Although the size of the assemblages was undoubtedly different, the content of the

assemblages was similar. The small deposits consisted of a serving vessels such as a bowl

or a cup, and often included a bridge-spouted jar, if a pouring vessel was present. Bridge-

spouted jars were present in five of the seven deposits, or over seventy percent of the

deposits, and serving vessels such as bowls or cups were present in all seven deposits. It

might be worth analyzing the occurrence of the bridge-spouted jar in large foundation

deposits in this area in future work, in order to determine whether the absence of this type

of vessel in the Room 50 MM IIIA deposit at Phaistos is anomalous or not. Cooking

vessels are not as common, and are present in forty percent of the non-Palatial deposits,

and in only one of the two Palatial deposits in Room 50 at Phaistos. Where present, these


42

vessels are not numerous, as seen in the LM IA deposit in Room 50, where there was

only one tripod cooking pot out of the assemblage of 123 vessels.

KNOSSOS AND ARCHANES

Unfortunately, most of the foundation deposits from Knossos have not been

properly recorded, and it is therefore difficult to provide a proper analysis quantifying the

types of vessels in the deposits. Unlike the Palatial context at Phaistos in Room 50, the

deposits at Knossos are much smaller. Of the deposits with known vessel numbers, the

largest Palatial deposit is the Temple Repositories, which included fifty vessels, including

vessel types such as jugs for pouring (32%), as well as bird vases and cups for drinking

(26%). The assemblage also included storage vessels such as amphorae (28%), which are

unattested elsewhere in foundation deposits, and are rarely found in feasting deposits

(Girella 2008: 170). The large number of storage and pouring vessels in the Temple

Repositories demonstrates the capacity of the Central Palace area for supplying a large

number of people with liquids, yet the lack of drinking vessels in this deposit is notable.

Unless the marine shells are considered to serve the function of drinking vessels, in

which case they would represent the great majority of the assemblage (over 99%), it

would be difficult to consider this a feasting deposit, due to the lack of serving vessels,

which only comprise 26 percent of the deposit without the marine shells.

The other Palatial assemblages at Knossos, those of the Southwest area, contain no

visible pattern. The deposit under Wall Delta contained what Evans simply noted as

“ordinary crockery,” providing no information as to the quantity or types of vessels


43

present, except that the deposit contained cups and bowls. Although it is uncertain

whether the deposit contained any pouring vessels, the contents seem similar to those of

the MM IIIA deposit in Room 50 at Phaistos. Both deposits contained an unknown

number of serving vessels, including bowls and cups, and neither deposit contained a

pouring vessel. Although there are similarities between these two deposits, the “ordinary”

array of vessels found in the foundation deposit under Wall Delta would suggest that this

was solely a foundation deposit, and not a feasting deposit.

The two non-Palatial deposits from Knossos, those of the Acropolis Houses and the

Unexplored Mansion, portray several similarities. Both foundation deposits contain

miniature vessels and a minimum of six miniature conical cups. While the foundation

deposit from the Unexplored Mansion contained regular-sized vessels, these comprised

only four vessels (less than 30%). The presence of the mini brazier in conjunction with

the miniature size of the vessels in the assemblage from the Unexplored Mansion has

allowed several scholars to consider it a votive deposit (MacGillivray et al. 1999: 467;

Popham 1984: 14; Hatzaki 2007: 172). The use of miniature vessels does not seem to be

specific to a time period, as deposits from the LM IA and LM IB periods contained both

miniature and regular-sized vessels. It does, however, seem to be specific to the site of

Knossos, since none of the non-Knossian deposits, including the deposits of town sites

associated with Knossos such as Archanes, produced such an array of miniature vessels.

In addition to the foundation deposits immediately surrounding the Palace at

Knossos, there is also evidence for foundation deposits at Archanes, a town closely

associated with the Palatial site. Although the ceramic assemblage from the deposit in


44

Area 9 at Archanes has not been published in detail in a readily accessible work, there is

little doubt that this deposit is a foundation deposit, due to its prominent position at the

base of the wall of the stair complex. The deposit’s conical cups, although not miniature

in size, are reminiscent of the other deposits from town contexts at Knossos, which all

contain a minimum of eight conical cups. The deposits also display similarities to those at

Ayia Triada and the town-context at Phaistos, including the inclusion of drinking vessels

such as handleless cups. Regarding the size of the non-Palatial deposits around Knossos,

all the deposits comprise approximately ten to fifteen vessels each, similar to the non-

Palatial deposits at Phaistos, which also comprise around ten vessels.

KOMMOS

The nine foundation deposits at Kommos are quite similar. Six of the deposits date

to the transitional MM III- LM IA period, with only one deposit dating to the MM III

period, and two dating to the LM IA period. All of the deposits contain at least one

conical cup, seven out of nine contain at least one bridge spouted jar, and four of the

deposits, all from the transitional MM III-LM IA period, contain at least one rhyton.

These deposits are all rather small, with the largest deposit consisting of ten vessels, and

the smallest consisting of two vessels. None of the deposits contain large bowls,

amphorae, cooking dishes or trays, large jars, or jugs, and the limited range of shapes

rules out the possibility of these deposits being merely household debris (Betancourt

1990: 46-47). The vessels seem to be the last vessels deposited before the entire

settlement was rebuilt, and are thus likely associated with this new phase of construction.


45

Betancourt surmises that the rebuilding must have been an event of some magnitude, and

would have involved a celebration, commemoration, or some sort of special activity

(Betancourt 1990: 48). It is possible, given the similar date and nature of the deposits,

that aside from being foundation deposits, these deposits also formed part of a drinking

celebration or feast. Certainly the presence of rhyta and the marked contrast with the

sherds from the rubble denote a ritualistic aspect to the deposit, although it is difficult to

know the exact nature of the activity that resulted in these vases being deposited.

PALAIKASTRO

The thorough publications of the site at Palaikastro have identified foundation

deposits ranging throughout the Neopalatial period, from the early MM III deposit of

Room C in Building 6, the later MM IIIA deposit from Room R1 also in Building 6, to

the LM IB deposit in Building 5. Despite the broad chronological timespan, the deposits

all contained few vessels, usually a single bridge-spouted jar. The number of vessels in

each deposit does not seem anomalous for non-Palatial deposits which range from one to

ten vessels, as is evident by the deposits at Phaistos (maximum of four vessels in non-

Palatial contexts), Ayia Triada and Kommos (maximum of ten vessels). It is important to

note that although the deposits at Kommos and Palaikastro are quite dissimilar to those at

Knossos in terms of vessel types, with no bridge-spouted jars appearing in the foundation

deposits at Knossos, the four goblets in the foundation deposit in Building 5 at

Palaikastro are quite similar to those of the foundation deposit in Corridor E of the

Unexplored Mansion. MacGillivray et al. note that although the Unexplored Mansion


46

deposit is assigned to the LM IA period, the deposit might be associated with the

remodeling of the wall during the LM II period, which would make the vessels in both

deposits contemporaneous (MacGillivray et al. 1999: 467).

From this analysis of different sites and contexts, it is clear that the conical cup and

the bridge-spouted jar are quite common vessels in foundation deposits. Conical cups are

present in sixteen, possibly seventeen, of the twenty-five foundation deposits, or over

60% of the deposits; bridge-spouted jars, although not as common as the conical cup, are

present in fourteen of the 25 deposits, or over 55% of the deposits. In comparison, only

six deposits (less than 25%) contained rhyta, and only four (16%) contained some sort of

cooking vessel. Other types of serving vessels, although present, are also not as frequent,

with only ten of the deposits (40%) containing vessels such as semiglobular cups, plates,

or straight-sided cups.

In addition, there is a sharp contrast between the number of vessels in a clearly

palatial context, such as the two from Room 50 at the Palace at Phaistos and the Temple

Repositories at Knossos, to those of the non-Palatial sites. It is important to note that

these three foundation deposits at the Palaces are all feasting deposits as well as

foundation deposits, which may be indicated by their larger size, as feasting deposits tend

to be larger, in order to include and be representative of the participants of the feast.

Chronologically, two deposits are defined as MM III, six deposits are defined as

specifically MM IIIA, and one is MM IIIB. Six deposits are transitional MM IIIB-LM

IA, one is undefined LM, six are LM IA, and two, possibly three, deposits are LM IB


47

(Table 2). Thus, nine deposits are from the earlier MM Neopalatial period, ten are from

the LM Neopalatial period, and six are from the transitional LM IIIB-LM IA period. It is

not surprising that less than fifteen percent of the deposits come from the LM IB period,

as many of the sites are abandoned at the end of this period, and thus there are no

reconstructions at many of the sites past the LM IA period.

In terms of content, the deposits remain largely unchanged throughout the

Neopalatial period. Of the twenty five contexts surveyed, twenty three are identifiable as

either major building operations, or as renovations. Thirteen contexts indicate the

construction of a new building, while ten indicate a major renovation to an already

constructed building. The contexts which indicate constructions include the MM IIIA

deposit from Room 50 at Phaistos, the nine deposits from Kommos (Rooms 28, 1, 8, 9,

15, 44, 48, 51), the deposit from the Acropolis Houses at Knossos, the deposit from the

Unexplored Mansion at Knossos, and the deposit in Area 9 at Archanes. The deposits

which suggest renovations at sites include: the three deposits from the House South of the

Ramp (Rooms XCI and XCIII) at Phaistos, the deposit from Corridor 74 at Ayia Triada,

the deposit from Room 20, and the Temple Repositories from Knossos, and the three

deposits from Palaikastro (Room R1 and C, Building 5). The types of vessels do not vary

based on major building operations versus renovations, which range from the MM IIIA to

the LM IB period.

Furthermore, the size of the deposits does not seem to be dependent on chronology,

but rather on the nature of the foundation deposit. Thus, foundation deposits that are also

feasting deposits are larger than the average foundation deposit throughout the


48

Neopalatial, as would be expected due to the nature of feasting, which usually involves a

large number of participants. In summation, the consistency of architectural and artistic

trends from the Middle and Late Minoan periods may be interpreted as a sign that the

builders’ practices were not altered throughout this period.


49

Chapter 5: Conclusions

The 25 foundation deposits described above provide a heterogeneous group in

terms of both content and structure, and no repetitive pattern is easily discernible for the

Neopalatial period. The size of the deposits varies from hundreds of vessels to as few as

one vessel, and displays no chronological change. There also seems to be no distinction

in the foundation deposits between various phases of construction, with little deviation

between the foundation of brand-new buildings and renovations. Two patterns in the

content of the deposits that are visible throughout the Neopalatial period are the use of

bridge-spouted jars and conical cups, which are present in every period from MM IIIA to

LM IA, and the difference in the size of Palatial and non-Palatial deposits.

Herva writes that Minoan foundation deposits appear to be more abundant at

Palatial sites (Herva 2005: 220); the present study, however, has demonstrated that this

may not be the case. Out of the 25 foundation deposits detailed above, fifteen, or 60

percent of the deposits, are located in non-Palatial sites. This may be due to more

thorough records and publications from recent excavations, which have allowed for the

identification of more foundation deposits than in the past, when the major Palaces were

excavated. The assumption that foundation deposits are more prevalent in Palatial sites

due to their importance and long occupational history must therefore be revised in future

studies of foundation deposits.

Furthermore, deposits at Palatial sites tend to be larger than those at non-Palatial

sites, as is evident in the two deposits from Room 50 in the Palace of Phaistos, and the


50

Temple Repositories deposit in the Palace at Knossos, all three of which contain at least

fifty items, whereas the deposits at non-Palatial sites do not contain more than 15 vessels.

There also seems to be a relationship between the size of the deposits and their

relationship to feasting. Communal foundation feasts, involving a greater number of

participants, produce larger foundation deposits, due to the involvement of an increased

number of participants in the ritual deposition of the artifacts. Unfortunately, this study

only included three identifiable feasting deposits, two of which have not been adequately

published in terms of their context and content, limiting the ability to draw strong

conclusions with respect to feasting foundation deposits.

Although the foundation deposits in the Neopalatial period range from the MM IIIA

period to the LM IB period, there are very few deposits at the end of the Neopalatial

period. The lesser number of foundation deposits — and therefore building and

renovation operations — during the LM IB period is predictable, due to the lack of

material culture during the LM II period, and the evident destructions and abandonments

of Minoan centers.


51

Bibliography

Betancourt, P.P. 1990. Kommos II: The Final Neolithic through Middle Minoan III Pottery. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Boulotis, C. 1982. “Ein Gründungsdepositum im Minoischen Palast von Kato Zakros. Minoisch-mykenische Bauopfer.”ArchKorrBl 12: 153-166.Catling, E., H. Catling, D. Smyth, G. Jones, and R.E. Jones. 1979. “Knossos 1975: Middle Minoan III and Late Minoan I Houses by the Acropolis.” BSA 74: 1-80.Carinci, F. and V. La Rosa. 2009. “Revisioni Festie II.” CretAnt 10.1: 147-294.Dietler, M.D. 2001.“Theorizing the Feast: Rituals of Consumption, Commensal politics, and Power in African contexts.” In Feasts: Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, Politics, and Power, edited by M.D. Dietler and B. Hayden, Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press. Driessen, J. and C.F. Macdonald. 2000. “The Eruption of the Santorini Volcano and its Effects on Minoan Crete.” In The Archaeology of Geological Catastrophes, edited by W.J. McGuire, et al., 81-93, London: Geological Society Special Publication. Driessen, J. et al. 2011. Excavations at Sissi II. Belgium: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.Ellis, R.S. 1968. Foundation Deposits in Ancient Mesopotamia. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.Evans, A. 1928. The Palace of Minos. Vol. 2, pt. 2. London: Cambridge University Press.Evans, A. 1930. The Palace of Minos. Vol. 3. London: Cambridge University Press.Fox, R.S. 2012. Feasting Practices and Changes in Greek Society from the Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age. Oxford: Archaeopress.Girella, L. 2007a. “Forms of Commensal Politics in Neopalatial Crete.” CretAnt

8:135-1168.Girella, L. 2007b. “Toward a Definition Of The Middle Minoan III Ceramic Sequence in South-Central Crete: Returning to the Traditional MM IIIA and IIIB Division.” In Middle Helladic Pottery and Synchronisms: Proceedings Of The International Workshop Held At Salzburg October 31st – November 2nd, 2004, edited by F. Felten, W. Gauss and R. Smetana, 233-256, Austria: ÖAWW.Girella, L. 2007-2008. “A View of MM IIIA at Phaistos: Pottery Production and Consumption at the Beginning o the Neopalatial Period.” Aegean Archaeology 9: 49-89. Girella, L. 2008. “Feasts in ‘Transition’? An Overview of Feasting Practices during MM


52

III in Crete.” In Dais The Aegean Feast: Proceedings of the 12th International Aegean Conference, edited by L. Hitchcock et al., 167-178, Belgium: KLIEMO SA. Girella, L. 2010. Depositi Ceramici del Medio Minoico III da Festos e Haghia Triada. Studi di Archeologia Cretese VIII. Padova: Bottega d'Erasmo.Girella, L. 2013. “Evidence for Middle Minoan III Occupation at Ayia Triada.” In Intermezzo: Intermediacy and Regeneration in Middle Minoan III Palatial Crete, edited by C.F. Macdonald and C. Knappett, 123-135, London: BSA.Hatzaki, E. 2007. “Neopalatial (MM IIIB–LM IB): KS 178, Gypsades Well (Upper Deposit) and SEX North House Groups.” BSA. Knossos Pottery Handbook: Neolithic and Bronze Age (Minoan) 14: 151-196. Hatzaki E. 2009. “Structured Deposition as Ritual Action at Knossos.” Hesperia Suppl: Essays on Ritual and Cult in Crete in Honor of Geraldine C. Gesell 42: 19-30. Haughton, B. 2009. Hidden History: Lost Civilizations, Secret Knowledge, and Ancient Mysteries. New York: Book-Mart Press. Herva, V.P. 2005. “The Life of Buildings: Minoan Building Deposits in an Ecological Perspective.” OJA 24.3: 215-227. Hitchcock, L. 2010. “The Big Nowhere: A Master of Animals in the Throne Room at Knossos?” In The Master of Animals in Old World Iconography, edited by D.B. Counts and B. Arnold, 107-118, Budapest: Prime Rate Kft. Hogarth, D.G. 1899-1900. “Early Town and Cemeteries.” BSA 6: 76. Knappett, C. and T. Cunningham. 2003. “Three Neopalatial Deposits from Palaikastro, East Crete.” BSA 98: 107-187.Knappett, C. and T. Cunningham. 2013. “Defining Middle Minoan IIIA and IIIB at Palaikastro.” In Intermezzo: Intermediacy and Regeneration in Middle Minoan III Palatial Crete, edited by C.F. MacDonald and C. Knappett, 183-195, London: BSA. La Rosa, V. 1995. “A Hypothesis on Earthquakes and Political Power in Minoan Crete.” Anali di Geofisica 38.5-6: 881-891.La Rosa, V. 2002. “Le Campagne di Scavo 2000-2002 a Festòs.” ASAtene 80: 635-869. La Rosa,V. 2002. “Liturgie Domestiche e/o Depositi di Fondazione? Vecchi e Nuovi Dati da Festòs e Haghia Triada.” CretAnt 3: 13-50Levi, D. 1976. Festòs e la Civiltà Minoica. Vol 1. Rome: Edizioni dell'Ateneo. Macdonald, C. 1990. “Destruction and Construction in the Palace at Knossos: LM IA-B.” In Thera and the Aegean World III: Vol. 3 Chronology, edited by D.A. Hardy and A.C. Renfrew, 82-88, London: The Thera Foundation.


53

MacGillivray, J.A. and J.M. Driessen. 1989. “Minoan Settlement at Palaikastro.” In L’Habitat Égéen Préhistorique. BCH Suppl 19, edited by P. Darcque and R. Treuil, 395-412, Athens: L'École française d'Athènes. MacGillivray, J.A. and L.H. Sackett. 2010. “Palaikastro.” In The Oxford Handbook of the Bronze Age Aegean, edited by E. Cline, 571-581, New York: Oxford University Press. MacGillivray, J.A., L.H. Sackett, J.M. Driessen, E. Hatzake, and I. Schoep. 1998. “Excavations at Palaikastro, 1994 and 1996.” BSA 93: 221-68. MacGillivray, J. A., H. Sackett and J. Driessen. 1999. ‘“Aspro Pato.’ A Lasting Liquid Toast from the Master-Builders of Palaikastro to their Patron’, in Aegeaum 20 Meletemata: Studies in Aegean Archaeology Presented to Malcolm H. Wiener as He Enters his 65th Year, edited by P. Betancourt et al., 465–468, Liège: Université de Liège.Pernier, L. 1935. Il Palazzo Minoico di Festòs. Vol. 1. Rome.Popham, M.R. 1984. The Minoan Unexplored Mansion at Knossos. Athens: BSA.Pelon, O. 1986. “Un Depôt de Fondation au Palais de Mallia,” BCH 110: 3-19. Platon, N. 1985. Zakros: The Discovery of a Lost Palace of Ancient Crete. Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert.Sakellarakis, Y. and E. Sapouna-Sakellaraki. 1997. Archanes. Minoan Crete in a New Light. Athens.Shaw, J.W. 1982. “Excavations at Kommos (Crete) during 1981. Hesperia 51: 164-194.Shaw, J.W. 2006. Kommos: A Minoan Harbor Town and Greek Sanctuary in Southern Crete. Italy: ASCSA. Shelmerdine, C. 2008. “Introduction.” inThe Cambridge Companion to The Aegean Bronze Age, edited by C. Shelmerdine, 1-14, New York: Cambridge University Press.Spratt, T.A.B. 1865. Travels and Researches in Crete. Vol. 1. Oxford: J. Van Voorst. Watrous, L.V. et al. 2004. The Plain of Phaistos: Cycles of Social Complexity in the Mesara Region of Crete. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology. Weinstein, J.M. 1973. “Foundation Deposits in Ancient Egypt.” Ph.D. diss, University of Pennsylvania. Wright, James C., ed. 2004. The Mycenaean Feast. Athens: The American School of Classical Studies in Athens.


54

Figures

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2. Feasting Deposit below Room 50 of Phaistos Palace (Levi 1976: Fig. 623).


55

Fig. 3- MM IIIA Deposit from Phaistos, Room 50 (Girella 2007-2008: Fig. 2).

Fig. 4- Room 50 at Phaistos view (http://www.grisel.net).


56

Fig. 5- Cups from LM IA Deposit in Room 50 at Phaistos (Levi 1976: Fig. 630).

Fig. 6- Rectangular Cist in Room 50 (Levi 1976: Fig. 627). Fig. 7- LM IA Deposit from Room 50 at

Phaistos in situ (Levi 1976: Fig. 629).


57

Fig. 8- Casa Sud Della Rampa, Phaistos Fig. 9- Room XCI Excavation Drawing. Phaistos(La Rosa 2002: Fig. 47). (modified from La Rosa 2002: Fig. 49).

Fig. 10- Room XCI Deposit from Phaistos in situ Fig. 11- Room XCIII Excavation Drawing (La Rosa 2002: 56). from Phaistos (modified from La Rosa 2002:

Fig. 49).


58

Fig. 12- Room XCIII Deposit from Phaistos Fig. 13- Second Deposit from Room XCIII (La Rosa 2002: Figs. 51-52). (Trench 905), Phaistos (La Rosa 2002: Fig. 53).

Fig. 14- Trench 905 Deposit from Room XCIII, Phaistos (La Rosa 2002: Fig. 54).


59

Fig. 15- Plan of Neopalatial Ayia Triada (McEnroe 2010: Fig. 9.40).

Fig. 16- Map of Corridor 74, indicating foundation Fig. 17- Foundation Deposit deposit location, Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: Fig. 10.2). from Corridor 74, Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: Fig. 10.2).


60

Fig. 18- Edificio Ovest Semi-ovoid cup type, Fig. 19- Edificio Ovest Conical cup with Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: 156, everted rim type, Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: 156, after Puglisi 2006: 208). after Puglisi 2006: 208).

Fig. 20- Edificio Ovest Straight-Sided cup types, Fig. 21- Edificio Ovest carinated cup Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: 156, after Puglisi 2006: 208). type, Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: 156,

after Puglisi 2006: 208).

Fig. 22- Edificio Ovest Bridge-Spouted Jar type, Ayia Triada (Girella 2010: 156, after Puglisi 2006: 208).


61

Fig. 23- Distribution of Bridge-Spouted Jar types in Ayia Triada and Phaistos (from Girella 2010: Fig. 85).

Fig. 24- Map of Neopalatial Knossos (McEnroe 2010: Fig. 7.2).


62

Fig. 25- Decorative Motifs from the Gypsades Well Upper Deposit Group, Knossos (Hatzaki 2007: Fig. 5.12).

Fig. 26- Gypsum Fragment From DVII.20, Fig. 27- LM IB Cup-Rhyton and loomweightKnossos (Macdonald 1990: Fig. 6). from DVII.20 (Macdonald 1990: Fig. 8).


63

Fig. 28- The East and West Repositories, Fig. 29- Selection of artefacts and ecofacts from the Knossos (Hatzaki 2009: Fig. 2.1). Temple Repositories at Knossos (Hatzaki 2009: Fig. 2.2).

Fig. 30- Area plan for Acropolis Trial Excavations, Fig. 31- Isometric Reconstruction of Knossos (Catling et al. 1979: Fig. 1). the MM III House (Catling et al. 1979: Fig. 7).


64

A B

Fig. 32- Position of foundation Deposit in Room 1, Fig. 33- Conical Cups from Foundation Acropolis Houses, Knossos (Catling et al. 1979: Fig. 14). Deposit, Acropolis Houses, Knossos (Catling et al. 1979: Fig. 45).

Fig. 34- Unexplored Mansion Plan, Knossos Fig. 35- “Milk Jug” type, Knossos (Popham 1984: Pl. (modified from McEnroe 2010: 9.2) 143.15).


65

Fig. 36- Corridor E Foundation Deposit, Unexplored Fig. 37- Corridor E Foundation Trench.Mansion, Knossos (Popham 1984: Pl. 137d). Unexplored Mansion, Knossos (Popham 1984: Pl. 26d).

Fig. 38- Plan, Archanes Tourkogeitonia Fig. 39- Reconstruction of Staircase at (McEnroe 2010: Fig. 8.14). Archanes, Areas 6, 8, 9 (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997: Fig. 14).


66

Fig. 40- Stone Square Slab at Base of the Wall, Fig. 41- Conical Cups in situ, Archanes Archanes (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997: Fig. 75).1997: Drawing 16).


67

Fig. 42- Plan of Palaikastro (Knappett and Cunningham 2003: Fig. 1).


68

Fig. 43- Plan of Building 6 at Palaikastro Fig. 44- Plan of Building 6 Rooms R1 and R3, Palaikastro (MacGillivray et al. 1998: Fig. 1). (Knappett and Cunningham 2003: Fig. 5).

Fig. 45- Section of Room R1, Foundation Deposit, Palaikastro Fig. 46- Bridge-Spouted Jar (Knappett and Cunningham 2003: Fig. 4). from Foundation Deposit, Palaikastro

(Knappett and Cunningham 2003: Fig. 33).


69

Fig. 47- Bridge- Spouted Jar from Room C, Fig. 48- Goblets in situ in Foundation Deposit from Palaikastro (MacGillivray et al 1999: Pl. CId). Building 5, Palaikastro (MacGillivray et al 1999: Pl. CIIIc).


Table 1- Summary of Foundation Deposits by Site.Table 1- Summary of Foundation Deposits by Site.Table 1- Summary of Foundation Deposits by Site.

Content (vessels)Name of Deposit Location Serving and Pouring Cooking Ritual Other DateRoom 50 Phaistos (hundreds of) cc, ss, semiglob cups, plates, bowls, none incense burner ovis/capra, fish bones, olive st. MM IIIARoom 50 Phaistos 120 cc; 2 br-sp., 1 tripod ck pot animal bones, olive st. LM IARooms XCI Phaistos 1 br-sp.;1 cc, 1 plate; cc sherds 1 scuttle sheep/goat bones, MM IIIARoom XCIII Phaistos 2 dec. bowls w/projecting rims MM IIIARoom XCIII Phaistos 1 br-sp., 1 cc MM IIIACorridor 74 Ayia Triada 2 br-sp., 6 hndlless cups 1 saucer, 1 brazier? MM IIIA lateEdificio Ovest Ayia Triada 1 br-sp.; 5 hndless cups; 2 cups w/ handles; 2 car. cups MM IIIBRoom 28 Kommos serving LM IARoom 1 Kommos 5 cc; 1 br-sp. TransRoom 8 Kommos 1 cc; 1 sm cup, 1 rhyton TransRoom 9 Kommos 2 cc 1 rhyton TransRoom 15 Kommos 4 cc; 1 sm bowl; 1 bell cup; 2 br-sp. 2 rhyta TransRoom 44 Kommos 6 cc; 2 br-sp.; 1 sm. jar 1 rhyton TransRom 48 Kommos 3 cc; 4 br-sp. TransRoom 51 Kommos 1 cc; 1 br-sp. MM IIIRoom 51 Kommos 1 cc; 1 oversized ss cup; 2 br-sp. 1 sm tripod ck pot 1 rhyton LM IAUnder Wall Delta Knossos unknown vessels LM IARoom 20 Knossos 1 sp. dec. cup rhyton 2 clay lm. weights LM IBTemple Repositories Knossos 16 jugs; 5 jars; 11 bird vases; 2 tall faience cups. snake goddess? > 6,000 shells; 14 amph. LM IAAcropolis Houses Knossos 13 mini cc LM IA-BUnexplored Mansion Knossos 3 mini sm, mouth-rounded “milk” jugs; 6 mini cc; 2 reg. cc 3 mini sm, mouth-rounded “milk” jugs; 6 mini cc; 2 reg. cc mini brazier? 2 scollop-shaped lamps LM IAArea 9 Archanes 15 handleless cc LM IRoom R1 PK 1 br-sp. MM IIIARoom C PK 1 br-sp. MM IIIBuilding 5 PK 4 sm. goblets LM IB

Key: sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated;

lm. weights: loomweights; cl: cook; amph: Amphorae; st: stones; reg: regular.lm. weights: loomweights; cl: cook; amph: Amphorae; st: stones; reg: regular.lm. weights: loomweights; cl: cook; amph: Amphorae; st: stones; reg: regular.

pika

70

Table 2- Summary of Foundation Deposits by ChronologyTable 2- Summary of Foundation Deposits by ChronologyTable 2- Summary of Foundation Deposits by Chronology

Name of DepositRoom CRoom 51

Rooms XCIRoom XCIIIRoom XCIIICorridor 74Room 50Room R1

Edificio Ovest

Room 1Room 8Room 9Room 15Room 44Rom 48

Area 9

Room 50Room 28Room 51Under Wall DeltaTemple RepositoriesUnexplored Mansion

Acropolis Houses

Room 20Building 5

Key: sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; lm. weights: loomweights; cl: cook; amph: Amphorae; st: stones; reg: regular.

Content (vessels)Location Serving and Pouring Cooking Ritual Other DatePK 1 br-sp. jar MM IIIKommos 1 cc, 1 br-sp. jar MM III

Phaistos 1 br-sp. jar, 1 cc, 1 plate; cc sherds 1 scuttle sheep/goat bones, MM IIIAPhaistos 2 dec. bowls w/projecting rims MM IIIAPhaistos 1 br-sp jar, 1 cc filled w/ sm stones? MM IIIAAyia Triada 2 br-sp jars, 6 hndlless cups 1 saucer, 1 brazier? MM IIIA latePhaistos (hundreds of) cc, ss, semiglob cups, plates, bowls, none incense burner? sheep/goat, fish bones, olive st. MM IIIAPK 1 br-sp. jar MM IIIA

Ayia Triada 1 br-sp jar; 5 hndless cups; 2 cups w/ handles; 2 car. cups1 br-sp jar; 5 hndless cups; 2 cups w/ handles; 2 car. cups MM IIIB

Kommos 5 cc, 1 br-sp. jar TransKommos 1 cc, 1 sm cup, 1 rhyton TransKommos 2 cc 1 rhyton TransKommos 4 cc, 1 sm bowl, 1 bell cup, 2 br-sp. jars, 2 rhyta TransKommos 6 cc, 2 br-sp. jars, 1 sm. jar 1 rhyton TransKommos 3 cc, 4 br-sp. jars Trans

Archanes 15 handleless cc LM I

Phaistos 120 cc, 2 br-sp. jars, 1 tripod ck pot animal bones, olive st. LM IAKommos serving LM IAKommos 1 cc, 1 oversized ss cup, 2 br-sp. jars 1 sm tripod ck pot 1 rhyton LM IAKnossos unknown vessels LM IAKnossos 16 jugs; 5 jars; 11 bird vases; 2 tall faience cups. snake goddess? > 6,000 shells- as cc?, 14 amph. LM IAKnossos 3 mini sm mouth-rounded “milk” jugs; 6 mini cc; 2 reg. cc 3 mini sm mouth-rounded “milk” jugs; 6 mini cc; 2 reg. cc mini brazier? 2 scollop-shaped lamps LM IA

Knossos 13 mini cc, LM IA-B

Knossos 1 sp. dec. cup rhyton 2 clay melon-shaped lm. weights LM IBPK 4 sm. goblets LM IB

sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; sm: small; Trans: Transitional MM III/LM IA; PK: Palaikastro; PAL: Palatial; CC: conical Cup; br-sp: Bridge-spouted jar; ss- Straight-sided cup; Hndless: handleless, sp. dec.: specially decorated; lm. weights: loomweights; cl: cook; amph: Amphorae; st: stones; reg: regular.lm. weights: loomweights; cl: cook; amph: Amphorae; st: stones; reg: regular.

pika

71

Minoan Foundation Deposits in Crete During the Neopalatial Period

Documents