Mycenaean Seminar 2005-2006

8/13/2019 Mycenaean Seminar 2005-2006

1/21

16 February 2 5

TALE O THRE E SITES:LATE BRO NZE I1 MEDITERRANEAN IMPORTS

IN COAST AL SITES O THE CARMEL RIDGE

M. Artzy

The three sites to be considered were active harbours/anchorages based on rivcr cstuariesduring segmentsof the Late Bronze Age. Imported m aterial goods from thc lands oithe seawere found i n all three. They were also well positioned at junc tions of thc north-southmaritime and the east-west sea to desert terrestrial routes. Tel Akko and TcllAbu Hawamare situated on the Bay of Akko/Haifa, on the northern con fines of the Carmcl Ridge, wh ileTel Nami is located on its western shadow. Their diverse geographical settings dictateddisparity in settlem ent patterns, as did their economic alliances with the different regions

and polities in the islands and coastal sites.This study concentrateson the second part of the LBA , extendin g approximately fromthe

14th c. to the first years of the 12th c. BCE, namely LB 11. T he cera mic assem blag es fromthe excavations of the harbour area at Tell Abu Hawam, together with those from Akko AreaPH, situated near the assumed harbour/anchorage of the LBA and Nami, whose importanceas a harbour/anchorage is the reason for its existence on thc Mcarot River cstuary, haverevealed thc potential complexity hitherto hidden behind thc gcneral notionof ccramic tradein the East Mediterranean in the later 2nd millennium BCE.

Tell Abu Hawam has been referredto in the past as a possible Mycenaean emporium whilea recent study has suggested that gravesin the vicinity of Ak ko as beinga burial ground ofmembers of an emporium representing foreign interests i n the area. At Nami, culticparaphernaliaas well as metal objects can well be compared,i f not directly to the M ycenaeanworld, to the central eastern Mediterraneankoine of the end of the 14th and 13th c. BC E.

With data gathered in the last few years from the three sites, twoof which aredimensionally small thus were probably not urban centres by themselves, the question arisesas to how to define them , whether they canbe viewed as eniporia sites in which foreignerssettled to further their homelands interests or trans-shipping centres. Should extensiveamounts of ceramic importsbe necessarily perceived as evidence of su ch settlcinents? W hatpart can be attributed to state trade, sailor,or entrepreneurial trade?Do these sitessubstantiate the concept that the LB eastern Mediterranean economy showed signs of longterm marketing strategy anda more complex manipulation of materialsas has been shownin past studies?

20 I


2/21

2 March 2 5BSA ICS ANNU AL SPRING LECTURE

IMPRESSIONS OF THE PAST:SEALS AND SOCIETY IN THE AEGEAN BRONZ AGE

0 H. Krzyszkowska

It was in the early 19th century A D that the first few Aegean seals reached public and p riva tccollections in the West; but few were recognized for what they were. Onlyin thc 1870s and1880s was there concerted interest in collecting early gems from the Greek islands,sometimes knownas Insefsteine. In London Sir Charles Newton acquired many fine piccesfor the British M useu m, both through purchase and from excava tions carried outin thcMycenaean cemetery of Ialysos. However, forall his interest, Ncwton derided the early gemsas crude and primitive; his notions of dating were hazy at best. It was leftto AdolfFurtwangler in Berlin to makea systematic attempt to distinguish Archaic Island Gems fromthe earlier Mycenaean pieces, known from Mycenae, Vapheio and chance finds on Crete. Yetwhen compiling his monumental study,Die anriken Gemnzen(1900) Furtwangler had onlya few hundred Bronze Ag e sealsto work with.

One hundred years later we have some10 OOO seals or ancient impressions m ade by themspanning all periods from late EB I (early 3rd millennium)until the fall of the Mycenaeanpalaces in c. I200 BC . The sequence is virtually continuous, although some periods arc bctterrepresented than others.Only pottery provides a more extensive record. That said, thcsurviving repertoireonly represe nts a fraction of the original output bcst estima tcs place

i t no higher than 3-5 . Indeed seals and sealings arc still comingto light at thc ratc o f c.lo00 every 10-15 ycars. But, so far, not a single surviving seal canbc matched to an ancientimpression in clay.

Seals and sealings have thepotential to inform us on wide range of key issues art andiconography, crafthechnology, administration, social status, interconnections within theAegean and further afield. But to integrate the evidence o gain a better undcrstandingofthc role played by sealsin Aegean society s a major challenge.

Moreover, somehow, w e must to grips with thetotality of the repertoire. Too easily arc wedazzled by the sheer technical brilliance and iconography of the finest gems and signet rings.Thus we must balance acknowledged masterpieces with products that arc derivative,

humdrum, or even dow nright crudein concept or execution.This, in turn, may hclp ofisct anylingering tendenciesto impose our own value regimes on thepast. Arc wc really justificdi nregarding sealsas status markers or more preciselyas denotinghigh status'?Somc surclydid but did all? There is a widespread assumption that seals existed chiefly foradministrative use. Does that really hold good across the board? In fact there is growingevidence to suggest that some types of seals were never meant to be used for sealingpurposes. If so, then som e seals may be more equal than others.

Whether there was any special link between motifs and certain social groups or ranksremains unclear. Indeed the genesis of motifs and their meaning is deeply problcmatic. When

202


3/21

THE MYCENAEAN SEMINAR 203

lions and spiders are juxta pose d on our pre-palatial cylinders was therc any signi licanc cother than the decorative? And how might we decide? Whyarc sonic subjects lavourcd morethan others?On Cre te running goats appearon seals and signet rings for about SO0 years.With n um erous examp les to work with running goats provide an idcal way of tracing stylisticdeve lopm ents through time and space. And yet the social significancc of this m oti l( ifa ny )escapes us entirely.

Of course seals are small and easily portab le;they might pass through many hands bcforcreaching their final resting place. Along the way they could inspirc thc productionof newseals, whosc motifs could be copiedor adapted from the originals, albcitin a morc up-to-datcstyle. As for the original seal,the heirloom seal, what didi t mean to its new ow ncr? Did thcmotif seein a bit old-fashioned? Or did this fact even reg ister ? Thc sc qucs tions merelyunderscore the dilemma we face when attempting to movc from thc purely dcscriptivc to thcapplication of glyptic eviden ce to wider social issues.

For a better understanding ofthe role played by sealsi n society much systcmatic rcscarchwill bc needed in the future. This paper highlighted some of thc insights gainedin rccentyears through the study of materials and by extension techniques. Thus thcrc arc clcarinstances of conspicuous disp lay, seen in the deploymentof cxotic raw matcrials (importedand man made). There is evidence that conservative and innovativc workshops existed at thesame time. From the neo-palatial period roughly25 of the extant repcrtoirc is madc01 softlocal stoncs engraved with simple hand-held tools not fine gemsor precious metals requiringsophisticated skills. Thus we gain theimpression that seal ownership and use was fairlyextensive in neo-palatial Crete. But how far down the social spectrum didseal owncrshipreally cxtc nd ? And w ere certain kinds of seals restricted to ccrtain so cialgroups o r classes?

By contrast in Early Mycenaean Greece seals are ma de cxclusivcly of semi-prc cious stonesand precious metals, sometimes further embellished with gold caps; the hoopso f gold signetrings may have elaborate granulationor cloisonnk. Moreover, wc have nowhere near thcquantity of seals that we have for the comparable period on Crctc. The ovcrall impressionremain s one of a highly restricted circle of seal ow ne rs he greati f not the good) in EarlyMycenaean society. By the later Mycenaean period production of hard stone seals and nietalsignet rings ceases; those usedin our palatial sealing deposits w erc he irlo om s. At thc sanictime new classes of seals made of soft local materials werc produced and arc cspccially

common i n so-called peripheral areas. Thu si t may be that i n .sm7w areas local clitcs wereusing thcsc sub-elite products as a means of negotiating status by cmulating pcrccivcdnorms of behaviour in the Mycenaean heartland. But much more analysis is rcquired:contextualizing the glyptic evidence with rigour, scrutinizing thc scalsin rclation to othcrfinds on a regional level, on a local level, cemetery by cemctcry, gravc by gravc. What isbcgin ning to em erge hanks to new discoveries and systematic study of scals themselves

s that seal ownership and usein later Mycenaean Grc ecc is much inorc coinplicatcd thanwas hitherto believed.

Our impression of the role played by seals in Aegean socicty will ncvcrbc pcrfcct; manycrucial issues will remain unresolved. We must learn to acccpt thc limitations ofour primaryevidence or to minimize the negative aspects:e.g. the extraordinary mismatch belwccn scalsand sealings; burial practiccs that too often depriveus of links hctwccn seals and individualinterme nts (always assuming we can find the gravesin the first place). Yet with pcrscvcrancc,


4/21

204 BICS-SO

and perhaps a bit of luck, fascinating new questions will surely present thcmsclvcs. And aspersonal possessions worn and broken, treasured and cop ied seals d o bring us tar closerto the individual thanis ordinarily possible in the Aegean B r o n x Ape. Herein lies oneo f themain attractionsof glyptic studie s butalso a major challenge.


5/21

16th March 2005

AEGINA KOLONNA IN TH E BRONZE AGE:NEW EXCAVATIONS AND RESEARCH OF THE

SCIEM 2000 PROJECT

W. Gauss

Aegina K olonna is known asone of the major centres in the Aegean Bronzc A ge,a situationthat i n part retlects its geographical position between mainland Greece, the Cyclades andCretc. Kolonna is the main settlement on the island and onc01 the very tcw sitesin GI-ccccwith a continuous and provab le stratigraphic settlement activity, lasting from the Earlyto theLate Bron ze Age. In terms of Kolonn a's pottery production, as wcllas in its lbrtifications andat least one exceptionally wealthy burial with gold jewellery anda rcccntly discovered 'goldtrcasurc', Kolonna has emerged as an Early and Middle Helladic sitc without pccron theGreek mainland. The importance of Aegina Kolonna for the chronology ol the centralAegean is mirrored by its imports from distant regions found at Kolonna and by substantialquantities of Aeginetan ceramics that are foundin most Bronzc Age sites i n thc centralAegean region.

The terminology and phasing system at Kolonna as well as rclatcd problems niay besumm arized as follows: the KolonnaI settlement phase subsumes the few remains of theFinal Neolithic period and the beginningof the EBA. Tw o subsequent phases KolonnaI1and I11 def ine the EH I1 period. Thr ee phases of occupation Kolonna IVto VI havebeen distinguished for the EH I11 period, wherea s four settlement phases Kolon na VIItoX hav e been differentiated for theM H period. The same terms have bccn useduntilrcccntly for describing the seq uence of ceramic phases. Th is is;I misiindcrsc~inding nd iiclear distinction hasto be made between the stratigraphic sequence01 settlement phases andthe sequence of ceramic phases. Therefore a preliminary alphabetical labelling systeml o rdcscribing the pottery phases has been introduced.

Alter the end of EH 11, there seems to be a clear break i n many respects, including thcpottery. The first phase of the EH 111 ceramic repertoire, pottery phaseD. shows newfeatures. At the same time type fossilsof the previous era, suchas sauce-boats, o r bell shapedcups are no longer produced. T he K olonnaV settlement phase of the advancedEH I11 periodis represented by an impressive destruction horizon that also produccda large number of

complete or almost complete pots. In spite of the excellent ceramic evide nce (potte ry phaseE), we lack clear indications, apart from obsidian, for directo r indirect imports from andcontacts with the Cyclades for most of EH111. Th is situation change swithin the Kolonna VIsettlement phase and the associated pottery phasesF and G , representing the finalstages 01EH 111 and the transition to the MBA. Now potters start adapting and imitating Cycladicprototypes and the Aeginetan pottery shows linksto the so-called Phylakopi I culture. Th e

Our research at Kolonna is partof the SClEM 2000 project (Synchronisationof Civilisations in the EasternMediterraneanin the Second MillenniumBC). Relevant preliminary reportsme: W . G;~uss nd I< Sinetana i n : M .Hietak (ed.).The .ryric/rrorriitrrio r ofciwi/ i . r t rr ioris r rhe ~ L I P I ~ ~ I I Metlirerrtrrretrrr r r r 2rrd rr~r/ / twriirwr C (Vienna2003) 47 1-86; W . Gauss and R . Sinetana i n : E. Alran-Stern, Die tig.tiisc./re Fr-~rkr i rVicima 2004 S8-67.

20.5


6/21

206 BICS-50

limited ceramic repertoireof EH I11 becom es richerin terms of vessel sh apes, patterns andsurface treatments. Withinthe Kolonna VIII settlement phase and pottery phascH , dating tothe early MBA, the well-known Aeginetan matt-painted pottery makes its first appcarancc.Also imports from Cre te and Minoan type loom-weights madeof local clay arc found for thcfirst time at Kolonna. Cycladic imports are frequent and Cycladic influencc is ob viou sin thcAcginctan adoption of Cycladic vessel shapes. We assume that within thc KolonnaVIIIsettlement phase the nucleus o f a large building complex he ccntre of the prehisto ric city

was founded. The advanced M BA, the KolonnaIX settlement phase and pottery phascIprovide evidence for Minoan-type pottery productionat Aegina. This pottery showsremarkablc differences from the other locally produced pottery, asi t is wheelmadc andnopotterss marks have been identifiedso far. Th e large building com plex was enlargcd andreached its maximum dimensionof at least 30 x 30 m. At the same time the prehistoric citycxpanded towards the east and a new fortification wall was built. A potterskiln was

constructed at the site and a member of thelocal elite was buried in a shaft grave outsidc thcnewly erecte d fortification wall.Thc Kolonna X settlement phase marks the transitionto the Late B ronze Ag c. Thc large

building complex went outof use and so far there is no cvidencc for Minoan-typc potteryproduction. An early stagein the LH pottery development is characterised by pottcry phascK. Acgina Kolonna continuedto be a major centre in thc central Aegean arca but [hcsituation seemsto change gradually within the Early Mycenaean period. Aeginctan potterstried to produce Mycenaean pottery but obviously werenot able to create the typical lustroussurface and paint. At the same the time range of exported Aeginetan pottery se em s to fall off.In the LH IIIA period a potters kiln was constructed at the site.So far mainly plain and

solidly painted Mycen aean open shapesof local production are foundin layers associatedwith the constru ction , periodof use and and the end of thekiln.

Hopefully future researchat Aegina Kolonna will shed further lighton some of the crucialquestions ofAegean prehistory, suchas the ceramic and chronological sequenceof thc MBAand LBA or the beginning and impact of so-called m inoanization.


7/21

I S Mav 2005

A COASTSCA PE VIEW OF THE AEGEAN BRO NZE AGE:CENTRES, PERIPHERIES, AND THAT IN BETW EEN

D. J. PullenIn this papcr I look at the Eastern Korinthia and SaronicGulf in the Early and Late BronzeAges, utilizing a coastscapc approach, an aspecto f landscape study that focuses on thecoastal zone, both land and sea. This study stems in part from thc Eastcrn KorinthiaArchaeological Survey (EKAS), whose principal historical aims were to cxplorc the changingrelationship between the ancient cityof Korinthos and its hinterland; o cxaminc humanactivities upon the diverse coasta l, lowland, and upland landscapes of thc castern Korinthiaover time; and to illuminate the interactions of the peopleof the eastern Korinthia within thcrcgion and with other parts of the Aegean area and beyond. But instcadof looking at

harbours and the coast as the periphery of a Korinth-ccntred landscapc,I now takc thcapproach o f looking at the entire Saro nic Gulf as a regionof coastscapcs, land scapes, andislands in order to understand the prehistoryof the castcrn Korinthia.

Thc work of Cyprian B roodban k on island archaeologyin thc Cycla dcs is vcry pcrtincntherc. Broodbanks characterizationsof islands in the Cyclades can be applied to the SaronicGull: in that much of th e coastal areas arc quasi-insular: thusin addition to islands such a sAegina, thcre arc peninsulas suchas Mcthana and mainland rcgions that, because of thcirgeographical isolation from the rest of the Pe lopo nne se, function as islands. Inter-island orisland-mainland distances are short, and often these dista nces are shorte r than lcngth of on eo f the islands, or the travel d istance between co asts of two oppo sing islands isless than thc

travel distance to the othe r side of onc or both of thesc islands. And the small-scale naturcof EB A com mu nities limits what these societie s can accomplish w ith limitcd manpow cr.

On c of the most obvious w aysin which the coast is utilized is for harbours. Unlikc thc builtharbours and facilitiesin the historical periods in the Acgcan, prehistoric harbours have lowarchaeological visibility. Evidence suchas the fresco from the West House at Akrotiri pointsto natural harbours, unmo dified by con structio ns. EK AS systematically searchcd forharbours, using a model for harbour locations constructed using cnvironmcntal dctcr min antssuch as usable slope, cultural determ inants suchas proximity to high rclicf and coast, andharbour determinants such as fetch and bathymetry.

Two harbours with accompanying settlements were identified: Vayia, a li)rtiticd settlementof EH T date, and Korphos: Cape Trelli, a Mycenaean harbour witha largc settlcmentattached. Of partic ular interest for archae olog ists is the useof karstic crosional patterns Ibrhelp ing date the rubble arc hitectu re at Vayia. Geo mo rpho logic al investigations aidcd thcreconstruction of a sheltered harbour during the Late Bronze Age, but which has nowsubsid ed due to local tectonic events. A second fortified EHI1 sitc wits disco vcrc d.n o t onthe coast. but inland abovc Nea Epidavros,on the mainland op posite Kolonna on Acgina.

The relationship of the two fortified EHI1 sites, Vayia and V assa, to othcr mainland EHsites and to Kolonna is problematic. Kolonna, at the centre of the Saro nic Gulf , would have

207


8/21

208 BICS-50

been ablc to dominate the entire SaronicGulf in the latter 3rd millennium through the useO F

longboats with their40-50 m ravel capabilities.This domination of the Saronic Gulf by Kolonna continued into the Middle and Late

Bronze Age, and may be on e reasonfor why no palace centre arosei n the Korinthia duringthc LB A. Instead of the Korinthian plain being a centreas has been supposed by previousscholars, it should be viewedas a periphery between two competing centres: Kolon na andMyc enae. The o ne substantial centre that is able to emerge is that at Korako u,i n largc partbecause i t is not on the SaronicGulf but rather on the Korinthian Gulf.


9/21

THE MYCENAEAN SEMINAR 2005 06

12 October 2 5

SECULAR AND SACRE D COLLECTORS:

HOW DID THEY MANAGE TO M AKE A LIVING?

Susan Lupack

The main focus of my research has been to understand the role that the religious sector,meaning the sanctuaries and their personnel, playedin the Myccnacan cconomy.I n doing thisI havc found that in several instances on the Linear B tablets, sucha s i n the shcc p tablets 01

Knossos, thc textile Of series of T hebe s, andin the Jn bronze tablcts 01Pylos, the names ofdcitics or religious personnel arc foundi n thc same administrative slot ;IS hc names 01individuals who are traditionally referred toas colle ctors . My working h ypothesisi s thatthe dcitics, or really the religious officials who werc workingi n their names within theirsanctuaries, would have fulfilleda role in the Mycenaean econ omy that was commcnsura tcwith that held by the secular collec tors.

However, this straightforward equation does not immediately hclpus t o understand thcreligious scc tor s econom ic role since the part played by the collcctors is itscllthc subje cto fmuch debate. Also whether the collectors were able to acquire anyreal benefit from theirrelationship with the sheep, textiles and bronze they are recorded with isalso dcbatcd. t istrue, for instance, that the collec tors of the shee p tablcts were required to payI substantialamount of wool and lambs to the palace. For instance, the Dk scrics shows that thc palace

expected75

g of wool per sh eep. Th e targets for lambs varied:in the DI scrics thc palacecxpectcd one lamb pcr ewe, while the lambing target for theDI( I scrics was only one lambpcr two cw cs. These targets w crc not inconsequential, butI think that. desp ite these burdens,the collectors may have been able to make the business of shepherdingand textile productionprofitable for themselves.

First, Aristotle and Varro both discuss what should be doncin ordcr t o ensure that cwcsproduced the highest number of twins possible. Both au thors sho wa knowledge of sclcctivcbreeding. of which the Myccnaeans were probably also aware. This lcavcs open thcpossibility that i n good years the collector may have been ableto retain s om e lambs for hisown use. Such lambs m ay have been used to replenish flocks the collectors held w hichdo not

appear on the tablets.Also Carlicr has pointed out that the normal Mycenaean targetof 750 g ol wool per shccp

must not have been unreasonable sincc wool production targets from theNear Enst arc olicnhigher than 750 g; some are as high as 1.3 kg. It seenis likely thcrcihrc that shccpi n theancie nt world must have produced at least kg of wool. Th us the Mycenaean colle ctorswould havc been ableto keep at leasta quarter kilo of wool per shcep, orSO kg from a flockof 200. This would certainly add up to amounts that would havc been useful formanufacturing textiles.

209


10/21

210 BICS-50

And i t does seem to be the case that several of the Cretan collectors wcrc involvedinmanufacturing textiles since their names can be tracedi n tablets that deal with textileproduction. T he collectors then would have been ableto profit from any textiles that wcrcproduced in excess of the targets set by the palace.

Also the animals produced a variety of other useful goods, suchas chccsc and yogurt.On cc thcy were culled from the flock they must have been eaten , whilc thcir sk ins, tendon s,and horns would have been made into items of clothing, vessels, musical instruments, andweapons.

Finally, in addition to the financial transactions the collec tors cngagcdin with the palace,they were probably also exchan ging their goods with other membersof their com munities.

This is, in fact, the way in which I see the collectors of thc The bes Of and the Pylos Jntablets as making the greater part of their livingsas well. T he collectors who wcrcin chargcof the textile workshops (Of series) and the bronze-working shop s (Jn scrics ) were working

for the palace under the tu ra si ju ystem, which means that they were allocated rawmaterials which they were expectedto return to the palace as finished goods. Since theallocations of raw materials were generally not large (wool:1-6 kg; bronzc: 3-4 kg), I thinki t is unlikcly that the palatialfa ru si ju ork was the sole occupationof these wo rkshops.Rathcr, the collectors who ran these shops probablytook on work from local clientsinaddition to what they were required to d o for the palace.

Just as the secular collectors benefitedin many ways from their sheep,so the religiouscollectors m ust also have do ne, and just as the secular collectorsin chargc of workshopsprobably also worked for other mem bers of their com munities,so the religious worksho psmust also have manufactured cloth and enga gedin metal wo rking for clients othe r than the

palace.The proceeds from their work were probably used by the sanctuariesto finance their

operations and to support their personnel. Most of the sanctuaries must have been fairlymodest in size, but in some cases, the religious collectors could have created surpluscs. whichwould havc expanded their opportunities for barter, and would have enabled themt o take onadditional roles within the community, such as landlord, employcr, and loan provider.Therefore, i t seem s possible that sanctuary sites could have actedas cconom ic ccntrcs justas the palaces did, albeiton a much reduced scale. In som e cases, the sanct uarics may havcbccome rather influential within their communities given thatthey were able to cornbinccultic knowledg e with econ omic power.


11/21

November 2 5

OLYMPIA AND ELIS FROM THE LATE BRONZETO THE EARLY IRON AGE

Birgitta Eder

The Classical division of the Gree k landscape, w hich still tendsto shape our gcographicalconcepts of Mycenaean Greece, is probably not valid for thc north-wcstcrn Pcloponncsci nthe Late Bronze Age (LBA). The region which was to bccome Elis only from thc Archaicperiod onwards had never been politically united undera Myccnncan palacc and itsorganisation . Bronze A ge settlement concentrated along thc two rivcr valleys, of thc Alphciosin the south and of the Peneios Riverin the north. Archaeological evidencc comes mainlyfrom chamber tombs and illustrates thatthe population o ft h e area was well intcgratcd intothe cultural koinC of the Peloponnese in the palatial period. Thepalacc o f Pylos in westernMcssenia may well have exercised some influence on thc ncighbouring rcgionunt i l itscollapse around the very end of LH IIIB (1200 BC).

After the collapse of the Mycenaean palaces elsewhere in the Peloponncsc, thc continueduse of many of the chamber tomb cemeteries during the post palatial periodof LH IIICsuggests that settlement patterns remained more or less unchanged. Pottcry and metalworkprove the existence of networksof regional contac ts withthc neighbouring regionsof Achaeaand the Ionian Islandsin LH IIIC. A pictorial craterof LH IIIC date comes from the ccmctcryof Ag. Triada and carries the illustrationof a prothesis scene. I t represents an important picceto document also continuities of social behaviour from the Late Bronze to the Early Iron Age(EIA) in Greece.

The establishment o f a new settlement pattern m arkedn ncw start in thc EIA. Thcrc is noevidence of a preceding occupation in Mycenaean times on the site of Ancient Elis, whcregroups of EIA pit graves and cist tombsform the earliest indication of scttlemcnt. which thcncontinued to deve lop in to the later historical periods.

In Olym pia cult w as first establishedin the EIA , close to thc tumulus from Early Helladictimes, the upper part of which was still visible. In the hcginningthc sanctuary scrvcd a s ameeting place and point of communication within the rathcr dispcrscd settlement pattcrn ofthe Alp heio s valley. Pottery illustrates the regional backgroundof thc participants and thatcom mu nal d rinking formed an integral partof the festivities. Th e prcsencc of EIA kylikes

indicates the survivalof some aspectsof Bronze Age cult.Figurines of bronze and clay from the sanctuary feature mainly bulls and horses, and

illustrate the wealthy economic background, which livestock ofleredto the population.Representationsof chariots and charioteersin bronze as wcll as in clay suggcst that the self-representation and lifestyle ofthe elites as char iot driving warriors had survived thc cndofthe LBA.

Th e region of Elis, rich i n cattle and horses, offered the appropriatc economic sctting forthe successors of the LBA, who ensured the survival of thc horse-drawn chariot and sonicreligious m emories froma Bronze Age past.

21 I


12/21

7 Ileceniber 200.5 VENTRIS M EMO RIAL LECTURE

NEW LIGH T ON THE MYCENAEANS IN NORTHERN GREEC E:EXCAVATIONS AT DIMINI IN THESSA LY

Vasiliki Adrymi-SismaniExcavations conducted during recent decadesin Thessaly, within the frameworko f large-scalc projects, have revealeda powerful and healthy Mycenaean presence,a well-structuredcommunity. I n particular, the important Mycenaean settlement excavatedin Dimini, locatednear the Bay of Volos in the Mag nesia district, has finally givenus a reliable picture of urbanorganisation of a Mycenaean settlement i n Thessaly.

Th is settlement, dating tothe end of the 13th century B C, hada similar urban plan to thoscof southern Gre ece. We note small differences, butalso the intention to mark social ra nkin g,with the constructionof the central large-scale com plex. Th is is actually a Combinationof

habitation spaces, areas for the storage of agricultural products(also containing produc ts ofcxchange activities), craft areas (metallurgy and ivory works hop s), and sacred space s. Thus ,this settlement concentratesall the elements of an administrative, economic and religiouscentre, and consequently i t is the only settlement in Thessaly that clearly o ffers elementsofsuch organisation and of a certain social ranking. Dim inis centr e along with thoseofPcvkakia and Palia, also established around the head of the Pagasitic Gulfin LB IIB overrich M B A strata must be seenas a political unit developed during LB IIIA-B, whichmaintained full control over the harbour onthe Pagasitic gulf,as well as over the Magnesianplain, thus controlling maritime transfers, trade, and exchanges between thc Thcssalian plainand the rest of the Mycenaean world.

Mycenaean Dimini was destroyed at the end of LB IIIB2,as occurred in the centres insouthern G ree ce, indicating similarity with the rest of the known My cenaean world. How ever,Diniini also offers us the possibility of observ ing what happened immediately a fter thedestruction of this centre, when fora short time a limited population inhabited restrictedareas, by repairing old buildingsor constructing new small- scale shelters. Th is pop ulatio nused pottery types simila r to LB IIIB2-IIIC Early, although presenting small differ ence s.Afterwards, settlement of Dimini was definitely aban don ed. After LB IIIC E arly, habitationcontinue s at Palia and the settlement organised with different structure dur ing the LB IIICMiddle period -seem s to suffer from the ou tbreak of hostilities withina society where thereis no evidence of a ruling family, as depicted i n the Warrior Vase.

Th e history of Myce naean presence in Thessaly is revealed by surveys conducted duringrecent dccades, which indicatea widespread diffusion of small settlemen ts throughout thewhole of Thessaly, without any fortification, continuing those dated tothe MB A, and alsoby funerary practices and monuments. Large scale tholos tombs at Kapakli, Lamiospito,Toumba, and that newly excavatedat Kasanaki, are located near theinlet of the Pagasiticgulf, the most powerful region of Thessaly ruled by Iolkos.A group of smaller tholos tom bslocated at Pteleos, Karla and Aerino, which date from LB IIIA Earlyto LB IIIC, probablybelong to a single ruling family of the region. Chamber tombs arealso located in many partsofThcssaly,as i n Meg a M onastirion, Pherai, Soufli M agoula. Like thesmall tholos tombs,

212


13/21


chamber tombs possessed funeral giftsin large quantity and great variety, implying that thedeceased in both tomb types probably belong to the same level olsocial ranking.I t seemsthat in Thessaly small tholos tombs replaced cham ber tombs.In addition cist and simple pitgraves with a few funeral gifts were found close to many settlements, and testify to funeralpractices concerning people that belonged to the lower levelso f the local societies.All tombsnormally contain burials, altho ugh two secondary crema tions(01previously burial bodies)were located in the tholos of Dimini A (Lamiospito) and of the newly-discovered tholosatKasanaki; these must be considered partof a purification c eremo ny taking place after burials.

Th e Mycenaean presencein Thessaly , especiallyas indicated through the finds of th e LBAsettlement at Dimini, allowus to regard Thessaly notonly as a commercial centre, but as partof the Mycenaean world whose northern borders must be shifted northot the SperchciosValley and Arta, in order to include the Th essalian plainas far as Mt Olympus.


14/21

18 Januaty 2006

HOMERS TROJAN W AR: HISTORY OR BRICOLAGE?

Susan Sherratt

Givcn that HomersIliad and Odysseycame quickly to be regarded by thc historical Greeksas the basis of their own earliest history,i t is inconccivablc that thc Trojan War motif,which forms the essential background of both, could have been invented outof nothing in the8th century BC. Indeed, it is a feature crucial to the success of such histories that theycontain what people knowintuitively to be true (like Demodokosin Odyssey viii, the bardhas to sing the talek m osrnon .Th is is not to say, how ever, that we should take H ome rsTrojan Wa r at face valueas a transmitted memory (let alone a record) o f a specific war whichactually took place several hundred years earlier, or that we should believe we can findthecvidcnce (direct or circumstantial) for such a historical warin the ground at Troy or

anywhere else . To d o so would quite certainly beto take a simplistic view both of thepotential of the archaeological record and its interpretation, andof the nature and role ofHomeric epic. T hou gh the Hom eric epics certainly havea deep prchistory which contributesto thcir formation, they are products of their own timc. If we are to undcrstand thc naturco fthc historicity of the Troja n W ar motif we have to begin by app roach ingi t contcxtually: bylook ing at the context ofthe motif within the Hom eric epics, and the context of the epicsthemselves in the wider arch aeolo gical context of the periodin which they emerged.

Vario us aspects of the Ho meric epics encourageus to see them as having a consciouslyintegrative function with an unmistakable (if embryonic) panhellenic force. Similarly, variousaspec ts of the arch aeolo gical record of the later 8th century, taken together andin parallel,

suggest a strong sense of Greek ethnogenesis of Greek-speakers in the process ofdisco verin g and definin g their own colle ctive identity, particularlyin relation to an easternothcr . Tog ether, these have som e clear implications forthe particular form that HomersTrojan War takes. To take the most obv ious example, the theme ofa collective Achaiancxpedition against Troy underthe consensual leadershipof Agamem non which couldhardly have happenedin real life at any periodin Greek history makes perfect senscin thisideological context, whereasi t seems thoroughly anachronistic when measured against whatwe know of the social, political and ideological environmentof Late Bronze Age Greece.

While several of the elements which contributeto the specifically Homeric themeof thcTrojan War (including someof the most obviously susceptibleto excavation) can almostcertainly be regardedas creations of the 8th century, others are undoubtedly very much o lder.Given the nature and historyof heroic song , and the kinds of successive contextsin whichi t may well have been created, transmitted and transformed or re-created over manycenturies, however, such elem ents are likely to be disparatein origin and with a propcnsityto cross linguistic and cultural boundaries and tofloat around i n time and space. Someofthcse elements can be traced back well beyond any traditional date(s) for thc Trojan War andalmost certainly have nothingto do with Tro y; others may well have to do with Tro y butnothing to d o with Greek s (or their My cena ean ancestors). T heir survival results from the

I A Iiill version of this paper will appe ar inBlCS 5 I 2008).

214


15/21

THE MYCENAEAN SEMINAR 21s

part they played in succe ssive elite ideologies which provided the contcxtsi n which hcroicsong was created, borrowed and reshaped overa very long period. Unlike the specificsof anarrative political history, the material remnantsof such ideologies can be traced in thearchaeological record, evenin areas and periods which, like the prehistoric Acgcan. lackhistorical records. Th oug h we can excavate Troy, we cannot excavatc thc Tro-ian W ar onlythe elements out of which i t was constructed.The Wa r is to be sought not i n thc archaeologyol specific history hut in the archaeology of ideological contexts.

Th e processes by which such element s accumulated around T roy and becainc nttachcd tothe Homeric idea of a Trojan War are also likely t o be complex and to cxtcnd overaconsiderable period. The Greek Trojan War is reallya series of accidents o f long-tcrmhistory rather than necessarily or even probably a rcflection (how cvcr distortcd)ol actualGreek history (or prehistory). Tro y's regional prominence for almost two millennia madei ta good candidate to become a 'legendary' city am ong many others.It is thc result o faccidents of

thehistory of the

lastthree millennia that i t became thc setting of a lcgcndary

war i n a set of literature which itself survivedto perpetuatc and disseminate thc lcgcndwcllbeyond its original conte xt andto encourage the continuing search lhr proof'o f its reality.

21s


16/21

15 ebrunty 2006

STORAGE FACILITIES AND DOM ESTIC ECONOM Y: THEEVIDENC E FROM LATE CYCLADIC I AKROTIRI, THERA

Irene NikolakopoulouAn in-depth considerationof storage facilities and storagc practices a s attcstcd in thcsettlement of Akrotiri dur ingits last phase of o ccup ation , theLCI /LM IA pcriod, providesimportant information on subsis tence strategies and the operation of household activitic sinthe settlement. The evidence comes from the direct information on thcusc of storagefacilities and the contextual app roach w ithin the dom estic units.

The examinationof local and imported pottery storage vcssels at Akrotiri tackles issues ofcultural variability in design and contextof use within the building units. Someof thc localstor agc vessel types are hus far niqueto Akrotiri. In termsof quantity and variety of

output, i t is evident that they served the diversified needsof an apparently affluentcomm unity. Increased dem and atthe beginning of the LCI period was met by a specialisedpottery industry, apparently capable of mass production. Th e requirementsof standardisation,which m ay have been impo sed by stron g socio -econ om ic facto rs, were niaterialised withina distinctly local potting tradition.

Th e locally-produced storag e vessels are far more numerous than im ports. Importedstorage vessels from Crete and other areasi n the southern Aegean have been found moreorless in cvery domestic un i t .T he distribution of local and irnportcd pithoiin rhc dom estic u nitsat Akrotiri presen ts some variation. Th e variety of storage vessel types indicates that diffcrentvessels served different needs, probably a ccor ding to functional qu alitics and the diversityof stored foodstuffs, rather than the exclusive associationof vessel form with designatedcontents.

Apart from clay storage vessels, smaller vessels from other materials (stone vascs, baskcts,sacks, wooden containers, chests) must have been used for the short-term storage offoodstuffs or for the storage of valuable objects. Built fittings, suchas benchcs with built-inpithoi, rcp ositorics, cupboard s, niches and shelvesalso provide significant inlhrination forstorag e practices.

With reference to the contents, storage vessels were the only storage units for long-tcrmsubsistence storage, while cupboards, repositories and nichcs contained mainly vascs andother objects and were not comm only used for long term storagc of foodstuffs. Th c studyofthe organic contents has resultedin valuable information on the kind of foodstuffs, thc stagesof processing and distribution patterns within the same building and comparatively withindistinct units in the settlement. Apart from subsistence commodities, the storage vessels wereused as containers for other objects, such as smaller vessels and baskets. A varicty of storagepract ices is attested for finished products and oth er objects usedi n household activities.

The picturc emerging from the arrangement and the layoutof storage areas in the buildingunits of the settlement emphasises the absence, based on available data,of any large structuredcsignated for comm unitykentralised subsistence storage. Th e evidence suggestsa dispersedmodel of storage function, organised on the household/doniestic level. A comparison with

216


17/21


storage areas attested in contemporary sites i n the Aegean and cspccially Minoan Crctccmphasiscs the absence at Akrotiri of a consistent architectural Iormof storagc ar ea, withspecific featuresin the planning and the layout. Rather,i t seems that the allocation of storageareas was more related to individual needs and requirements. The spatial arrangementsoffittings may illustrate a strong cultural input in the layout choices and theuse of space asattested in the domestic units. Storage areas are well integratedin the building units, and thestorage function is part of activity systems, which may occasionally overlap accordingtospecific needs. The most common pattern is that of the combinationof subsistence storagewith pottery storage.

The contextual evidence and functional analysis of activities within specific units suggeststhat some of the Akrotiri buildings are clearly more than domestic units; they can possiblybe best described as [as k-o rien ted esiderrtial wi i t . From the evaluation ol subsistencestorage potential, based on the Akrotiri eviden ce for each individual m ulti-storicd buildingand archacobotanical data,i t becomes evident that the subsistence potential ofthc residentialunits docs not directly relate to their size. In general, i t seems that the units enjoyed asubstantial d eg ree of self-sufficiency, w ith stored foodstuffs ableto supp ort the inhabitantsfor a considerab le time span. However, none ofthe units, not even Sector A, were ablet oprovide any kind of buffer reliefi n periods of food crisis on a community level. Morcovcr,the association of the finds with indirect information on field cultivation, land use and ann ualagricultural yields, takinginto account the strong limitations, suggests that the inhabitants ofLC Akrotiri were, in theory at least, capa ble o f a moderate/substantial level of subsiste ncesclf-sufficiency basedon local land cultivation; however, the provisionof comm odities couldhave depended both on local resources and imports.

Apart lrom subsistence storage, information lor o ther dom estic activities and the functionof task-oriented dom estic units com es from storageof objects, tools, vcsscls of specificfunction and raw materials. Th ere appearsto be a limited range of large-scalc productionactivities, which would have had ec ono mic impacton the life of the settlemcnt, with textileproduction the most prominent.

The nature of the external contacts and economic interactionof Akrotiri with polities inCrete and other areas doesnot appear to depend on the sites craft specialization or m assproduction of particular commodities for export. The outward economic orientation of thccomm unity, the involvementin long-distance trade activities and the strategic position01 thcisland in the southern A egea n, accoun t for the prosperityof the settlement at the beginning

of the Late Bronze Age, rather than adherence to a strict domestic mode of production.Stor age was largely limitedto the internal, subsi stence operation01the community.


18/21

15 arch 2006

THE PEAK SANCTUARY OF PYRGOS TYLISSOSAND MINOAN SYMBO LISM

Evangelos K yriakidisMaterial from peak sanctuaries has provideda rich and stimulating focus for previousresearch on ritual. Among the issues explored have beenthe attribution of ritual value to theactivities at peak sanctuaries; the definitionof the peak sanctuary category; the degreesofcstablishment ofthe rituals there; the functionof some peak sanctuariesas ritual institutions;and their role i n Minoan power politics. It was clear that these peaks were extremelyimportant locations which, over time, changed their charac ter and rolein the Minoan settingboth contributing to and being influenced by their ideological and socio-politicalenvironment.

Th e work on the Peak Sanctuary of Pyrgos near Tylisso s, exca vated by Sty liano s Alexioui n a salvage excavationin 1963, following looting, complements this past research and offersfurthcr insights on these same themes. A six-w eek studyof the entire material took pla ceinspring 2005. Although this study enabled som e questions to be answ ered,i t inevitably alsogenerated new queries and identified new problems. T he material yielded sev eral surprises ,including the presence of stalactites broken off from(a) cavc(s); pottery dating through to theEarly Iron Age, and even further intothe Classical period; the depiction of extremelyelaborate coiffure on some female figurines; many largc bull figurines; andadisproportionately large numberof special vessels/figurine groups/building modelsin a veryfragmentary state, which are equalto or greater in number than the figurine material.

The latter observations have raised two issues: that small animal figurines may never haveappeared on their own, but only in figurine groups, and more importantly, that we maypreviously h ave missed many of these special vessels/figurine gro ups/b uildin g mo delsbecause they area pecu liar set that can easily be classifiedas pottery. Indeed the fact thatRutkowski had looked through the Pyrgos material and had missednot only more than halfthe figurine s, but also the o verwhelm ing majorityof the building models may suggest asimila r situation for Petsofas and , indeed, for many other peak sanctu aries.

Moreover, the preliminary study of the figurine material revealed other interestinginformation, not always entirely new. Paint seemsto have been used widely to depictclothing, and occasionallyfor musculature on the male body. Someof the female hairstyles,may include baskets or other w oven elements. Th e gesturesof figurines may well be varied,as Peatfield proposes, and other iconography suggests that these gestures arenot veryobvious from the material, largely becauseof weathering and breakage. Interestingly,thepeculiar featuresof some of these figurines very closely resemble thoseof some figurinesfrom the Metaxas Collection (nowin the Herakleion Museum).

The fact that figurines were often foundin groups m akes i t possible that multiple roleswere served by figurines. The possibility that these roles may includenot j u s t differentadorants but also gods goes against the curren t majority op inion , which se em sto be againstthe depiction of gods on peaks, largely influenced by the also dominant theory that go ds were

218


19/21


generally not depicted in three-dimensional art and that there were no cult statucs. Argum entscan be made against these views, however.

Previous research 2005) showed how floating objects on somc Minoan gold signet ringsdcpict constellations, includinga number of flying figurcs, whichi t has bcen argued mayrepre sent god s. At least one of the stances assumed by the floatingfigurcs is thc sam e a s avery commonly attested stance of the clay figurinesin Pyrgos and elsew here. This m ightsuggest that the figurines depict not only adorants (as supposed prcviously) but possiblyalsotheir gods. The similarityi n stance of the Palaikastro Kouros cgardcd by manyas a cultstatue also strengthens this possibility.The question of figurines dcpicting gods of courseraises a num ber of issues that will needto be considered in future.

Finally, there are some other ideas drawn from the studyof thc figurincs that would liketo touch upon, and which may be themes we may wish to cons idcrin Minoan research. Thcdepiction of semi-nude and, forthe most part, slim male bodies m ay rcllccta similar situationto that identitied for the Classical Gre ek periods, w hereby scu lptors idealisc thc male bodyand present i t always lean and athletic. This, of course, does not im ply that there is continuitybetween the Minoan and the Classical worldin this respect, but it may incan that the attitudestowards the male bodyin the Minoan period dictate the renderingsof it i n art in thcsc specificways.

M ore generally, we may want to keepin mind that the act ofcarryin ga tigurinc would havedistanced the carrier from the mundane world and would have beena token for membershipof the community that went to the peak sanctuary. A relationship will always bc drawnbetween the carrier and the figurines,be they animal or human, god or m ortal, clay or metal.

Thus, material from peak sanctuaries, andin particular the figurincs,not only constitutes

a rich source of information in itself, but also serve s to shed light and raise que stions on awhole array of issues which we may w ish to pursuein Minoan research.


20/21


21/21

T H E M Y C E N A E A N S E M I N A R 22 I

Thc original systemic contcxt of the material was likely a scrics01 Icasts, religiouscelebrations, or public ceremonies, conducted o ver a short period (p roba bly not longcr thanabout four decades)on the eve of the formation of a ncw palacc-statc in thc Sitcia region. Asa palimpsest of the social dynamics at the end of an important final stageof politicalconsolidation, the pots themselves functionedin feasts that wcrc pcrformcd somcwherc at thcsite, but in all likelihood in the space later occupied by the palace between thc end ofthe 20thccntury through the tirst quarterof the 19th century BC. This contcxt at Pctras could thcnrepresent a pivotal and short-lived phase of dynamic social interactionin the re,' ion acoalescence and centralisation of different groups or factions, enacting rituals that wcrcrestru cturin g and perh aps redefining o ld-fashioned, essentially Prc palatia l, rclationalhierarchies. The end result of the process may havc bccn thc new socio-politicalconfigurations that were to characterise the emerging state and establish thc idcologicalpurview of a central palatial authority.

T h c pottery of the Lak kos is charactcrised by an energetic diversity and proliferation offorms, while looking backward archaistically to latc Prcpalatial shapcs and ware groups.There is evidence for dynamic stylistic and technical innovation and cxpcrimentation;extremes of stylistic redundancy and novel decorative variability; and symbolic transfercnccwith designs derived from or rcduplicated i n both inscribed and pictorial scals, peaksanctuary figurines and perhap s textiles. Th e pots' users wcre likely to havc bcen m em bers

rent sodalities representing the competing interests of individuals, kinship units,villages, towns or even regions linked by peak sanctuaries. The pots functioncd as mcdia forsym bolic display , articu lating com plex competitive and complementary relationships onathreshold of culture change.

Mycenaean Seminar 2005-2006

Documents