Beyond the Palace: Mycenaean East Lokris 9781407302690, 9781407332727

Citation preview

BAR S1781 2008

Beyond the Palace: Mycenaean East Lokris

KRAMER-HAJOS

Margaretha Kramer-Hajos

BEYOND THE PALACE: MYCENAEAN EAST LOKRIS

B A R

BAR International Series 1781 2008

Beyond the Palace: Mycenaean East Lokris Margaretha Kramer-Hajos

BAR International Series 1781 2008

ISBN 9781407302690 paperback ISBN 9781407332727 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407302690 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

Table of contents

Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………….................................

1

List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………………………………..

3

List of Tables………………………………………………………………………………………………………

5

List of Abbreviations……………………………………………………………………………………………...

6

Foreword…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

7

PART I Chapter 1: Introduction…………………….…………………………………………………………………….

9

Chapter 2: Natural environment………………………………………………………………………………... Geography and topography………………………………………………………………………………………... Geology……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Shoreline…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Climate, vegetation and agriculture………………………………………………………………………………...

18 18 21 23 29

Chapter 3: Sites…………………………………………………………………………………………………… The plain of Atalanti……………………………………………………………………………………………….. Livanates-Pyrgos (Kynos)………………………………………………………………………………………. Livanates-Rema Pharmaki (Rema Pharmaki)…………………………………………………………………... Livanates-Kokkinonyzes (Kokkinonyzes)……………………………………………………………………… Atalanti-Skala (Skala Atalantis)………………………………………………………………………………… Atalanti-town (Atalanti)………………………………………………………………………………………… Atalanti-Spartia (Spartia)……………………………………………………………………………………….. Kyparissi-Agios Ioannis (Kyparissi)……………………………………………………………………………. Tragana-Mitrou (Mitrou)………………………………………………………………………………………... Tragana-Agia Triada (Agia Triada)……………………………………………………………………………... Proskynas-Kotrona (Kotrona)…………………………………………………………………………………... Proskynas-Rachi (Proskynas)…………………………………………………………………………………… Proskynas-Chiliadou (Chiliadou)……………………………………………………………………………….. The southeast coast………………………………………………………………………………………………… Malesina-Vlichada (Vlichada)………………………………………………………………………………….. Malesina-Agios Georgios………………………………………………………………………………………. Lekouna-Samarthi and Lekouna-Angeli Anesti (Lekouna)…………………………………………………….. Malesina-Velanidia (Velanidia)………………………………………………………………………………… Malesina-Goumourades (Goumourades)……………………………………………………………………….. Martino-Agia Panagia (Martino)……………………………………………………………………………….. Larymna-Kastro (Larymna)…………………………………………………………………………………….. Larymna-Pazaraki (Pazaraki)…………………………………………………………………………………… Central inland……………………………………………………………………………………………………… Kalapodi-Agios Apostolis (Kalapodi)………………………………………………………………………….. Kalapodi-Kokkalia (Kokkalia)………………………………………………………………………………….. Kalapodi-Vagia (Vagia)………………………………………………………………………………………… Zeli-Agios Georgios…………………………………………………………………………………………….. Zeli-Kvela (Kvela)……………………………………………………………………………………………… Zeli-Golemi (Golemi)…………………………………………………………………………………………... Megaplatanos-Sventza (Sventza)……………………………………………………………………………….. The northern coast…………………………………………………………………………………………………. Agia Aikaterina-Melidoni (Melidoni)…………………………………………………………………………... Agnanti-Dimitrakis (Agnanti) and Agnanti-Kastri……………………………………………………………... Arkitsa-Roustiana (Roustiana)…………………………………………………………………………………..

35 36 37 40 40 41 42 42 43 44 48 49 49 50 51 51 51 52 53 53 53 53 56 57 57 59 61 62 64 64 68 69 69 69 72

1

Chapter 4: Finds………………………………………………………………………………………………..… Late Helladic I……………………………………………………………………………………………………... Late Helladic II…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Late Helladic IIIA………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Late Helladic IIIB………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Late Helladic IIIC………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Submycenaean to Protogeometric…………………………………………………………………………………. Other Bronze Age finds and trade………………………………………………………………………………….

75 75 78 81 85 88 97 99

PART II Chapter 5: Site distribution……………………………………………………………………………………… Site location and geography……………………………………………………………………………………….. Site location and geology………………………………………………………………………………………….. Missing settlements………………………………………………………………………………………………... Settlement distribution models…………………………………………………………………………………….. Settlement style…………………………………………………………………………………………………….

101 101 103 106 110 114

Chapter 6: Settlement history…………………………………………………………………………………… The Middle Helladic – Late Helladic transition…………………………………………………………………… Late Helladic IIB…………………………………………………………………………………………………... Late Helladic IIIA………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Late Helladic IIIB………………………………………………………………………………………………….. The Late Helladic – Early Iron Age transition……………………………………………………………………..

118 118 122 123 125 129

Chapter 7: Society…………………………...……………………………………………………………………

133

Chapter 8: Summary…..………………………………………………………………………………………….

144

Appendix 1: Literary testimonia…………………………………………………………………………………

147

Appendix 2: Catalogue of LBA pottery from the 1988-1989 surface survey at Mitrou……………………...

154

Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………………………….

173

2

List of Figures 1.1: 1.2: 1.3: 1.4: 1.5: 1.6:

Central Greece with the territory of ancient East Lokris Topography of East Lokris Approximate ancient borders of East Lokris Study area Topography of the study area Bay of Atalanti area

11 12 13 13 15 16

2.1: 2.2: 2.3: 2.4: 2.5:

Natural routes Soils of southeastern East Lokris The fault of Atalanti British Admiralty chart of 1847 with the Bay of Atalanti Reconstruction of the Late Bronze Age shoreline at -10 m of the present shoreline in the southern part of the Bay of Atalanti

20 22 25 25 28

3.1: 3.2: 3.3: 3.4: 3.5: 3.6: 3.7: 3.8: 3.9: 3.10: 3.11: 3.12: 3.13: 3.14: 3.15: 3.16: 3.17: 3.18: 3.19: 3.20: 3.21: 3.22: 3.23: 3.24: 3.25: 3.26: 3.27: 3.28: 3.29: 3.30: 3.31: 3.32: 3.33: 3.34: 3.35: 3.36: 3.37: 3.38:

Mycenaean sites in southeastern East Lokris CHELP survey area The mound of Kynos from the northwest View from Kynos towards Atalanti island and the Aitolyma peninsula Kokkinonyzes tomb plan The mound of Skala Atalantis (in the foreground) from the southeast Spartia Tomb VIII, with pithos burial in dromos Kokkinovrachos and foothills of Mt. Chlomon from the north Mitrou from the east Dressed slabs from cist tomb in northeastern scarp Mitrou balloon photo (with MAP 2004 trenches) Mitrou trenches with the LH IIIC „Building B‟ and the subsequent PG „Building A‟ Agia Triada Tomb V Remains of Agia Triada chamber tomb (in foreground) with view on Mitrou View from Chiliadou facing northwest Lekouna-Samarthi plan Larymna plan Gla Cyclopean wall Larymna Cyclopean wall Ruts at Pazaraki (arrow points at inner edges) View from Kokkalia, location 1, facing south Kokkalia location 1, chamber tombs Landscape at Vagia, with spring on the left Vagia plan Zeli-Agios Georgios Tombs XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV plan Zeli-Agios Georgios LH IIIB-C tombs Zeli-Agios Georgios Tombs I-II (from 1985) View from Kvela facing west View from Golemi facing southwest Golemi, the two tombs from 1985 Golemi Tomb XXV The loaf-shaped hill of Sventza (planted with olive trees) View from Sventza towards the southeast and Atalanti island Tombs I-VI at Sventza, plan The mound of Melidoni from the east View from Melidoni over the plain of Longos View from Agnanti facing northwest Agnanti chamber tomb plan

36 37 38 38 41 42 43 44 46 46 46 47 48 49 50 52 54 55 55 56 60 60 61 61 63 63 63 65 65 66 66 67 67 68 70 70 71 71

3

4.1: 4.2: 4.3: 4.4: 4.5: 4.6:

LH I surface pottery from Mitrou Hardness of Mitrou surface sherds (in absolute numbers) by period LH II surface pottery from Mitrou Mitrou, 41: LH II alabastron with marine decoration Kokkinonyzes, LH IIB jar Top: Zeli-Agios Georgios, LH IIB squat jugs; Bottom L: Golemi, LH IIB baggy alabastron; Bottom R: Agia Triada, LH IIB-IIIA alabastron Kokkalia, LH IIB alabastron LH IIIA surface pottery from Mitrou Kokkinonyzes, LH IIIA1 hydria and piriform jar Mitrou, LH IIIA2-early IIIB phi figurine LH IIIB1 surface pottery from Mitrou Mitrou, LH IIIB2 Psi figurine Kynos LH IIIC Middle Fragments 1-4 Kynos LH IIIC Middle Fragment 5 Kynos LH IIIC Middle Fragment 6 Skyros, LH IIIC Middle ship depiction Part of the Medinet Habu naval battle relief Kalapodi, LH IIIC Middle “Warrior krater” Lefkandi, LH IIIC Middle krater fragments Mitrou, 132 and 133: LH IIIC Middle krater Dimini, PG krater with many LH IIIC characteristics LH IIIC surface pottery from Mitrou: Deep bowls, kraters, and amphoras Sventza, LH IIIC Early small piriform jar with granary decoration Kalapodi, Submycenaean-EPG neck-handled amphora

76 78 79 79 79 81

102 104 108 109 111

5.6: 5.7: 5.8: 5.9

Sister towns and routes Settlements in relation to soil fertility Settlement-cemetery relations, assuming a maximum distance of three km Settlement-cemetery relations, assuming a maximum distance of two km in the hilly interior Hypothetical site catchment areas, assuming a 5.5 km radius for coastal sites and a 4 km radius in the hilly interior Hypothetical site catchment areas, assuming a 2 km radius for all sites Nearest neighbor model Nearest neighbor model Settlement regions

6.1: 6.2: 6.3: 6.4: 6.5:

LH I-IIA sites and other sites mentioned in the text LH IIB sites LH IIIA confirmed and likely sites LH IIIB confirmed and possible sites LH IIIC-Submycenaean confirmed and possible sites

119 122 124 126 129

4.7: 4.8: 4.9: 4.10: 4.11: 4.12: 4.13: 4.14: 4.15: 4.16: 4.17: 4.18: 4.19: 4.20: 4.21: 4.22: 4.23: 4.24: 5.1: 5.2: 5.3: 5.4: 5.5:

4

81 83 84 85 86 88 89 89 90 90 90 93 93 94 94 95 96 98

111 113 113 115

List of tables 1.1:

Late Bronze Age Chronology for the Greek Mainland

10

2.1: 2.2: 2.3: 2.4:

The geological timescale (in million years ago) Bronze Age sea levels Agricultural produce at Late Bronze Age sites Percentages of farm animals at palatial and rural sites

22 24 32 33

3.1: 3.2:

Summary of sites Site chronology

73 74

5.1: 5.2:

Sites in relation to soils Number of landscape characteristics of settlement sites shared with other settlement sites in the study area

5

104 106

List of Abbreviations

Journal abbreviations follow AJA standards, except for the Archaiologikon Deltion which has been abbreviated AD throughout. Compass directions are abbreviated N, E, S, W and may be combined (thus e.g. SW Southwest, ENE East-northeast) Other abbreviations used are: BA CHELP EIA FM FS GAS HMB LH LM MAP MH MM SM PG

Bronze Age, which may be combined with E (Early), M (Middle), or L (Late): LBA Late Bronze Age Cornell Halai and East Lokris Project Early Iron Age Furumark Motif (from Furumark 1941) Furumark Shape (from Furumark 1941) Greek Archaeological Service Handmade burnished ware Late Helladic Late Minoan Mitrou Archaeological Project Middle Helladic Middle Minoan Submycenaean Protogeometric (may be combined with E (Early), M (Middle), or L (Late): EPG Early Protogeometric

6

Foreword The first aim of this work is to give a reasonably comprehensive overview over all available information about Mycenaean archaeological sites in a well defined area on the northwestern shore of the North Euboean Gulf, an area which roughly corresponds to the southeastern part of East Lokris (Central Greece) and which served as a corridor between northern and southern Greece over land as well as over sea. This is done in Part I. The first chapter lays out the chronological and spatial framework. The following three chapters give factual information and deal respectively with the natural environment, the Mycenaean sites known in the area, and selected significant finds from the area. The second aim, with which Part II is concerned, is to analyze these findings against the background of the area‟s location in Central Greece, north of the palace of Orchomenos and on the North Euboean Gulf, the northern part of the strait between the Greek mainland and the island of Euboea. Chapters 5 through 7 are therefore interpretative and combine information from the previous chapters in order to, respectively, examine the influence of the landscape on site distribution, write a settlement history of the region, and examine what the finds tell us about the actual people and the society of our area in the Late Bronze Age. These chapters are increasingly speculative, though the hypotheses put forward are always based on the actual findings. The conclusions of the study are briefly summarized in a final chapter.

and the relatively scarce finds from others. A few sites seem to be under direct control of Orchomenos in this phase.

The study area is located „beyond‟ the palace of Orchomenos, and thus in the periphery of the Mycenaean world; far from being a backwater, though, it is during most of the Late Bronze Age firmly embedded in the Mycenaean culture. The area owes its mainstream character to its location on the North Euboean Gulf.

Special thanks are due to William Murray, Kerill O‟Neill, Jeremy Rutter, and Steven Soter for making their unpublished papers and data available to me, to John Coleman for showing me unpublished settlement sites, to Nina Kyparissi (former ephor, IDEPKA) for permission to visit unpublished burial sites, to Sonia Dimaki for showing me unpublished pottery in storage at the museum in Elateia, to Eleni Zahou and Olga Kyriazi for showing me unpublished pottery from their excavations at Proskynas, to Aleydis Van de Moortel and Eleni Zahou (MAP directors) and Kerill O‟Neill (MAP field director) for permission to view unpublished pottery from the excavations at Mitrou, to Maria-Photeini Papakonstantinou (ephor, IDEPKA) for permission to view unpublished pottery in storage at the museum in Lamia, to Maria Pilali at the ASCSA for assistance with permits and practical aspects of my field research, to Mary-Jane Schumacher (INSTAP-SCEC) for producing drawings of pottery from the Mitrou surface survey, and to Mary Eliot and Richard Janko for reading a first draft of this work. I also wish to thank John Bintliff, John Coleman, Sonia Dimaki, Olga Kyriazi, and Jerry Rutter for their kind advice at various points. Any and all errors remaining in this manuscript are my responsibility alone.

After the collapse of the Mycenaean palaces, including Orchomenos, southeastern East Lokris rebounds. Sites which seem to have been of little importance during the acme of the Mycenaean palaces, now have a chance to grow out into local centers with a rich and unique material culture which survives with little or no gap in the material record into the Early Iron Age. The North Euboean Gulf is once again important in this period, the end of the Late Bronze Age and the beginning of the Early Iron Age, when it plays a role in uniting sites along its coast in a koine which stretches from Lefkandi in the south to Dimini in the north. I would like to thank the Cornell Halai and East Lokris Project (CHELP), the Mitrou Archaeological Project (MAP), and the 14th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities at Lamia (IDEPKA) for the opportunity to work on pottery from Mitrou and see unpublished pottery from sites in the area. I am also indebted to the American School of Classical Studies at Athens (ASCSA), the Institute for Aegean Prehistory Study Center for East Crete (INSTAP-SCEC), and to the Department of Classical Studies at Indiana University, Bloomington for facilitating my work.

It is via the maritime route through the North Euboean Gulf that influences from southern Greece reach the area in the beginning of the Late Bronze Age, causing a rapid „Mycenaeazation‟ of especially the coastal sites which works in addition and sometimes in contrast to the influences reaching the area over land and stemming from Orchomenos, Thebes, and Central Greece in general. Especially in the early stages of the Late Bronze Age the two spheres in which southeastern East Lokris is rooted – the maritime, „international‟ one and the local, more rural one – are in permanent tension with each other, resulting in unique cultural expressions. In the heyday of the Mycenaean palaces, southeastern East Lokris appears to be peripheral. Not only are there no traces of a palace, but throughout the region a cultural decline is visible through the abandonment of some sites

7

Funding was provided by the Schrader Archaeological Endowment Fund in Classical Archaeology (Indiana University Bloomington), the Townsend Fund (Department of Classics, Cornell University), and the Institute for Aegean Prehistory.

familiar to the reader, and where existing publications use a certain spelling, I have used those familiar forms: thus Thermopylae, Thebes, and Lefkandi rather than Thermopylai, Thiva, and Leukanti. Illustrations, maps and photographs are by the author, unless otherwise indicated in their caption. In all maps which carry elevation information, contour lines are drawn at 200, 400, 600, and 800 m. Drawings of the Mitrou surface survey sherds (Chapter 4) were made by Mary-Jane Schumacher. Translations are by the author, except where credit is given to the relevant source. The title of this work is adapted from Van Andel and Runnels‟ 1987 landmark book Beyond the Acropolis. A Rural Greek Past.

In transliterating Greek words I have adopted a compromise between the traditional and the phonetic spellings and have aimed for clarity rather than thorough consistency. Generally, I have followed the Greek spelling closely: thus Agios Georgios, not Ayios Yeoryios, and Aitolyma, not Aetolyma. In Modern Greek names, however, has been transliterated with v, and with i: thus Kvela, not Kbela, and Aikaterini, not Aikaterine. In cases where a Latinized or Anglicized form has long been in use and can be supposed to be

8

PART I Chapter 1: Introduction The term Mycenaean refers to the dominant culture of the Late Bronze Age on the southern and central Greek mainland, the Late Helladic (LH) period. The LH sequence, starting with LH I and ending with LH IIIC Late and Submycenaean, is based on changes in pottery styles (see Table 1).1 Despite the many subdivisions within the sequence, which suggest a well solidified system, the debate over the absolute (i.e. calendar) dates corresponding to each of these phases is still unresolved.2 Briefly, the debate revolves around the date for the eruption of Thera, which in relative terms took place towards or at the end of Late Minoan IA.3 The proponents of the traditional low chronology base their arguments on Egyptian synchronisms, putting their trust in Egypt‟s historical king lists, and date the eruption to between 1560 and 1520 BC.4 Arguments for the high chronology

are based on scientific techniques of radiocarbon dating, dendrochronology, and ice-core dating. In the high chronology the eruption is dated to ca. 1628 or 1645 BC.5 The case for a late 17th century date has recently been strengthened by the publication of a series of radiocarbon dates and especially by the analysis of an olive tree buried during the eruption on Thera, which was dated by a combination of radiocarbon and dendrochronological techniques (Friedrich et al. 2006, Manning et al 2006).6 These findings date the eruption to 1627-1600 BC with a 95.4% probability. The pottery phases for which this debate is most relevant are LH I-LH IIIA1 (see Table 1.1). One of the problems with the high chronology in pottery terms are the lengthening of the LH IIA phase to about 100 years (Manning 2007, 116 note 5): the relatively small amounts of pottery from this phase seem to suggest a short time period. Manning however suggests the possibility that the LH IIA phase only appears short because the material used to build chronological synchronisms is limited to the

1

Rutter argued in 1978 for arguments against a separate Submycenaean phase (Rutter 1978). His observation that all Submycenaean pottery came from tombs instead of settlement contexts and should be viewed as the tomb pottery of the LH IIIC Late phase has since been challenged by findings at e.g. Kalapodi, where JacobFelsch discerns a clearly separate Submycenaean phase in Kalapodi (LH IIIC in levels 1-12, Submycenaean in levels 13-15, a transitional Submycenaean-early Protogeometric in levels 16-17, and early Protogeometric in levels 18-23. Felsch 1996, XVI). Elsewhere SM has been found stratified above LH IIIC Late deposits as well (see Lemos 2002, 7), and Mountjoy, too, distinguishes a separate Submycenaean phase (Mountjoy 1986, 194; 1993, 28-30; 1999; see also Mountjoy 1988). Although the stylistic differences between LH IIIC Late and Submycenaean pottery are small, they are noticeable at various sites (see Lemos 2002, 7 note 48: e.g. the SM Deep Bowl at Tiryns is deeper than the LH IIIC Late one and sits on a very low conical foot). 2 Recent synopses of the debate are Bietak 2003, Wiener 2003a, and Manning 2007. 3 See the conference volume edited by Hardy and Renfrew, 1990, for the importance and debate surrounding the dating of the volcanic eruption of Thera. For the relative date of the eruption, see especially the contribution by Soles and Davaras in this volume (pp. 8995). 4 E.g. Warren and Hankey 1989. For establishing synchronisms with the Egyptian historical chronology and its implications, see the various papers in Åström 1987 (especially Kitchen 1987) as well as Bietak 2003. It should be noted that Cline has suggested a high

chronology, using synchronisms between the orient and the Aegean (Cline 1994). 5 Baillie 1995 provides a useful introduction to the principle, potential, and limitations of dendrochronology. For its use in the Aegean, see Hughes et al. 2001 and Kuniholm et al. 2005. Kuniholm et al. (1996) suggested a ca. 1628 date based on dendrochronological evidence (followed by a cautious response by Renfrew 1996); Manning 2007, 103 however emphasizes the lack of positive evidence to connect the tree ring evidence with the eruption of Thera. For recent radiocarbon dates supporting the high chronology, see Friedrich et al. 2006 and Manning et al. 2006 (both summed up in Balter 2006) and Manning 2007. For an evaluation of the ice core evidence, see Manning 2007, 104. For the problems with radiocarbon dating in the eastern Mediterranean, see e.g. Warren 1996 and Keenan 2002. Since all three scientific methods are relatively new and their results frequently revised, many Aegean archaeologists are reluctant to revise the traditional low chronology to any great extent (e.g. Warren 1996, Bietak 1998, 2003, Bietak and Hein 2000). 6 When a dendrochronological sequence is „floating,‟ i.e. not tied to the present, fairly precise dates can nevertheless be gained by so-called „wiggle-matching,‟ a procedure in which a piece of wood is radiocarbon dated at fixed intervals – e.g. on every tenth growth ring – so that the resulting wiggly curve can be matched against the radiocarbon calibration curve. 9

Table 1.1: Late Bronze Age Chronology for the Greek Mainland (adapted from Mountjoy 1999, 17) Low chronology Warren and Hankey 1989, 169

High chronology Manning 1995, 217

Pottery sequence

Mycenaean civilization characteristics (after Mountjoy 1993 and Preziosi and Hitchcock 1999, 8)

1600-1510/00 1510/00-1440 1440-1390

1680-1600/1580 1600/1580-1520/1480 1520/1480-1435/05

LH I LH IIA LH IIB

1390-1370/60 1370/60-1340/30

1435/05-1390/70 1390/70-1360/25

LH IIIA1 LH IIIA2

1340/30-1185/80

1360/25-1200/1190

1185/80-1150/40

1200/1190-

LH IIIB1 LH IIIB2 LH IIIC Early

Grave Circle A, Mycenae Tholos tombs, Vapheio tomb Chamber tombs; pottery no longer influenced by Minoan pottery Warrior Graves Expansion of Mycenaean trade to Levant; Mycenaean Koine; Mycenae, Tiryns, Thebes, Treasury of Atreus Great age of Mycenaean palaces; Pylos, Gla Destruction of palaces; Linear B tablets Some reoccupation, recovery; fibulae, Naue II sword, handmade burnished pottery Pictorial pottery; decline in trade Cist grave cemeteries; depopulation

1150/40-1100/1090 1100/1090-1065 1065-1015

LH IIIC Middle LH IIIC Late Submycenaean

last part of this phase (Manning 2007, 116), while in fact there may have been more pottery from the earlier LH IIA period. The same has been suggested for contemporary LM IB, which poses a similar problem (Mountjoy 1999, 16, Manning 2007, 116). Mountjoy points out that both chronologies have the problem for the Mycenaean pottery that the LH IIIB1 phase is lengthened (from its former date of about 1300 to 1340/30 in the low and 1360/25 in the high chronology) and the LH IIIA2 phase correspondingly shortened (Mountjoy 1999, 16).7 Given the large amounts of LH IIIA2 material and the existence of no fewer than three distinct sub phases at Nichoria (McDonald et al. 1992, 495), it seems unlikely that the LH IIIA2 phase lasted for little more than about a generation (Mountjoy 1999, 16); the high chronology has however a potentially late end date (1325) for the LH IIIA2 phase, so that this problem may be less acute in the high chronology.

Although the Mycenaean culture dominated LH Greece, it was more or less homogeneous only during the ca. two centuries spanning the LH IIIA and B phases. During the periods before (LH I-II) and after (LH IIIC-SM), regional differences are striking. Moreover, during these long transitional periods, the Mycenaean culture, even if predominant, is certainly not the only visible culture. In these transitional periods the Greek mainland underwent marked changes which affected all cultural characteristics to such an extent that the culture at the end of the transitional period hardly resembled that which flourished in the beginning. In these periods, when societies and entire cultures were in rapid flux, even turmoil, influences from various regions and cultural connections become visible and intermingle before settling down to a common standard. For Mycenaean Greece, the first of these transitional periods is the Middle Helladic-Late Helladic transition, in which within just a generation or so an elite emerged at various sites (most notably of course at Mycenae, where members of this elite were buried with most if not all of the wealth they had enjoyed in life in the Shaft Graves of Grave Circles A and B), and the following early Mycenaean phase, encompassing the LH I-II phases.8 The second transitional period is the Late Bronze Age-Early Iron Age transition, when again within a relatively short

There can be little doubt that eventually scientific advances will settle the debate definitively. For the moment the level of insecurity regarding the absolute dates for the Late Bronze Age is such that calendar dates are rarely used in this study: dating indications are almost exclusively relative, using the subdivisions for the LH sequence. 7

Adaptations – different versions – of either chronology exist as well; recently e.g. Hope Simpson and Hagel published their own adaptation of the low chronology, which is slightly higher and has reduced spans for the LH IIIC phases (Hope Simpson and Hagel 2006, 21-22). They refrain from explaining the reasons for these adaptations. A lower chronology is favored by Dickinson, who places the beginning of LH I at ca. 1550 BC (Dickinson 1994, 19).

8

„Early Mycenaean‟ is of course a relative term; I have chosen to incorporate only the very first phases of the Mycenaean culture, since by the end of LH IIB many standard aspects of the Mycenaean culture (burial in chamber tombs, lustrous decorated pottery) are in place in Central Greece. Others (e.g. Lewartowski 2000) include LH IIIA1, as a pre-palatial period before the Mycenaean koine spread throughout the Aegean. 10

Figure 1.1: Central Greece with the territory of ancient East Lokris

time period the Mycenaean palatial civilization collapsed (at the end of LH IIIB) and all aspects which defined the Bronze Age – writing, large-scale architecture, working of precious metals and exotic materials, to name but a few – disappeared from the archaeological record when Greece was plunged into the so called Dark Age. Neither transition happened simultaneously or in the same way in every region of the Greek mainland: the core regions, e.g. the Argolid and Messenia in the Peloponnese were the first to have a recognizably Mycenaean culture, but were perhaps also hit hardest when palatial civilization disappeared.

zone” or as “the inner edge of the periphery,” it is in either case a border zone of sorts.9 In peripheral areas it may be easier to discern which connections played a role in the initial spread and eventual decline of the 9

Feuer, who addresses methodological questions as to what exactly constitutes the Mycenaean core area and what are peripheral areas, regards our study area (see below Figure 1.4) as the outermost part of the Mycenaean core area (Feuer 1999, 8, fig. 2), and indeed it is clearly part of the Mycenaean mainstream in most respects. Snodgrass on the other hand sees Lokris not merely as a peripheral region, but moreover one where “the reflections of Mycenaean culture were faint and fleeting at best; and where as a result the material features of Middle Helladic times appear to merge directly and uninterruptedly into those of the post-Mycenaean period, which so closely resemble them” (Snodgrass 2000, xxvi).

Just like the time periods at the periphery of the Mycenaean civilization – the early and the late phases – are of special interest, so, too, are areas on the fringes of the Mycenaean civilization, and for similar reasons. Whether one chooses to regard our study area, in Feuer‟s words (Feuer 1999, 10) as “the outer edge of the core 11

Figure 1.2: Topography of East Lokris

Mycenaean culture. In peripheral areas the pull of other cultures may be stronger, and an older, local „substrate‟ may remain more prominent and intermingle with the Mycenaean culture to create local variants of standard Mycenaean practices. In the area which is the subject of this work, the transitions between the MH-LH and the LBA-EIA provide an especially interesting case study in what may happen when a stronger, „higher‟ culture is acquired in an area which is subsequently marginalized by the great powers of that culture, and as a consequence flourishes again after the demise of the stronger powers.

but the basic territory has always been confined to the narrow strip of land along the coast of the North Euboean Gulf in Central Greece (Figure 1.1), from Larymna to Thermopylae, bounded on its southwest by the mountain ranges of Kallidromos, Knemis and Chlomon (Figures 1.2, 1.3). Opountian Lokris was the historically dominant part of East Lokris; it was named after its capital Opous (Strabo 9.4.1; see Appendix 1 p. 147), which was located at the modern town of Atalanti (see also Chapter 5 p. Epameinondas, see Pausanias 9.23.4; certainly in the third century, as argued by Haas (who rejects the earlier date; Haas 1998, 16)). Originally, however, it was Lokrian (Lykophron 1146, Skylax, Periplous 60) and it remained under Lokrian control for many centuries (Katsonopoulou 1990, 10, n. 13). Another example is Hyampolis, which according to Homer (Iliad 2.521) belonged to Phokis, yet according to today‟s administrative division is part of Lokris (see Jacob-Felsch 1988, 194). Under Ottoman administration East Lokris extended deep into the Kephissos Valley almost to Elateia (Kiel and Sauerwein 1994, 13); the modern eparchia of Lokris extends even further west and as far south as Mt. Parnassos.

The study area roughly corresponds to East Lokris in Central Greece. It consists of ancient Opountian Lokris, with an extension to the west into Epiknemidian Lokris and Phokis. Opountian Lokris occupied the southeastern part of ancient East Lokris. The exact borders of the historical East Lokris have varied somewhat over time,10 10

Parts of modern Phokis and Boeotia were East Lokrian at some point in time: e.g. Larymna is Boeotian nowadays, and in fact has become Boeotian more than once throughout historical times (possibly in the fourth cent. BC when the Thebans rose to power under 12

Figure 1.3: Approximate ancient borders of East Lokris

Figure 1.4: Study area

13

107). The less important northwestern part of East Lokris was known as Epiknemidian Lokris, after Mount Knemis in the Kallidromos range (Strabo 9.4.1; Knemis meaning „greave‟ in ancient Greek, „shin‟ in modern Greek), the area‟s most prominent mountain peak. The ancient border between Opountian and Epiknemidian Lokris was marked by the Profitis Ilias (Figures 1.2, 1.3).

Since for the Late Bronze Age political boundaries in the area of East Lokris are unknown,14 the study area has been chosen using the latter criterion. The boundaries of the study area are defined by natural features (the sea, high hills, and mountains) and thus enclose a natural catchment area. This catchment area has a degree of conformity and unity, not only with respect to the natural landscape – which is characterized by coastal plains and foothills – but also, as I hope to show, in its Late Bronze Age development and culture.15 The area, sandwiched in between the mountains and the sea, is a maritime area which owed much of its development to the sea traffic through the North Euboean Gulf and thus poses a striking contrast with its immediate neighbors Boeotia and Phokis.

For the purposes of this study I have defined an area which incorporates Opountian Lokris, the easternmost part of Epiknemidian Lokris, and the north-eastern corner of Phokis (Figures 1.3, 1.4). This area has been chosen according to criteria common in the selection of an area for archaeological survey. Much was written about the selection of an area suitable for survey, whether extensive or intensive, in the 1980s, when a steep rise in popularity of survey projects in the Aegean was accompanied by an outpour of papers addressing survey methodology.11 Surveys, both of the large-scale collecting sort and smaller non-collecting surveys, in Central Greece have generally focused on historical entities; examples are the large-scale intensive Cambridge/Bradford Boeotian Expedition, focusing in part on the area around ancient Thespiai (Bintliff and Snodgrass 1985, Bintliff 2006, Bintliff et al. 2006), Fossey‟s one-man surveys of Phokis, Boeotia, and Opountian Lokris (Fossey 1986, 1988, and 1990a), McInerney‟s account of ancient Phokis (McInerney 1999), and the Cornell Halai and East Lokris Project survey of the probable ancient territory of Halai (Coleman 1992).12 Another particularly well-defined strategy has been to limit survey to a specific catchment area – i.e. an area which forms a natural unity, such as an island, a valley, or a plain.13 The underlying assumption is that such an area would have been a cultural, economical, and political unity as well, since it would have been more or less separate – though by no means isolated – from adjacent regions due to the presence of mountains, high hills, or the sea.

Let us examine the borders of this area. In the northwest of the study area, at Kamena Vourla, the very steep foothills of Mt. Knemis almost touch the sea, effectively closing off the narrow coastal zone east of Kamena Vourla from the open valleys west of it, which border the Malian Gulf and extend into the Spercheios valley (Figures 1.2, 1.4). The location of present day Kamena Vourla would also have been the westernmost border for sea traffic passing through the Euboean Gulf to destinations to the north: most ships would not have traveled into the cul-de-sac of the Malian Gulf but have passed from here across the Euboean Gulf to continue northeast, into the Gulf of Pagasae to the north, or to the Sporades, Skyros and the north Aegean to the east (Figure 1.1).16 The eastern part of Epiknemidian Lokris can thus be expected to have shared with Opountian Lokris the economic and cultural benefits brought by the major maritime traffic; for this reason it has been included in the study area. The border of the study area is then drawn through Mt. Knemis, southeastern Kallidromos, and Mt. Chlomon, from where it follows the historical borders of Opountian Lokris (Figures 1.3, 1.4). This historical border follows more or less the hill tops; although the hills and mountain ranges are generally lower in this part of East Lokris, they do represent natural (geological) boundaries. Thus the study area incorporates Kalapodi, which in historical

11

See especially the conference volume edited by Keller and Rupp, 1983. Some seminal publications on survey methodology in the Aegean are Bintliff 2000, Cherry 1983, 1994, and 2003; the recent handbook by Banning (2002), which is not limited to the Mediterranean, devotes relatively little attention to area selection. 12 See also Chapter 3 p. 36 and Figure 3.2. 13 Examples are the early Euboea survey (Sackett et al. 1966), the Agiopharango Valley survey (Blackman et al. 1977), the Melos survey (Renfrew and Wagstaff 1982, see especially the contribution by Cherry), the Lasithi plain survey (Watrous 1982), the Kavousi survey (which was limited to drainage regions between the mountains and the coast; Haggis 1996), and the Pylos Regional Project survey area, which is “largely a self-contained unit,” blocked by high hills which separate it from the other plains and valleys (Davis et al. 1997, 498).

14

The linear-B tablets found at Thebes have so far shed little light on this question; although they may give some indication about the territory or rather influence sphere of Thebes, they do not, despite claims of the editors to the contrary (Aravantinos et al. 2001, 355), appear to mention any sites from East Lokris. See also KramerHajos 2006. 15 The only exception to this uniform development seems to have been Larymna (see below p. 15, and Chapter 6 pp. 126-127). 16 Nowadays Agios Konstantinos, ca. four km east of Kamena Vourla, functions as the port for ferries to and from Volos and the Sporades. 14

Figure 1.5: Topography of the study area. Mycenaean sites italic.

times was part of Phokis (Figure 1.3). Although Kalapodi is located on the border of three different cultural/political areas (Phokis, Opountian Lokris, and Epiknemidian Lokris), it has easy access to the coastal plains of East Lokris and at least part of the drainage of its territory is to the plain of Atalanti to the north and northeast. Its pottery displays similarities to the pottery from Mitrou and Kynos, two of the most important Mycenaean sites in the study area (see Chapter 4 pp. 93 and 97). Mitrou itself is located just southeast of the Plain of Atalanti (Figures 1.5, 1.6), in the geographical center of Opountian Lokris.

coastal sites which warrant its inclusion in the study area.19 The border of the study area with Boeotia south of Larymna is formed by the steep Skroponeri peninsula (Figure 1.2), which forms a significant boundary. The study area, then, is a coastal area, enclosed on one side by the North Euboean Gulf and on the other by mountains and hills. Since the study area does not exactly conform to either ancient East Lokris or Opountian Lokris or modern Lokris, henceforth in this manuscript „southeastern East Lokris,‟ „study area,‟ „area under review,‟ or similar phrases will be employed to refer to the study area.20 It shares a border with Boeotia to the south, Phokis to the west, and the Malian Gulf area to the northwest. It lies across from northern Euboea and has easy access to the Gulf of Pagasae via the sea (Figure

Larymna does not belong unequivocally to East Lokris: no significant geological boundaries separate it from either the heart of Opountian Lokris or the Kopaic Basin east and southeast of Orchomenos in Boeotia.17 I have included it in the study area for two reasons: it is recognized as Lokrian in the earliest historical periods,18 and, more importantly, as a maritime town located on the western shore of the North Euboean Gulf it might be expected to have certain commonalities with East Lokrian

19

The next important coastal town to the southeast, Anthedon, belongs however certainly to the Theban influence sphere. 20 „Lokris,‟ whether referring to the modern eparchia or the ancient East and West Lokris combined, is much larger than the study area, „East Lokris‟ is still considerably larger, and „Opountian Lokris‟ is not only much smaller than the study area, but, more importantly, refers to the historical (but not necessarily Mycenaean; see Chapter 5 p. 107) town of Opous and is thus anachronistic.

17

The northern border of the Kopaic Basin is delineated by the Melas river (Figure 1.5). 18 For an account of the problems in ancient sources, referring to Larymna as Lokrian or Boeotian, see Oldfather 1916a. 15

Figure 1.6: Bay of Atalanti area (adapted from CHELP base map; courtesy of John Coleman)

1.1). These five bordering regions are essentially different from the study area in the Late Bronze Age (see Chapter 5 p. 114 ff.).

would certainly have frequented the ports and coastal settlements in southeastern East Lokris. As such, the area can be expected to have been subjected to various influences and becomes especially interesting in transitional periods: the beginning of the Late Bronze Age, which may have been ushered in by lucrative trade between the Mycenaeans of the Shaft Graves at Mycenae and Transylvania (Davis 1983) – a trade which may well have used the route through the North Euboean Gulf and thus may have passed by southeastern East Lokris – and the end of the Late Bronze Age, traditionally attributed to the „Dorians‟ coming from the north,21 either passing through southeastern East Lokris, or just bypassing it.22

The importance of southeastern East Lokris lies in the fact that it forms a corridor between northern and central Greece. There are only two viable overland routes into Central Greece from Thessaly, one via the Kephissos valley, leading southeast to Orchomenos and from there to Thebes, and the other crossing through the coastal plains of East Lokris, entering the area via the narrow pass at Thermopylae (Figure 1.2). The Kephissos route, although requiring greater vertical movement at the pass to its northwest, between the Kallidromos and the Parnassos mountain ranges (Figure 1.2), than the coastal route through East Lokris, may have been the preferred one in the Late Bronze Age: Mycenaean sites are densely packed around the Kephissos river through the entire length of this valley. Nevertheless, some traffic between north and south can be expected to have passed through our area as well. More importantly, southeastern East Lokris, located on the North Euboean Gulf, would have had its share of north-south traffic via the sea. The North Euboean coast opposite the study area is for the most part less hospitable than the shores on the mainland side (Figure 1.4), and traffic through the North Euboean Gulf

21

Thus Thucydides 1.12 (see Appendix 1 p. 149). The „Dorian hypothesis,‟ long thought to be little more than myth due to the fact that the „Dorians‟ were not detectable in the archaeological record, has more recently seen a revival, especially in European scholarship. For the argument that the Dorians do not need to be detected in order to assume their invasion, see Winter 1977. Some older scholarship on a Dorian invasion: Hammond 193132, Heurtley 1926-27, Milojcic 1948-49. More recently: Godart 1990, Eder 1990, 1997, 1998, Finkelberg 1999.

16

However, the interest of this area is not limited to „international‟ contacts and developments: interregional relations may be illuminating as well. These, too, are determined to great extent by the area‟s location, beyond the palace of Orchomenos and on the North Euboean Gulf, and focus therefore on the important Mycenaean kingdom of Orchomenos on the one hand, and sites united by the North Euboean Gulf (Lefkandi, Volos) on the other hand. As the immediate and peripheral neighbor of the important Mycenaean kingdom of Orchomenos, this important site may be expected to have exercised great influence on the study area. It will be possible not only to determine these influences, but perhaps also to trace if and how the engineering projects around the Kopaic Basin changed the existing balance between the two neighbors and affected the subsequent development in southeastern East Lokris. Similarly, it will be visible how southeastern East Lokris responded to the fall of Orchomenos at the end of LH IIIB, and how it, at various

times in its history, interacted with other North Euboean Gulf sites. The study area was at times a backwater, at other times solidly in the mainstream of Mycenaean civilization. As will be shown, southeastern East Lokris experienced a constant dynamic tension between influences from maritime cultural circles, causing it to become part of a wider cultural koine whether in the Late Bronze or the Early Iron Age, and interior influences from Boeotia, Phokis, and Thessaly; between Mycenaean and local (in the early Mycenaean period) or, possibly, intrusive (towards the end of the Bronze Age) influences. In southeastern East Lokris these different traditions met and coexisted, mixed, and changed under each others‟ influence. The area gravitated sometimes to one direction, sometimes to the other, incorporating cultural idiosyncrasies from different regions to create its own, often unique, cultural vocabulary and to survive and thrive throughout the Late Bronze Age.

See also Hall 1997, 56-65 for the theoretical problems of using mythological accounts to reconstruct historical events and the various ways legends could be adapted to serve contemporary (i.e. Archaic or Classical) political and social purposes. 22 Herodotus 1.56.3 (Appendix 1 p. 149) suggests in his sketch of the Dorian migrations that the Dorians may have bypassed southeastern East Lokris, although his account naturally lacks the sort of geographic precision we would like to see: “[…] during the reign of Deukalion, this people dwelt in Phthiotis [northeast of the Malian Gulf], but under Dorus, the son of Hellen, they moved to the tract at the base of Ossa and Olympus [i.e. they moved north], which is called Histiaiotis; forced to retire from that region by the Kadmeians, they settled, under the name of Makedni, in the chain of Pindus [further to the west]. Hence they once more moved and came to Dryopis [later known as Doris, southwest of the Malian Gulf and thus bordering Epiknemidian Lokris]; and from Dryopis having entered the Peloponnese in this way, they became known as Dorians.” (Her. 1.56.3). “In this way” is left unexplained: did they move via the southern route through the Kephissos valley, or the more northern route along the coast?

17

Chapter 2: Natural environment Combining archaeological evidence with findings provided by geology, pollen analysis, and animal bones, this chapter provides an attempt to „reconstruct‟ the East Lokrian landscape as it was in Mycenaean times. Much work has been done on questions of vegetation, climate, and geology during the last decades, and modern archaeologists, especially those concerned with prehistoric sites, integrate these issues into their interpretations of sites to a greater degree than ever before. Yet most sites in Greece are still studied primarily or exclusively in the traditional way: architecture, pottery, and other artifacts make up the bulk of the publications, and even when other issues are addressed, it is still relatively rare to find them integrated with the purely archaeological evidence to form a comprehensive picture of what life was like at the site under discussion.1 In East Lokris this is no different, and in many cases the only evidence available for non-archaeological features comes from outside the boundaries of our region.

ancient Opous was situated in the same place as modern Atalanti.2 Other coastal plains are, from north to south, those of Longos, Arkitsa, and Tragana (Figure 1.5). The Bay of Atalanti yields much fish (Oldfather 1926, 1137; see also Katsonopoulou 1990, 4 and 6); part of the attractiveness of the tourist village of Theologos (Figure 1.5) is the fresh fish caught in the bay the same morning. The mountainous interior is formed by a WNW-ESE oriented horst, with peaks at Mount Kallidromos (1419 m), Mount Chlomon (1080 m)3, and Mount Knemis (ca. 936 m)4 (Figures 1.2-1.4). Mount Kallidromos and Mount Chlomon are visible from most parts of southeastern East Lokris and thus form easy orientation points; Mount Chlomon has a characteristic conical peak which makes it a well recognizable landmark. Although located well outside the study area, Mount Parnassos (2455 m) to the southwest (Figure 1.2) is an easily visible reference point from the higher elevations in East Lokris. The Kallidromos mountains extend from the Malian Gulf over 40 km5 to the southeast, to the plain of Atalanti; they have been reduced by erosion of the Xerias (Figure 1.2) and other rivers to a labyrinth of ravines (Naval Intelligence 1945, 65). The country northwest of Megaplatanos (Figure 1.5), too, is characterized by many small, steep hills with small torrents cutting through limestone plateaus. The areas of Tragana, Proskynas, Mazi, and Malesina (Figure 1.6) in particular are rich in springs which are perennial and of great value to inhabitants even nowadays. These springs may be fed by the flow-off from the Kopaic basin, like the springs around Pazaraki south of Larymna (see Figure 3.1) (Higgins and Higgins 1996, 76). Ancient inhabitants will

Geography and topography Southeastern East Lokris consists mainly of fertile plains along the coast and of the mountain ranges bounding those plains. Inhabitable are only the plains, where agriculture is practiced, and the foothills, where olives are cultivated. On the fertile plains along the coast vegetables, tobacco and cotton are grown, while olives and pine trees cover the foothills. Goats and sheep graze on marginal lands and the sea provides fish and other sea food. Inland we find hills and highland plains. Although the sea is visible from many inland places, many of the interior high plains and hills are covered in maquis vegetation where flocks of sheep and goats graze; they are only sparsely inhabited, have a different microclimate, flora, and fauna, and give a markedly different impression than the lowlands.

2

The identification of Opous with Atalanti is based on inscriptions, even though this location only partially agrees with ancient accounts: see Fossey 1990a, 71-74. For Strabo on Opous, see Appendix 1 p. 147. 3 The 2001 Michelin map of Greece (1:700,000) gives the height as 1080 m (so too Kiel and Sauerwein 1994, 15, with 1081 m), whereas the Road Editions map of Central Greece (with the cooperation of the Hellenic Army Geographical Service; no date) (1:250,000) gives 979 m. The Handbook of the British Naval Intelligence has 3,543 ft, which corresponds to 1080 m (Naval Intelligence 1945). Most likely the Road Editions map is incorrect: on the soil map series (map sheet of Vagia) the highest peak is given as 1079 m, while the second highest peak is 979 m (Ministry of Agriculture 1983). 4 Kiel and Sauerwein give the height as 938 m (Kiel 1994, 15); the Naval Intelligence Handbook gives 3,071 ft or 936 m (Naval Intelligence 1945, 65). 5 25 miles (Naval Intelligence 1945, 65).

The largest of the plains is the triangular plain of Atalanti (Figure 1.5), entirely cultivated with a concentration nowadays on tobacco, grain, olives and vines. This coastal plain is the economic and administrative center of the area, and nowadays Atalanti is the largest town and capital of the district. In the archaic period Opous was the most important town in the area and it is likely that 1

Laudable exeptions are e.g. Nichoria (Rapp and Aschenbrenner 1978, and Klithi (Bailey 1997); on the regional level the studies of Messenia (McDonald and Rapp 1972), the Argolid (Van Andel and Runnels 1987), Kea (Renfrew and Wagstaff 1982) and Laconia (Cavanagh et al. 1996 and 2002) each represent landmarks in a holistic approach to ancient landscapes.

18

the early 20th century (Oldfather 1926, 1136), Malesina is nowadays a charming small town and local center which has remained unaffected by tourism, unlike its coastal satellite Theologos. Martino, originally founded as an Albanian shepherds‟ village (Oldfather 1926, 1136), has received a rather bad reputation with archaeologists due to the local pastime of illicit digging.10 The problem of looting is especially acute in the area of the Aitolyma plateau, where almost all known chamber tombs are looted, severely limiting our knowledge of the area (see also Chapter 3 p. 51 ff.).

have appreciated the abundance of fresh water in this area. On the east, the foothills of Kallidromos end at the plain of Atalanti, on the southeast they abut upon the hills of limestone which extend from the coast to the threshold of the Elateia basin. Near the junction of the two types the Daphnoremma valley, a narrow hollow probably due to fracture (Naval Intelligence 1945, 65) provides a pass between Elateia and Atalanti (Figures 1.2, 1.5). From Mount Chlomon the upland plateau of Kolaka extends towards the east (Figures 1.2, 1.5). It is characterized by wide and gently rolling hills. The hills around Exarchos and Kolaka (Figure 1.5) are mostly barren6 and used for grazing; they incorporate upland plains where agriculture is practiced. These hills descend again to make place for the valley of the Kephissos, the most important perennial7 waterway of the area, leading into the vast plain of the Kopaic Basin.

The hills around Agios Ioannis (Figure 1.5; renamed in recent years to Neo Kokkino) yield nickel and Larymna is home to the only nickel smelting plant in Greece, LARKO; the heavily smoking plant pollutes the adjacent bay and barren hills and the entire area is covered in red dust.11 Naturally, in the Bronze Age this area would have made a quite different impression.12 At Tsoukka, south of Proskynas (about halfway between Proskynas and Hyettos), the hills were mined for iron before and for a short time after WW II, but it is not clear if the iron sources were exploited in antiquity.13 Aerial conveyors, forming a line down the Pliasas valley to Vivos (Figure 1.5) attest to the transport of iron ore to the sea, where it would be carried onto ships; another line of conveyors ending at Gaidaronisi (“Donkey Island”, sometimes called simply “Gaidaros”), can be traced back into the hills to the area south of Neochori as well (Figure 1.6).

At the southeastern end of the study area the large rounded Aitolyma plateau is forested, stony, and sparsely inhabited (Figures 1.5, 1.6).8 The wide and rolling hills between Martino and Larymna are covered in dense pine forests, largely burned during destructive forest fires in the summer of 2000. Like many of the other towns in the region, Malesina and its smaller neighbor, Mazi, were originally Albanian settlements („Arvanitika choria‟); the area east of Malesina, on the eastern coast of the Aitolyma plateau, shows a prevalence of „Arvanitika‟ (Albanian toponyms, Katsonopoulou 1990, 59).9 Poor in

Hills, plains, and sea are often close to each other in southeastern East Lokris. Historically, settlements of all periods tended to be located on low hills and foothills, exploiting the fertile plains for agriculture and horticulture and practicing agriculture and pastoralism in the hills (cf. the distribution maps for Opountian Lokris in Fossey 1990a, 117-127; only two sites in his survey, both dating to the Classical period or later, are located above 400 m). The coastal villages added fishing to this

6

Compare Figures 2.2 and 5.1 and see below, p. 21: the soil here consists largely of Triassic-Jurassic deposits, which are infertile. 7 The river is, however, “much reduced in summer” (Naval Intelligence 1945, 62). 8 “Essentially uninhabited” in the beginning of the 20th century (Oldfather 1926, 1136). See also Naval Intelligence 1945, 65-66: “The limestone country to the east, though quite different from that of the Pliocene rocks, is almost as much a waste, and, since goats greatly outnumber men, vegetation is largely reduced to bush of Kermes oak, with some woods of ilex. Only on the coastal slopes do maquis and Aleppo pines appear. Inland, cream-colored cliffs stand above shaly, scrubcovered slopes where occasional hollows of red earth are cultivated for grain, olives and pears. Above all this country rises a single prominent mountain, Chlomon, of hard dolomitic limestone and offering a wide panorama.” 9 The Greek „Alvani‟) refers to the modern inhabitants of Albania (and by extension to ethnic Albanians who have only recently immigrated to Greece), whereas „Arvanites‟) is the name for Greeks from originally Albanian descent, who have however lived in Greece for centuries and are completely

assimilated. Malesina and Mazi are populated by Arvanites, while Tragana is home to a number of Alvani. 10 Fossey‟s remark about Martino is telling: “Of all the villages of Central Greece which I have visited during quarter of a century‟s travels, Martínon is the most difficult; its inhabitants are not merely unfriendly but positively hostile” (Fossey 1990a, 33). The event giving rise to this remark was his being held at gunpoint (personal communication from John Coleman). 11 In a recent article in  (August 9, 2007), it was stated that according to Greenpeace LARKO discharges at least 1.5 million tons of heavy-metal waste into the sea each year. 12 In Pausanias‟ lifetime, the hills above Larymna provided boar-hunting (Pausanias 9.23.4). 13 If they were, they may have been one of the causes for the relative prominence of the region in the EIA (see also Chapter 6 p. 132). 19

Figure 2.1: Natural routes (Mycenaean sites italic)

mode of life. Nowadays seasonal tourism, almost exclusively national,14 provides the coastal places with extra income.

connected with the Kopaic Basin and Gla, and from there with Orchomenos, via a saddle in the hills. Nowadays the modern road follows the same course. In the Late Bronze Age the Kopaic Basin was a lake, partially drained by the Mycenaeans in the LH IIIB period before it became a wetland again (Iakovides 1998, 277-278). Nowadays it is completely drained and an important agricultural area for Central Greece. Another route is nowadays followed by the National Road and leads from Gla to the north, via the saddle over the hills at Martino, and from there northwest to Proskynas. East of Mt. Chlomon two narrow ravines, cut out by the torrents of the Pliasas and the Revenikos, connect the coast with Boeotia. The Pliasas ravine leads from the plain of Hyettos to Proskynas, the Revenikos valley to the west follows a parallel course from the same plain, ending at the fertile plain of Tragana. Similarly, the plain of Atalanti is connected to the Kopaic Basin by a north-south pass through Kolaka, where a local road passes through nowadays. A string of later sites, possibly watchtowers, is located along it, and it might have been used in the Bronze Age as well. Finally, west of Tragana a ravine leads to the area south of Neochori (Figure 1.6) and connects from there to Kolaka.16

The study area is thus, despite its small size and overall geological unity, fragmented, with different types of landscapes and subregions. This fragmentation may be part of the explanation for the often fierce rivalry which exists between towns: rather than a unit governed by one large central town, the region is prone to the development of many smaller, competing centers (so also Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 235).15 The location on the north Euboean Gulf and the proximity of mountains and sea, as well as the many springs and torrents, are uniting features of the area as a whole. A number of passes connect southeastern East Lokris with Boeotia (Figure 2.1). In the southeast, Larymna is 14

Most tourism consists of weekend tourists from Athens, with the occasional charter bus from abroad. 15 Nowadays, for example, the rivalry between Malesina on the Aitolyma peninsula and Tragana in the plain of Atalanti gives rise, if not to outright hostility, then at least to carping remarks from either side directed towards the other, which seem to revolve around Tragana‟s poverty and backwardness and Malesina‟s unfriendliness and unreliability.

16

An account from the late Georgos Laios mentions a ravine leading from Tragana, behind the monastery of Agia Triada and south of the 600 m high peak southwest of Tragana, to Kolaka (personal communication from 20

The easiest natural route from southeastern East Lokris to Phokian territory is by the torrent valley of the Daphnoremma. From the northern part of the plain of Atalanti this valley, first broad, then narrowing at Agios Vlasios before Kalapodi, then widening up again, leads to Kalapodi, from where the Kephissos valley is reachable through the pass north of Sphaka. The plain of Longos has access to the Daphnoremma valley south of it through the valley of the river Dipotamos, which formed the alluvial deposits of the plain (see also Figure 1.2).

east coast. Associated with it are mines of iron and nickel in the hills around Agios Ioannis (Naval Intelligence 1945, 65). Next were formed the jurassic schist-chert formations found northeast of Elateia. This formation is characterized by sandstones, radiolarites (sediments composed of fossils), and pelites (rock composed of fine particles of clay or mud) with white limestone lenses. Small patches of limestone here and there stem from the upper jurassic. Jurassic to lower cretaceous are the flysch sediments occurring in a small area southeast and south of Exarchos, and upper cretaceous limestone occurs in five other small patches west and south of Exarchos. All these triassic, jurassic, and cretaceous deposits belong to the mesozoic era (see Table 2.1) and all are inhospitable for agriculture: the hard limestone, the predominant rock from the mesozoic, weathers into a bright red soil which does not contain much humus (Bintliff 1977, 92-93).

Geology The study area consists of a horst (the mountain range extending in an ESE direction from Mt. Kallidromos) flanked by two grabens: the Euboean Gulf, including the coastline immediately next to it, and the valley of the Kephissos river (Figure 1.2). This basic structure and its orientation determines many significant geological characteristics of the area: a number of faults run along both sides of the horst, the most important of which is the fault of Atalanti (see below p. 24 ff.).

The other areas, making up the largest part of our study area, are considerably younger: upper miocene and pliocene sediments from the concluding phases of the tertiary era, are found in a large area around Malesina, consisting of conglomerates, sands and marls containing much calcium-carbonate, marly limestone, and clays. An extended area from Mt. Knemis to Livanates as well as small patches north of Sphaka, southwest of Gaidaronisi, and northwest of Kolaka consist of plio-pleistocene deposits, thus dating to the transition between tertiary and quarternary. These deposits, made up of sands, conglomerates, clays, peat or lignite (brown coal) beds, and red clayey material, erode easily and are dissected by many ravines. The soft tertiary limestone formations produce excellent soils, rich in humus and calcium (Bintliff 1977, 92-3). According to Kiel and Sauerwein, Kolaka (and its former neighbor Neochori) owe their existence to this small island of fertile plio-pleistocene deposits east of Mt. Chlomon (Kiel and Sauerwein 1994, 15).

The geological diversity of the area within this basic scheme is shown in Figure 2.2. Intrusive igneous rocks, formed from liquid magma, are found in small areas south of Tragana, southwest of Exarchos, north of Elateia, northwest of Megaplatanos, and south and west of Agios Konstantinos. They consist of ophiolites (serpentine and crystalline limestone or marble spotted with green serpentine). Other types of rock were formed from weathering and „recycling‟ of these original rocks in various ways and over various time spans. The oldest of these date to the triassic (Table 2.1) and are found in two small patches, the hills around Atalanti and those south of Longos. They consist of permotriassic limestone, greywackes (coarse sandstones/fine conglomerates), schists, prasinites, and volcanites. About 45 million years later, during the later triassic and earlier jurassic, the material which now makes up Mt. Chlomon was formed, as well as the hills south of Martino and Larymna, those between Elateia and Zeli, and the narrow ridges along the coastline between Livanates and Kamena Vourla, where it forms the edge of the Kamena Vourla fault. They consist of triassic-jurassic or lower jurassic limestone and dolomites.17 Dark serpentine occurs along the southern margin of the plain of Atalanti and appears again near the

Finally, alluvial plains are found in the valley along the Kephissos river and along the coastline, in narrow strips or in larger plains at Mitrou, Atalanti and Longos. These fertile alluvial deposits are recent in geological terms, all dating to the holocene. But unlike the plain at Thermopylae to the north, the coastal plains in the study area existed already in the Bronze Age, since the coastline was at that period further out (see below p. 23 ff.) and Bronze Age sites such as Mitrou and Skala Atalantis (see Chapter 3, p. 44 and 41) are located in or next to these plains. From this brief overview it becomes clear that limestone is predominant in the area; the only large parts where limestone is completely absent are in the quaternary alluvial plains along the coast and the Kephissos valley. These alluvial plains yield the most fertile soils, although their heavy character makes tilling hard work. Early agriculturalists generally preferred lighter soils, such as the limestone formed during the tertiary period, which

John Coleman); although this route may have been used by the inhabitants of Tragana, it is unlikely to have been a major route. The presence of vicious sheep dogs behind the monastery has prevented me from attempting to trace this route. 17 Mount Chlomon itself is made up of hard dolomitic limestone (Naval Intelligence 1945, 66). 21

Key:

al – alluvium c2 – upper cretaceous jc – jurassic and cretaceous j3 – jurassic-lower cretaceous

mp – mio-pliocene oph – ophiolites p – pliocene pq – plio-pleistocene

rt – permotrassic sh – jurassic tj – triassic-jurassic

Increasing darkness indicates greater fertility of the soil. Figure 2.2: Soils of southeastern East Lokris (adapted from the 1983 Institute of Geology and Mineral Exploration map of Greece)

Table 2.1: The geological timescale (in million years ago) Quarternary

Holocene Pleistocene Pliocene Miocene Oligocene Eocene Palaeocene

Cenozoic Tertiary

Mesozoic

Palaeozoic

Cretaceous Jurassic Triassic Permian Carboniferous Devonian Silurian Ordovician Cambrian

22

0.01 2 7 26 38 54 64 136 190 225 280 345 410 440 530 570

produced fertile soil, but since draft animals for plowing were known in the LBA (the first evidence for yoked oxen consists of a fragmentary figurine group dating back to the EBA; see Pullen 1992), the heavy alluvium may well have been exploited by the Mycenaeans. The relatively soft tertiary limestone was not only a good soil for the farmer; it also facilitated the construction of chamber tombs. Flysch sediments, too, form a valuable soil (Bintliff 1977, 7). The hard limestone formed in the mesozoic period yields low quality soils unsuitable for agriculture, and it is unsurprising that modern towns, with the exception of the industrial town of Larymna, avoid these locations.

Hafemann, who investigated underwater sites worldwide, concluded in 1960 that over the last 2500 years a worldwide rise in sea level of 2.6-2.8 m took place (Hafemann 1960a and b); Fairbanks‟ global curve shows a sea level of ca. 4-5 m lower than at present for 20001000 BC (as reproduced in Van Andel 1990, 151; it should be noted that the curve is „adjusted‟ for the last 4000 years BP).20 Apart from the eustatic rise of sea level, regional isostatic adjustment is due to the redistribution of mass between polar caps and oceans. Generally, in regions near the former center of glaciation, sea level falls, since the ice load is removed and the land rises up, whereas further away from the ice sheets the land does not rebound and the extra melt water added to the oceans causes a rise in sea level. In Greece, the process caused additional sea level rise. The isostatic sea level during the second millennium BC in our area was ca. two m lower than it is today (Lambeck 1996, 599: -4 m in 4000 BC, -1.20 around the beginning of our era).

Shoreline Large changes in the coastline have taken place since the Bronze Age due to a steady sea level rise. Global sealevel changes are caused by two main factors: glacial (or isostatic), i.e. the growth and melting of the polar ice caps (the world ocean level is still rising after the last ice age), and geoidal (or eustatic), i.e. deformations in the earth‟s core and mantle, the breakup of continents and opening of new deep basins which drain the world ocean, and the growth of mid-oceanic volcanic ridges and their collapse after cooling, which decrease and increase respectively the ocean basin‟s capacity (Price et al. 2002, 178). It appears that often both factors together are referred to as „eustatic‟, and are used for „global sea level‟ (e.g. Lambeck 1996).

For the Argolid, Jameson et al. (1994) posit a very rapid rise between 8500 BC and 4000 BC, when it flattened at a level ten m below the present level. Since then, the rise continues slowly, with at most 0.20 m a century (Jameson et al. 1994, 195). Assuming, for ease of calculation, a steady rise since 4000 BC,21 the sea level in the Argolid would have been at -6 m at the beginning of the Mycenaean era ca. 1600 BC, and at -5 m in 1000 BC. As indicated by Hafemann‟s results (Hafemann 1960a and b), however, it is likely that in fact the curve for the last 6000 years is not linear, but has the greatest increase in sea level early on and then flattens out (since a linear curve would give a rise of ca. 4.2 m for the last 2500 years as opposed to Hafemann‟s 2.6-2.8). Assuming that both Hafemann and Jameson et al. are correct in their calculations, the 1.4-1.6 m difference would have to be accounted for by a greater rise between 4000 and 500 BC. Extrapolation of this result to the Mycenaen era is impossible without other points of reference. Jameson et al. 1994, 201, show a local curve for the Argolid in which the level is -10 in 2000 BC, -6 in 1500 BC, staying level until 800 BC, after which it rises more quickly.

Since the end of the last ice age, global sea level has been steadily rising due to the melting of the ice. According to most studies, the greatest rise took place between 14000 and 6000 years ago with a rate of up to 15-20 mm per year (Lambeck 1996, 588).18 In 8000 BC, Euboea and East Lokris were still connected to each other and the entire Gulf of Atalanti, from Livanates to Cape Kerata north of Theologos (Figure 1.6), was dry land (Lambeck 1996, 603 fig. 6d). After 4000 BC the rise in sea level leveled off. Nevertheless, in the Bronze Age the world sea level was lower than today (Lambeck 1996, 595).19

18

This involved flooding of low-lying plains at the rate of about a kilometer per year (!) in certain regions of the world (Persian Gulf, Gulf of Carpentaria of northern Australia; Lambeck 1996, 588). 19 Most experts now seem to agree on this scheme, e.g. Van Andel 1990, Lambeck 1996. Another scenario is that eustatic sea level reached its current height some time between 2000 and 5000 years ago (Flemming 1978). The reason that eustatic sea level change is so hard to measure or calculate is that concurrent with the melting of the ice caps, landmasses under or near those ice caps experienced uplift since the weight of the ice was alleviated, while those further away started subsiding due to the increasing weight of the water covering them.

Therefore it is not enough to measure the rise of sea level relative to a land mass. 20 BP: Before Present, refers to 1950, the year after which the first radiocarbon dates were published (Taylor 1987, 97). 21 In reality, so-called „little ice ages‟ during the last 8000 years must have caused brief stillstands or even reversals in the rise of the sea. The last of these little ice ages occurred only four to three hundred years ago, as recorded in the advance and withdrawal of mountain glaciers. See Jameson et al. 1994, 195. 23

Finally, local tectonic sea level change is due to seismic and aseismic subsidence or uplift. The Euboean Gulf and the land immediately adjacent to it – including the Lokrian coastline – form the graben of the mountain range WSW of it. This graben is subsiding, thus ever enlarging the width of the Euboean Straits (Bintliff 1977, 7, 9).

Aitolyma peninsula subsided. We do not know if the rate of subsidence was steady, although on a geological time scale this might be a reasonable approximation (Steven Soter, pers. comm.); we can regard it as a hypothetical model approximation, but nothing more. In that case, calculating with a subsidence rate of 1.3 mm/year gives a land subsidence of 3500 x 1.3 mm = 4.55 m since 1500 BC. In other words, not only was isostatic relative sea level lower by ca. two m (see above), the land was also 4.55 m higher in the middle of the second millennium BC. In conclusion, sea level in this small area would have been ca. 6.5 m lower in 1500 BC than it is today. This estimate is close to that for the Argolid, where relative sea level in 1500 BC is estimated to have been -6 m.

Various estimates of the rate of land subsidence specific for our region have been published, from 0.27-0.4 mm/yr (Ganas et al. 1998) to 0.8-1.4 mm/yr (Stiros and Rondogiani 1985, reference in Pantosti et al. 2001) and 0.1-1.2 mm/yr (Pantosti et al. 2001). For the area north of Halai (Figure 1.6) Soter et al. (forthcoming) offer a new estimate of the subsidence rate. A submerged ancient quarry surface extends to 4.5 m below present sea level, near the water‟s edge north of Halai. Stone from the quarry was evidently used in fortification walls at Halai in the 4th century BC. At that time, the regional isostatic sea level was about 1.4 m lower than today (cf. Lambeck 1995). Assuming the quarry was above sea level when exploited, it must have subsided by at least 3.1 m in the last 2300 years, giving an average rate exceeding 1.3 mm/yr.

In summary, at the start of the Mycenaean era global sea level was ca. 4-5 m lower than today (Fairbanks), and in 500 BC ca. 2.7-2.8 m lower than today (Hafemann). Isostatic sea level was however only ca. two m lower in 1500 BC than it is today. In addition, the Aitolyma peninsula subsides with at least 1.3 mm/year. In the Argolid, sea level in 1500 BC was six m lower than today. Calculating with a steady rate of land subsidence of 1.3 mm/year and using an estimate of isostatic sea level of -2 m throughout the second millennium, we arrive at the following probable approximations for local sea levels for 2000, 1500, and 1000 BC:

Since we do not know how much above sea level the ancient quarry was, the 1.3 mm/year is a minimum rate. Moreover, it is possible that only this small part of the

Table 2.2: Bronze Age sea levels Date 2000 BC 1500 BC 1000 BC

Isostatic sea level* -2.3 m -1.9 m -1.5 m

Land subsidence 4000 (years) x 1.3 mm = 5.2 m 3500 (years) x 1.3 mm = 4.55 m 3000 (years) x 1.3 mm = 3.9 m

East Lokris -7.5 m -6.45 m -5.4 m

Sea level Argolid -10 m -6 m -6 m

*Calculating with Lambeck’s rate of a sea level rise of 0.7-1.0 mm/year and starting from a relative sea level of -4 m in 4000 BC gives the following relative isostatic sea levels: 2000 BC: -4 + (2000 x 0.7-1.0) = -4 + 1.4-2.0 = -2.6 to -2.0 m 1500 BC: -4 + (2500 x 0.7-1.0) = -4 + 1.75-2.5 = -2.25 to -1.5 m 1000 BC: -4 + (3000 x 0.7-1.0) = -4 + 2.1-3.0 = -1.9 to -1.0 m Given the relatively large degree of uncertainty in the rate (0.7-1.0) and the consideration that this rate may not have been constant throughout the second millennium but may have fluctuated, only the (rounded) average for each of the three dates is given.

It should be stressed that these numbers are estimates based on the assumption of a linear rate of land subsidence which is the same for the entire coastline of our study area. In fact, parts of the coastline are likely to have subsided even more due to frequent seismic activity in the region.

2.3), makes the southern part of the study area one of high seismic activity. Places located on the subsiding side of the fault – in our area Skala Atalantis and Mitrou – subside with every substantial earthquake. On the British Admiralty chart from 1847 Mitrou is depicted as a peninsula (Figure 2.4; Mitrou in center), and Gaidaronisi is separated from the mainland by a marshland dissected

The Atalanti fault, orientated roughly WNW-ESE from Atalanti along the mountain ridge to Martino (Figure

24

Figure 2.3: The fault of Atalanti (after Cundy et al. 2000, figure 1)

Figure 2.4: British Admiralty chart of 1847 with the Bay of Atalanti; the arrow points at Mitrou

25

by narrow canals only.22 In April 1894, about half a century after the Admiralty Chart was created, two earthquakes, of respectively 6.4-6.7 and 6.5-7.2 on the Richter scale, occurred a week apart.23 They resulted in a straight fracture of 60 km long,24 from Larymna almost to Agios Konstantinos (Figure 1.5; Naval Intelligence 1945, 66). The second of the two shocks was accompanied by a tidal wave25 and caused the alluvial plain of Atalanti to subside. Gaidaronisi and Mitrou, which had been peninsulas up to this point in time, now became islands. The late Mr. Georgos Laios of Tragana informed me in 2003 that his grandfather had told him how the Laios family used to farm the land east of Mitrou, which is now under water, before the fateful day of 1894.

subsided and the sea had withdrawn to its initial place (Papavassiliou 1894, Cundy et al. 2000, 5-6). He states that “the whole region of Atalanti got separated from the Roda Mountain [the eastern foothills of Mt. Chlomon] and sank by about 1.5 m” (quoted by Cundy et al. 2000, 6). Mitsopoulos limits the sinking of the land to a ca. ten km long strip of coast from Skala Atalantis to Almyra (i.e. to the southern half of the plain; Almyra is the bay to the southeast of Gaidaronisi, see Figure 1.6) and ten m wide (Mitsopoulos 1894, 224-5), and Skouphos records 25-30 cm of submergence in the Almyra area, noting that the area of submergence was 300 m wide between Almyra and Skala Atalantis (Skouphos 1894, 439).26 Eyewitness reports on the sinking of the land thus range between ca. 0.25 m and 1.5 m, leading to a width of land of tens of meters to 300 m being submerged in the southern half of the plain.

The exact magnitude of the 1894 disaster is disputed. At Skala Atalantis the harbor sank into the sea and remains of it can nowadays been seen ca. two m below the high water mark (Cundy et al. 2000, 5). According to Pantosti and his collaborators, who took field measurements over a large area to create dislocation models, the land here sank by no more than ca. 40 cm (Pantosti et al. 2001, 778 fig. 13). Perhaps this discrepancy can be explained by a dislocation of the harbor structures subsequent to the earthquakes: they might have sank or slid farther down the sea bottom once the land had been flooded. Recent scientific investigations of terrestrial and marine deposits opposite the island of Gaidaronisi point to a change between 30 and 80 cm (Cundy et al. 2000, 24; the high degree of uncertainty is caused by the tidal range of 6070 cm at Gaidaronisi). Modern scientific estimates of the vertical displacement thus range between 30 and 80 cm.

Even if the land subsided by no more than 25 cm, in a flat alluvial plain like the plain of Atalanti this would cause a significant amount of land to be engulfed and changed permanently into sea floor or saltwater marsh (such as presently exists west of Gaidaronisi). Instances of this sort would have been not merely traumatic for the people living in the vicinity of the affected area, but would have taken away valuable farmland and changed the shape of the local coastline considerably. In the summer of 426 BC a similar disaster took place, as documented by Thucydides, Demetrios of Kallatis, and Diodorus Siculus.27 Their accounts show how dramatic events of this sort were. Thucydides‟ account is brief and factual: after a winter in which many mild earthquakes occurred, a much heavier earthquake in the summer struck the region and tsunamis flooded Atalanti island and Orobiai (modern Rovies; see Figures 1.2, 1.6) on northern Euboea. The coastline changed permanently and “what was once land, is now sea” ( . Thuc. 3.89.2-3).

Eyewitness accounts vary as well. Papavassiliou mentions that the plain of Atalanti remained covered in water for a distance of some meters (in the north) to some tens of meters (in the south) even after the tsunami had 22

Written accounts from 1834 and 1853 confirm that Gaidaronisi was still at that time a promontory, not an island (Oldfather 1926, 1142). On the 1897 Map of the Kingdom of Greece, by the Military Information Division, Gaidaronisi and Mitrou are still represented as peninsulas. The map is stated to be up to date with regards to the 1881 new Greco-Turkish boundary line, but the earthquake must have struck after this section of the map had been prepared. 23 Contemporary and eyewitness reports on these earthquakes and their consequences: Mitsopoulos 1894 and 1895, Papavassiliou 1894a and 1894b (both summarized in English by Davison 1894), Philippson 1894, and Skouphos 1894. Useful modern articles include: Stiros and Dakoronia 1989, Cundy et al. 2000, Pantosti et al. 2001, Albini and Pantosti 2004, Ganas et al. 2006. 24 37 miles, Naval Intelligence 1945, 66. 25 There is increased evidence for ancient tsunamis in many onshore areas as well: Price et al. 2002, 178.

26

“[…] ein langgezogener Damm, zu dessen beiden Seiten in seiner ganzen Länge 25-30 cm tief das Meerwasser das Land bedeckt. So ist die ganze Strecke von Halmyra bis nach […] Skala von Atalanti […] in einer Breite von etwa 300 m vom Meer überschwemmt […]”. 27 Thucydides 3.89.1-5, Demetrios of Kallatis FgrHist 85F6 (Strabo 1.3.20), Diodorus Siculus 12.59.2. These and other ancient texts mentioned in this chapter can be found in Appendix 1, p. 150 ff. Modern literature: Guidoboni 1994, 118-22; Stiros and Dakoronia 1989, 422-38. Antonopoulos 1992 is mainly concerned with the area around Thermopylae to the northwest, but also makes some useful general remarks. Buck and Stewart 2000 explore the difficulties in combining scientific and ancient literary evidence in order to reconstruct the event. 26

Demetrios of Kallatis gives more specific details, especially regarding the extent of the disaster. Earthquakes and tsunamis shook towns and communities in northern Euboea, East Lokris, southern Thessaly, and flooded as far inland as Phokis; some of the plains were flooded as far as twenty stades inland (

of the coast are recurring features in the area, as listed by Guidoboni et al. (1994). In 199-8 BC30 an earthquake, followed by an eruption, shook Chalkis in Euboea (Figure 1.1; Guidoboni et al. 1994, 229-30). Eusebius writes that also in 105 AD, under emperor Trajan, Opous was destroyed in an earthquake (Eusebius Hieron. Chron. 194d; Orosius 7.12.5. Listed in Guidoboni et al. 1994, 229-30); Procopius records a great earthquake in Central Greece in 551-2 AD, accompanied by a tidal wave, which caused serious damage including substantial changes to the terrain and the destruction of Skarpheia in Epiknemidian Lokris (Procopius, Wars 8.25.16-21; discussion in Guidoboni et al. 1994, 331-2).



Strabo 1.3. 20). These twenty stades equal ca. four km. Since the permanent flooding of the plain in 1894 was significantly less (300 m at most) it is likely that Demetrios here reports the temporary greatest extent of the tsunami (with or without literary exaggeration), as also suggested by the use of the aorist . The area which sank permanently was likely much smaller.

Skarpheia has a location similar to that of Skala Atalantis (Figure 1.2): in an alluvial plain and on the subsiding side of a fault (in this case, the Kamena Vourla fault). The entire northern coast of East Lokris is located near faults and subsides during earthquakes: the area between Skala Atalantis and Martino due to the fault of Atalanti, the area west of Arkitsa due to the fault of Kamena Vourla (Figure 2.3). The area of Kynos, on the other hand, seems to have conflicting tendencies to rise up or subside: shoreline features that are dated broadly contemporaneous with the 426 BC event occur at elevations of around a meter above sea level (Pirazzoli et al. 1999, Cundy et al. 2000, 23), although in the late Mycenaean or Early Iron Age the site subsided. This is probably because this area sometimes behaves as being on the uplifting side of the Kamena Vourla fault, other times is influenced by the Atalanti fault and subsides (Pirazzoli et al. 1999, 366, Cundy et al. 2000, 23; see Figure 2.3).31

According to Diodorus Siculus “in Lokris the isthmus of a peninsula was torn apart and the island named Atalanti was formed” during these events ( , . Diod.

12.59.2). This description of Atalanti by Diodorus has been taken by some as evidence that in 426 BC Atalanti became an island, just as in 1894 Gaidaronisi became one.28 However, as Fossey sets forth (Fossey 1990a, 183-4), Thucydides makes it clear that Atalanti was an island already in 431 BC:  ,  

(“At the end of the summer the Athenians fortified Atalanti, an island located opposite the Opountian Lokrians which had been uninhabited so far […].” Thuc. 2.32). As early as 1876 Lolling suggested that it might be the present-day islet of Agios Nikolaos, which lies just northwest of Atalanti island (Figure 1.6), that got separated from the main island in 426 BC (Lolling 1876, 255). If that is indeed the case, Diodorus‟ mistake is easy to understand: “not a peninsula called Atalanti [...] became an island but a projection or “peninsula” of that island [...] became a separate islet” (Fossey 1990a, 184). This agrees with Demetrios of Kallatis, who also says that “the central part of Atalanti” split open (Strabo 1.3.20).

When taking into account the sudden subsidence of land around the southern part of the plain of Atalanti, a phenomenon which occurred many times throughout history and most likely prehistory as well,32 we can surmise that the Bronze Age coastline of that area would be even farther out than based on the sea level calculations alone. The most conservative estimate, only adding the lowest rate of 0.25 m from the 1894 earthquakes, now gives -7.75 m in 2000 BC, -6.70 m in 1500 BC, and -5.65 m in 1000 BC. However, it may be clear that the real sea level in this area is likely to have

Whether this particular earthquake/tsunami is to be attributed to the Atalanti fault is disputed but of little consequence for this study.29 Suffice it to say that earthquakes accompanied by tidal waves and subsidence

30

Or possibly 260 BC, if it is correct to identify this earthquake as the cause of sudden abandonment of the site of Halus (on the northern tip of Euboea) in 260. See Guidoboni et al. 1994, 230 for a short discussion. 31 The retreat of the sea at Thermopylae, on the other hand, must of course be attributed to accumulation of river deposits. See e.g. Antonopoulos 1992, 87. 32 Clear archaeological evidence is lacking so far. Possibly the excavations on Mitrou (see Chapter 3, p. 44) and the geophysical surveys associated with them will produce more evidence for the location of the Bronze Age shoreline.

28

E.g. earlier scientists: Mitsopoulos 1894, 224, Skouphos 1894. Recently, Guidoboni et al. 1994 and Cundy et al. 2000, 23-4 come to the conclusion that the forming of Atalanti was not caused by the fault of Atalanti, but do not question Diodorus. 29 See Pantosti et al. 2001, 776-7 for some views pro and contra. 27

Figure 2.5: Reconstruction of the Late Bronze Age shoreline at -10 m of the present shoreline in the southern part of the Bay of Atalanti

A tentative reconstruction34 of the Late Bronze Age shoreline in the southern part of the Bay of Atalanti can then be proposed by tracing the 10 m bathymetric curve (Figure 2.5);35 the difference in the landscape at either side of the Bay of Atalanti is negligible since the difference is likely to be no more than ca. 6.5 m and the coast is much steeper. The area around Mitrou, on the other hand, looks markedly different nowadays than it would have in the Late Bronze Age.

been much lower: the 0.25 m for the 1894 subsidence is the lower estimate on a scale which goes up to 1.5 m,33 the certain subsidence in 426 BC is not taken into account at all, since estimates are lacking, and for other known and unknown earthquakes no subsidence is taken into account, though given the geology of the area, subsidence must be assumed. In reality, extrapolating from the data we have, sea level around the southern half of the Plain of Atalanti in Mycenaean times was likely to be close to ten m lower than today.

The site of Mitrou would accordingly have had more arable land in the Late Bronze Age than the small plain it faces nowadays and would command the plain from its low rise. A bay to the west of Mitrou, sheltered by the hills of Gaidaronisi, would have been a natural harbor; a small island would have controlled access to this natural harbor from the north. Watch points on Gaidaronisi and the hills just east of the bay would have been able to detect ships; the hills of Proskynas and Chiliadou would

The consequence of this is that a number of sites which are nowadays located hard on the sea – especially Mitrou, but also Skala Atalantis – would have been low rises in a coastal plain in the Bronze Age. The same is probably true for Bronze Age Kynos, since Pirazzoli does not identify any uplifting of the site before the fourth century BC, and some subsidence during or after the Mycenaean era: apart from the gradual sea level rise, Kynos saw “a small coseismic subsidence movement probably dating between 1380 and 965 B.C., and a greater coseismic uplift between 360 B.C. and A.D. 210” (Pirazzoli et al. 1999, 366).

34

Geophysical survey to reconstruct the ancient shoreline with greater certainty is highly desirable. 35 Note that the bathymetric curves on the British Admiralty chart (Figure 2.4) are given in fathoms; 1 fathom = 1.829 m. For the reconstruction of Bronze Age sea level, I have used the Ministry of Agriculture Soil map of Greece, 1983, Livanates sheet, on which the bathymetric curves are given in meters.

33

Using the latter number, we arrive at levels of -9.0 m in 2000 BC, -7.95 m in 1500 BC, and -6.9 m in 1000 BC. 28

see any land convoys approaching from the southeast. Mitrou thus had an excellent location, in a sheltered bay in the larger Bay of Atalanti in the Euboean Gulf.

A similar conclusion is reached for the southern Argolid by Van Andel and Runnels (1987, 153). Others stress that erosion and soil exhaustion, though detectable already before the Bronze Age in some areas and continuing throughout the centuries, increased significantly in the second half of the second millennium due to the intensification of agriculture which took place during the Bronze Age (Sarpaki 1992, 62). And for example Halstead maintains that human impact started on a large scale at the end of the Bronze Age the earliest (Halstead and Frederick 2000); Bintliff claims that severe deforestation is a phenomenon of the last few centuries only (Bintliff 1977, 66-70).

Climate, vegetation and agriculture „Reconstructing‟ vegetation and, by extension, climate of an ancient landscape may be less straightforward than describing geology, topography, or even changes in coastline. Yet it is imperative to try to make such a reconstruction, because without it an ancient landscape will not come to life but remain barren and unimaginable, and because it is the use of the ancient landscape which is of special interest to the archaeologist. Since vegetation is inextricably tied together with ancient agricultural practices and both are, if not a direct result of climate, then at least strongly influenced by it, the three will be discussed together in this section.

The sources which can give information about the vegetation of Central Greece in Mycenaean times are analysis of seeds and other charred plant remains from excavated sites and pollen analysis. Depictions of plants and flowers in Mycenaean art, potentially another source of information, are generally highly stylized, rather than naturalistic, and do not necessarily reflect the local flora. Flower and plant depictions from East Lokris are the generic Mycenaean motifs: for instance, highly stylized palms, papyrus plants, ivy leaves, lilies and generic „Mycenaean flowers‟ occur on the Mycenaean pottery from Mitrou. These motifs are artistic conventions, occurring in identical shape on Mycenaean pottery everywhere, and it is safe to conclude that they do not reflect any local reality.

Greece as a whole can be divided into five different vegetational zones (Bintliff 1977, 109) with a roughly NNW-SSE orientation. Going towards the east, the zones become progressively dryer and hotter. East Lokris belongs to the so-called Aegean Belt, the hottest and driest of the five zones, occupying roughly the eastern part of central and southern Greece. On the west it borders on the slightly cooler and moister Chestnut Belt. The Aegean Belt is generally dry, hot, and barren, with only a short rainy season. This allows for the growth of plants with a limited growth season, such as cereals, but is less beneficial for the growth of trees, which have greater perennial moisture requirements. Due to the arid climate, the soils in this area are poor: in the dry summers the water with nutrients is drawn to the surface where the nutrients are lost for the vegetation without some kind of water transfer (Sarpaki 1992, 62), aridity stops the activity of micro-organisms which help to produce a good soil texture, aeration and nutrient retention (Anastasiades 1949, 359), clay concentration is very low in dry climates (Bintliff 1977, 90), and nitrogen, one of the most important soil nutrients, is in very short supply in Greece (Sarpaki 1992, 62). Bintliff concludes that much of the landscape in the Aegean Belt is naturally inhospitable to tree growth (Bintliff 1977, 72). Due to the scanty surface vegetation, the scarcity of micro-organisms, and the slow decomposition of organic material, the humus layer is thin; overgrazing, deliberate burning of maquis (to favor annual plants good for grazing), and cultivation make matters worse.

Pollen analysis as a method depends on the presence of suitable lakes for sample extraction, because only there pollen could be deposited in sediment without disturbance and remain preserved, and only when the soil has not been disturbed one gets a chronological „map‟ of ancient pollen deposits. Only few sites in Greece are suitable for pollen analysis since often either lakes are not permanent or their deposits are dominated by minerals via inflowing streams (Wright 1985, 186). Due to the scarcity of suitable sites it is often tempting to extrapolate knowledge from one area in or even outside the Greek peninsula, to other areas in Greece. Furthermore, pollen analysis never provides information only on the exact site of the boring, since pollen is carried by the wind over varying distances. Thus, depending on the force and the direction of the wind at the moment the pollen were airborne, pollen from more or less far-away regions are mixed with the local pollen. Hence analysis can give a general idea of the vegetation of a larger area only, but never provide a clear localized picture. For these reasons, pollen analysis is especially valuable in providing a long time picture of general vegetation trends; it rarely provides the degree of specificity required to track vegetation changes over a brief period of time or to pinpoint the exact vegetation in a small

It is a matter of some dispute when major erosion started taking place. Zangger has suggested that soil erosion took place locally during the Late Bronze Age, but that most erosion took place earlier, during the first 1000 years after the introduction of agriculture (Zangger 1992b, 18).

29

region.36 The advantages of pollen analysis are that pollen remain remarkably well preserved in certain conditions and are generally easily identifiable, if not to species, then at least to genus. Being organic, and preserved in organic material, they can also be absolutely dated by radiocarbon analysis.

earliest, even where human presence is attested since the 6th millennium BC. Only 2000 years later appear the first indications for major forest clearance. These late indications for forest clearance show that any LBA clearances were small enough not to influence the total pollen counts: they must have been islands in a sea of forests, limited to a fertile zone around the settlement and to plains and lower hills. Archaeological finds dated to the Bronze Age are however scarcer in northern Greece than in our area, so that the human influence factor, which was minimal in northern Greece, may have played a more important role for the vegetation in southeastern East Lokris. Moreover, northern Greece belongs to a different climate zone than southeastern East Lokris, so that it is not possible to transfer the data from northern cores to our area.

Since no pollen analysis has been carried out in the study area itself, we are bound to infer and extrapolate from data from other areas. Most pollen cores are from northern Greece and the Balkans, some cores are from the Peloponnesus; possibly most relevant to our study are cores from the Kopaic Basin.37 They show that during the last glacial period Greece had a steppe vegetation, which after the end of the Ice Age was transformed into forests. Towards 6200 BC the forest became denser, pointing to more humid conditions which may have been caused by an increase in precipitation or by a decrease in temperature; in the Neolithic era Greece was covered in forest vegetation. Evidence of some landscape destabilization is present for as early as the sixth to third millennia BC: alluviation, for example, may result from exploitation and erosion of steep slopes (Zangger 1992a). Around 2000 BC, when humidity reached modern levels, the present-day distribution of forest and steppe had established itself in broad outline. Changes in the composition of the forests that occurred after ca. 1500 BC and are localized, must have been due mainly to human activity (Van Zeist and Bottema 1982, 289).

Evidence from the Peloponnese, which in these two respects may be better comparable with southeastern East Lokris, indicates forest clearing as early as the second millennium BC. Near Pylos there is evidence for treeless vegetation until ca. 5500 BC, when oak and pine expanded; pine declined ca. 1500 BC, at the time of major Late Bronze Age activity (Kraft et al. 1980).38 Pollen diagrams from the Osmanaga Lagoon near Pylos show vegetation disturbance on adjacent alluvial plains, possibly caused by the cutting of pine trees and the planting of olives, after 2000 BC (Wright 1972). In general, the forest vegetation in southern Greece remained largely undisturbed until ca. 2000 BC, after which the impact of farming on the vegetation is clear (Bottema 1982).

The cores from northern Greece show that that area was richly wooded around 2000 BC. Pollen indicators associated with human activity (especially olive and grains) appear only in the second millennium BC at the

A core from the Kopaic Basin near the study area shows a decline in oak after ca. 3000 BC (Allen 1990, 175-177), coinciding with an increase in pine, olive and hornbeam. Beech and pistachio likewise occur in greater numbers when oak is less frequent. But even when the percentage of oak pollen is lowest, at ca. 2000-1500 BC, it is still much higher than the percentages for any other species. This suggests the presence of human agriculture in the plain after 2000 BC, while the hills remained wooded. The decline in oak is accompanied by an inwash of eroded topsoil into the lake, thus causing the lake to become shallow to the point of a marsh. This suggests

36

The problems inherent in the method are well phrased by Bintliff (1977b, 59): “Certain necessary assumptions that are made by analysts in order to achieve a total reconstruction of a given localized landscape over a prolonged period of time, are demonstrably open to serious doubt. Such assumptions, commonly decisive, are the representativeness of the preserved spectrum for the total district vegetation; the constancy of lake sedimentation that allows simple interpolation and extrapolation between absolute dates in a core; the detection of human influence in fluctuations of total tree pollen and of particular tree and grass species, as opposed to climate or species competition as explanation for such trends.” 37 Northern Greece: Wijmstra 1969, Wijmstra and Smit 1976, Bottema 1979 (cores from Tenaghi Philippon in eastern Macedonia), Gerasimidis 2000 (Serres, Macedonia), Willis 1992a, b, c (northwest Greece), Tzedakis 1993, 1994 (cores from Ioannina in northwestern Greece). Peloponnese: Bottema 1990, Atherden et al. 1993. The Kopais: Greig and Turner 1974, Turner and Greig 1975, Allen 1990, 1997, Tzedakis 1999.

38

Carpenter proposed a major climate change around 1500 BC (Carpenter 1966); independent evidence for climatic change seemed to be lacking, however (Wright 1968). Baillie notes “climatic deterioration” in Europe in the 17th and the 12th centuries BC (Baillie 1998). 30

man-caused erosion for this limited area.39 It is likely that the Mycenaean drainage works in the Kopaic Basin took place at the time when the lake was changing into a marsh (Allen 1997).

these animals still occur today, although in small numbers. Lions, so often depicted in Mycenaean hunting scenes, existed in the eastern Mediterranean (attested for e.g. Late Bronze Age Kastanas and Tiryns, see Boessneck and Von den Driesch 1979, 1980, and Von den Driesch and Boessneck 1990 with further references), although they were probably not very common (Dickinson 1994, 28). The overall picture provided by Kalapodi is fairly consistent with what we know for the rest of mainland Greece in the Bronze Age, where red deer, wild boar, and hare are among the animals most commonly hunted for food (Dickinson 1994, 28). Badger, beech marten, lynx, otter, and weasel are conspicuously absent from the LBA deposits at Kalapodi, although at least some of these may be included in the „small predators‟ group).41

Many of the changes in vegetation in the second millennium BC can thus be associated with Late Bronze Age forest clearing and crop growing. The clearance of the lowlands for agriculture was accompanied by deforestation of the hills for extensive pasture (Halstead 1996, 27). The summer pastures that now exist in many highland areas in Greece, however, were created or at least greatly expanded in quite recent times. Most parts of the country in antiquity were far less treeless than today, and extensive deforestation in some mountainous areas, at least, is a phenomenon of the last few centuries (Cherry 1988, 15; see also Bottema 1974, Turner and Greig 1975, Halstead 1987, and Halstead and Frederick 2000).

Which crops were cultivated on the cleared land? Analysis of charred seeds and other small organic remains preserved in excavated soil is an excellent way of determining local vegetation at very specific time periods,42 and since excavations take place at sites of human occupation or interference, this method will limit its detection largely to agricultural flora. As to date, no flotation remains have been published from excavated Bronze Age sites in the study area. However, results from other sites indicate that in the Bronze Age the main agricultural products were cereals (especially barley, the most dependable of the cereals, einkorn, and emmer; Sarpaki 1992, 69), pulses (which have the ability to fix atmospheric nitrogen, scarce in the Greek soil), olive, and

Further indication for a relatively wild natural environment in southeastern East Lokris in the final period of the LBA is given by the remains of sacrificed animals in the LH IIIC-SM Kalapodi deposits. Bones and other remains from wild animals included red, fallow, and roe deer (443, 51, and 6 bones respectively), wild boar (8 bones), bear (1), fox (4), lion (2), wild cat (1), small predators (2), hare and rabbit (20), hedgehog (9), birds (8), tortoises (316), fish (11), and mollusks (65).40 From later (post-Dark Age) periods two wolf bones are preserved. The abundance of deer bones suggests that deer were common locally, which, since deer thrive in forested areas with small clearances, in turn suggests a largely wooded environment for the area of the Daphnoremna valley in the Late Bronze Age. It should be noted that even nowadays this valley and the surrounding hills are greener than many other parts of the study area.

41

The problem with the evidence from Kalapodi – especially for the wild fauna – is that it is found in a ritual context (see Chapter 3 p. 58; the predominance of deer bones may well be correlated to the fact that at least in historical periods the site was a sanctuary for Artemis, who as goddess of wild animals and the hunt was often given deer sacrifices). If in a settlement context the bones of an animal which would provide a tasty meal are rare or absent, we can conclude that that species is rare in the area (but see the caveat by Payne 1985, 212), provided that there are no circumstances (e.g. chemical composition of the soil) which would prevent the preservation of the bones. In a ritual context, on the other hand, the absence of a certain species does not indicate that that species did not occur, only that that species was not sacrificed or consumed at ceremonial meals. The presence of bones of a certain type, on the other hand, makes it likely that that animal occurred in the region, and the greater the number of bones, the greater the likelihood. Yet, it is possible that rare animals would be transported – probably after having been killed in a hunt – some distance to make a special sacrifice. 42 Assuming, of course, that the grain seeds are from locally grown plants, not imported.

The presence of bear (and probably wolf) is unsurprising: in the wilder parts of the Pindos mountains in Epirus 39

This is thus in contrast to the general picture Bintliff had earlier identified for Greece, that erosion is a recent phenomenon. When discussing an earlier core (Turner and Greig 1974), Bintliff concluded that initially oak covered the basin floor and was later replaced by alternating grasses and sedges. The hills would have been always barren (Bintliff 1977, 81-2). But since oak remains high, it more likely represents vegetation on the hills, which were not exploited by humans to any great extent. 40 See Stanzel 1991, 16 table 2. Obviously the number of bones does not correlate directly to the number of animals: some species have bones which splinter more easily and thus appear to be more numerous when in fact they are not; species whose bones are for any reason more easily identified are exaggerated, etc. See Payne 1985, 219-223 for the problems in translating bone counts to individual animals. 31

Table 2.3: Agricultural produce at Late Bronze Age sites (adapted from Halstead 1992a, 108 and 1994, 204) Site

Grains

Legumes

Fruits and other crops

Assiros

Bread wheat Spelt Emmer Einkorn Hulled barley Common millet Einkorn Hulled barley

Bitter vetch Lentil

Flax Grape

Emmer Einkorn Common millet

Bitter vetch

Emmer Hulled barley Wheat

Bitter vetch Vetch Lentil Celtic bean Bitter vetch

Gla Iolkos Iria Kastanas

Midea Mycenae

Celtic bean

Thebes Tiryns

wine.43 Table 2.3 lists the grains, legumes, and fruits and other crops produced at various Late Bronze Age sites.

Fig Opium poppy Gold of pleasure Grape Strawberry Fig

Pear

Two grain samples from Mycenae on the other hand contain weeds typical of modern fields, thus confirming the specialization suggested by the tablets (Halstead 1992b, 65-66; 1994, 201 with references; see also Halstead 2001). Similarly, from Gla only einkorn is preserved, suggesting a high degree of specialization which coincides with the interpretation of Gla as a storage facility (see also Chapter 6 p. 127). It can be concluded that the palaces controlled crop production to some extent, favoring large scale monocultures, whereas in rural areas outside palatial control a variety of crops was grown on a smaller scale, thus spreading the risk of crop failure (see e.g. Forbes 1989). To protect further against crop failure, land holdings would be small and scattered, thus providing a range of microclimates, and polycropping would be standard.

The olive, conspicuously absent from this table, had long been domesticated (Runnels and Hansen 1986) and was predominantly used for the production of oil, both for cooking and for the perfume industry (Shelmerdine 1985). The increasing abundance of charred grape seeds during the Bronze Age is accompanied by the appearance of morphologically domesticated pits (Kroll 1982, 1983, Hansen 1988, see also Smith and Jones 1990). The palatial archives confirm the importance of the grape as the basis for wine (Ventris and Chadwick 1973, 282-283) and of the fig as a dietary staple (ibidem, 218-221). On the other hand, the specialization detectable in Linear B archives, which are concerned with one type of wheat, is not always reflected in the excavated material: sites belonging to a rural economy, such as for example Assiros in Macedonia, show a great diversity of crops, with evidence for polycropping (the practice of growing grain and vegetables in orchards), typical for subsistence farming (see also Halstead 1996). Moreover, the weeds at Assiros as identified by their seeds were similar to those in modern gardens, which are typically diverse. Sarpaki has noted the same evidence for small family holdings in the palaeo-ethnobotanical remains from Late Bronze Age Thera (Sarpaki 1990).

In Mycenaean East Lokris such a situation can be expected for all smaller settlements, villages and hamlets. Where settlements grew in size, however, land plots had to be located further away, automatically leading to “more extensive techniques of husbandry” and a “reduction in the diversity of crops planted (Halstead 1989, 76-77). Usually this situation is understood to have taken place during the transition from Neolithic to the Bronze Age. However, it seems likely that during the Late Bronze Age both systems, with possible gradations in between, may have existed next to each other: the extensive system around the larger settlements, basic subsistence farming in small hamlets. After the collapse of the palace system, when settlement became less centralized, the latter system can be expected to have become more widespread. In East Lokris, which was a

43

Based on these four categories, Sarpaki has proposed to introduce the „Mediterranean Quartet‟ for the Late Bronze Age (Sarpaki 1992), after the traditional „Mediterranean Triad‟ of cereals, olives, and wine based on classical authors and modern farming practices. 32

Table 2.4: Percentages of farm animals at palatial and rural sites (adapted from Halstead 1996, 29) Settlement

Site type

1

% sheep

% sheep/goat

Akrotiri N 50 Kalapodi C 76 Kastanas V 27 Knossos P 63 Kommos N 74 Pevkakia N 24 Phylakopi N 73 Pylos P 47 Tiryns P 31 1 N=nucleated settlement, C=cult center, V=village, P=palatial center

rural area not under palatial control, most if not all agricultural activity would have been on this small scale.

% goat

% pig

% cow

22

19 7.5 40 25 22 30 13 32 22

9 16.5 22 12 4 33 14 21 37

11

13

10

concluded that these sites had a higher degree of specialization than some of the sites in the hilly interior; it is reasonable to suppose that these sites were then larger, too, than the interior sites and exploited a larger area of land.

This hypothesis is strengthened by Iezzi‟s conclusions from her study of skeletal and dental remains from various cemeteries in Lokris (Iezzi 2003a, 2005a). Dental and skeletal analysis of remains from the Mycenaean cemetery at Kolaka-Agios Ioannis (south of Kolaka, Figure 2.1) has revealed that part of the diet of the people at this site consisted of rough-textured, probably gathered foods (Iezzi 2005a, 227), in addition to dairy products and some agriculture. Although Kolaka-Agios Ioannis falls strictly speaking outside the study area, it nevertheless confirms that in the interior parts of Central Greece the population subsisted on a mix of farming, pastoralism, and gathering. Hunting may well have played some role too. Similar analysis of skeletal remains from Atalanti-Spartia (Chapter 3 p. 42), on the other hand, revealed high rates of caries thus indicating a high dependence on agriculture (Iezzi 2005a, 227). This suggests that the inhabitants at the edge of the plain of Atalanti did cultivate and exploit that natural fertile plain. Since a “reduction in the diversity of crops planted” (Halstead 1989, 76) goes hand in hand with a reduction in “the intensity of tillage, manuring and weeding or in the opportunities for emergency irrigation,” which lead in turn to an increased risk of crop failure and the inability to produce surpluses (Halstead 1989, 77), settlement nucleation must have undermined existing householdlevel coping mechanisms, causing a dependence on surplus controlled by an emerging elite (ibidem). Even though we should not assume a palatial type monoculture for the sites around the Plain of Atalanti,44 it can be

If farming takes place on a small scale, pastoralism is a small scale activity as well. Indeed, examination of animal bones shows that as with the agriculture, the specialization detectable in the Linear B archives was absent in a rural economy. In settlement contexts the ratio of male versus female domesticated animals such as sheep, goats, and cattle are, in connection with the age at which the animals died, important indicators for the role these animals played in subsistence (Halstead 1987, 77). If the primary role of sheep, for example, is to produce milk, most male offspring are killed off at a young age. If meat production is the main aim, most males are killed at around two to three years of age. If sheep are mainly kept for their wool, both females and (castrated) males are allowed to survive. The choice of strategy is determined by factors such as security of the herd (a large number of non-breeding animals in the prime of their life provide the greatest security) and grazing options (if possibilities for grazing are limited, the milk strategy will yield the greatest amount of energy; if grazing is unlimited, the meat strategy will give the highest energy yield; Halstead 1987, 80). In general, “the improvement in male survivorship in the Bronze Age suggests increasing emphasis on wool and/or herd security at the expense of energy productivity” (Halstead 1987), which in turn suggests an economy exceeding the household level.45 Lokris which could have given rise to and supported the growth of a palace is the area of the Plain of Atalanti. For other reasons, however, it is unlikely that southeastern East Lokris ever had a palace. See also Chapter 6 p. 125 ff. 45 Cattle sees an improvement of male survivorship in the Bronze Age in Thessaly which can be explained by the fact that oxen were used as draft animals (Halstead 1987). Similarly the increase in bovid bones from 15 to 35%

44

All known Mycenaean palaces are located in or on the edges of fertile plains, a condition which seems to have been necessary for the development of a local center into a palace in the first place; once the palace had the power and means to exploit the fertile plain, it may have reinforced its status and wealth continuously in a spiraling effect. Given this restriction on the location of Mycenaean palaces, the only place in southeastern East 33

The male-female ratios of sheep on Linear B tablets from Knossos confirm that there the wool model was followed. In Bronze Age Lerna and Argissa (Thessaly), however, examination of the bones suggest the meat model was popular (Halstead 1981a, 1987). All this suggests that the palatial model differed from a more subsistence-based model, which was favored in pre- and post-palatial times as well as in peripheral areas.

goats may have crossed small distances between summer (hill) and winter (lowland) pastures, may have existed (Cherry 1988). Presumably a „daily transhumance‟, such as going up to the hills in the mornings and in the evenings returning to a perennial pen, could have been practiced as well. One should not assume grand-scale transhumance for these non-specialized herds and their shepherds, as was the case with the palatial herds (Killen 1985);47 Halstead (in Halstead and Frederick 2000) concludes that transhumant pastoralism is a specialized economic strategy tied intimately to market forces which were not yet existent in the LBA. Atherden (ibidem) adds that pollen evidence does not suggest such an adaptation until 1000 AD. What did emerge in the Bronze Age, after the Neolithic model of small scale, localized, intensive and diversified farming and herding, was a localized, seasonal expansion of grazing into marginal areas as part of a mixed farming regime.

When comparing the ratios of the four agricultural animals, based on the presence of their bones, for a number of Late Bronze Age sites (Table 2.4) it becomes immediately clear that the percentages of sheep are smallest in rural Kastanas and Pevkakia, where pigs and cattle are relatively abundant. At Kalapodi the percentages of bones are as following: sheep and goat 76%, bovine 16.5%, pig 7.5% (Table 2.4).46 This picture is more extreme than that of the palatial and nucleated sites of Knossos, Kommos, and Phylakopi in its emphasis on sheep. Rather than assuming a palatial type of stock breeding in this area, however, we should assume that the sample of sacrificed animals is not representative of the actual numbers of animals kept as livestock (see above note 41).

In summary, Late Bronze Age southeastern East Lokris was probably largely covered in forests, especially on the hills, although during the Late Bronze Age ever more land would have been cleared around existing and newly founded settlements. The cleared land was initially used for crop cultivation, but caused automatically a deforestation of further-away and higher lying lands for grazing. All of this was presumably on a small scale, and at least when during the LH IIIC period a decentralization of settlements took place, the forests around settlements were teeming with deer and other wildlife.

Around the larger settlements, with an extensive agricultural regime, it would have been increasingly difficult to herd small household groups of animals, so communal herding would have come into play, with a potential weakened control of the household over the livestock „bank‟ (Halstead 1989, 77). Again, this situation, in which emerging elites could control surpluses, can be expected to have occurred especially around the plain of Atalanti. Some form of local transhumant pastoralism, in which the flocks of sheep and

For the people living in the interior hills of southeastern East Lokris, an ancient mode of life persisted, with gathering and hunting playing a role as well as smallscale agriculture and animal husbandry. The situation around the plain of Atalanti was different: here specialization took place, with larger-scale agriculture exploiting the fertile plain, resulting in a reduction in crop diversity and a dependence on centrally stored surplus controlled by an elite. Thus we may assume that Mycenaean elites would have emerged in this area. That this was indeed the case is shown by the finds from sites in this area, which are discussed in Chapter 4.

between the LH IIIA and the Dark Age in Nichoria reflects “a major change from dairying to meat ranching at the transition from the LH to the Dark Age” (Rapp and Aschenbrenner 1978, 65). 46 Domesticated animal bones from the Kalapodi excavations belong to sheep and goat (4487), bovine (978), pig (438), horse and donkey (10), and dog (46) (Stanzel 1991). These were all common in the Late Bronze Age: sheep, goat, cow, pig, and dog were ubiquitous from the Neolithic onwards; horse and donkey occur sporadically during the Bronze Age and coincide with increased distances from farmsteads to fields due to nucleation, and with greater size of fields due to specialization (Halstead 1994, 202). That oxen were used for plowing already in the Early Bronze Age is attested by an EH bovine figurine with parts of a yoke from Tsoungiza (Pullen 1992). Generally, however, work animals such as oxen would have been very expensive and therefore rare (Halstead 1987, 82), which is indicated by the fact that they are individually named on the Knossos tablets (Chadwick 1976, 127).

47

Large-scale transhumance was practiced in East Lokris in modern times, when the number of shepherds practicing transhumance in the first half of the 20th century was great enough for the Naval Intelligence to remark in 1945 that the density of human population of the entire area of mountains and hills was only 33 per sq. mile, but in the winter there were additional shepherds from the southern Pindos (Naval Intelligence 1945, 66).

34

Chapter 3: Sites Most excavated Mycenaean sites in the study area are cemeteries or even single tombs; the evidence for settlements is relatively small. Since the publications by Hope Simpson and Dickinson, who for the study area list no more than eight sites, most of the classic mound type and most not or only cursorily excavated (LivanatesKynos, Skala Atalantis, Kyparissi-Agios Ioannis, Theologos (erroneously, see p. 50), Larymna-Kastro, Larymna-Pazaraki, Agia Aikaterina-Melidoni, and Agnanti; Hope Simpson 1965; Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979), several other settlements have been discovered. Most, however, have not been excavated and their importance can be difficult to determine. The overwhelming majority of excavated sites thus consists of burial sites. This is no cause for surprise: upon the discovery of a chamber tomb, typically by looters, but also because someone (almost) falls into it, the Greek Archaeological Service performs a short salvage excavation to prevent (further) looting and therefore irrevocable loss of information. When, however, the presence of a settlement is confirmed, further investigation rarely takes place. Settlements are less at risk of being looted, and excavating them would require years of excavation in an extended area, an enterprise for which the means are often lacking. The excavations of the settlements of Livanates-Pyrgos (Kynos, see p. 37), Tragana-Mitrou (p. 44) and the sanctuary at KalapodiAgios Apostolis (p. 57) are fortunate exceptions and their importance for our knowledge of the Late Bronze Age in East Lokris can hardly be overestimated.

for their time, discussing an impressive number of sites, whether represented in the professional literature or discovered by the authors by personal investigation. The authors are especially adept at identifying „high mound‟ sites, i.e. sites on conspicuous locations: natural hills, rocks, and outcrops, or artificial mounds, and thus cover the larger and more important Mycenaean centers. In our study area, however, many new discoveries have been made since the publication of the Gazetteer in 1979. Fossey‟s study is limited to the historic territory of Opountian Lokris (in other words, the western part of our study area is not represented; see Figures 1.3 and 1.4), which is a logical consequence of Fossey‟s choice to list sites from all periods through the Late Roman period. Fossey catalogues sites previously known in the literature, though often gives new plans (drawn by G. Gauvin), bringing together all available evidence for each listed site. He combines epigraphical, literary, geological, and strictly archaeological evidence to sketch a picture of Opountian Lokris in different periods, attempting to identify remains with places known from literature; his treatment of cemetery sites however is very cursory and the wide chronological scope detracts from the depth in which the Late Bronze Age is covered. This chapter intends to provide a summary and an update of the previous studies. Although I have attempted to be exhaustive and include all sites known as of 2006, I am certain that the following catalogue presents a far from complete picture and that in the future many more sites will be discovered in this area. Ideally, of course, formal surface survey should be carried out in the entire area, or at the least in those parts of the study area where numerous cemeteries attest to habitation, yet settlements are elusive. The methodology of the Bradford-Cambridge Boeotian Expedition might serve as an example to be followed in East Lokris: a systematic fine grained survey of the entire area, which pays close attention to less conspicuous ceramics and takes landscape and geological features into account in reconstructing settlement patterns (see Bintliff and Snodgrass 1985).

The vast majority of known tombs have been excavated since the Ephoreia of Classical Antiquities of Lamia was established in 1973 (AD 29 (1973-1974) B2, Athens 1979, 513), especially under the direction of former ephor Fanouria Dakoronia. Most have only been published in annual excavation reports of the Greek Archaeological Service in the Archaiologikon Deltion (AD). These yearly reports are concise and their focus or interpretation may change from year to year as more becomes known. Visual material (maps, charts, drawings, photographs) is necessarily scanty. A few sites are mentioned and illustrated in Dakoronia 2002 and in Dakoronia (n.y.)

The order in which sites are presented in this chapter is based on the modern Greek deme system, since this allows for easiest reference. Each site is identified by the name of the deme in which it is found, followed by the name for the exact locality within the deme. These „unofficial‟ names are known to the local population, although for the most part they are not found on any map. Following this full designation and in brackets is the abbreviated name with which the site will be referred to

The studies of Hope Simpson and Dickinson (Hope Simpson 1965; Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979) and Fossey (Fossey 1990a) contain valuable information on the better known settlement sites in East Lokris. Hope Simpson‟s 1965 study is limited to Mycenaean sites; Hope Simpson and Dickinson‟s Gazetteer takes the entire Bronze Age into account. Both represent landmarks in the study of Mycenaean topography and are exhaustive

35

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb; x stretch of road at Pazaraki.

Figure 3.1: Mycenaean sites in southeastern East Lokris

in this manuscript.1 This survey starts with sites at the plain of Atalanti and from there proceeds clockwise.

so similar to the pottery found at Tragana-Mitrou that the phrase „satellite site‟ comes to mind for Proskynas-Rachi.

The periods during which a site was in use are given whenever known; an overview of the chronology of the sites discussed in this chapter is presented in table form at the end of this Chapter, p. 73.

The important Mycenaean settlements of LivanatesKynos and Tragana-Mitrou have been and are being excavated, respectively; Proskynas-Rachi has been excavated as well but appears to have been of secondary importance in the Late Bronze Age. At Kyparissi-Agios Ioannis excavation was limited to the Archaic remains; Mycenaean settlement is attested by surface sherds. Two official survey projects have been carried out in this area. The Cornell Halai and East Lokris Project (CHELP), directed by John Coleman, surveyed an area of 185 square kilometers, centering on Halai, in 1988 and 1989 (Coleman 1992, 268). The surveyed area included all territory that might have belonged to Halai at one time or another (Figure 3.2), but centered on a few known sites. Bronze Age material was found only at the coastal site of Tragana-Mitrou (see below, p. 44).2 The low mound site

The Plain of Atalanti The plain of Atalanti forms the center of Opountian Lokris. At the edges of this large and fertile plain a number of Mycenaean sites are known. Although not part of the plain nowadays, the sites of Proskynas-Kotrona, Proskynas-Rachi, and Proskynas-Chiliadou are included in this list for two reasons: first, in the Bronze Age, the plain of Atalanti would have extended to Gaidaronisi and Tragana-Mitrou or further, and therefore would have been directly connected with the smaller valley where Proskynas-Kotrona and Proskynas-Rachi are located, and second, the Mycenaean pottery from Proskynas-Rachi is

2

It should be noted that consequently Bronze Age, including Mycenaean, remains were excavated at Proskynas (p. 49) and that Coleman himself discovered several Mycenaean sites in later years (ProskynasKotrona, p. 49, Proskynas-Chiliadou, p. 50, MalesinaVlichada, p. 51, and Malesina-Goumourades, p. 53).

1

For published sites, this is in general the name used in the publications. 36

Figure 3.2: CHELP survey area (adapted from CHELP base map, courtesy of John Coleman)

of Skala Atalantis has been surface surveyed by Sonia Dimaki. The Mitrou Archaeological Project (MAP), directed by Aleydis Van de Moortel and Eleni Zahou, conducts a fine-grained surface survey of the island of Mitrou concurrent with its excavation.

considerable, rising up in the northern part of the plain of Atalanti and dominating the coast, it is the classic example of the site of an ancient settlement. The site was partially excavated between 1985 and 1995 by the Ephorate of Lamia under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia (the excavated part is roofed, visible on the right in Figure 3.3). The rich LH IIIC remains lead to the conclusion that the mound is the place identified by Strabo as Kynos (Strabo 9.4.2 (Appendix 1, p. 147); see also Dakoronia 1993, 124-126).

Livanates-Pyrgos (Kynos) Site type: Settlement mound, excavated by the Greek Archaeological Service under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia from 1985-1995. Directions: Take the Livanates exit from the National Road Athens-Lamia, proceed east towards the sea. At the shore, go left (north), proceed on the dirt road until a steep mound rises on your left. This is the ancient site of Kynos.

The LH IIIC settlement extends over the top and the slope of the hill to its base; it is partially covered by a Hellenistic fortification wall which was founded directly on top of the LH IIIC remains. The center of the hill yielded PG remains as well, while at other parts of the site the LH remains are directly overlain by Roman remains. Sherds dating to Archaic, Classical, and Hellenistic times were present below the Roman remains. Settlement began in the MH period, after which the earliest evidence dates to LH IIIA. Since the LH IIIC remains, dating mainly to the LH IIIC Middle phase, are remarkable and since it was not possible to excavate earlier strata without destroying those important remains, little is known about earlier occupation of the site.

Three km north of the modern village of Livanates, only 40 m removed from the sea, is the steep mound site identified with Homeric Kynos (Figure 3.3). The mound is ca. 15 m high and ca. 200 (N-S) by 70 (E-W) m at the top (Oldfather 1925, 31, followed by Fossey 1990a, 81). From it one has a wide view on the entire Bay of Atalanti (Figure 3.4) and to the mountain peaks of Euboea, Chlomon, and the Kallidromos range. Since the mound is

37

Figure 3.3: The mound of Kynos from the northwest

Figure 3.4: View from Kynos towards Atalanti island and the Aitolyma peninsula

A LH IIIA1 layer with small parts of walls was preserved on top of a compact stratum with few MH sherds. Above these LH IIIA1 walls were clear signs of a fire, and above these were LH IIIB2 levels with a number of clay floors alternating with burned destruction layers, possibly caused by earthquakes, which are frequent in the area (see Chapter 2 p. 24 ff.). Two skeletons found together with stones and burning marks may represent earthquake

victims. One deceased had been given a LH IIB cup and was found on top of a cist grave dating to the MH period. Since only a very small area was dug below the LH IIIC levels, to prevent the LH IIIC walls from collapsing, it is impossible to say anything about the extent of the LH IIIA-B occupation with any certainty.

38

The LH IIIC Middle evidence consists of mudbrick walls on stone foundations and floor levels with pottery remains. These structures belong to storage complexes and workshops. The orientation of these remains is slightly different from those of the LH IIIB occupation, suggesting a break in habitation. One room housed a hearth with many animal bones in an ash layer and sherds from a tripod cauldron, indicative of (ceremonial?) cooking. A mudbrick pottery kiln was found with many pieces of misfired but high quality LH IIIC sherds, as well as spindle whorls and figurine fragments around it, evidence for a local pottery industry and suggesting the presence of a textile industry (although not necessarily on a larger scale than that of the household level) with weaving and sewing activities.3 The remains of an oven and mineral slag suggest industrial activity as well.4

was rebuilt, closely following the pre-existing lay out. Pottery associated with this settlement dates to the LH IIIC Late phase. This settlement, too, was destroyed by an earthquake, which leveled the place to the ground. It was rebuilt more simply, using the material from the previous occupation; in the mass of mudbrick from the previous occupation small children were buried in cists with meager grave goods (a single shell or small stone, or a fish-bone bead; rarely with a jug, Nikolaou 1999, 153, AD 41, pl. 69 and AD 43, pl. 125). Floors were of packed mud, walls sloppily constructed. Finds include a LH IIIC pithos with a plastic band decoration, a bronze knife, a bronze axe, a stirrup jar, etc. Of special importance may be the three fragmentary clay figurines of ships found here, two of warships and the third perhaps of a trading barge (Dakoronia 1996b, 159; Dakoronia (n.y.), 44-45 and figs. 22-23; see also Chapter 4 p. 96).

A LH IIIC clay floor with many pithoi in situ must have been used as a storage facility (AD 40 pl. 59). It has mudbrick walls standing to two m high on three sides. Many vessels had fallen down from a higher floor or from shelves in the storeroom. Piles of ceramic material of unpurified clay with strong burning marks and burn marks on the pithos bodies and on the walls of the room are a strong indication that a catastrophe, likely an earthquake, took place in LH IIIC Middle. An east-west alley of about one m wide between the houses and storage rooms was found full with items from the buildings which had fallen during the LH IIIC catastrophe. Pithoi with seeds and round clay storage bins in earlier floor levels suggest that the area was used as storage quarters in at least three consecutive phases; one might speculate that grain or other produce grown on the fertile plain of Atalanti was stored centrally at Kynos.

This phase, too, was ended by an earthquake. Settlement continued and was now characterized by handmade burnished ware and the appearance of compass-drawn concentric circles on amphoras (see Chapter 4 p. 98 for a brief discussion of this phenomenon). In summary, Kynos does not present much clear evidence for the earlier LH periods, but flourished throughout the LH IIIC period. Its wealth may have been due in part to exploitation of the fertile plain of Atalanti: Kynos may have functioned as the central grain storage facility of the area encompassing the northern part of the plain of Atalanti. Especially in LH IIIC Middle the ceramic material is rich and of high quality, with pictorial vases with unique representations. In the LH IIIC Early-Middle layers, all over the excavated area signs of a catastrophe, most likely an earthquake, occur. Yet Kynos also offers rich evidence for LH IIIC Late and of Submycenaean (this in contrast to the tombs at Livanates, AtalantiSpartia and Megaplatanos-Sventza; Dakoronia 1996a, 1171, where later evidence is scarce though not wholly absent).

Many high quality LH IIIC sherds were found in the IIIC Middle level, some of which are figurative and depict ships and naval battles (AD 42, pl. 135, AD 43, pl. 125, AD 46, pl. 83; see also Chapter 4 p. 91 ff. and Figures 4.13-4.15). Other finds included ceramic and stone spindle whorls, obsidian blades, fragments of bone needles, bone arrow heads, fragmentary psi- and animal figurines, a bronze axe, three bronze arrow heads, a bronze needle, and a bronze chisel. The size of the LH IIIC room and the range and quality of the pottery and the other finds indicate the importance of Kynos in the LH IIIC Middle period.

Kynos must have been an important harbor town, given its excellent location on the shore.5 Dakoronia has suggested that this site was the port for a more interior site located at Livanates-Palaiokastro (near Kokkinonyzes, see Figure 3.1. Dakoronia 1993, 125126). But although Livanates-Palaiokastro has a later fortification wall, there are no Mycenaean remains known to me apart from the chamber tomb (see below p. 41). The ancient harbor of Kynos could have been located north of the mound, between the Acropolis and the ruins at Ag. Nikolaos and Ag. Theodoros, where Oldfather mentions remains of a temple and a peribolos

After the earthquake and accompanying fires which ended the LH IIIC Middle phase at Kynos, the settlement 3

Bone needles were found as well, though it is not made explicit where exactly. 4 The type of metallurgy was most likely copper smelting for bronze working. Copper ore would have been imported from Thessaly, southern Attica, or the southeastern tip of Euboea (McGeehan Liritzis 1996, fig. 3.2.1).

5

The harbor structures at Kynos are being studied for a doctoral dissertation by Petros Kounouklas from the 14 th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities at Lamia.

39

(Oldfather 1925, 31), or just below the mound and partially under water.

gray steatite, date the tomb to LH IIIB-IIIC. However, a monochrome small handleless jar illustrated in AD 47, pl. 62, appears to date to LH IIIA1.6 No other Mycenaean tombs have been found at this location.

Kynos is an interesting and complex site and the final publication will undoubtedly be a landmark in the scholarship on Mycenaean sites in Central Greece. Until that time, we can only get a glimpse of its importance through the preliminary reports in the AD and the occasional paper focusing on a single aspect of the site.

References: Dakoronia, F., in: AD 47 (1992) B1, Athens 1997, 203204 and pl. 62 Blackman et al. 1997, 74

References: Hope Simpson 1965, 138 (# 466) Hope Simpson and Lazenby 1970, 47 Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 263 (#G72) Dakoronia, F. in: AD 40 (1985) B1 Athens 1990, 173-174 and pl. 59; AD 41 (1986) B1, Athens 1990, 68-69 and pl. 69; AD 42 (1987) B1, Athens 1992, 234 and pl. 135; AD 43 (1988) B1, Athens 1993, 223-224 and pl. 125; AD 44 (1989) B1, Athens 1995, 171-172 and pl. 102-103; AD 45 (1990) B1, Athens 1995, 177-178 and pl. 86; AD 46 (1991) B1, Athens 1996, 194-195 and pl. 83; AD 47 (1992) B1, Athens 1997, 208-211 and pl. 63-64; AD 48 (1993) B1, Athens 1998, 218-219 and pl. 70; AD 50 (1995) B1, Athens 2000, 338-339 and pl. 121 Dakoronia 1987; 1991; 1993; 1996b; 1999b; 2002; 2003; (n.y.) 40-46 and figs. 20-23 and 25 and pls. 3-6 Catling 1987, 34 Fossey 1990a, 81-84 and pls. 55-58 French 1992, 50; 1993, 50 Tomlinson 1995, 24 Blackman 1996, 62; 1998, 73-74 Blackman et al. 1997, 73 Haas 1998, 107-110 Nikolaou 1999 Blackman 2000, 80

Livanates-Kokkinonyzes (Kokkinonyzes) Site type: Chamber tomb, excavated by the GAS under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia in 1980. Directions: In Livanates, follow the signs to the Iera Moni Metamorphosis Sotiros, continue on the same road. On the left, just before a turn to the right and at the point where the electric pylons are nearest to the road, a dirt road turns sharply left. This is the site of LivanatesKokkinonyzes, ca. three km southwest of Livanates,7 where a large Mycenaean chamber tomb was found. The location has a view on the Bay of Atalanti with Atalanti island. This magnificent Mycenaean chamber tomb, dug out in the soft porous bedrock, has a chamber measuring 3.70 x 2.70 m (Figure 3.5). A square entrance (stomion), 1-1.10 m wide, was located in the eastern wall, carefully carved with a well-worked square front and closed off with rubble masonry. Its dromos was 8.50 m long and 1.501.90 m wide and had walls tapering towards the ceiling. In the center of the dromos was a rectangular pit, 1.25 x 0.56 m and 0.60 m deep, filled with soil and not containing any finds. An interesting feature of the tomb is that the middle part of the chamber, continuing the line of the stomion, was dug out deeper in such a way that it created „benches‟ along the north and south walls, much like raised beds. This „corridor‟ runs the entire depth of the chamber (Figure 3.5) and was used for secondary burials, like a standard pit. On the northern „bed‟ two burials lay next to each other with heads towards the west, on their back with lower limbs contracted. These represent the latest burials, given that the latest pottery was found associated with them (AD 35, 245). Remains of secondary burials and associated grave goods had been swept aside onto the east side of the „bed‟ along the north wall and into the central ditch of the chamber. Both established practices for secondary burial – simply pushing aside earlier remains, and the use of pits – were thus applied.

Livanates-Rema Pharmaki (Rema Pharmaki) Site type: Chamber tomb, excavated by the GAS under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia in 1992. Directions: the site is located one kilometer southwest of Livanates, just beside the Atalanti-Livanates road, where the road turns sharply right over a small torrent cutting through two low hills. The tomb has been backfilled; it is located where the hill on the left, looking towards the southwest, has been exposed, since excavation and subsequent backfilling has left this part eroded. After heavy rainfall the archaeological guard of the area found Mycenaean vessels lying in a heap, high up on the northern slope above the stream. Subsequent surface survey of the area revealed the northern part of a chamber tomb located west of the heap of vessels. Its southern part had been washed away by the torrent. Of the part which was extant, only the floor and an outline of the walls were visible. Finds, including a jug, alabastra (AD 47, pl. 62), a small trefoil mouthed jug, a one handled cup, amphoriskoi, and three conical „buttons‟ of black and

6

Small handleless jars are common in LH IIIA1 and can be monochrome, linear, or decorated with stipple (Mountjoy 1986, 56). 7 AD 35 (1980), 244: two km; Dakoronia 1993, 125: ca. 2.5 km; Dakoronia 1996, 1168: three-four km.

40

Figure 3.5: Kokkinonyzes tomb plan (adapted from Dakoronia 1996, 1170 fig. 2)

Finds from this tomb include pottery, cylindrical and spherical beads of glass or bone, and a steatite „button.‟ An important find not mentioned in the AD reports but mentioned and illustrated in Dakoronia 1996a, 1171 and plate 5, is a large amber bead, attesting to interregional contacts, though most likely within the Mycenaean world (see Chapter 4 p. 100).8

the concept of sister towns, see Chapter 5 pp. 101-102). Although this would be a very likely scenario, there are no certain Mycenaean remains at Livanates-Palaiokastro (see also above p. 39). References: Dakoronia, F., in: AD 35 (1980) B1, Athens 1988, 244245 and pl. 105 Catling, H.W., AR 35 (1988-1989), 48 Dakoronia 1996, 1167-1173 Mountjoy 1999, 810 and 813 nos. 8 and 10

The pottery dates this tomb to LH IIB – early IIIA1, which makes this one of the earliest chamber tombs in the study area (see Chapter 4 pp. 80 and 84 and Figures 4.5 and 4.9 for some of the pottery and its significance). The tomb was reused for pithos burials in the late Hellenistic-early Roman period.

Atalanti-Skala (Skala Atalantis)

Another chamber tomb was found robbed nearby: its existence is mentioned in Dakoronia 1993, 126, but the tomb is otherwise unpublished. At or near the Kokkinonyzes tomb, at the location of LivanatesPalaiokastro, Dakoronia mentions a settlement/acropolis which she associates with these two Mycenaean chamber tombs (Dakoronia 1993, 125-126). She suggests that this settlement could be the interior sister town of Kynos (for

Site type: settlement mound, surface surveyed by Sonia Dimaki. Directions: The site is located just northwest of the junction between the provincial Skala Atalantis – Atalanti road and the National Road Athens – Lamia, at 141 km, at the electric pylon (Figure 3.6). This highly eroded mound near the village of Skala Atalantis is located near the sea, halfway between Livanates-Kynos and the next coastal site, TraganaMitrou, in the fertile plain of Atalanti. It was first mentioned by D.H. French (see Fossey 1990a, 75). It measures ca. 150 m east-west by ca. 60 m north-south and is at maximum ca. two m high; it is hard to recognize. Yearly plowing makes the mound ever lower; it is not unlikely that in the Late Bronze Age the mound would have been considerable and an easily recognizable landmark. It has sherds dating from the Neolithic through the LH era (personal communication from Sonia Dimaki; French mentions only EH III, MH, and LH IIIB, see

8

Although Dakoronia does not specify the find spot as Livanates-Kokkinonyzes but simply as Livanates, the description of the tomb (p. 1169) makes it clear that the Kokkinonyzes tomb is meant. Interestingly, Dakoronia mentions “amber-beads” (in the plural), as an example of imported goods found in East Lokrian graves (Dakoronia 1996a, 1171). Konstantinidi, who provides catalogues of finds for the tombs at Agnanti (Konstantinidi 2001, 145), Kvela (149-150), Golemi (150), and Sventza (150) does not list any amber finds at all. More detailed find catalogues are sorely missed in cases like this. 41

Figure 3.6: The mound of Skala Atalantis (in the foreground) from the southeast

Fossey 1990a, 75). Personal inspection yielded several kylix fragments. Surface survey undertaken by Sonia Dimaki has however produced very little Mycenaean pottery (personal communication from Sonia Dimaki).

date for these three graves is correct, we may assume a LH settlement nearby. References: Dakoronia, F., in: AD 42 (1987) B1, Athens 1992, 225226 French 1993, 49 Lewartowksi 2000, 86 (nos. LO2.1, LO2.2, LO2.3)

References: Fossey 1990a, 75 Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 262 (#G71) The results of the surface survey by Dimaki have not been published yet.

Atalanti-Spartia (Spartia) Site type: Chamber tombs, excavated by the GAS under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia in 1990. Directions: Take the road out of Atalanti to the south (passing left of the small church with playground), following the line of hills to the right. Eventually you pass by a sheeps‟ den to the right. Behind and to the right of the two high conifer trees visible from here, in the middle of an olive grove, is the site of Atalanti-Spartia. The site is located about two km southeast of the modern town of Atalanti, on the east-southeastern slope of the foothills of Mt. Chlomon, which form the western border of the plain of Atalanti.

Atalanti town (Atalanti) Site type: Extramural cist graves, excavated by the GAS under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia in 1987. Lewartowski mentions three cist tombs in an extramural context with the remains of child burials in the town of Atalanti (Odos Ethnikis Antistaseos 79, property of G. Yiannoutsou), dating to the LH period (Lewartowski 2000, 86, LO2.1, LO2.2, and LO2.3). The report in the AD, however, refrains explicitly from assigning a date more specific than „Bronze Age‟ (AD 42, 226) since sherds were small and undecorated and the only other find, a biconical spindle whorl (Lewartowski 2000, 86: “steatite button”) is undecorated and does not allow a more precise dating. Lewartowski‟s LH date seems to be based on the extramural context of the graves.9 If the LH

Mycenaean; i.e. MH III/LH – LH II/LH IIIA1, see Lewartowski 2000, 3] which suggests a continuity of MH customs […] and their partial disappearance seems to correspond to changes in the organisation of Mycenaean communities at the end of EMyc.”

9

Lewartowski 2000, 16: “the largest assemblages of intramural graves are known from EMyc [early 42

2), a ring askos (Dakoronia (n.y.), 38 fig. 15), a clay spindle whorl, conical steatite buttons, engraved beads, an amber bead,10 steatite seals (one with a deer), bronze rings, and an obsidian blade. Classical sherds were found mixed with Mycenaean sherds on the floors of the chambers (but not in the pits or niches), evidence for the reuse of these tombs. On top of a contracted skeleton, with head towards the west, a Submycenaean bronze pin was found. References: Dakoronia, F., in AD 45 (1990) B1, Athens 1995, 178179 and pl. 84 Tomlinson 1995, 23 Dakoronia 1996a, 1168 Dakoronia (n.y.), 38 and fig. 15

Kyparissi-Agios Ioannis (Kyparissi) Site type: Settlement. Directions: The site is located on the lower north slopes of Kokkinovrachos, the red rock above the brewery, about one km to the northwest of the summit and about 1.5 km south of the village of Kyparissi, south of the chapel of Agios Ioannis. Figure 3.7: Spartia Tomb VIII, with pithos burial in dromos (after AD 45 plate 84)

The modern village of Kyparissi-Gardinitsa is located at the southeast of the plain of Atalanti. On the hill at the eastern end of a chain of smooth hills (Dakoronia 1993, 117) remains of a polygonal fortification wall are preserved. The hill is known as Kastraki or Kokkinovrachos due to its red soil. Relatively flat on top, it is nestled against the high slopes of Mt. Chlomon and thus well protected in the back (Figure 3.8); moreover it dominates the entire Atalanti plain as well as an important road to the south (Dakoronia 1993, 117). On the hill itself all remains date to the Archaic period and later (Blegen 1926, 401) and below the acropolis, to the northwest, Blegen excavated a temple in 1911 (Blegen 1926, 403). Mycenaean remains have been found on the lower north slopes of the hill. To the south of a small ravine and ca. 300 m west of the chapel, Hope Simpson noticed an erosion deposit of LH IIIB-C Early, Geometric, Archaic and Classical sherds. The exact date of these sherds is disputed: in Hope Simpson‟s 1965 publication, he mentions LH IIIB-C Early (followed by Hope Simpson and Lazenby 1970, 47-48, and Dakoronia 1993, 117), whereas Hope Simson and Dickinson limit

After tomb robbers had opened two Mycenaean chamber tombs here, the Archaeological Service excavated them. They have a long dromos with walls tapering towards the ceiling, leading to a spacious rectangular chamber dug out in the soft bedrock. Already in classical times, when a necropolis was established on this spot, the chambers collapsed. The tombs are oriented west-east (with dromos and entrance on the eastern wall of the chamber). Both chamber floors had pits for secondary burials; one had a pit in the dromos near the entrance. Dakoronia points out that in the tombs of Atalanti, which were spacious and not very crowded, the habit was to open pits for the secondary burials, unlike in e.g. Megaplatanos-Sventza, where skeletons were simply swept aside to make place for new interments (Dakoronia 1996a, 1170 and see below p. 69). Both tombs had a niche in their dromos; one contained a contracted burial, the other the remains of several skeletons. In the dromos of one tomb, a burial pithos was found in situ (Figure 3.7; AD 45, pl. 84). This is unusual in southeastern East Lokris in the Late Bronze Age and has been taken as evidence for a foreign element in the population buried at Spartia (see Chapter 7 p. 138).

10

Or possibly an electrum bead: the modern Greek έλεκτρονmeans both amber (attesting to its electrical properties, which may well have been one of its attractions in the eyes of the Mycenaeans) and the naturally occurring gold and silver alloy electrum. Since amber beads are mentioned by Dakoronia as general imports in East Lokrian chamber tombs (1996a, 1171), it is perhaps more likely that this material is meant here.

The tombs are dated to LH IIIA2 late-LH IIIC Early. Finds included alabastra, one handled cups (one illustrated in AD 45, pl. 84, with curtailed spiral decoration dates to LH IIIA2 late and is similar to one from Vourvatsi; see Mountjoy 1986, p. 84, fig. 100 no.

43

Figure 3.8: Kokkinovrachos (left) and foothills of Mt. Chlomon from the north

themselves to “LH III(B?),” which is followed by Fossey (1990a, 64) without hesitation (“LH IIIB”). Fossey‟s footnote 2 on the same page (“the IIIC seems to be a misunderstanding on [Spyropoulos‟] part of “C” (= Classical) in Hope Simpson‟s earlier listing (1965: 137 no. 465)” appears to be erroneous and thus adds to the confusion.

springs. In the Late Bronze Age, when sea level here was at least ten meters lower than today (see Chapter 2 p. 28), Mitrou would not have been an island or even a promontory, but a low rise in an extended coastal plain, with a deep sheltered bay to its west (see Figure 2.5). On the north side of the island cliffs rise to about 12 m above sea level; from there the island slopes gently to the south where it is connected to the mainland by a sandy spit which falls dry at low tide and it covered by up to ca. 0.8 m of water at high tide. Erosion from the sea has created vertical scarps on the northeast and northwest sides of the islet (see Figure 3.11). Wall socles, individual mudbricks, floor levels, and tombs are visible in these scarps, although continuing erosion combined with looting takes its toll and slabs of tombs from the scarp can be found lying about on the beach. At least one of these tombs (Figure 3.10) may date to the LH I phase, based on its construction with carefully worked slabs and a large sherd of an early Mycenaean „teacup‟ in Gray Minyan fabric (Catalogue No. 2: see Chapter 4, Figure 4.1) which most likely belonged to a vessel deposited in the tomb.11

References: Hope Simpson 1965, 137 (#465) Hope Simpson and Lazenby 1970, 47 Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 262 (#G70) Fossey 1990a, 62-65 and plates 40-45 Dakoronia 1993

Tragana-Mitrou (Mitrou) Site type: Settlement, surface surveyed by CHELP in 1988-1989 and excavated by MAP since 2004. Directions: Take the Tragana exit from the National Road Athens-Lamia and turn towards the sea. Keep going straight until you reach the sea. Mitrou is the small tidal islet located on your left (Figure 3.9). Mitrou is a large and important site located at the coast southeast of Skala Atalantis, at approximately the same distance from Skala Atalantis as Kynos. Mitrou is located opposite a small fertile coastal plain to its south and southeast and occupies the southernmost tip of the triangular plain of Atalanti. It is surrounded by freshwater

11

The slabs of this tomb are cut with grooves at their edges to make them fit together. This technique was observed at Pevkakia Magoula in tomb 360, which is dated securely to the Late Helladic period on the basis of its place in the stratigraphy. See Maran 1992, p. 35. 44

In 1988-1989 the Cornell Halai and East Lokris Project carried out a surface survey of the site under direction of John Coleman and William Murray. The finds, studied by the author in collaboration with Kerill O‟Neill (KramerHajos 2002 and 2005; Kramer-Hajos and O‟Neill, forthcoming) indicate that Mitrou was settled throughout the Late Bronze Age and an important Mycenaean center already at the very beginning of the Late Bronze Age (Kramer-Hajos 2005a, 191-198). Excavation was started by the Mitrou Archaeological Project, directed by Aleydis Van de Moortel and Eleni Zahou, in 2004 (Figure 3.11) and has yielded rich LH IIIC and Dark Age remains, as well as important early Mycenaean building remains. A dense network of walls, more or less following a grid system, was revealed by electric resistivity survey in 2003. This survey shows that the settlement spread over the surface of the islet and had an orderly town grid. Survey finds suggest that it may have been divided into different quarters for the rich and ordinary citizenry (Kramer-Hajos 2005a, 239-242; Kramer-Hajos and O‟Neill, forthcoming).

as of 2005, suggest that a disaster took place towards the end of the LH IIIA2 phase. Building D and the settlement around it, too, were destroyed in this period, at least one of its streets filed up with building blocks from Building D. The remains were left “as visible ruins for nearly 200 years” (Van de Moortel 2007, VIII). The following LH IIIB phase is less well represented among the survey finds; especially the LH IIIB2 phase seems hardly existent. The identified LH IIIB1 material consists almost entirely of fragments from kylikes and kraters: vessels associated with drinking. Figurines are present as well. Excavation results indicate more dramatically a severe decline during the LH IIIB phase: no deposits and “only three very small walls and partially preserved dirt floors” belonging to this phase had been encountered as of 2005 (Van de Moortel 2006, VIII). Remains from the LH IIIC period, on the other hand, are of great importance. Krater fragments suggest close connections with Dimini (see Chapter 4 p. 93), which can be reached easily via the North Euboean Gulf. Excavation has uncovered a LH IIIC building („Building B,‟ Figure 3.12), with substantial rubble walls (0.70-0.80 m thick) and possibly a row of columns along its central axis.12 Similar rows of central supports are attested for a small number of substantial LH IIIC buildings – all in the Argolid and in the Corinthia – and have been associated with the emergence of a new ruling elite (Van de Moortel and Zahou 2005, 44, with references). This would imply that Mitrou, as in the beginning of the Late Bronze Age, now, too, was quick to grow into a center of regional importance, modeled on similar centers in southern Greece. Remarkable is that not only the main building of this new settlement was constructed on top of the ruins of Building D, but that the settlement around it, too, followed more or less the same plan as the early Mycenaean settlement (Van de Moortel 2007, VIII).

Late Bronze Age pottery from the surface survey spans all phases from LH I through LH IIIC, but the evidence for LH IIIB2 and LH IIIC Early is scarce. LH IIIA2 sherds predominate. Of special importance are sherds of the lustrous Mycenaean LH I type, which is attested at only very few sites in central Greece (Mountjoy 1999, 639 and 807; see also Chapter 4 p. 77) and which thus indicate Mitrou‟s importance in the early Mycenaean period and attest to its contacts with southern Greece, where Mycenaean LH I ware originated. Excavation at Mitrou, which in 2005 uncovered the remains of a monumental apsidal building (32 x 24 m, with pink plaster floors and walls made of cut field stones) dating to the earliest phases of the Late Bronze Age (Van de Moortel 2006, VIII) now seems to confirm the picture of a wealthy center with an emerging elite in the early Mycenaean period. This building is located in the northwestern part of the islet and is the largest apsidal building found in Greece to date (Van de Moortel 2006, VIII). Another large building, dated to the same time period or slightly earlier, was found below Building B (Figure 3.12), which dates to the LH IIIC. With its one m thick walls, of which the outer facades were constructed with large stones, and size (ca. 13.5 x 8.5 m) this early Mycenaean building („Building D‟) attests to the presence of an early elite as well (ibidem). It was moreover “part of a well-organized settlement with orthogonal streets, 3 m wide and carefully laid with pebbles” (Van de Moortel 2007, VIII), suggesting that they were designed for busy traffic including perhaps wheeled vehicles.

Recovered in a small room („Building C‟) adjacent to the northwestern wall of Building B was a large Submycenaean pottery deposit of largely intact vessels, including a wheelthrown cooking pot with bones of a piglet (Van de Moortel and Zahou 2005, 44; Rutter, forthcoming), which seems to have ritual associations (see Chapter 4 p. 97). Since most vases were found intact, Building C seems to have been buried intentionally (Van de Moortel 2006, VIII). Other pottery from the LH IIIC levels is Handmade Burnished Ware, which continued to be made in large quantities in the Protogeometric period. 12

For a report on „Building B‟ see Van de Moortel and Zahou 2005, 41-44. The suggestion of a central row of supports is based on a roughly circular and possibly worked column support underlying one of Building A‟s fieldstone bases, on the central axis of Building B (Rutter, forthcoming, „Addendum‟).

The surface sherd material, which increases steadily from LH I through LH IIIA2, suggests that habitation continued throughout the Mycenaean period. LH IIIA2 deposits of broken pottery, some with evidence of heavy burning, recovered by the MAP excavation in four areas

45

Figure 3.9: Mitrou from the east

Figure 3.10: Dressed slabs from cist tomb in northeastern scarp

Figure 3.11: Mitrou balloon photo (with MAP 2004 trenches) (adapted from Van de Moortel and Zahou 2005 p. 42 fig. 3)

46

Figure 3.12: Mitrou trenches with the LH IIIC ‘Building B’ and the subsequent PG ‘Building A’ (adapted from Van de Moortel and Zahou 2005 fig. 4 p. 43)

In other respects, too, there seems to be remarkable continuity between the end of the Late Bronze Age and the beginning of the Early Iron Age at Mitrou. The walls of the LH IIIC building B were reused for an Early Iron Age apsidal building („Building A‟), providing “an unprecedented example of architectural and spatial continuity across the Bronze Age – Iron Age divide” (Van de Moortel and Zahou 2005, 45). The divide still exists, however: although the location of the central power remained the same, the rest of the settlement changed dramatically in the EIA, with part of the LBA settlement being turned into a cist grave cemetery and the remainder abandoning the orderly street plan with rectangular dwellings for scattered apsidal structures (Van de Moortel 2007, VII-VIII).

(see above p. 39), but a MH stone chisel mold with traces of copper still visible is a clear indication that in the MBA the inhabitants of Mitrou did engage in metallurgy (Kramer-Hajos and O‟Neill, forthcoming) and it is unnecessary to assume that the activity would have been abandoned with the arrival of Mycenaean culture. Mitrou was undoubtedly one of the largest and most important centers in East Lokris for most, if not all, of the LBA. Although the ancient name of the site is unknown (the modern name is derived from Agios Dimitrios) and identification with known sites is therefore difficult, analysis of the pottery and small finds recovered from Mitrou present a picture of a settlement that endured throughout the Bronze Age and into the Early Iron Age. It engaged in trade over a wide area of the Aegean and was home to a wealthy elite, which can be detected already in the earliest phases of the LBA.

I do not know of unequivocal evidence for LBA industrial activity at Mitrou, as was attested for Kynos

47

Figure 3.13: Agia Triada Tomb V (adapted from AD 48 p. 210 fig. 3)

References: Girard 1881, 39 Schachermeyr 1976a, 218 and 271 and 1976b, 176 Catling 1988, 47 French 1989, 47-48 Fossey 1990a, 50 and plate 25 Coleman 1992 Kramer-Hajos 2002; 2005a, 160-245; 2005b Van de Moortel and Zahou 2005 Van de Moortel 2006; 2007 Kramer-Hajos and O‟Neill (forthcoming) Rutter (forthcoming)

construction and looting before the Archaeological Service came to the rescue. In 1992 and 1993 eight tombs were excavated by the Ephoreia; in 1997 a ninth was excavated. They were dug in the northern slope of the hill. Apart from tomb III, which has its entrance to the west, all tombs are oriented north-south (entrance in the north wall of the chamber) with small inclinations towards the northwest. All tombs have a long and wide dromos, a rectangular entrance closed with rubble masonry, and a roughly rectangular or roughly round chamber. The small size of the chambers is attributed to the hardness of the local rock (AD 47). Since the rock is not merely hard, but also flakes off when worked, the chambers display irregularities. Possibly it is this difficulty in working the rock which is responsible for the rubble masonry inner supporting walls of tomb V, which also help to support the ceiling (Figure 3.13).

Tragana-Agia Triada (Agia Triada) Site type: Chamber tombs, excavated by the GAS under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia from 1992-1997. Directions: From the town of Tragana, follow the signs south to the Iera Moni Agia Triada. After passing the modern cemetery the road curves left twice. At about one km SSW from the modern village, before the following switchback to the left, the opening of a tomb is visible left, next to the road. Eight more tombs were excavated in the field below.

Only tombs IV and VIII were intact; the other tombs had collapsed, probably due to an earthquake. The fact that the tombs were filled with earth and rock ironically helped to preserve their contents to a greater degree than usual. The tombs contained more than one burial each. The dead were buried with their head towards the south (away from the entrance to the chamber) and in contracted position. Many tombs had open cists in the chamber floors for secondary burials; in one case (tomb III), a cist contained a primary burial of a small child and was

This necropolis was discovered when the rural road from Tragana to the monastery was widened in 1992. Subsequent looting necessitated official excavation; some of the tombs were thoroughly destroyed by road

48

covered with a stone slab. The incorporation of cists (rather than pits) inside chamber tombs is, like the pithos burial at Spartia (above p. 43), uncommon for Late Bronze Age East Lokris and has been interpreted as indicative of a foreign influence (Chapter 7 p. 138). Finds include amphoriskoi, alabastra, cups, jugs (AD 47, pl. 62 and AD 48, pl. 68), conical steatite and small conical crystal „buttons,‟ beads, a bronze blade, unworked bronze pieces, and figurines, among which a quadruped (canine ?) and an unusual group consisting of a horse (?) with rider (Dakoronia (n.y.), 39 fig. 17). A sealstone with a female figure with raised hands and a piriform jar are on display in the Museum at Atalanti. On the basis of the finds the tombs have been dated to LH IIIA1-IIIB2,13 but according to Sonia Dimaki the LH IIIB evidence is minimal (pers. comm.). A slightly baggy rounded alabastron with flaring lip and rock pattern decoration from tomb X (AD 52, pl. 172; see figure 4.6) dates to LH IIB-IIIA1, and LH II presence at the site of Agia Triada is also indicated in the map in Dakoronia 1999a (p. 181 fig. 1). It is likely that the Mycenaean tombs here were associated with the settlement on Mitrou; the distance between the two sites is ca. three km and Mitrou is visible from the location of the cemetery (Figure 3.14). Analysis of the Mycenaean skeletons from the Agia Triada tombs revealed that the inhabitants of these tombs reached a higher age than the people buried in chamber tombs elsewhere in East Lokris (see also Chapter 7 p. 138): the average age at death for those interred in the Ayia Triada chamber tombs was 44, with one individual living to a ripe old age of 60, while the average at most other sites in Lokris was 34 (Iezzi 2005a, 114).

Figure 3.14: Remains of Agia Triada chamber tomb (in foreground) with view on Mitrou (adapted from photo in CHELP archive; courtesy of John Coleman).

Proskynas-Kotrona (Kotrona) References: Dakoronia, F., in: AD 47 (1992) B1, Athens 1997, 205206 and pl. 62; AD 48 (1993) B1, Athens 1998, 209-210 and pl. 68; AD 52 (1997) B1, Athens 2003, 436-437 and pl. 172 Blackman et al. 1997, 74 Blackman 1998, 75 Dakoronia 1999a, 181 fig. 1 Dakoronia (n.y.), 39 and fig. 17 Whitley 2002, 49

Site type: Settlement. I have not visited the site myself; the information here is based on personal communication from John Coleman (Jan. 2007). On the east side of Vivos Bay, on the Kotrona hill John Coleman reports surface finds including MH pottery and Mycenaean kylix stems. It is possible that Kotrona was the location of a small Mycenaean settlement. The site is unpublished.

Proskynas-Rachi (Proskynas) Site type: Settlement, excavated by the GAS under direction of Eleni Zahou, and chamber tombs. Directions: From Proskynas, take the underpass to the west under the National Road, then turn left towards the north. Take the first turn left, going up towards the west. The site is located at the end of this road on your left, just

13

Dakoronia mentions evidence for later use (into Submycenaean) in Tomb V.

49

Figure 3.15: View from Chiliadou facing northwest

beside the National Road. From it one can see Mitrou, Gaidaronisi, and the Kallidromos mountains.

entrance of 0.90 m wide. The entrance was closed by a limestone slab of 0.90 m wide, 1.00 m high, and 0.15 m thick, and smaller stones filling up the gaps. The fill from the tomb contained three crania and other skeletal remains, a bronze ring and sherds which indicate that the tomb had been disturbed already in late Byzantine times. There can be little doubt that these two tombs are to be associated with the newly excavated settlement.

The hill opposite the modern village of Proskynas and separated from it by the National Road is known as Megali Rachi. Recent excavations by Eleni Zahou of the 14th Ephorate of Prehistoric and classical Antiquities at Lamia revealed here, apart from unusually rich EH layers, some LH as well. Although the amounts of LH pottery were not extensive, the quality is excellent. Personal inspection of some of the LH material from Proskynas showed that the preserved sherds are extremely similar to the material found at Mitrou. Possibly Proskynas was a satellite settlement of Mitrou in Mycenaean times and the same potters produced elite vessels for both sites, working with clay from the same source. Sherds were found in association with a stretch of wall, six m long and one m wide, which must have been a circuit wall given its thickness. Two pit graves and a cist grave from the Mycenaean era were also excavated here (personal communication from Eleni Zahou, summer 2003).

It should be noted here that during recent investigations (surface survey and excavation) at nearby Theologos, the location of the site of Halai, no Mycenaean pottery has been found, despite references in Hope Simpson and Dickinson (see also Fossey 1990a, 42 n. 5, who noted the same error). References: the AD volumes reporting the excavation of the settlement have not appeared yet (but see Blackman 1998, 75 for a summary of the EH remains). For the tombs, see: Dakoronia, F., in: AD 33 (1978) B1, Athens 1986, 141 (summarized in Catling 1985, 41) Katsonopoulou 1990, 116-117 Dakoronia 2002 Kyriazi 2002 and forthcoming (a), (b), and (c)

On the northwestern side of Megali Rachi a Mycenaean chamber tomb was found by looters in the late 1980‟s (Katsonopoulou 1990, 116); in 1978 another isolated Mycenaean chamber tomb was excavated by the GAS on the western slope of the hill of Padi, northeast of Proskynas and 500 m east of the National Road AthensLamia at the 126 km mark (see report in AD 33, summarized in Catling 1985, 41). The tomb was cut out in the bedrock, a friable white limestone. Its chamber is elliptoid, 4.60 m in diameter, and its tapering walls form a dome. The dromos is 2.10 m long and descends towards the northwestern wall of the chamber to a rectangular

Proskynas-Chiliadou (Chiliadou) Site type: Settlement and cemetery? Directions: Take the road from Proskynas towards Malesina. Before reaching the National Road, and just before the gas station on your right, take a steep right onto a dirt road. Continue to the top of the hill. The site is to your right, behind the small house and on the very edge of the hill. 50

The hill of Chiliadou, southeast of Proskynas, is the location of what appears to be a Late Bronze Age settlement; sherds include deep bowl handles and a possible kylix stem fragment. The site has commanding views over the Bay of Atalanti with Kynos and Mitrou (Figure 3.15), the Aitolyma peninsula, including the Goumourades hill (see below), and all the way to Larymna as well as across the North Euboean Gulf to Euboea.

east and the south. The coast is here less hospitable, with steep cliffs, until it reaches the Bay of Larymna. It is sparsely inhabited nowadays,15 and the evidence for sites from the Late Bronze Age on this stretch of coast is fragmentary and preliminary, consisting largely of looted and sometimes undatable chamber tombs and surface scatters of Mycenaean sherds. The recent discoveries of no fewer than two Mycenaean sites of importance in this area (Vlichada and Goumourades, see below) suggest that our picture of this area is far from complete.

The hill of Chiliadou is also the location of chamber tombs. Although there is no direct evidence for Mycenaean remains at this site, the few references to chamber tombs might suggest a Mycenaean cemetery (reused in later times) at this site.14

The evidence for settlement in this area is limited to surface finds; although some excavation has taken place at Larymna-Pazaraki, no Mycenaean remains were revealed. Spectacular and unique for the study area is the stretch of Cyclopean fortification wall at LarymnaKastro, but here, too, other traces of settlement are scarce.

References: The settlement was discovered by John Coleman in 2005 and is unpublished. The cemetery is mentioned in: Onassoglou, A. in: AD 38 (1983) B1, Athens 1988, 158 Katsonopoulou 1990, 93-94 Dakoronia 2002, 11 and 17 ff.

Malesina-Vlichada (Vlichada) Site type: Settlement. Directions: From Malesina, drive north towards the coast. The second beach you reach has a hill overlooking it to the left: this hill is the location of the site of Vlichada.

The southeast coast East of the Aitolyma peninsula, which encloses the Bay of Atalanti on its eastern side, the coast continues to the

A low hill on the coast of the Aitolyma Peninsula, with a view of the North Euboean Gulf and the coast of Euboea, Vlichada is an extensive site with a rich surface scatter of MH and Mycenaean sherds. Mycenaean sherds include kylix stems and deep bowl fragments. The number of sherds and the quality suggest a large and important center in this location, where until recently only sporadic tombs were known. The cemeteries at Agios Georgios and Zastanos-Agia Aikaterina (see below), must have belonged to this settlement; the cemeteries at Lekouna (see below) may have belonged to the Vlichada settlement as well.

14

In 1983 ancient graves were revealed when a field was leveled on the western side of the hill of Chiliadou. Ten graves were subsequently excavated by the local Ephoreia, one of which was a chamber tomb. This chamber tomb had a dromos of 2.60 m long and 0.80 m wide and an elliptoid chamber of 2.30 x 2.77 m. The disturbed remains of at least three burials were found on the chamber floor, together with an iron ring. Katsonopoulou also reports a Late Roman lamp, two bronze coins, and other iron objects from this tomb (Katsonopoulou 1990, 94); no report is made of Mycenaean sherds. Goldman reportedly also excavated chamber tombs at Chiliadou (Katsonopoulou 1990, 94, based on personal communication from archaeological guard Nikos Psarras). The results of these excavations were unfortunately never published. Oldfather reports excavation of “graves” (unspecified as to type or period) at Chiliadou by members of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, also unpublished (Oldfather 1916b, 166, n. 1); west of the village of Proskynas more tombs (unspecified) were dug by looters (Katsonopoulou 1990, 94, based on personal communication from Mr. Psarras). Recently a cemetery consisting of 110 tombs dating from the Late Geometric to the Late HellenisticEarly Roman Age was excavated here by the 14th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities under direction of Eleni Zahou (F. Dakoronia in AD 54 (1999) B1, Athens 2005, 372-377 and Dakoronia 2002, 11 and 17 ff.).

John Coleman noted the site in 2005. The site has not been published.

Malesina-Agios Georgios Site type: Chamber tombs. Directions: From Malesina, follow signs northward to the Agios Georgios monastery. Pass by it and keep going north to the steep slope towards the sea. Take the second road to your left, a sharp turn, and again the second road to your left. Continue on the dirt road until it turns right. In the hill on your left five excavated chamber tombs are visible. In one of them a Mycenaean sherd was found. 15

In recent years many summer apartments have been built at the coast. In winter the area remains desolate, however.

51

Figure 3.16: Lekouna-Samarthi plan (adapted from AD 40 p. 169 fig. 10)

The site is close to the sea, but has all the characteristics of an inland site: one cannot see the sea from here but is surrounded by the wide, fertile hills of the upland plateau of the Aitolyma peninsula.

35 (1980) B1, Athens 1988, 246, followed by Catling, H.W., AR 35 (1988-1989), 48.

Lekouna-Samarthi and Lekouna-Angeli Anesti

Nearby, at Zastanos-Agia Aikaterina, northeast of the town of Malesina near the chapel of Agia Aikaterina, looters opened a tomb ca. 50 m west of the entrance to the chapel. The chamber tomb was thoroughly emptied, probably already in antiquity. Its dromos was short, 1.30 m long, and 0.64 m wide. Entrance to the chamber was in its western wall. The dromos entered the chamber with a 0.60 m deep step. The chamber was ellipse shaped with a domed roof, 2.10 x 2.30 m and 1.10 m high. The fill yielded only few Roman sherds. It cannot be excluded that the tomb was cut out in the Bronze Age and was reused in Roman times.

Site type: Chamber tombs, excavated by the GAS under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia in 1985 and 1987. At two different places in Lekouna chamber tombs were found: at Lekouna-Samarthi and at Lekouna-Angeli Anesti. I have not been able to visit either site myself. Katsonopoulou reports that the location in both cases is near Palio Chorio, the old town of Malesina, located north of the modern town near the monastery of Agios Georgios (Katsonopoulou 1990, 61; 58-59 for the location of Palio Chorio).

References: Malesina-Agios Georgios has, as far as I know, not been published. I was alerted to the existence of this site by retired archaeological guard Nikos Psarras, who also mentioned the presence of the single Mycenaean sherd. For Zastanos-Agia Aikaterina, see Dakoronia, F., in: AD

In 1985 two chamber tombs were found on the site of Lekouna-Samarthi, on the property of D. Tselekouni, in Lekouna. They were dug out in the soft porous limestone. The tombs have been backfilled and are no longer visible (personal communication from Vlassis Charagliannis).

52

One tomb had been emptied by looters, the other was untouched and revealed a skeleton stretched out at full length, right hand resting on the chest and left on the abdomen, and head towards the west. The stomion was narrower than the dromos and closed with rubble masonry (Figure 3.16). Their chambers were irregularly ellipse shaped, 2.15 x 1.19 m with the entrance in the southern wall of the chamber and short dromoi with almost vertical walls leading to them (2.30 and 1.75 m long; ca. 0.95 and 0.80 m wide). Since no grave goods were found in these tombs, it is impossible to date them securely, but the extended burial position and the lack of grave goods are not typical for Mycenaean East Lokris. Only at Kalapodi-Vagia (see below p. 62) and at Megaplatanos-Sventza (p. 69) a skeleton was found in extended position; in both cases it, too, was lying with the head towards the west, but at Vagia a stirrup jar accompanied the deceased. If the tombs at LekounaSamarthi are Mycenaean – and their construction is very unremarkable – they may be of IIIC or Submycenaean date, like the tomb at Megaplatanos- Sventza, when burial customs, like pottery, became less standardized (see e.g. Iakovides n.y. for the diverse burial customs at LH IIIC Perati).

The site has not been published. Nikos Psarras and John Coleman alerted me of its existence.

Malesina-Goumourades (Goumourades) Site type: Settlement. Directions: On the road from Proskynas to Malesina, turn right onto a dirt road just before Mazi and cross over to the other side of the main road. Continue and take a left across a shady ford; where the road climbs to the top of the hill, the site stretches out on both sides of the road. The Goumourades hill, west of the village of Mazi, is a low but prominent hill with an almost flat surface and steep slopes on the northwest, northeast, and southeast sides.16 The site is located on the lower slopes of the hill, close to springs and torrents. A rich surface scatter of Mycenaean and later sherds, among which kylix stems are prominent, indicates the presence of a LBA center. The sherds are smaller and more worn than those on the Malesina-Vlichada site (see above p. 51), but are present in large quantities. The site, which must have been agricultural in nature, was possibly a lower-level site than Vlichada.

In the olive grove Angeli Anesti in Lekouna a single chamber tomb was discovered. Apart from a few bones in the northwest corner of the chamber it did not yield any finds and it has not been dated. The tomb was dug out in the soft porous rock with an east-west orientation. Its dromos was 1.50 m long and almost a meter wide, the entrance in the southern wall of the chamber was irregular, and the chamber itself had an irregular ellipse shape and dimensions of 2.40 (north-south) by two (eastwest) by 1.17 (height) m.

John Coleman noted the site in 2005. The site has not been published.

Martino-Agia Panagia (Martino)

References: Dakoronia, F., in: AD 40 (1985) B1, Athens 1990, 169; AD 42 (1987) B1, Athens 1992, 231 French 1992, 51; 1993, 50

Site type: Chamber tombs. Looted Mycenaean tombs are reported by Katsonopoulou near the church of Panagia NNE of the village of Martino, and farther north along the road from Panagia to Larymna (Katsonopoulou 1990, 117, based on personal communication by now retired archaeological guard Giannis Kiranas). I have not been able to find more information about these sites or verify their location.

Malesina-Velanidia (Velanidia)

References: Katsonopoulou 1990, 117

Site type: Settlement. Directions: From Malesina, take the road out of town north until a sign to Kalamaki directs you to the right. Continue straight to the northeast on this dirt road, past the crossing with the little shrine. A field on your left has a scatter of sherds. The site has a view on the sea and Mt. Kandili on Euboea (see Figure 1.2).

Larymna-Kastro (Larymna) Site type: Fortified acropolis. Directions: Take the Martino/Larymna exit from the National Road Athens-Lamia and follow directions to Larymna. In Larymna, follow directions „Acropolis.‟

Despite reports of an abundance of obsidian and ceramics, among which kylix stems, personal investigation produced only a small number of worn nondiagnostic sherds. The site has nevertheless been indicated on the map since archaeological guard Nikos Psarras was firm about both the location and the earlier presence of numerous kylix stems.

The modern town of Larymna is situated at the head of the bay on the western side of the Bay of Larmes. The eastern side of the bay is dominated by the nickel 16

It looks in fact not dissimilar from the MegaplatanosSventza hill, or even the Agia Aikaterina-Melidoni hill.

53

Figure 3.17: Larymna plan (adapted from Fossey 1990a p. 25 fig. 4)

extraction plant LARKO. A very small coastal plain surrounds the town on its western side; beyond that steep hills close the village off on the land side. A small peninsula jutting out NNE is enclosed by ancient walls; another ancient wall encircled the lower town to the south and west of the acropolis. West of the acropolis the Bay of Larmes forms a small inlet, the so called „ancient harbor‟ (Figure 3.17). Although Fossey finds the „old harbor‟ with its gently sloping pebble beach suitable for vessels of shallow draft (Fossey 1990a, 23), according to Haas it is highly unlikely that this was in fact a harbor in ancient times: the deepest point of the bay is nowadays no more than two meters and the wall which enclosed the town continues uninterrupted across the bottom of the bay (Haas 1998, 101, with further references). In the

Bronze Age, this „ancient harbor‟ might have been a low valley. The actual harbor would have been located on the southeast side of the acropolis, where submerged ancient moles, jutting into the deeper bay, are visible. Around this „ancient harbor‟ and all around the small peninsula, ancient fortification walls with towers at regular intervals are visible. Most of these walls are made with ashlar masonry, apart from a short section on the eastern side of the peninsula which is polygonal, using a reddish stone, and date to the Classical or Hellenistic periods. Over a stretch of ca. 80 m on the western side of the peninsula, east of the „ancient harbor,‟ however, a wall in a rough polygonal style of quite large (though rarely more than one m long) light gray stones is

54

Figure 3.18: Gla Cyclopean wall

preserved to ca. 2.5 m (Figure 3.19). Oldfather recorded an average of 4.5 m for its thickness (Oldfather 1916a, 37). Fossey notes that “its style invites comparison with the Kyklopeian walling at many Mykenaian sites in the nearby Kopais (e.g. Glá and Áyios Ioánnes) and suggests that it may be the earliest of the preserved wallings” (Fossey 1990a, 23 and cf. 1990b, 72-89). Like the walls at Gla (Figure 3.18) and Agios Ioannis, the Cyclopean style of the Larymna wall is more polygonal and fewer interstice stones are used (interstice stones are not totally absent (see Figure 3.19): Hope Simpson and Hagel 2006, 82). This wall, which does not have any projecting towers or bastions, has a sharp 90o angle at its southern end, where it turns inward, away from the inlet of the bay (see Figure 3.17). Nowadays it merely encloses a local backyard; in earlier times however a wall was observed cutting the entire peninsula off from the mainland and quite possibly the few meters of this wall as preserved formed a part of this (Fossey 1990a, 23). Originally, then, the wall would have bounded a low acropolis. At one point, the wall slopes downwards towards the north (Figure 3.19), which suggests that an earthquake or a gradual depression of the land took place after the construction of this wall. Hope Simpson and Dickinson mention the presence of LH IIIB sherds among the stones of the wall (Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 243-4, #G22), which would give a terminus post quem for its construction; personal investigation however has yielded no sherds whatsoever. Loader might agree (and implicitly disagrees

Figure 3.19: Larymna Cyclopean wall

55

Figure 3.20: Ruts at Pazaraki (arrow points at inner edges)

with Fossey (1990a, 23)) when he suggests that Larymna was “just beginning to fortify [itself] at the end of LH IIIB2” (Loader 1998, 163).

Larymna-Kastro via a narrow valley through which the modern road leads. Many walls are preserved, most of which are in poor condition; one trench reveals a portion of nice polygonal at the southeast. Rubble walls form a circuit around the top of the hill, and here and there rooms are clearly outlined. The date of these walls is however impossible to determine. Among Neolithic, EH, Classical, Hellenistic, and Roman pottery, also LH IIIAB pottery was reported on this site by Hope Simpson and Dickinson (1979, 243, G21). Personal investigation has yielded no LBA sherds.

Larymna occupies a strategic position as the harbor of the northern Kopaic basin and it is the most convenient port for Orchomenos (Oldfather 1916a, 41), to which it has access via a valley and the saddle over the hills at Larymna-Pazaraki, about 2.5 km south of Larymna (see below). References: Oldfather 1916a, 32-61 Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 243-4, #G22 Fossey 1990a, pp. 22-26 and pls. 1-5 Haas 1998, 100-107 Hope Simpson and Hagel 2006, 81-82 and pl. 18a and b

Just north of the acropolis of Pazaraki, along the modern road, traces of an ancient road are visible (Figure 3.20). Oldfather assumes that the ruts represent a „Minyan‟ route (Oldfather 1916a, 42); Pritchett merely talks about an „ancient route‟ (Pritchett 1989, 115). The road consists of ruts, 1.55 m. apart measured from center to center and in the beginning of the 20th century at some places still 0.40 to 0.45 m. deep (Oldfather 1916a, 41-2, with photograph), which cut through a limestone plateau. Hope Simpson, who visited the site in 1964, reported that the ruts were as much as 0.45 m. deep and about 1.40 m. apart, measured from inner edge to inner edge (Hope Simpson 1981, 69). The two accounts thus agree on the maximum depth of the ruts, and, with a width of 0.15 cm. for each rut, they agree on the distance between the two ruts as well. The road could be followed for about 300 m. in the beginning of the 20th century (Oldfather 1916a, 41). However, most of the limestone plateau in which the ruts were visible was mined for the construction of the modern road and in the process much of the ancient road

Larymna-Pazaraki (Pazaraki) Site type: Two archaeological features are located close to each other at this site: a stretch of road and above it an acropolis. Directions: Take the road out of Larymna to the south. Both the acropolis and the road at Pazaraki (on your left) are well indicated. A low conical hill overlooking an upland plain which is surrounded by steep mountain slopes is known as Bazaraki or Pazaraki (the Greek diminutive of a Turkish word, meaning „little bazar‟) and it is connected with 56

was destroyed (Pritchett 1989, 115). Nowadays, therefore, the ruts are visible over the course of only a few meters, just above and at the edge closest to the modern road and where they are exposed they measure only a few centimeters deep.

took place over sea, there would have been no need for a standard wagon size outside the district. Hope Simpson and Hagel (2006, 170-171) remind that most trade over land would not have taken place by cart or wagon, since trade was limited to luxury goods which would not have been transported in large amounts, but with pack animals, most likely mules and donkeys.17 Carts and wagons would be used over short distances only, for large loads such as straw, grains, and other agricultural products.

Before much of the road was destroyed, the civil engineer Despotopoulos measured the steepness of the road and found a gradient of as much as 14%; elsewhere on the Orchomenos-Larymna road he measured a gradient of as much as 30% (Pritchett 1989, 114-5); at Mycenae Steffen reported a gradient of “ca. 30-40%” for the Late Bronze Age roads (Pritchett 1980, 193, with reference). Pritchett observes that ancient roads run straight with steep gradients but few zigzags (Pritchett 1989, 114-5), since carts and wagons would have lacked a pivoting forecarriage and thus were unable to negotiate bends with a short radius (Pritchett 1980, 194). This does not always seem to be the case for Mycenaean roads, however (Walberg 2007, 71). Wheel ruts are to be expected especially on steep roads, where carts would veer off the road without them, and were generally intentionally cut, instead of resulting from erosion by the passage of many carts over time.

Even if the Pazaraki road is not Mycenaean, it is likely that in Mycenaean times a route followed this same course: between Larymna and Pazaraki the saddle through the hills along which both the ruts and the modern road lead, is the obvious route for a road. The Mycenaeans, who were established both in Larymna and in Pazaraki, probably used the same natural route, which most likely continued towards Gla and Orchomenos, as does nowadays the modern road. References: Oldfather 1916a, 41-42 and fig. 3 Hope Simpson 1981, 69 # C20 Pritchett 1989, 114-115 Fossey 1990a, 27-32 and pls. 6-7; 1990b, 72-89 Hope Simpson and Hagel 2006, 82

Whether the Pazaraki ruts were carved out intentionally or were the result of erosion from the wheels over time, they are clear proof that wagon axels had a standard gauge. The question is whether this gauge was standard in certain time periods, thus providing a tool to date these roads, or rather in certain areas, or a combination of the two. Pritchett lists a large number of different trackwidths for different areas and periods (Pritchett 1980, 173-7, with further references). Ruts around Mycenae are 1.23 m apart, similar to a road in southeastern Messenia (1.25 m) which may have connected Mycenaean Pylos and Sparta. A long stretch of road from Orchomenos to Larymna and roads in the Argolid measure 1.55-1.60 m; a road between Kreusis and Thespiai dated by Heurtley to the Mycenaean era (Heurtley 1923-5, 39) was measured by Hope Simpson and Lazenby as having an interval of 1.40 m between the inner edges (Hope Simpson and Lazenby 1964, 239 n. 29), while Pritchett gives the width between the tracks as 1.60 (Pritchett 1965, 55, but see Pritchett 1980, 175 for his reservations). The „standard‟ gauge in Greece in classical and Hellenistic times is given as 1.35-1.44, and most arterial routes have ruts ca. 1.40 m apart. The 1.40-1.55 m of the Pazaraki ruts seems to correspond to most of these measurements except for those around the citadel of Mycenae. Since those are the ones which are most securely dated to the Mycenaean period, it may be more likely that the Pazaraki road dates to historical times. The same conclusion is reached by Jansen in his work about Mycenaean roads and stations: on the basis of the width between the ruts he dates the road at Pazaraki tentatively to classical times (Jansen 2002, 20). Alternatively, Mycenaean wagons may not have had a standard axel size in all districts; if most trade

Central inland Evidence for Mycenaean activity in this region, west of the plain of Atalanti, is better documented than for the previous region. Sites are clustered in the low hills near the Daphnoremma and Dipotamos rivers and their tributaries (see Figure 1.2). The important site of Kalapodi is being excavated under direction of Rainer Felsch and Hans Georg Niemeyer; other evidence for this region comes almost exclusively from chamber tomb cemeteries which are numerous, large, and rich in this area.

Kalapodi-Agios Apostolis (Kalapodi) Site type: Cult center, excavated since 1973 by Rainer Felsch and Hans Georg Niemeyer. Directions: on the main road from Atalanti to Elateia, follow the sign to Kalapodi. The site is well indicated and just right of the road, after the chapel on the left.

17

One of the reasons for the placement of the handles on stirrup jars, which were used to transport oil, is that they facilitated tying the vessel to the side of a pack animal‟s back (Hope Simpson and Hagel 2006, 172).

57

The site of Kalapodi-Agios Apostolis is located at the point where the pass from the plain of Atalanti to the Kephissos valley opens up in a small triangular basin. The site was excavated between 1973 and 1982 under the direction of R. Felsch; H.G. Niemeyer took over in 1984. Several preliminary reports (Felsch et al. 1980, Felsch 1981, 1983, 1987) and the first final publication volume has been published, covering the Mycenaean, Corinthian, and Byzantine pottery (Felsch 1996).

made available to them at the sanctuary, or the sanctuary would serve exclusively a local public. Based on historical parallels, the former possibility is perhaps more likely (see also Chapter 7 p. 143). The excavators noted the variety in the samples of grains found, and the number of pithoi and storage and cooking vessels suggests that the early character of the site was connected with agricultural and pastoral festivals where communal feasting and sacrifices cemented cultural links and provided an opportunity for the exchange of goods, beliefs, and ideas (Lemos 2002, 221, Felsch 1996, 102103). It is indeed likely, given the prominence of the region throughout the LBA, that the site functioned as a cult center not for one settlement, but for a wider region.

Kalapodi was the site of the sanctuary of Artemis Elaphebolos and Apollo Hyampolis in Archaic and Classical times, but was a cult place already in late Mycenaean times. Pottery shows a continuous sequence from LH IIIC through Protogeometric, with abundant evidence for a separate Submycenaean phase.18

Given the continuity of cult activity, it is tempting to assume continuity of the receiver(s) of the cult, i.e. of the deity or deities worshipped, as well. It is indeed not unlikely that in the Mycenaean period the sanctuary was dedicated to Artemis, who is elsewhere attested on Linear B tablets (Ventris and Chadwick 1973, 127) and may be identified as the „Potnia theron‟ on Aegean seal stones and frescoes (Nilsson 1967, 308-9 and 486; Vermeule 1974, Kap. V 89, but see Marinatos 2000, 93 ff.). Her association with deer (Nilsson 1967, 484) might explain the disproportionally large sample of deer bones from the Mycenaean and Protogeometric periods from Kalapodi (Chapter 2 p. 31), although deer were in general a favorite hunting game for the Mycenaeans, as attested by the many vase paintings (Jacob-Felsch 1996, 104). The other role of Artemis, as a specifically female goddess assisting in child birth, may be reflected by the many spindle whorls and loomweights in the Mycenaean strata, objects typically associated with the female sphere (Jacob-Felsch 1996, 105).

The Mycenaean cult center is located under an altar in the cella of the small archaic temple (Felsch 1981, 83 fig. 2). Here, in a deep trench, a ceramic basin was found with a fragment of a bull rhyton. Simple hearths were covered by ashes with many animal bones (see also Chapter 2 p. 31) and surrounded by rich sherd collections and small finds. These were possibly ash altars and they continue throughout the Submycenaean and Protogeometric to the Geometric periods in the same area (Jacob-Felsch 1996, 104). Other evidence for cult in the LH IIIC period consists of miniature vessels deposited as offerings and dedications, a kalathos (used to receive the blood from the sacrificial victim, as also on the well-known sarcophagus from Agia Triada on Crete), and a conical plate with its handles on the rim; since handles and rim imitate a reed basket, it may have been used for fruit offerings. Also found were open drinking vessels, apparently smashed on the spot after use as a part of the ritual, especially kylikes but also skyphoi, as well as kraters, ladles, amphorae, pithoi etc. and cooking- and kitchen wares, probably to provide the worshippers with a meal as a part of the celebration. Most of the fine pottery is decorated (Jacob-Felsch 1996, 103), which may suggest a celebratory usage. Other finds include rings, pearls, pendants, anthropomorphic and zoomorphic ceramic idols, spindle whorls and loomweights, and wheel-made bull figurines.

Among the other animal remains were a large number of tortoise shell fragments and entire shells (although the total number of tortoise remains constituted not more than ca. 3% of the total animal remains assemblage, close to 70% of all tortoise remains was found in LH strata: Felsch 1999, 168-169). The shells of four young tortoises were placed together on a floor next to the altar (Felsch 1999, 168); Felsch draws a parallel with the two tortoise shells found in front of a table at the sanctuary at Phylakopi (ibidem). There they are interpreted as

Different types of clay in different mixes were used for the pottery, but all probably from the vicinity (Jones 1996, 120).19 So worshippers would either use the vessels

Kynos, Orchomenos, Platania (Lamia), and Kirrha in Phocis (Jones 1996, 115). Jacob-Felsch suggests that the clay for the Mycenaean pottery at Kalapodi may come from Zeli on the basis of a 19th century sherd found at Kalapodi bearing an inscription which gives Zeli as the potter‟s home (Jacob-Felsch 1996, 86). A large Mycenaean cemetery was excavated at Zeli-Agios Georgios (see below, p. 62) so that a connection between the two locations is not unlikely.

18

Jacob-Felsch 1988 and 1996, corrected from the earlier statement in Felsch et al. 1980, 47, where a gap between LH IIIC and the 9th cent. BC was supposed. 19 The variety in percentages of elements in the clay is large, as elsewhere in Boeotia, so that it is sometimes hard to say whether something is a local product or an import (Jones 1996, 117-8). Other prehistoric sites in Central Greece for which chemical data are available are 58

soundboxes for musical instruments (Renfrew 1985, 325326).

At location 2, three large chamber tombs are visible in the back yard of the late Anastasios Dalianis who, an enthusiastic amateur archaeologist, proclaimed them „royal tombs‟ on account of the rich finds they yielded. A fourth was found on the adjacent property of A. Bakandritsou. The four tombs (I-IV) have been dated to the LH IIA-B to LH IIIC phases and are thus the earliest chamber tombs known from southeastern East Lokris. Cut out in the soft bedrock, they have a NE-SW orientation with the entrance in the south wall, closed off with rubble masonry. All four tombs had long dromoi with inclined walls. Tomb I had a round chamber, the others were orthogonal. In tombs I and III a cist held secondary burials; there were small side chambers too. It is notable that, apart from Agia Triada (above p. 49), this is the only site where chamber tombs contained cists, rather than pits and niches, for secondary burial.

Only very few scattered early Mycenaean sherds (13) and sherds from the palatial period (five LH IIIA, four LH IIIB) have been found at Kalapodi (Jacob-Felsch 1996, 82). The early Mycenaean sherds originate at a low flat hill 1.5 km north of the road leading from the cult center to the village (and thus just east of Zeli-Agios Georgios, where the earliest tombs date back to LH IIB; see below p. 62); the location of a settlement to be associated with LH IIIA-B sherds has not been determined, but there can be little doubt that it was nearby (Jacob-Felsch 1996, 82). References: Felsch and Kienast 1975 Felsch et al. 1980 Felsch 1981; 1987; 1996 Catling 1980, 23; 1981, 28-29; 1982, 32-34 Jacob-Felsch 1987, 1996 Stanzel 1991 Jones 1996 Mountjoy 1999, 809 and 815-818 nos. 26-35 Lemos 2002, 221

All four tombs except for tomb II (which yielded only sherds and a biconical button/spindle whorl) were extraordinarily rich in grave goods. Finds, partially on display in the Archaeological Museum of Atalanti, include alabastra, amphoriskoi, and other pottery (including from tomb IV four kylikes with traces of tinning and a stirrup jug with traces of tinning and gold sheet application on the base of the neck (photo in AD 53 plate 151), a bronze sword with ivory and gold inlay (tomb I), bronze daggers and knives, and jewelry (mainly from grave IV): a gold necklace with grain-shaped and round beads with filigrain application, another gold necklace of stylized lilies, a necklace consisting of gold plaques with lilies, and numerous gold rosettes used as clothing ornaments. They may date to LH IIB-IIIA.20

Kalapodi-Kokkalia (Kokkalia) Site type: Chamber tombs, excavated by the GAS under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia in 1998. At two locations at Kalapodi-Kokkalia, NNW of the town of Kalapodi, chamber tombs have been excavated. Directions: After entering the village of Kalapodi from the east, take the first road right. Continue straight until the road turns left; at this point five tombs are visible straight ahead. To reach the other location, take the road from the center of Kalapodi towards Zeli. The backyard of the last house in Kalapodi on your left houses three chamber tombs.

Beads, seals, and other small finds of cornelian, agate, chalcedon, crystal, amethyst, steatite, amber,21 bronze and glass abound as well, and from grave IV come two ivory plaques with animal- and marine decorations, as well as a highly decorated ivory buckler. This cemetery constitutes a unique find in southeastern East Lokris: not only are these the oldest chamber tombs known, but they are also by far the richest. Until their discovery, the only gold find in the study area, from Agnanti, consisted of a single ring (see below p. 72). One cannot help but wonder if the reason that this cemetery is truly one of a kind, or whether its richness is due to the eventualities of preservation. Since these tombs were located in a private and fenced yard whose owner happened to be favorably disposed towards archaeology, they were not looted but properly excavated.

Kokkalia is located in the foothills of the Kallidromos range and the Parnassos mountain range and the landscape here is correspondingly hilly, with inland high plains and views on the mountains (Figure 3.21). At location 1, five large chambers are visible, cut out in the limestone rock. Four of them have collapsed or been cut through vertically so that only the rear half of the chamber is still there; since the ceilings of these half chambers are still intact, the large chambers are used nowadays for storing agricultural equipment (Figure 3.22). This site was shown to me by archaeological guard Vlassis Charagliannis; as far as I know it has not been published and I do not know of any finds from these tombs.

20

The tinned pottery, consisting of kylikes and a stirrup jug, must date to LH IIIA. 21 Or electrum (see note 10 above). 59

Figure 3.21: View from Kokkalia, location 1, facing south

Figure 3.22: Kokkalia location 1, chamber tombs

References: Dakoronia, F., and S. Dimaki, in: AD 53 B2 (1998), Athens 2004, 394-395 and pl. 151 Blackman 1998, 73

60

Figure 3.23: Landscape at Vagia, with spring on the left

Figure 3.24: Vagia plan (adapted from AD 35 p. 243 fig 5)

this high inland plain, a spring flows even in summer (Figure 3.23).

Kalapodi-Vagia (Vagia) Site type: Chamber tombs, excavated by the GAS under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia in 1980. Directions: From the main square in Kalapodi, take the road SW, then go off right, past the cemetery, up onto a dirt road. Continue, take a right, and at the end you get to a field where a Mycenaean cemetery was excavated. This site is located northwest of the village of Kalapodi. On

In 1980 two Mycenaean chamber tombs were excavated at this site after ground-leveling activities had revealed one tomb. The tombs had been dug out in the soft porous bedrock next to each other. Chambers were irregularly ellipse shaped (Figure 3.24). Although the roof of both had collapsed, the walls, tapering towards the ceiling, 61

indicate roofs were domed. Tomb I was used for one burial and had the skeleton and grave goods preserved in situ; Tomb II had been robbed. Dromoi were wide (1.101.40 m) and short (2.45 m); the entrance to the chamber was narrower than the dromos (0.70 m). Chambers were 3.55 x 3.20 m and 2.80 x 2.10 m. The chamber floor of tomb I contained a round pit (Figure 3.24) with the remains of three earlier burials; a new burial was lying in extended position, head to the west (i.e. away from the entrance to the tomb), right hand on the chest and left hand along the body. A stirrup jar stood next to the head.

Between 1977 and 1985 the Greek Archaeological Service excavated here 29 chamber tombs, constituting an extensive Mycenaean cemetery. The tombs date from LH IIB to IIIA2, with the earliest tombs located to the east of the road, which agrees with the assumption of an early Mycenaean settlement east of Zeli-Agios Georgios (see above p. 59), but sherds from the fill of looted chambers belong to LH IIIB and IIIB-C as well.23 The tombs may have been reused in Hellenistic or Roman times. They were dug out in rows in the soft rock of both the northern and the southern side of the hill. The majority of the tombs was found on the northern side of the hill and had their entrance and dromos on the north side. Chambers are ellipse shaped or irregularly rectangular with rounded corners and domed roofs, and measure from ca. 2.40 x 2.10 m to ca. 3.30 x 3.30 m; only the two western most tombs have smaller chambers (Figures 3.25-3.27). Secondary burials were accommodated in an ellipse shaped niche (in the northern chamber wall of tomb XXIII, of which dromos and stomion are entirely lost: Figure 3.25) or in a shallow pit in the chamber floor (1.05 x 0.55 m of tomb XXVI). Most tombs had multiple burials, up to at least seven to eight, but two of the tombs had single inhumations. Entrances to the chambers are ca. 0.65-1.0 m wide and were closed by rubble masonry. Dromoi are wider than the stomion, ca. 1.25-1.40 m, and no more than 3.10 m long in the earlier tombs, and over five m long and ca. 1.50 m wide for the looted LH IIIB-C tombs (Figure 3.26).

The extended position of the burial is unusual and in the study area only paralleled at Lekouna-Samarthi (p. 53) and Sventza (p. 69). Since many bone fragments turned up in the fill, the tomb was evidently used for multiple burials. Finds included LH IIIA2 alabastra, jugs, a tinned jug, stirrup jars, a feeding bottle (AD 35, pl. 104), conical and biconical steatite „buttons,‟ and seals, including a lentoid glass paste seal with antithetic lines. From the preliminary reports in the AD it is not clear whether the LH IIIA2 alabastra and tinned jug were associated with the latest, extended burial – although that would seem a reasonable hypothesis given their well preserved state – or with earlier burials; the uniquely extended position of the latest burial is however suggestive of a LH IIIC date (see e.g. Iakovides n.y. for the varied burial customs at Perati). References: Dakoronia, F., in: AD 35 (1980) B1, Athens 1988, 242244 and pl. 104 Catling 1988, 48 Mountjoy 1999, 809

The burial in the niche of tomb XXIII was accompanied by three squat jugs; in the chamber were another squat jug, three alabastra (AD 35, pl. 103), four steatite 'buttons', three agate beads and two steatite seals with engraved animals. Other finds include an askos (AD 34, pl. 62) alabastra (AD 32, pl. 67), stirrup jars, squat jugs, skyphoi, a piriform jar (AD 33, pl. 47), psi and phi figurines (AD 32, pl. 67), a bird and two canine (?) figurines, a small handmade conical cup, glass, serpentine and agate beads, biconical steatite „buttons‟, a bronze pin, a bronze knife, and an iron knife. The squat jugs, a Thessalian shape, are decorated in the Thessalian style, although motifs have parallels with pottery from Thebes and the Peloponnese as well (Mountjoy 1999, 811; see also Chapter 4 p. 80). The location of Zeli-Agios Georgios, at the crossroads of a NS pass and an EW corridor, may be responsible for the incorporation of different traditions.

Zeli-Agios Georgios Site type: Chamber tombs, excavated by the GAS under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia in 1977-1980, 1985, and 1999. Directions: Take the road from Kalapodi to Zeli, to the church of Agios Georgios (next to the road on the right side). Here and on the other side of the road, west of the church, some 30 chamber tombs were excavated from 1977 on.22

22

In the AD volumes for 1985 and 1999, tombs are numbered I-II and III-V, respectively. I assume that these tombs were excavated at a different location than the majority of the tombs, which are discussed in earlier volumes of the AD and numbered I-XXIX, but have not been able to verify this. Tombs I and II have a different plan, with irregularly round small chambers, than the

majority of tombs (compare Figure 3.27 with Figures 3.25 and 3.26). 23 Two psi-figurines from tomb IV (AD 54, 369) date this tomb to LH IIIB.

62

Figure 3.25: Zeli-Agios Georgios Tombs XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV plan (adapted from AD 35 p. 241 fig. 4)

Figure 3.27: Zeli-Agios Georgios Tombs I-II (from 1985) (adapted from AD 40 p. 173 fig. 13)

Figure 3.26: Zeli-Agios Georgios LH IIIB-C tombs (adapted from AD 37 p. 190 fig. 3)

63

References: Dakoronia, F., in: AD 32 B1 (1977), Athens 1984, 104 and pl. 67; AD 33 B1 (1978), Athens 1985, 139 and pl. 47; AD 34 B1 (1979), Athens 1987, 186 and pl. 62; AD 35 B1 (1980), Athens 1988, 240-242 and pl. 103; AD 40 B1 (1985), Athens 1990, 171 and 173 Lampropoulou, L., in: AD 37 (1982) B1, Athens 1989, 189 and fig. p. 190 Catling 1985, 42; 1987, 35; 1988, 49 French 1990, 47; 1993, 50 Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 60 and 67 Dakoronia, F. and S. Dimaki, in: AD 54 (1999) B1, Athens 2005, 369-370 Mountjoy 1999, 809 and 812 nos. 6-7

Zeli-Golemi (Golemi) Site type: Chamber tombs. Directions: Drive from Kalapodi towards Atalanti. After about five km, after seeing the line of cypress trees on your left, take a sharp left onto a dirt road. Follow this road, taking a right at the T-crossing. Continue straight until the low rise in the landscape with vines on your right. The tombs are on your right, perpendicular to the road on which you came, at the edge of a field belonging to G. Georgios, on the site of Zeli-Agios Georgios. The landscape here is wide and open, with fertile plains and rolling hills (Figure 3.29). Altogether 31 chamber tombs were found in this cemetery, all but two looted.24 They are carved out in rows in the soft limestone of the area, on the northern edge of a low rise in the landscape, and have a northsouth orientation, with the entrance to the chamber in its northern wall (Figures 3.30-3.31).25 The chambers were trapezoid or rectangular, sometimes with rounded corners, or ellipse shaped, and had domed roofs. Dromoi were short, low, and wide, or longer, to 4.80 m, and taper towards the ceiling. The entrances, square, rectangular or irregularly shaped, were closed by rubble masonry; one entrance had door jambs and a lintel. Two of the tombs had very small irregularly round chambers and relatively long dromoi, reminiscent of the „Type B‟ tombs at Elateia and Modi (see Chapter 6 p. 131) which may be characteristic of LH IIIC-Submycenaean chamber tombs. Mostly the chambers were medium sized. Pits and niches in dromos or chamber were rare. The tombs have been dated in the AD reports from LH IIIA2 to LH IIIC Early (the seven found in 1989) and to LH IIIB-IIIC Late, perhaps extending to early Submycenaean (the 16 tombs from 1988); two alabastra however date to LH IIB (Mountjoy 1999, 809 and see Figure 4.6).26 The tombs were in part re-used in Hellenistic and Roman times.

Zeli-Kvela (Kvela) Site type: Chamber tombs, excavated by the GAS under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia in 1986-1987. Directions: From Zeli, take a dirt road to the northwest (from the main square past the post office on your right), then take a steep dirt road right down towards the east. Another dirt road goes steeply up left, and after a few meters up onto this road, three chambers are visible on your left in the bright white limestone rock. After tomb robbers drew attention to this Mycenaean cemetery, which is located at a relatively wild and hilly spot in the foothills of the Kallidromos mountain range (Figure 3.28), a total of seven tombs was excavated here, of which only one was undisturbed. They were dug out in the local soft limestone and have an east-west orientation, with the dromos leading to the eastern wall of the chamber. They have irregular square chambers, with carelessly carved walls; the intact ceilings were irregularly domed. Above the chamber entrance of one tomb was a sloppily carved arch. Chamber entrances were closed off with rubble masonry. The interred were buried in contracted position on their side with their head to the west. Finds from the one intact tomb include alabastra (AD 42, pl. 135), juglets (AD 41, pl. 68), a phi figurine, a bronze knife (from the dromos), conical and biconical steatite buttons, conical steatite spindlewhorls, and spherical beads. Konstantinidi adds to these a fine bronze ring and a glass bead. The tombs are dated to LH IIIC in the AD; an alabastron illustrated in AD 42, pl. 135 appears to be LH IIIA2.

24

The first two tombs, found in 1985, were not assigned numbers. Thus, the 16 tombs excavated in 1988 are numbered I-XVI, the seven tombs from 1989 XVII through XXIII, the two from 1991 are XXIV and XXV, the one from 1992 is XXVI, the one from 1996 is XXVII, and the two from 1999 are XXVIII and XXIX. 25 AD 47 (1992), 208 mentions an east-west orientation, “the same as the previous tombs.” AD 48 (1993), 322, too, mentions an east-west orientation. In all earlier reports when the question of orientation is addressed, the orientation is consistently given as north-south and the plan in AD 46 (1991) shows a chamber tomb with its entrance due north (Figure 3.31). The discrepancy may be caused by the fact that some of the tombs actually seem to be oriented towards the north-northeast (witness the plan in AD 40; Figure 3.30); possibly the latest excavated tombs are inclined more towards the east. 26 Sonia Dimaki dates the main use of the cemetery to LH IIIA (personal communication).

References: Dakoronia, F., in: AD 41 (1986) B1, Athens 1990, 68 and pl. 68; AD 42 (1987) B1, Athens 1992, 234 and pl. 135 Mountjoy 1999, 809 Konstantinidi 2001, 149-150

64

Figure 3.28: View from Kvela facing west

Figure 3.29: View from Golemi facing southwest

65

Figure 3.30: Golemi, the two tombs from 1985 (adapted from AD 40 p. 170 fig. 11)

Figure 3.31: Golemi Tomb XXV (adapted from AD 46 p. 194 fig. 3)

In one of the two undisturbed tombs, a skeleton with head towards the south and in contracted position on its back lay next to decayed bones from earlier burials. Next to its right shoulder stood a pyxis (AD 40, pl. 57). In the other intact tomb six skeletons lay in contracted position on their back on the chamber floor, their head towards the south. Vessels were standing next to their heads and they had been wearing bronze pins and rings as well as amber,27 steatite, and glass beads, bone pins, and conical steatite „buttons.‟ Finds from the other tombs include alabastra (AD 43, pl. 126), jugs, stirrup jars (AD 46, pl. 83), an amphora, a hydria, a biconical clay spindle whorl, phi figurines (AD 44, pl. 102), a bronze ring, bronze pins, bone pins and needles, a bronze knife, vast quantities of beads of faïence, glass (some incised), rock crystal, and amber (or electrum: see note 10 above), large numbers of conical and biconical steatite „buttons‟, six steatite, one glass and one rock crystal seal stone, and three sea shells, one with a hole.28 The quantity and variety of these finds

– the „left-overs‟ from the looters – are striking and suggest that these tombs served a rich upper layer of Mycenaean society.29

while in High (LH IIIA1-LH IIIB) and Final Mycenaean (LH IIIC) they are the lowest possible (Lewartowski 2000, 42). This supports an early date for at least some of the Golemi tombs, since the shells are here found in rich tombs and even worked to be worn as jewelry. 29 Konstantinidi mentions jewelry from two of the chamber tombs (faience beads, conical and biconical buttons of steatite, and a plain bronze ring of thin plate; Konstantinidi 2001, 150); from the AD reports however it appears that almost all tombs produced steatite buttons and beads of various materials.

27

Or electrum. See note 10 above. Lewartowski has concluded from his study of burial goods that the status indices of shells are very high in Early Mycenaean (MH-LH IIIA1) and Submycenaean, 28

66

Figure 3.32: The loaf-shaped hill of Sventza (planted with olive trees)

Figure 3.33: View from Sventza towards the southeast and Atalanti island

67

Figure 3.34: Tombs I-VI at Sventza, plan (adapted from AD 40 p. 177 fig. 16)

References: Dakoronia, F., in: AD 40 (1985) B1, Athens 1990, 169170 and pl. 57; AD 43 (1988) B1, Athens 1993, 225-226 and pl. 126; AD 44 (1989) B1, Athens 1995, 170-171 and pl. 102; AD 46 (1991) B1, Athens 1996, 193-194 and pl. 83; AD 47 (1992) B1, Athens 1997, 207-208; AD 51 (1996) B1, Athens 2001, 322-323 French 1992, 49 Tomlinson 1995, 24 Blackman 1996, 63; 2001, 64 Blackman et al. 1997, 74 Dakoronia, F. and S. Dimaki, in: AD 54 (1999) B1, Athens 2005, 377-378 Mountjoy 1999, 809 and 812 no. 5 Konstantinidi 2001, 150

Directions: The site can be found when driving from Megaplatanos in the direction of Golemi (keep the church of Megaplatanos to your left and follow the road to the NNE). After panoramic views on Mt. Parnassos (left) and a bit later on the sea (right), take the dirt road to the left (where the vineyard starts). The area is characterized by small, smooth hills with fertile soil ; one of these hills to your left has a low conical shape, roughly resembling that of a loaf of bread, and is planted with olive trees (Figure 3.32). Mycenaean tombs were found on the NE side of this hill, in the olive grove belonging to P. Dimitrellos, 89 km WSW of Livanates, 4-4.5 km WNW of Megaplatanos. From this hill the mountain range of Mt. Chlomon is visible as well as the Bay of Atalanti with Atalanti island (Figure 3.33). Seven chamber tombs were excavated here after looters had discovered the cemetery, six close to each other and a seventh about 70 m NE of the others. The tombs are dug out in the soft white limestone typical for the area; most have their entrance on the SE. They date to the LH IIIB2LH IIIC period; two vessels illustrated in AD 40, pl. 58

Megaplatanos-Sventza (Sventza) Site type: Chamber tombs, excavated by the GAS under direction of Fanouria Dakoronia in 1985 and 1997.

68

date to LH IIIC Late (Mountjoy 1999, 810). Most chambers were ellipse shaped, two were irregularly rectangular (Figure 3.34). Their roofs were domed. Dromoi are long (6.50-8.31 m in length) with walls strongly tapering towards the ceiling (e.g. from 1.26 m on the floor to a mere 0.25 m on top). Except for one case, where the stomion has a well worked front with door jambs, entrances are as wide as the dromoi. Stomia were closed with rubble masonry or, in one case, with a stone slab (Figure 3.34). Dromoi and chambers of all seven tombs were filled with earth. The dead, up to eight per chamber, lay in contracted position on the floor of the chamber with their head opposite the entrance; in Tomb VII one skeleton lay at full length (as also at Vagia and Samarthi, see above p. 62 and 53), which in this case is consistent with the late date of the tombs (the deceased was found without grave goods). It is noteworthy that earlier burials here are consequently swept aside instead of being collected into pits (Dakoronia 1996, 1170; see also p. 43).

National Road. Go up, keeping the steep hill to your right, until you reach the plateau from where it is possible to enter the hill. On a steep sided rocky hill with a flat top next to the modern hamlet of Agia Aikaterina or Melidoni, lies the site of Melidoni/Kastro (Figure 3.35). It is located in between two coastal plains, the plain of Longos to the west (Figure 3.36) and the plain of Arkitsa (see Figure 1.5) to the east, at a point where the mountains almost touch the sea. Its location is thus excellent, commanding both fertile plains from a natural pass. To its east the mountain slopes are gentle and wooded; several torrents cut through it. Apart from a gentle slope in the southwest, where the hill of Agia Aikaterina is connected to the rest of the mountain ridge, the hill has steep sides and is thus a natural stronghold. It is not dissimilar to the Goumourades hill and the Sventza hill, though it has a more prominent location, and seems a natural place for a „high mound site.‟ It is encircled by a circuit wall, dating to historical times, which encloses an area of approximately 165 by 70 m (Fossey 1990a, 91). Fossey reports LH III (B-C, possibly LH IIIA as well) sherds; Hope Simpson and Dickinson mention LH IIIA-B sherds; during my visit I found mainly roof tiles and black-glazed classical sherds.

Finds include stirrup jars, jugs (AD 40, pl. 58), alabastra and other pottery (one askos, AD 40, pl. 58), as well as (in five of the tombs) conical steatite „buttons‟ (five of them illustrated in Dakoronia (n.y.), 39 fig. 18), many glass, rock crystal, and faïence beads, two seals (one illustrated in Dakoronia (n.y.), 40 fig. 19), and a bronze open finger ring with spiral ends (Dakoronia (n.y.), 38 fig. 16).

Fossey identifies the site with Strabo‟s Alope (Strabo 9.4.3, see Appendix 1, p. 148; Fossey 1990a, 92), which comes, together with Daphnous, after Kynos; 30 Thucydides implies that Alope was a coastal town in Opountian Lokris which was near Thronion in Epiknemidian Lokris (Thuc. 2.26; see Appendix 1 p. 152).

References: Dakoronia, in: AD 40 (1985) B1, Athens 1990, 176-178 and pl. 58; AD 52 B1 (1997), Athens 2003, 436 and pl. 172 Onassoglou 1989a French 1992, 51 Dakoronia 1993; 1996; (n.y.) 36-37, 39, and figs. 13, 18, and 19 Mountjoy 1999, 809-810 Konstantinidi 2001, 150 Whitley 2002, 49

References: Hope Simpson 1965, 138 (# 467) Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 263, G73 Fossey 1990a, 91-93 and plates 59-61 Haas 1998, 110-112

The northern coast The coast west of Kynos is characterized by steep hills which almost reach the sea; the land along the shores is narrow. Three Mycenaean settlements are known in this area, all from casual surface finds, and one excavated cemetery. Only one site, Melidoni, occupies a coastal location; the other sites are located in the steep high hills of Mt. Knemis and the Profitis Ilias (Figure 1.2).

30

Fossey identifies Livanates-Pyrgos as Kynos, Agia Aikaterina-Melidoni as Alope, and Agios Konstantinos as Daphnous. He warns however that an alternative identification is possible, based on the name of Daphnousia of an area of fields a little ESE of Agia Aikaterina, which may imply that Agia Aikaterina is in fact ancient Daphnous, in which case Alope should be further east, perhaps near Arkitsa. See Fossey 1990, 92. Since these are all names of towns from historic periods, this discussion is of limited relevance for our study.

Agia Aikaterina-Melidoni (Melidoni) Site type: Settlement. Directions: The hamlet of Agia Aikaterina can be reached from the service road parallel and southwest to the

69

Figure 3.35: The mound of Melidoni from the east

Figure 3.36: View from Melidoni over the plain of Longos

70

Figure 3.37: View from Agnanti facing northwest

The Bronze Age settlement is located on the steep hill of Kastri, ca. one km northeast of the village of Agnanti, near the hill country of Epiknemidian Lokris (Figure 3.37) and separated from the coastal plains and the sea by the high ridges of Mt. Knemis. The settlement location controls the pass from the coast to the interior valley of Kalapodi via the Dipotamos river, perched high above this river between the peaks of Mt. Knemis and the Profitis Ilias (Figure 1.2). LH sherds are abundant; a bronze Mycenaean sword was found here as well. A necropolis of undisturbed Mycenaean chamber tombs dating to the LH IIIA and LH IIIC-SM periods and extending into the PG31 was found intact at Kritharia/Dimitrakis, on a slope at the southwestern edge of the village of Agnanti on the northeastern foot of the Tachtali hill, a low outcrop of the Knemis Mountain range. These were the first Mycenaean tombs to be discovered in this region of Central Greece. On the surface of the Tachtali hill many sherds, ranging in date from the EH to the Hellenistic era, were found.

Figure 3.38: Agnanti chamber tomb plan (adapted from AD 25 p. 237 fig. 13)

Agnanti-Dimitrakis (Agnanti) and Agnanti-Kastri

The tombs have small chambers (the largest chamber measured 2.20 x 1.88 m and was 1.32 m high; its dromos was 3.45 m long), varying from rectangular to ellipse

Site type: Chamber tombs, excavated by the GAS in 1967, 1970, and 1990, and settlement. Directions: From Kamena Vourla, follow the signs towards Agnanti, keeping on the curving mountain road until you reach the village of Agnanti. Turn right onto a dirt road. Just after the road bends left, on your left is the site of Dimitrakis, where Mycenaean chamber tombs were found, southwest of the modern village.

31

Dakoronia in AD 45 (1990), 182, dates the cemetery from the LH IIIC to the Submycenaean period; earlier, Spyropoulos dated the finds from the tombs to LH IIIA and LH IIIC (AD 25, 235-237). Neither excavator was thus able to detect a LH IIIB phase. 71

shaped (Figure 3.38). All tombs housed multiple burials; in one of the tombs no fewer than ten crania were found. Bones were swept aside to the northern wall of the chamber. The majority of the finds date to the LH IIIC phase.

Arkitsa-Roustiana (Roustiana)

Finds from one tomb include LH IIIA alabastra, pyxides, and piriform jars, LH IIIB-C jugs and small kraters, and LH IIIC stirrup jars as well as bronze pins, bronze hairspirals, two bronze fibulae, an ivory pin, steatite beads and buttons, and a bronze, an iron, and a gold ring. The number of metal finds in this assemblage is remarkable and can in part be explained by the late date of the tomb. Among the SM-PG finds an amphora with concentric circle decoration on the shoulder was found (see Chapter 4 p. 98 for a brief discussion of similar vessels). The cemetery is certainly associated with the settlement.

The site of Roustiana, located WNW of Livanates in high and steep, wooded terrain, was discovered by Fanouria Dakoronia and mentioned as the location of a Mycenaean settlement in Dakoronia 1993, 126 and in Dakoronia (n.y.), 36. In the 1993 report Dakoronia mentions an abundance of Mycenaean sherds; in the 2002 description of the site Cyclopean walls are added to the observations. In the AD report for 1980, where Roustiana first appears, no mention is made however of either Mycenaean sherds or Cyclopean walls: this report mentions exclusively classical graves and finds on this acropolis.33 If the walls surrounding the acropolis were of Mycenaean date, the site would be unique in southeastern East Lokris: the only certainly fortified site dating to the LBA in the area is Larymna, and that is a coastal site, not an acropolis in the mountains. Although judgement needs to be suspended until the Roustiana walls are well documented, it seems likely to me that the walls date to historic times, when fortified settlements favored higher locations (see e.g. the site distribution maps in Fossey 1990a, 119 fig. 21 and 123 fig. 23).

Site type: Settlement. I have not visited the site myself; the information here is based on publications by Fanouria Dakoronia.32

References: Philippaki, B., S. Symeonoglou and N. Pharaklas, in: AD 22 (1967) B1, Athens 1968, 246 Spyropoulos, Th.G., in: AD 25 (1970) B1, Athens 1972, 235-237 and pl. 210 Catling 1971, 13 Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 263 (#G74) Schachermeyr 1980, 319 Dakoronia, F., in: AD 45 (1990) B1, Athens 1995, 182 no. 11 Mountjoy 1999, 809 Konstantinidi 2001, 145

References : Dakoronia 1993, 126 Dakoronia (n.y.), 36

32

Since only rough indications as to Roustiana‟s location are provided in the publications and I have not been able to verify the location of this site myself, its appearance on the map in Figure 3.1 is provisional and approximate only. 33 F. Dakoronia in AD 35 (1980) B1, Athens 1988, 252.

72

Table 3.1: Summary of sites

Site*

Type

Kynos Rema Pharmaki Kokkinonyzes Skala Atalantis Atalanti Spartia Kyparissi Mitrou

Chiliadou Vlichada Malesina-Agios Georgios Lekouna Velanidia Goumourades Martino-Agia Panagia Larymna Pazaraki Kalapodi Kokkalia

S, ct exc. CT exc. CT exc. S ss. ct exc. CT exc. S ii. S exc., ss.; ct ss. CT exc. S ii. S, ct, pg, CT exc. S ii., CT? exc. S ii. CT exc. CT exc. S ii. S ii. CT exc. S ii. S ii. S exc. CT exc.

Vagia Zeli-Agios Georgios Kvela Golemi Sventza Melidoni Agnanti Roustiana

CT exc. CT exc. CT exc. CT exc. CT exc. S ii. S ii., CT exc. S ii.

Agia Triada Kotrona Proskynas

LH I

LH II

LH III

SM

Remarks

A, B, C (A1), B, C A1 early + ? A2 late – C early B, C early A, B, C

+

SM includes HMB ware Single tomb Single tomb; amber

+

Pithos burial in dromos; amber; seals

+

SM includes HMB ware; seals

+

Cists (mostly for sec. burial); seal

+

A, (B) + A

?

No finds known Fully extended burial

A-B

+ + ? C? + + ? A2?-B A, B C A(-C)

B

+

A, B B

+

B B

A2, (C?) A (B-C) A2, C A(2) – C late B2 – C late A, B, C (A), C +

No finds known Fortification +

Cult site. SM includes HMB ware Cists for sec. burial; tinned vessels; amber; seals; agate; gold; sword Fully ext. burial; tinned vessels; seals Seals; agate

?

Amber; seals Fully extended burial; seals

+

Gold ring

*For the location of these sites, see Figure 3.1, p. 36. Key: S CT ct pg exc. ss. ii. + sec. ext.

Settlement Chamber tomb(s) cist tomb(s) pit grave excavated surface survey informal investigation (also used for sites where excavation did take place, but the only evidence for Mycenaean occupation consists of surface scatter) phase is represented secondary extended

73

Table 3.2: Site chronology

Key:

Black Dark gray Light gray White

phase is present phase may be present LH III is present, but without specification as to LH IIIA, B, or C phase suspected but dating method is circumstantial (not based on (diagnostic) finds)

74

Chapter 4: Finds After our examination of the sites, it is time to turn our attention to specific finds from some of the sites under discussion. In this chapter I discuss the significance of selected finds, mostly pottery, from the area. Much of the pottery evidence in this chapter is based on the results of my study of the pottery from the 1988-1989 surface survey at Mitrou (Kramer-Hajos 2002, 2005a; KramerHajos and O‟Neill forthcoming);1 references to individual sherds from Mitrou concern this surface material unless specified otherwise. Apart from this stylistic analysis, attention will be paid to the three main excavated settlements in the study area: Kynos, Mitrou, and Kalapodi, since only these have produced stratified finds. Finds from tombs are of course not ignored; since they often consist of intact vessels as well as especially rich remains, an analysis of the finds in the region cannot afford to ignore the evidence from burial sites. The information in this chapter is presented chronologically and follows the pottery distinctions, from LH I through Submycenaean.

Diagnostic fragments from Mitrou are carinated rims, handles, and ring stems of ring-stemmed goblets. Although these shapes are generic for MH Gray Minyan pottery everywhere in Greece, especially close parallels are found with material from Pteleon in Thessaly (Figure 1.1). The Matt Painted ware, too, has parallels with Matt Painted ware from Pteleon. The transition to the LBA on Mitrou shows a great variety in fabrics and styles. The bridge spout of an Aeginetan hole-mouthed jar (Catalogue no. 1, Figure 4.1) follows closely the Middle Helladic Matt Painted tradition with its pale, gritty fabric, untreated surface, and matt black decoration. It dates to the transitional period between MH IIIB and LH IA (see Dietz 1991, 186-9 for examples from both periods). The muscovite („gold mica‟) inclusions in this piece classify it as Aeginetan ware, i.e. an import from Aegina (Figure 1.1).5 This large jar may have been traded for its contents – hole-mouthed jars are easy to seal – and proves that Mitrou was in contact with the islands of the Aegean during the transition to the Mycenaean period.

Late Helladic I

Gray Minyan ware continues to be used, but may now be used for Mycenaean shapes, as is attested by a Gray Minyan sherd found below a well made cist tomb in the eastern scarp (2, Figure 4.1; see Chapter 3 p. 44 and Figure 3.10). The sherd is thin and well made and has the characteristic shine and soapy feel of this class; burnishing marks are clearly visible. Its smooth curve and a flaring lip suggest it belongs to a LH I „teacup‟ rather than to a MH shape (see Dietz 1991, 202-3, figs. BA-5 and BA-5a); its profile as preserved is virtually identical to the profile of 10. It is likely that the vessel to which it belonged was deposited in the cist tomb below which it was found. This sherd therefore provides additional support for the hypothesis that the well-built cists in this part of the site date to the Early Mycenaean period. This is by no means an isolated example of this type of pottery,6 and in fact it is to be expected that this type of pottery was more common than it appears: nondiagnostic sherds (many small body sherds) cannot be distinguished from MH Gray Minyan ware and may well go largely undetected in both surface survey and

Most of the information about the earliest Mycenaean period in the study area comes from Mitrou. In order to understand the degree to which the early Mycenaean pottery from Mitrou, as elsewhere, adhered to old traditions or, conversely, to see clearly the sudden differences which the LH I phase introduces, I give a brief overview over the pottery from the preceding, Middle Helladic, period.2 Four classes of fine ware are represented on Middle Helladic Mitrou: the early Red Burnished, the omnipresent Dark Burnished or Gray Minyan, Yellow Minyan (very rare), and Matt Painted ware. Of these, Gray Minyan makes up the overwhelming majority of the material.3 Gray Minyan ware was first discovered at Orchomenos, from where it received its name,4 and was subsequently found to be extremely common in Central Greece and frequent in the Peloponnese. 1

A complete catalogue of LH pottery from the surface survey is given in Appendix 2. For a fuller discussion of LBA pottery from Mitrou, with photographs, see KramerHajos 2005, 191-220. 2 See Kramer-Hajos and O‟Neill, forthcoming, for a discussion of the MH pottery from the 1988-1989 surface survey at Mitrou. 3 It should be noted that although Gray Minyan ware is the hallmark of the MH period, it survived in some areas in large quantities into the LH I phase. E.g. Davis 1979. 4 „Minyan Orchomenos‟ appears in Iliad 2.511.

5

Biotite, „silver mica‟, occurs naturally in the local dolomite and is found with some frequency in sherds from Mitrou. 6 Another example from Mitrou consists of the full profile of a Vapheio cup in Gray Minyan fabric. Thanks are due to MAP directors Aleydis Van de Moortel and Eleni Zahou, and to MAP pottery director Jeremy Rutter, for permission to mention this unpublished find.

75

Figure 4.1: LH I surface pottery from Mitrou. Drawings M.-J. Schumacher.

76

excavation. This sherd is a clear indication of the manner in which the local MH traditions not only persisted next to the new Mycenaean cultural types, but also mixed with them to create ‟hybrid‟ vessels (see also Chapter 6 p. 118 and Chapter 7 p. 135 for the significance of such hybrid vessels). Central Greece, where the Gray Minyan tradition was strong and the Mycenaean culture arrived early, may have been an especially fertile area for this sort of experimentation.7

four mm – and their fabric is very fine, without any inclusions. The Vapheio cup fragments are slipped and polished on the outside and unfinished on the inside, as is standard in LH I open vessels. A large shallow cup fragment (20) too, has an interior rim band but is otherwise unfinished. The importance of these sherds of Mycenaean LH I ware from Mitrou lies in the fact that the Mycenaean LH I style is so far severely underrepresented in this part of Greece (Mountjoy 1999, 639 and 807). The only other examples of the style known in the wide region are a Vapheio cup sherd from Drachmani-Piperis (at Elateia, see Figure 6.1), decorated with a ripple pattern (Mountjoy 1999, 811, fig. 323.1), one piriform jar and two sherds, both of Vapheio cups with linear decoration, from Orchomenos, and one Vapheio cup sherd decorated with a ripple from Eutresis (Mountjoy 1999, 648). For Euboea, Thessaly, and Phokis no LH I is listed at all.

Bichrome and Polychrome Matt Painted Ware („Shaft Grave Ware‟) is relatively common on Mitrou (3-13; Figure 4.1). Most of the sherds belonging to this class have an orange colored fabric and are slipped and burnished – either after or, more commonly, before the application of the matt paint – on the outside. The added paint is black, bluish, red and brown and shows simple geometric patterns and lightly curving bands. Dietz (1991, 32) suggests a Boeotian origin for this ware, based on its distribution and on provenance studies. This ware, too, combines MH (the matt paint) and Mycenaean (the fine fabric)8 features and it is thus unsurprising that it, too, should appear with some frequency in Central Greece. The decorations on the Mitrou sherds have parallels with Korakou (wavy bands, Davis 1979, figs. 5 and 6), Eutresis (wavy bands, Goldman 1931, 171 fig. 240, no. 3), and Agia Marina (wavy bands and wiggly lines; 11: red zigzag in between black bands).

With seven9 fragments from surface survey alone, Mitrou is therefore unusually rich in Mycenaean LH I material (Kramer-Hajos 2005a, 196; Kramer-Hajos and O‟Neill forthcoming), which is in agreement with the assumed establishment of an early Mycenaean elite at Mitrou (see also Chapter 3 p. 45). Further evidence for this hypothesis is provided by a find made by the GAS in 2002 consisting of the complete profile of a Minoan cup dating to the LM IA phase (contemporary with LH I). The cup has been studied by Olga Kyriazi (forthcoming b). It is unequivocal proof that in the early Mycenaean period Mitrou had contacts with the Aegean islands and/or Crete; one may imagine an early Mycenaean elite enjoying prestigious high quality pottery, imported as well as locally made.

Next to these essentially MH traditions a new and truly Mycenaean style appears, characterized by lustrous dark (black, brown, or red) paint on a light slip (14-20; Figure 4.1). This style, which is influenced by the contemporary lustrous Minoan pottery, may have its origins in Laconia, where it developed perhaps under direct influence from the Minoan colony on the island of Kythera. From Laconia it may have spread to the Argolid (Dickinson 1977, 108 note 2; Mountjoy 1993, 5) and further, to be found by the end of the LH I phase everywhere in the Peloponnese, apart from Arcadia and Achaea, and more sporadically in south-central Greece in Attica, Boeotia, Phokis, and Euboea (Mountjoy 1993, 5). Everywhere it makes up just a small percentage of the pottery from the time period, with the MH wares and their spin-offs making up the bulk of the material.

The extant LH I sherd material from Mitrou clearly shows that the LH I period is a period of transition, and thus of experimentation. The lack of consolidation is visible throughout the manufacturing process of the pottery: various fabrics are used, the surface treatment on vessels belonging to the same fabric category differs, the time of application of the paint as well as the type of paint (matt or lustrous) varies, and the hardness of firing displays a large range (see Figure 4.2: 65% of LH I sherds is Mohs 3, 20% Mohs 4, and 15% Mohs 2).10 The only other phase with a more even distribution of sherds

This Mycenaean LH I style is represented in the surface material from Mitrou by a sherd from an alabastron (14) and by several Vapheio cup fragments (15-18). The distinctive shape with the projecting ridge in the center of the body and the painted ripple leave no doubt as to their identification. The sherds are thin – between three and

9

Nos. 14-20. Although three of these have a painted interior rim band (18-20), the interior is otherwise unfinished (i.e. no traces of slip or smoothing), so I think it is reasonable to assign them to LH I. 10 For this analysis all sherds from the surface survey were used which could be ascribed to any of the phases shown in the diagram, a total of 300. Of the LH II-III sherds, the overwhelming majority (over 91%) was fired medium hard (i.e. Mohs 3 or 4), versus 85% of the LH I material.

7

Similarly, Yellow Minyan evolved seamlessly into Mycenaean Unpainted ware. Mycenaean shapes in a highly burnished Yellow Minyan fabric are common throughout Central Greece in LH I-II. 8 The fabric can also be viewed as MH Yellow Minyan.

77

Figure 4.2: Hardness of Mitrou surface sherds (in absolute numbers) by period.

over three different ranges of hardness is the PG, arguably another transitional and thus experimental phase.11

far rare in East Lokris; Mountjoy lists only sherds from Drachmani-Piperis (Mountjoy 1999, 810 and 811; for Drachmani-Piperis see Figure 6.1). She comments, however, on the similarity of that material to contemporary pottery from Boeotia and southern Greece and expects that further excavations will produce more LH IIA material, especially in the southern part of East Lokris (Mountjoy 1999, 810). The LH IIA sherds from Mitrou can now be added to the corpus and since the AD reports ascribe a LH IIA-B date to some of the Kokkalia tombs (Chapter 3 p. 59) it may be assumed that at Kokkalia, too, LH IIA pottery was found.

New, Mycenaean, shapes appear, but potters occasionally make those shapes using the old fabrics and manufacturing methods. The MH Matt Painted keeps its fundamental characteristics, but evolves to incorporate more colors and is now primarily applied on burnished surfaces. Everywhere in Greece these “non-Mycenaean” LH I wares make up the bulk of the material (Mountjoy 1999, 20). This is true for Central Greece as well and perhaps especially; particularly Gray and Yellow Minyan, Matt Painted, and Polychrome Matt Painted are common (Mountjoy 1999, 811). The new true Mycenaean style is rare in Central Greece; the number of Mycenaean LH I sherds from the surface survey on Mitrou is exceptional and attests to Mitrou‟s early contact with the core of the Mycenaean world. It is clear that people at Mitrou, although not entirely or immediately giving up the old traditions, nevertheless readily embraced the new styles.

LH II sherds from Mitrou are very fine and well made: the clay rarely contains inclusions and then only very few small ones. Most fine ware sherds are slipped; decoration is applied with thick red, brown or black lustrous paint on an off-white to orange colored slip. The paint is often cracked, without however flaking off. For most sherds, the decoration, rather than the shape, is the diagnostic feature. Marine style (mostly LH IIA: 24, 26, 28, 30-33, 41) and floral patterns (LH IIA and B; 23, 34-36, 39, 40, 46, 50, 51, 53) are popular, but other decorations occur as well. Experimentation with different styles and fabrics seems to have ceased by this time.

Late Helladic II

One of the LH IIA sherds with marine decoration (28, Figure 4.3), a large sherd with a depiction of an octopus or argonaut, has a fabric and a slip which are of a deeper orange than on other sherds from Mitrou and may be an import; no clay analysis has however taken place. The sherd may belong to Mountjoy‟s „pseudo-Minoan class‟ (Mountjoy 1999, 21), almost exact imitations of the LM IB Marine style but produced on the mainland and widespread (Mountjoy 1999, 21-22); possible production centers outside the Argolid are Athens and Thebes

In the surface material from Mitrou both LH IIA (23-32) and IIB (33-40) are represented (Figure 4.3). LH IIA is so 11

The single very soft or hard sherds occurring in the LH II and IIIC periods are significant exceptions: they show a lack of consistency in firing in these two periods, yet this lack of consistency occurs only rarely. Similarly the four LH IIIA soft sherds make up only 10% of all IIIA sherds; 90% of LH IIIA sherds is fired medium hard. Unsurprisingly, it is the LH IIIB phase which sees the greatest consolidation in firing.

78

Figure 4.3: LH II surface pottery from Mitrou. Drawings M.-J. Schumacher.

Figure 4.4: Mitrou, 41: LH II alabastron with marine decoration

Figure 4.5: Kokkinonyzes, LH IIB jar (after AD 35, pl. 105)

79

(Mountjoy 1999, 21).12 Other examples with marine decoration (24, 26, 30-32) appear to be local products. The identified LH IIA material consists wholly of jugs and jars, including stirrup jars (24-26) and piriform jars (27-28).

Another example of a mix between MH and LH IIB characteristics on pottery was found in the chamber tomb at Kokkinonyzes. A small jar currently on display in the museum of Lamia has a decoration of solid black pendant triangles from its neck (Figure 4.5). Decoration is reminiscent of the MH, where pendant triangles are a favorite motif on Matt Painted Ware (Buck 1964, 250 and plates 42-43, see also Dietz 1991, figures 49 and 58). This vessel dates however to the LH IIB phase and was found together with LH IIB-early IIIA1 vessels (see AD 35, pl. 105 and Mountjoy 1999, 810 and 813 nos. 8 and 10, fig. 323).

The evidence suggests that Mitrou remained a site of great importance and that it had connections with the regions to its south and east rather than west and north. Similar connections to southern Greece and even Crete are proposed for Drachmani-Piperis, based on the LH IIA material from that site, among which is a bell cup of the pseudo-Minoan class (Mountjoy 1999, 811 no. 2). Two depicted LH IIA goblets from Drachmani-Piperis are on the other hand old-fashioned with their slightly carinated upper body, which is ultimately derived from the MH Gray Minyan goblet (Mountjoy 1999, 811 nos. 3-4). At this interior site, then, too, old „local‟ traditions stubbornly remained next to new and for that time undoubtedly flashy imports, paralleling developments in the study area, where Mycenaean ways of producing pottery infiltrate, rather than supplant, MH traditions, which keep showing up through details of fabric (41, see below) or shape.

Two LH IIB squat jugs from the Zeli-Agios Georgios cemetery (Figure 4.6, top) display strong characteristics of the LH IIB Thessalian style: both are baggy with a low center of gravity, just as the Thessalian examples (Mountjoy 1999, 810; small rounded alabastra and squat jugs with baggy bodies represent a regional style in Phthiotis and Thessaly in LH IIB, Mountjoy 1999, 25). Decoration is similar too: Mountjoy lists a similar use of reduplicated wavy stems, of a single rock pattern, sometimes with a fringed peak, of a continuous pointed rock pattern, and of groups of wavy vertical stems. One squat jug is decorated with wavy vertical stems alternating with a single fat stem (Figure 4.6, top right), a motif very popular at Korakou and also found at Thebes and in Thessaly (Mountjoy 1999, 811); the other has stemmed spirals with cross-hatched center and a fill of fringed rock pattern. The cross hatched spirals are attested for Korakou, while the fringed rock pattern is Thessalian (Mountjoy 1999, 811).

The finest LH IIB piece from Mitrou is a rim sherd from an Ephyraean goblet, the hallmark of the LH IIB period (Mountjoy 1999, 25), with a painted lily (35, Figure 4.3). The identified LH IIB material consists almost exclusively of open shapes: goblets (35-38), and Vapheio cups decorated with foliate bands (39, 40). If this observation of LH IIA closed and LH IIB open shapes is not coincidental, one might suggest that closed shapes were imported for their contents and inspired local imitations, whereas drinking vessels may have changed more slowly (meaning that some of the LH I cups may in fact have been produced only in LH IIA).

A baggy alabastron from Golemi has Thessalian style decoration as well (Figure 4.6, bottom left): multiple stemmed spiral and pointed rock pattern (Mountjoy 1999, 811; photo in AD 40, plate 57). that the site of Drachmani-Piperis has produced very little material of this phase, so that it cannot be determined whether the Thessalian style reached Central Greece via the Kephissos valley, or mainly via the corridor following the coast (ibidem). However, a small rounded alabastron from Agia Triada (Figure 4.6) is more similar to LH IIB examples from Phokis (see Mountjoy 1999, 764 figure 297 especially no. 91; its shape also compares well to a LH IIIA1 alabastron from Bikiorema, ca. six km west of Lamia (Figure 1.2)): it is somewhat baggy and irregularly shaped, but is more perked up and has a considerably wider base than the examples from Zeli-Agios Georgios and Golemi, and is decorated with a standard rock pattern. This is a possible indication that the coastal corridor was less subject to Thessalian influences than the Kephissos valley. In addition, in the Mitrou surface survey corpus small rounded alabastra and squat jugs with baggy bodies have not been identified (KramerHajos 2005a, 201, and Kramer-Hajos and O‟Neill, forthcoming).

A grayish background (with black paint) may occur especially, though certainly not exclusively, together with marine patterns (31, 32, 41). It seems possible that potters created the effect of a bluish-gray background for their marine creatures on purpose. The idea for the gray background may be rooted in the old MH tradition of Gray Minyan ware, which may have been used into the LH IIB phase, now combined with Mycenaean decorative patterns. One alabastron sherd with LH IIB rock pattern, although not fired gray throughout (the interior is buff colored) has a highly burnished exterior, which looks and feels like Gray Minyan Ware on which lustrous paint has been applied (41, Figure 4.4).13

12

In the context of a deposit belonging to the „PseudoMinoan class,‟ Mountjoy mentions an orange fabric as Messenian (Mountjoy 1999, 23). 13 I wish to thank Olga Kyriazi, who first made me think about the Gray Minyan „feel‟ of this sherd.

80

Figure 4.6: Top: Zeli-Agios Georgios, LH IIB squat jugs (after Mountjoy 1999, 812 figure 323 nos. 6 and 7); Bottom L: Golemi, LH IIB baggy alabastron (after Mountjoy 1999, 812 figure 323 no. 5); Bottom R: Agia Triada, LH IIB-IIIA1 alabastron (after AD 52, plate 172)

IIIA1.14 Tinning was not uncommon on vessels used during burial rites and subsequently buried with the deceased (there is a tinned jug from Vagia as well, see Chapter 3 p. 62) and was probably meant to imitate metal vessels (Immerwahr 1966): silver sets of vases have been found in tombs at Dendra and Argos (Mountjoy 1993, 66). Their occurrence in the rich tombs of Kokkalia suggests however that they were not merely „poor man‟s substitutes‟ for silver vessels. The set from a chamber tomb on the Areopagus, too, is from an extraordinarily rich tomb containing weaponry and an abundance of gold ornaments (Immerwahr 1966, 381).15 Both the stirrup jug and the kylix were common shapes used in Mycenaean eating and drinking rituals during the funeral; kylikes are

Figure 4.7: Kokkalia, LH IIB alabastron (after AD 53, pl. 151)

Another important early Mycenaean center is located at Kokkalia (Chapter 3 p. 59). Of the only two vessels illustrated to date (AD 53, pl. 151), one is a LH IIB rounded alabastron with rock pattern and ivy (Figure 4.7); its shape and decoration are standard.

14

Mountjoy 1986, 203: the stirrup jug has two handles in LH IIIA1, three in LH IIIA2. It is limited to the LH IIIA period (ibidem, Table III). The kylix as a shape appears first in LH IIIA1 and continues, with changes in shape, through LH IIIC (Mountjoy 1986, 204-5). Tinning, however, is largely limited to the LH IIIA phases. 15 Tin is a relatively rare resource, which had to be imported from either Afghanistan, via Syria, or Etruria or even as far away as Cornwall (Taylour 1983, 144-145; Muhly 1985). Using tin on vessels takes this resource away from bronze working (bronze being an amalgam of ca. 10% tin and 90% copper) and even though the result may not be as fancy as a silver vessel, it is thus certainly not a cheap vessel either.

Late Helladic IIIA The other illustrated vessel from Kokkalia is a tinned two handled stirrup jug with gold foil around the base of the neck. Four kylikes (not illustrated) are tinned as well. Together these tinned vessels comprise a full set: a jug for pouring and four cups for drinking, dating to LH

81

often found shattered in pieces against the blocking wall of the stomion and appear to have been used in toasting.

luxury goods is generally assumed to be typical for the earlier Mycenaean period, before power was consolidated and centered in the hands of very few families who held on to whatever outward signs of power were available.

The presence of a full set of tinned pottery is not unusual (Mountjoy 1993, 66) and it is possible that potters produced matching sets of vessels for use in various services (Wright 2004b, 25 note 40): in LH IIB potters made matching Ephyraean goblets and pitchers (Mountjoy 1983; 1999, 57-58) and there are sets of LH IIIB1 Zygouries pottery as well (Wright 2004b, 25 note 40).

The swords may suggest a warrior burial, but it is equally possible that it represented social status and religious significance, rather than strictly military status (Konstantinidi 2001, 237-238). The lilies recurring on the gold jewelry are a common motif in Minoan and Mycenaean jewelry and may have had religious connections: they are often depicted in representations of religious character (Konstantinidi 2001, 239).18 Konstantinidi expects that gold examples of this type would be appropriate for priests (ibidem 241). If indeed it was a „priest-king‟ buried in this grave, it is interesting to note that centuries later this place would become (or remain?) a center of cult activity.

More spectacular than the pottery is the jewelry from these tombs: a gold necklace with grain-shaped and round beads with filigrain application, another gold necklace of stylized lilies, a necklace consisting of gold plaques with lilies, and numerous gold rosettes used as clothing ornaments. The necklace with the stylized lilies from this location is similar to examples from a chamber tomb at Mycenae (see Konstantinidi 2001, 73 ff. and 282 figure 21, center) and one at Prosymna (ibidem, 84 and 284 figure 23b, top), which can both be dated to LH IIIAB; the round beads with filigrain application seem to date earlier, however (cf. e.g. Konstantinidi 2001, 284 figures 8b and 23a, both from Prosymna).16 Konstantinidi observes that precious materials are most common in LH I-LH II (Konstantinidi 2001, 212). It should be noted that these are, apart from a gold ring at Agnanti (Chapter 3 p. 72) the only LBA gold finds from southeastern East Lokris to date.

LH IIIA sherds from Mitrou (Figure 4.8) attest to a thriving culture in this period on the coast as well. Especially sherds dating to the LH IIIA2 phase are abundant in the surface material from Mitrou. Typical well represented LH IIIA1 shapes are the piriform jar (55, 56), goblet and kylix (57-60) (including an Ephyraean goblet with argonaut, using added white, 57), and mug (62, 63).19 The LH IIIA1 decorative motifs include spirals, bands, nets, stipple, and fish scales. As in LH II, fine wares are usually slipped with an off-white, buff, yellowish or brownish-orange slip. Paint is mostly lustrous red, fabrics are pale pink to whitish-yellowish. The LH IIIA1 assemblage from Mitrou seems to attest to Mitrou‟s incorporation into the cultural koine of the period: all pottery is well made and follows the standard schemes of shape and decoration.

Apart from the gold there are stunning quantities of other more or less precious materials from Kokkalia: cornelian, agate, chalcedony, crystal, amethyst, steatite, ivory, amber, bronze, and glass are present. The question of the exact date of this assemblage becomes interesting in view of the region‟s role in the LH IIIA-B phases, when Thebes was the major center in Central Greece which produced or worked gold, precious stones (rock crystal, lapis lazuli, onyx, agate)17 ivory, and perhaps glass (Halstead 1992b, 63). Whether or not the assemblage at Kokkalia dates largely to LH IIIA, it is likely that these luxury goods were worked at Thebes and found their way northwest to the area of Kalapodi. This dispersion of

The pottery found in the rock cut chamber tombs in southeastern East Lokris, too, consists mostly of the standard Mycenaean funerary pottery, with predominantly decorated closed shapes. Alabastra served as containers for burial gifts, probably unguents (Mountjoy 1993, 127); Mountjoy suggests that the small 18

Konstantinidi invokes the controversial „Priest King‟ fresco from Knossos as an example: this figure was originally restored as wearing a headdress with lilies as well as a silver necklace consisting of lily-shaped beads. More recent restorations have however divorced the torso fragment from the headdress (Niemeier 1988). Although the figure still wears the necklace, its interpretation as „priest king‟ is highly disputed. It is notable that in Christian iconography the lily‟s white color symbolizes „purity‟ as well as resurrection. 19 Generally kylikes are well represented in surface material: their cups are fragile and since they were in constant use, they provide more sherds than other shapes. Moreover, their stems are sturdy and among the most easily recognizable sherd material.

16

Glass beads in the same shape occur with some frequency on Crete and date to LM IIIA(2); see e.g. Effinger 1996, 174 (EpH 1d) and plate 31c; 248 (MK 2a) and plate 50b; 281 (PK 14d) and plate 59a; 282 (PK 15d) and plate 58f. 17 Thebes is the only palace with evidence for onyx and agate working (see Halstead 1992b, 62-63). No onyx is found at any site in the study area, but although the only other recorded find of agate in the study area, at Agios Georgios, dates to the early Mycenaean era (LH II-IIIA; before the palace at Thebes) as well, it is nevertheless likely that it was worked at Thebes and found its way into the Kalapodi area from there.

82

Figure 4.8: LH IIIA surface pottery from Mitrou. Drawings M.-J. Schumacher.

83

Figure 4.9: Kokkinonyzes, LH IIIA1 hydria and piriform jar (not to scale) (after Mountjoy 1999 p. 812 fig. 323 nos. 10 and 8)

handles, which were not useful for lifting, may have been used for tying on a cloth cap (ibidem). Stirrup jars were used for perfumed oil, and small piriform jars, with their wider mouths, may have contained honey as well as unguents (ibidem).

wealthy elite. It is decorated with dark brown bands along the base of the false spout and the handle; the multiple stem (or circles and chevrons) and the concentric circles on the top of the false spout are drawn in lustrous orange paint, which has now partly flaked off. The vessel fragment makes a refined and elegant impression. Apart from the still popular stylized foliate band, decoration on LH IIIA2 sherds consists of flowers, quirks, and parallel bands.

Vessels from the chamber tomb at Kokkinonyzes, some of which are illustrated in AD 35 (plate 105), give a slightly different picture. A LH IIIA1 hydria, decorated with “a local attempt at zigzag, wavy band and foliate band” (Mountjoy 1999, 813) is interpreted by Mountjoy as “the result of untutored attempts at copying Mycenaean motifs” rather than as an established local style (ibidem). It is dated to the early phase of LH IIIA1 by association with a regular piriform jar with lily. The two vases were found together and pose a striking contrast (Figure 4.9): one standard Mycenaean, the other experimental in outlook. Together they give an indication of the degree of familiarity of local potters with the Mycenaean patterns and thus the degree to which Mycenaean patterns had not merely penetrated but actually become part of the common culture of the area. They attest to the fact that, despite the evidence from Mitrou and Kokkalia for the presence of an elite which partook fully in the Mycenaean koine, the transition to this Mycenaean koine was in many respects a long lasting phase in this part of Greece.

Among the open shapes, the goblet largely disappears in favor of the kylix. Motifs include chevrons (69) and horizontal whorl shells (70, 74, 75)20 and are often painted with a bright orange-red paint and polished to a high shine. Other LH IIIA2 shapes are the stemmed bowl with wavy band decoration (82, 83) and mugs with a characteristic ridged rim (78-81). That the potters at Mitrou did not always completely follow the standard Mycenaean ways is shown by a locally made unique three-handled kylix, unearthed by MAP in 2004 (illustrated in Van de Moortel and Zahou 2005, 44 fig. 5). Although the concept of the three handles may have been inspired by the common three handled alabastron or 20

The rather schematized Mycenaean whorl shell is most often identified as murex brandaris, which was used in the production of purple dye (Pliny Nat. Hist. 9.62.135) as well as incense (D‟Agata 1997) and thus likely had elite connotations. It is thus a fitting motif on a drinking cup and it may be no coincidence that depictions of shells of this type became popular in the period of expansion of Mycenaean trade to the Levant (see Table 1.1), where the use of murex as a dye is attested since the first half of the second millennium at Ugarit (Syria; Stieglitz 1979). See also Stieglitz 1994.

The Mitrou surface survey material dating to the LH IIIA2 phase (64-83, Figure 4.8) continues to show evidence of Mitrou‟s firm establishment in the Mycenaean koine. Closed vessels include the alabastron (64) and stirrup jar (65-67). A large sherd of a fine small stirrup jar (65) used for perfumed oil (Shelmerdine 1985, 141-143) demonstrates the continued presence of a

84

society, as they were in Archaic Greece.22 The horse first appears on steles marking the graves of Shaft Grave dynasts at Mycenae (Steles I, IV and V, where a horse draws the deceased warrior‟s chariot (Hood 1978, 98-100 and figs. 78 and 81). From the LH IIIB phase fresco fragments survive from palace walls at Mycenae and Tiryns depicting chariots drawn by horses (Hood 1978, 80-81), as well as frescoes from Pylos representing horses among other animals (lions, deer) in files (Hood 1978, 80). Their very location (palaces) as well as the medium in which they are shown (fresco painting) are an indication of the status associated with the horse. This can further be inferred from small Mycenaean figurines: most zoomorphic figurines, which were likely produced by potters who also created vessels, for ordinary people and in great numbers, portray bovids (or sheep, pigs, or dogs), not horses (Demakopoulou 1988, 225).

piriform jar, the fact that no other kylikes with three handles are known attests to the creativity and inventiveness of the potters at Mitrou; it serves as a reminder of the local character of the pottery in southeastern East Lokris in the LH IIIA2 phase as much as the Kokkinonyzes hydria did for the LH IIIA1. One wonders whether this particular vessel may have had a special function, practical or otherwise, or whether it represents a „quirk‟ of a potter who was talented enough not to be limited by established shapes and forms.

In summary, the evidence for the LH IIIA phase in southeastern East Lokris is abundant. Pottery is well made, with a large variety in decorative motifs, and follows largely the standard Mycenaean practices. Although there are exceptions showing local peculiarities throughout the LH IIIA phase, it is clear that the Mycenaean koine, which began in southern Greece in LH IIIA1, embraced the study area as well; its pottery became standardized, as also elsewhere in Phthiotis and Thessaly.23 Finds clearly indicate the continuing presence of an elite.

Figure 4.10: Mitrou, LH IIIA2-early IIIB phi figurine

A head and torso of a phi figurine belonging to French‟s Phi A class (French 1971, 116) dates to the LH IIIA2early IIIB (Figure 4.10). Nine fragments of zoomorphic figurines, probably bovid, date from LH IIIA (the earliest is an example of the most naturalistic „Wavy Type 1‟ with irregular wavy lines; see French 1971, 151-158) to LH IIIA-B (fragments with parallel wavy or straight lines or bands).

Late Helladic IIIB Perhaps the slight decrease in LH IIIB surface material at Mitrou is to be connected with the four LH IIIA2 deposits of broken pottery, one of which showed evidence of heavy burning, thus suggesting that some sort of disaster took place at the end of the LH IIIA2 phase (see Chapter 3 p. 45). Especially the LH IIIB2 phase is very poorly represented. The identified LH IIIB1 material (Figure 4.11) consists almost entirely of

An extraordinary find is a large ear which probably belonged to a bull figure21 with a head of about 15-20 cm long. Large animal figures are generally associated with votive deposits; a large bull figure has been found in what appears to be a household shrine in the Mycenaean settlement of Dimini (Adrimi-Sismani 1996). It is thus tempting to suppose that Mitrou had at the very least a house with a shrine, and possibly a larger cult center.

22

The horse is an important animal in Geometric art, bestowing glory upon its owner whether in life (e.g. pyxides with handles consisting of one up to four horses (representing actual chariot spans? See e.g. Boardman 1998, 31 fig. 38), or in death (e.g. the Dipylon kraters with processions of warriors in horse-drawn chariots. E.g. Boardman 1998, 35 fig. 45). Hurwit has drawn attention to the fact that the first time an animal is represented on a PG vase from the Greek mainland, it is a horse (on a belly handled amphora from the Kerameikos. Hurwit 1985, 58). One is also reminded of the PG Centaur figure from Lefkandi. 23 Only Phokis remained outside the koine with a distinct regional style. LH IIIA2 saw the floruit of the Mycenaean koine, but Phokis still had a distinctive local style (Mountjoy 1999, 15).

The figurine group of horse and rider from Agia Triada, if the identification of the animal is correct, attests to the importance of the Mitrou-Agia Triada area in the LH IIIA phase as well: although chariot groups are found in Mycenaean tombs with some frequency, horses are generally associated with the aristocracy in Mycenaean 21

While it is possible that the bovid ear may come from a rhyton, it seems more likely, according to O‟Neill, to be part of a large bull figure (Kramer-Hajos and O‟Neill, forthcoming).

85

Figure 4.11: LH IIIB1 surface pottery from Mitrou. Drawings M.-J. Schumacher.

86

fragments from kylikes (101-111, 117, 118) and kraters (97-100): vessels associated with drinking. Deep bowls are present as well (113-115), as are miniature vessels (121-122) and figurines.24 Excavation results indicate more dramatically a severe decline during the LH IIIB phase, with as of 2005 no evidence for deposits and very little for architecture (Chapter 3 p. 45).

(Iakovides 2001, 91) most fine wares are undecorated and it is generally assumed that in a Mycenaean palace undecorated kylikes fulfilled the role of today‟s plastic cups: cheap, highly expendable drinking vessels for the use of visitors to the palace.27 Rather, one must assume the presence of a local elite for whom drinking parties with fancy equipment served a role in conspicuous consumption.28

The LH IIIB period is the height of the Mycenaean palace period, in which pottery was mass produced and traded throughout the Mediterranean world and the Levant. Due to the process of mass production, the range of decorative motifs is smaller than before and the execution of these motifs becomes more and more standardized. On Mitrou, standardization is detectable in the firing process as well: pots are fired consistently medium hard (Mohs 3-4; Figure 4.2). Decoration of the Mitrou LH IIIB pots follows the standard motifs of the period. The whorl shell motif is predominant, occurring on almost half of the identified decorated material (97, 98, 100, 102, 103, 105, 106, 108, 109, 111-114, Figure 4.11); flowers (96, 99-101, 110, 116) occur too. One sturdy body sherd from a krater is decorated with vertical whorl shell and octopus flower (100). The solid body of the whorl shell dates this sherd to the end of the LH IIIB1 period (Mountjoy 1986, 95). One stem of a Zygouries kylix, diagnostic for the LH IIIB1 phase, was identified (103).25

A large shoulder fragment of a fine stirrup jar, decorated with unvoluted flower (96), suggests a continued interest in storing and using perfumed oil, another indication for the presence of an elite. Several fragments from semicoarse large transport stirrup jars date to LH IIIB-C and are indicative of trade during these phases (282, 283); one may surely imagine olive oil and other goods arriving to Mitrou‟s elite with some frequency. MAP excavations have added to this picture: despite the paucity and flimsy nature of the architectural remains, two seal stones and high-quality sherds from the Argolid, dating to the LH IIIB, were found (Van de Moortel 2007, VIII). The obvious popularity of the vertical version of the whorl shell as decoration, introduced in the LH IIIB1 phase (Mountjoy 1986, 67),29 is once again an indication of the enthusiasm with which Mitrou absorbed the mainstream stylistic developments. This enthusiasm may have waned slightly, however, over the course of the LH IIIB phase; or possibly the potters on Mitrou were selective in choosing which fashions to embrace. In the Mycenae houses all kylikes except for one, dating to LH IIIB1, are unpainted (Tournavitou 1992, 198), since during LH IIIB1 the kylix as a decorated shape was being replaced by the deep bowl. The horizontal handles on deep bowls make them suitable for drinking as well as

Paint is no longer bright red, but mostly brown or black on the LH IIIB sherds from Mitrou. Fabrics can still be very pale, especially on kylix fragments, but darker pinkish and buff fabrics appear as well. Especially the many krater fragments have a relatively dark buff fabric; the applied paint is dark brown or red. The striking number of decorated kylikes and kraters from Mitrou indicate the presence of a wealthy upper class engaging in frequent symposiastic activity. Undecorated kylikes were popular everyday drinking vessels used in undistinguished domestic contexts, witness their variety in shape and especially finish (Tournavitou 1992, 198),26 but the fact that potters took the time and effort to decorate their kylikes demonstrates a wealthy buying force. This wealthy upper class was not part of a palatial setting: at Pylos, Thebes (Symeonoglou 1973, pl. 57-63), Orchomenos (Mountjoy 1983) and Gla

27

See also Jacob-Felsch 1996, 103, who interprets the large percentage of decorated fine wares in Kalapodi as a contra-indication for a palace. 28 See also Bendall 2004, 112 for evidence that kylikes were especially associated with banqueting. 29 Two criteria are followed for separating the LH IIIA2 phase from the LH IIIB1 phase: the appearance of the deep bowl as a shape and the appearance of the vertical whorl shell as a decoration. Strictly speaking, the vertical whorl shell appears before the deep bowl, so that one can adopt an earlier demarcation based on the appearance of the vertical whorl shell, or a later demarcation based on the appearance of the deep bowl (see Mountjoy 1986, 67). If some of the vertical whorl shells from Mitrou date in fact to LH IIIA2, this would be even stronger evidence for Mitrou‟s desire to keep up with current fashions. If this were the case, moreover, the number of LH IIIB1 decorated kylix fragments diminishes. The vertical whorl shell motif became however popular in LH IIIB1 and is, if not diagnostic, at least typical for the phase; hence in the survey material all vertical whorl shells have been assigned to the LH IIIB1 phase.

24

Miniature vessels are diagnostic for the LH IIIB period and very frequent in settlement groups, but within IIIB cannot be further differentiated, whether on the basis of shape or of decoration (Mountjoy 1986, 101; 126). 25 For a recent overview on the dating of the Zygouries kylix, see Thomas 2004. 26 She also relates this observation to “the phenomenon of mass production and of quickly-turned-out vessels with not much attention paid to detail and appearance” (Tournavitou 1992, 198).

87

134) and dates to late LH IIIB (Kramer-Hajos and O‟Neill, forthcoming). The Mitrou material from LH IIIB thus poses somewhat of a problem: it is well made and presents evidence of an elite; yet excavation has so far failed to detect more than very minimal activity in this phase. LH IIIB finds are rare at Kynos (some LH IIIB2 occupation) and Kalapodi as well, though they do occur with some frequency in various cemeteries: from Rema Pharmaki a LH IIIB straight sided alabastron is published (AD 47, pl. 62); other finds date the tomb to LH IIIB-C. It may be significant that this is a single tomb: although it should not be excluded that this tomb was part of a larger cemetery, so far no other tombs have been found in its vicinity, conform the general poverty of remains from this period. The Agia Triada cemetery has finds dating to LH IIIB1-2 as well (a linear mug illustrated in AD 48 (plate 68) with strongly concave sides dates to LH IIIB1; see also AD 47, 205-6; AD 48, 209-210; AD 52, 436437); the LH IIIB evidence is however minimal (personal communication from Sonia Dimaki). Tombs at Sventza have been dated to LH IIIB2-LH IIIC; the few vessels that have been published (a jug and an askos in AD 40, pl. 58; a small piriform jar in Dakoronia 1996, 1173 plate 3) date to LH IIIC Late (Mountjoy 1999, 810) and LH IIIC Early, respectively.

Figure 4.12: Mitrou, LH IIIB2 Psi figurine

eating30 and the fact that they are decorated on the interior suggests that originally they were used for liquids (Tournavitou 1992, 199), so that it is not surprising that they should replace the kylix. On Mitrou, however, the deep bowl apparently did not succeed to replace the kylix in the LH IIIB period, and kylikes continued to be decorated.31 The significant numbers of decorated fragments may indicate that Mitrou now conservatively adhered to old standards at a time period when elsewhere a new tradition was taking hold.32 It is possible that this phenomenon is to be connected with the general scarcity of LH IIIB remains, as indicated above: when there is cultural decline and possibly isolation (see also Chapter 6 p. 125 ff.), one would expect cultural stagnation.

The bronze ring with spiraliform ends illustrated in Dakoronia et al. 2002, 38 fig. 16, is dated by association with a stirrup jar to LH IIIB1 by Dakoronia (n.y. 39). It has parallels with contemporary rings from Central Europe (ibidem). Two gemstones, used as seals, from two different tombs date to LH IIIA2-B and were possibly heirlooms (Onassoglou 1989a). One depicts a schematized deer (illustrated in Dakoronia et al. 2002, 40 fig. 19), the other has a linear design which Onassoglou identifies as a schematized bucranium (ibidem). The tombs at Agnanti-Dimitrakis date to LH IIIA-PG, but the majority of finds belongs to the LH IIIC phase (AD 25B, 235-237). All in all, the evidence for LH IIIB is scanty in the study area.

The LH IIIB2 period in Greece is characterized by the appearance of deep bowls with a monochrome painted interior and a very deep rim band and of rosette bowls. Neither is with certainty attested in the Mitrou surface corpus; in fact, only two sherds certainly belonging to LH IIIB2 have been identified (119 and 120, Kramer-Hajos and O‟Neill, forthcoming). The torso of a psi figurine with applied pellet breasts and an elaborate red painted decoration on the back (Figure 4.12) belongs to the Late Psi A class (French 1971, 133-

Late Helladic IIIC

30

Residue analysis of a LH IIIB-C deep bowl from Thebes showed that the bowl had been used to hold at various times barley beer and wine, figs, olive oil, pulses, and meat (Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 184-185). 31 The undecorated kylix is not absent at Mitrou: of seven inventoried undecorated kylix fragments from the survey at least two, 117 and 118, can be ascribed to the LH IIIB period (the others, 261-265), may belong to LH IIIB or C). Moreover, many undecorated fragments will not have been collected or inventoried. 32 See however note 29: it is possible that some of the decorated kylix fragments (notably 102, 105, 106, 108, 109, and 111) were in fact produced in LH IIIA2.

Finds from the LH IIIC period, on the other hand, are numerous and of great importance. All three excavated settlements in the study area, Kynos, Mitrou, and Kalapodi, have yielded significant LH IIIC remains. Since the LH IIIB destruction of the Mycenaean centers and the collapse of the palace economies caused the disappearance of the Mycenaean koine as well, parallels between the pottery of different sites in the LH III period attest to contact and the presence of a regional style. In most areas these regional styles reached their peak in LH IIIC Middle. Southeastern East Lokris may have been

88

Figure 4.13: Kynos LH IIIC Middle Fragments 1-4 (after Dakoronia 2002, 98-99 plates 4-5)

Figure 4.14: Kynos LH IIIC Middle Fragment 5 (after Dakoronia 1996a, 1173 plate 4)

89

Figure 4.15: Kynos LH IIIC Middle fragment 6 (after Dakoronia 1999b, 127 fig. 1)

Figure 4.16: Skyros, LH IIIC Middle ship depiction (adapted from Mountjoy 1999, 736 fig. 284.49)

Figure 4.17: Part of the Medinet Habu naval battle relief (after Wachsmann p. 165 fig. 8.1)

90

part of the „East Mainland koine,‟ which Mountjoy views as embracing both the eastern mainland and the Aegean islands in LH IIIC Middle-Late (Mountjoy 1999, 15).

The Kynos ships are oared, and although the two ships on Fragment 1 have a mast and rigging, in this battle they are rowed (as were much later the triremes of classical Greece). This is also shown on Fragment 6, where the sail is drawn up on the mast while a rather sketchily drawn warrior stands below, ready to attack. Wachsmann has convincingly shown that the lunate shapes below the deck on Fragments 1 and 2 are the torsos of the rowers, conceived in a way similar to the helmsman at the stern of the ship (Wachsmann 1998, 132). It should be noted, however, that in the case of the helmsman the rounded part of the torso represents the back, whereas in the case of the rowers the rounded parts may represent their front (on the right ship), since the rowers supposedly sit facing the stern of the ship and are leaning back on their benches at the end of their stroke (Wachsmann 1998, 132 and fig. 7.9), or their back (on the left ship, which is facing the opposite direction as indicated by the shape of the hull, the rigging, and the absence of a helmsman). The oars of the rowers face the other way as well. The oars of the ship on Fragment 5 reach the deck, suggesting the ship was rowed from the upper deck, an important development which may indicate a first step towards a two-banked ship (Wachsmann 1998, 137 and 155). The ships as depicted are similar to geometric depictions of war galleys and may indeed be taken as prototypes for those later depictions.34

Most spectacular among the LH IIIC finds from southeastern East Lokris are the finds of LH IIIC Middle pictorial kraters with ship depictions from Kynos. Fragments from more than four figurative kraters have been found (Dakoronia 1999b, 121), all decorated with similar depictions of ships carrying fully armed warriors brandishing javelins or swords and shields (Figures 4.134.15; Dakoronia 1987, 1996b, 1999b; Dakoronia et al. 2002, plates 3-5; Wachsmann 1998 figures 7.8, 7.15, and 7.16). As such, these depictions are unique: there are other Mycenaean depictions of ships, as well as of warriors, but only on these fragments from Kynos do we find a combination of these two motifs. Their implications are far-reaching, seeming to indicate the occurrence of sea raids, possibly by bands of pirates, or even of organized naval warfare. Although the themes on these sherds are the same, they appear to have been produced by different artists: compare for example the superior draftsmanship in Fragments 1-4 with the lesser quality work on Fragment 5 and the almost caricatured stick figure of the warrior on Fragment 6. The ships represent typical Mycenaean oared galleys, a design possibly invented by the Mycenaeans (Wedde 1999, 465). The depictions clearly show that these LBA ships had no ram, and their positioning on Fragment 1 – with the left ship placed higher and slightly smaller than the right ship – probably indicates that they are not about to collide head-on, as ships with a battle ram would, but move next to each other so that the warriors on board of both ships can board the other ship and on-board battle can commence (Dakoronia 1999b, 123). Fragment 5 shows the battle in full fling; the warriors are fighting on the deck of the ship as they would on land. The absence of a mast is here no doubt to accommodate the rather complex scene of warriors engaged in hand to hand combat.

Most striking, however, are the tall vertical stem posts on the ships, visible on Fragments 1, 3, and 5. A similar stem post appears on a contemporary sailing ship depiction from Skyros (Figure 4.16; Mountjoy 1999, 737, no. 49), to the east of Euboea (Figure 1.1), where it is obvious that the top of the stem post represents an animal head. The top of the post on Fragment 3 looks similar. The vertical stem post with bird head is reminiscent of the Sea Peoples‟ ships on the Medinet Habu naval battle relief (Figure 4.17; Romey 2003, 33-34 and Wachsmann 1998, 130 and 172).35 This relief records the battles Ramesses III fought (and won, naturally) against the Philistines and other Sea Peoples (here all depicted emaciated, in contrast to the well-fed Egyptians) in the year 1179 (Drews 1993, 158). Their ships (as well as those of the Egyptians) have sails drawn up on the mast, as the Kynos ships.

The grim consequences of the naval battle are shown in Fragment 4, where a corpse floats, horizontally and facing down, under a fish. The prow of one ship and the steering oar of another are visible next to him. The spared out breasts on this figure surely indicate the loss of his protective corselet (so too Dakoronia 1999b, 120); this is also indicated by the absence of the fastening loops on the shoulders.33

Wachsmann and Romey see further parallels between the Kynos depictions and the Sea Peoples on the Medinet Habu relief in the headgear of the warriors. The warriors 34

Karageorghis and Vermeule mention the “instinctive aesthetic feeling of connection between Late Mycenaean painting and the seventh century” (Karageorghis and Vermeule 1982, 120 note 1). 35 Wachsmann observes that the Sea Peoples‟ ships on the Medinet Habu relief “are virtually identical in nearly all surviving details to [the right ship on Fragment 1]” (Wachsmann 1998, 172).

33

A fragment from a „Warrior Krater‟ from Volos “may have nipples on the metal corselet […] or spiral scales” (Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982, 135, no. XI 57). The depiction, with spared out „breasts‟ with „nipples‟ in the center, is very similar.

91

on Fragments 1 and 3 (and 5?) wear spiky helmets of the type commonly known as „hedgehog helmets.‟ These helmets are common in the LH IIIC pictorial repertoire (see Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982 for numerous examples); probably the most famous examples are those worn by the file of warriors on the „back‟ of the Warrior Krater from Mycenae (Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982, 130-132 no. XI. 42). Fragments from a warrior krater from Volos indicate that in at least two cases this type of helmet consisted of a “double leather cap with an inserted crest at the seam along the crown, for a reserved area along the top of the head separates helmet and crest” (Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982, 135). These helmets represent a departure from the earlier standard Mycenaean boar tusk helmets, leading to questions regarding their origin, and Wachsmann and Romey connect them with the feathered headgear of some of the Sea Peoples on the Medinet Habu naval battle relief (Figure 4.17; Romey 2003, 33-34 and Wachsmann 1998, 130 and 172). The similarity is not great, however. Moreover, fragments from another krater from Kynos show fishermen with nets and fish of various sizes (see Dakoronia 2002, 100 pl. 6); the heads of these fishermen are similarly drawn which suggests that the dotted head outline can simply indicate hair (see also Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982, 91).

point forward to the eighth century geometric depictions on Dipylon vases as well. In other instances they are lunate (Fragments 1, 3) or round (Fragment 5). It is likely that the lunate shields on Fragments 1 and 3 represent a sophisticated way of showing a round shield in a side view: the less accomplished artist of Fragment 5 has refrained from attempting to depict a round shield in a side view, instead using the easier frontal view.37 On Fragment 5 two warriors with the two different shield types are engaged in combat, but on Fragment 1 two warriors with two different types of shields appear to join forces against two other ships sailing in the opposite direction and carrying at least two warriors, one with concave and one with round shield. It is therefore not clear in the Kynos depictions that one type of shield represents one army, let alone ethnicity, while the other type represents the enemy;38 the shields can thus not be taken as an indication for Mycenaeans (from Kynos) fighting non-Mycenaeans. The apparent left-handedness of two of the warriors on Fragment 1 must be unintentional and caused by artistic constraints of the silhouette style, which cannot use overlapping to any great extent since clarity will be lost (another characteristic shared with geometric art). The two warriors on Fragment 5 are watched by a figure standing at the stem post and either holding on to it with one hand, or, perhaps more likely, gesturing, possibly in a „forwards‟ move, similar to the gesture employed by a warrior on a fragment from Lefkandi (Fig. 4.19, top), whose raised arm was interpreted as the gesture of “a leader waving his men forward” (Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982, 136). He has something long and curved at his face and one wonders if he is sounding the signal for battle. Dakoronia is surely correct in her suggestion that this must be the captain of the ship or the general of the army (Dakoronia et al. 2002, 44).

The Kynos warriors are protected by corselets and shields as well. Two of the warriors on Kynos Fragment 1 have „fringed‟ shirts or corselets, possibly simply consisting of two rectangular sheets of perhaps reinforced linen (Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982, 109), one hanging on the front and the other protecting the warrior‟s back, fastened together on the shoulders (hence the loops on Fragment 1); they have equally fringed or spiky shields. The shield of one of the warriors on Fragment 5 appears to be spiked as well. The shields are small on all three relevant Kynos fragments, clearly no longer representing the Mycenaean tower shields or figure-of-eight shields; small round shields are a common feature of LH IIIB-C pictorial vase painting (see Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982, 109), possibly gaining its popularity due to contact with the Near East (ibidem). Since they are small, they indicate “a shift in fighting tactics toward mobility, away from set standing duels” (ibidem). Some of shields on the Kynos fragments are concave like a proto-Dipylon shield (Fragments 1, 5, 6).36 Thus not only ships, but shields

The observed similarities between the Kynos depictions and the Medinet Habu relief could simply mean that the people at Kynos – as elsewhere – had adopted the ships and equipment common for the period. Alternatively,

allies of the Hittites on the Luxor reliefs of the Battle of Kadesh” (ibidem). 37 Since the same artist does draw a standard concave shield, it is likely that the concave shields are shown in all instances in a front view (and therefore do not represent a rectangular shield from the side). 38 On the Medinet Habu relief, the Sea Peoples all have round shields, while the Egyptians carry shields which are more rectangular. Vermeule and Karageorghis remark that small round shields are attributes of the Shardana and the Peleset, both constituents of the Sea Peoples, but are depicted on the Pylos frescoes as well. They are typically accompanied by javelins, as they are here (Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982, 109).

36

A similar concave shield seems to be portrayed on the aforementioned krater from Volos (Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982, XI 57). In their 1982 publication, Vermeule and Karageorghis were understandably puzzled about the exact meaning of the “dark object […] shaped like the blade of a double axe” but the subsequent evidence from Kynos corroborates their hunch that it was a shield (Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982, 135). They note that “not dissimilar” shields “appear among the

92

Figure 4.18: Kalapodi, LH IIIC Middle “Warrior krater” (after Mountjoy 1999 p. 816 fig. 325 no. 28)

they could imply that the potters-painters at Kynos were familiar with Sea Peoples. This association in turn leads to tantalizing questions which are easier to ask than to answer: did the inhabitants of Kynos defend themselves against bands of Sea Peoples by taking to their ships, rather than waiting to be raided? Or were the inhabitants of Kynos actually among those elusive Sea Peoples themselves?39 The eventual answers to these questions may have important ramifications for our understanding of the end of the Bronze Age in this area. What is certain is that for LH IIIC inhabitants of Kynos, ship board battles were an important iconographical theme, which in turn suggests that these LH IIIC Mycenaeans valued their own (perceived) role as warriors. Figure 4.19: Lefkandi, LH IIIC Middle krater fragments (after Evely et al. 2006, plate 58a and 60 (B10))

The warriors on these ship depictions are painted in solid silhouette style with only the eyes spared out.40 A similar silhouette style is attested at Kalapodi, where hunters are black silhouettes (Figures 4.18). These hunters appear to wear similar hedgehog helmets as the Kynos warriors. Jacob-Felsch has noted the strong similarity in shape and decoration between these “warrior krater” fragments from Kalapodi and those from Lefkandi (Jacob-Felsch 1996, 87); similarities include the silhouette style as well as checkered designs (on Figure 4.19 and see Felsch 1987, 30 fig. 51). Another similarity between the Kynos warriors, the Kalapodi hunters, and a warrior from Lefkandi, are the fringed skirts. Jacob-Felsch assumes that the regional contacts in the Mycenaean era were so tight that a regional style could develop in Central Greece (“der Landschaftsstil Mittelgriechenlands,” Jacob-Felsch 1996, 86), rather than assuming the existence of wandering potters offering their services in different locales within a region. As characteristics of this regional style she notes the lack of certain shapes and decorative motifs and the plainness and tendency for abstraction of the material (ibidem, 87). Given the similarities between

the Kynos material and that from both Kalapodi and Lefkandi, this regional style would then encompass Kynos as well as Kalapodi and Lefkandi, suggesting that it is focused on the North Euboean Gulf and its immediate and easily reachable hinterland.41 It is expected, given the noted similarities between the Kynos warriors and warriors from Volos – similarities which included the concave shield type and the spared out „breasts‟ on one of the figures – that Volos, too, was part of the same pictorial tradition. Indeed, it has been noted that at Volos the LH IIIC pottery is “almost identical” with that from Lefkandi (Evely et al. 2006, 219), evidence for a LH IIIC „coastal koine‟ focusing on the North Euboean Gulf. Moreover, three LH IIIC Middle sherds from the Mitrou surface survey, belonging to one krater (132 and 133, Figure 4.20), display marked similarities with a PG krater from Volos, which has many LH IIIC characteristics (Figure 4.21; Sipsie-Eschbach 1998): both have panels consisting of carelessly executed multiple wavy lines and both use dots to frame motifs. A close connection between the two sites is thus expected; in fact, the North Euboean Gulf provides an easy route

39

The Warrior Vase from Mycenae may lead to similar questions. The warriors carry small shields and wear helmets with horns, not unlike those worn by the Shardana bodyguards of Ramses II at Kadesh, on one side, „hedgehog helmets‟ on the other. 40 The only exception is one warrior on Fragment 1 whose neck (or neck guard?) is drawn in outline.

41

Desborough suggested already in 1964 that a LH IIIC Middle Euboean koine existed (Desborough 1964, 20 and 228).

93

Figure 4.20: Mitrou, 132 and 133: LH IIIC Middle krater. Drawing M.-J. Schumacher.

Figure 4.21: Dimini, PG krater with many LH IIIC characteristics (after Sipsie-Eschbach 1998, pl. 71)

94

Figure 4.22: LH IIIC surface pottery from Mitrou: Deep bowls, kraters, and amphoras. Drawings M.-J. Schumacher.

95

The identified LH IIIC material from the Mitrou survey (Figures 4.20 and 4.22) is generally of high quality. It comes largely from kraters (129, 131-133, 139-144), with deep bowls (130, 145, 146), amphoras (126-128, 135, 136), and (stirrup) jars (125, 134, 137, 138) making up the remainder of the material, and dates predominantly to the earlier phases of the LH IIIC. Although occasionally carelessly decorated, the LH IIIC material from Mitrou is technically well made: the clay is well levigated, the shapes are clear. Fabrics are generally darker than in the preceding periods, a brownish or pinkish buff decorated with a lustrous dark brown paint which is occasionally highly vitrified (132, 133). Some pieces are characterized by a dull orange paint on a light slip (135, 144-146); Rutter has suggested that a fine reddish fabric decorated with this dull orange paint served as a local alternative to the Lefkandi White Ware (Rutter forthcoming). White Ware appears to be conspicuously absent at Kalapodi, Mitrou, Kynos, or Volos; Evely et al. speculate however that at Volos certain wares with a gray fabric may in fact be White ware (Evely et al. 2006, 219).44

Figure 4.23: Sventza, LH IIIC Early small piriform jar with granary decoration (after Dakoronia 1999a, 184 fig. 6)

between the two (see Figure 1.1). Parallels between Kynos and Lefkandi are further suggested by coarse ware: a „button-based pithos,‟ a shape common in LH IIIC levels on Lefkandi (Evely et al. 2006, 219 and 214, fig. 2.39: 1, 3 and pl. 24.2), from Kynos is illustrated in AD 45 pl. 84.42 Pithos fragments from Mitrou (293, 299300) have parallels with pithoi from Kalapodi and Delphi (Kramer-Hajos 2005a, 225-228).

Among the LH IIIC material from Sventza is a LH IIIC Late askos, a shape which is uncommon both in funerary contexts and after the LH IIIC Early phase (Mountjoy 1986, table III); Dakoronia notes a preference in Mycenaean graves in East Lokris for rare shapes (Dakoronia 1996a, 1171). Apart from the askos she mentions the flask, the ring-askos (one from Spartia is illustrated in Dakoronia et al. 2002, 38 fig. 15) and the lekane as examples of unusual pottery (ibidem). A small piriform jar with granary decoration from Sventza (Figure 4.23; see also Dakoronia 1996a, 1173 pl. 3) is unusual since the shape was elsewhere replaced by the amphoriskos by LH IIIC Early (ibidem and Mountjoy 1986, 137); this local product may indicate a certain conservatism in the region or at least in a particular workshop. Conservatism, rather than innovation, is perhaps the reason for an unusual finger ring in Tomb VI in Sventza as well (illustrated in Dakoronia et al. 2002, 38 fig. 16; see above p. 88). The ring is described by Konstantinidi as an “open finger ring of bronze with spiraliform ends” (Konstantinidi 2001, 150); Dakoronia notes that it was found worn by a deceased in association with a LH IIIB1 stirrup jar and would be the earliest example of a bronze ring with spiral ends in Greece (Dakoronia 1996a, 1171 and note 31). Although it is not to be excluded beforehand that Mycenaeans in southeastern East Lokris would have invented the type, it is, given the later date of the other, published pottery (see above p. 88), perhaps more likely that the LH IIIB1 stirrup jar was in fact produced during the LH IIIC phase, after an earlier fashion.

The additional finds of three terracotta ship models from a slightly later time period (LH IIIC Late) at Kynos has been interpreted as evidence for the existence of a fleet in Late Mycenaean Kynos (Dakoronia 1996b). Although it may be premature to think of a fleet of Homeric-type penteconters stationed at Kynos,43 it is more than likely that Kynos was an important port, given its excellent location on the shore. Two of these ship models are sleek war galleys (Dakoronia et al. 2002, 44 fig. 22 and Dakoronia 1996b); the third is deeper and wider. Dakoronia has interpreted this third ship as a sturdy trading barge, thus providing evidence for the existence of specialized water craft (Dakoronia 1996b); Wedde on the other hand prefers to view it as another type of galley which could be used for warfare as well as trade (Wedde 1999). One may wonder what Kynos may have exported: grain, pottery, bronze, textiles?

42

It may be noted too that at both Kynos and Lefkandi storage facilities contained pithoi as well as unbaked clay bins (Chapter 3 p. 39 and Evely et al. passim). 43 Dakoronia estimates that one of the terracotta ship models from Kynos representing a war galley may have had at least 25 oars on each side, thus fitting the definition of the penteconter (Dakoronia 1996b, 160). In the Catalogue of Ships, Kynos heads the entry for the Lokrians, who provide 40 ships for the expedition against Troy (Iliad 2.527-535; see Appendix 1 p. 152).

44

Lefkandi White Ware has been found at Kea as well and a common origin is suggested for both the Euboean and the Kean White Ware (Evely et al. 2006, 220; Jones 1986, 476).

96

mixing of traditions took place as during the transition from the MBA to the LBA: in both cases Mycenaean shapes can be recognized in non-Mycenaean fabrics.

Submycenaean to Protogeometric Locally produced handmade pottery from the transition between the LBA and the EIA was found at Kynos, Mitrou, and Kalapodi. Handmade Burnished Ware first turns up in LH IIIC levels and continues at both Kalapodi and Mitrou throughout the Submycenaean and Protogeometric phases (Jacob-Felsch 1996, 75).45 Most of the HMB ware consists of non-Mycenaean cooking pots and other domestic and utilitarian vessels (including large heavy walled pithoi); the presence of these nonMycenaean types was taken as evidence for intrusive population elements by e.g. Rutter (Rutter 1975, 1990) and Deger-Jalkotzi (1977, 1983) who saw formal parallels with, respectively, Troy/the Northern Balkans and southern Italy and Sicily;46 Kilian saw the closest parallels with Epirus in northwest Greece (Kilian 1978). Occasionally, however, Mycenaean shapes are imitated, as also at LH IIIB Tiryns (Kilian 1978). Most spectacular among these in the study area are one or possibly two handmade and dark burnished kylix stem fragments reported from the MAP excavations on Mitrou, “the first examples of this quintessentially Mycenaean ceramic form to have been recognised in this markedly nonMycenaean ceramic class at a Mainland Greek site” (Rutter forthcoming, „Addendum‟). Regardless of the exact origin of these handmade burnished vessels (should we imagine a potter using a familiar (hand building) technique and finish to imitate a Mycenaean shape which was regarded as „classy‟?), it is likely that during the transitional period from the LBA to the EIA a similar

Rarer than the HMB ware is handmade unburnished pottery, known from Kalapodi and Mitrou. A Submycenaean pottery deposit from Mitrou includes more than twenty crude, miniature handmade unburnished vessels of a medium coarse fabric and a wheel thrown cooking pot containing the femurs of a young pig and four foetal piglets (Rutter forthcoming, „Addendum‟ and Van de Moortel and Zahou 2005, 44). The handmade pottery, representing eight different open shapes (Rutter forthcoming, „Addendum), among which a kylix, a tray, and cups (Rutter, forthcoming, figs. 6, 7, 8, and 10), has parallels with pottery from the Submycenaean Horizon 7 at Kalapodi (Van de Moortel and Zahou 2005, 44; Jacob-Felsch 1996, 98-100, especially nos. 302-306), perhaps an indication that the „regional style‟ detected in LH IIIC Middle continued in the SM phase.47 In addition to vexing chronological questions (see Rutter, forthcoming), it is difficult to assess the reasons behind the production of this sort of vessels. Since both at Mitrou and at Kalapodi these vessels were found together with wheel made Submycenaean pottery, the method of manufacture must have been a conscious choice rather than a necessity (as opposed to the HMB ware). Possibly their miniature size dictated the manufacturing method: LH IIIB miniature vessels are hand built, too. But whereas the LH IIIB miniature vessels turn up frequently in domestic contexts (Mountjoy 1986, 101; 126),48 the miniature size of the Submycenaean vessels might indicate a ritual context, given their association with the cooking pot with piglet bones on Mitrou and the general cult context of the finds at Kalapodi.49

45

At Lefkandi, interestingly, handmade ware is largely limited to LH IIIC phase 1 (= LH IIIC Early) and PGGeometric levels; it is very rare during the LH IIIC phases 2-3 (= Middle-Late) (Evely et al. 2006, 227 and passim). Moreover, the HMB ware at Lefkandi may be of non-local origin (clay analysis seems to be inconclusive; ibidem 308). Finally, whereas at Kalapodi and Mitrou occasionally Mycenaean shapes are imitated in this HMB ware, at Lefkandi the handmade carinated cup from phase 1a is actually suggested to be the inspiration for wheelmade carinated cups from the same phase (ibidem 182). At Dimini, too, HMB ware is limited to the LH IIIC early, the last occupation phase of the large megaron complex (Adrimi-Sismani 2006, 474-475). It appears together with Gray pseudo-Minyan wheel-made polished ware after the destructions at the end of LH IIIB2beginning of LH IIIC Early and differs enough from the locally Mycenaean handmade cooking pots for the excavator to suggest a short-lived change in population (Adrimi-Sismani 2006, 471). 46 For a northern origin, see also Bankoff and Winter 1984 and Bankoff et al. 1996. HMB ware is however locally made: see e.g. Jones 1986, 474-476. For arguments against a foreign origin of HMB ware, see Walberg 1976 (followed by Rutter‟s reply: Rutter 1976) and Small 1990 and 1997.

Just as in this transitional period potters on Mitrou produced wheelmade unburnished vessels as well as handmade burnished and unburnished vessels, so, too, did they create wheelmade burnished cooking pots (Rutter forthcoming, fig. 11). 47

Since this pottery follows Mycenaean shapes but is arguably „degenerate‟ (handmade, crude, and unburnished), the term „Submycenaean,‟ if it were not already in use for the sparsely and sloppily decorated wheelmade vessels from the same time period, would describe this class of pottery well. 48 From Lefkandi-Xeropolis LH IIIC Early miniature vessels are present in domestic contexts as well and are suggested to be children‟s toys: Evely et al. 2006, 22. 49 Miniature kylikes from LH IIIB Pylos are associated with (feasting) rituals (contra Blegen‟s suggestion that they were toys: Stocker and Davis 2004, 70); a miniature kylix from LH IIIA2 Tsoungiza is interpreted similarly (Dabney et al. 2004, 90-91).

97

Possibly in this peripheral area certain Mycenaean shapes and decorations survived well into the 11th century BC and beyond, and their appearance next to PG decorations is therefore more an indication of the backwardness of the region, adhering to old traditions, than of an innovative spirit (see e.g. Deger-Jalkotzi and Zavadil 2003, “Report on the Final General Discussion,” 257259; and see the PG krater from Dimini with its many LH IIIC characteristics, Figure 4.21, and the LH IIIC Early small piriform jar from Sventza, Figure 4.23).51 In other words, the „pure LH levels‟ where surprisingly skyphoi with pendant semicircles were found, should perhaps rather be viewed as PG levels where surprisingly large amounts of LH material survived. The implications of this could potentially be far reaching and might ultimately mean that at Kalapodi and other sites in East Lokris stylistically LH IIIC Late-Submycenaean deposits are chronologically Early Iron Age rather than Late Bronze Age. It would at the same time support and devalue any argument for continuity between the Late Bronze and the Early Iron Age, since Late Helladic shapes continue into the Early Iron Age, but the evidence for pre-Iron Age use of the Kalapodi sanctuary and for the Elateia cemetery dwindles. In other words, whereas traditions would show continuity, locations would not.

Figure 4.24: Kalapodi, Submycenaean-EPG neck-handled amphora (after Felsch 1987 fig. 55 p. 32)

The Protogeometric pottery from Mitrou has strong parallels with material from Lefkandi. Sherds belong to a small range of shapes, largely imported, among which are kraters and skyphoi with pendant concentric semicircles, hallmark of the period (Catling and Lemos 1990, 22-23). It is notable that many of the fine PG vessels found at Mitrou were mended in antiquity, which attests to their high value. None of the handmade burnished ware, which was produced locally, shows evidence of repairs (Van de Moortel and Zahou 2005, 48), evidence for the difference in status between the two classes of pottery and perhaps an indication that contacts between the mainland and Euboea were no longer frequent: rather than importing new vessels, they were repaired.

Significant finds from Kalapodi include SM-EPG neckhandled amphorae with a decoration of concentric circles, made with a compass and a multiple brush (Figure 4.24).50 These are the only wares from Kalapodi which are not made of local clay (Jacob-Felsch 1988, 194 and 1996, 57-59; Jones 115-120). These imports are all made from the same type of clay, which suggests a common origin for them; Jacob-Felsch has suggested an origin in Thessaly and Doris, from where they would have been transported to other areas by migrating Dorians (JacobFelsch 1988, 198). The presence of skyphoi with a LH shape but concentric circle design in pure LH levels (Catling 1982, 29) has led to a discussion of the origin of the common Protogeometric compass drawn circles. Desborough placed the invention in early Protogeometric Attica (Desborough 1952, 119-126). More recent publications propose an origin of the skyphos with pendant concentric semicircles on Lefkandi, since it is there alone that the full range of shapes and types of skyphoi is represented (Kearsley 1989, Catling and Lemos 1990). Instead of assuming that this PG design appeared unusually early or was even invented in Central Greece, we should perhaps assume that this is another case of cultural conservatism.

51

It could also be an example of “religious conservatism” (a term used by Stocker and Davis 2004, 70). The skyphoi were presumably produced locally and for use in the sanctuary. As cult vessels, they may have kept their traditional shape longer than similar vessels in a domestic context: cults are often conservative. The technique of compass-drawn circles may have been regarded as no more than a convenient technique to improve the already existing designs of (semi)circles and may as such have been accepted more easily than a change in shape. Thus these skyphoi would not indicate the general backwardness of the region, but only reflect the conservatism of the cult.

50

Lemos states they were made with a compass but not with the multiple-brush technique (Lemos 2002, 56); see also Eiteljorg 1980 and Jacob-Felsch‟s reaction in JacobFelsch 1988.

98

indicate that only finished chert tools or prepared cores were imported to Mitrou.

Other Bronze Age finds and trade Many stone, metal, and other non-ceramic finds cannot be accurately dated to one of the subdivisions of the Late Helladic period, but do give information about trade and exchange patterns.52 Cylindrical, conical, and biconical Mycenaean spindle whorls, beads and counters, both of stone and of terracotta, are frequently encountered, in tombs as well as in the surface material from Mitrou.53 Their presence on the chest of a corpse in a grave at Sventza may indicate they were ornaments of some kind (Dakoronia et al. 2002, 40).54 The stone used for these items found at Mitrou is black or green steatite. The green steatite is not available locally and may have been imported from as far away as Kythera or Crete (KramerHajos and O‟Neill, forthcoming).

The many fragments of saddle querns on Mitrou are of conglomerate or andesite. The andesites range in color from the pale red and bluish gray associated with the andesites from the Saronic Gulf islands to the dark gray and black associated with the andesites from Nisyros and Santorini in the south Aegean Volcanic Arc (see KramerHajos and O‟Neill, forthcoming, for references). Two mortars in the form of three-legged bowls, which are common in Cyprus, Crete, the Cyclades and on the mainland in the Middle and Late Bronze Age and are found in both domestic and ritual contexts, may have been used for grinding spices, like those employed in scenting olive oil. Evidence of Mycenaean fishing at Mitrou is provided by two folded lead fishing weights, one long and thin, the other almost square. Both types are very similar to those from a fisherman‟s tomb in Perati, which date to the LH IIIC phase (depicted in Demakopoulou 1988, 244-245; cf. Iakovidis 1969-1970 vol. 2, p. 355; vol.3, pl. 135b). Their weight suggests that they may have been used on a thrown cast net. Folded lead weights are typical for the Late Bronze Age, when metallurgy in general and the use of lead became more common and accessible to ordinary people. Lead weights are less bulky, though more expensive, than stone or terracotta weights. Lead would probably have been imported from Laurium in Attica or from Siphnos as a byproduct of silver manufacture.

The chipped stone from Mitrou consists of obsidian with a few chert pieces. The predominance of obsidian suggests that the chipped stone dates mainly to the Early Helladic period and thus falls outside the scope of this study. However, most pieces are hard to date to any specific phase of the Bronze Age and it is possible that the chipped stone industry survived throughout the Bronze Age and, perhaps, into the Early Iron Age.55 The obsidian from Mitrou was imported from Melos as unprepared nodules and locally worked, as is shown by the presence of primary as well as secondary and tertiary flakes. This may suggest that raw nodules were collected on Melos not by specialized knappers – who would prepare the cores at the quarries before transporting them elsewhere – but by traders or fishermen happening to pass by. A few of the chert pieces look like the chocolate chert from the Pindos region; local chert beds are all of such poor quality that they would have been unsuitable for tool manufacture. The chert cores exhibit a degree of fine workmanship matching that of the obsidian cores. The absence of unretouched chert cortical flakes might

The evidence for metallurgy at Kynos (Chapter 3 p. 39) suggests copper imports from Thessaly, southern Attica, or the southeastern tip of Euboea. Tin, used not only at Kynos to create bronze jewelry and weaponry (found for example at Kynos, Spartia, Agia Triada, Kokkalia, Ag. Georgios, Golemi, Sventza, and Agnanti), but also used to coat funerary vessels at Kokkalia and Vagia, may have its origins as far away as Afghanistan, Etruria, Spain, Central Europe (Bohemia), or Cornwall (see Immerwahr 1966; Muhly 1985). When it shows up, it suggests embeddedness in a regional exchange network.

52

For a brief discussion of the animal bone evidence at Kalapodi, see Chapter 7. 53 The small finds from the surface survey at Mitrou were studied by Kerill O‟Neill and are to be published in Hesperia (Kramer-Hajos and O‟Neill, forthcoming); the following information on stone finds and lead fishing weights is derived from O‟Neills report. 54 Hypotheses on the function of these objects range from dress weights to true spindle whorls to buttons or ornaments (Iakovidis 1977, 113-119). 55 Parkinson devoted in 1999 much needed attention to the question of chipped stone in the Mycenaean economy and reached the sensible conclusion that the absence of chipped stone from palace sites and from the Linear B records does not imply an absence of the industry as a whole, but rather that chipped stone production took place outside of the palatial control and at other centers than the palace. See also Kardulias 1999.

The rich gold, glass, rock crystal and precious stone finds from Kokkalia, Golemi, Sventza, and Ag. Georgios, and especially the agate goods from the Kokkalia tombs, suggest contact with a regional center, most likely Thebes, where these goods may have been produced. The date of these finds has in most cases not been published – only the two Sventza seals have been dated to LH IIIA2B (Onassoglou 1989a) – but given the general development in the area it is most likely that they predate the LH IIIB. This also fits with the assumption that a dispersion of luxury goods is generally typical for the earlier Mycenaean period, before power was consolidated and centered in the hands of very few families who held on to whatever outward signs of power were available (Voutsaki 2001, 203). Given the easy route from Thebes

99

via Orchomenos to Kalapodi, it is not surprising that prestige goods should have found their way to the Kalapodi area.

their amuletic powers (amber has electrical qualities) rather than purely for decoration (Harding and HughesBrock 1974, 152).

The amber bead from Kokkinonyzes (and those from Spartia, Kokkalia, and Golemi) must have ultimately come from the Baltic coast; this and similar finds of individual beads (as opposed to whole necklaces in the LH I shaft graves at Mycenae) do not, however, suggest that far ranging trade networks to northern Europe were in place during the LH IIB/IIIA1 phases. Rather than being new imports, these beads may represent a „residue‟ of the quantities of LH I amber, trickling down the social scale from the elites in the Argolid to humbler people in central Greece generation after generation, and may thus suggest a gift-exchange network operating within the Mycenaean world (Hughes-Brock 1985, 259). This is suggested not only by the wider geographical spread of amber finds in Greece in LH IIB-IIIA1 (Harding and Hughes-Brock 1974, 148 ff.), but also by the fact that despite this greater spread the actual finds of amber in a single context are far fewer than before, often just a single bead. These single beads may have been worn for

Although one amber bead was found in a LH I-II find context at Thebes in Central Greece in Thebes, this represents a single exceptional find: almost all amber from the LH I-II phases is concentrated in the Argolid and Messenia (Harding and Hughes-Brock 1974, 147 ff.).56 From LH IIIA onwards, amber is more widespread in Central Greece, and consists then exclusively of no more than 1-3 beads in any given context (Harding and Hughes-Brock 1974, 150-151 figs. 2-3). The single amber beads from the tombs in the study area fit this picture very well. It is not surprising that the few instances of amber in southeastern East Lokris are in rich burials at locations with easy access to either Orchomenos (Kokkalia, Golemi) or the North Euboean Gulf (Kokkinonyzes, Spartia): even when the valued amber reached southeastern East Lokris through an exclusively Mycenaean (as opposed to European) exchange network, it found its way to the East Lokrian elites via the old and tried trade routes.

56

Renfrew suggested that amber in this early Mycenaean period reached the Shaft Grave kings via a „prestige chain‟ of gift-exchange stretching across Europe; the Mycenaean kings were the last link in this chain (Renfrew 1972, 467-468). It is possible that this early amber did not reach the Peloponnese over land, but via sea routes from Britain (where amber may have washed ashore or have been purposefully imported): the amber spacer plates found in Greece are strikingly similar to spacer plates found in Great Britain (Harding and Hughes-Brock 1974, 156-157).

100

PART II Chapter 5: Site distribution By combining information from Chapters 2 and 3, and thus examining the setting of the sites, it is possible to analyze which landscape factors influenced settlement distribution in late Bronze Age southeastern East Lokris. Although an environmentally deterministic perspective ought to be avoided, common sense nevertheless leads one to expect that certain landscape types would be favored over other types: no farmer in his right mind would settle happily on a barren, rocky hilltop, to give an extreme example. By systematically studying these factors of the natural environment, it is eventually possible to describe a „settlement style‟ for the region.

phase and survives into the Protogeometric, it seems possible that the location was chosen with „invisibility‟ (if not defensibility) in mind, not unlike the „refuge settlements‟ on Crete at the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Early Iron Age. Any disturbances would most likely have bypassed this remote location via the plains along the coast. On the other hand, some of the large coastal settlements – most notably Kynos and Mitrou – were very important in the LH IIIC phase, a clear indication that the coast was not abandoned and depopulated in this time period. Indeed, one may wonder whether in the LH IIIC phase these coastal settlements would be not only strong but also offensive, causing some of their weaker neighbors to retreat into the mountains, and what in this respect the significance of battle scenes on board of foreign-looking ships, as at Kynos (Chapter 4 p. 91), is. Clearly, more thorough investigation is needed in this area to establish the location and the chronology of sites and thus gain an understanding of the end of the LBA and the transition to the EIA in this area.

Site location and geography The ranges of mountains, which break up the landscape and create barriers between the interior and the coast, promote the growth of numerous local centers in the area (Hope-Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 235). Possibly this fragmentation of the landscape is partly responsible for the apparent lack of one (palatial) center in the area (see also Chapter 6 p. 125), just as it may have contributed to the forming of the „Hundred Houses‟ of the Lokrian aristocracy in historic times (Polyb. 12.5.7; Appendix 1 p. 152), rather than to the formation of one powerful city state with a large territory. One of these centers was located at or in the immediate vicinity of Kalapodi in the interior valley formed by the Daphnoremma and Dipotamos rivers (see Figure 1.2). Kalapodi was a cult center, but the large numbers of tombs around it (at Kokkalia, Vagia, and Zeli-Agios Georgios) strongly suggest a large settlement located, if not at the exact spot of Kalapodi, then at least nearby (see also Chapter 3 p. 59). The rich finds from these tombs indicate that this was the location of a regional center long before it became a cult center. Most other known settlements, and all settlements which appear to have been important centers, are located on or very close to the coast (Figure 5.1): Melidoni, Kynos, Skala Atalantis, Kyparissi, Mitrou, Proskynas, Vlichada, Goumourades, Larymna, and Pazaraki.

Melidoni, Kynos, Mitrou, Skala Atalantis, Vlichada, and Larymna were located directly on the coast. Melidoni, Kynos and Vlichada occupied high hills or mounds, Mitrou and Skala Atalantis occupied a lower hill, and Larymna was partially fortified. Although sea level was lower in the Bronze Age and Mitrou was in the Bronze Age not an islet, it was located in a bay and may well have had a harbor function. Kynos and Melidoni were likely harbors, too; in the case of Kynos there is evidence of the importance of ships and seafaring in the ship models and the pictorial krater fragments with depictions of naval battles. Skala Atalantis was at a part of the coast which was shallow; for LBA ships which seem to have had no or only rudimentary keel planks (Wachsmann 1998, 241-243), this would not have been an impediment. On the contrary, if LBA seafaring was any similar to Homeric seafaring, a shallow beach would have been an ideal natural harbor where ships could have been drawn up to the beach without much difficulty. Kyparissi, Proskynas, Chiliadou, Goumourades, and Pazaraki were at little distance from the sea and must have benefited from the proximity of the sea indirectly (profiting from the sea traffic which connected them with the southern and eastern Aegean), but would not have been ports themselves. Proskynas was likely the interior sister town of Mitrou: Mycenaean pottery at Mitrou and Proskynas is extremely similar, so a close connection between the two is strongly suggested. Pazaraki may have

Agnanti, although not much further from the coast than Kyparissi, Proskynas, Goumourades, and Pazaraki, is however separated from the coast by steep hills, does not have a view on the sea, and is thus oriented rather towards the interior than towards the coast. Agnanti is also the highest located settlement in the study area at close to 400 m (Figure 5.1). Since at least the accompanying cemetery dates largely to the LH IIIC

101

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb; x stretch of road at Pazaraki.

Figure 5.1: Sister towns and routes

had a similar relation to Larymna. It seems possible that Goumourades and Vlichada had a similar relationship, although this is difficult to determine just on the basis of incidental surface finds. Dakoronia has proposed that Kynos had an interior sister town as well, at LivanatesPalaiokastro near Kokkinonyzes (Dakoronia 1993, 125126); it is unclear, however, whether any of the remains on this classical acropolis are Mycenaean. A similar pattern of „double towns‟, with an inland and a coastal center, exists nowadays (e.g. Atalanti and Skala Atalantis, Livanates and Skala Livanates, Tragana and Tragana Paralia, and even, with a larger distance, Malesina and Theologos).1 The difference between the modern „double towns‟ and the Late Bronze Age ones seems to be one of hierarchy: whereas nowadays invariably the emphasis is on the inland town and the beach town is a dependent satellite, the opposite may well have been the case in Mycenaean times (as it was certainly for Mitrou and Proskynas), when the North Euboean Gulf, not the National Road, was the main traffic route in this area. This would make Vlichada a higher-order site than Goumourades, which the casual surface finds seem to confirm: the finds at Vlichada – an extensive site –

include a fair amount of decorated pottery, while at Goumourades most is undecorated. Similarly, it is not hard to believe that Larymna, with its Cyclopean walls, was more important than Pazaraki, from which only sherds are reported (Figure 5.1). Not all sites follow this pattern: a settlement responsible for the Spartia tombs might have functioned as sister town for Skala Atalantis, although Skala Atalantis does not appear to have been an important site; harder to imagine is that coastal Kotrona or Velanidia were part of a system like this. At both locations, remains seem to suggest just a small settlement (hamlet or farmstead?). The more mountainous sites (Chiliadou, Kyparissi, Agnanti, and possibly Roustiana fall outside this system as well. Several settlements are located near significant streams or rivers: this is the case for Skala-Atalantis, Kyparissi, Kalapodi, and Agnanti-Kastri. Even many sites which are not near a large river, are however located close to a source of fresh water. Mitrou, Proskynas, and Goumourades are in an area rich with springs (Chapter 1 pp. 18-19); Larymna, too, receives a creek which flows even in summer. The larger waterways serve as natural routes as well, since they follow the valleys. Indeed, most sites are located on or near the routes laid out in Chapter 2 (Figure 5.1): the sites clustered around Larymna are on the route between Gla and Larymna; Proskynas, Mitrou,

1

The phenomenon is also referred to as the „ano-kato‟ („upper-lower‟) system.

102

and Goumourades are more or less on the route from Gla to the plain of Atalanti. Proskynas in fact occupies a crossroads, since a route to the Plain of Hyettos starts here as well. Sventza is perhaps farther to the north than one would expect, but the settlement to be associated with it may in fact have lain closer to the route between the plain of Atalanti and Kalapodi. The settlement associated with the Golemi cemetery was likely on the same route. Kalapodi itself is on the crossroads of two routes: the one between the plain of Atalanti (and thus the sea) and Elateia, and the one to Hyampolis and Orchomenos. The cemetery of Kvela is off the main routes, but here, too, the associated settlement may have been located somewhat nearer the route between Agnanti and Kalapodi. Despite the pattern observed by Bintliff, that the locations of settlements are chosen from the perspective of securing food resources, with slight concessions to defense but virtually none to the proximity of either traffic routes or, surprisingly, fresh water (Bintliff 1977, 114-116, 136-138, 156-157, 288-289), it is thus clear that in southeastern East Lokris most sites are positioned remarkably well in a traffic-system. It is possible that in fact the situation does not contradict Bintliff‟s findings, but that in this particular area fertile land and rich fishing waters were common enough to allow settlers to consider lesser priorities as well.

located on extensive Tertiary deposits in low hills, as are Velanidia, Vlichada, and Goumourades. Naturally, settlements avoid the higher hills and mountains.2 A closer look at the geology around known sites (see Table 5.1) reveals that most settlements (Kynos, Skala Atalantis, Mitrou, Proskynas, Vlichada, Goumourades, Kalapodi, and Melidoni) are surrounded by Tertiary deposits or alluvium, on lower to middle slopes or in open valleys, and near deep soil.3 The locations of Larymna and Pazaraki, on the other hand, are surprising as they are located on Mesozoic soils (Figure 5.2), which are less valuable for agricultural purposes. An analysis of the number of landscape characteristics shared between sites in the study area (Table 5.2) reveals that Kyparissi, Larymna, and Pazaraki are „outliers‟ among the settlements of southeastern East Lokris, with respectively 11, 10, and 0 common factors, followed by Mitrou and Skala Atalantis, which have 14 factors in common. All other settlement sites have more than 20 factors in common with each other. Whereas Mitrou and Skala Atalantis are however unique in their location on prime agricultural locations – alluvial soils in a flat plain – Kyparissi, Larymna, and Pazaraki stand out because of the unsuitability of their location for agriculture: higher hills with steeper slopes, a smaller depth of soil, or infertile soil. In this analysis Pazaraki is unique in all four aspects of surficial geology, physiography, soil depth, and slope. It should be noted, however, that although Pazaraki itself is located on a steep hill with shallow and bare soil covering hard limestone, immediately adjacent to this hill is a fertile valley; the settlement may well have owed its existence to this valley. Pazaraki is also, however, the only settlement in the study area located at a „choke point‟ (Figure 5.1): a narrow saddle through the hills which rise up steeply on both sides.4 All traffic from the Kopaic Basin to the coast would have passed by this point and as such it occupies a position not unlike that of Hyampolis (see Figure 6.4).5

Site location and geology Alluvial plains are frequent in the study area and many settlements are found in or, more frequently, at the edges of them. Apart from these alluvial plains, large parts of the study area consist of Tertiary deposits (Figure 5.2; compare Figure 2.2: the plio-pleistocene deposits north of Kalapodi and Kolaka, the mio-pliocene deposits around Goumourades) and patches of ophiolites with serpentine, which all yield fertile soil (Bintliff 1977, 92 and 97). The study area seems in this respect much more hospitable than for example the Argolid, where settlements tend to crowd together in the small patches of ophiolites and Tertiary deposits (Bintliff‟s „serpentine‟ and „Neogen‟ soils respectively) along the edges of alluvial plains („Younger Fill‟, see Bintliff 1977, 251-265, Map series 2). With the important exception of Larymna, settlements all exploit the fertile alluvial and Tertiary soils.

2

It should be noted that since nowadays less human activity takes place in the mountains than in the lower hills and the plains, archaeological remains are less likely to be noticed in the mountains than elsewhere. 3 In all analyses of settlement location, Roustiana has consistently been omitted, since its location on the map is approximate (see Chapter 3 p. 72 note 32). 4 Although Kalapodi is located at the edge of a valley with hills on both sides, this valley is wider and the hills more easily passable than at Pazaraki. 5 Agnanti-Kastri controls the Dipotamos pass, Melidoni the east-west coastal traffic. Neither, however, appears to have the total command over a single, very important route that Pazaraki and Hyampolis have: Agnanti-Kastri is surrounded by hills, preventing an open and unencumbered view over the pass, and control over the strip of land at Melidoni does not affect sea traffic.

At the edge of the coastal plains we find Proskynas (valleys of Vivos and Tragana), Mitrou (valley of Tragana and plain of Atalanti), Kyparissi, Skala Atalantis (plain of Atalanti), Kynos (plain of Atalanti and plain of Arkitsa), and Melidoni (plains of Longos and Arkitsa). The two large settlements of Kynos and Mitrou are thus both located very well: on the coast and near large plains. At Kynos there is ample evidence for the exploitation of the fertile plain of Atalanti in the form of bins and pithoi used for grain storage (see Chapter 3 p. 39); at Spartia the evidence from skeletal remains equally suggests a heavy reliance on agriculture (Chapter 2 p. 33). Kalapodi is

103

White: infertile Mesozoic soils Light gray: fertile ophiolites

Medium gray: fertile Tertiary deposits Dark gray: fertile alluvial soils

Figure 5.2: Settlements in relation to soil fertility

Table 5.1: Sites in relation to soils (after Ministry of Agriculture 1983) Site

Surficial geology

Physiography

Soil depth

Slope

Kynos Rema Pharmaki

gentle gentle

deep

gentle

Skala Atalantis Atalanti

Alluvium Peridotites/Alluvium

deep deep

gentle gentle

Spartia

Peridotites/Alluvium

deep

gentle

Kyparissi

Peridotites (next to tertiary deposits and alluvium)

deep and shallow (next to deep)

moderate (next to gentle)

Mitrou

Alluvium (close to Peridotites, Tertiary deposits, and hard limestone)

lower slopes rounded summits and lower slopes (on edge of flat) rounded summits and lower slopes flat rounded summits, lower slopes/flat areas rounded summits, lower slopes/flat areas middle slopes and rounded summits (next to lower slopes and flat area) flat (close to lower slopes and rounded summits)

deep deep

Kokkinonyzes

Tertiary deposits Tertiary deposits (on edge of Alluvium) Tertiary deposits

deep (close to shallow and bare soils)

gentle (close to moderate slopes)

104

Agia Triada

Hard limestone (on edge of peridotites)

rounded summits and middle slopes

Kotrona

Tertiary deposits

Proskynas

Tertiary deposits

Chiliadou

Tertiary deposits

Goumourades

Tertiary deposits

Vlichada

Tertiary deposits

Malesina-Agios Georgios Lekouna

Tertiary deposits

Malesina-Velanidia

Tertiary deposits

Martino-Agia Panagia Larymna

Tertiary deposits / hard limestones Limestone colluvium and alluvium Hard limestones (on edge of Alluvium)

rounded summits and middle slopes rounded summits and middle slopes middle slopes and rounded summits middle slopes and rounded summits lower slopes and rounded summits lower slopes and rounded summits lower slopes and rounded summits (next to open valleys) middle slopes and rounded summits rounded summits and lower slopes lower slopes

Pazaraki

Tertiary deposits (next to alluvium)

Kalapodi

Tertiary deposits

Kokkalia

Tertiary deposits

Vagia

Zeli-Agios Georgios

Tertiary deposits (on edge of hard limestone ) Tertiary deposits

Kvela

Tertiary deposits

Golemi

Tertiary deposits

Sventza

Tertiary deposits

Agnanti

Tertiary deposits (next to hard limestones)

Melidoni

Tertiary deposits (next to alluvium) Tertiary deposits (next to hard limestones)

Agnanti-Kastri

bare (on edge of deep and shallow soil) deep

moderate

deep and shallow

gentle and moderate gentle and moderate moderate

deep and shallow

gentle

deep and shallow

gentle and moderate gentle and moderate gentle and moderate (next to gentle)

deep

deep and shallow deep and shallow (next to deep)

deep and shallow

gentle

deep / bare and shallow deep and shallow

gentle

lower and middle slopes (on edge of closed valley) rounded summits and lower slopes rounded summits and lower slopes rounded summits and lower slopes

bare and shallow (on edge of deep)

gentle and moderate moderate and steep (on edge of gentle)

deep

gentle

deep

gentle

deep

gentle

rounded summits and lower slopes rounded summits and middle slopes rounded summits and middle slopes (on edge of rounded summits and lower slopes) middle and lower slopes (on edge of rounded summits and middle slopes) rounded summits and middle slopes (next to middle and upper slopes) lower slopes

deep

gentle

deep (near deep and shallow) deep and shallow (on edge of deep)

gentle and moderate gentle and moderate

deep and shallow

gentle and moderate

deep and shallow

gentle and moderate (next to moderate and steep) gentle

rounded summits and middle slopes (next to cliffs and lower slopes)

105

deep (next to deep and shallow) deep and shallow (next to bare and shallow)

gentle and moderate (next to steep and moderate)

Table 5.2: Number of landscape characteristics of settlement sites shared with other settlement sites in the study area Kyn.

Skal.

Kyp.

Mit.

Kot.

Pr.

Ch.

Vl.

Vel.

Gou.

Lar.

Paz.

Kal.

Agn.

Mel.

Kynos Skala-At. Kyparissi Mitrou Kotrona Proskynas Chiliadou Goumour. Vlichada Velanidia Larymna Pazaraki Kalapodi Melidoni Agnanti-K.

2 0 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 0 3 4 1

2 0 4 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 2 0

0 0 0 0 0 3 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 2

2 4 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 2 0

2 1 0 1 4 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 2 3

2 1 0 1 4 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 2 3

1 0 3 0 2 2 3 2 3 1 0 0 1 3

1 0 1 0 2 2 3 2 2 2 0 2 1 3

2 1 2 1 2 2 2 4 2 1 0 2 2 3

2 1 2 1 2 2 3 2 4 1 0 2 2 3

1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 0 0 1 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

3 2 0 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 0 0 3 1

1 0 2 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 0 1 1 -

4 2 0 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 0 3 1

Total

23

14

11

14

23

23

21

21

26

27

10

0

21

25

23

Larymna is an „isolated‟ site in a strikingly large unfertile area, at about two km distance from a small alluvial plain; nowadays the town is home to a nickel smelting plant and part of a mining area which extends via Pazaraki to Agios Ioannis (Figure 1.4) further southwest. Its location is thus far from ideal from an agricultural point of view. Although the small fertile valley would support a small settlement, it would restrict growth into a larger town; one wonders, moreover, why a settlement in that case would not be located closer to that valley. One might suppose that fishing, which is rich in the North Euboean Gulf, took the place of farming as a subsistence base.6 However, since Larymna is also the only fortified town in the study area and nearby Pazaraki occupies a strategic location, one might expect a „special purpose‟ for it. In Chapter 6 (p. 126 ff.) it is suggested that Larymna and Pazaraki belonged to the influence sphere of Orchomenos in the LH IIIB phase and are part of a string of forts defending the Kopaic Basin.

the rock, to which the small size and irregularity of the chambers is attributed). In those cases where both the settlement location and the location(s) of its cemeteries are known, the cemeteries are located higher up in the hills than the settlement: Kynos and Mitrou are located on a low plain, whereas Rema Pharmaki, Kokkinonyzes, and Agia Triada are higher up in the foothills; the same is true for the cemeteries which surround Kalapodi. AgnantiKastri is on a steep hill, but its cemetery is nevertheless located at a higher elevation.

Missing settlements Perhaps the two most striking features of the site distribution in the study area are the difference in established number of settlements between the western and the eastern part of the study area, and the imbalance between the number of settlements versus the number of cemeteries in the western part (Figure 3.1). In this interior part of the study area there are many cemeteries without associated settlements to accompany them: settlements are clearly missing in the record. This may be due to the fact that many prehistoric settlements, which were too small and unimportant to boast strong fortification walls, are in general hard to detect; the smallest types of sites, hamlets and farmsteads, would moreover not have produced and used much fine ware, and coarse domestic wares are often almost invisible against the soil. As a result, large parts of the prehistoric landscape remain „hidden‟ from us, since even in systematic surveys the faint traces of prehistoric settlements are easily missed

Chamber tomb cemeteries are necessarily located in hills, mostly in low foothills which could have been exploited by the living inhabitants in the Late Bronze Age. A brief analysis shows that in the study area they are located on lower to middle slopes, which can be gentle to moderate; they are located mostly on Tertiary deposits, but also on hard limestones (Table 5.1: Agia Triada; the reports on Agia Triada in the AD explicitly mention the hardness of 6

A Mycenaean site southeast of Larymna, on a small peninsula on the southern shore of the bay of Skroponeri (Figure 6.4) is perhaps comparable with Larymna in location. It is, even much more so than Larymna, generally accessible only from the sea, enclosed on all sides by steep and high mountains, and with access to only a very limited plain.

106

(Bintliff et al. 1999).7 An example in the study area is the site of Proskynas.

south of the town, at Spartia, and possibly three cist tombs in town, however, no Mycenaean material has turned up at Atalanti. It seems therefore unlikely that a Mycenaean town existed in the same location as the historic Opous. In a paper delivered at the 1994 conference on the periphery of the Mycenaean world in Lamia, John Coleman suggested that Homeric Opoeis should perhaps be equated with the site of Mitrou (unpublished). This is a tantalizing suggestion since Mitrou has the sort of major Late Bronze Age remains we are looking for; especially LH IIIC remains are impressive, as they are also at Kynos. There is however no positive evidence to equate Mitrou with Opoeis. Moreover, it is possible that the entry in the Catalogue reflects a post-Mycenaean reality (e.g. Anderson 1995, Dickie 1995, Dickinson 1999), in which case the search for a Mycenaean Opoeis is obviously futile.

Yet, large chamber tomb cemeteries such as at Zeli-Agios Georgios or Golemi must have belonged to fairly large settlements. Moreover, the richness of grave goods from these cemeteries suggests that they belonged to important centers. Since in this part of the study area no survey has taken place at all, it must be supposed that in Mycenaean times not only farmsteads, hamlets, and villages, but major centers existed at places which are as of yet blank on the map. Only when we assume that our distribution map is grossly incomplete, it is possible to understand the relative abundance of tomb sites. An illuminating example of how a distribution map of the area may change due to even informal survey is provided by the eastern third of the study area. Until recently, no more than four sites (Proskynas, Velanidia, Larymna, and Pazaraki) were known in this area (Kramer-Hajos 2005a, 76-87), although frequent reports of Mycenaean tombs suggested that once a larger number of settlements must have dotted the hills of the Aitolyma Plateau. In 2005, after years of patiently walking and re-walking hills in this area, John Coleman discovered several LBA sites which were unknown so far. Due to these discoveries, the number of settlements in the record has doubled to eight with the additions of Kotrona, Chiliadou, Vlichada, and Goumourades. It is only to be expected that similar efforts in the western third of the study area would reveal at least some of the settlements responsible for the cemeteries in this area.

Nevertheless, given the importance of Atalanti throughout later history,8 no doubt due to its excellent location at the edge of the Plain of Atalanti, it is very likely that also in the Mycenaean era a town of some importance would have flourished in this area, even if not exactly at the location of the modern (and historical) Atalanti. In order to arrive at a hypothesis regarding the location of this and other missing settlements, it may prove useful to analyze the cases where both a settlement and its associated cemeteries are known. This may enable the creation of a set of criteria to which settlements and cemeteries in the study area confirm; criteria which can then be applied to areas where settlements are suspected but so far elusive.

The most famous of the „missing settlements‟ is undoubtedly Opoeis. This town is mentioned in the Homeric Catalogue of Ships entry as the second town of the Lokrians, after Kynos (Iliad 2.531; see Appendix 1 p. 152). Its position in the Catalogue, on the most important metrical unit (after the caesura) of the first line of the Lokrian entry suggests it was one of the most important places in the Lokrian catalogue (Visser 1997, 405). The historic Opous has been identified at Atalanti on the basis of inscriptions (Fossey 1990a, 71 ff., Dakoronia 1993, 117-120); with the exception of two chamber tombs just

In the study area, whenever known settlements are associated with cemeteries, the distance is three km at most (Figure 5.3): Kynos is ca. three km removed from both Rema Pharmaki and Kokkinonyzes and the distance between Mitrou and the Agia Triada tombs is ca. three km as well. The distance between Agnanti-Kastri and Agnanti (about 1.5 km) in the hilly area of Epiknemidian East Lokris suggests that the distance is a direct function of the landscape and that the ancient inhabitants of the area preferred to reach a cemetery in not more than a ca. half hour walk. The distance from the Kalapodi sanctuary to the cemetery at Kokkalia is only one km and the distance to Vagia and to Zeli-Agios Georgios is ca. two km each. The cemeteries at Kvela and Golemi are ca. four km and ca. 4.5 km away, respectively. In the local terrain four kilometers can be covered on foot in almost an hour, probably more if a dead body is carried in

7

Bintliff developed the concept of the „hidden landscape‟ as a result of his findings in the Boeotia survey (Bintliff et al. 1999): compared to classical settlements, a smaller amount of material, which has moreover degraded over a longer time span, is exposed on the surface. In the longterm Boeotia survey, prehistoric settlements were several times discovered by mere coincidence (Bintliff et al. 1999, 145). Most of these settlements were small and must have been mere farmsteads. Survey projects are generally well aware of the different „visibilities‟ of individual time periods; for the Late Bronze Age e.g. the LH I-II phases are less „visible‟ than the LH IIIA and B phases (Ruttter 1983).

8

Assuming historic Opous is to be equated with Atalanti, the town already figured as the capital of the district in Strabo‟s time and had dominated Kynos since the Archaic period. In pre-industrial times Atalanti was the largest town in East Lokris for all years for which data are available (Kiel and Sauerwein 1994; see also below p. 114).

107

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb.

Figure 5.3: Settlement-cemetery relations, assuming a maximum distance of three km (solid circles: settlement at center, dashed circles: cemetery at center)

procession.9 Therefore it is likely that the last two cemeteries belong to different settlements.

Rema Pharmaki belonged to other settlements closer by, perhaps satellite villages of the larger center of Kynos (see above p. 101), or even to individual rich families (traders? landowners?) in the district of the larger centers, and that the cemetery of Kynos itself is yet to be discovered. The fact that both at Kokkinonyzes and at Rema Pharmaki only one tomb was found,11 may support this hypothesis: a large and important center like Kynos would certainly have larger cemeteries. Especially the grandiose Kokkinonyzes tomb may have belonged to an individual wealthy family; the fact that it dates to the period before Kynos may have reached its greatest power is a further argument against their association, reason why in Figure 5.3 they have been given their own

Since chamber tomb cemeteries need to be located in hills, the distance of the hills from the settlement would have been a determining factor in choosing the place for a cemetery; hence the distance between tombs and settlement is largest at Mitrou and Kynos, which are both located in a plain. Nevertheless, the distance of three km seems excessive.10 It is possible that Kokkinonyzes and 9

Cavanagh and Mee remark that the sloping dromos of many a chamber tomb may have been negotiated by a wheeled vehicle (1998, 49), although it is usually narrow and occasionally stepped. But even if the body would have been carried on a cart, the accompanying procession which can be assumed to have taken place must have been on foot. 10 According to Boyd, Mycenaean cemeteries were typically only several hundred meters from the settlements with which they were associated (Boyd 2002, 61). At Mycenae most cemeteries are located well within 1.5 km from the citadel; only the cemetery at Plesia is further away (ca. 2.5 km; French 2002, 42). Since this cemetery is separated from the citadel by the Zara mountain, one could suspect that it served not Mycenae

itself but a local village. The size of the cemeteries decreases when their distance from the citadel increases, which suggests that the farther outlying cemeteries served in fact not the citadel itself, but its „suburbs.‟ It should be noted, however, that the landscape around Mycenae is very hilly. 11 Or two, at Kokkinonyzes. See Chapter 3 p. 41.

108

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb; ? hypothetical settlement.

Figure 5.4: Settlement-cemetery relations, assuming a maximum distance of two km in the hilly interior (solid circles: settlement at center, dashed circles: cemetery at center)

plain).13 The cemetery was also located above the settlement, which was most likely located on Tertiary or alluvial deposits. We can then suggest possible locations for the settlements belonging to the cemeteries at Spartia, Sventza, Golemi, Kvela, and Martino (Figure 5.4).

territories which, incidentally, neatly border those of Sventza and Spartia.12 In the case of Mitrou and Agia Triada, their association is almost certain: Mitrou flourished during the time that the Agia Triada tombs were in use, and the Agia Triada tombs have an excellent view on Mitrou, thus linking them to this settlement. One would expect to find chamber tombs east of the island, in the hard limestone rock nearby; such tombs have indeed been reported by local people. Since chamber tomb cemeteries are highly dependent on the presence of rock which is soft enough to be carved and a good hill slope, cemeteries might be established by necessity further away from the settlement than seems convenient.

One settlement may have been associated with the tombs at Spartia and the possibly LH tombs at Atalanti. Since the low foothills of Mt. Chlomon, in which the two cemeteries are located, provide excellent circumstances all along, this settlement may have been located anywhere along these low hills. It appears likely, however, that cist tombs, even if extramural, would generally be placed close to a settlement and that therefore, if the Atalanti cists are LH in date, and if one settlement built both these cists and the Spartia chamber tombs, this settlement should be sought closer to Atalanti. Alternatively, two settlements may be „missing‟ in this area, one associated with the Spartia tombs and the other with the Atalanti tombs.

The pattern which can be tentatively assumed is that the cemetery of a settlement was located within a radius of maximum three km of the settlement (necessarily in the case of Kynos and Mitrou, which were located in a 12

Given the doubtful identification as Mycenaean of the tombs at Atalanti, and given their different nature (cist tombs versus chamber tombs) they have been ignored in the representation in Figure 5.3.

13

It should be noted that the distance between the cemeteries of Sventza and those of Kokkinonyzes and Rema Pharmaki is ca. six km each. See Figure 5.3.

109

It is possible that one settlement was responsible for both Sventza and Golemi, but it seems more likely that two different settlements were located closer to each of these cemeteries. Similarly, although one settlement may have exploited both Golemi and Kvela, it is probable that two settlements were involved, each closer to their cemetery. Indeed, if we assume that in this interior and hilly part of southeastern East Lokris a cemetery would be at a maximum distance of only two to 2.5 km from its settlement, as is the case for Kokkalia, Vagia, and ZeliAgios Georgios, each of the above cemeteries must have belonged to one settlement (Figure 5.4).

Although cemeteries are located within a two or maximum three km radius, the catchment area of the sites was considerably larger – naturally so, since each settlement was surrounded by not only cemeteries, but by fields, pastures, and, at its territorial borders, „wild‟ land. A site catchment area is strictly speaking "the total area around a site from which the site‟s contents have been derived" (Renfrew and Bahn 32000, 258); more commonly understood, however, site catchment analysis is a technique used to estimate the area around the site which would have been exploited by the people inhabiting the site by drawing a circle around the site with a radius of a one-hour walk.15 Naturally, the circle would be distorted by the effects of the topography: a one hour walk on a plain covers a greater distance than the same one hour in a hilly landscape. Within this circle, different soils and landscape types can be analyzed to estimate the potential of the site in terms of crop yield, other food sources, and specialized industrial activities. A simpler, more schematic common approach is to draw a circle with a fixed radius and analyze the resources available within this circle.

One settlement may have been located south of Sventza, at the edge of the fertile plain of Atalanti, near the Daphnoremma stream, and on a lower elevation than the cemetery. A location near the modern village of Golemi, west of the cemetery, seems less likely since that would place the settlement above the cemetery and further away from water, and one might expect finds to turn up during building activities in Golemi. An extensive settlement must have existed near the Golemi cemetery, possibly west of it, near the valley of the Dipotamos river, but, since a higher ridge separates Zeli-Golemi from the Dipotamos river valley, more likely southeast of it in the Daphnoremma valley along the main route between Kalapodi and the plain of Atalanti (see Figure 5.1). Another settlement, perhaps smaller, may have been located north or northeast of Kvela, again on a lower elevation and near the river valley.

Drawing circles with a radius of 5.5 km in the area of the coastal plains and with a radius of four km in the hilly interior shows that this simplified model may represent reality quite accurately (Figure 5.5): the major sites of Mitrou, Kynos, and Melidoni have their borders at ca. 5.5 km apart, as do Vlichada and Larymna. The overlap between Mitrou and Vlichada may be corrected by slight adjustments based on the terrain (a range of low hills, terminating at the coast at Kotrona, separates the territory of Mitrou from that of Vlichada); alternatively, it is possible that Vlichada had a somewhat smaller territory. It may have been a lower level site than Mitrou, where casual surface finds indeed included many more fine painted wares.

The settlement to be assumed with the looted chamber tombs at Martino-Agia Panagia may have been located east of the modern town of Martino, in one of the valleys consisting of Tertiary deposits and adjacent to an open alluvial valley (see Figure 5.2).

The seemingly large overlap in territory between Melidoni and Agnanti is explained by the difference in landscape types which these two neighboring sites

Settlement distribution models It is possible to „model‟ the site distribution in southeastern East Lokris in several simple ways. Although the following models are no more than simple approximations against which reality needs to be tested, it is hoped that they can nevertheless illuminate the distribution pattern of sites in the area, and in the process give some indication about the likelihood of certain locations of „missing settlements‟ as well. Three techniques will be employed here to analyze settlement distribution: site catchment analysis, nearest-neighbor model, and historical analogy.14

these two known entities. The resulting representation was not only static, forcing the model‟s inner logic onto a reality which would most likely not have conformed to this logic, but moreover failed to take into account differences between plain and hill sites. I have therefore abandoned this approach here. Analysis with Thiessen polygons is equally unfruitful in a situation where not all settlements are known, and has moreover the principal limitation of ignoring the hierarchical relationship between sites. For a brief introduction to Central Place Theory and Thiessen polygons, see e.g. Renfrew and Bahn 32000, 178-179. 15 The one-hour radius is typical for farming communities. Hunter-gatherer communities require a circle with a two-hour radius (Renfrew and Bahn 2000, 258).

14

For an attempt to use Central Place Theory analysis, see Kramer-Hajos 2005a, 277-280. The first two hexagons were drawn around Kynos and Mitrou as known centers of major importance in the LH III period, and the rest of the hexagon grid was filled out following

110

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb; ? hypothetical settlement.

Figure 5.5: Hypothetical site catchment areas, assuming a 5.5 km radius for coastal sites and a 4 km radius in the hilly interior (solid circles: based on an existing settlement, dashed circles: based on potential settlements)

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb; ? hypothetical settlement.

Figure 5.6: Hypothetical site catchment areas, assuming a 2 km radius for all sites (solid circles: based on an existing settlement, dashed circles: based on potential settlements)

111

exploit; if we were to draw the southwestern part of the circle around Melidoni with a radius of four km, the overlap would become significantly less. The border between Kalapodi and the hypothetical area to its northeast coincides with the narrowest point of the valley and is thus likely to be correct. Thus in the interior, Agnanti and Kalapodi have each well-defined territories as well.16

fertile strip of coastal plain west of Longos (Figure 2.1). This would result in a pattern similar to that of Classical and Hellenistic East Lokris, where the coastal sites were Larymna, Halai, Kynos, Alope (Melidoni), and Daphnous (northwest of Agios Konstantinos; Strabo 9.4.2-3, see Appendix 1 pp. 147-148; see also maps in Haas 1998, 16, 22, and 33). Although this representation is reasonably convincing where the major centers are concerned, the many smaller sites in the eastern part of the study area suggest that besides – or perhaps rather below – this organization lies another, more finely grained, distribution pattern. In other words, although the major centers are located at a ca. two hours walk from each other, many smaller sites which are closer together are interspersed between them. In fact, Bintliff has recently established for historic Boeotia that most often the territory of a town or village was limited to the area within a half-hour walk, or two to three km (Bintliff 2006, 16). It is worth considering the pattern which emerges when applying these findings to our prehistoric study area. Figure 5.6 shows hypothetical catchment areas with a two km radius.18 As becomes clearly visible, this system works remarkably well for the sites of Mitrou, Kotrona, Proskynas, Vlichada, and Goumourades, which now each have well defined territories without much overlap.19 Moreover, when overlaying these circles on sites in this small area, the dense pattern which emerges automatically suggests possible locations for sites not marked on the map; the representation strongly suggests a settlement on the Aitolyma peninsula, between Goumourades and Velanidia. Another potential settlement, NW of Vlichada, could have controlled the Bay of Atalanti from the east. Whereas it is generally fairly easy to fill out the pattern such that all circles fit neatly together (which is of course much rather a function of mathematics than of archaeological reality: with infinitely small circles the landscape would be perfectly covered), this well-fitting pattern in the eastern part of the study area suggests that this model, too, may represent actual reality quite closely.

Moreover, the borders of the circles coincide fairly well, though by no means perfectly, with the border of the study area: the natural borders as defined in Chapter 1 now function as natural borders to the catchments areas of individual settlements. Mt. Chlomon falls naturally outside the territory of any sites; although some grazing may have taken place on its lower slopes, the higher parts would have been unexploited. As we have seen above (p. 102), the settlements of Skala Atalantis, Proskynas, Goumourades, and Pazaraki may have been smaller and possibly subordinate to or satellites of their larger neighbors; as such they are located more or less at the edge of the larger sites‟ catchment areas.17 Kyparissi and Chiliadou, located in the hills but with commanding views of lower-lying sites and the coast (see Chapter 3 pp. 43 and 50 and Figures 3.8 and 3.15), may have had some defensive purpose, possibly in accord with their proximity to the border of the study area. However, any conclusion based on the scarce and preliminary findings at Kyparissi and Chiliadou would be premature. Striking in this representation is that the assumed settlements at Kvela and Golemi, too, are shown as located at the edges of other territories (Kalapodi and Agnanti for Kvela, Kalapodi and the territory of the hypothetical settlement at Sventza for Golemi). Based on the rich finds from Golemi, it is hard to believe that this cemetery would have belonged to a smaller, „peripheral‟ settlement. Nevertheless, the hypothetical locations for the settlements associated with Sventza and Spartia both have likely catchment areas.

An interesting observation is that the cemeteries in this case are generally on the outskirts of the circle or even

Much of the empty area SE of Chiliadou is not conducive to agriculture, so that it is unsurprising that we should not find a site there. North of Mt. Knemis, between modern Agios Konstantinos and Aspironeri (Figure 1.5), on the other hand, a site may well have existed, exploiting the

18

Since human behavior does not change that much, even if circumstances do, it may not be much of a stretch to assume similar settlement patterns in prehistory as in history. The proximity of the major Mycenaean centers of e.g. Kynos and Mitrou to modern local centers suggests the same. 19 It should be noted that taking a radius of 2.5 km gives satisfying results for the sites of Kynos, Skala Atalantis, Kyparissi, and Mitrou, which then have touching borders. This, again, may be a reflection of the topography of the landscape: a half hour walk in the flat plain of Atalanti does amount to approximately 2.5 km, whereas in the hills it is closer to two km.

16

For the sake of clarity of representation it is assumed in this and subsequent models that all Mycenaean sites are contemporaneous. 17 Since coastal sites seem generally to be of greater importance in Mycenaean East Lokris than slightly more interior sites, I have chosen to assume major importance for the site of Vlichada. This leads then automatically in this representation to a subordination of Goumourades to Vlichada.

112

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb.

Figure 5.7: Nearest neighbor model (thick lines: lines of contact between major sites, thin lines: lines of contact between minor sites)

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb; ? hypothetical settlement.

Figure 5.8: Nearest neighbor model (dashed lines: contacts between hypothetical settlements)

113

beyond the two km radius, on liminal lands as it were. Another observation is that in this representation both Chiliadou and Pazaraki encroach upon their neighbor‟s territory; one might wonder whether the relation between Chiliadou and Proskynas was any similar to that between Pazaraki and Larymna.20

once again, expect a site on the coast west of the plain of Longos, near Agios Konstantinos, too. Finally, pre-industrial data on East Lokrian settlements and economy from written sources, specifically the Ottoman-Turkish census and taxation registers, may serve as a model against which the data on the landscape and the known Mycenaean settlements may be checked. The taxation registers from the Ottoman Turks between A.D. 1466 and 1821 indicate the number of households per settlement and the sort and amount of products these households produced. This can give some indications of subsistence possibilities and economy of settlements in the same locations, as well as help with predicting locations of other, „missing‟ settlements in Mycenaean East Lokris, since Mycenaean sites may have been located in the same fertile areas as historic pre-industrial settlements.23 The pre-industrial data consistently indicate that Atalanti was the largest settlement in the area; other large settlements at various points in time between 1466 and 1821 were Valtetsi (near Kalapodi and Zeli), Longos, and Martino (Kiel and Sauerwein 1994). Of these, the Kalapodi area is indeed a major center of Mycenaean civilization and a center near Martino is suggested by some of the models as well as by the presence of chamber tombs. The fact that Longos, in between Kamena Vourla and Agios Konstantinos, is the only coastal town of significance according to the Ottoman records, shows the limitations for assuming historical continuity of settlement patterns. Since agriculture was probably a smaller scale affair in the Late Bronze Age than in premodern Greece, and seafaring may have been more important, the apparent absence of a major Mycenaean center at Atalanti (substituted instead by centers on the coast of the plain, at Kynos and Mitrou) does not need to be a surprise, but does constitute a clear warning against assuming continuity of settlement patterns throughout history and prehistory, and thus against any landscape „determination‟ for settlement patterns.

In conclusion, although the large sites probably had an influence extending beyond a half hour walk and incorporated smaller villages in their territory, the territory of both large and small sites which was intensely used was likely limited to a fairly small area of which each point could be reached within half an hour. One can use a second model to visualize settlement patterns: by drawing straight lines between neighboring sites, a network of connections becomes visible (Figure 5.7). Assuming that the largest distance between neighbors is ca. eight to eleven km, as is suggested by empirical data21 as well as by site catchment analysis, one can detect „missing links‟ in the network.22 In areas where many settlements are known, the resulting network is dense and well built out, leaving little room for other settlements; where however large areas are „empty‟ and show no connections, it is likely that settlements are missing from the record. This method confirms that one or more settlements must have been located around the Plain of Atalanti. One possible solution to the large empty area north of Mt. Chlomon is to suppose a center near modern Atalanti (assuming a similar spread of settlements for the Late Bronze Age as exists nowadays); another possibility is shown in Figure 5.8 and incorporates conclusions based on the typical relations between settlements and cemeteries in southeastern East Lokris. The large empty space between Chiliadou, Gla, and Pazaraki consists largely of infertile soil (cf. Figure 5.2) so that the absence of known sites in this area is less surprising. One would, 20

Alternatively, Proskynas and Chiliadou may have been occupied in different periods (the kylix and deep bowl fragments from Chiliadou suggest a later phase than Proskynas). 21 These are the approximate distances between modern towns and villages in the study area, although in a few cases (Malesina–Mazi, Atalanti–Megaplatanos, Kalapodi–Zeli) the distance is no more than four km. In other words, generally the distance between towns and villages is ca. two hours on foot (corresponding to the assumed one-hour catchment radius); where it is less, there is a relationship of main and satellite town/village in which the satellite is located higher in the hills. Since these villages were established in the era before automobiles, this is probably not a coincidence. 22 For the clarity of presentation, the cemeteries at Kolaka-Agios Ioannis and Elateia-Alonaki are here treated as if they were settlements.

Settlement style The study area has certain definite characteristics which are not or only partially shared with neighboring regions: it is fragmented, has no fortifications (with the exception of Larymna, which seems to belong rather to the Kopais 23

Although environmental and cultural determinism must be avoided, and in fact there are differences of preference between prehistoric and historic locations (e.g. the LBA populations in the study area may well have preferred the easier to till Tertiary deposits in the low hills over the heavier alluvial soils), nevertheless some basic choices for settlement location seem to differ little between the LBA and modern times (one is reminded of the proximity of the Mycenaean centers of Kynos and Mitrou to modern local centers).

114

Figure 5.9: Settlement regions

in the LH IIIB phase, see Chapter 6 p. 126 ff.), has mound sites along the coast, and chamber tomb cemeteries in the interior. In fact, when comparing settlement in southeastern East Lokris with that in neighboring regions, a „regional settlement style‟ emerges which is perhaps no less an indication of a common culture than a regional pottery style.

the Kephissos valley, and the Spercheios valley all have land borders with the study area, although parts of the Spercheios valley are more easily reached over sea, and the Thebais, the Strait of Oreoi, the Gulf of Volos, and northern Euboea are easily reachable by sea. Although Attica and southern Euboea can be reached via sea routes as well, they are nevertheless separated from the study area by the Euripos, the narrow strait at Chalkis, and will not be discussed here.

This can be demonstrated most easily by systematically comparing and contrasting settlement characteristics of neighboring areas with the characteristics which have been determined for southeastern East Lokris. For this purpose seven regions, all easily accessible from the area under review, are briefly examined: the Kopais, the Thebais, the Kephissos valley, the Malian Gulf and Spercheios valley, the Strait of Oreoi, the Gulf of Pagasae, and northern Euboea (Figure 5.9).24 The Kopais,

The Mycenaean Kopaic region differs from East Lokris in two respects: it has a palace and boasts a high number of strongholds.25 The large number of strongholds, among Oreoi is chosen to reflect the fact that the latter would have shared in the maritime tradition, with traffic through the North Euboean Gulf passing by, while the former would have been bypassed in this respect. I have omitted Skroponeri, an inlet with a small isolated valley enclosed by high hills. The prehistoric site there (Figure 6.4: a Mycenaean settlement on a conical hill with a view of Euboea, see Mountjoy 1999, 643 and 641 figure 245, with references) would be generally accessible only by sea. 25 For the Mycenaean sites in the Kopais region, see Hope Simpson and Lazenby 1970, Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, Fossey 1988 and 1990b, Mountjoy 1999, 641 and 643-644, and Hope Simpson and Hagel 2006.

24

These regions have been defined approximately by the same criteria as the study area: each forms a natural catchment area. It could be argued that the Kephissos valley logically, on the basis of its geography, belongs to the Kopaic Basin. It is true that there are no natural borders between the two regions, but since the Kopais forms a very well defined area, I have taken its „hinterland,‟ the Kephissos valley, as a separate unit. In later history, too, the Kephissos valley is separate from the Kopais: it is part of Phokis, not of Boeotia. The border between the Spercheios valley and the Strait of

115

which the site of Gla (see Figure 6.4), is certainly connected with the exploitation of the Kopaic Basin; the wealth and importance of Orchomenos may well be due to the same. In this case, the palace and the strongholds reinforced each other: the palace most likely oversaw the building of the strongholds, which in turn provided the palace with protection of lands which increased its wealth and status. Ultimately, Mycenaean settlement in the Kopais thus differed due to the geographical characteristics of the area. Similarly, the lack of a palatial center in southeastern East Lokris may be due in part to the fragmented nature of the area (see Chapter 2 p. 20) and point forward to the Archaic situation, in which East Lokris was an ethnic community with multiple centers, rather than the political and administrative territory of one large city-state such as Athens or Thebes.

two. The number of settlement remains in the Kephissos Valley is striking, and is undoubtedly a direct consequence of the fertility of the river valley. In contrast, in the interior of southeastern East Lokris settlements seem relatively scarce. The situation along the coast is better comparable: Melidoni, Kynos, Chiliadou, Goumourades, and Pazaraki are all located on high hills or mounds, though none of them is fortified. A parallel with southeastern East Lokris is the apparent lack of a palace center in the Kephissos valley. Although fortified sites may be present, none of them has yielded any remains which would lead one to assume the presence of a Mycenaean palace. In this respect, the Kephissos valley is as peripheral as southeastern East Lokris and seems to share its fate: when the palaces were strong, these regions suffered a decline (see also Chapter 6 p. 125 ff.). Indeed, the rich early Mycenaean remains from Agia Marina, as well as the rich LH IIICProtogeometric finds from the cemetery of ElateiaAlonaki (Figure 5.7), seem to indicate that, like southeastern East Lokris, the interior of the Kephissos valley could flourish in times when the palaces were weak or non-existent. The fact that nearby Orchomenos was strong in LH IIIB and, moreover, possibly more interested in exploitation of the Kopais than in its hinterland, therefore not „investing‟ in the Kephissos valley, may be the explanation for this.

The main difference between the Thebais and the study area lies in the degree of centralization of the area. The study area seems to have had multiple regional centers; in the Thebaic region, on the other hand, the palace of Thebes (Figure 5.9) is the obvious central power. The evidence for settlements is far greater in the Thebais than in the study area, and mound sites are more common as well and not only found along the Euboean Gulf (as in southeastern East Lokris), but elsewhere too.26 Undoubtedly the natural landscape was in this case, too, at least partly responsible for this: in a generally flat landscape like the Theban plain, settlements will choose low hills for their location, which over the years become conspicuous mounds. In southeastern East Lokris, which is predominantly hilly, criteria for site location would rather be the proximity to a fertile plain or valley, and settlements would be founded in the lower foothills of a more rugged landscape. The fact that in the Thebais evidence for Mycenaean walling seems largely limited to sites on the Corinthian and Euboean Gulf suggests a concern with attacks from the sea; the fortified harbor site of Anthedon may be compared to Larymna.

The lack of systematic surveys and excavations is to blame for the unclear picture that the area of the Gulf of Malis / Spercheios Valley presents.28 Settlement seems to have been dispersed; at present there is no evidence for even a regional center, let alone a palace. Most evidence in the area comes from tombs, and in that respect the area is not dissimilar from the interior parts of southeastern East Lokris. Again, this may be due to the lack of surveys rather than to any real difference between this and the previous regions.

The remains in the Kephissos valley, too, are characterized by their location, which is usually a prominent hill or mound commanding a plain (Agia Marina, Anthochori, Hyampolis; see Figure 5.7).27 Sometimes traces of „Cyclopean‟ walls are preserved on these hills, below the historical acropolis circuit wall. In both respects the region seems similar to the Kopais, and it is indeed possible to view the Kephissos Valley as Orchomenos‟ hinterland: no natural borders separate the

Rachita (Figure 1.2) and its immediate vicinity have produced most of the evidence for this area. A rectangular built grave at Vardates near Rachita dating to LH IIIC is a unique find, unparalleled in any of the areas discussed so far, including our study area. It seems to point to influence from Thessaly, where tholoi and other built graves as well as cists are more common than chamber tombs.29 The presence of chamber tombs at Achinos (east of Stylis, see Figure 1.2) indicates that the

26

28

For Mycenaean sites in the Thebais, see Hope Simpson and Lazenby 1970, Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, Fossey 1988, Symeonoglou 1985, and Mountjoy 1999, 640-643. 27 For Mycenaean sites in the Kephissos valley, see Hope Simpson 1965, Hope Simpson and Lazenby 1970, Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, Fossey 1986, McInerney 1999 (App. 1), and Mountjoy 1999, 808-809.

For Mycenaean sites in this area, see Hope Simpson 1965, Hope Simpson and Lazenby 1970, Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, and Mountjoy 1999, 808-809. 29 Most Thessalian burials during the Late Bronze Age are cists. Only one chamber tomb has been excavated, at Katomavrolophos; Hope Simpson and Dickinson noted only one group of chamber tombs in all of Thessaly, just southwest of Lake Boibe (NNW of Volos).

116

area may have been part of two different zones of influence: the Thessalian and the Central Greek. Interestingly, the Central Greek chamber tombs are found north of the Malian Gulf, closer to Thessaly, whereas Vardates is located south of the Malian Gulf and therefore in Central Greece. It is possible, though the evidence is really too scanty to be sure, that Achinos was influenced by the Euboean Gulf traffic, or perhaps simply by local traffic across the Malian Gulf, which is narrowest at this point. Vardates, on the other hand, is located at the narrow pass which provides access to Central Greece from the north.

rather than risking the more dangerous open waters east of the island. These settlements are primarily, if not exclusively, located on promontories and low mounds. They are concentrated around the coastal plains, are in all cases located near rivers (which are relatively plentiful in northern Euboea), and are often separated from each other by the mountain ranges of Lichas, Telethrion, and Kandili (Figure 1.2). A palace is lacking; rather, there seem to be several regional centers, possibly, as in the study area, due to the fragmentation of the landscape. The settlement pattern is thus similar to that in East Lokris.33 In summary, unlike the Kopais, the Thebais, and possibly the Gulf of Volos, southeastern East Lokris does not have a palace, despite the presence of a large fertile plain. Unlike the Kopais and the Kephissos valley, sites in our area are not fortified, with the important exception of Larymna (for which see Chapter 6 p. 126). Fewer settlements seem to be „mound sites‟ than in the Thebais, the Kephissos valley, the Gulf of Volos, and Euboea; those settlements that can be classified as mound sites are all, significantly, located on the shore: Melidoni, Kynos, Skala Atalantis, possibly Mitrou, and Vlichada. As such, they seem to be part of a string of sites along the Euboean Gulf, showing a development parallel to that of Euboea. Settlement in southeastern East Lokris seems thus to have most in common with Euboea.34 The many chamber tomb cemeteries place southeastern east Lokris firmly in the central (and ultimately, southern) Greek tradition, as opposed to regions north of the study area where tholoi, cist tombs, and variations thereof are more common. It seems likely that the differences observed between southeastern East Lokris and its neighboring regions are at least in part due to differences in the natural landscape; yet the commonalities our region – especially its coastal parts – has with Euboea suggests that the maritime area of the Euboean Gulf followed the same development and had a common settlement history, which differed from the interior of central Greece.

For the Strait of Oreoi, too, most evidence comes from burial sites.30 Since this area bordered the maritime route through the North Euboean Gulf up to the Gulf of Pagasae and NE to the Aegean, we might expect close parallels with southeastern East Lokris. However, the little that is known from this area has not borne out this hypothesis. A unique site at Glypha (Figure 1.2) seems, with its grave circle of cists and pits (see Chapter 6 p. 120), closer to the Thessalian tradition than to Central Greece; small tholoi at Pteleon point to a Thessalian connection as well. Like the Strait of Oreoi, the Gulf of Volos might be expected to have similar settlement characteristics as southeastern East Lokris. Here too, however, the differences are more obvious than any similarities: this region was centralized, with the site of Dimini (modern Volos; Figure 5.9) functioning as the regional center, if not the palace; tombs are mostly of the tholos type. The Mycenaean finds at the Gulf of Volos thus pose a striking contrast with the finds in southeastern East Lokris.31 It is likely that Dimini could develop into a major center due to its location: at the head of the Gulf of Pagasae it was in contact with southern and central Greece via the sea routes through the North Euboean Gulf, it had a large area of fertile hinterland to exploit, and it was far enough removed from the palaces in central Greece not to be directly influenced by competition from their side. Most of the Mycenaean settlements on Euboea were located on the western coast.32 This has two reasons: first of all, due to strong winds the east coast of Euboea is less hospitable than the west coast, and secondly, maritime traffic would have passed through the Euboean Gulf

33

As is the pottery: at the end of the Mycenaean period, LH IIIC Middle „warrior kraters‟ from Lefkandi show remarkable parallels with „warrior kraters‟ from Kalapodi, as well as with contemporary krater fragments from Kynos (see Chapter 4 p. 93), suggesting contact or even a shared culture between Euboea and southeastern East Lokris in this phase. 34 It is interesting to note the short passage in Plutarch‟s Life of Sulla (26.3-4; see Appendix 1 p. 153), where Sulla, while „vacationing‟ in Aidepsos on Euboea (Figure 1.2), meets some fishermen from Halai (Figure 1.6). This passage illustrates unintentionally where the interests of coastal settlements in southeastern East Lokris lay: in the Euboean Gulf and the land across from it. This was the case in Roman times, and probably had been the case since times immemorial.

30

For Mycenaean sites (or the lack thereof) in this area, see Hope Simpson 1965, Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, and Mountjoy 1999, 808-809 (Glypha erroneously located at “the mouth of the Spercheios Valley,” 808). 31 For Mycenaean sites round the Gulf of Volos, see Hope Simpson 1965, Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, and Mountjoy 1999, 819-822. 32 For Mycenaean sites on Euboea, see Hope Simpson 1965, Sackett et al. 1966, Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, and Mountjoy 1999, 692-694.

117

Chapter 6: Settlement history The previous chapter focused on the distribution of settlements in space, disregarding their place in the chronology of the area. This chapter aims to rectify that by looking at Mycenaean southeastern East Lokris and its settlements from a diachronic perspective, thus achieving a settlement history of the region. Since this chapter deals with sites, rather than with pottery, the chronological distinctions used here are slightly different from those used in Chapter 4 for the ceramic phases. 1

southeastern East Lokris which have yielded large quantities of Gray Minyan ware as well as LH III pottery are Larymna (Fossey 1990a, 24),5 Skala Atalantis (Fossey 1990a, 75), Kynos (see Chapter 3 pp. 37-38), and Melidoni (Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 263). All these sites are on the coast. Even when no Early Mycenaean has been found yet, these sites are likely to have been, if not ports of some importance, at least inhabited settlements in the early stage of the Late Bronze Age, benefiting from the traffic through the North Euboean Gulf. For Larymna one might assume settlement from „overseas‟ since its location is perhaps not that obvious from a land-perspective (Chapter 5 pp. 103, 106): a large area around it is infertile and one might wonder why agriculturalists would consider settling in a place like that. For a seafaring people, however, Larymna would have been ideal: it offers a sheltered harbor and the steep hills on its east, south, and west side form a natural defense against possible hostilities from the hinterland; only to the north is the site relatively open, providing access to a small fertile plain suitable for agriculture.

The Middle Helladic – Late Helladic transition LH I is in the study area mostly known from Proskynas and Mitrou (Figure 6.1). The surface survey records from Mitrou show that the LH I pottery there, though distinctive, forms only a small percentage of the total diagnostic pottery recovered: in between masses of MH Gray Minyan and LH III sherds, the LH I lustrous Mycenaean, polychrome matt painted, and Gray Minyan is easily overlooked (as it was by Fossey who mentions MH and LH IIIA-C: Fossey 1990a, 50). A similar situation is attested for Agia Marina, a classic mound site in the Kephissos valley, where reports mention MH and LH IIIA-B (Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 259 #G61), while in fact also a substantial number of LH I polychrome matt painted sherds were found. Excavation by Soteriades in 1913 yielded a number of fine LH I sherds of the polychrome matt painted type, which were however overlooked amidst the vast amounts of EH pottery, some of it of the distinctive light-on-dark variety to which the site gave its name, and the excellent LH IIIA-IIIC Early pottery also found here. The LH I sherds were stored in boxes and neglected for almost a century, until Sonia Dimaki directed her attention to them.2

For this LH I period it is useful to make a distinction between the lustrous, „true Mycenaean‟ LH I ware and the Polychrome Matt Painted ware and other wares inspired by the MH tradition. These other wares represent the MH-LH transition in pottery terms, since they display traits associated with both the MH and the Mycenaean pottery. Polychrome Matt Painted, which probably originated in Boeotia (Chapter 4 p. 77), is abundant in Agia Marina and Orchomenos, deep in Boeotia. It may well have spread from Orchomenos, which was a center for MH pottery production, to Agia Marina via the river valleys and to Mitrou via the passes and valleys east of Mt. Chlomon (see Chapter 2 p. 20 and Figure 2.1). The lustrous LH I ware, which shows Minoan influence and may have spread from Laconia via the Argolid to southern Central Greece, is on the other hand especially abundant on Mitrou, while at excavated sites in the interior the record is poor (Chapter 4 p. 77). The distribution picture for this ware is thus very different, with coastal Mitrou emphasized.

Since it is apparently only too easy to overlook LH I sherds,3 it is possible that other sites with both MH and LH III material in southeastern East Lokris were in fact inhabited in the early Mycenaean period as well.4 Sites in 1

For an overview on the phases established at the sites discussed in Chapter 3, see Tables 3.1 and 3.2, pp. 73-74. 2 The LH I material is currently housed in the new Archaeological Museum of Elateia and studied by Sonia Dimaki. I wish to thank Dimaki for showing me these sherds. 3 Rutter 1983 draws attention to the relative „invisibility‟ of the LH I and LH II phases in survey material especially. 4 Sackett et al. assumed continuity for most Euboean sites which have both MH and LH III material (Sackett et al. 1966, 99-102) and although this is a bold assumption – ascribing hundreds of years of occupation to a site

without evidence for it – it is, given the relative „invisibility‟ of the LH I and LH II phases in survey material, not entirely inconceivable. 5 At the nearby islet of Lagonisi, just northeast of Larymna (Figure 1.6), MH Gray Minyan ware is abundant as well. That Lagonisi was already settled in the Early Bronze Age is indicated by the large amounts of obsidian (personal communication from John Coleman).

118

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb.

Figure 6.1: LH I-IIA sites (regular font) and other sites mentioned in the text (Italic font); main routes from Orchomenos indicated in dashed lines

This indicates in the first place that Mitrou was a center for an elite in the LH I phase, as is now indicated, too, by the monumental building on Mitrou dating to this time period (Chapter 3 p. 45); moreover one might hypothesize that the spread of the lustrous LH I ware may have taken place primarily via the Euboean Gulf, more or less bypassing the interior of Boeotia. Further survey and excavation and fuller publication of earlier excavations are needed to refute or confirm this hypothesis. If this hypothesis were correct, one might expect to find lustrous LH I ware at coastal sites on Euboea as well.6 LH I and I/II sherds are indeed reported for a number of sites (Gialtra-Kastelli, Rovies-Palaiochori, Politika-Kafkala, Manika, Chalkis-Trypa, Lefkandi-Xeropolis; see Hope Simpson 1965, Sackett et al. 1966, Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979), but it is not clear whether in any or all cases the references are to the lustrous LH I ware.7

Nevertheless, Euboean „settlement style‟ (see Chapter 5, p. 117), with Mycenaean sites on promontories or low mounds, is similar to the coastal sites in southeastern East Lokris, and may confirm an early Mycenaean „koine‟ spreading through the Euboean Gulf. A tentative conclusion based on the results to date thus suggests a difference between the maritime area of the Euboean Gulf and the interior of Central Greece in the early Mycenaean period. If both Orchomenos and the Euboean Gulf were important for the dissemination of early Mycenaean culture, the absence of any LH I material at Pazaraki may seem surprising; future investigations might unearth LH I remains in this area, though likely below the top of the these reports do not indicate the type of ware. It is likely that in most cases references are to Mycenaean Unpainted ware (Chapter 4 p. 77 note 7), which evolved naturally from Yellow Minyan and thus represents the „mixed tradition.‟ Another caveat is that Hope Simpson and Dickinson (1979) report LH I-IIIC ware at Amarynthos (#F85), while Mountjoy (1999, 694) confirms only LH II-IIIC Middle. Mountjoy warns that no LH I lustrous material from Euboea has been published (Mountjoy 1999, 694).

6

It is also possible that maritime traffic through the North Euboean Gulf would favor the coasts of the mainland which, with the exception of the area just north of the Euripos, the narrow strait at Chalkis, is generally less steep and more hospitable than the Euboean coast. 7 It should be noted here that reports of LH I exist for interior Boeotian and Phokian sites as well, even though excavated sites have yielded only very little. Once again

119

hill. It should be noted, however, that a MH phase has not been reported for this site either and that all settlement characteristics of Pazaraki are unusual compared to other sites in the region (Chapter 5 p. 103). It is therefore possible that Pazaraki was not an „organically developing‟ settlement, but indeed only a later site, built in this location for a special purpose connected with Larymna (see also below p. 126).

consisting of undecorated vessels in a coarse or semicoarse dark fabric, which was occasionally burnished (Papakonstantinou 1999a, 175-176 figs. 9-13). Some cists were reused in the LH IIA period, and it is from this phase that the only decorated vessel found in the grave circles was found: a standard Mycenaean squat jug decorated with hatched loop (Papakonstantinou 1999a, 175 fig. 8). Since it is unique in the assemblage, it may have been imported.

The complete absence of LH I pottery around the Gulf of Volos, just north of the North Euboean Gulf (Figure 1.1), and the rare LH IIA vessels there, all imports (Mountjoy 1999, 823), suggest that the Mycenaean culture did not spread this far north during LH I-IIA:8 in the early Mycenaean period, we may perhaps imagine ships from southern regions sailing up and down the length of the Euboean Gulf, but not rounding the westernmost tip of the island and venturing east through the Strait of Oreoi.

Grave mounds are known from LH I (and, in northern Greece, LH IIIC) and cist graves are common throughout the Late Helladic period in Thessaly; grave circles are however primarily known from the Peloponnese (Papakonstantinou 1999a, 172). This site thus appears to characterize the MH-LH I transition in Central Greece in much the same way as the „mixed tradition pottery‟: it is a period of experimentation, in which customs and traditions are in flux and influences from different directions are adopted and mixed together. Nevertheless, this tumulus with cists should perhaps rather be viewed as a local adaptation of the Thessalian tradition, than as a conscious effort to import Peloponnesian burial customs: the absence of early Mycenaean pottery is a strong indication for the absence of Mycenaean culture in this area during the LH I phase, and the single Mycenaean LH IIA jug suggests by its very uniqueness that during LH IIA the Mycenaean culture had barely started penetrating these northern regions.

Evidence from Glypha-Phanos, located six km northeast of Glypha (Figure 1.2), seems to suggest the same. The evidence consists of a grave mound with two Mycenaean grave circles with pit and cist graves, dating to the transition between MH and LH I.9 This unique site is equated with ancient Antron.10 Grave circle A is a half circle with a diameter of 11 m. The perimeter is formed by a single line of stones. Limestone cists at the edges of the circle are oriented towards the center of the circle; the dead were buried in contracted position with their head towards the center. The smaller cists, which are probably the oldest (Papakonstantinou 1999a, 173) were almost square with a length of about one meter, the larger tombs were up to 1.5 m long. Three m northwest of it, grave circle B was a complete circle, though only partially preserved, with a diameter of ca. 13 m. It contained 27 Mycenaean cists, some reused in late Roman times. The cists in circle B were oriented along a northwestsoutheast line; burial customs were otherwise similar to those in circle A. Grave goods included pottery vessels (jugs, cups, kantharoi, amphoriskoi), ceramic spindle whorls, steatite beads or medallions, and small bronze items (pins, bracelet, knife). All pottery illustrated from the graves of this transitional period is non-Mycenaean,

LH IIA pottery in southeastern East Lokris is rare, but similar to contemporary pottery from Boeotia and southern Greece. This is the case for LH IIA sherds from Mitrou as well as for a LH IIA cup from DrachmaniPiperis (Chapter 4 p. 80). Kalapodi now joins Mitrou as a center where an elite emerges, as is indicated by the very early chamber tombs at Kokkalia. It is thus clear that southeastern East Lokris was by the LH IIA phase part of the Mycenaean culture, in contrast to areas only slightly further north. This suggests that over land, the Kallidromos mountains formed the border of the Mycenaean world in the early Mycenaean period; on the sea, the Lichades (Figure 1.2) may have functioned as „border stations‟ on the outermost fringes of the Mycenaean world.

8

See also Adrimi-Sismani 2006, 465-466, who notes the scarcity of LH I and II architectural remains at Dimini and states that they “are associated with the Matt-Painted Polychrome ware of the Middle Bronze Age style which was continuously in use.” 9 Papakonstantinou, M.-Ph. in: AD 43 (1988) B1 222223; AD 45 (1990) B1 172-173; AD 47 (1992) B1 193194 and pl. 60-61; AD 48 (1993) B1 217-218; AD 49 (1994) B1 309; AD 50 (1995) B1 340; Papakonstantinou 1996; 1999a and b. Mountjoy mentions LH IIA on the basis of a report by Dakoronia (Mountjoy 1999, 808). The site is absent from Lewartowski 2000. 10 First mentioned by Homer in the Catalogue of Ships, Iliad 2.697.

Given the easy route from Orchomenos to Kalapodi, we might expect a LH I phase at or near Kalapodi as well. For Kalapodi the presence of LH I-II sherds is in fact reported (Chapter 3 p. 59).11 The presence of LH I-II material at Kalapodi, though scanty, in conjunction with the LH IIA tombs at Kokkalia (and, slightly later, the 11

These sherds are not illustrated, but the mention of LH I-II without distinction makes it likely that either sherds of Mycenaean Unpainted ware with early Mycenaean profiles are meant (examples of the „mixed tradition‟), or lustrous Mycenaean sherds.

120

important LH IIB cemetery at Zeli-Agios Georgios), indicates that here too already in the Early Mycenaean period, long before Kalapodi became a cult center in the LH IIIC phase, an important center was located. The many cemeteries reflect the importance of this location, which is of course excellent, at the crossroads between the Atalanti-Elateia and the Atalanti-HyampolisOrchomenos route.

early date of these cist tombs suggests that they may represent the local, indigenous substrate of the population, which continued to use the non-Mycenaean way of burial (so Snodgrass 2000, xxvi); the abundant LH I evidence from Mitrou suggests however that here even otherwise culturally „acclimatized‟ Mycenaeans may have used cist grave burials. In southeastern East Lokris built chamber tombs, tholos tombs and shaft graves are unknown, as is the degree of experimentation in burial customs as seen at Glypha: cist tombs from the MH-LH I phase have been abandoned in favor of rock-cut chamber tombs by the LH IIB phase. The absence of built chamber tombs, which may be characteristic of the early Mycenaean civilization in southern Greece (they often predate tholoi and chamber tombs at Mycenaean sites, Papadimitriou 2001, 166 and passim), has been taken to reflect a relatively late arrival of Mycenaean burial customs to this area, when they were already consolidated to rock-cut chamber tombs (ibidem).

The picture of dissemination of the Mycenaean culture via the Euboean Gulf and of the MH-LH „mixed‟ tradition from Orchomenos over land is not black-andwhite, but rather refined. This is already suggested by Kalapodi‟s (possibly) lustrous Mycenaean sherds. Moreover, coastal Mitrou took part in the „mixed tradition,‟ as witnessed by the Mycenaean cups in Gray Minyan fabric (Chapter 4 p. 75) and the numerous fragments of Polychrome Matt Painted Ware. Therefore Mitrou, with both lustrous Mycenaean and mixed ware, took part in the early Mycenaean „koine‟ spreading through the Euboean Gulf and at the same time was influenced by the strong MH traditions which still held Central Greece in their grip. It must be remembered that Mitrou is easily reachable from Orchomenos, and that Kalapodi is easily reachable from the coast as well as from Orchomenos. In reality many sites may have benefited from contacts from both directions.

All known built chamber tombs in Central Greece are located on the coast. The earliest examples, dating to the MH III/LH I transitional period, appear in Boeotia and Euboea, on the major sea route between the mainland and Euboea (Dramesi and Lefkandi, both on the South Euboean Gulf close to the Euripos, the narrow strait at Chalkis: Figure 1.1); the earliest built chamber tomb in Phokis dates to the LH IIA period and faces the Peloponnese (Medeon in Phokis; Papadimitriou 2001, 167). Thus the Mycenaean custom of constructing built chamber tombs spread northwards from the Peloponnese via sea routes: the Euboean Gulf and the Corinthian Gulf, respectively. This strengthens the hypothesis that other aspects of Mycenaean culture would have found their way north via the Euboean Gulf as well, although the lustrous LH I ware evidently traveled, or at least was adopted, faster than the Mycenaean burial customs. This may come as no surprise: burial customs, with their different set of emotions, touching the core of a people‟s belief system, conform to different behavior than pots. Since they are more intricately tied together with a people‟s feeling of identity, they are less prone to change. Indeed, when burial customs do suddenly change, the appearance of a new ethnicity is sometimes supposed (Blackburn 1970, 8; but see the cautious discussion in Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 116-117), so that we may wonder if perhaps Dramesi and Lefkandi are the locations of early Mycenaean settlers or immigrants from

With the transition from the Middle Helladic to the Late Helladic period, burial customs change too, but less rapidly than pottery: the standard MH mode of burial in cist and pit graves may continue throughout the LH I-II phases in some parts of southeastern East Lokris. By the LH IIB period, however, many Mycenaeans in southeastern East Lokris are buried in rock-cut chamber tombs. The evidence for Mycenaean cist tombs in the study area is scanty and limited to LH I-II: two pits and a cist dating to Mycenaean times are known from Proskynas (Chapter 3 p. 50), Lewartowski reports three early Mycenaean cists from Atalanti whose method of dating is however circumstantial (Chapter 3 p. 42), and one or two possibly Mycenaean cist tombs are located at the settlement site of Mitrou (Chapter 3 p. 44).12 The concentration of cist tombs around the plain of Atalanti may be no more than coincidence, reflecting the number of excavations and surveys in this area. Since cist tombs are in general less conspicuous than chamber tombs and have therefore a greater chance to go undetected, it is likely that the evidence of Mycenaean pit and cist tombs in southeastern East Lokris presents only small part of the picture.13 The

2000, 16 and table 13). Thus entire cemeteries consisting of cist tombs may be unknown as of yet. Given the methods of the local looting guilds (metal detection and sounding the soil for cavities), chamber tombs may stand a greater chance to be discovered, although cists are not impossible to detect in this way.

12

The cist tombs from Kynos may date to the Early Iron Age, since they were dug into LH IIIC Late levels (Chapter 3 p. 39). 13 Lewartowski points out that Mycenaean cemeteries may consist entirely of simple graves (Lewartowski

121

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb.

Figure 6.2: LH IIB sites

the Peloponnese.14 Their choice of settlement, especially at Dramesi, would reflect the typical Mycenaean concern with control (in this case over the Euripos).

prestigious artifacts, such as the agate beads from ZeliAgios Georgios and Kokkalia?) from Thebes and Orchomenos into the Kalapodi area west of Mt. Chlomon (see Figure 6.2).

Late Helladic IIB

These early tombs are striking in the quantity and quality of their grave goods: at Kokkalia a veritable treasure was found, and at Zeli-Agios Georgios and at Golemi finds made of rock crystal, glass, and semi precious stones abound. At Kokkinonyzes, Kokkalia, and Golemi finds include amber beads. The grand interior of the Kokkinonyzes tomb points to an elite burial as well. This suggests strongly that in the early Mycenaean period – LH II-IIIA1 – chamber tombs in southeastern East Lokris accommodated elite burials.17

By LH IIB, southeastern East Lokris seems fully embedded in the Mycenaean koine. Regular, rock-cut chamber tombs, which are a thoroughly Mycenaean burial mode, are extremely rare in Central Greece until LH IIA15 and become standard only in LH IIIA (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 48 and 67); yet the first such tombs occur in the study area as early as LH IIA (Kokkalia) and IIB (Kokkinonyzes, Agia Triada, ZeliAgios Georgios, and Golemi).16 This may suggest a spread of Mycenaean customs and culture (including

17

Chamber tombs were not the prerogative of the elite, as has been suggested (Alden 1981, 19; Taylour 1983, 81): some chamber tombs are poor in grave goods (Dickinson 1983, 62-66). Possibly the use of chamber tombs grew more widespread over time, resulting in a greater percentage of poor chamber tombs in the LH IIIA and LH IIIB phases (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 78). See Sjöberg 2004, 81-84 for a useful overview on the problems of deducting socio-economic status from grave goods deposited in tombs.

14

See also Chapter 7 p. 138 for the pithos burial at Spartia and the cists at Agia Triada. 15 The earliest chamber tombs appear in Central Greece at the primary centers of Thebes and Chalkis (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 67) in the LH I-II phases (ibidem, 60). 16 Although the possibility that some of the earlier finds are heirlooms is not to be excluded, the quantities of LH IIB pottery suggest that these tombs were in use since LH IIB.

122

The early Mycenaean elites in southeastern East Lokris were not concentrated in one regional center, but more dispersed over several local centers. As mentioned before, southeastern East Lokris is prone to the development of multiple local centers, and in the early Mycenaean period such centers evidently existed at Mitrou, Kokkinonyzes, Golemi, and in the Kalapodi area. The locations of these early tombs are consistent with the introduction of rock cut chamber tombs either over land via Thebes (from where the Kalapodi region and Golemi are readily accessible) or over sea via Chalkis (Kokkinonyzes).

cemetery in the Kopais (Figure 6.3). These instances might reflect a lack of awareness of landscape types in which to practice the still relatively new custom of rock cut chamber tomb cemeteries.19 The dead were buried in no particular orientation: in most cases their head was furthest from the entrance, but this does not always seem to be the case. The interred were lying on either side with contracted lower limbs and hands folded on their chest or in front of their face, or on their back with their hands on their abdomen or along their sides and with contracted lower limbs (Dakoronia 1996, 1169-1170) during most of the LH period; variations occur with a fully extended burial at Vagia, which may date for this reason to LH IIIC, and at Sventza. Secondary burial took place in pits, but the practice of simply pushing aside earlier skeletal remains and grave goods to make room for the new inhabitants of the tomb are well attested too.

The rock-cut chamber tombs in southeastern East Lokris follow general Mycenaean principles of construction and usage. They were cut out of the rock with axes or chisels, presumably of bronze, although occasionally the limestone might be soft enough to carve with a stone tool (Boyd 2002, 54). On several of the better preserved tombs chisel marks are clearly visible (e.g. on the roof of the chamber at Kokkalia (location 2, tomb II) and above the stomion and on the walls of the dromos of some of the tombs at Zeli-Agios Georgios). Orientation of the chamber tombs is determined by the slope of the hill, with the chamber on the uphill side.18 The varying length of the dromoi is determined by the slope of the hill, and the size of the chambers and their regularity is at least in part influenced by the hardness of the local rock (leading to small chambers in Agia Triada). Nevertheless it appears that in southeastern East Lokris dromos length may also depend on period of construction: the earlier tombs have often shorter dromoi which look less regular than those of later tombs (compare e.g. the LH IIIB2-IIIC tombs at Zeli-Agios Georgios (Figure 3.26) and Sventza (Figure 3.34) with the earlier tombs at Zeli-Agios Georgios (Figures 3.25 and 3.27) - did the people in the LH II-IIIA periods on purpose choose steeper hills (requiring less carving and resulting in shorter dromoi) for their cemeteries? These early tombs are in general not yet very standardized; the tombs at Zeli-Agios Georgios show a wide variety of shapes and dimensions (Figures 3.25 and 3.27) and the Kokkinonyzes tomb is unique with its monumental character and its ditch running through the middle of the chamber (Figure 3.5).

The standard Mycenaean culture extended in the LH IIB phase up to Volos at the head of the Gulf of Pagasae: LH IIB pottery from Volos is locally made and indistinguishable from contemporary southern examples (Mountjoy 1999, 823-824). Elsewhere around the Gulf of Pagasae, too, LH IIB pottery is common and of local manufacture. In contrast, most of the LH IIB pottery from the interior of Thessaly is of lower quality than its southern counterparts, made with different techniques and giving a less elegant result (ibidem). This is a strong indication that the Mycenaean culture spread via maritime routes: the Gulf of Pagasae, in contact with southern Greece via the main maritime route through the Euboean Gulf by the LH IIB phase, had standard Mycenaean pottery, like Mitrou, whereas sites only slightly further inland did not benefit from the maritime tradition and displayed more local features (Chapter 4 p. 80: bagginess and local decoration are attested for both Golemi and Zeli-Agios Georgios).

Late Helladic IIIA LH IIIA pottery has turned up at the coastal settlements of Melidoni, Kynos, Mitrou, and possibly Skala Atalantis, Vlichada, and Goumourades. It appears in the tombs at Kokkinonyzes (LH IIIA1 early), Spartia (LH IIIA2 late), Agia Triada, Kokkalia, Zeli-Agios Georgios, Golemi, and Agnanti (Figure 6.3). In other words, all sites with early Mycenaean material continue to exist into the LH IIIA period, and a number of cemeteries are now

The cemetery of Agia Triada, which is first established in the LH IIB phase, is located in an area which is in fact not very suitable for chamber tombs, resulting in small and irregular chambers; the same is the case with the relatively early (LH IIIA1) Kolaka-Agios Ioannis 18

East-west orientation: Kokkinonyzes, Spartia, Lekouna-Angeli Anesti, Kvela, Sventza, Agnanti. Northsouth orientation: Agia Triada, Lekouna-Samarthi, Kokkalia, Vagia, Zeli-Agios Georgios, Golemi. Orientation unknown/not given: Rema Pharmaki, Proskynas-Rachi, Malesina-Agios Georgios, ZastanoAgia Aikaterina, Martino.

19

Though the practice was perhaps not „new‟ in terms of absolute years – the cemeteries around Kalapodi may have been in existence for a century before the tombs at Kolaka were created – it was new in terms of experience: no earlier chamber tomb cemeteries are known to exist near either Agia Triada or Kolaka-Agios Ioannis.

123

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb.

Figure 6.3: LH IIIA confirmed (regular font) and likely (Italic font) sites

first established. At Kalapodi, the Kokkalia cemetery is still in use in the LH IIIA period; the very large cemetery at Zeli-Agios Georgios is used throughout the LH IIIA period and is proof that a large settlement must have been located nearby, even though at Kalapodi itself only very few LH IIIA sherds have been found. The cemetery at Agnanti, as well as those at Elateia and Modi-Skamna further to the west in the Kephissos valley, which are first used in the LH IIIA phase, show that Mycenaean burial customs were penetrating deeper into the interior of Central Greece.

LH IIIB (Symeonoglou 1985). If Thebes was the source of the wealth in the tombs of Kokkalia, Zeli-Agios Georgios, and Golemi, it must have been the first palace complex or its predecessor where these precious items were worked. The common occurrence of chamber tombs in southeastern East Lokris during the LH IIIA phase indicates once again that the region was fully part of the Mycenaean culture of central and southern Greece. In the LH III period, rock cut chamber tombs were the standard type in not only in East Lokris but also in Boeotia, whereas in Thessaly the common tombs are diminutive tholoi, rectangular built tombs, and cist graves; almost no chamber tombs are known from Thessaly (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 77).20 Reversely, cist and pit graves are rare in

Many of the rich grave goods from the Kokkalia, ZeliAgios Georgios, and Golemi tombs may date to the LH IIIA phase. They may have been produced at Thebes, which was important already before the palatial period, in the MH and early LH periods, as attested by a large megaron and rich tombs. In the palatial period, Thebes was a major administrative center which manufactured and worked many of the precious materials found in these tombs; notably the working of agate is so far not attested anywhere else but at Thebes (Chapter 4 p. 82 note 17). Two successive palace complexes seem to have occupied the plateau of the Kadmeia, the first of which was destroyed around the end of the LH IIIA2 phase/beginning of the LH IIIB1 phase; a second, possibly only partial destruction followed at the end of

20

Two tholos tombs are known at Volos: one at Kapakli, to the north (Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 273, Avila 1983), founded in LH IIIA1 and containing large amounts of gold jewelry, and one on the outskirts of Volos (Ekathimerini of Febr. 10, 2004). The recently discovered second intact subterranean tholos tomb was discovered during construction of a new Volos ring road along with four or five small cist tombs. The monumental structure is with 6.5 meters high and eight meters in diameter half the size of the treasury of Atreus at

124

East Lokris (Lewartowski 2000, 15) and in Boeotia, although increasing numbers from the Peloponnese and Central Greece are being published; the cist was however very common in northern Greece.21 East Lokris is thus closer to Boeotia than to Thessaly in burial habits.

it are destroyed and left in ruins; new buildings are few and flimsy. This suggests that the destruction was intentional, accompanied by a decline in population, and possibly followed by oppression. These destructions likely contain the explanation of Mitrou‟s subsequent decline in the LH IIIB phase (see below).

At Kynos a LH IIIA1 stratum is sealed by a burned layer and followed by LH IIIB2. It is possible that some sort of disaster struck the settlement at Kynos at the end of the LH IIIA1 phase, but since the excavated area is very small, it cannot be excluded that the evidence for burning is limited to a small part of the site. Similarly, it is difficult to conclude from the current evidence whether there was a gap in occupation at Kynos between LH IIIA1 and LH IIIB2. If the evidence from the excavated area is representative for the site as a whole, the apparent gap in occupation might be related to Mitrou‟s apparent prominence during the earlier part of the LH IIIA2, or it may be part of the same phenomenon that diminished Mitrou‟s importance towards the end of the LH IIIA2 phase. It is also possible, however, that LH IIIA2 and IIIB1 strata remain hidden beneath LH IIIC remains elsewhere on the site.

Late Helladic IIIB The LH IIIB period, the period of the Mycenaean citadels and palaces, greatest expansion of Mycenaean trade, greatest standardization of cultural expression, and Linear B script used for administration of storage and transactions, is in the study area arguably the poorest, most insignificant of all Mycenaean phases. Not only does southeastern East Lokris, despite the presence of earlier elites and of a large fertile plain and suggestions of centralized storage of grain products at Kynos in the LH IIIC phase, seem to have lacked a palace; moreover a large number of sites was actually abandoned during the LH IIIB period. These changes might be associated with a political and economic centralization accompanying the dominance of the palaces. In the case of southeastern East Lokris, where in this period a strong center is entirely lacking, the palace of Orchomenos, which reached its peak in this period, may have been responsible for southeastern East Lokris‟ rapid fall into a provincial backwater.

At Mitrou the evidence is clearer, although there, too, conclusions must necessarily be preliminary. At Mitrou many of the LH IIIA2 remains are heavily burnt, and the monumental Building D as well as the settlement around

Sites surviving into the IIIB period are Melidoni, Kynos, and Mitrou; Vlichada and Goumourades may have LH IIIB sherds among their surface pottery as well. The number of LH IIIB2 surface sherds from Mitrou is much smaller than the number of LH IIIB1 or earlier sherds (Chapter 3 p. 45; Chapter 4 p. 85), suggesting that Mitrou may have lost much of its importance during the LH IIIB phase. This picture is dramatically confirmed by excavation on Mitrou by the MAP: whereas multiple deposits of LH IIIA2 were uncovered as well as architecture and deposits spanning all LH IIIC phases, similar finds from the LH IIIB periods are so far lacking. Yet, LH IIIB seal stones and high quality LH IIIB1 sherds, especially from well-made and finely decorated vessels associated with drinking (kraters and kylikes; Chapter 4 p. 87), indicate the continuing presence of an elite which used the standard Mycenaean wares; Mitrou may however have seen serious decline during the LH IIIB phases. I do not know of Mycenaean material from nearby Proskynas postdating the LH IIIA phase and the Agia Triada cemetery dwindles in importance (Chapter 3 p. 49; the same is true for the cemetery of Kolaka-Agios Ioannis in the Kopais). Most striking however is the apparent abandonment of sites in the Kalapodi region, especially since in the immediately preceding LH IIIA phase this region was extraordinarily rich. Only 5 LH IIIA and 4 LH IIIB sherds are known from Kalapodi itself (see Chapter 3 p. 59) and the cemeteries at

Mycenae and may have contained the remains of a local ruler (Ekathimerini of Febr. 10, 2004). At Nea Ionia to the northwest, cist tombs dating to LH IIB-IIIA1 contain fine bronze weapons, indicating that in Thessaly cist tombs could hold elite burials. A cemetery at VolosPefkakia (the settlement dates to LH IIIA2-IIIB, Mountjoy 1999, 820, and may have been the harbor of Dimini-Iolkos) includes rectangular built tombs and a tholos tomb. 21 The number of cist tombs in the archaeological record dating to the LH I through LH IIIB periods is steadily growing: LH I cist tombs: Alden 1981, 78 (Argolid); Barakari-Gleni 1990, 172-175 (Argolid), Maran 1992, 35 (Pevkakia Magoula); LH I-II: Boyd 2002, table 2 and passim (Ilia, Messinia, Lakonia); LH IIB-IIIA1-2: Baziou-Eustathiou 1991 (Volos); LH IIIB: Vanschoonwinkel 1991, 184-185 gives a full list with bibliography (Argolid, Messenia, Elis, Achaea, Arkadia, Lakonia, Attika, Boeotia, Phokis, Thessaly); for the entire span of the Mycenaean culture in all of Greece (but with some lacunas: e.g. the grave circle at Glypha (Papakonstantinou 1996; 1999a and b) and the LH I cist tomb at Pevkakia Magoula (Maran 1992, 35) are missing): Lewartowski 2000 (for the southwestern Peloponnese now supplemented by Boyd 2002). The long-held assumption that cists graves, the standard grave form in the MH period, only reappear with a „Dorian invasion‟ at the very end of the Mycenaean era (see e.g. Desborough 1964, 37-40) is no longer valid.

125

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb.

Figure 6.4: LH IIIB confirmed (regular font) and possible (Italic font) sites

Kokkalia, Zeli-Agios Georgios, and Golemi do not seem to survive the LH IIIA-IIIB transition (Figure 6.4).22 This apparent abandonment of sites stretches north as far as Agnanti.

(LH IIIA2-B) below the walls on the northeastern side of the mound. In the LH IIIB period Hyampolis might have grown to be a strong local center, possibly under the control of Orchomenos, exploiting the fertile lands to its north as well as to its south and overshadowing temporarily the sites around Kalapodi. Kalapodi‟s important LH IIIC deposits, however, indicate that if abandonment did take place, it was not for long.

One way to explain this is to assume centralization or suppression from nearby Hyampolis (Figure 6.4). The site of Hyampolis, known already to Homer under the same name (Iliad 2.517 ff.), consists of an impressive mound which controls the important passageway from the north and the east towards Orchomenos and the Kopaic Basin.23 Given its excellent location, a pass between southeastern East Lokris and southern Central Greece, overlooking a large fertile plain, it seems likely that in the Late Bronze Age a settlement would have existed here. Although no prehistoric material was found during the brief excavation by the British School in 1894 (Yorke 1896), Hope Simpson and Dickinson report LH IIIB sherds on the slopes outside the walls of Hyampolis (Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 259, G60) and personal inspection yielded several Mycenaean sherds

The only part of southeastern East Lokris for which the general picture of decline is not valid, is its very southeastern part, where Larymna appears for the first time during the LH IIIB phase. Larymna is also the only site in our area with evidence of fortification, and it has been noted that its type of Cyclopean masonry compares best to the wallings at Gla and Agios Ioannis (Chapter 3 p. 55; see Figure 6.4). Gla and Agios Ioannis in turn are part of a long string of fortifications along the northern side of the Kopaic Basin. The Kopaic Basin, originally a lake in winter and a swamp in summer, was drained by the Mycenaeans in order to create large areas of arable land.24 The palace

22

The evidence for LH IIIB at Golemi and Zeli-Agios Georgios is minimal. 23 Attesting to Hyampolis‟ strategic location is the 6th century victory of the Phokians here over the invading Thessalian cavalry (Herodotos 8.28).

24

Two canals flanked by two m high and 30 m wide dykes carried the water to katavothres, sinkholes, on the eastern side of the Kopais; in addition polders were

126

which must have been responsible for these drainage works is Orchomenos, which not only benefited from these works but is also associated with them in mythology.25 Mycenaean sites are clustered along the edges of the basin and include a large number of fortifications along the northern side of the Kopaic Basin (Figure 6.4): starting north of Orchomenos and going clockwise around the Kopaic Basin we find Poligira, Pyrgos, Stroviki, Kastron/Topolia, Gla, Agia Marina, Chantsa, and Agios Ioannis along the northern border, all characterized by Cyclopean walling on a hill; along the southern border only Kastri/Haliartos has Cyclopean style circuit walls (Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 237-242).26

hill of Pazaraki (and vice versa); Pazaraki in turn is situated ideally from a military point of view, controlling the access route between the sea and a well watered plain, and surrounded by low hills which are suitable for various forms of agriculture. A Mycenaean settlement or outpost here would be in visual contact with the fortification at Agios Ioannis, which in turn formed part of the group of Mycenaean fortifications mentioned above. As such Pazaraki would have been in an ideal position to relay warnings of intrusions from the bay at Larymna to this fortification system. It seems likely then, that both Pazaraki and Larymna were in the palatial period under Orchomenian control and belonged to the region of the Kopais rather than to East Lokris. Orchomenos would certainly have tried to gain access to the important North Euboean Gulf, and Larymna would have been a logical choice: it was easily reachable and served as a strong border towards Orchomenos‟ rival Thebes.28

Of all these strongholds, Gla is the best-known. Its purpose may have been to protect the drainage works and administer the storage of produce generated on the polders; a dual purpose is among other things suggested by its „melathron,‟ which consists of two equal and roughly symmetrical corridor-and-room systems connected to each other and forming an L-shape (Iakovides 2001, 150). Fossey has argued convincingly for all these strongholds that, since they are all in visual range with each other and, ultimately, via relay stations, with Orchomenos, they served to protect the Kopaic Basin and its drainage works from invasions or attacks from the north (Fossey 1990b, 84-88, with previous literature).

This explanation for the existence of Larymna (and Pazaraki) also explains Larymna‟s odd location as noted in Chapter 5 (p. 103): it is the only of all sites, whether settlement or cemetery, which is not located in or adjacent to fertile soil. Whereas fishing no doubt can be invoked to explain part of this, even fishing villages typically have access to fertile soils to add cereals to their diet. Larymna, however, has hardly any such soils, and certainly not enough to allow growth into a town deserving of the type of fortifications Larymna boasts; the modern town owes its existence mostly to the jobs supplied by the nickel plant on the southern side of the Bay of Larymna and the fish hatcheries on its northern side.29 If Larymna was built for the purpose of securing Orchomenian access to the sea and as an extension of the Kopaic defense works, this odd location in conjunction with the impressive fortifications is explained. Since Larymna was not an organically developing settlement, but, as it were, „custom-built‟ by Orchomenos as part of an elaborate defensive system, it did not have to be selfsufficient. As Orchomenos‟ port, there is no doubt that Orchomenos would have overseen that the distribution of goods, including grain, included Larymna. The grain would have been redistributed via Gla, whose purpose was in part the storage of grain (Iakovides 1998), perhaps especially einkorn, which stores well (see Table 2.3).

Since the wall at Larymna is similar to the walls of Gla but unlike anything known from our study area, Larymna appears in this period to have been the last extension of this series of strongholds extending from Orchomenos, via Gla, to the coast.27 Larymna has a good view on the

constructed around Gla, Stroviki, Pyrgos and a number of other places (Iakovides 1998, 277 and 2001, 155-156). 25 According to the myth, Herakles and his Theban followers destroyed Orchomenos and flooded its basin. A real rivalry between Thebes and Orchomenos may well be at the basis of this story. 26 It should be noted that the other southern settlements are all on steep hills or spurs or otherwise strategic locations. Fossey moreover described the walls at Daulosis-Kastraki, east of Haliartos, as „of Cyclopean style‟ (Fossey 1988, 312-313); Hope Simpson and Hagel express their doubts about this and favor a Classical or Hellenistic date, though they agree that a Mycenaean fort would be expected at this site (Hope Simpson and Hagel 2006, 80). 27 Already Oldfather (1916a, 40-41) connects Larymna with Orchomenos; though part of his argument for this is based on his assumption that the road at Pazaraki is “Minyan” (it is in fact more likely Classical: Chapter 3 p. 57), the part where he connects the two based on topography and fortification is valid, and he was certainly right in his conclusion.

It is curious that the line of fortifications seems largely limited to the northern border of the Kopaic Basin. When speculating about its purpose, Fossey came to the conclusion that this fortification-line, given its location, 28

Oldfather observes that the area of Larymna belonged to Orchomenos in the Catalogue of Ships (Oldfather 1926, 1185). 29 Indeed an ironic coupling, given the pollution the nickel plant causes in the waters around Larymna.

127

must be a defense of the most vulnerable and important part of the Kopaic drainage works: the katavothres (sinkholes) (Fossey 1990b, 87). Many sinkholes, however, are located on the southeastern side of the Kopaic Basin, although a large number, including the „Megali Katavothra‟ or „Great Sinkhole,‟ as well as a canal flank the northern side of the Kopaic Basin. Along the southern Kopaic border only Haliartos has traces of Mycenaean fortification. If southern fortification served to protect against a real or perceived Theban threat, one would expect Onchestos to have been fortified, since it is located at the pass between the hills which lead from Thebes into the Kopaic Basin. Apparently the status-quo between Orchomenos and its southern neighbor Thebes, although most likely precarious at times, allowed for less conspicuous signs of territorial autonomy. Since Thebes had plenty of fertile farmland itself, control over the Kopaic Basin may at least initially not have been of great importance for Thebes.30 The question why Orchomenos felt it necessary to invest in defending the northern border of the Kopaic Basin, remains; the fortifications suggest however that the relationship between Orchomenos and its northern neighbors was far from ideal.31

On the other hand, developments in the Gulf of Volos show a flourishing LH IIIB phase. A number of Mycenaean settlements existed around the Gulf of Volos, as attested by reports of LH sherds on the surface and excavation of Mycenaean buildings around Volos, but by far the most important Mycenaean site is Dimini, the seat of a recently excavated Mycenaean center, possibly even a palace (Adrimi-Sismani 1996; 2006).34 It is a mound site with an extensive Mycenaean settlement at its foot. Most impressive is a large building complex, dating to LH IIIA2-LH IIIC Early, consisting of two megaron-type buildings and a central court, workshops, storage rooms, and domestic quarters. Megaron A, which was entered via a propylon, included two wings of rooms separated by a corridor, a peristyle, and a rectangular hearth. Megaron B contained a large altar whose location and associated finds (including anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figurines) are suggestive of official cult processions and libations (Adrimi-Sismani 2006, 173).35 These megaron houses have yielded evidence for jewelry and tool production in the form of stone molds, as well as actual jewelry, weapons, and “a stone object inscribed with Linear B script” (Adrimi-Sismani 2006, 468). Associated with the settlement at Dimini are two tholos tombs, a type of burial site which is, since construction is cumbersome, associated with elite burials.36 The settlement flourished during LH IIIA-B and is equated by its excavator with the legendary Iolkos, from where Jason and his Argonauts set sail to recover the Golden Fleece. These finds show that the developments in southeastern East Lokris were local and largely limited to this small area, suggesting that it may have been the flourishing of Orchomenos and Thebes which sidelined southeastern East Lokris and Euboea, respectively.37

Although in the LH IIIB phase two new cemeteries were established, at Rema Pharmaki and Sventza, the general picture of decline in the LH IIIB phase is corroborated by the fact that these cemeteries have either only one tomb, as at Rema Pharmaki, or grave goods dating mostly to LH IIIC, as at Sventza, indicating that the real flourishing of the cemetery took place later.32 A similar decline in the LH IIIB phase is suggested at Lefkandi on Euboea: this may well be another case in which a „peripheral‟ Mycenaean site could flourish during the early Mycenaean phases and, especially in this case, after the collapse of the palaces, while during the height of the palaces it was relatively insignificant. 33

partially caused by extensive cutting into LH IIIB strata in the LH IIIC Early phase (ibidem 1, 9). Evidence for LH IIIB occupation is at least in the center of the mound “barely represented” (ibidem 135). Evely et al. stress that at sites in Euboea, as on the Boeotian coast opposite Chalkis, LH IIIC “may have been a period of particular importance” (ibidem 219). 34 Linear B tablets, the clearest evidence for an administrative role for the center, are so far absent. There is however evidence for writing as well as for storage, workshops and cult, and the character of the site is monumental. 35 Among the cult paraphernalia found in Megaron B are mentioned: “a kylix sherd inscribed with Linear B script; a miniature mug; […] sherds from at least two rhyta; a gem; nine female terracotta figurines; six small bovine figurines; a terracotta miniature throne with a seated figure; bronze pins.” (Adrimi-Sismani 2006, 474). 36 These tholoi, together with two LH IIIA2 cist graves at Dimini, indicate how different Thessalian burial customs remained even when pottery is undistinguishable from its southern counterparts. 37 See also Chapter 7 p. 139 note 24.

30

However exactly the diplomatic and political relations were between Thebes and Orchomenos in the LH IIIB period, the myth of Herakles and his Thebans flooding the Kopaic Basin and destroying Orchomenos hints that Orchomenos might have done well to spend more resources on its southern line of defense. The citadel of Gla was built and destroyed within the course of perhaps as little as a half century. 31 At best, Orchomenos may have feared that the East Lokrians would be unable to repel any attacks coming from the north. A more likely explanation however offers itself: Orchomenos may well have been responsible for the destructions at Mitrou and possibly Kynos, which sent these flourishing sites backwards at exactly the time period that Orchomenos reached its acme. 32 In fact the Rema Pharmaki tomb may well date back to LH IIIA1 (Chapter 3 p. 40). 33 The “LH IIIB gap” (Evely et al. 2006, 111) in the main excavated part of Lefkandi-Xeropolis on Euboea is

128

● settlement; + cemetery/tomb.

Figure 6.5: LH IIIC-Submycenaean confirmed (regular font) and possible (Italic font) sites

Since at the end of the LH IIIB period Gla was destroyed, the Kopaic Basin flooded and became once more a lake, and Orchomenos lost its importance, it is unsurprising that we should find little to no evidence for habitation at Larymna or Pazaraki in LH IIIC. With the collapse of the palatial centers, however, most of southeastern East Lokris rebounds and other, local centers develop in LH IIIC. Major sites in the LH IIIC phase are Kynos, Mitrou, and Kalapodi, as well as Elateia in the Kephissos valley. LH IIIC is also the major phase at Agnanti, and is attested at the cemeteries of Rema Pharmaki, Spartia, Golemi, and Sventza. The cemetery at Vagia was possibly reused in this phase too. The cemetery at Spartia continues in existence until the LH IIIC Early period (Figure 6.5).

The Late Helladic – Early Iron Age transition The period between the fall of the palaces and the beginning of the EIA was a turbulent time. Despite a revival in LH IIIC Middle, the period is widely marked by destructions, abandonment, and migrations in Central Greece and the Aegean islands alike (Lemos 1995, 4546). The LH IIIC Late and Submycenaean phases are in fact among the least understood periods in Aegean prehistory. Some symptoms of this are e.g. the debate over the validity of a separate SM phase (see Chapter 1 p. 9 note 1), over the origin of HMB ware (Chapter 4 p. 97 and note 46) and the more general question of the cause(s) of the end of the Bronze Age (see Drews 1995 for an overview over proposed causes). Eventually, finds from southeastern East Lokris might shed more light on the question whether the end of the Bronze Age was due to invaders from the north (the „Dorians‟), which could have entered southern Greece via our study area, raiders from the sea (the „Sea Peoples‟), who have been mentioned in relation with the krater fragments from Kynos, or yet other causes (LH IIIC destructions at Kynos have been attributed to earthquakes, see Chapter 3 p. 39). For the moment, however, the picture of the transition between the LBA and the EIA in southeastern East Lokris is sketchy as elsewhere.

Further to the north, in the area of the Spercheios Valley and Epiknemidian Lokris, evidence suggests a local flourishing in LH IIIC as well. Although our picture of this area is sketchy, due to the lack of systematic surveys and excavations, the evidence which does exist dates, significantly, largely to LH IIIC. Most evidence in this region comes from Rachita (Figure 1.2) and its immediate vicinity. Arguably the most interesting find is a rectangular built grave at Vardates (near Rachita) dating to LH IIIC Early and likely to be associated with a

129

pottery from Elateia is dull and uninspired.40 This confirms the idea of a coastal koine in LH IIIC Middle: sites which were reachable by sea remained in close contact, excluding the interior. Although Elateia flourished no less than coastal southeastern East Lokris in LH IIIC, it was part of a different tradition, a local center independent from the koine developing and focusing on the north Euboean Gulf. Deger-Jalkotzi has noted the “progressive tendency towards an idiosyncratic development” of the LH IIIC Middle and Late pottery from Elateia (Deger-Jalkotzi 1999, 195): although from the MPG and especially the LPG on, a Protogeometric Euboean koine envelops Elateia, in the transition from LH IIIC to PG the developments appear wholly local (ibidem 196).

settlement presumed at Rachita. The grave was excavated in the 1930‟s and constitutes a unique find, unparalleled in the study area or any of the adjacent areas. It seems to point to influence from Thessaly, where tholoi and other built graves as well as cists are more common than chamber tombs. The construction of the grave, with a stone pillar in the middle supporting the cover, is unusual (Lewartowski 2000, 11). In its lack of standardization it recalls the grave circles at Glypha from the transition to the LBA. Next to the multiple burials in the grave a bronze spearhead and some vessels dating to the LH IIIC Early period were found (Mountjoy 1999, 808).38 Lewartowski observes that weapons are very rarely found in simple graves of the final Mycenaean period; the only other example he lists is a spearhead in a child‟s grave at Volos (ibidem 40). Vardates is located at the narrow pass which provides access to Central Greece from the north. It is tempting, in the context of possible Late Bronze Age – Early Iron Age invasions from the north, to attach too much significance to this single LH IIIC spearhead.39

The flourishing of southeastern East Lokris in the LH IIIC phase is thus linked to the collapse of the palaces as well as to the North Euboean Gulf. The importance of seafaring is clearly indicated by the pictorial krater fragments from Kynos. Here LH IIIC is the most important period, possibly overshadowing Mitrou (Kramer-Hajos 2005b), with evidence in particular for a vibrant LH IIIC Middle phase. The site probably always functioned as a harbor of some importance, but the figurative krater fragments from the LH IIIC Middle phase and the terracotta ship models are especially vivid witnesses to Kynos‟ seafaring history in this phase. Mitrou continues to be settled in this period, and excavation revealed LH IIIC remains of great importance.

The finds from the LH IIIC Middle period suggest that southeastern East Lokris was part of a koine which included also Euboea and the Gulf of Pagasae (Chapter 4 pp. 93 and 96). Lemos repeatedly emphasizes in her work the existence of such a koine, focusing on Euboea and the North Euboean Gulf and unrelated to the earlier palace system (Lemos 1998; 1999, 21; 2002). She describes the constituents of this koine as enterprising communities which “had to learn fast how to survive in difficult times [and] briefly flourished with pottery, luxurious imports and ideas” (Lemos 1998, 45). These communities were invariably located on the coast or at least had easy access to sea routes, since forging ties with communities throughout the Aegean improved their chances for survival in an era when the protection of the palaces had been lost (Lemos 1999, 21). As I have argued, with the exception of Larymna and Pazaraki our area never benefited from palatial protection – rather the opposite – but despite this, or perhaps more likely, because of this it immediately moved to occupy the power vacuum that was created with the collapse of the palaces.

Both Kynos and Mitrou appear to have an uninterrupted sequence from LH IIIC through Protogeometric. At Mitrou the degree of continuity between the LBA and the EIA is especially remarkable, consisting of a Protogeometric apsidal building not only following the orientation and lay-out of the earlier LH IIIC remains, but actually reusing LH IIIC walls (Chapter 3 p. 47 and Figure 3.12). Although at Kynos several destructions took place throughout the LH IIIC phases, these destructions have been interpreted as caused by earthquakes by the excavator.41 Since LH IIIC and SM are followed by Protogeometric, and HMB ware is present throughout, there seems to be cultural continuity.

In stark contrast to the well made figurative krater fragments from Kynos and Kalapodi and the LH IIIC Middle krater fragments from Mitrou, the LH IIIC

40

The Elateia material comprises grave goods (see below p. 131), while the cited Kynos and Kalapodi pieces were meant to be used by and for the living in symposia emphasizing the wealth and status of the host. Nevertheless, the finds from Elateia do seem radically different from the settlement assemblages from sites inside the study area. 41 Lemos sees a general pattern of LH IIIC Middle destructions affecting the settlements of the LH IIIC Middle koine, leading to a decline in LH IIIC Late (e.g. Lemos 1999, 21) and a new koine in SubmycenaeanProtogeometric (Lemos 1995).

38

Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 265 (G78) mention some earlier sherds as well, and Mountjoy finds it possible that one vessel may date to LH IIIB2 (Mountjoy 1999, 813). 39 Invaders from the north would have entered Central Greece at this point, via the same narrow pass where in the 5th century BC Leonidas and his Spartan army would battle with the Persians.

130

It is curious that despite the evidence for a rich LH IIIC Middle phase, the two cemeteries around the plain of Atalanti – Agia Triada and Spartia – show a gap in this period; only in the Submycenaean phase there is some evidence for use again.

The tombs can be classified into two types. Type A tombs, the earlier type, date predominantly to the LH IIIC Middle/Late period (a few tombs date to LH IIIAIIIC Early) and follow the standard layout of Mycenaean chamber tombs, with dromos-entrance-chamber. They are well cut, with pits or up to three niches in the long dromos (especially near the southern end) and in the chamber; pits and niches can contain secondary or, especially but not exclusively in the case of children, primary burials. Some niches were closed by rocks or slabs and pits are often covered with undressed stone slabs. There are numerous pottery offerings particularly with the secondary burials. Some tombs have a side chamber opposite the entrance. Intact burials in situ show that the dead were buried in contracted position.

We get an impression of vibrant, important centers at the coast – and in the valleys easily reachable from there – which after the fall of the palaces quickly develop into major hubs and then survive the transition to the Early Iron Age, if not entirely unscathed, then at least with much less trauma than sites further south. The exact identity and role of the warriors on Kynos‟ krater fragments becomes important in this respect: were the southeastern East Lokrian coastal inhabitants among the aggressors towards the end of the Bronze Age who were responsible for the fall of the Mycenaean civilization elsewhere, and is their active role in this „Catastrophe‟ (borrowing the term from Drews 1995) the reason for their own relatively smooth transition into the Iron Age?42

The later type B tombs, dating to the LH IIIC Late/SM to PG period, are found among the type A tombs and especially in the western part of the cemetery. A few tombs were used in the geometric period as well. Dromoi are cut out irregularly and carelessly and can be any length. The entrance to the chamber is not well defined. The chamber itself is poorly cut and is reminiscent of a cave-like pit with room for only one burial; in one case the second body was laid over the first. These tombs lack pits and niches and have few offerings. The presence of Handmade Burnished Ware is notable. Most tombs contained contracted burials; a few had however cremations placed in pots in the chamber, belonging to LH IIIC Late. Often multiple bodies were put on top of one another. Dromoi were used for primary burials as well; new graves were dug on top of these.

At the interior site of Kalapodi, too, the LH IIIC phase is the most important of the Mycenaean phases and here, too, the degree of continuity into the Early Iron Age is striking. Not only is a full sequence of LH IIIC, Submycenaean, and Protogeometric pottery preserved, indicating that no gap existed at any time between the late Mycenaean and the Early Iron Age, but more importantly, the LH IIIC remains already suggest the presence of a cult center at the very location where later an Archaic altar would be established (Chapter 3 p. 58). This development is comparable to what happened at Elateia, another peripheral site with which the sites in southeastern East Lokris share a poor LH IIIB phase followed by extraordinary LH IIIC remains which continue without much interruption into the EIA. Elateia is the site of a large cemetery with 91 chamber tombs, mostly dating to LH IIIC-PG.43 The cemetery, located on the western slope of the hill northwest of the archaic acropolis at Elateia, at Alonaki-Agios Loukas, has a wide view over the plain. The necropolis came to light in 1985, when looters opened a number of tombs. Excavations under the joint direction of Fanouria Dakoronia and Sigrid Jeger-Dalkotzi took place between 1985 and 1992.44

LH IIIC-SM chamber tombs of Type B also occur at Modi-Liaraki, deep in the interior of the Kephissos Valley, and, in our study area, at Golemi. It may be significant that these tombs, associated with the transition to the Iron Age, occur only in the interior. Interesting is the remarkable degree of integration of different cultural expressions: the tombs are of Mycenaean type, though very poorly executed and small enough to serve a single burial, even if many hold multiple burials; HMB ware, possibly an intrusive element (Chapter 4 p. 97), is among the grave goods; and standard Mycenaean contracted inhumations are found alongside non-Mycenaean cremations. Finds, especially from the pits of type A tombs, indicate the rich character of the site. They include steatite, glass, rock crystal, carnelian, and amethyst beads in various shapes, two gold beads in the form of a stylized bucranium (Konstantinidi 2001, 148-149), bone, stone,

42

One might even propose that the actual prominence of the region in the LH IIIC (and following EIA) phases may explain the surprising prominence of the region in the Homeric Catalogue of Ships. See also Chapter 7 p. 143. 43 The earliest pottery dates to the LH IIIA1 phase (Bächle 2000). Some tombs were re-used in Hellenistic and Late Roman times. 44 Dakoronia, F., in: AD 40 (1985), 171-172 and pl. 58; AD 41 (1986), 65-68 and pl. 66-68; AD 42 (1987), 231-

234; AD 44 (1989), 174-177 and pl. 107; AD 45 (1990), 183-184 and pl. 86; AD 47 (1992), 207; Dakoronia, F. and S. Deger-Jalkotzi, in: AD 43 (1988), 229-232; Jalkotzi and Dakoronia 1992; Deger-Jalkotzi 1999; Konstantinidi 2001, 148-149.

131

and steatite pendants (ibidem), an abundance of bronze rings, two of which with a bezel, a gold ring with bezel, fragments of silver rings (ibidem), bronze fibulae (AD 44, pl. 107), gold fibulae, bronze, iron, and bone pins (AD 40, pl. 58), bronze hair-spirals, a bronze earring, glass objects (AD 41, pl. 67), crystal and steatite seals, a bronze seal (Konstantinidi 2001, 148-149), conical and biconical steatite spindle whorls or buttons, psi and phi figurines, obsidian, bronze and iron blades and knives (AD 45, pl. 86), a bronze sword, boar‟s tusks (AD 41, pl. 67), and two sea shells.45 Finds of special importance are three PG figurines which display features of both the Mycenaean and the Dark Age traditions and thus indicate continuity from Bronze to Iron Age (Alram-Stern 1999). The large number of metal finds is striking and may best be compared with contemporary Agnanti, which has yielded remarkable amounts of bronze pins (see Chapter 3 p. 72).

flourishing due to the koine they formed, were now under severe stress, perhaps even attack from the direction of the sea, leading perhaps to an interruption of trade routes and to a different settlement and lifestyle? It must be stressed, however, that the overall pattern is one of continuity, much rather than of interruption. The LH IIIC Middle koine, possibly after a brief interruption in LH IIIC Late, developed into the „Euboean koine‟ in the Submycenaean-Early Iron Age.46 Protogeometric skyphoi with pendant semicircles, the hallmark of PG pottery from Lefkandi, from Mitrou suggest that Mitrou was part of this koine.47 Mycenaean shapes with PG decoration at Kalapodi (Chapter 4 p. 98) indicate the transitional and experimental character of this period. The persistence of LH shapes suggests a certain conservatism, which has been explained as a sign of „backwardness‟ of this peripheral region.

Like Elateia, Agnanti, although inhabited as early as the LH IIIA phase, seems to have been especially important during the LH IIIC phase. Agnanti is similar to Elateia in site type (cemetery), date (LH IIIC-SM), location away from the coast (Elateia is located deeper in the interior of Phokis, but Agnanti is perhaps harder to reach from the coast), and number of metal finds. This suggests that Agnanti may have been excluded from the LH IIIC Middle koine as well. In fact, it appears likely that its location, high in the hills and not visible from the sea (Chapter 5 p. 101) may have helped in its survival into the Submycenaean and Protogeometric phases, not unlike the „refuge settlements‟ on Crete (e.g. Karphi: see Pendlebury 1938).

The undisputed cultural leader and center of the Euboean koine was Lefkandi on Euboea. The settlement at Lefkandi absorbed foreign influences – contacts existed with northern Greece and the Aegean, Cyprus, Egypt, and Phoenicia and the Near East,48 – and disseminated its new knowledge of vase making, painting, and iron working49 (Thomas and Conant 1999, 97). East Lokris was in an ideal position to benefit from the newly acquired knowledge and contacts. Whether the inhabitants of East Lokris exploited the iron ore in their own region (Chapter 2 p. 19) or not, southeastern East Lokris, just on the other side of the Gulf of Euboea, shared fully in the new Protogeometric culture. Mitrou‟s apsidal building as well as its semi- and full-circle skyphoi, both hallmarks of the Euboean koine, show that Southeastern East Lokris was now, as in the beginning of the Late Helladic period, in the very center of happenings, absorbing, adopting, and adapting whichever new influences came through the Euboean Gulf.

Another site which, like Kynos and Mitrou, has a poorly represented LH IIIB phase followed by important LH IIIC Middle remains, is Lefkandi. Lefkandi, although surviving into the EIA and flourishing then, as well as in LH IIIC Middle, sees some destruction at the end of the LH IIIC Middle phase. Following habitation is “marked by slow deterioration” (Lemos 1999, 21). Something similar may have happened somewhat later at Kynos, where the LH IIIC Late settlement was destroyed and rebuilt more simply. At Mitrou, too, despite the overwhelming evidence for continuity between the LBA and the EIA, the abandonment of the LBA rectangular structures and the associated town grid in favor of dispersed and flimsy apsidal buildings, suggests a break of some sort. Is it possible that, unlike at interior sites such as Kalapodi and Elateia, these coastal sites, initially

46

The phrase “Euboean koine” was coined by Lemos (2002) to describe the common PG culture disseminating from Lefkandi and encompassing much of Central Greece and Thessaly. 47 The frequency of repairs on PG vessels imported from Lefkandi to Mitrou (Chapter 4 p. 98) suggests that contact between the two sites may have been less frequent than is suggested by the phrase „Euboean koine.‟ 48 In a geometric cist tomb in Tragana (near Mitrou: see Figure 1.5) a Near Eastern import with an inscription in Neo-Hittite was found (Onassoglou 1989b), showing that by this time southeastern East Lokris, too, had reestablished trade routes with the Near East. 49 The main publications on the important site of Lefkandi are: Popham and Sackett 1968 and 1980, Popham and Milburn 1971, Catling and Lemos 1990, Popham et al. 1993, Popham and Lemos 1996, Evely 2006. For a brief summary and interpretation see Lemos 2002, 140-146.

45

Both sea shells were found in richly furnished tombs: one of the sea shells was found among piriform jars, jugs, amphoriskoi, a three-handled alabastron, a pyxis, gold, silver, bronze, and other jewellery, a bronze spearhead, a bronze razor, bronze tweezers, a large number of boar‟s tusks, and two iron knives (Konstantinidi 2001, 148-149). See Chapter 3 p. 66 note 28 for the chronological implications of shells in rich burials.

132

Chapter 7: Society We have seen where settlements were located and how the region as a whole developed during the Late Bronze Age. In this brief chapter I will turn to the actual people who lived in southeastern East Lokris in the LBA. Who were they? What was their society like? And is it possible to pry from the material remains they left behind a thing or two about their values – about what was important to them, about how they thought about themselves? In short, what do the material remains tell us about the inhabitants of the settlements in LBA southeastern East Lokris? Ironically, it is the burial remains which often give the most information about the life of the ancient inhabitants.

important to these new elites: without undisturbed graves advertising a self image (e.g. of ritual makers, warriors, or hunters), we can only conjecture.3 Similarly, the basis of their power – perhaps control over surplus agricultural produce and accompanying redistribution, or control over import of prestige goods, or over ritual? – is impossible to know at the moment.4 However, Mitrou‟s coastal location, in a natural bay whose entrance was, most likely, protected by a small island (see Figure 2.5), seems to suggest that the emergence of an elite may have been connected with seafaring adventures, whether trade or less friendly endeavors like raiding and pirating.5

Study and comparative analysis of the burials from 29 LH IIIB-C chamber tombs at four different locations in East Lokris has revealed some striking findings. The study, undertaken by Carina Iezzi, included skeletal remains from Spartia, Agia Triada, Kolaka, and Modi.1 Kolaka and Modi, both outside the study area (Kolaka, SE of Mt. Chlomon, e.g. on Figure 6.3; Modi west of Elateia), represent sites in the interior; Agia Triada and Spartia are part of coastal southeastern East Lokris.

Another question is the ethnicity of these early elites. In southeastern East Lokris, and at Mitrou in particular, there is nothing to suggest that they might be intrusive, and in fact there is strong evidence pointing to an indigenous origin: the shape of Mitrou‟s largest monumental building is apsidal like the standard dwelling shapes in the MH period.6 This suggests that the new elite was local, growing out of indigenous MH roots. The other monumental structure from this early period, Building D, was large and well constructed, with thick walls suggesting that they carried a second storey. More importantly, the building was embedded in an orthogonal town grid with wide pebbled streets (Chapter 3 p. 45). This is unique for the beginning of the Late Bronze Age on the Greek mainland, and elsewhere in the Aegean only attested in Minoan settlements and at Troy (Van de Moortel 2007, VIII). Van de Moortel may well be right in thinking that this reflects strong leadership of the Mitrou elite (ibidem); one cannot help but wonder if these early leaders were inspired by what they had seen on their journeys to Crete and other parts of the Aegean.

The earliest evidence, however, consists not of burials but of LH I lustrous pottery, especially Vapheio and other cup fragments, and the remains of two large, even monumental buildings (the apsidal building and Building D: Chapter 3 p. 45) on Mitrou. Thus we find, after a MH period with little evidence for social stratification, suddenly evidence for emerging elites in early Mycenaean times. The monumental buildings may have been residences, gathering places, or both; the prominence of Vapheio cup fragments (Chapter 4 p. 77 and Figure 4.1) suggests that ceremonial drinking was one of the activities taking place in these buildings. This ceremonial drinking may have been one of the ways in which this new elite attempted to solidify its status.2 To date, these are the only indications we have of what was

These pebbled streets were wide enough to accommodate wheeled vehicles; their main function may however have

1

An important note is that Iezzi‟s study assigns all burials to LH IIIB-C, without distinction, and assumes no significant change over time (Iezzi 2005a, ix). At least theoretically, some of the changes between Agia Triada and Spartia that Iezzi notes might be due to a difference in lifestyle between LH IIIA-B (Agia Triada) and LH IIIB-C (Spartia), in addition to differences of location. 2 Wright has discussed the evidence of ceremonial drinking in the formation and consolidation of early Mycenaean elites (Wright 1995; 2004a). Although the evidence he discusses comes exclusively from tombs, the general idea that drinking served to convey status and forge alliances (as the symposion did in Classical Athens) is independent from the context in which drinking equipment is found.

3

The three categories proposed are taken from Thomas‟ investigation of iconographic motifs on objects from the Shaft Graves at Mycenae (Thomas 1999). 4 All three have been proposed (sometimes in conjunction with each other) for the emergence of palatial civilization on Crete or complex society in the Aegean in general: e.g. storage and redistribution: Renfrew 1972, 297, Halstead 1981b; trade in prestige goods: Van Andel and Runnels 1988; religious control: Haggis 1999. 5 Raiding and pirating have been suggested for the sudden wealth at the earlier site of Kolonna on Aegina (e.g. Basch 1986, 429). 6 Building D was not completely uncovered as of 2006 (Van de Moortel 2007).

133

been symbolic: the added investment they represented over streets of simply packed dirt and their esthetic value served as status symbols, signifying to anyone that he was now entering the rulers‟ quarter. Nevertheless, carts and wagons may have carried agricultural produce, harvested on the plain of Atalanti, to the settlement at Mitrou to be stored centrally. It is conceivable that indeed the major roads led to Building D, which may have had a function similar to that of the later palaces in the Aegean: overseeing the storage and distribution of goods. In that case, the basis of the elites was not only accumulation of goods from trade or raiding, but also control over agricultural produce. Until further excavation results, however, this must remain speculative.

status of the deceased individual rather than that of his family or clan. It is thus unsurprising that cist tombs are the common form of burial in periods in which society seems to have been relatively egalitarian, or at most „ranked‟ (the MH and Dark Age periods),8 whereas shaft graves, tholos tombs, and chamber tombs occur in the highly stratified Mycenaean period.9 For the earliest Mycenaean period, these types of family graves are not attested in southeastern East Lokris, despite the presence of other culturally Mycenaean finds such as pottery. If this is not due to mere chance of preservation or discovery, it may indicate a certain conservatism on the part of these early elites, perhaps also reflected in the apsidal shape of their largest building. Despite their enthusiasm for fine Mycenaean pottery and their well organized settlement, they preferred the old burial modes. Apart from the obvious explanation that burial modes are inherently less prone to change than the type of cup used to drink from, one may wonder if perhaps the elites in this area were initially rather individual „Big Men‟ who each had to prove their leadership (by setting out to sea and acquiring goods?) and then consolidate it (by accommodating ceremonial drinking), than members of an important clan who inherited their status from their fathers.10

Not only ideas, but actual goods must have been brought in from abroad as well. Surface survey finds from the period – for example the presence of Aeginetan ware (Chapter 4 p. 75) – indicate that the Mycenaean elite at Mitrou was in contact and traded with the southern Aegean, including Minoan Crete or the Cyclades, the Peloponnese, and Aegina from the inception of the Mycenaean culture on. Many of these goods would, by the very fact that they were acquired far away, have been prestige items which, if the rich and powerful at Mitrou were anything like their counterparts in the Argolid, may have been buried with them. However, since so far no undisturbed graves from the period have been discovered, this must remain speculative.

8

See Whitley 2001, 89-90, about the hypothesis that Dark Age Greece was a ranked (rather than stratified) society, in which status was achieved rather than ascribed, and inequality, though existing, was not “a permanent feature of the social hierarchy.” 9 There is some debate regarding the significance of the switch from chamber tombs with communal burials in the LH to single burials in cist tombs in the EIA. Desborough invoked an invasion of newcomers, perhaps from Epirus (Desborough 1972, 106-111); Snodgrass on the other hand preferred to see this as a revival of the MH culture (Snodgrass 22000, 177-184, 314-317). Given Snodgrass‟ understatement of the degree to which e.g. Lokris was part of the mainstream Mycenaean culture (see also Chapter 1 p. 11 note 9), his eagerness to see a MH substrate at work is understandable. Dickinson (1983) and Mee and Cavanagh (1984) on the other hand prefer to interpret the change in terms of changing social and political organization, requiring a more economical mode of burial. This could be the explanation for the existence of „Type B‟ chamber tombs at e.g. Elateia and Golemi in LH IIIC-SM (Chapter 6 p. 131). 10 Cavanagh and Mee suggest that the collective tombs of LH I-II Greece imply “that social status must have been perceived as hereditary, at least in theory” (1998, 134). The Shaft Graves “represent a transitional stage between single graves and collective tombs” (ibidem 131); similarly, Thomas suggests, based on the iconography of selected Shaft Grave items, that in this period a shift occurred to an extension of power and status for the clan, not just for the individual (Thomas 1999). Indeed, the

In fact, the only graves possibly dating to this phase at Mitrou are one or two looted cist tombs (Chapter 3 p. 44). Cist tombs, meant for a single burial, assume a radically different approach to burial than tombs designed for multiple use such as shaft graves, tholos tombs, or the later chamber tombs (Desborough 1964, 56; see also Hall 1997, 117). In those communal tombs, members of a family or clan would be buried over the course of generations,7 each new burial giving the family an opportunity not only to reinforce its internal ties, but also to proclaim to their neighbors their family-wealth, status, and lofty ancestry. Individual burials in cists, however, no matter how rich, do not emphasize the family bond to the same degree, do not offer the same opportunity for advertizing inclusion (or exclusion), and proclaim the 7

Although it is not sure what exactly the criteria for inclusion were: see Dickinson 1994, 215 (“the descendants of an original pair will sooner or later, perhaps in the next generation, establish more than one family; do all such descendants become entitled to burial in the same tomb? […] In the absence of accurate data on skeletal remains it cannot ever be assumed that all members of a household, or of several households if these used the same tomb, were buried together; there might have been selectivity against one sex, against nonadults, particularly infants, or in favour of holders of a certain rank or office”). 134

If this was the case, one would expect to see this reflected in the burial record. Cavanagh and Mee conclude that in the early Mycenaean period, since hereditary rights were disputed, “death and power were seen as inextricably linked” which resulted in a uniquely Mycenaean “glorification of death” (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 56). Whether this was indeed the case at Mitrou is not possible to know: we do not have the original contents of the early Mycenaean cist tomb from which a well made, but hardly spectacular Gray Minyan „teacup‟ stems (Chapter 4 p. 75). But even if this „teacup‟ does not appear to be very prestigious, it emphasizes once again the importance of the consumption of liquids. Moreover, it is a „hybrid‟ vessel, combining a MH fabric with a Mycenaean shape. The formal aspects and the historical relevance of the phenomenon of hybrid vessels have been discussed in previous chapters (Chapter 4 pp. 75-77 and Chapter 6 p. 118), but there may be social implications as well. It has been demonstrated11 that taking over new and exotic cultural forms is a way to gain prestige for new elites; yet in order to successfully transfer the meaning of the prestigious imported items to their community, the new elite needs to express that meaning “in the familiar material and social code of their community” (Wright 2004a, 96-97). At Mycenae, as a result of this mechanism, a “Mycenaean drinking service was being created at this time [which] merged indigenous pottery forms with exogenous ones” (Wright 2004a, 96). It is conceivable that a similar mechanism lies behind the creation of this and other vessels which combine Mycenaean with MH characteristics, and that the remarkable variety of vessels and other cultural expressions in this period is not only due to the transitional character of the period, but also a direct consequence of the aspirations of upcoming elites who use prestigious new forms next to traditional ones and use hybrid forms to bridge the gap between the two.12

the traditional MH shape, a rectangular town plan „imported‟ from abroad, and all in a size meant to impress. The very size of the buildings provides ample evidence for the importance of their inhabitants, even if the absence of rich burial remains makes the elite on Mitrou far less visible than its contemporaries in Mycenae, or at the earlier elite at Kolonna on Aegina.13 Although the „provincial‟ elite here in southeastern East Lokris was undoubtedly less rich than the „Shaft Grave Princes‟ from Mycenae, the settlement remains are unique and reflect a powerful leadership which had seen the world. In short, the early Mycenaeans responsible for the monumental buildings at Mitrou, and using the drinking cups decorated in the new and fancy lustrous paint inspired by Minoan pottery, would have been active sea farers. On their trips they encountered towns with a degree of organization which inspired them to build in similar fashion at home, although they did not always follow the rectangular plan of those foreign buildings. They may have been initially „Big Men‟ rather than dynasts, whose power base was rooted in seafaring and associated trade or piracy, and possibly also in social storage and redistribution of agricultural produce, brought in from the plain of Atalanti. Of course the term „elite‟ implies the existence of a lower stratum of the population; it is in fact possible that below the elite was a complex stratification consisting of several layers of society, each successive one having less wealth and social and political influence. However, since MH society is typically assumed to have been relatively egalitarian, and in the early phases of the LBA elites just started emerging, it is perhaps more likely that in this phase a small elite ruled (more or less formally) the rest of the population, which was relatively unstratified. Since the sturdy rectangular buildings surrounding Building D probably belonged to members of this small elite (the relatives of the ruler?), the „common people‟ may have lived in scantier dwellings further away from the center of power.

The architectural remains on Mitrou from this period are similarly hybrid in nature, with a large apsidal building in

very wealth of the Shaft Graves suggests that living members of the family had an investment in showing off their riches and prowess to other families. If the Shaft Graves are indeed representative of a transition between the two systems, it is unsurprising that contemporary southeastern East Lokris would still adhere to the MH system. 11 See Wright 2004a, 96 for references. 12 Wright 1995, 295 puts it as follows: “The prestige enhancement that accompanies the introduction of foreign but not altogether new ceremonies of drinking, and the social distance expressed by the luxurious vessels used in the ceremonies are fundamental aspects of the emergence of chiefly groups at developing Mycenaean centers. Hybrid vessels incorporate all these elements and document the syncretistic nature of early Mycenaean social and political ideology.”

When slightly later we encounter a rich elite in the Kalapodi area, the evidence comes from undisturbed burials. These chamber tombs, for communal burials most likely accommodating a family or clan, suggest that status was now hereditary. Similarly, LH III chamber tombs in the coastal areas of East Lokris, at the sites of Agia Triada and Spartia, suggest that the elites which had emerged around the Plain of Atalanti were now well established and consolidated. The burial of a child in a family tomb at Agia Triada suggests that elite children were now considered first and foremost part of a family

13

There is to date nothing to suggest a scale of wealth comparable with MH Kolonna or MH-LH I Mycenae. 135

and worthy of burial with their relatives, again evidence that status was now hereditary.

What is clear is that by the LH IIIA phase a Mycenaean elite was in power in the area of Kalapodi, whether their power was based primarily on prominence in war, the hunt, trade, storage of surplus goods, or, as I like to think, ritual. This elite behaved in the expected manner for Mycenaeans, burying their deceased with their wealth in what must have been an impressive show of might and power. Tinned vessels were given to accompany the deceased, and the set of four kylikes and a jug indicates the social importance of drinking, which was to be done in company and to be initiated, organized, and supervised by an elite member of society for his peers.15 This tomb and its tinned pottery assemblage, though unique in southeastern East Lokris, is witness to the standardization of drinking ceremonies and burial customs: similar assemblages are found in rich tombs at Dendra, Asine, Prosymna, Mycenae, Berbati, the Athenian Agora and elsewhere (Wright 2004a, 99). This standardization was “not merely the result of the growth of craft industries, which were able to turn out items of standardized shape and size, but much more an indication of the emergence of standards of taste and a burgeoning demand for commodities which represented status and that could be used in displays of status” (Wright 2004a, 100). This tomb is therefore clear evidence for the aspirations of the Kalapodi elite to adhere to general upper-class Mycenaean standards.

The deceased buried in Mycenaean chamber tombs in southeastern East Lokris were typically placed in contracted position, i.e. with knees drawn up. This is the case regardless of the amount of space available in the tomb (see e.g. Figure 3.5) and thus may have had “some ritual significance” (Dickinson 1994, 209). The explanation coming most readily to mind is that the contracted position resembles the foetal position and may thus reflect a wish for the deceased to be reborn. The common occurrence in graves of alabastra (which held unguents as well as spices), stirrup jars (containing perfumed oil), and piriform jars (which were perhaps used for honey as well as unguents; Mountjoy 1993, 127), may reflect a similar concern for the integrity of the body if one assumes that these vessels would have held the oil and other embalming substances with which the body was prepared for funeral. Apparently, this concern for the dead body stopped as soon as all the flesh had decayed: secondary burials of skeletal remains are often simply swept aside, causing the bones of the skeleton to end up in jumbled heaps. It is possible that earlier grave goods were removed on such occasions, since the dead “were powerless to avenge this” once their bones were bare (Dickinson 1994, 209); the practical consideration that grave goods are useless for one who no longer possesses a body may also have played a role.

Who were these elites? Presence of seal stones suggests that they were the official representatives of the Mycenaean administration. It may be instructive to compare the Kokkalia evidence with contemporary evidence from the Argolid, where our picture is more complete. There, too, it was “the newly enfranchised functionaries of the palace-centred system” who accounted for “the proliferation of chamber tombs at this time” (Wright 2004a, 100). These local officials were charged with various roles serving the needs of the complex society which had evolved; one of these roles was the regulation and control over religious practices (ibidem).16 These religious practices could be organized and sponsored by the palace, while taking place in the province, as has been demonstrated for LH IIIA2 Tsoungiza, where sacrifices and feasts were sponsored by the palace at Mycenae (Dabney et al. 2004, 93). Although the distance between Mycenae and Tsoungiza is

Iconographical evidence from larnakes at Tanagra suggests that female mourners, ritually tearing at their hair, would have accompanied the dead body in a funeral procession to the cemetery. Since only women are shown in this role, it is likely that in Mycenaean Greece, as later in Classical Greece, care for the dead was a particular female domain. The power base for the LH II elites near Kalapodi is again subject to speculation. However, since Kalapodi is located in the interior, an explanation for the emergence of an elite here based on seafaring is unlikely. In this fertile area, control over agricultural surplus may be a more likely explanation. It is moreover tempting, given Kalapodi‟s late Mycenaean function of cult center (Chapter 3 p. 58), to speculate that control over a ritual, or an ideology connecting the ruling family with cult, was the basis for the power of these elites. Konstantinidi hints at this when she connects the swords found in the Kokkalia tomb with priests rather than with warriors (see Chapter 4 p. 82).14

Mycenaeans themselves most likely did not distinguish clearly between the two. 15 In his survey of Mycenaean feasting, Wright assumes that sets of tinned pottery like the one from Kokkalia were used in feasting ceremonies (Wright 2004b, 26) and that their presence in a tomb “may refer to the status of the deceased as one who shares drinks with special companions” (ibidem 27). 16 Others may have been “policing the state, handling commercial exchanges, overseeing estates” etc (Wright 2004a, 100).

14

See also Thomas 1999 for the conflation of secular and religious leadership roles in iconography: to some extent the question whether the „treasure‟ from the Kokkalia tomb belonged to a king or a priest – and thus, whether in the LH II-IIIA period Kokkalia was a „secular‟ or a „religious‟ center, is an anachronistic one, since the 136

somewhat less (ca. 15 km) than the distance between Orchomenos and Kalapodi (ca. 20 km), it is tempting to assume that a similar mechanism was at work. A desire of Orchomenos to draw this part of the province into its political sphere would account not only for the wealth and standardization of the Kokkalia tombs, but would also explain the presence of prestigious goods manufactured at Thebes but buried here at Kokkalia: in the Argolid the consumers related to the palace system “participated in and stimulated a burgeoning market in international goods” (Wright 2004a, 100) and here, in the „province‟ a similar mechanism may be at work dispersing goods from Thebes into the hands of officials in the province.

out, most notably the LH IIIA1 hydria from Kokkinonyzes with the non-Mycenaean decorative pattern (Figure 4.9) and the LH IIIA2 three-handled kylix from Mitrou (Chapter 4 p. 84). These vessels seem to suggest that in this peripheral area some of the fluidity of the early Mycenaean period remains. Whereas in the Argolid individual oddities cease to exist in the LH IIIA phase (Wright 2004a, 98), when palatial standards create conformity, as they did at Kokkalia, here in southeastern East Lokris any palatial control which may have existed was far weaker than in the Myenaean core area. Nevertheless, the presence of the amber bead at Kokkinonyzes suggests that Kokkinonyzes was part of a Mycenaean exchange network, and conformity as expressed by the use of chamber tombs and of mostly standard Mycenaean pottery shows a high degree of internalization of Mycenaean cultural standards.

The extent to which southeastern East Lokris incorporated the Mycenaean administrative system is suggested by the presence of seals, in the study area the most visible tools of the Mycenaean bureaucracy. They are reported for Spartia, Mitrou, Agia Triada, Kokkalia, Zeli-Agios Georgios, Vagia, Golemi, and Sventza. They are thus clustered in two groups, coinciding with the two locations where the earliest elites are attested: around Kalapodi and at the plain of Atalanti.17 Their wide spread distribution suggests a number of local officials administering and documenting various aspects of the Mycenaean bureaucratic system. Is it coincidental that their presence is limited to areas easiest reachable from Orchomenos?

Local elites around the Plain of Atalanti generally enjoyed good health: individuals from the tombs at Agia Triada and Spartia were consistently found to have been healthier on average than individuals from tombs from inland sites (Koalaka and Modi) dating to the same period (Iezzi 2003a; 2005a, 123-125; 2005b); for example anemia was significantly more frequent in the interior than on the coast. This health difference between the coastal and interior regions may in part reflect a difference in diet: the likely addition of fish to the diet of the coastal East Lokrians (of which the lead fishing weights retrieved from Mitrou (Chapter 4 p. 99) bear witness) must have provided important oils and minerals which the inlanders lacked (Iezzi 2003a). In addition, however, lower rates of osteoarthritis and slight bone deformations18 suggest that the coastal inhabitants who were buried in the chamber tombs suffered less manual labor than their contemporaries in the interior (Iezzi 2005a, 192). These findings are consistent with the idea that the coastal region was generally rich and home to an elite; they also suggest that only the elites were buried in chamber tombs in the coastal region.

In IIIA1 the Kalapodi area is thus fully part of the palatial mainstream; in LH IIIB it is not – it is in fact virtually non-existent. We must ask ourselves the question of what brought about this drastic change. Since we suggested that it was Orchomenos which created the elites at Kokkalia, we have to look at Orchomenos to seek the answer to this question. The most visible and significant difference between LH IIIA1 and LH IIIB Orchomenos is that the latter had organized the drainage of the Kopaic Basin. As a consequence, Orchomenos in the LH IIIB period had plenty of fertile farmland under its control, which however needed vigilant protection in the form of a series of well-placed forts which also served to guarantee access to the sea (Chapter 6 p. 127). Given Orchomenos‟ emphasis on and investment in this large area to its east, it may have neglected its hinterland to the northwest: the Kalapodi area, which was now less crucial. Possibly even a strategically placed fort at Hyampolis officially severed the Kalapodi area from Orchomenos‟ sphere of influence.

A striking phenomenon affecting Mycenaean burials in general is the skewed nature of the burial remains; especially children are underrepresented. Moreover, the numbers of the dead are generally lower than one would expect. The two observations together strongly suggest that a significant part of the population was excluded from burial in chamber tombs and received an archaeologically „invisible‟ burial (Dickinson 1994, 208209). Burial in chamber tombs, although becoming increasingly more common during the LH III phases, must nevertheless have been reserved for the higher and more urbane layers of society. Undoubtedly those were also the layers that were culturally most „Mycenaeanized‟: the poorest and least visible

Despite the generally standard material from the LH IIIA phases in southeastern East Lokris, some oddities stand 17

Only in the case of Mitrou and Sventza the seals are dated: the Mitrou seals are dated to LH IIIB (Van de Moortel 2007, VIII), those from Sventza to LH IIIA2-B (Onassoglou 1989a).

18

Especially platymeria (flattening of the femur, possibly due to frequent squatting (Iezzi 2003a)). 137

constituents of society – the rural peasants and pastoralists on the fringes of the territories of the larger centers – must have lived their lives throughout the LBA pretty much the same as they had done in the MBA, and would continue to do in the EIA.19

this may indicate that they were raised elsewhere, possibly on Crete, where their stature would be average, then came to coastal East Lokris as adults (again an indication for the international contacts of coastal East Lokris due to the North Euboean Gulf). A hardy childhood would have stunted their growth, but once they survived that, the better East Lokrian diet allowed them to reach high ages. Some of the irregular features of the burials at Spartia and Agia Triada – e.g. the pithos burial in the dromos of a tomb at Spartia, the cists in the chambers of Agia Triada tombs (Chapter 3 pp. 43, 49 and Figure 3.7) – are then explained as imported Cretan customs.20 This would be another strong indication that coastal East Lokris differed significantly in character from the interior; it is at the same time evidence for coastal contacts with other regions in the Aegean.21

Infants and young children form a significant percentage of those excluded from chamber tomb burial, and the LH IIIC late or EIA intramural cist tombs of infants or very young children at Kynos are part of a long Bronze Age tradition of burying small children in single graves under the floor of the house. Since this intramural burial mode is practiced exclusively with infants and young children, it suggests that these children were perceived differently from adults: they were not considered full members of society and were, unlike adults, not thought of as polluting in death. Cavanagh and Mee (1998, 111) contrast the treatment of children as belonging to a certain age class with the view of a child as an individual and as close kin, and see the development from one to the other as fitting “with the trend from communal flat cemeteries to „family‟ tombs” during the beginning of the LBA. The intramural burial of children as at Kynos suggests that the two views may have existed together: children are buried separate from adults, emphasizing their age, but in their own household, acknowledging the family tie. It should be noted, however, that there is very little to acknowledge their individuality. It may well have been mostly lower class children who were buried thus: the earlier elites at Agia Triada emphasized the inherent status of the child as a valued member of the family by entombing it in the family sepulcher. Both low family status and low „age status‟ may be responsible for the paucity of grave goods expended on the infant burials at Kynos: grave goods were limited to shells (which have the lowest possible status index in LH IIIC: Lewartowski 2000, 42), small stones, or fish-bone beads; rarely a jug was given. A difference in burial modes for adults and children also implies the existence of a rite of passage to mark the entry into adulthood; no indications about the nature of such rites exist for the study area, however.

This interpretation would have interesting consequences for our interpretation of the Kokkalia tombs, the only other location where cists were incorporated in chamber tombs, although here they held secondary burials only (Chapter 3 p. 59). If the explanation is, as Iezzi suggested, the presence of Cretan „immigrants,‟ these cists at Kokkalia would indicate that Cretan immigration was not limited to the coast but occurred further inland as well.22 If this is the case, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that there is a connection between the presence of an elite 20

See also Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 75, where Minoan influence on Karpathos is used to explain the presence of a terracotta larnax in the chamber tomb at Arkasa. Dickinson mentions Minoan pithos and larnax (functionally and formally, if not technically, similar to a cist) burials associated with built tombs at Archanes and inside rock cut chamber tombs at Knossos (Dickinson 1994, 215). 21 The larnax burials at Tanagra in coastal Boeotia are another example that comes to mind – are we to think of Cretan immigrants settling on the coasts of the North Euboean Gulf (as proposed by Kanta in 1980)? In this respect it is interesting to note that another irregular feature of the Spartia chamber tombs, the niches in the dromos, are rare in Central Greece, although they have been reported for the earlier tombs at Tanagra (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 68). This might – though not in any straightforward manner – strengthen the idea of a Cretan connection. Dickinson observes for Tanagra that, apart from burial in larnakes, “there is no other reason to suggest a Cretan element in the population” (Dickinson 1994, 231). If, however, we were to assume with Iezzi a presence of Cretan women only, and assume that burial would be a specifically female domain, it may be possible that Cretan influence is found in burial customs but nowhere else. 22 It must be remembered that the Kokkalia tombs are significantly earlier than the Spartia and slightly earlier than the Agia Triada tombs, making direct comparison difficult.

The generally good health of the people living at Mitrou is visible in a relatively high average age at death for the women: whereas the average at the other sites in East Lokris was around 34 (at the interior sites only it was no more than ca. 31 years), at Agia Triada it was 44 (with many women exceeding 50 years of age (Iezzi 2005a, 217) and one individual even living to a venerable 60; Iezzi 2005a, 114). Despite the fact that the women at the coast lived much longer than their peers in the interior, however, they were significantly shorter in stature (Iezzi 2005a, 187). Iezzi hypothesizes (Iezzi 2005a, 239) that 19

The evidence from e.g. Kolaka and Modi is problematic in this reconstruction: the people buried in the standard Mycenaean chamber tombs evidently had followed a very traditional lifestyle (Chapter 2 p. 33). 138

upper layer of society and these Cretan immigrants: Kokkalia, Agia Triada and Spartia were all burial sites of elites.23 This is not to return, with Sir Arthur Evans, to a Cretocentric view on Aegean prehistory, in which Minoans were responsible for the flowering of Mycenaean civilization: after all, Iezzi‟s hypothesis implies a movement only of women. Possibly these Mycenaean elites brought Cretan women with them from their trading trips. It is regrettable that a careful analysis of skeletal remains has not yet been applied to any remains from the tombs around Kalapodi; it would be interesting to see whether the cultural connections visible between Kalapodi and the coast extend to the actual people from this area as well.

explained in Chapter 6, I favor oppression from Orchomenos over Theban interference) kept a close eye on Mitrou, they may well have prevented any significant rebuilding. To control the North Euboean Gulf, however, and close Mitrou off from its maritime lifeline, would have been more difficult: Mitrou‟s access to the sea is much better than that of Orchomenos, and even if the ruler of Orchomenos had ships stationed at Larymna, cutting Mitrou off effectively would have been possible only by closing off the Gulf of Atalanti, which is an unlikely scenario.25 It must be remembered that Volos in the LH IIIB phase was a major Mycenaean center, and it is likely that ships from the Argolid and elsewhere were sailing up and down the length of the North Euboean Gulf. It is thus conceivable that the occasional import of valuable cups, kraters, and fine stirrup jars filled with perfumed oil, all goods still highly valued by the surviving remnant of Mitrou‟s elite, did reach Mitrou. Incidentally, a high degree of hostility between Orchomenos and southeastern East Lokris would offer an explanation for the dense fortifications along the northern side of the Kopaic Basin.

After a period of cooperation and incorporation in the Mycenaean culture of southern Central Greece, the early elites evidently failed in competition with their peers further south, and in the process lost much of their visibility, if not, perhaps, their actual existence. Again the evidence from Mitrou is telling. The early Mycenaean settlement was thoroughly destroyed in the LH IIIA2 phase, and not rebuilt until LH IIIC – a time period of almost two centuries (see Table 1). In an informal publication Aleydis Van de Moortel has tentatively suggested that the ruler of Thebes or Orchomenos may have ordered the destruction of Mitrou, eliminating its ruling class and leaving the ruins as a visible permanent warning (Van de Moortel 2007, VIII), and I have argued along similar lines in Chapter 6. At Mitrou there is however striking evidence that after this oppression in the LH IIIB phase, inhabitants tried to rebuild their original settlement, following the basic plan of the early Mycenaean settlement and constructing a major building on top of the old elite building. This may suggest that the old elite families from Mitrou were still in place, and moved to reestablish structure and order as well as their own prominence as soon as the threat from Orchomenos was gone.

The marked change in building style on LH IIIB Mitrou seems to be accompanied by depopulation. Had the inhabitants of Mitrou, after the LH IIIA2 destructions, left Mitrou and settled elsewhere, or had they simply been decimated in those destructions? One could speculate that some of the inhabitants from Mitrou took to the hills and settled at Kyparissi, where evidence is limited to the LH IIIB and possibly IIIC Early phases. However, it is important to be cautious when all evidence exists of surface sherds which are not even firmly dated (see Chapter 3 pp. 43-44). It is unsurprising that the coastal communities of southeastern East Lokris, which had been enterprising seafarers long before the palaces developed, flourished again as soon as those palaces collapsed. Indeed, they now band together with Kalapodi, which may well have suffered the same suppression by Orchomenos (via the fort of Hyampolis) and with Lefkandi, which may have been oppressed by Thebes:26 pottery of Kalapodi and Lefkandi is remarkably similar to that of Mitrou and Kynos in the post-palace period. Ties with Volos are

This scenario also explains the odd situation in which there is barely any architecture to speak of in the LH IIIB phase, yet we find high quality, „elite‟ pottery and seal stones.24 If the rulers at Orchomenos (for the reasons

23

At Agia Triada and Spartia all tombs were looted before they could be properly excavated, which may be the reason for a relatively disappointing assemblage of grave goods. Yet the seal and, if we are allowed to extrapolate from both later (Geometric and Archaic) and earlier (Shaft Grave) iconography, the horse with rider from Agia Triada, as well as the amber bead and seals from Spartia suggest a richness of grave goods befitting an upper layer of society. 24 The two seal stones, dated to LH IIIB in Van de Moortel 2007, VIII (Chapter 4 p. 85) present a problem in this reconstruction of events: seal stones are

administrative tools and suggest a presence at Mitrou of officials representing the palace administration. 25 In that case, one would surely expect a visible Orchomenian presence (i.e. a LH IIIB presence) at Mitrou. 26 Linear B tablets from Thebes suggest that Amarynthos (on the coast to the east of Lefkandi) was part of the Theban realm (Aravantinos et al. 2001, 355), and the proximity of Lefkandi to Dramesi on the other side of the gulf (Figure 1.1) makes Theban dominance a likely scenario. Lefkandi, like coastal southeastern East Lokris, suffered a decline in LH IIIB (Chapter 6 p. 128). 139

renewed as well. Orchomenos and Thebes are both emphatically left out from this LH IIIC Middle koine.

at least the sea between Euboea and the mainland. Given the general turmoil throughout the Aegean in this period, it is more than likely that these ships on occasion would have encountered enemy ships. In fact, the danger of seafaring – whether due to bad weather or to enemy encounters – is suggested by iconography on kraters as well as by burial data from LH IIIB-C chamber tombs.

Whatever the power base and the self image of the early elites in the area was, towards the end of the Mycenaean era we encounter an elite boasting to be fearless sailors and warriors. The pictorial krater fragments from Kynos paint a picture of a fierce and warlike people; on pictorial fragments from Lefkandi and Volos we see energetic warriors as well, and similar iconography is used at Kalapodi for hunting scenes. Whether or not these kraters depict actual events is less important than the message they were meant to convey. These fancily decorated kraters indicate that towards the end of the Mycenaean era, as in the beginning, the elites consolidated their power by ceremonial drinking. Now the propaganda was not limited to the abundance of wine and the high quality equipment used, but included the image of these elites: they portrayed themselves as warriors, suggesting that their prowess in battle and on sea was part of their power base.

In the coastal tombs the number of interred women exceeded that of men, which is highly unusual for the LBA (Iezzi 2005a, 218; see also Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 127 for a systematically higher number of males than females in Mycenaean chamber tombs). Moreover, these women lived much longer (ca. 44 years; one matriarch even lived to the age of 60) than their male counterparts (32 years; Iezzi 2005a, 216, 217) – again a unique situation for the Late Bronze Age when, due to preferential treatment of boys or the stresses of child bearing, women typically lived shorter than men.28 Since the health of the interred at death was typically good, this suggests that coastal men may have perished early or away from home when on trading trips or otherwise engaged in sea travel – ending up, perhaps, like the unfortunate on Fragment 4 of the Kynos krater (Figure 4.13). Combined with the evidence of the pictorial kraters from Kynos, one gets the impression that the coastal regions, or at least the lifestyles followed by its inhabitants, were especially dangerous in the LH IIIC phases.

The LH IIIC phase appears thus in some respects to share the same characteristics and values as the LH I phase in southeastern East Lokris: the values of a warrior/trader class, oriented towards the sea, and using their prowess in seafaring, trading, and/or looting and pillaging to establish their prominence. The LH IIIB phase, which in palatial areas saw the dominance of bureaucrats and in our area was a time of relative poverty and isolation, appears to have been just a temporary disturbance in this warrior society.27

There were more differences between the lives of Mycenaeans living on the coast and those of their contemporaries living in the interior. The entire subsistence base seems to have been different, with accompanying consequences in social structure. The coastal population was more dependent on agriculture, while the interior population used a more mixed diet (Iezzi 2005a, ix; see also 181, 237). This is unsurprising given the presence of the large fertile plain of Atalanti and the evidence for storage of agricultural produce at Kynos. The people buried at Spartia in fact suffered from caries as a result of their reliance on cereals and other processed foodstuffs high in carbohydrates (Chapter 2 p. 33). Iezzi found moreover that “based on stressors observed in both sexes, there appears to have been a division of labor by sex inland, while there was more of a social division of labor coastally” (Iezzi 2005a, ix; see also 181, 237). This may also relate to the different modes of subsistence in coastal versus interior regions (see also Chapter 2 p. 33): in more traditional huntinggathering communities, which are generally egalitarian, men and women typically perform very different sorts of tasks, whereas in agricultural societies tasks differ less

Although not consciously advertised, in reality part of the power the elites at Kynos held may have been based on control of agricultural surplus: one is reminded again of the numerous grain storage bins, undoubtedly used to store produce grown on the plain of Atalanti. Since this is the sort of mechanism often invoked to explain the emergence of palaces on Crete as well as on the mainland, it is now possible to add another explanation to the absence of a palatial center in southeastern East Lokris: not only the natural topography, but also the active oppression from Orchomenos may have prevented a development into a palatial society in LH IIIB East Lokris. Since we do know that in the LH IIIC phases the coastal parts of the study area were in close contact with Lefkandi and Volos, it may be clear that ships from southeastern East Lokris once again roamed the seas – or 27

It is tempting to refer to Thucydides‟ remark about the fortification of the island of Atalanti as a stronghold against pirates (Thuc. 2.32; Appendix 1 p. 150): East Lokris, like the more infamous West Lokris, may well have had a history of piracy going back to the very beginning of the LBA.

28

The situation in the interior tombs of Kolaka-Agios Ioannis and Modi is more normal with an average age at death for men of ca. 39 years, for women of ca. 31 years (Iezzi 2005a, 216-218). 140

between the sexes and more between social classes, which emerge with the introduction of agriculture and landownership. Thus it also suggests that inland society was more egalitarian, while along the coast there was stronger social stratification: where elites are present, labor is bound to be divided based on social standing. Reversely, the absence of a social division of labor in the interior might indicate a relatively egalitarian social structure there (which may have remained virtually unchanged since the MH period, even though, obviously, Mycenaean burial customs were adopted).

suggested immigration of Cretans with the proposed inbreeding of the coastal population: did Cretans, buried at Agia Triada and Spartia, arrive in or even slightly before LH IIIA, as well as in LH IIIC and are the bones with the congenital disease e.g. LH IIIB or early IIIC? If in the LH IIIB phase the region was relatively isolated, possibly after a sudden and severe decline in population due to hostility and excessive control of Orchomenos, one could imagine a hereditary disease turning up with some frequency. Not only actual bones, but burial customs, too, suggest that at least in the LH IIIC phase the Kephissos valley and southeastern East Lokris followed separate developments. Cremation, not attested for the study area, does occur at the cemetery of Elateia. Cremation and inhumation may suggest two diametrically opposite ways of viewing a person‟s essence: cremation acknowledges the dispensability of the body and emphasizes instead the „freeing‟ of the soul from the body, whereas inhumation – especially with the presence of grave goods allowing the deceased to continue his life in the afterlife as during life – presupposes either the continued use of the body or its inherent sanctity. The practice of cremation spread from Asia Minor via the Dodecanese to Crete and to places on or near the east coast of the Greek mainland (Iakovides n.y., 15-16; Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 93-94). It is known from the closing years of the Mycenaean era (late LH IIIB-Submycenaean) in the cemeteries of Brauron, Prosymna, Salamis, and Thebes (Iakovides n.y., 15), from where it seems to have traveled northwest from Thebes through the Kephissos basin to Elateia. It does not appear to have crossed over any of the passes to central East Lokris, nor has it traveled over sea to the coastal site of Kynos and its cemeteries.

Finally, Iezzi notes that the skeletal material from tombs on the coast “contained a higher prevalence of Asiatic traits, while the inland region had more European traits” (Iezzi 2005a, ix-x; see also 232).29 This last observation suggests perhaps most clearly that coast and interior were separate regions, with separate developments. The geography of the region clearly played a major role in this: the mountains which delineated our study area formed very real barriers for the people living at either side of them and different people as well as different cultural traits reached the Kephissos valley and southeastern East Lokris. This separation, due initially to the geography of the terrain, may have been actively enforced by the elites who occupied the coastal sites. A physical abnormality consisting of excessive bone growth of part of the skull was found in a number of individuals in different tombs; all, however, were from tomb groups near the coast (Iezzi 2003b). From inland tombs this abnormality was absent. Although environmental factors should not be excluded beforehand, it seems most likely that a hereditary factor caused this abnormal growth (Iezzi 2003b). This suggests that all individuals displaying this congenital disease were related to one another and, assuming that the disease would be carried on a recessive gene, as is the case with other congenital diseases, were the products of a long tradition of inbreeding. The complete absence of this disease in the interior suggests once again that the coastal region was isolated to some extent from the interior: apparently no frequent population exchange through marriage or other resettling took place between the two regions. This in turn allows us a glimpse into the social structure of the Mycenaean settlements in the study area. Possibly the group identity of the Mycenaean inhabitants of the coastal towns was continuously reinforced and stabilized by intermarriage, ultimately leading to a rare disease occurring with some frequency (Iezzi 2003b).

This separation is suggested by the LH IIIC finds as well: as the extent to which LH IIIC formed a common culture is indicated by the similarity of LH IIIC pottery from Dimini, Kynos, Kalapodi, Mitrou, and Lefkandi, the markedly different looking pottery from Elateia sets the interior of the Kephissos valley apart from this LH IIIC Middle koine. Although the Elateia pottery was found in a funerary context, which may contribute to some of the differences, the lack of clear parallels with the sites mentioned above suggests that this interior site was not a part of the LH IIIC koine. Although Elateia flourishes after the collapse of the palaces, in the LH IIIC period, and in that respect is similar to southeastern East Lokris, it is not part of the same cultural circle. Kalapodi is, and there may be another reason for this than the fact that it shared the rest of the region‟s fate during LH IIIB and is easily reachable from the coast. The answer must be sought in the character of the site. Here people gathered to sacrifice, possibly to Artemis (Chapter 3 p. 58), to whom the sanctuary was dedicated in historic times. The number of spindle whorls and loomweights,

It is regrettable that more secure dates for these bones are unavailable. Firmer dates might be able to suggest answers to problems such as how to reconcile the 29

One wonders if this may be connected with the suggested Cretan presence on the coast. 141

associated with the female domain, may be linked to Artemis as goddess of childbirth (Chapter 3 p. 58).

Deer also figure prominently in Mycenaean frescoes, where they appear in hunting scenes which may serve as the preparations for the feast (Wright 2004b, 38-40). They appear frequently on pictorial kraters, which themselves may well have served a role in feasting, as well (Wright 2004b, 40 note 116). The „warrior krater‟ fragments from Kalapodi (Figure 4.18) must be connected with this: although no deer or other game is preserved on these fragments, the iconography of the hunting scene on a krater which was apparently used in the sanctuary suggests a connection between hunting, sacrificing, and feasting. It is likely that elites would provide the game, and it is equally possible that the consumption of these foods would be restricted to elites (Wright 2004b, 40): choosing a domestic animal from a herd is far easier and therefore does not guarantee the same status to the person offering the animal. It is notable that most deer bones from Kalapodi belonged to adult animals (Stanzel 1991, 88): part of the value of the hunted animal lay in the difficulty of procuring it.

Among the bones of sacrificed domesticated animals, sheep and goats are predominant. Sheep and goats were sacrificed in approximately equal numbers (Stanzel 1991, 20 table 3); an oddity, since in general sheep bones dominate sacrificial assemblages. This has likewise been connected with Artemis, to whom goats may have been more readily offered (Stanzel 1991, 21). There is a strong preference for young adults (ibidem, 22 table 5) and possibly a preference for female victims (ibidem, 24 table 6), which might again be related to the deity to whom they are sacrificed. Bovine bones are, with just over 16%, the second most popular group of domesticated animals for sacrifice (Stanzel 1991, 44), and constitute the most prominent group of burned (as opposed to non-burned) bones.30 Like sheep and goats, they were slaughtered in the sanctuary (ibidem). It is likely that the bovine remains represent offerings from groups with a higher status than those who offered the sheep and goats. Most of the animal bones, from bovines as well as from sheep and goats, are from parts which have a lot of meat; Stanzel suggests that the non-meaty parts could have been given to the priest or priestess or burned in their entirety for the goddess (Stanzel 1991, 44).

The tortoise remains at Kalapodi have been connected with Artemis in her role as chthonic goddess (Stanzel 1991, 162; Felsch 1999, 168); their possible role as sound boxes for lyres, suggesting the use of music in cult, has already been mentioned (Chapter 3 pp. 58-59). Based on ethnographic evidence, a significant role of music in cult should be expected.32

The relatively large number of deer bones (500: far fewer than those of domestic animals which number ca. 6000, but far more than any other wild mammals: Stanzel 1991, 15-16 table 2) has already been interpreted in the light of a possible connection with Artemis (Chapter 3 p. 58). However, deer bones are also attested in (ritual) feasting contexts at Pylos, Tsoungiza, and Agios Konstantinos (Wright 2004b, 40) suggesting that deer meat was regular fare at Mycenaean feasts; Linear B evidence suggests the same (ibidem).31

So who was doing all the sacrificing and feasting at Kalapodi? The sheer number of animal bones recovered from the LH IIIC-SM levels (more than from any other

distinguish between the two (Wright 1994, 63-72; 2004, 126). In reality, the two must have often coincided. This is also suggested by the remains from Agios Konstantinos on Methana, where the evidence suggests a “small-scale, sacrificial-feasting ritual in a religious context” (Hamilakis and Konsolaki 2004, 135). Wright eloquently sums up the way sacrifice and feasting are conflated: “The animals represent wealth and thus emphasize the special occasion of the feast. Their sacrifice requires expertise […]. The animals provide a high level of nutrition for the feasters, and the act of eating them is a sharing of flesh and blood. For this reason the symbolic value of the meat is high, and it is important that this taking of animal life is mediated by ritual, with appropriate respect and offerings to the ancestors and gods” (Wright 2004b, 52). See also Hamilakis and Konsolaki 2004, 135: “sacrifice should be meaningfully discussed within the broader framework of the archaeology of feasting, and more generally food consumption, as a socially important, sensory embodied experience.” 32 Compare also the famous Cretan Agia Triada sarcophagus, where bull sacrifice is accompanied by flute music and libations are poured with the accompaniment of a lyre player.

30

Among the domestic animals, sheep and goat bones are burned least frequently (Stanzel 1991, 164 table 7; Felsch 1999, 168 fig. 3). 31 At Pylos the reasons for the feast may have been largely social and political (Stocker and Davis 2004). It has been calculated that several thousands of persons could be fed by a palace-organized feast where two tons of meat, mostly of bovines, were cooked (Halstead and Isaakidou 2004, 148; Wright 2004, 125); moreover there were at least three different degrees of inclusion in the feast (Bendall 2004, 123-124). Tsoungiza, however, is a well published case where feasting in a ritual context is attested (Dabney, Halstead, and Thomas 2004). The assemblage was initially interpreted as a rural shrine (Wright 1994, 69-70); a re-interpretation of faunal remains and ceramics however suggested a feast with a strong religious character. This of course, as Wright rightly points out, raises the question of how to 142

period) indicates the prolific nature of these sacrifices. Given these large numbers of bones and the regional character of the sanctuary in historical times, participants may have come from a wide region around Kalapodi. Their worship was accompanied by feasting: cookingand kitchen wares attest to the importance of preparing meals for the worshippers, while the predominantly decorated fine kylixes, skyphoi, and kraters suggest the celebratory nature of the meals and the importance of drinking. Although feasting can create and emphasize social inequality by various degrees of offering inclusion versus exclusion, in the case of the Kalapodi sanctuary, where worshippers would have come from various areas, its predominant function may well have been to create a communal identity. It is thus possible that Kalapodi was included in the Euboean koine because it was used as an important sanctuary by inhabitants from the coastal parts of southeastern East Lokris.

The transition to the Early Iron Age appears less traumatic in the study area than in most areas south of it: Kalapodi, Kynos, and Mitrou all show remarkable degrees of continuity. The most striking evidence for continuity between the LBA and the EIA may come, once again, from Mitrou, where the EIA „Building A‟ uses the LH IIIC walls of „Building B.‟ Since both buildings appear to have been “rulers‟ dwellings” this suggests that the location of power remained unchanged from the LBA to the EIA (see also Van de Moortel 2007, VII).34 The presence of Type B chamber tombs at Golemi suggests a continuing Mycenaean population, which now however lacks the resources to cut out large tombs. I have tentatively suggested (Chapter 6 p. 131) that this degree of continuity may have been due to the region‟s activity after the fall of the palaces: if settlements like Mitrou and Kynos were home to a strong and enterprising warrior/sailor class, it is likely that they would have been active participants in the series of dramas causing the end of the Bronze Age, rather than passively suffering attacks and decline. Such an active role might even be a reason for the oft noted prominence of East Lokris in the Homeric Catalogue of Ships:35 if the region was a prominent player in the chaos of the closing years of the LBA, raiding and looting coastal towns, this might have been „remembered‟ in the songs sung at the homes of EIA rulers such as at Mitrou, who would have welcomed the opportunity to hear about their own ancestors‟ prominent role in an overseas adventure.36 After all, if the story of the Trojan War is stripped of its heroic elements, we are left with the story of a group of sailors raiding and looting a foreign city and taking off with the women of that city. And this, I have suggested, may simply have been the way of life for the inhabitants of settlements like Kynos and Mitrou.

Ritual is also suggested by the finds on Mitrou of a SM cooking pot with the remains of femurs of a young pig and four foetal piglets. The cooking pot, found together with a deposit of miniature vessels, is modest in size, as are the piglet remains. Hardly the remains of a feast put on by an elite in order to impress peers and lower classes alike, this must have been a restricted event with a stronger emphasis on ritual than on consumption.33 At Agios Konstantinos at Methana, the animal bone evidence from the main cult room was predominantly from very young, some newborn, pigs (Hamilakis and Konsolaki 2004, 143). Although the evidence at Agios Konstantinos is earlier (LH IIIA-B) and there most of the pig bones are burned, in both cases there was ritual consumption and there appears to be a degree of continuity, even into the Classical era, of sacrificing piglets (undoubtedly promoted by the notorious fertility and high birthrates of pigs).

34

The term “rulers‟ dwellings” is borrowed from Mazarakis-Ainian 1997. 35 E.g. Oldfather 1916a, 43, Hope Simpson and Lazenby 1970, 50, and Schachermeyr 1983, 202 all note the large number of sites for the entry of East Lokris which are basically unknown by Strabo. Schachermeyr remarks that the poet seems to attempt to offset the unimportance of the listed places by their large number (Schachermeyr 1983, 202). These unknown places may have flourished briefly during the tumultuous transition between the LBA and the EIA, before falling into obscurity. 36 Could this reconstruction of events also be the reason for the “surprising” (Hope Simpson and Lazenby 1970, 33) omission of Larymna from the Catalogue of Ships?

33

It is noteworthy that in palatial Pylos miniature kylikes are associated with the most restricted type of feasting: whereas thousands of individuals could have been fed by the meat from animal offerings, only 22 miniature kylikes were found, a number that corresponds remarkably to the 22 seats recorded on Linear B tablets registering the feasts (Stocker and Davis 2004, 71; Palaima 2004, 115). But any perceived parallel with the “more than twenty” (Chapter 4 p. 97) miniature vessels (not only kylikes) from the SM deposit at Mitrou – a context far removed in space and time from LH IIIB Pylos – must be coincidental. 143

Summary Due to the fragmented nature of the evidence, conclusions are preliminary; the excavated sites in the area color our picture of the study area perhaps to a too high degree. These sites include two coastal settlements, Mitrou and Kynos, and an interior sanctuary at Kalapodi, as well as a large number of chamber tomb cemeteries. In the eastern part of the study area, many more settlements are known, though only from informal reconnaissance; chamber tombs are here often looted or poorly documented. In the western and interior part, chamber tomb cemeteries, some large and with rich burials, greatly outnumber the known settlements, suggesting that settlements are still to be found in this fertile area.

centralized economy is suggested for much of the study area: LH IIIC Kynos provides evidence for central storage in pithoi and clay bins, and skeletal remains from chamber tomb cemeteries around the plain of Atalanti (Spartia and Agia Triada) display dental caries, indicative of consumption of processed carbohydrates. The many rich burials suggest an advanced degree of social stratification. These burials also attest to the thoroughly Mycenaean character of the study area and connect the area with southern Greece rather than with Thessaly. Southeastern East Lokris serves as an important overland corridor between south-central and northern Greece; of even greater importance for the region is, however, its location on the North Euboean Gulf. The evidence strongly suggests a maritime (trade) network with sea routes maintaining contacts between coastal sites. Routes would follow the Euboean Gulf up to the Gulf of Pagasae and down to Attica and the Cyclades. Pottery finds suggest that it was the North Euboean Gulf through which the Mycenaean culture spread northwards: Mitrou is rich in LH I lustrous Mycenaean pottery, originating in the southern Aegean, in contrast to sites further inland.

The natural resources of southeastern East Lokris are abundant: much of the soil is fertile, consisting of light and easy to till Tertiary deposits and of coastal plains with heavy but fertile alluvium, and fresh water springs are numerous, especially around the Aitolyma plateau and the plain of Atalanti. As a consequence, settlements could afford to take into account site selection criteria of secondary importance as well, and many sites cluster around natural routes. Cemeteries are up to ca. three km distance from the settlements and on a higher elevation. The evidence from the eastern part of the study area further suggests that coastal centers were spread out at ca. 10-11 km from each other, while in addition a denser network of smaller sites existed at ca. four km from each other.

Thus it was through this maritime route that the Mycenaean culture was brought to southeastern East Lokris in the beginning of the Late Bronze Age, and there is evidence that enterprising seafarers, the core of an emerging elite, from the area actively set out to acquire goods – with which came ideas – from the southern and eastern Aegean. Southeastern East Lokris quickly established itself as part of the Mycenaean cultural circle. At the same time, local, MH traditions were strong in the interior. In southeastern East Lokris, influences from both directions merged: potters experimented with new shapes, fabrics, and decorations, and combined those in unorthodox ways to fuel the new elite’s desire for status goods connecting the exotic with the familiar.

Mitrou, a tidal islet nowadays, would have been connected to the mainland in the LBA; although geophysical survey is needed to determine the changes in the local shoreline since the LBA, basic calculations suggest that the local shoreline has sunk with a minimum of ten m relative to current sea level. In that case, Mycenaean Mitrou would have been a mound in a coastal plain, with a sheltered harbor giving access to the Gulf of Atalanti. Mitrou is important for our understanding of the beginning of the LH period in southeastern East Lokris; it flourished, like Kynos and Kalapodi, towards the end of the LBA as well. All three sites are situated in prime locations, which undoubtedly contributed to their prominence. Kalapodi is located on a crossroads between two important routes: a north-south route from Orchomenos to the shore of the North Euboean Gulf, and an east-west route connecting the Kephissos valley and the plain of Atalanti. In addition, Kalapodi has access to a vast area of excellent agricultural soils. Kynos and Mitrou were both in a position to benefit from the maritime traffic passing through the North Euboean Gulf; both had access to the fertile plain of Atalanti. A

These elites emerged early in southeastern East Lokris: imposing settlement remains at Mitrou from the transition between MBA and LBA attest to the presence of an elite, and by LH IIB a center with a wealthy elite existed at Kalapodi as well, judging from the rich graves at Kokkalia. These elites were thus centered around the fertile plains; I have speculated that, possibly in addition to their control over storage of surplus agricultural products, their power base may have been seafaring and trade for Mitrou and control of religion at Kalapodi. The architectural remains from Mitrou suggest that the rulers here were inspired by southern Aegean town plans with their regular orthogonal layout; at the same time,

144

they adhered to the indigenous MH apsidal plan in a monumental building. Thus the hybrid nature of the pottery from the MH-LH transition seems to be mirrored by a hybrid way of building; both reflect not merely the transitional and thus experimental and fluid character of the period, but may represent a more or less conscious manipulation on the part of the ruling class to inspire awe without alienating the ‘common citizens.’

indistinguishable from Mycenaean pottery elsewhere, the region’s development in LH IIIB was markedly different from that in southern central and southern Greece. In most of the study area the evidence for Mycenaean habitation in this period is minimal. This scarcity of LH IIIB remains suggests that in the palatial period the area was rather a backwater. I have tried to explain this by assuming oppression by Orchomenos, which expanded to its greatest extent in LH IIIB, incorporating Larymna in its line of defense. This explains why Larymna is the only site in southeastern East Lokris which is fortified with Cyclopean masonry; it also explains its and nearby Pazaraki’s unusual location: whereas all other settlements in the study area are located in or adjacent to large areas of fertile soil, Larymna has access to only a very small fertile plain, and Pazaraki is located on a choke point, controlling the access route between Orchomenos and Larymna.

One of the rich tombs at Kokkalia contained a sword as well as daggers and much jewelry; although the weaponry may suggest a warrior grave, it is as likely that it is ceremonial and to be connected with a priest caste. Since burial form and grave goods suggest that these tombs are the final resting place of officials connected to the Mycenaean administration, I have tentatively suggested that Orchomenos may have incorporated Kalapodi in its influence sphere, thus establishing a certain amount of control over the religious rites performed at Kalapodi.

Initially, then, Orchomenian influence appears to have been positive, aiding in an early flourishing of the Kalapodi area. With the construction of the grand engineering works around the Kopaic basin, however, Orchomenos appears to have purposefully excluded and marginalized its northern neighbor to such an extent that not only did southeastern East Lokris fail to follow the same development as Orchomenos in the LH IIIB phase, it even saw serious decline.

In the LH IIIA phase the study area was fully part of the Mycenaean cultural circles of south-central Greece: Mycenaean officials were buried in chamber tomb cemeteries with their seal stones and with elite goods likely produced at Thebes. These goods may have reached the study area via Orchomenos. That the study area formed part of a Mycenaean interregional exchange network is also suggested by the presence of amber beads in tombs throughout the study area. Thus it appears that through the LH IIIA phases the study area was oriented both towards the North Euboean Gulf – its lifeline to the Aegean – and to the central Greek core areas of the Mycenaean world, Thebes and Orchomenos. The North Euboean Gulf united sites along its route, and sites on both side of the Gulf shared in the same culture. Throughout the Late Bronze Age, settlement characteristics of southeastern East Lokris – especially the predominance of unfortified mound sites on the coast – are similar to those in North Euboea.

After the collapse of the palatial system at the end of the LH IIIB period, which saw the demise of Orchomenos, southeastern East Lokris rebounded, however, to form a koine with other sites on the North Euboean Gulf, a koine which emphatically ignored Orchomenos and Thebes. Local centers at Mitrou, Kynos, and Kalapodi flourished during the LH IIIC period. Unlike the center at Elateia in the Kephissos valley, these centers in the study area were oriented towards the coast and were fully part of a LH IIIC Middle koine focused on the North Euboean Gulf and stretching from Volos in the north to Lefkandi in central Euboea. Pottery from this period from the sites of Kynos, Mitrou, and Kalapodi, shows strong parallels with pottery from Volos and Lefkandi.

Another similarity between the study area and Euboea is the lack of a palatial center or strong regional center. Since important early centers with an elite existed at Mitrou and in the Kalapodi area, this leads to the question why these centers did not grow out into palaces the way Orchomenos and Thebes did. Part of the answer is contained in the question: with multiple centers, there was not one obvious super-center in the region. This fragmentation, an important characteristic of settlement in the study area, is a consequence of the landscape, which is broken up by ranges of hills and thus not conducive to the establishment of one large center. Another aspect is the suggested subordination of East Lokrian sites to Orchomenos. Yet, this may not be the whole truth.

Pictorial kraters from Kynos show that elites from this period promoted an image of themselves as warriors and sailors, which may well have been rooted in reality and can perhaps be connected with the region’s prominence in the Iliadic Catalogue of Ships, as well as with the notorious ‘Sea Peoples.’ The Kynos ships with their long stem posts have been compared to the ships of the Sea Peoples depicted on the Egyptian Medinet Habu relief, and shield and helmet types on the Kynos kraters have been associated with those of the Peleset and the Shardana, constituents of the Sea Peoples. That life may have been dangerous on the North Euboean Coast is suggested by burial remains in chamber tombs at Agia Triada and Spartia, where males are

Although the LH IIIB phase is the only phase in which pottery from the study area is entirely unremarkable and 145

underrepresented, possibly because they perished at sea. Skeletal and other burial remains from these tombs also suggest that Cretan women may have constituted part of the population of the coastal settlements, which may indicate exchange or raiding. If the latter is the case, one is forcefully reminded of the story of the Sack of Troy for the sake of capturing a woman.

possible explanation for the striking degree of continuity between LBA and EIA is the active role of the coastal settlements in this transitional period. During the transition from BA to EIA, the material record again shows a certain ‘fluidity:’ various wares, most notably handmade burnished ware, are present next to more ‘standard’ LH IIIC-PG wheelmade wares. It is disputed if and to what extent the presence of handmade burnished ware reflects a foreign element in the population, or simply a change in social and political circumstances. The re-use of existing chamber tombs and the carving of new tombs of Type B, as at Golemi, suggest the latter, while the appearance of nonMycenaean shapes in combination with non-Mycenaean techniques may indicate a foreign presence. Rather than having two mutually exclusive categories of pottery, however, in the study area all combinations of wheelmade versus handmade and burnished versus unburnished wares coexist, and handmade burnished ware is occasionally used to imitate Mycenaean shapes.

At Kalapodi a sanctuary was established which would grow without interruption into the important Archaic sanctuary of Artemis Elaphebolos and Apollo of Hyampolis; the LH IIIC remains are located directly below an Archaic altar. In line with the importance of animal sacrifice and accompanying feasting, LH IIIC Middle pictorial kraters from Kalapodi portray hunters. Analysis of animal bones has verified that deer formed a small but significant portion of the animals sacrificed at Kalapodi, and although deer are prominent in other Mycenaean feasting assemblages, they may have been especially suitable as sacrifices to Artemis, goddess of the hunt, who appears on Linear B tablets and may have been the primary deity worshipped at Kalapodi in the LBA. A connection with Artemis as goddess of childbirth is suggested by the many spindle whorls found at Kalapodi.

After these turbulent times, in the EIA southeastern East Lokris participated in the new maritime ‘Euboean koine,’ a flourishing cultural unity once again oriented towards the sea, the life line for the area throughout the LBA.

Although Kalapodi is somewhat further inland than most sites partaking in the LH IIIC Middle koine, it is undoubtedly part of it. The krater fragments, as well as the other pottery from Kalapodi, are strikingly similar in style to contemporary pottery from coastal sites. This suggests that Kalapodi served as a sanctuary for the area of coastal East Lokris in LH IIIC Middle. At Kalapodi, as at Mitrou, Kynos, and Lefkandi, a decline in LH IIIB is followed by a flourishing LH IIIC phase which continues uninterrupted into the EIA. I have suggested that a

The development of southeastern East Lokris cannot be viewed apart from its location. The area was a backwater during the acme of Mycenaean civilization in the LH IIIB phase, possibly due to oppression by its mighty southern neighbor Orchomenos. In all other periods, the area flourished and was solidly in the mainstream of Mycenaean culture. It owed its incorporation in a Mycenaean koine largely to its location on the important maritime route through the North Euboean Gulf.

146

Appendix 1: Literary testimonia Texts are given in the order in which they appear in the main text.

Strabo 9.4.1-7                                                 147

 Translation:1  [1] Locris comes next in order, and therefore I must describe this country. It is divided into two parts: one part is that which is inhabited by the Locrians and faces Euboea; and, as I was saying, it was once split into two parts, one on either side of Daphnus. The Opuntians were named after their metropolis, and the Epicnemidians after a mountain called Cnemis. The rest of Locris is inhabited by the Western Locrians, who are also called Ozolian Locrians. They are separated from the Opuntians and the Epicnemidians by Parnassus, which is situated between them, and by the Tetrapolis of the Dorians. But I must begin with the Opuntians. [2] Next, then, after Halae, where that part of the Boeotian coast which faces Euboea terminates, lies the Opuntian Gulf. Opus is the metropolis, as is clearly indicated by the inscription on the first of the five pillars in the neighborhood of Thermopylae, near the Polyandrium: "Opöeis, metropolis of the Locrians of righteous laws, mourns for these who perished in defence of Greece against the Medes." It is about fifteen stadia distant from the sea, and sixty from the seaport. Cynus is the seaport, a cape which forms the end of the Opuntian Gulf, the gulf being about forty stadia in extent. Between Opus and Cynus is a fertile plain; and Cynus lies opposite Aedepsus in Euboea, where are the hot waters of Heracles, and is separated from it by a strait one hundred and sixty stadia wide. Deucalion is said to have lived in Cynus; and the grave of Pyrrha is to be seen there, though that of Deucalion is to be seen at Athens. Cynus is about fifty stadia distant from Mount Cnemis. The island Atalanta is also situated opposite Opus, and bears the same name as the island in front of Attica. It is said that a certain people in Eleia are also called Opuntians, but it is not worthwhile to mention them, except to say that they are reviving a kinship which exists between them and the Opuntians. Now Homer says that Patroclus was from Opus, and that after committing an involuntary murder he fled to Peleus, but that his father Menoetius remained in his native land; for thither Achilles says that he promised Menoetius to bring back Patroclus when Patroclus should return from the expedition. However, Menoetius was not king of the Opuntians, but Aias the Locrian, whose native land, as they say, was Narycus. They call the man who 1

Translation by H.L. Jones, The Geography of Strabo (Loeb Classical Library), Cambridge (Mass.) and London 1927.

was slain by Patroclus "Aeanes"; and both a sacred precinct, the Aeaneium, and a spring, Aeanis, named after him, are to be seen.

       

[3] Next after Cynus, one comes to Alope and to Daphnus, which latter, as I said, is rased to the ground; and here there is a harbour which is about ninety stadia distant from Cynus, and one hundred and twenty stadia from Elateia, for one going on foot into the interior. We have now reached the Maliac Gulf, which is continuous with the Opuntian Gulf.   [4] After Daphnus one comes to Cnemides, a natural stronghold, about twenty stadia by sea; and opposite it, in Euboea, lies Cenaeum, a cape facing the west and the Maliac Gulf, and separated from it by a strait about twenty stadia in width. At this point we have now reached the territory of the Epicnemidian Locrians. Here, too, lying off the coast, are the three Lichades Islands, as they are called, named after Lichas; and there are also other islands along the coast, but I am purposely omitting them. After twenty stadia from Cnemides one comes to a harbour, above which, at an equal distance in the interior, lies Thronium. Then one comes to the Boagrius River, which flows past Thronium and empties into the sea. They also call it Manes. It is a winter-stream, so that at times one can cross it dry-shod, though at other times it has a breadth of two plethra. After this one comes to Scarpheia, which is situated ten stadia above the sea, thirty stadia distant from Thronium, and slightly less from the harbour itself. Then one comes to Nicaea and Thermopylae.

                                

[5] As for the remaining cities, it is not worth while to mention any of them except those which are mentioned by Homer. Calliarus is no longer inhabited, but is now a beautifully-tilled plain, and they so call it from what is the fact in the case. Bessa, too, does not exist; it is a wooded place. Neither does Augeiae, whose territory is held by the Scarphians. Now this Bessa should be written with a double s (for it is named from its being a wooded place, being spelled the same way--like Nape in the plain of Methymne, which Hellanicus ignorantly names Lape), whereas the deme in Attica, whose inhabitants are accordingly called Besaeeis, should be written with one s. [6] Tarphe is situated on a height, at a distance of twenty stadia from Thronium; its territory is both fruitful and well-wooded, for already this place had been named from its being thickly wooded. But it is now called Pharygae; and here is situated a temple of Pharygaean Hera, so called from the Hera in the Argive Pharygae; and, indeed, they say that they are colonists of the Argives.

           

[7] However, Homer does not mention the Western Locrians, or at least not in express words, but only in that he seems by contrast to distinguish these from those other Locrians of whom I have already spoken, when he says, "of the Locrians who dwell opposite sacred Euboea," 148

           Thucydides 1.12

implying that there was a different set of Locrians. But they have not been much talked about by many others either. The cities they held were Amphissa and Naupactus; of these, Naupactus survives, near Antirrhium, and it was named from the shipbuilding that was once carried on there, whether it was because the Heracleidae built their fleet there, or (as Ephorus says) because the Locrians had built ships there even before that time. It now belongs to the Aetolians, having been adjudged to them by Philip.

[1]  [2]   [3]       [4]        

XII. Indeed, even after the Trojan war Hellas was still subject to migrations and in process of settlement, and hence did not get rest and wax stronger. [2] For not only did the return of the Hellenes from Ilium, occurring as it did after a long time, cause many changes; but factions also began to spring up very generally in the cities, and, in consequence of these, men were driven into exile and founded new cities. [3] The present Boeotians, for example, were driven from Arne by the Thessalians in the sixtieth year after the capture of Ilium and settled in the district now called Boeotia, but formerly Cadmeïs; only a portion of these had been in that land before, and it was some of these who took part in the expedition against Ilium. The Dorians, too, in the eightieth year after the war, together with the Heracleidae occupied the Peloponnesus. [4] And so when painfully and after a long course of time Hellas became permanently tranquil and its population was no longer subject to expulsion from their homes, it began to send out colonies. The Athenians colonized Ionia and most of the islands; the Peloponnesians, the greater part of Italy and Sicily and some portions of the rest of Hellas. And all these colonies were planted after the Trojan war.

Herodotos 1.56.2-3:

Translation:3

Translation:2

[2] He found by inquiry that the chief peoples were the Lacedaemonians among those of Doric, and the Athenians among those of Ionic stock. These races, Ionian and Dorian, were the foremost in ancient time, the first a Pelasgian and the second a Hellenic people. The Pelasgian race has never yet left its home; the Hellenic has wandered often and far. [3] For in the days of king Deucalion it inhabited the land of Phthia, then the country called Histiaean, under Ossa and Olympus, in the time of Dorus son of Hellen; driven from this Histiaean country by the Cadmeans, it settled about Pindus in the territory called Macedonian; from there again it migrated to Dryopia, and at last came from Dryopia into the Peloponnese, where it took the name of Dorian.

[2]     [3]          

2

Translation by Charles Forster Smith, Thucydides. History of the Peloponnesian War (Loeb Classical Library), London and New York 1928. 3 Translation by A.D. Godley, Herodotus, with an English Translation (Loeb Classical Library), Cambridge 1931. 149

Thucydides 3.89.2-3:      ·        Thucydides 2.32:

  At that time, when the earthquakes were frequent, the sea at Orobiae in Euboea receded from what was then the shore, and rose in waves again and came all the way to part of the city. Part of the water subsided and part continued to flood the land; and what was once land is now sea. And all the people who could not flee to high ground in time were killed. A similar flood occurred at the island of Atalante, off the coast of Opountian Lokris.Part of the Athenian fortification was destroyed and of two ships, which were drawn on land, one was shattered to pieces.

At the end of the summer the Athenians fortified Atalanti, an island located opposite the Opountian Lokrians which had been uninhabited so far, in order to prevent pirates from sailing out from Opous and the rest of Lokris to plunder Euboea. These things happened in this summer after the return of the Peloponnesians from Attica.

 ,      

Strabo 1.3.20 (Dem. of Kall., FgrHist. 85F6): ’ '    ,   , ' '  ·  ,  , ,  .  · ' ,   , ' ·   , ,  ,  ·  , ’ ,   ,  ,  ,   ,  150

Relating all earthquakes that ever occurred in Greece, Demetrios of Kallatis says that most of the Lichades islands and of Kenaion was engulfed; the hot water springs at Aidepsos and at Thermopylai stopped for three days and then started flowing again, and those at Aidepsos broke forth at another source as well; at Oreos the wall next to the sea and about seven hundred houses collapsed; of Echinos, Phalara, and Herakleia in Trachis a large part fell down, the settlement of Phalara was even turned upside down from its foundations. He says that to the people of Lamia and Larissa similar things happened; also Skarpheia was thrown up from its foundations, and no less than seventeen hundred people drowned, and more than half as many Thronians; again a triple wave rose up: one part was carried in the direction of Tarphe and Thronion, one part to Thermopylai, and the rest into the plain as far as Daphnos in Phokis. The springs of rivers were dried up for several days, and the Spercheios changed its bed and made the roads navigable, and the Boagrios was carried down a different ravine, and many areas of Alope, Kynos and Opous were seriously damaged, while Oion, the castle above Opous, was completely destroyed, and a part of the wall of Elateia was broken down, and during the Thesmophoriai at Alponos twenty five girls ran up to one of the towers at the harbor to get a view, and when the tower fell, they themselves, too, fell into the sea. It is also said that the

, .  ,  ,  .

central part of Atalanti near Euboea was split open to the extent that ships could pass through, and some of the plains were flooded as far as twenty stades inland, and a trireme was lifted out of the docks and deposited over the wall.

Diodorus Siculus 12.59.2:  ,   ,  ,  .

In many parts of Greece such severe earthquakes occurred that the sea even flooded and destroyed some coastal towns, and in Lokris the isthmus of a peninsula was torn apart and the island named Atalante was formed.

Eusebius Hieron. Chron. 194d; Orosius 7.12.5. (Listed in Guidoboni et al. 1994, 229-30): terrae motu quattuor urbes Asiae subversa, Elaea Myrina Pitane Cyme, et Graeciae civitates duae, Opuntiorum et Oritorum; tres Galatiae civitates eodem terrae motu dirutae [...]

An earthquake struck four towns in Asia Minor: Elaea, Myrina, Pitane, and Cyme, and two Greek cities, Opous and Oreos; three cities in Galatia were devastated in the same earthquake […]

Procopius, Bell. 8.25.16-21. (Discussion in Guidoboni et al. 1994, 331-2):

In that time, extraordinary earthquakes occurred throughout Greece and struck Boeotia, Achaea, and the land around the Krisaean Gulf. Countless places and eight towns were destroyed to the ground, among which were Chaironeia, Koroneia, Patras and all of Naupaktos, where also a great loss of human life occurred. And many chasms formed where the earth split open. […] In the strait between Thessaly and Boeotia [i.e. the Malian Gulf] suddenly came a wave from the sea, engulfing the town of the Echinaeans and Skarpheia in Boeotia. It advanced far over land and engulfing the towns there immediately destroyed them to their foundations. For a long time the mainland was flooded by the sea, so that for quite a while people could go on foot to the islands in that gulf, since the waters of the sea had obviously left their own bed, flooding the land in an unnatural way as far as the mountains which rise there. When the sea returned to its home, fish were left on the ground […]

   . ,  ,  ,  .  . […] ,  ,    .   .  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  .  , 

151

  Around the same time the Athenians sent out thirty ships to be stationed around Lokris and at the same time guard Euboea. Kleinias, son of Kleopompos, was their commander. And after his attacks and destructions of the places there were along the coast, he also captured Thronion, and took some of the inhabitants as hostages, and at Alope conquered those of the Lokrians who had come to help.

Thucydides 2.26.1-2       [     

  Translation:4

Polybius 12.5.6-11                            Homer, Iliad 2.527-535:

First of all, [they stated] that at Locri all ancestral nobility is derived from women, not from men, as, for example, those are considered noble among them who are said to be of the “hundred houses.” These "hundred houses" were those distinguished by the Locrians as the leading families before the colony was sent out, the families from which the Locrians, as the oracle ordered, were to select by lot the virgins they had to send to Troy. Some women belonging to these families left with the colony, and it is their descendants who are still considered noble and called “of the hundred houses.” Again, as regards the virgin ministrant they call the Phialephorus [“cupbearer”] the tradition is much as follows. At the time they expelled Sicels who had occupied this site in Italy, at whose sacrifices the procession was led by a boy of one of the most celebrated and noble families, the Locrians adopted several of the Sicilian rites, as they had no inherited ritual, retaining among others this particular one, but making merely this change in it that they did not appoint one of their boys to ne Phialephorus, but one of their virgins, because nobility among them was derived from women.

        

And the Lokrians were commanded by Oïleus’ son swift Aias, the lesser, not so great as Telamonian Aias, but far less. He was small, with linen corselet, but with the spear he surpassed all the Greeks and the Achaeans. They lived in Kynos and Opoeis and Kalliaros, Bessa and Skarphe and lovely Augeiai, and Tarphe and Thronion and around the streams of Boagrios. Him followed forty black ships of the Lokrians, who live opposite sacred Euboea.

4

Translation by W.R. Paton, Polybius. The Histories IV (Loeb Classical Library), London and New York 1925. 152

 Translation:5

Plutarch, Sulla 26.3-4:

[3] While Sulla was tarrying at Athens, his feet were attacked by numbness and a feeling of heaviness, which Strabo says is premonitory gout. He therefore crossed the straits to Aedepsus and used the hot waters there, taking a holiday at the same time, and passing his time pleasantly with the theatrical artists. Once, as he was walking along the seashore, certain fishermen brought him some very fine fish. Being delighted with their gift, and learning that they were from Halae, “What!” said he, “is any man of Halae still alive?” [4] For when he was pursuing the enemy after his victory at Orchomenos, he had destroyed three cities of Boeotia together, Anthedon, Larymna, and Halae. The men were speechless with terror, but Sulla smiled and bade them depart in peace, since they had brought with them no mean or despicable intercessors. The men of Halae say that this gave them courage to go back again in a body to their city.

[3] ςς ς ςς ςς ς ςς ςς ςς ςςςς ςςς ςςςς ς4] ςςς ςςςςς ςς ς ςςς ςς  ςςς

5

Translation by B. Perrin, Plutarch’s Lives IV (Loeb Classical Library), London and New York 1916. 153

Appendix 2: Catalogue of LBA pottery from the 1988-1989 surface survey at Mitrou Unless stated otherwise, all pieces are wheel made, have no core, no inclusions, are not porous, have no surface treatment and no decoration. Sizes are in meters. The size of inclusions is based on a 5 point scale, in which < 0.1 mm is ‘very small’, 0.1 – 1.0 mm is ‘small’, 1.0 – 2.0 mm is ‘medium’, 2.0 – 4.0 mm is ‘large’, and > 4.0 mm is ‘very large’. The density of inclusions is likewise based on a 5 point scale with the categories ‘very few’, ‘few’, ‘quite many, ‘many’, and ‘very many’. Limestone, mica (muscovite or gold mica and biotite or silver mica), and quartz inclusions are labeled as such; other inclusions are labeled by their color only, e.g. ‘red’ or ‘black’.

Gray Minyan:

Abbreviations peculiar to the catalogue: L.: maximum preserved length W.: maximum preserved width Diam.: diameter Th.: wall thickness Ext.: exterior Int.: interior MDP: P.A. Mountjoy, Mycenaean Decorated Pottery: A Guide to Identification, Göteborg 1986 RMDP: P.A. Mountjoy, Regional Mycenaean Decorated Pottery, Rahden 1999

4. Jar, neck. C2-604.20. Decoration: painted blue and red bands (applied after burnishing).

The catalogue is organized chronologically, and within each period according to ware, shape, and morphological element. The first line of each entry gives the number of the find in the catalogue, shape, morphological element, and inventory number. For the system behind the inventory numbers, see Kramer-Hajos 2005, 179 ff. and especially note 20, or Kramer-Hajos and O’Neill, forthcoming.

7. Jar or jug, body fragment. M-L6.01. Figure 4.1 Decoration: painted red and black bands and wavy line.

2. Semi-globular cup, rim fragment. C2-605.137. Figure 4.1 Mainland Polychrome Matt Painted: 3. Jar, neck and shoulder fragment. C2-609.13. Figure 4.1 Decoration: painted bichrome red and black bands (applied after burnishing).

5. Jar, shoulder fragment. C2-604.14. Figure 4.1 Decoration: red zone bordered by black band. 6. Jug, body fragment. M-F3.01. Figure 4.1 Decoration: painted black and red cross-hatched lozenges/double axe and bands, applied before burnishing: paint smooth and smeary.

8. Jar, shoulder fragment? M-D5.01. Figure 4.1 Decoration: bichrome painted black and red oblique stripes and bands. Inside is reworked (rough and irregular). 9. Jar or jug, body fragment. M-F5.22. Figure 4.1 Handmade. Decoration: painted bichrome red and black narrow converging stripes (applied after burnishing). Int. rough and irregular.

Entries which are published in Hesperia (Kramer-Hajos and O’Neill, forthcoming) are not repeated in full. For photos and drawings of many of the pieces in the catalogue, see Kramer-Hajos 2005 and Kramer-Hajos and O’Neill, forthcoming.

10. Semi-globular cup, rim fragment. C2-605.107. Figure 4.1 L. 0.044, H. 0.045, Diam.: 0.100, Th. 0.004. Fabric: 5YR6/6, many small limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. polished, 10YR7/6. Decoration: painted bichrome black and red (7.5YR5/4) stripes and zigzag.

Late Helladic I Aeginetan Matt Painted:

11. Open vessel? Body fragment. M-C5.03. Figure 4.1 Decoration: polychrome painted red, blue, and black bands (applied after burnishing). Int. reworked.

1. Hole-mouthed jar, bridged spout. M-C6.08. Figure 4.1 Decoration: painted black bands.

12. Body fragment. M-L6.04. Handmade. Decoration: painted brown and black bands and oblique stripes (applied after burnishing).

154

13. Body fragment. C2-606.08. Decoration: painted bichrome black and red bands, oblique stripes.

22. Conical cup, complete profile. C2-605.144. Figure 4.1 Handmade. L. 0.036, W. 0.054, Diam. ~0.100, Th. 0.00911. Fabric: 2.5YR4/4, very many small-med. sand, quartz inclusions, Mohs 3. Very coarse. Irregularly shaped.

Fine Lustrous: 14. Rounded alabastron, body fragment. M-H3.10. Figure 4.1 Decoration: painted brown spiral. Cf. MDP fig. 32, FS 218, 1.

Late Helladic IIA Fine Lustrous:

15. Vapheio cup type II, body fragment. C2-602.04. Figure 4.1 Decoration: painted black ripple. Projecting ridge at center of body. Clay color is very pale - Corinthian origin?

23. Bridge spouted jug, handle. M-E5.05. Figure 4.3 Decoration: painted black formal foliate band on int. Cf. MDP fig. 38.18, FM 64.IIA, fig. 24.1 for shape. 24. (Stirrup) jar, shoulder fragment. M-G5.05. Decoration: painted red-brown octopus/argonaut and marine motifs. Cf. Mountjoy 1981, pl. 16, 205; MDP fig. 28.2.

16. Vapheio cup, body fragment. M-C/D5.06. Decoration: painted red ripple. Cf. M-J5.03, C2.602.04; MDP fig. 34.5,6; 8.8. 17. Vapheio cup (type II?), body fragment. M-J5.03. Figure 4.1 Decoration: painted black ripple. Part of projecting ridge preserved.

25. Stirrup jar, handle. M-G4.01. Figure 4.3 Decoration: painted black wavy bands. Cf. MDP fig. 50, FS 224.2. 26. Stirrup jar? Body fragment. M-J5.02. Figure 4.3 Decoration: ext. painted red marine design. Cf. Mountjoy 1981, pl. 16, 205.

18. Vapheio cup, rim fragment. M-G5.12. Figure 4.1 Decoration: ext. and int. rim painted red; ext. with ripple. Cf. fig. 49, FS219, 4. This sherd may represent a transitional phase from LH III: the painted interior might place it in the LH II period, but the decoration is typical for LH I.

27. Piriform jar, shoulder fragment. M-E5.23. W. 28, L.: 34, Th.: 6.5. Fabric: 5YR7/3, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped. Decoration: ext. painted black. Cf. MDP fig. 28, FS 169.4. Handle scar at lower right; upper left curves up towards neck.

19. Semi globular cup, rim fragment. M-I8.02. Figure 4.1 Decoration: int. and ext. painted rim band, ext. red foliate band. Unfinished int. Cf. MDP fig. 7.7.

28. (Piriform) jar, body fragment. C2-609.07. Figure 4.3 Decoration: painted black octopus or argonaut. Cf. MDP fig. 12.10, 11; Mountjoy 1981, pl. 16, 205. Minoanizing, marine style.

20. Shallow cup, rim fragment. C2-606.47. Figure 4.1 L. 0.113, H. 0.057, Diam. 0.180, Th. 0.003-4. Fabric 10YR7/4, few very small black inclusions, Mohs 3. Decoration: int. painted black rim band, ext. red (5YR3/3) rim band.

29. Jar or jug, body fragment. M-E5.21. Decoration: painted purplish-brown bands with 'drops' inside; possibly an ‘ogival canopy’. Cf. MDP fig. 23.2; 24.

Coarse: 30. Jar, body fragment. M-H5.02. Decoration: painted reddish-yellowish brown marine or floral design. Cf.MDP fig. 18.1; 28.1; 29.1; 30.1 for filling motif.

21. Conical cup, complete profile. C2-605.151. Figure 4.1 H. 0.079, Diam.: 0.130, Th.: 0.006-8 (Wall thickness at bottom edges: 10). Fabric: 5YR5/4. Gley 1:4/N core, many small-med. sand, pebbles inclusions, Mohs 3. Mended from four fragments.

31. Jar? Body fragment. C2-602.01. Decoration: painted black sea urchin. Cf. MDP fig. 16.4, FM 27.10. 32. Jar? Body fragment. C2-603.11. Decoration: painted black octopus or argonaut. Cf. MDP fig. 12.10,11 155

42. Amphora, handle. M-D5.07. L. 0.044, W. 0.047, Th. 0.020. Fabric: 10YR8/3, quite many small black, red inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 2.5Y8/2. Decoration: painted oblique 'ladder', 5YR6/8. Cf. RMDP figs. 249.34, 268.3.

Late Helladic IIB Fine Lustrous: 33. Rounded alabastron, body fragment. C2-609.12. Decoration: painted orange rock pattern. Cf. MDP fig. 43.1,2.

43. Bridge spouted jug? Body fragment. M-F4.12. L. 0.032, W. 0.023, Th. 0.005-6. Fabric: 10YR7/1, few small black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped. Decoration: painted black lines and dots. Cf. MDP fig. 22, F591.4, fig. 24. Possibly LH IIA.

34. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-H5.03. W. 37, L.: 28, Th.: 5. Fabric: 5YR7/3, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 5YR7/3. Decoration: painted black motif (lily?). Cf. MDP fig. 38.1. Irregular int. surface: worked over with hand.

44. Stirrup jar, handle. M-F5.06. Decoration: monochrome paint on top and outside; black design on int.

35. Ephyraean goblet, rim fragment. M-E5.04. Figure 4.3 Decoration: painted black lily. Cf. MDP fig. 54, FS 254.4.

45. Jar? Shoulder fragment. M-E5.19. L. 0.038, W. 0.032, Th. 0.003-5. Fabric 7.5YR7/6, bit porous, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped and lightly polished, 10YR8/4. Decoration: painted orange perpendicular lines framed with dots.

36. Goblet? Rim fragment. M-C/D5.01. Figure 4.3 Decoration: int. and ext. rim painted brown motif (palm?). Cf. MDP fig. 53.11.

46. Jug or jar, body fragment. C2-609.25. W. 0.042, H. 0.037, Th. 0.006. Fabric 7.5YR7/4, very few very small-small limestone, black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted brown foliate band or ogival canopy. Cf. MDP fig. 24.1, 5; 47.2.

37. Goblet? Foot. M-D5.15. W. 0.028, Diam.: 0.080-90, Th.: 0.005. Fabric: 5YR7/6, very few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: slipped, 2.5YR4/8. Decoration: painted bands (10R4/6). Cf. MDP fig. 53.1. Paint very sloppily applied.

47. Jug or jar? Body fragment. M-F5.11. L. 0.063, W. 0.038, Th. 0.005-7. Fabric: 7.5YR8/4, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped. Decoration: painted band and spiral, 5YR4/6. MDP fig. 26; 47.1.

38. Goblet, foot. M-D5.22. L. 0.055, W. 0.021, Diam. 0.070-80, Th. 0.006. Fabric: 2.5YR5/4, core 5Y6/1, Mohs 5. Surface: slipped, 10YR7/3. Decoration: monochrome painted black. Cf. MDP fig. 55

48. Goblet, rim fragment. M-D5.05. Figure 4.3 Decoration: ext. and int. painted monochrome red. Cf. RMDP figs. 334.41-2, 268.7, 248.17, 249.37-9.

39. Vapheio cup, body fragment. C2-609.14. Decoration: painted horizontal bands and foliate band. Cf. MDP fig. 50.

49. Goblet, stem. M-J9.02. Figure 4.3 W. 33, L.: 77, Th.: 6. Fabric: 5YR6/6, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 7.5YR7/5. Decoration: monochrome painted (5YR4/6).

40. Vapheio cup, body fragment. M-H5.09. Decoration: painted black bands and foliate band. Cf. MDP fig. 50, FS224.7.

50. Vapheio cup, body fragment. C2-604.15. Decoration: ext. painted reddish brown formal foliate band. Cf. MDP fig. 50. The unslipped interior suggests that the piece may date to LH I, but curve and decoration point to LH IIB.

Late Helladic IIA-B Fine Lustrous: 41. Alabastron, body fragment. M-C4.05. Figure 4.4 Decoration: painted black rock pattern with part of spiral. The fabric is gray on the ext. due to firing in the kiln; the interior is buff colored.

51. Vapheio cup, body fragment. M-E5.15. Decoration: painted red foliate band. Cf. FM 12 I-IIA, FM 32 IIA, fig. 34.3, 50.1. 156

52. Cup, full profile. C2-604.01. Figure 4.3 L. 0.061, W. 0.030, Diam. ~0.070, Th. 0.002-6. Fabric: 5YR7/6, Mohs 4. Decoration: ext. and int. monochrome paint, 10R5/6(red) to 5YR5/6 (yell. red) to 5YR4/2(dark reddish gray). A quarter of the rim of this small cup is preserved.

61. Semi globular cup? Rim fragment. M-E5.10. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted brown and yellow, red bands and spiral. 62. Mug, rim fragment. M-D5.04. Figure 4.8 Decoration: int. painted red band at lip; ext. painted red bands and stipple.

53. Open vessel, body fragment. M-H5.05. L. 0.021, W. 0.025, Th. 0.005. Fabric: 7.5YR7/2, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR7/2. Decoration: painted matt black ivy and stone. Cf. MDP fig. 24, F5.103.4. Possibly LH IIA.

63. Mug, rim fragment. C2-608.37. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted brown net; rim and int. unpainted. Cf. MDP fig. 73.8.

Fine Unpainted:

Late Helladic IIIA2

54. Goblet, stem and foot. M-I9.01. Figure 4.3 L. 0.060, W. 0.043. Fabric: 5YR6/6, few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. polished. Cf. MDP fig. 53.3. Base is not as hollow as in IIA and B examples shown by Mountjoy.

Fine Lustrous: 64. Straight sided alabastron, body fragment. M-D5.14. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted black bands and foliate band. Cf. MDP fig. 84.

Fine Lustrous:

65. Stirrup jar, top. C2-608.02. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted orange and dark brown multiple stem. Cf. MDP fig. 91.1. Bichrome decoration. Plastic ridge under rim.

55. Piriform jar, shoulder fragment. M-E5.24. Decoration: painted brown fish scales. Cf. MDP fig. 58.2.

66. (Stirrup) jar, shoulder fragment. M-G5.19. Decoration: painted brown running quirk and parallel lines.

56. Piriform jar, shoulder fragment. C2-603.10. Figure 4.8 Decoration: int. painted red band, ext. curved stripes. Cf. MDP figs. 49.4 and 59.

67. Stirrup jar, body fragment. M-G5.04. Decoration: painted red and brown horizontal bands. Cf. MDP fig. 93.1.

Late Helladic IIIA1

68. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-D4.02. Decoration: ext. painted orange running quirk and band.

57. Ephyraean goblet, rim fragment. M-E5.03. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted argonaut. Cf. MDP fig. 54.1/14 (shape rim); 76.2.

69. Kylix, rim fragment. C2-609.22. Decoration: painted red chevrons and vertical lines. Cf. MDP fig. 106. Rim band was painted first, then vertical lines from bottom to top, finally chevrons from right to left.

58. Goblet, rim fragment. M-N6.01. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted 2.5YR5/8 curve stemmed spiral, band at rim. Cf. MDP fig. 75.1.

70. Kylix, rim fragment. M-J5.01. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted dark brown horizontal whorl shells.

59. Kylix or goblet, rim fragment. M-K9.01. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted red band and net.

71. Kylix? Rim fragment. M-C/D5.02. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted orange flower (Octopus flower?). Cf. MDP fig. 135.2; 107.5.

60. Kylix, foot. C2-608.36. Decoration: painted monochrome 2.5YR5/6.

72. Kylix, stem. M-C5.06. Decoration: painted 2.5YR4/8 wide horizontal bands. Cf. Symeonoglou pl. 22, fig. 33.8 (from the destruction level of Room B).

157

73. Kylix, stem. M-C/D5.04. Decoration: painted red broad bands.

85. Krater, rim fragment. M-J8.01. Figure 4.8 W. 0.062, H. 0.037. Th. 0.005-6. Fabric 5YR6/6, yellowish-gray core, bit porous, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: painted redbrown papyrus.

74. Kylix, body fragment. M-D5.12 Decoration: painted brown horizontal whorl shell. Cf. MDP fig. 107.1.

86. Kylix, parts of stem and body. C2-609.26. L. 0.072, W. 0.067, H. 0.052, Th. 0.004. Fabric 10YR8/4, very few very small-large limestone inclusions, bit porous, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: painted red bands. Cf. MDP fig. 76, 107.

75. Kylix, body fragment. M-G3.01 Decoration: painted brown horizontal whorl shell. Cf. MDP fig. 107.6. 76. Kylix, body fragment. C2-602.14 Decoration: painted red brown wavy lines (curve stemmed spiral?).

87. Kylix, foot. M-F5.12. L. 0.045, W. 0.033, Diam. ~0.120, Th. 0.006-7. Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, Mohs 3,5. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: painted 2.5YR5/8 (red) to 4/4 (dusky red) bands around ext. of foot. Small part of foot.

77. Cup, rim fragment. M-E5.12. Figure 4.8 Decoration: ext. and int. painted red foliate band, band at rim, and int. bands. Cf. MDP fig. 104.1 (int.). 78. Mug, rim fragment. C2-608.24. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted dark brown bands; ridged rim. Cf. MDP fig. 101.2. Straight lip. Ext. and int. painted. 79. Mug, rim fragment. M-D5.10. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted band at ridged rim, foliate band.

88. Kylix, foot. C2-606.18. L. 0.084, W. 0.036, Diam. ~0.090, Th. 0.005-11. Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, slightly porous, Mohs 2. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR8/6. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR6/8 (red) bands.

80. Mug, rim fragment. M-M7.01. Decoration: ext. painted reddish black design, 3 grooves in rim.

89. Bowl or cup, base. C2-608.23. Decoration: ext. painted red-black circles, int. painted red circles.

81. Mug, body fragment. C2-604.07. Decoration: ext. painted dusky red horizontal bands. 3 horizontal grooves.

90. Bowl? Rim fragment. M-H3.19. Figure 4.8 W. 15, L.: 25, Diam.: ~140, Th.: 4-5. Fabric: 5YR7/4, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: int. + ext. painted red band, ext. painted 2.5YR4-5/8 band and whorl shell?

82. Stemmed bowl, rim fragment. M-F5.14. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted 2.5YR5/6 curved bands. Cf. MDP fig. 112,1/4.

Fine Unpainted: 83. Stemmed bowl, rim fragment. M-F5.19. Figure 4.8 Decoration: painted red bands and wavy line. Cf. MDP fig. 112.4.

91. Jar/hydria/jug, rim fragment. M-F5.02. W. 0.048, L.: 0.055, Diam.: 0.160, Th.: 0.006-0.007 (body); ~0.010 (rim). Fabric: 5YR6/4, gray core, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR7/6. Decoration: groove in rim. Cf. RMDP fig. 339.73.

Late Helladic IIIA1-2 Fine Lustrous:

92. Goblet stem + foot. M-C/D5.07. Figure 4.8 W. 51, L.: 53, Diam.: 65 (foot), Th.: 3.5-4. Fabric: 5YR7/3, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 2.5Y8/2.

84. Jar? Body fragment. C2-609.24. W. 0.040, H. 0.035, Th. 0.004. Fabric 7.5YR7/6, very few very small red inclusions, slightly porous, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: painted red running spiral/stemmed spiral. Cf. MDP fig. 60.4, 61.1.

93. Goblet stem + foot. M-E5.02. Figure 4.8 W. 66, L.: 66, Diam.: ~65, Th.: 5.5. Fabric: 5YR6/6, gray core, Mohs 4. Full base profile.

158

Aeginetan:

105. Kylix, stem. M-K9.02. Decoration: painted horizontal bands, horizontal stripes, ends of whorl shells. Cf. MDP fig. 141.12.

94. Kylix? Rim fragment with handle. C2-608.21. L. 0.069, W. 0.046, Diam. ~0.160, Th. 0.004. Fabric: 5YR6/8, many small-large limestone, golden mica, black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and top rim have traces of slip, 7.5YR8/6. Cf. RMDP figs. 258.143, 340.84.

106. Kylix, stem. M-C/D6.04. Figure 4.11 Decoration: painted whorl shell (or stem of flower?). 107. Kylix, stem. C2-608.12. Figure 4.11 L. 0.060, W. 0.082, Th. 0.004. Fabric: 10YR8/2, quite some small-med. red, black, limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Decoration: very faint traces of pink-orange paint visible on stem.

Late Helladic IIIB1 Fine Lustrous: 95. Stirrup jar, false mouth. C2-606.20. Figure 4.11 L. 0.028, W. 0.036, Diam. 0.012 (stem of false mouth), Th. 0.004. Fabric: 7.5YR7/4, Mohs 4. Surface: slipped? Decoration: painted black horizontal bands. Only traces of paint. The piece has been dated to LH IIIB1 on the basis of the narrow band at base of false neck.

108. Kylix, parts of stem and body. C2-606.48. Decoration: ext. painted red - reddish brown wide and narrow bands and whorl shell. 109. Kylix, body fragment. C2-600.02. L. 0.029, W. 0.039, Th. 0.004-6. Fabric: 10YR8/4, slightly porous, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: ext. painted brown vertical whorl shell.

96. Stirrup jar, large shoulder fragment. M-J7.01. Figure 4.11 Decoration: painted orange brown unvoluted flower.

110. Kylix, body fragment. M-D5.11. Decoration: painted red-brown flower or palm. Cf. MDP fig. 133.1, FM 15, IIIB16. Palm not common; appears on rhyton, kylix, krater.

97. Ring based krater, rim fragment. C2-603.02. Figure 4.11 Decoration: painted whorl shell and ‘trefoil rock-work’ (FM 29).

111. Conical kylix? Body fragment. M-C5.04. Decoration: painted orange whorl shells.

98. Krater, rim fragment. M-F/G5.01. Figure 4.11 Decoration: painted vertical whorl shell, band at rim.

112. Shallow cup, rim fragment. M-G5.02. Figure 4.11 Decoration: painted vertical whorl shells.

99. Krater, rim fragment. M-G5.09. Figure 4.11 Decoration: painted orange flower.

113. Deep bowl, rim fragment. C2-603.03. Figure 4.11 Decoration: painted red vertical whorl shell, ext. and int. band at rim.

100. Krater, body fragment. M-H5.01. Figure 4.11 Decoration: painted brown whorl shell and flower, octopus. Cf. MDP fig. 135.2; 134.

114. Deep bowl, rim fragment. M-H3.13. Figure 4.11 Decoration: painted red vertical whorl shell, horizontal bands inside. Cf. Symeonoglou Pl. 21, fig. 32.3 (deep bowl rim from the destruction level of Room B).

101. Kylix, rim fragment. M-G5.03. Figure 4.11 Decoration: painted brown/orange horizontal flower, voluted.

115. Deep bowl? Rim fragment. M-C/D5.05. Figure 4.11 Decoration: painted red panel pattern with horizontal wavy lines.

102. Kylix, rim fragment. C2-602.03. Decoration: painted red vertical whorl shell. Cf. MDP fig. 139.

116. Open vessel, body fragment. C2-609.23. Decoration: ext. painted brown flower/ivy. Cf. MDP fig. 135.5.

103. Zygouries kylix, stem. M-H4.12. Decoration: painted black panel of whorl shell ends. Cf. MDP fig. 141.11. 104. Kylix, stem. M-I9.02. Decoration: three painted dark brown horizontal bands.

159

Fine Unpainted: 126. Amphora, handle. M-G4.08. W. 0.033, H. 0.029, Diam. 0.040. Fabric: 7.5YR6/4, many small yellow, black, red inclusions, Mohs 2. Decoration: painted 7.5YR4/2-5/3. Ribbed: cf. RMDP 688, fig. 264.206 and MDP fig. 206.2. For shape see also MDP fig. 213.1, 3 and 214, p. 167; Jacob-Felsch 1996, 232 (krater).

117. Kylix, rim fragment. C2-605.73. Figure 4.11 L. 0.058, W. 0.040, Diam. ~0.160, Th. 0.003-4. Fabric: 10YR8/3, few small red, limestone inclusions, bit porous, Mohs 3. 118. Kylix, body fragment. M-H3.18. L. 0.043, W. 0.042, Th. 0.003-5. Fabric: 10YR8/3, many small red inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. (and int.?) slipped, 2.5Y8/4.

127. Amphora, handle and body fragment. M-D5.08. Figure 4.24 L. 0.089, W. 0.030, Th. 0.015 (handle), dimensions body fragment 0.056 x 0.054. Fabric: 5YR8/4, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR7/4. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR6/6 (red) wavy band on outside of handle and in band around attachment point. Cf. RMDP fig. 273.67. Firing hole on outside at attachment point.

Late Helladic IIIB2 Fine Lustrous: 119. Stirrup jar (piriform jar?), body fragment. M-F5.20. Decoration: painted red horizontal bands, stripes and non-continuous wavy line. Cf. MDP fig. 127.2.

128. Amphora, handle and body fragment. M-D5.09. Figure 4.24 L. 0.053, W. 0.067, Th. 0.004 (body); dimensions handle: 0.035 x 0.020. Fabric: 5YR7/4, many small-large quartz, limestone, black, silver mica inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: handle slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: handle painted 2.5YR5/6 (red) vertical wiggle. Cf. RMDP fig. 273.67; 256.128 (LH IIIB).

120. Jug? Body fragment. C2-602.05. Decoration: painted red panel pattern. Late Helladic IIIB1-2

129. Krater, rim fragment. M-O6.03. Figure 4.24 L. 0.058, W. 0.040, Diam. 0.220, Th. 0.007. Fabric: 7.5YR8/4, few very small black inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 2.5YR8/3. Decoration: painted brown design (concentric circles?) Cf. FM 44; Mountjoy 1983 fig. 25.68 (Scimatari) for similar design. Symeonoglou Pl. 21, fig. 32.7 has a similar design on a small body sherd from a deep bowl.

Fine Lustrous: 121. Miniature jug, body fragment. M-E5.13. Decoration: painted red horizontal band and foliate band. Cf. MDP fig. 123. 122. Miniature bowl, rim fragment. C2-609.04. Decoration: painted red rim band, foliate band.

130. Deep bowl, rim fragment. C2-606.17. Figure 4.24 Decoration: int. and band at rim on ext. painted red. Cf. RMDP figs. 266.227, 262.184-6, 260.168, 343.108; French and French plate 29.2.

123. Kylix, body fragment. C2-608.03. Decoration: painted dark brown parallel circles, stripes. 124. Kylix? Body fragment. M-F4.09. Decoration: painted red rosette/sea anemone. Sea-anemones are found on kylixes from Thebes: Symeonoglou Pl. 35, fig. 103-104.

Late Helladic IIIC Middle Fine Lustrous: 131. Ring based? krater, rim fragment, body fragment, and handle scar. M-G5.20. Figure 4.24 Decoration: int. painted monochrome black, ext. black spiral. Cf. FM 46, IIIB - spiral, MDP fig. 65, FS 93 zwickel. Rim is very crooked (firing mistake). Shape: MDP fig. 223.1.

Late Helladic IIIC Early Fine Lustrous: 125. Small stirrup jar, handle. M-G4.04. L. 0.010, W. 0.016, Th. 0.006. Fabric: 5YR7/3, Mohs 3. Slipped, 7.5YR8/2. Decoration: painted black bands.

160

132. Krater, body fragment. M-F5.17. Figure 4.22 Decoration: int. painted monochrome, ext. red and brown design. Cf. FM 43IIIC:2,n. Brown paint highly vitrified. From same krater as 133.

137. Jar (piriform), neck. C2-602.10 L. 0.076, W. 0.106, Th. 0.008-10. Fabric: 5YR7/4, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR8/4-7/4. Decoration: painted black band near rim where body curves out. Cf. RMDP fig. 266.222. Possibly LH IIIC Early.

133. Krater, body fragment. M-C5.05 and MF5.21. Figure 4.22 Decoration: int. monochrome paint, ext. red-brown design. Cf. FM 43IIIc:2,n. Paint highly vitrified. From same krater as 132. Mended from two fragments.

138. Jar, rim fragment with handle scar. M-H/I2.04. Figure 4.24 Decoration: ext. and int. rim painted red triglyph. Cf. MDP fig. 174. 139. Krater, rim fragment. M-G5.18. Figure 4.24 Decoration: int. monochrome brown paint, ext. brown design. Cf. FM 40 and Mountjoy 1983, fig. 25.68 (Scimatari) for a somewhat similar though much more sloppily executed design.

Late Helladic IIIC Late Fine Lustrous: 134. Stirrup jar, handle. C2-604.19. W. 0.030, H. 0.046, Th. 0.011-15. Fabric 7.5YR6/4, very few small-medium limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: polished, 7.5YR6/4. Decoration: ext. handle painted brown cross. Cf. MDP fig. 215.1-2 (p. 168); fig. 247.1 p. 189).

140. Krater, rim fragment. C2-602.16. Figure 4.24 W. 0.049, H. 0.048, Th. 0.010-19. Fabric: 7.5YR6/4, few small limestone, red inclusions, Mohs 3. Decoration: ext. painted black and 7.5YR4/2 and 10YR3/1 circles, int. monochrome. 141. Krater, body fragment. M-H5.08. Figure 4.24 L. 0.042, W. 0.029, Th. 0.0010. Fabric: 2.5YR5/3, few very small black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 2.5YR6/4. Decoration: painted red bands, zigzag. Cf. MDP fig. 200, 30.

Dull Orange Painted: 135. Neck handled amphora, handle. M-K6.03. Figure 4.24 L. 0.040, W. 0.110, Th. ~0.018. Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted two intertwined 10R5/6 (red) wiggles. Cf. MDP fig. 239.3; RMDP fig. 265.211;214. Horizontal grooves at 2 ends where handle was attached to vessel. Cf. Catling and Lemos 1990, pl. 63-64 (Submycenaean).

142. Krater, body fragment. M-E5.20. Figure 4.24 L. 0.051, W. 0.047, Th. 0.009. Fabric: 5YR7/2-7/4, very few med. black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR6/4. Decoration: ext. painted 5YR5/3 (reddish brown) to 3/2 (dark reddish brown) design. 143. Krater, body fragment. C2-602.02 L. 0.036, W. 0.029, Th. 0.009-11. Fabric: 5YR7/6, very few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: int. painted 2.5YR5/5, ext. painted motif (triglyph pattern?). Badly worn.

Late Helladic IIIC Early-Late Fine Lustrous: 136. Amphora, rim fragment and handle. C2-609.01. Figure 4.24 L. 0.082, W. 0.070, Th. 0.010. Fabric: 5YR7/4, few very small black inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: slipped. Decoration: painted brown design. Cf. MDP fig. 206.1. Handle has two holes, only one of which goes through.

Dull Orange painted: 144. Krater, rim fragment. M-C5.02. Decoration: painted orange-brown concentric arcs? Cf. MDP fig. 170 & 166.10. 145. Deep bowl, parts of rim, body, and handle. M-G4.06. Figure 4.24 Decoration: int. painted monochrome, ext. red bands. Cf. MDP fig. 52, FS237.2. 161

146. Deep bowl, parts of rim, body, and handle. M-G5.13. Figure 4.24 Decoration: int. painted monochrome, ext. red bands. Cf. 145.

154. Small stirrup jar? Spout. C2-608.42. W. 0.023, L.: 0.033, H.: 0.013, Diam.: 0.008 (int. mouth), Th.: 0.004. Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, very few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Decoration: traces of 2.5YR5/8 (red) paint in band around mouth.

Late Helladic II-III: 155. Stirrup jar, handle. C2-604.17. W. 0.028, H.: 0.051, Th.: 0.005-0.007. Fabric: 7.5YR6/6, very few very small-small limestone, black, red inclusions, Mohs 2. Decoration: painted 7.5YR3/2 and 5YR5/4 bands.

Fine Lustrous: 147. Alabastron? Body fragment. M-E5.07 W. 0.025, L.: 0.030, Th.: 0.003-0.005. Fabric: 5Y8/2, very few med. black inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 5Y8/3. Decoration: painted 2.5Y4/3-4 geometric motif. Fabric color suggests Corinthian origin?

156. Stirrup jar? Handle. C2-603.07 W. 0.015, H.: 0.027, Diam.: 0.009 x 0.016, Th.: 0.007. Fabric: 7.5YR7/4, few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 2. Decoration: painted 5YR4/4 cross.

148. Stirrup jar, top. M-F5.05. W. 0.024, L.: 0.020, Th.: 0.005-0.006. Fabric: 7.5YR7/2, Mohs 4. Surface: slipped, 7.5YR7/2. Decoration: painted red (5YR4/5) circles. Probably LH IIIB1, possibly LH IIIA2. In III(A2-)B1 the disk is convex instead of concave as in IIA. In these periods the paint is denser (instead of thin-lined circles).

157. Small piriform jar? (Or stirrup jar). Shoulder fragment. M-L6.02 W. 0.015, L.: 0.024, Th.: 0.004-0.005. Fabric: 2.5YR6/4, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR7/4. Decoration: painted 2.5YR5/8 concentric circles and foliate band. Cf. MDP fig. 81.7.

149. Small stirrup jar, false mouth. C2-607.01. W. 0.027, L.: 0.042, H.: 0.018, Diam.: 0.014 (ext. mouth), 0.007 (int. mouth). Fabric: 7.5YR8/4, Mohs 3,5. Decoration: traces of 2.5YR5/6 (red) paint.

158. Jar? Shoulder fragment. M-G5.16. W. 0.044, L.: 0.090, H.: 0.033, Th.: 0.004-0.008. Fabric: 7.5YR6/4-5YR7/6, many small-med. limestone, black, silver mica, quartz inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR6/8 (red) design.

150. Stirrup jar, shoulder fragment. M-H4.06. W. 0.035, L.: 0.053, Th.: 0.003-0.008. Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: ext. painted reddish brown circles.

159. Amphora, rim fragment with handle. M-E4.11. W. 0.045, L.: 0.064, Th.: ~0.010. Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR5/4 (weak red) - 5/6 (red). Pierced with 3 holes in horizontal row at point where handle meets rim.

151. Stirrup jar? Shoulder fragment. M-G4.03. W. 0.043, L.: 0.046, Th.: up to 0.009. Fabric: 7.5YR7/4, many small-large limestone, black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 2.5Y8/2. Decoration: ext. two painted black horizontal bands.

160. Amphora, rim fragment with handle. M-C/D6.05. W. 0.044, L.: 0.062, Th.: ~0.008. Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, gray core, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: ext., top rim, (and int. handle?) painted black. Pierced with 3 holes in horizontal row where handle meets rim.

152. Stirrup jar, spout. M-H4.05. W. 0.033, Diam.: 0.018 (ext.); 0.009 (int.). Fabric: 7.5YR8/6, quite some med. red, black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 2.5Y8/2. Decoration: ext. painted 7.5YR4/3 (brown) band around base. Dimensions body fragment 0.036 x 0.037.

161. Amphora, handle. C2-603.19. W. 0.086, L.: 0.036, Th.: ~0.015. Fabric: 5YR6/6, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted black, int. has traces of paint.

153. Small stirrup jar, spout. M-E5.08. W. 0.024, Diam.: ~0.018. Fabric: 5YR7/6, gray core, Mohs 4. Decoration: ext. monochrome 2.5YR5/8 (red) - 3/2 (dusky red) paint.

162

162. Amphora, handle. C2-603.18. W. 0.058, L.: 0.041, Th.: ~0.016. Fabric: 7.5YR8/4, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: ext. painted 5YR4/2 (dark reddish gray) vertical bands.

170. Closed vessel, body fragment with handle scar. MG5.21. W. 0.053, L.: 0.061, Th.: 0.005-0.008. Fabric: 5YR7/4, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: ext. painted 5YR6/8 (reddish yellow) - 4/3 (reddish brown) designs.

163. Hydria?, handle. M-F4.10. W. 0.044, L. 0.063, Diam. handle 0.011, Th. 0.005. Fabric 7.5YR7/4, very few very small-very large limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Ext. painted black wide band around handle; splashes on handle. Cf. MDP fig. 178, 205, 228.1 for motif. LH IIIC? LH IIIC Middle has the multiple splashes on deep bowl handles of the close style (MDP 178).

171. Closed vessel, body fragment with handle scar. MK8.01. W. 0.050, L.: 0.072, Th.: 0.004. Fabric: 5YR6/4, gray core, some small-med. limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: traces of 5YR4/3 (reddish brown)-3/1 (very dark gray) paint on ext. Probably wheel made, but int. irregular. Horizontal handle.

164. Closed vessel, rim fragment. M-H/I2.02 W. 0.068, L.: 0.034, Th.: 0.004-0.005. Fabric: 2.5YR6/4, Mohs 4. Decoration: painted 2.5YR5/6 (red) – black, traces of design on ext. Grooves well under rim.

172. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-F5.09. W. 0.038, L.: 0.037, Th.: 0.006. Fabric: 10YR7/3, few med. limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 2.5Y8/2. Decoration: ext. painted 5YR6/8 (reddish yellow) horizontal band.

165. Closed vessel, rim fragment. M-C/D6.09. W. 0.043, L.: 0.049, Diam.: ~0.260, Th.: 0.005-0.007. Fabric: 5YR6/6, Mohs 4. Decoration: ext. and int. painted 2.5YR5/6 (red) – black. Int. quite grooved from fingers.

173. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-F5.23. W. 0.040, L.: 0.027, Th.: 0.003-6. Fabric: 5YR7/4, some small black inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 2.5Y8/2. Decoration: ext. painted 5YR6/8 (reddish yellow) horizontal bands.

166. Closed vessel, shoulder fragment. C2-608.31. W. 0.036, L.: 0.064, H.: 0.009, Th.: 0.005-0.008. Fabric: 5YR6/4-6/6, very few small-med. black, limestone inclusions, Mohs 4,5. Decoration: ext. painted black with 10YR8/3 (very pale brown) narrow band.

174. Closed vessel, body fragment. C2-604.08. W. 0.046, L.: 0.058, Th.: 0.004-0.008. Fabric: 7.5YR7/4, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 5YR5/8 (yell. red) and 3/2 (dark reddish brown) horizontal bands. Int. is thickly grooved from fingers on turning wheel.

167. Closed vessel, shoulder fragment. M-E4.05. W. 0.037, L.: 0.064, H.: 0.023, Th.: 0.005-0.010. Fabric: 10YR7/3, few small limestone inclusions, bit porous, Mohs 3. Decoration: ext. painted 7.5YR5/3 (brown) - black band.

175. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-D5.13. W. 0.054, L.: 0.075, Th.: 0.008-0.010. Fabric: 2.5YR7/4, very few small-med. limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 7.5YR4/4 (brown) - black designs.

168. Closed vessel, shoulder fragment. M-H3.02. W. 0.044, L.: 0.072, H.: 0.030, Th.: 0.004-0.009. Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, quite some limestone, red, black inclusions, Mohs 2,5. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR8/6. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR6/6 (red) band.

176. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-F4.06. W. 0.053, L.: 0.059, Th.: 0.004-0.006. Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, gray core, few small-med. limestone, black inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR7/6. Decoration: ext. painted 10R5/6 (red) - 4/2 (weak red) horizontal broad bands.

169. Closed vessel, bottom? M-G5.11. W. 0.038, L.: 0.043, Th.: 0.003-0.004. Fabric: 2.5Y8/3, quite some small-med. limestone, black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped. Decoration: ext. painted 7.5YR4/34/4 (brown) band.

177. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-I9.03. W. 0.043, L.: 0.039, Th.: 0.006-0.008. Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, gray core, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 5YR7/6. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR5/8 (red) - black stripes.

163

178. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-C5.01. W. 0.029, L.: 0.058, Th.: 0.005-0.007. Fabric: 5YR7/4, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR5/2-5/3. Decoration: ext. painted dark brown design.

186. Krater? Rim fragment with handle. M-E5.09. W. 0.035, L.: 0.034, Th.: ~0.014 (rim). Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, Mohs 3. Decoration: ext. and int. painted monochrome 10R5/6 (red) - 4/2 (weak red). Horizontal handle.

179. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-F4.11. W. 0.024, L.: 0.045, Th.: 0.006-0.009. Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, gray core, some small black, limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: ext. traces of paint, 10R6/6 (light red) - 4/3 (weak red). Piece at bend in body.

187. Krater, rim fragment. C2-608.45. W. 0.019, L.: 0.020, H.: 0.044, Th.: 0.010-0.019. Fabric: 7.5YR4/3, few small limestone, black inclusions, Mohs 3. Decoration: painted black vertical stripe. LH IIIA?

180. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-F4.04. W. 0.043, L.: 0.048, Th.: 0.005-0.006. Fabric: 5YR7/4, many small-large black, limestone, yellow, quartz (?) inclusions, Mohs 2. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR5/8 (red) and 4/6 (dark red) horizontal bands.

188. Krater, handle. C2-608.x12 W. 0.044, L.: 0.020. Fabric: 10YR6/4-5/3, Mohs 4,5. Surface: slipped, 2.5Y5/2. Decoration: painted black bands. LH IIIA-B 189. Goblet, rim fragment. C2-609.02. W. 0.036, L. 0.018, Diam. 0.120, Th. 0.003. Fabric 5YR7/6, Mohs 3 Ext. slipped, 7.5YR7/6. Ext. and int. painted, red (2.5YR5/8), band at rim in and out; ext. motif: running spiral? Cf. MDP fig. 99.3 (Piperi);fig. 75.1, 8. LH IIIA? Handle scar has band around it.

181. Closed vessel, body fragment. C2-603.09 W. 0.050, L.: 0.052, Th.: 0.006. Fabric: 2.5YR6/8, Mohs 2. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR4/2 (dusky red) design. 182. Closed vessel, body fragment, near rim. C2-608.25. W. 0.036, L.: 0.046, Th.: 0.002-0.003. Fabric: 10YR7/3, quite some small-very large red, black, limestone, quartz inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: ext. painted black spiral.

190. Goblet, rim fragment. M-E4.03. W. 0.022, L. 0.044, Th. 0.005. Fabric 5YR6/6, gray core, Mohs 4. Slipped, 7.5YR7/6. Painted red 2.5YR4/8 band at rim, wavy bands. LH IIIA?

183. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-J4.01 W. 0.028, L.: 0.030, Th.: 0.007. Fabric: 2.5Y6/3, some small limestone, black inclusions, quite porous, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: ext. painted black design.

191. Goblet, stem with body fragment and foot. C2606.28. W. 0.040, L.: 0.051, H.: 0.057, Diam.: ~0.019, Th.: 0.003-0.005 (bowl). Fabric: 5YR7/6, Mohs 3,5. Decoration: int. and ext. monochrome black painted.

184. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-C/D6.06 W. 0.028, L.: 0.036, Th.: 0.004. Fabric: 5YR7/6, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR6/8 (red) - 3/3 (dusky red) design. Cf. M-C/D5.02 for motif. LH IIIB?

192. Goblet, stem with body fragment and foot. M-E5.18. W. 0.036, L.: 0.045, H.: 0.040, Diam.: 0.022, Th.: 0.004. Fabric: 10YR8/3, gray core, few small red inclusions, Mohs 4. Decoration: ext. 5YR6/8 (reddish yellow) - 4/1 (dark gray) painted bands; int. monochrome.

185. Krater, rim fragment with handle scar. M-E5.16. W. 0.050, L.: 0.079, Diam.: ~0.290, handle: 0.038 x 0.016, Th.: 0.006-0.008 (body); ~0.016 (rim). Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, many small-large black, red, limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 10R5/6 (red) band under rim and top rim.

193. Goblet, foot. M-D5.20. W. 0.024, Diam.: ~0.065 (foot); ~0.038 (stem). Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, gray core, few small black inclusions, Mohs 3. Decoration: ext. and int. bowl has traces of 5YR4/4 (reddish brown) - black paint.

164

194. Kylix, stem with bowl. M-D5.02. W. 0.056, Th.: 0.004-0.005. Fabric: 2.5YR6/8, gray core, Mohs 4. Decoration: ext. and int. lustrous 2.5YR6/8-5/8 (red) paint. Dimensions bowl 45x58.

202. Deep bowl? Rim fragment. M-I5.01 W. 0.021, L.: 0.028, Diam.: ~0.150, Th.: 0.004-0.005. Fabric: 10YR7/4, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. + int. slipped? Decoration: int. painted 7.5YR3.5/2 bands; ext. bands + wiggly line. Possibly Submycenaean

195. Kylix, stem. C2-608.14 W. 0.077, L.: 0.059. Fabric: 5YR6/4, many very small sand inclusions, Mohs 3. Decoration: painted red-purplish black with oily shine. Paint applied on turning wheel? (diagonal orange red bands visible).

203. Deep bowl, handle with body fragment. M-H3.16. W. 0.076, L.: 0.068, Diam.: 0.011 x 0.017 (handle), Th.: 0.004-0.007. Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, Mohs 3. Decoration: ext. and int. painted monochrome10R5/6 (red) - 3/3 (dusky red). Horizontal upturned handle.

196. Kylix, hollowed stem. M-G3.02. W. 0.041, Diam.: 0.022 (top), 0.008 (int.). Fabric: 2.5YR7/4-7.5Y8/4, few small-med. limestone, red inclusions, Mohs 2. Decoration: traces of red paint.

204. Deep bowl, handle and body fragment. W. 0.060, L.: 0.045, Diam.: 0.011 (handle), Th.: 0.0030.004. Fabric: 7.5YR8/6, few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: ext. and handle painted 2.5YR6/8 (red) designs. Cf. RMDP figs. 347.140, 256.125-6, 257. Upturned horizontal handle. LH IIIB

197. Kylix, foot. M-F5.08. W. 0.028, L.: 0.044, Diam.: ~0.100, Th.: 0.005-0.006. Fabric: 7.5YR7/4, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: painted 10YR3/2 (very dark grayish brown) rings around foot. Small part of foot.

205. Deep bowl, handle. M-G5.22. L.: 0.020, H.: 0.066, Diam.: 0.012 (handle), Th.: 0.004. Fabric: 10YR7/4, few very small-small limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. polished. Decoration: painted 7YR5/6 stripes.

198. Conical kylix, body fragment. M-E5.11 W. 0.033, L.: 0.047, Th.: 0.005-0.009. Fabric: 5YR7/6. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR7/6. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR6/8 (red) design.

206. Deep bowl? Body fragment. M-F4.13 W. 0.034, L.: 0.036, Th.: 0.003-0.005. Fabric: 5YR6/4, very few small quartz inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. + int. slipped, ext. polished, 7.5YR7/6. Decoration: painted brown wavy line + bands. Paint too worn to determine original color. Possibly Submycenaean.

199. Cup/bowl, body fragment. M-O6.01. W. 0.032, H. 0.040, Th. 0.003. Fabric 10YR7/4, very few very small limestone inclusions, slightly porous, Mohs 3. Ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/3. Ext. painted brown linear design: bands and parallel stripes. 200. Deep bowl, rim fragment. C2-609.10. W. 0.031, L.: 0.027, Th.: 0.005. Fabric: 7.5YR7/4 – 10YR8/4, very few very small-small red, limestone inclusions, Mohs 3,5. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: painted 5YR4/6 design. Cf. FM11.51. Mended from two fragments.

207. Deep bowl? (Open vessel) Body fragment. M-G5.15. W. 0.062, L.: 0.071, Th.: 0.004. Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 10R5/6 (red) horizontal bands. 208. Open vessel, ring foot and body fragment. M-K7.02 W. 0.045, L.: 0.061, H.: 0.018, Diam.: ~0.055 (foot), Th.: 0.005-0.007 (ring). Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, few small-large limestone, clay, black inclusions, slightly porous, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/4 and 7.5YR8/6. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR5/6 (red) band and circle, int. painted 2.5YR6/8 (red).

201. Deep bowl, rim fragment. C2-609.11. W. 0.035, L.: 0.024, Th.: 0.005-6. Fabric: 10YR7/4 + 5YR6/6, few very small-small red, limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: painted 2.5YR4/8. Int. irregular. From same vessel as C2-609.10?

209. Open vessel, ring foot and stem. C2-604.02. W. 0.023, Diam. 0.050, Th. 0.008. Fabric 2.5YR7/4, Mohs 4. Ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Ext. painted monochrome lustrous black. 165

210. Open vessel, ring foot. M-F4.05 W. 0.041, L.: 0.057, H.: 0.034, Diam.: ~0.120 (foot), Th.: 0.008-0.009 (ring: ~0.008). Fabric: 5YR7/6, some small red clay, limestone inclusions. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 10R5/6 (red) band above foot.

219. Open vessel, body fragment. C2-604.09. W. 0.012, L.: 0.025, Th.: 0.004-0.005. Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR5/8 (red) design. 220. Open vessel, body fragment. C2-604.10. W. 0.037, L.: 0.026, Th.: 0.007. Fabric: 2.5YR7/4, some small black inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: ext. and int. painted 2.5YR6/8 (red) in; 2.5YR6/8 (red) and black out horizontal bands.

211. Open vessel, ring foot. C2-605.69. W. 0.038, L.: 0.029, H.: 0.013, Diam.: ~0.060 (ring), Th.: 0.002-0.004 (ring: 7). Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, Mohs 3. Decoration: ext. painted 10R5/6 (red) band above foot; int. monochrome. 212. Open vessel, bottom. M-J7.03 W. 0.042, L.: 0.059, H.: 0.033, Diam.: ~0.120 (foot), Th.: 0.004-0.008. Fabric: 5YR7/6, many small-very large quartz, limestone, red inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 5YR4/4 (reddish brown) band above foot.

221. Open vessel, body fragment. C2-603.27. W. 0.048, L.: 0.086, Th.: 0.007-0.008. Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped. Decoration: int. painted monochrome 5YR5/8 (yellowish red) - 3/2 (dark reddish brown). Pierced mending hole.

213. Open vessel, body fragment. W. 0.046. L. 0.049. Th. 0.003-0.004. Fabric 7.5YR6/6, few very small limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Ext. and int. painted monochrome 5YR5/6 (yellowish red) – black.

222. Open vessel, body fragment near rim. M-I5.02. W. 0.055, H. 0.041, Th. 0.007. Fabric 5YR7/8, slightly porous, Mohs 3. Ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: int. and ext. painted red: int. monochrome, ext. bands, spiral/concentric circles

214. Open vessel, body fragment. M-H5.04 W. 0.021, L.: 0.038, Th.: 0.005. Fabric: 7.5YR8/4, Mohs 3,5. Surface: ext. (and int.?) slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR5/8 (red) - 4/2 (dusky red) design.

223. Open vessel, body fragment near rim. M-F4.07. W. 0.027, H. 0.029, Th. 0.004-0.006. Fabric 7.5YR7/6, Mohs 2. Ext. slipped? 7.5YR7/6. Decoration: int. and ext. painted red: int. rim band, ext. bands and loops.

215. Open vessel, body fragment. C2-603.13. W. 0.045, L.: 0.043, Th.: 0.005-0.006. Fabric: 10YR6/2, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. (and int.?) slipped, 10YR7/2. Decoration: ext. painted brown design.

224. Open vessel, body fragment. M-H5.06. W. 0.029, L.: 0.024, Th.: 0.004-0.005. Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, very few small red inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR5/8 (red) whorl shell.

216. Open vessel, body fragment. M-C/D6.01. W. 0.046, L. 0.049, Th. 0.003-0.004. Fabric: 7.5YR6/6, few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Ext. and int. painted monochrome 5YR5/6 (yellowish red) – black.

225. Open vessel? Body fragment. C2-603.12. W. 0.021, L.: 0.037, Th.: 0.003-0.004. Fabric: 5YR7/6, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. (and int.?) slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 5YR6/8 (reddish yellow) - 4/4 (reddish brown) design.

217. Open vessel, body fragment. M-E5.17. W. 0.034, L.: 0.030, Th.: 0.006-0.007. Fabric: 10YR7/3, very few small black, limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 2.5Y8/4. Decoration: ext. painted black design.

226. Open vessel, body fragment. M-F5.13. W. 0.046, L.: 0.043, Th.: 0.005-0.006. Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, quite some small limestone, red, black inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR5/6 (red) - 4/3 (dusky red) design.

218. Open vessel, body fragment. M-G3.06. W. 0.056, L.: 0.052, Th.: 0.005-0.006. Fabric: 7.5YR6/4, gray core, very few small-large limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR7/4. Decoration: ext. painted black motif.

166

227. Open vessel, body fragment. M-I8.01 W. 0.048, L.: 0.029, Th.: 0.003-0.004. Fabric: 5YR7/6, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 2.5Y8/3. Decoration: ext. painted brown design. Mended from two sherds.

236. Rim fragment. C2-605.68. W. 0.051, L.: 0.049, Diam.: ~0.100, Th.: 0.004. Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, bit porous, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: int. painted monochrome 2.5YR5/8 (red) - 4/3 (dusky red); ext. band. Mended from 2 pieces.

228. Open vessel, body fragment. M-H4.01. W. 0.054, L.: 0.072, Th.: 0.009-0.010. Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, very few med.-large limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR7/4. Decoration: int. painted monochrome2.5YR5/8 (red), ext. design.

237. Rim fragment. M-D5.06. W. 0.031, L.: 0.046, Diam.: ~0.180, Th.: 0.005. Fabric: 5YR7/6, Mohs 3,5. Decoration: ext. and int. painted monochrome 2.5YR5/8 (red).

229. Rim fragment. M-C4.06. W. 0.032, L.: 0.029, H.: 0.049, Th.: 0.009-10. Fabric: 7.5YR6/4, few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 2. Decoration: painted 7.5YR3/2 circles and chevrons.

238. Rim fragment. M-H3.01. W. 0.020, L.: 0.034, Diam.: 0.060, Th.: 0.002-0.004. Fabric: 7.5YR8/4, Mohs 3. Decoration: ext. painted 7.5YR4/2 (brown)-3/2 (dark brown) horizontal bands.

230. Rim fragment. C2-603.22. W. 0.039, L.: 0.044, Diam.: ~0.220, Th.: 0.005. Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, Mohs 3. Decoration: ext. and int. painted monochrome 2.5YR5/8 (red).

239. Rim fragment. M-D5.21. W. 0.010, L.: 0.044, Diam.: ~0.120, Th.: 0.011 (rim). Fabric: 7.5YR7/4, few small limestone, black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 2.5Y8/2. Decoration: painted 2.5Y4/1 (dark gray) bands.

231. Rim fragment. C2-605.45. W. 0.032, L.: 0.049, Diam.: ~0.180, Th.: 0.005-0.010. Fabric: 2.5YR6/8, Mohs 3. Decoration: ext. and int. painted 2.5YR5/8 (red) - 3/4 (dusky red).

240. Rim fragment with body fragment. M-H3.08. W. 0.066, L.: 0.053, Th.: 0.004-0.007 (rim >0.012). Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, few med. limestone, slate inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR8/6. Decoration: ext. painted design, int. painted monochrome. Brown-black (7.5YR4/4) out, yellowish-red-black (5YR5/6) in and on top rim.

232. Rim fragment. C2-602.06. W. 0.034, L.: 0.049, Diam.: ~0.160, Th.: 0.005. Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, Mohs 4. Decoration: ext. and int. painted monochrome black. 233. Rim fragment. M-C/D6.07. W. 0.024, L.: 0.048, Diam.: ~0.160, Th.: 0.004. Fabric: 5YR7/6, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: ext. has painted 7.5YR4/6 (strong brown) - black band around rim.

241. Rim fragment with handle fragment. M-C/D6.03 W. 0.069, L.: 0.071, Diam.: ~0.120 (of handle ~0.027), Th.: 0.007-0.008. Fabric: 7.5YR7/4, few small-large limestone, black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 2.5Y8/2. Decoration: painted 5YR4/4 (reddish brown) band around rim. Big horizontal handle.

234. Rim fragment. M-J10.01 W. 0.035, L.: 0.032, Th.: 0.004-0.006. Fabric: 2.5YR7/4, Mohs 2,5. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: ext. painted 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) design; int. monochrome 10R5/6 (red).

242. Handle. C2-604.16. L.: 0.016, H.: 0.041, Th.: 0.009. Fabric: 7.5YR7/4, few small limestone, red inclusions, Mohs 2. Decoration: painted 2.5YR4/4 bands. Int. handle has thumbprints. LH IIIC?

235. Rim fragment. M-E4.02 W. 0.022, L.: 0.061, Th.: 0.007. Handmade. Fabric: 5YR7/6, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: ext. and top rim painted 2.5YR5/6 (red) - 3/2 (dusky red).

243. Handle. M-J9.01 W. 0.057, L.: 0.056, H.: 0.040. Fabric: 5YR6/4, some small limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Decoration: ext. painted 2.5YR5/8 (red) - 4/2 (dusky red) band (spiral?) around handle attachment; impressed circle at attachment. Vertical handle.

167

244. Body fragment. W. 0.063, L.: 0.060, H.: 0.028, Diam.: ~0.110 (foot), Th.: 0.003-0.009. Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, Mohs 3. Decoration: ext. painted 10R6/8 (light red) horizontal bands.

253. Spouted conical krater? Rim fragment with handle and body. M-G5.10. W. 0.043, L.: 0.068, Diam.: ~0.300, Handle: 0.011 x 0.019, Th.: 0.004-0.006 (body); 0.017 (rim). Fabric: 5YR7/6, gray core, quite a few small-med. red, black, quartz inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped? Cf. RMDP fig. 340.84. Horizontal handle.

Fine Unpainted: 245. Alabastron (baggy)?, body fragment. C2-608.22. W. 0.068, L.: 0.093, Th.: 0.002-0.008. Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, quite some small-very large limestone, black inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. has traces of slip. Ca. 1/4 of body and almost complete profile preserved.

254. Spouted krater (or basin?), rim fragment with spout. M-H5.07. W. 0.050, L.: 0.063, Diam.: 0.021 x 0.017 (spout at int. body), Th.: ~0.017 (rim). Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, very few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Cf. RMDP Figs. 272.82, 259.163, 266.220.

246. Stirrup jar, spout. M-D/E3.07 W. 0.049, Diam.: 0.022 x 0.028 (int. 0.005). Fabric: 5YR7/6, quite some small black, red, limestone inclusions, Mohs 4.

255. Krater, rim fragment. M-F5.03. W. 0.047, L.: 0.056, Diam.: ~0.260, Th.: 0.005-0.006. Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR7/4.

247. Amphora, rim fragment with handle. C2-603.20. W. 0.050, L.: 0.055 (of handle: 0.038), Th.: ~0.013-0.014 (handle). Fabric: 2.5YR6/8, gray core, Mohs 3. Pierced with 1 hole at edge where rim meets handle.

256. Krater, rim fragment. C2-606.30. W. 0.046, H. 0.067, Th. 0.005-6. Fabric: 5YR5/6, some small limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR7/5.

248. Amphora, handle. C2-603.21. W. 0.091, L.: 0.033 (handle), Diam.: 0.034 x 0.022, Th.: 0.007 (body). Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 7.5YR7/6. Pierced with 1 hole.

257. Goblet? Rim fragment with handle scars. C2-608.38. W. 0.057, L.: 0.070, Diam.: ~0.240, Th.: 0.004. Fabric: 5YR6/6, gray core, very few small quartz inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Cf. RMDP figs. 334.40-42, 268.5-7, 255.108.

249. Closed vessel, bottom. M-F5.15. W. 0.058, L.: 0.052, H.: 0.018, Diam.: 0.032 (foot), Th.: 0.004-0.006. Fabric: 5YR7/8, gray core, some small-med. limestone? inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped?

258. Goblet, foot and stem. C2-605.135. W. 0.026, Diam.: ~0.055 (foot), ~0.019 (stem), Th.: ~0.003. Fabric: 5YR7/6, gray core, quite some smalllarge black, red inclusions, Mohs 3. Ca. 1/2 of foot preserved.

250. Closed vessel, bottom. M-C/D6.02 W. 0.121, L.: 0.081, H.: 0.033, Diam.: ~0.100 (foot), Th.: 0.007 (walls) – 0.010 (bottom). Fabric: 5YR6/4, very few small limestone, red inclusions, Mohs 3.

259. Goblet, foot. M-G5.07. W. 0.030, L.: 0.056, H.: 0.016, Diam.: ~0.055, Th.: 0.003-0.006. Fabric: 2.5YR7/4, gray core, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 2.5YR7/6.

251. Closed vessel, body fragment. W. 0.059, L.: 0.035, Th.: 0.010 (body); ~0.019 (rim). Fabric: 5YR6/6, gray core, few med.-large limestone, black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. has traces of slip, 7.5YR8/4.

260. Goblet? Foot. M-E4.06. W. 0.053, L.: 0.036, H.: 0.026, Diam.: ~0.070 (foot), Th.: 0.005 (wall) – 0.011 (bottom). Fabric: 7.5YR6/4, gray core, Mohs 5. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR4/5 - 2/3.

252. Krater, rim fragment with body fragment and handle scar. M-D5.17. W. 0.061, L.: 0.089, Diam.: ~0.300, Handle: 0.009 x 0.029, Th.: 0.004-0.008 (body); ~0.018 (rim). Fabric: 5YR6/6, gray core, very few small black, limestone, red inclusions, Mohs 3,5. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 5YR7/6 . Horizontal handle.

261. Kylix, stem with bowl and foot. M-H3.17. W. 0.055, Diam.: 0.022. Fabric: 2.5YR6/8, no core, very few small-med. red, limestone inclusions, bit porous, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR7/6. Dimensions bowl 39x49.

168

262. Kylix, stem with bowl. M-D/E3.02. W. 0.053, Diam.: 0.016. Fabric: 5YR6/6, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/4. Dimensions bowl 0.032 x 0.038.

271. Open vessel, body fragment. C2-602.09. W. 0.065, L. 0.054. Th. 0.004-0.005. Fabric: 5YR7/6, very few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/4. Cf. C2-602.10. Int. rough. LH III

263. Kylix, stem and foot. M-E5.14. W. 0.027, Diam.: ~0.055 (foot), 0.017 (stem), Th.: ~0.003. Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, Mohs 4. Surface: slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Entire foot preserved.

272. Rim fragment. C2-609.03. W. 0.034, L. 0.039, Th. 0.004. Fabric 5YR6/7, Mohs 3. Slipped, 7.5YR6/7.

264. Kylix, stem. M-D5.16. W. 0.064, Diam.: 0.018, Th.: 0.004-5. Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, gray core, very few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. bowl slipped, 5YR7/6-6/6. Small parts of bowl and foot preserved.

273. Rim fragment. M-D5.03. W. 0.031, L.: 0.057, Diam.: ~0.240, Th.: 0.003-0.005 (body), ~0.015 (rim). Fabric: 7.5YR5/4, gray core, Mohs 5. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR7/4.

265. Kylix, stem C2-605.74 W. 0.031, Diam.: 0.026. Fabric: 5YR7/6, gray core, very few small-large limestone, red inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: slipped, 7.5YR7/6.

274. Rim fragment. C2-605.72. W. 0.039, L.: 0.053, Diam.: ~0.170, Th.: 0.004. Fabric: 5YR7/6, few small limestone inclusions, fairly porous, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 5YR7/8.

266. Cup, handle. C2-609.09. W. 0.046, L.: 0.024, Th.: 0.012 x 0.007. Fabric: 10YR6/4, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped, 10YR7/6. Cf. MDP fig. 103. High swung handle; rim incorporated. LH IIIA-B

275. Rim fragment. M-F5.04. W. 0.040, L.: 0.038, Diam.: ~0.230, Th.: 0.006-0.007 (rim: ~0.019). Fabric: 7.5YR8/4, few small red inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/4.

267. Open vessel, rim fragment. C2-602.07. W. 0.041, L.: 0.065, Diam.: ~0.240, Th.: 0.005. Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, few small black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR7/4. Cf. RMDP fig. 249.42-43. Profile: krater. But thin: ring-handled cup?

276. Handle. C2-604.06. W. 0.042, L.: 0.041 (handle: ~0.026), Th.: 0.003 (body); ~0.004 (handle). Fabric: 5YR7/6, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 10YR8/3. Very flat, upturned vertical handle. 277. Bottom. C2-604.03. W. 0.047, L. 0.036. Fabric: 5YR 6/6, gray core, some small-medium limestone inclusions, Mohs 3.

268. Open vessel, ring foot. M-F5.18. W. 0.065, L.: 0.054, H.: 0.020, Diam.: ~0.070 (foot), Th.: 0.003-0.007 (ring: 4). Fabric: 5YR6/6, gray core, quite some small black, quartz, silver mica, limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 5YR7/6.

278. Bottom. C2-608.32. W. 0.025, Diam.: ~0.035 (foot), Th.: 0.003-0.004. Fabric: 7.5YR7/6-6/6, quite many small-med. black, limestone, red inclusions, Mohs 3.

269. Open vessel? Bottom. M-H3.15. W. 0.042, L.: 0.042, Diam.: ~0.035 (foot), Th.: 0.002 (bottom) – 0.005 (wall). Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. (and int.?) slipped, 10YR8/6.

Transport Stirrup Jars: 279. Stirrup jar, top. M-I4.01. W. 0.058, L.: 0.104, Th.: 0.015. Handmade. Fabric: 5YR5/1, few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: slipped?, 5YR5/6. Decoration: monochrome painted 5YR5/6. Crudely made.

270. Open vessel, body fragment. C2-603.05. W. 0.027, H. 0.054, Th. 0.003. Fabric 7.5YR6/4, few small limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Ext. and int. slipped, 7.5YR6/3.

169

280. Stirrup jar (large, coarse), false mouth. C2-603.14. W. 0.044, Diam.: ~0.060 (top), Th.: 0.007. Fabric: 2.5YR7/6, many med.-large very angular red, black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. has traces of slip, 10YR8/3. Decoration: ext. has traces of 10YR3/2 (very dark grayish brown) paint. Dimensions body fragment 0.045 x 0.062.

287. Rim fragment? M-F5.07. W. 0.054, L.: 0.048, Diam.: ~0.160, Th.: 0.008. Fabric: 2.5Y7/4, core 5Y6/2 (light olive gray), very few small black, limestone, golden mica inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 2.5Y7/3. Decoration: painted 10YR3/2 (very dark grayish brown) band around rim.

281. Stirrup jar, false mouth. M-G5.01. W. 0.042, L.: 0.063, Diam.: 0.003-0.004, Th.: 0.010. Fabric: 5YR6/1, many small limestone inclusions, Mohs 5. Surface slipped, 5YR6/6. Decoration: top monochrome black painted, black design on side. Diameter top: 0.070.

Aeginetan Cooking and Storage Vessels: 288. Cooking pot, rim fragment. M-H3.20 W. 0.091, L.: 0.134, Diam.: ~0.225, Th.: 0.014-0.023 (rim). Fabric: 5YR6/4-6, gray core very many very smalllarge silver, golden mica, quartz, black inclusions, Mohs 4.

282. Stirrup jar, top. M-H4.03. L. 0.093, W. 0.032, Diam. ~0.850, Th. 0.018-19. Fabric: 5YR7/4, very few very small-small black inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: slipped? Decoration: painted black spiral; originally painted monochrome? LH IIIB-C

289. Tripod, leg. M-I7.02. Fabric: 5YR6/4, grayish brown core, many very small golden mica inclusions, Mohs 3. 290. Tripod, leg. M-E4.09. Fabric: 5YR6/4, grayish brown core, many very small golden mica inclusions, Mohs 3.

283. Stirrup jar, top. C2-608.13. L. 0.095, W. 0.043, Th. 0.011. Fabric: 2.5YR5/1, many small sand, limestone, big pebbles, shell inclusions, Mohs 7. Decoration: originally painted black, plastic spiral. Crudely made. LH IIIB

291. Tripod, leg. M-G5.06. W. 0.064, L.: 0.065, H.: 0.017, Diam.: 0.025 x 0.034 (leg), Th.: 0.005-0.012. Fabric: 5YR6/4, grayish brown core, many very small golden mica inclusions, Mohs 3. 292. Pithos, body fragment. M-J6.01 W. 0.061, L.: 0.105, Th.: 0.015. Fabric: 2.5YR5/6, very many small-large golden mica, red, black inclusions, Mohs 3,5. Decoration: plastic: raised band with stamped? motifs.

Aeginetan Fine Matt Painted: 284. Closed vessel, body fragment. M-D/E3.08. W. 0.076, L.: 0.071, Th.: 0.006-0.009. Fabric: 10YR8/32.5Y7/3, many small golden mica, limestone, black inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 2.5Y8/2. Decoration: ext. painted 5YR6/8 (reddish yellow) – black bands.

Coarse Wares: 293. Pithos, rim fragment. M-G3.08. L. 0.079, W. 0.082, Th. 0.029-0.032. Handmade. Fabric 7.5YR6/4, many small-very large quartz, yellow, red, black, limestone, grey inclusions, Mohs 2. Decoration: raised band with a zigzag line of small imprinted circles.

285. Closed vessel, body fragment. C2-605.44. W. 0.046, L.: 0.026, Th.: 0.008. Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, many small limestone, black, golden and silver mica inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: ext. painted grayish brown vertical bands.

294. Pithos, rim fragment. C2-608.47. W. 0.072, H.: 0.055, Th.: 0.014-0.018. Handmade. Fabric: 2.5YR5/3, many small-large limestone, black, red inclusions, Mohs 3. Decoration: raised bands with imprints of small circles in rows.

286. Kylix, stem with foot and bowl. M-C/D6.08. W. 0.049, Diam.: 0.018. Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, quite some very small limestone, red, golden mica inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. has traces of slip, 7.5YR7/6. Dimensions bowl 0.036 x 0.039.

295. Pithos, rim fragment. M-L6.04 W. 0.079, L.: 0.084, Th.: ~0.025. Fabric: 5YR8/4, very many small-large angular red inclusions, Mohs 2,5. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: stamped motifs on rim. Motif: 'grains'.

170

296. Pithos, rim fragment? C2-601.01. W. 0.041, H.: 0.037, Th.: 0.020. Handmade. Fabric: 7.5YR6/4, gray core, many small-very large limestone, quartz, black, red inclusions, Mohs 2. Decoration: imprints: small squares in horizontal row.

304. Pithos, body fragment. M-H3.06 W. 0.090, L.: 0.064, Th.: 0.014. Fabric: 5YR7/6-8, very many small-large black, red, limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: plastic: raised horizontal band. Raised band 20 mm high.

297. Pithos, bottom. C2-606.46. W. 0.156, L.: 0.179, H.: 0.117, Th.: 0.024 (walls) – 0.042 (bottom). Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, gray core, very many smallvery large red, black, yellow, limestone inclusions, Mohs 3,5. Decoration: plastic: 3 horizontal grooves. Mended from 2 pieces.

305. Pithos, body fragment. C2-602.11 W. 0.064, L.: 0.096, Th.: 0.025. Fabric: 2.5YR6/6-gray, many small-med. black, quartz, silver mica inclusions, Mohs 4. Decoration: plastic: raised band with incision of large unconnected zigzags.

298. Pithos, body fragment. C2-608.06 and C2-608.07. W. 0.149, L. 0.132, Th. 0.022-0.028. Fabric 2.5YR5/6, gray core, very many small-very large angular limestone, black, red, quartz inclusions, Mohs 3.5. Ext. slipped, 5YR6/4. Plastic decoration: raised circle with impressed center. Diam. circle out 50, in 20.

306. Pithos, body fragment. M-H3.07 W. 0.092, L.: 0.059, Th.: 0.024-0.026. Fabric: 5YR6/8, gray core, many small-large quartz, black, silver mica inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 5YR6/4. Decoration: plastic: raised band with prints like woven rope/grains. Raised band 40 mm high, distance between prints 18 mm

299. Pithos, body fragment. M-G4.05. L. 0.068, W. 0.084, Th. ca. 0.022. Fabric 5YR7/6, many small-large black inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: raised band with small imprinted squares in rows.

307. Pithos, body fragment. M-K7.01 W. 0.044, L.: 0.079, Th.: ~0.032. Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, dark gray core, very many small-very large red, black inclusions, Mohs 2. Decoration: plastic: raised band? with stamped small squares on ext.

300. Pithos, body fragment. C2-602.12. L. 0.142, W. 0.015, Th. 0.025-9. Handmade. Fabric 5YR7/6, gray core, very many small-very large angular black, red inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR8/4. Decoration: raised band, ca. 5 cm high, with a zigzag line of imprinted squares.

308. Pithos, body fragment. M-I10.01. W. 0.092, L.: 0.078, Th.: 0.018. Fabric: 2.5YR6/4, very many small-large limestone, black, yellow inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: traces of slip on ext., 10YR8/2. Decoration: plastic: raised horizontal band. Raised band 23 mm high.

301. Pithos, body fragment. C2-602.08. L. 0.070, W. 0.111, Th. 0.012-13. Fabric 2.5YR6/8, gray core, quite many small-large black, limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 5YR6/4. Decoration: raised band (35 mm high) with imprinted rings.

309. Pithos, body fragment. M-H3.06. W. 0.090, L.: 0.064, Th.: 0.014. Fabric: 5YR7/6-8, very many small-large black, red, limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. slipped, 10YR8/3. Decoration: plastic: raised horizontal band. Raised band 20 mm high.

302. Pithos, body fragment. M-J9.03. W. 0.069, L.: 0.078, Th.: ~0.014. Fabric: 5YR6/4, many small-very large limestone, black, red, shiny greenish inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. has traces of slip, 5YR8/3. Decoration: plastic: raised band with imprints (finger?) in it. Raised band 37 mm high.

310. Pithos, body fragment. C2-602.15. W. 0.074, L.: 0.063, Th.: 0.020. Fabric: 2.5YR5/6, very many small-large angular limestone, black inclusions, Mohs 3,5. Surface: ext. slipped? Decoration: plastic: raised band with incisions of parallel oblique stripes in a feather pattern. Raised band 25-30 mm high.

303. Pithos, body fragment. C2-609.06. W. 0.069, L.: 0.066, Th.: ~0.020. Fabric: 7.5YR5/3, gray core, very many small-very large limestone, black, red inclusions, Mohs 4. Decoration: plastic: stamped circles.

171

311. Pithos, body fragment. C2-606.38 W. 0.086, L. 0.128, Th. 0.016-0.020. Fabric 5YR6/6, gray core, many small-large black, limestone, greenish inclusions, Mohs 4. Ext. slipped, 5YR6/4, plastic decoration: raised band, 14 mm high, with rope dec.

317. Pan? Bottom. M-F5.10. W. 0.060, L.: 0.058, Th.: 0.005 (bottom) – 0.012 (wall). Handmade. Fabric: 2.5YR6/6, gray core, quite some small-very large limestone inclusions, Mohs 4. Surface: ext. and int. slipped, 5YR7/6. 318. Tripod, leg. C2-605.79. W. 0.061, L.: 0.114, H.: 0.096. Fabric: 2.5YR5/67.5YR5/2, very many small-very large black, limestone, slate inclusions, Mohs 4.

312. Pointed amphora, bottom. M-E4.08. W. 0.039, L.: 0.043, H.: 0.016, Th.: 0.007-0.008. Fabric: 2.5YR5/4, very many small-med. angular black, red inclusions, Mohs 3. 313. Pointed amphora, bottom. M-G4.02. W. 0.034, L.: 0.042, H.: 0.024, Th.: 0.007-0.009. Fabric: 10YR5/1-2, some small-large limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Surface: ext. slipped?

319. Tripod, leg. C2-605.150. H.: 0.078, Diam.: 0.052 x 0.033 (end), 0.059 x 0.034 (where broken off). Fabric: 2.5YR6/4-7.5YR4/2, gray core, very many small-very large limestone, black, red inclusions, Mohs 3,5. Surface: ext. slipped, 7.5YR5/2.

314. Pan, profile. M-H6.01 W. 0.061, L.: 0.105, H.: 0.035, Th.: ~0.018 (bottom). Fabric: 7.5YR6/4, very many small-very large quartz, limestone inclusions, Mohs 4.

320. Brazier, handle. M-H4.11. W. 0.050, L.: 0.072, H.: 0.070, Diam.: 0.028 x 0.023 (handle). Fabric: 5YR6/4, gray core, quite some very small-med. mica, red, limestone inclusions, Mohs 4.

315. Pan, rim fragment. C2-601.02. W. 0.043, H.: 0.039, Th.: 0.011-0.017. Handmade. Fabric: 10YR6/4, many small-large limestone, black, red, gray inclusions, Mohs 3. Decoration: imprinted small squares forming N shape.

321. Basin, rim fragment. C2-605.153. W. 0.069, H.: 0.126, Th.: 0.023. Fabric: 7.5YR6/4, gray core, many small-large limestone, black, red, little quartz inclusions, Mohs 3.

316. Pan, bottom. M-M6.01 L.: 0.072, H.: 0.045, Th.: 0.011-0.015. Handmade. Fabric: 7.5YR7/6, many med. quartz, black, red, limestone inclusions, Mohs 3. Two firing holes.

172

Bibliography Adrimi-Sismani, V. 1996. “The Mycenaean town at Dimini: new data about ancient Iolkos,” Incunabula Graeca 98, 1295-1309 2006. “The palace of Iolkos and its end,” in: S. Deger-Jalkotzi and I.S. Lemos (eds.), Ancient Greece: from the Mycenaean palaces to the age of Homer, Edinburgh, 465-481

Åström, P. (ed.) 1987. High, middle or low? Parts I-II (SIMA pocketbooks 56, 57), Göteborg

Albini, P. and D. Pantosti. 2004. “The 20 and 27 April 1894 (Locris, Central Greece) earthquake sources through coeval records on macroseismic effects,” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 94, 1305-1326

Avila, R. 1983. “Das Kuppelgrab von Volos-Kapakli,” Prähistorische Zeitschrift 58, 15-60

Atherden, M., J. Hall and J.C. Wright. 1993. “A pollen diagram from the northeast Peloponnese, Greece. Implications for vegetation history and archaeology,” The Holocene 3, 351-356

Bächle, A.E. 2000. “Zur Chronologie der Anlage des Friedhofs von Elateia: Die früheste Keramik,” in: F. Blakolmer (ed.), Österreichische Forschungen zur Ägäischen Bronzezeit 1998. Akten der Tagung am Ιnstitute für Klassische Archäologie der Universität Wien 2.-3. Mai 1998, Vienna, 191-197

Alden, M.J. 1981. Bronze Age population fluctuations in the Argolid from the evidence of Mycenaean tombs, Göteborg Allen, H. 1990. “A postglacial record from the Kopais Basin, Greece,” in: S. Bottema, G. EntjesNieborg, and W. van Zeist, Man’s role in the shaping of the eastern Mediterranean landscape, Rotterdam, 173-82 1997. “The environmental conditions of the Kopais Basin, Boeotia during the post glacial with special reference to the Mycenaean period,” in: Bintliff (ed.) Recent developments in the history and archaeology of Central Greece. Proceedings of the 6th International Boeotian Conference (BAR Int. Series 666), Oxford, 3958

Bailey, G. (ed.) 1997. Klithi: Palaeolithic settlement and quaternary landscapes in northwest Greece, Vols. 1 and 2, Cambridge Baillie,

M.G.L. 1995. A slice through time: dendrochronology and precision dating, London 1998. “Evidence for climatic deterioration in the 12th and 17th centuries BC,” in B. Hänsel (ed.), Mensch und Umwelt in der Bronzezeit Europas, Kiel, 49-55

Balter, M. 2006. “New carbon dates support revised history of Ancient Mediterranean,” Science 312 (5773), 508-509

Alram-Stern, E. 1999. “The Mycenaean figurines of Elateia,” in: 

Bankoff, H.A. and F.A. Winter. 1984. “Northern intruders in LH IIIC Greece: a view from the north,” Journal of Indo-European Studies 12, 130

 , 215-222

Anastasiades, P.A. 1949. “General features of the soils of Greece,” Soil Science 67(5), 347-362

Bankoff, H.A., N. Meyer and M. Stefanovich. 1996. “Handmade Burnished Ware and the Late Bronze Age of the Balkans,” JMA 9, 193-209

Anderson, J.K. 1995. “The Geometric Catalogue of Ships,” in: J.B. Carter and S.P. Morris (eds.), The ages of Homer. A tribute to Emily Townsend Vermeule, Austin

Banning, E.B. 2002. Archaeological survey (Manuals in archaeological method, theory and technique), New York

Antonopoulos, J. 1992. “The tsunami of 426 BC in the Maliakos Gulf, eastern Greece,” Natural Hazards 5, 83-93

Barakari-Gleni, K. 1990. “ ,” AD 39(1984)A, Athens 1990, 171-204

Aravantinos, V.L., L. Godart and A. Sacconi. 2001. Thèbes: fouilles de la Cadmée I. Les tablettes en Linéaire B de la Odos Pelopidou, Edition et commentaire, Pisa & Rome

Basch, L. 1986. “The Aegina pirate ships of c. B.C. 1700,” Mariner's Mirror 72, 415-437

173

2006. Testing the hinterland: the work of the Boeotia Survey (1989-1991) in the southern approaches to the city of Thespiai, Cambridge

Baziou-Eustathiou, A. 1991. “ ,” AD 40(1985)A, Athens, 17-67 Bendall, L.M. 2004. “Fit for a king? Hierarchy, exclusion, aspiration and desire in the social structure of Mycenaean banqueting,” in: P. Halstead and J.C. Barrett (eds.), Food, cuisine and society in prehistoric Greece (SSAA), Oxford, 105-135

Bintliff, J., O. Dickinson, P. Howard and A. Snodgrass. 2000b. “Deconstructing „the sense of place‟? Settlement systems, field survey, and the historic record: a case study from Central Greece,” Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 66, 123-149

Bietak, M. 1998. “The Late Cypriot White Slip I Ware as an obstacle of the high Aegean chronology,” in M. S. Balmuth and R. H. Tykot (eds.), Sardinian and Aegean chronology: towards the resolution of relative and absolute dating in the Mediterranean, Oxford, 321-322 2003. “Science versus archaeology: problems and consequences of high Aegean chronology,” in M. Bietak (ed.), The synchronisation of civilisations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the second millennium B.C. II (Vienna 2003) 23-33

Blackburn, E.T. 1970. “Middle Helladic graves and burial customs with special reference to Lerna in the Argolid” (unpublished dissertation, University of Cincinnati) Blackman, D. 1996. “Archaeology in Greece 1996-97,” Archaeological Reports 43, 1-125 1998: “Archaeology in Greece 1998-1999,” Archaeological Reports 45, 1-124 2000: “Archaeology in Greece 2000-2001,” Archaeological Reports 47, 1-144 2001: “Archaeology in Greece 2001-2002,” Archaeological Reports 48, 1-115

Bietak, M. and I. Hein. 2000. “The context of White Slip Wares in the stratigraphy of Tell el-Dab‟a and some conclusions on Aegean chronology,” in V. Karageorghis (ed.), White Slip Ware, Nicosia, 171-194

Blackman, D., J. Baker and N. Hardwick. 1997. “Archaeology in Greece 1997-98,” Archaeological Reports 44, 1-136

Bintliff, J. 1977. Natural environment and human settlement in prehistoric Greece (BAR Int. Series 28), Oxford (ed.) 1997. Recent developments in the history and archaeology of Central Greece. Proceedings of the 6th International Boeotian Conference (BAR Int. Series 666), Oxford 2000. “Beyond dots on the map: future directions for surface artefact survey in Greece,” in: J. Bintliff, M. Kuna and N. Venclová (eds.), 2000: The future of surface artefact survey in Europe, Sheffield, 3-20 2006. “Issues in the economic and ecological understanding of the chora of the Classical polis in its social context: a view from the intensive survey tradition of the Greek homeland,” in: P. Guldager Bilde and V.F. Stolba (eds.), Surveying the Greek chora. The Black Sea region in a comparative perspective, Aarhus, 13-26 Bintliff,

Blackman, D., K. Branigan et al. 1977. “An archaeological survey of the lower catchment of the Ayiofarango Valley,” BSA 72, 17-84 Blegen, C.W. 1926. “The site of Opus,” AJA 30, 401-404 1949. “Hyria,” Hesperia, Suppl. 8, 39-42 Boardman, J. 1998. Early Greek vase painting, 11th-6th Centuries BC: A Handbook, London Boessneck, J. and A. von den Driesch. 1979. “Ein Löwenknochenfund aus Tiryns,” Archäologischer Anzeiger 1979, 447-449 1980. “Ein Beleg für das Vorkommen des Löwen auf der Peloponnes in “Herakleischer” Zeit,” Archäologischer Anzeiger 1980, 257-258 Bottema, S. 1974. Late Quaternary vegetation history of Northwestern Greece, Groningen 1979. “Pollen analytical investigations in Thessaly (Greece),” Palaeohistoria 21, 19-40 1982. “Palynological investigations in Greece with special reference to pollen as an indicator of human activity,” Palaeohistoria 24, 257-289 1990. “Holocene environment of the southern Argolid: a pollen core from Kiladha Bay,” in: T.J. Wilkinson and S.T. Duhon (eds.), Excavations at Franchthi Cave, fascicule 6, Bloomington, 117-138

J.L. and A.M. Snodgrass. 1985. “The Cambridge/Bradford Boeotian Expedition: the first four years,” JFA 12, 123-161

Bintliff, J., P. Howard and A. Snodgrass. 1999. “The hidden landscape of prehistoric Greece,” JMA 12 (2), 139-168 2000a. “Rejoinder,” JMA 13, 116-123

174

1994. “The prehistoric environment of Greece: a review of the palynological record,” in P.N. Kardulias (ed.), Beyond the site: regional studies in the Aegean area, Lanham, 45-68 Bottema, S. and Woldring, H. 1990. “Anthropogenic indicators in the pollen record of the Eastern Mediterranean,” in: S. Bottema, G. EntjesNieborg, and W. van Zeist, Man’s role in the shaping of the eastern Mediterranean Landscape, Rotterdam, 231-65

and change in a Greek rural landscape. Vol. II: archaeological data (BSA Suppl. 27), London 2002: The Laconia Survey. Continuity and change in a Greek rural landscape. Vol. I: Methodology and interpretation (BSA Suppl. 26), London Chadwick, J. 1976. The Mycenaean world, Cambridge Cherry, J.F. 1982. “A preliminary definition of site distribution on Melos,” in: C. Renfrew and M. Wagstaff (eds.), An island polity. The archaeology of exploitation in Melos, Cambridge, 10-23 1983. “Frogs round the pond: perspectives on current archaeological survey projects in the Mediterranean area,” in: D.R. Keller and D.W. Rupp (eds.), Archaeological survey in the Mediterranean area, Oxford, 375-416 1988. “Pastoralism and the role of animals in the preand protohistoric economies of the Aegean,” in: C.R. Whittaker (ed.), Pastoral economies in Classical antiquity (The Cambridge Philological Society Suppl. Vol. 14), Cambridge 1988, 6-34 1994. “Regional survey in the Aegean: the “New Wave” (and after),” in: P.N. Kardulias (ed.), Beyond the site: regional studies in the Aegean area, Lanham, New York, London, 91-112 2003. “Archaeology beyond the site: regional survey and its future,” in: J.K. Papadopoulos and R.M. Leventhal (eds.), Theory and practice in Mediterranean archaeology: Old World and New World perspectives, Los Angeles, 137-159

Boyd, M.J. 2002. Middle Helladic and Early Mycenaean mortuary practices in the southern and western Peloponnese (BAR Int. Series 1009), Oxford British Admiralty. 1847. Gulf of Volos with Oreos and Atalanti channels, British Admiralty Map 1556, scale 1:100.000, Survey of 1846-1847 Buck, R.J. 1964. “Middle Helladic Mattpainted Pottery,” Hesperia 33, 231-313 Buck, V. and I. Stewart. 2000. “A critical reappraisal of the classical texts and archaeological evidence for earthquakes in the Atalanti region, central mainland Greece,” Geological Society, London, Special Publications 171, 33-44 Carpenter, R. 1966. Discontinuity in Greek civilization, Princeton Catling, H.W. 1971. “Archaeology in Greece, 1971-72,” Archaeological Reports 18, 3-26 1980. “Archaeology in Greece, 1980-81,” Archaeological Reports 27, 3-48 1981. “Archaeology in Greece, 1981-82,” Archaeological Reports 28, 3-62 1982. “Archaeology in Greece, 1982-83,” Archaeological Reports 29, 3-62 1985. “Archaeology in Greece, 1985-86,” Archaeological Reports 32, 3-101 1987. “Archaeology in Greece, 1987-88,” Archaeological Reports 34, 3-85 1988. “Archaeology in Greece 1988-89,” Archaeological Reports 35 (1988 - 1989) 3-116

Cline, E. 1994. Sailing the wine dark sea (BAR Int. Series 591), Oxford Coleman, J.E. 1992. “Excavations at Halai, 1990-1991,” Hesperia 61, 265-289 Cundy, A.B., S. Kortekaas, T. Dewez, I.S. Stewart, P.E.F. Collins, I.W. Croudace, H. Maroukian, D. Papanastassiou, P. Gaki-Papanastassiou, K. Pavlopoulos and A. Dawson. 2000. “Coastal wetlands as recorders of earthquake subsidence in the Aegean: a case study of the 1894 Gulf of Atalanti earthquakes, central Greece,” Marine Geology 170, 3-26

Catling, R.W.V. and I.S. Lemos. 1990. Lefkandi II.1. The Protogeometric building at Toumba: the pottery (BSA Suppl. 22), London

Dabney, M.K., P. Halstead and P. Thomas. 2004. “Mycenaean feasting on Tsoungiza at ancient Nemea,” in: J.C. Wright (ed.), The Mycenaean feast, Princeton, 77-95

Cavanagh, W. and C. Mee. 1995. “Mourning before and after the Dark Age,” in: C. Morris (ed.), Klados. Essays in honour of J.N. Coldstream (BICS Suppl. 63), London 1998. A private place: death in prehistoric Greece (SIMA 125), Jonsered

D‟Agata, A.L. 1997. “Incense and perfumes in Late Bronze Age Aegean,” in: A. Avanzini (ed.), Profumi d’Arabia, Rome 1997, 85-99

Cavanagh, W., J. Crouwel, R.W.V. Catling and G. Shipley. 1996. The Laconia Survey. Continuity

Dakoronia, F. 1987. “War-ships on sherds of LH IIIC kraters from Kynos,” in: H. Tzalas (ed.), Tropis 175

II. 2nd International Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity, Delphi, 117-122 1991. “Earthquakes of the LH IIIC period at Kynos,” in: 

Deger-Jalkotzy, S. 1977. Fremde Zuwanderer im spätmykenischen Griechenland, Vienna 1983. “Das Problem der 'Handmade Burnished Ware' von Myk. IIIC,” in S. Deger-Jalkotzy (ed.), Griechenland, die Ägäis und die Levante während der 'Dark Ages' vom 12. bis zum 9.Jh. v. Chr. [Akten des Symposions von Stift Zwettl 11.-14. Oktober 1980], Vienna, 161-178

 

1992. “Mittelhelladische Gräber in Ost-Lokris,” Ath.Mitt. 102, 55-64 1993. “Homeric towns in East Lokris. Problems of identification,” Hesperia 62, 115-27 1996a. “Mycenaean East Lokris,” in: Atti e memorie del secondo congresso internazionale di micenologia 3, Rome, 1167-1173 1996b. “Kynos…fleet” [sic], in: H. Tzalas (ed.), Tropis IV. 4th International Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity, Center for the Acropolis Studies, Athens, 28, 29, 30, 31 August 1991. Proceedings, Athens, 159-171 1999. “Representations of sea-battles on Mycenaean sherds from Kynos,” in H. Tzalas (ed.), Tropis V: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity, Athens, 119-128 2002. in: Ministry of Culture: 14th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities:

Deger-Jalkotzi, S. and M. Zavadil (eds.) 2003. LH III C Chronology and Synchronisms. Proceedings of the International Workshop held at the Austrian Academy of Sciences at Vienna May 7th and 8th, 2001 Demakopoulou, K. (ed.) 1988. The Mycenaean world: five centuries of early Greek culture 1600-1100 BC, Athens 1990. “Palatial and domestic architecture in Mycenaean Thebes,” in: P. Darque and R. Treuill (eds.), L’Habitat Égéen préhistorique, 307-317 Desborough, V.R.d‟A. 1952. Protogeometric pottery, Oxford 1964. The last Mycenaeans and their successors: an archaeological survey c.1200-c.1000 BC., Oxford 1972. The Greek Dark Ages, London

     , Lamia

Dickie, M. 1995. “The geography of Homer‟s world,” in: Ø. Andersen and M. Dickie (eds.), Homer’s world: fiction, tradition, reality, Bergen, 29-56

2003. “The transition from LH III C to the Early Iron Age at Kynos,” in: S. Deger-Jalkotzi and M. Zavadil (eds.), LH III C Chronology and Synchronisms. Proceedings of the International Workshop held at the Austrian Academy of Sciences at Vienna May 7th and 8th, 2001, 37-51 n.y. “  ” in: F. Dakoronia, D. Kotoulas, E. Mpalta, V. Sythiakaki, and G. Tolias, “,” Athens, 17-112

Dickinson, O.T.P.K. 1974. “The definition of LH I,” BSA 69, 1974, 109-120 1977. The origins of Mycenaean civilisation (SIMA 49), Göteborg 1983. “Cist graves and chamber tombs,” BSA 78, 5567 1994. The Aegean Bronze Age, Cambridge 1999. “The Catalogue of Ships and all that,” in P.P. Betancourt, V. Karageorghis, R. Laffineur and W-D. Niemeier (eds), Meletemata (Aegeum 20), Liège, 207-10 2006. The Aegean from Bronze Age to Iron Age. Continuity and change between the twelfth and eighth centuries BC, London and New York

Davis, E. 1983. “The gold of the Shaft Graves: the Transylvanian connection,” Temple University Aegean Symposium 8, 32-38 Davis, J.L. 1979. “LH I pottery from Korakou,” Hesperia 48, 234-263

Dietz, S. 1991. The Argolid at the transition to the Mycenaean age. Studies in the chronology and cultural development in the Shaft Grave period, Copenhagen

Davis, J.L., S.E. Alcock, J. Bennett, Y.G. Lolos, and C.W. Shelmerdine. 1997. “The Pylos Regional Archaeological Project. Part 1: overview and the archaeological survey,” Hesperia 66, 391-494

Dimaki, S. (forthcoming) “ ,” in: 



Davison, C. 1894. “M. Papavasiliore on the Greek earthquakes of April 1894,” Nature 50, 607 176

   

Elaphebolos und des Apollon von Hyampolis 1978-1982,” AA, 1-99 Felsch, R.C.S. and H.J. Kienast. 1975. “Ein Heiligtum in Phokis,” AAA 8, 1-24



Drews, R. 1995. The end of the Bronze Age: changes in warfare and the Catastrophe ca. 1200 B.C., Princeton

Felsch, R.C.S., H.J. Kienast, and H. Schuler. 1980. “Apollon und Artemis oder Artemis und Apollon? Bericht von den Grabungen im neu entdeckten Heiligtum bei Kalapodi, 1973-1977,” AA 38-73

Eder, B. 1990. “The Dorian migration - religious consequences in the Argolid,” in: R. Hägg and G. Nordquist (eds.), Celebrations of death and divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid, Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 11-13 June 1988, Stockholm, 207-211 1997. “Dorische Wanderung,” in: Der Neue Pauly, Enzyklopädie der Antike, hrsg. v. H. Cancik und H. Schneider, Band 3: Cl-Epi, Stuttgart, 787-791 1998. Argolis, Lakonien und Messenien vom Ende der mykenischen Palastzeit bis zur Dorischen Einwanderung, Wien (Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Veröffentlichungen der Mykenischen Kommission Band 17)

Feuer, B. 1999. “The Mycenaean periphery: some theoretical and methodological considerations,” in: 

 , Lamia, 7-14

Finkelberg, M. 1999. “Greek epic tradition on population movements in Bronze Age Greece,” in: R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos. Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l'Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19), Liège/Austin, 31-36 Flemming, N.C. 1978. “Holocene eustatic changes and coastal tectonics in the northeast Mediterranean: implications for models of crustal consumption,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A289, 405-58

Effinger, M. 1996. Minoischer Schmuck (BAR Int. Series 646), Oxford Eiteljorg, H. 1980. “The fast wheel, the multiple-brush compass, and Athens as the home of the Protogeometric style," AJA, 84, 445-452

Flemming, N.C. and C.O. Webb. 1986. “Tectonic and eustatic coastal changes during the last 10,000 years derived from archaeological data,” ZfG n.s. supp. 62, 1-29

Evely, D. (ed.) 2006. Lefkandi IV: the Bronze Age. The Late Helladic IIIC settlement at Xeropolis (BSA Suppl. 39), London

Forbes, H. 1989. “Of grandfathers and grand theories: the hierarchised ordering of responses to hazard in a Greek rural community,” in: P. Halstead and J. O‟Shea (eds.), Bad year economics, Cambridge, 87-97

Fairbanks, R.G. 1989. “A 17,000-year-old glacio-eustatic sea level record: influence of glacial melting rates on the Younger Dryas event and deep ocean circulation,” Nature 342, 637-642 Felsch, R.C.S. 1981. “Mykenischer Kult im Heiligtum bei Kalapodi?” in: R. Hägg and N. Marinatos, Santuaries and cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, Stockholm, 81-90 1996. (ed.) Kalapodi. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen im Heiligtum der Artemis und des Apollon von Hyampolis in der antiken Phokis, Band I, Mainz 1999. “ in: 

 , Lamia, 163-170

Felsch, R.C.S. et al. 1987. “Kalapodi. Bericht über die Grabungen im Heiligtum der Artemis

177

Fossey, J.M. 1986. The ancient topography of eastern Phokis, Amsterdam 1988. Topography and population of ancient Boiotia, Chicago 1990a. The ancient topography of Opountian Lokris, Amsterdam 1990b. “Mycenaean fortifications of the north east Kopaïs, in: J.M. Fossey,” Papers in Boiotian topography and history, Amsterdam, 72-89 1997. “The Homeric description of Boiotia: Mykenaian or Archaic? Or both?” in: Bintliff (ed.) 1997. Recent developments in the history and archaeology of Central Greece. Proceedings of the 6th International Boeotian Conference (BAR Int. Series 666), Oxford, 139148

French, E.B. 1971. “The development of Mycenaean terracotta figurines,” BSA 66, 101-187 1989. “Archaeology in Greece 1989-90,” Archaeological Reports 36, 2-82 1990. “Archaeology in Greece 1990-91,” Archaeological Reports 37, 3-78 1992. “Archaeology in Greece, 1992-93,” Archaeological Reports 39, 3-81 1993. “Archaeology in Greece 1993-1994,” Archaeological Reports 40, 3-84 2002. Mycenae: Agamemnon's capital: the site and its setting, Stroud 2002

significance,” Journal Science 1, 177-194

of

Archaeological

Guidoboni, E., A. Comastri and G. Traina. 1994. Catalogue of ancient earthquakes in the Mediterranean area up to the 10th century, Rome Haas, J.C. 1998. Hellenistic Halai: an analysis of the historical sources, stratigraphy, and ceramics (unpubl. Master‟s thesis, Cornell University) Hafemann, D. 1960a. “Die Frage des eustatischen Meeresspiegelanstiegs in historischer Zeit, in: Verhandlungen des deutschen Geografentags,” Bd. 32, Berlin, 218-31 1960b. “Ansteig des Meeresspiegels in Geschichtlicher Zeit,” Die Umschau, Vol. 60, 193-6

Friedrich, W.L., B. Kromer, M. Friedrich, J. Heinemeier, T. Pfeiffer and S. Talamo. 2006. “Santorini eruption radiocarbon dated to 1627-1600 B.C.,” Science 312 (5773), 548 Furumark, A. 1941. Mycenaean pottery: analysis and classification, Stockholm 1944. “The Mycenaean LH IIIC pottery and its relation to Cypriote fabrics,” OpArch 3, 194-265

Haggis, D.C. 1996. “Archaeological survey at Kavousi, east Crete. preliminary report,” Hesperia 65, 373-432 1999. “Staple finance, peak sanctuaries, and economic complexity in late Prepalatial Crete,” in: A. Chaniotis (ed.), From Minoan farmers to Roman traders. Sidelights on the economy of ancient Crete, Stuttgart, 53-85

Ganas, A. and V.A. Buck. 1998. “A model for tectonic subsidence of the Allai archaeological site, Lokris, central Greece,” Bulletin of the Geological Society of Greece 32, 181-7 Ganas, A., G.P. Roberts and T. Memou. 1998. “Segment boundaries, the 1894 ruptures and strain patterns along the Atalanti Fault, central Greece,” Journal of Geodynamics 26, 461-486

Hall, J.M. 1997. Ethnic identity in Greek antiquity, Cambridge Halstead, P. 1981a. “Counting sheep in Neolithic and Bronze Age Greece,” in: I. Hodder, G. Isaac and N. Hammond (eds.), Pattern of the past: Studies in honor of David Clarke, Cambridge, 307-339 1981b. “From determinism to uncertainty: social storage and the rise of the Minoan palace,” in: A. Sheridan and G. Bailey (eds.), Economic Archaeology, Oxford, 187-213 1987. “Man and other animals in later Greek prehistory,” BSA 82, 71-83 1989. “The economy has a normal surplus: economic stability and social change among early farming communities of Thessaly, Greece,” in: P. Halstead and J. O‟Shea, Bad year economics. Cultural responses to risk and uncertainty, Cambridge, 68-80 1992a. “Agriculture in the Bronze Age Aegean: towards a model of palatial economy,” in: B. Wells (ed.), Agriculture in Ancient Greece. Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 16-17 May, 1990, Stockholm, 105-116 1992b. “The Mycenaean palatial economy: making the most of the gaps in the evidence,” Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 38, 57-86

Ganas, A., E. Sokos, A. Agalos, G. Leontakianakos and S. Pavlides. 2006. “Coulomb stress triggering of earthquakes along the Atalanti Fault, central Greece: Two April 1894 M6+ events and stress change patterns,” Tectonophysics 420, 357–369 Gerasimidis, A. 2000. “Palynological evidence for human influence on the vegetation of mountainous regions in northern Greece: the case of Lailias, Serres,” in P. Halstead and C. Frederick (eds.), Landscape and land use in postglacial Greece (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 3), Sheffield, 128-37 Girard, P. 1881. “De Locris Opuntiis” (unpublished dissertation), Paris Godart, L. 1990. “La caduta dei regni micenei a Creta e l'invasione dorica,” in D. Musti (ed.), Le Origine dei Greci: Dori e mondo egeo, Rome, 173-200 Goldman, H. 1931. Excavations at Eutresis in Boeotia, Cambridge (Mass.) Greig, R.A. and J. Turner. 1974. “Some pollen diagrams from Greece and their archaeological 178

1994. “The north-south divide: regional paths to complexity in prehistoric Greece,” in: C. Mathers and S. Stoddart (eds.), Development and decline in the Mediterranean Bronze Age (Sheffield Archaeological Monographs 8), Sheffield 1996. “Pastoralism or household herding? Problems of scale and specialization in early Greek animal husbandry,” World Archaeology 28, 20-42 2001. “Mycenaean wheat, flax and sheep: palatial intervention in farming and its implications for rural society,” in S. Voutsaki and J. T. Killen (eds), Economy and politics in the Mycenaean palace states (The Cambridge Philological Society Suppl. Vol. 27), 38-50.

1981. Mycenaean Greece, Park Ridge, NJ Hope Simpson, R. and O.T.P.K. Dickinson. 1979. A gazetteer of Aegean civilisation in the Bronze Age, vol. I: the mainland and islands, Göteborg Hope Simpson, R. and D.K. Hagel. 2006. Mycenaean fortifications, highways, dams and canals (SIMA 133), Sävedalen Hope Simpson, R. and J.F. Lazenby. 1970. The Catalogue of the Ships in Homer’s Iliad, Oxford Hughes, M.K., P.I. Kuniholm, J.K. Eischeid, G. Garfin, C.B. Griggs and C. Latini. 2001. “Aegean treering signatures explained,” Tree-Ring Research 57, 67-73

Halstead, P. and C. Frederick (eds.) 2000. Landscape and land use in postglacial Greece (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 3), Sheffield

Hughes-Brock, H. 1985. “Amber and the Mycenaeans,” Journal of Baltic Studies 16, 257-267

Halstead, P. and V. Isaakidou. 2004. “Faunal evidence for feasting: burnt offerings from the Palace of Nestor at Pylos, in: P. Halstead and J.C. Barrett (eds.), Food, cuisine and society in prehistoric Greece (SSAA), Oxford, 136-154

Hurwit, J.M. 1985. The art and culture of early Greece, 1100-480 B.C., Ithaca Iakovidis, S. 1969-1970.  (vols. 1-3), Athens n.y. “Excavations of the necropolis at Perati” (Occasional Paper 8, Institute of Archaeology, University of California), Los Angeles (summary of the 3 vols. in Greek, Athens 1969-1970) 1977. “On the use of Mycenaean “buttons,”” BSA 72, 113-119 1983. Late Helladic citadels on mainland Greece, Leiden 1989. , Athens 1998. , Athens 2001. Gla and the Kopais in the 13th century B.C., Athens

Hamilakis, Y. and E. Konsolaki. 2004. “Pigs for the gods: burnt animal scarifices as embodied rituals at a Mycenaean sanctuary,” OJA 23, 135-151 Hammond, N.G.L. 1931-32. “Prehistoric Epirus and the Dorian invasion,” BSA 32, 131-179 Hansen, J.M. 1988. “Agriculture in the prehistoric Aegean: data versus speculation,” AJA 92, 39-52 Harding, A. and H. Hughes-Brock. 1974. “Amber in the Mycenaean world,” BSA 69, 145-172

Iezzi, C.A. 2003a. “Health, disease, environment, and family: the Mycenaeans of Central Greece,” paper presented at the 104th Annual Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America, New Orleans. Abstract published in AIA‟s Abstracts, volume 26 2003b. “Mycenaean mega-bones: a study of excessively thick cortical bone from Late Bronze Age Central Greece,” American Journal of Physical Anthropology 120, suppl. 36, 120 (abstract) 2005a. Regional differences in the health status of late Bronze Age Mycenaean populations from East Lokris, Greece (unpublished dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo) 2005b. “The Mycenaean women of Central Greece,” paper presented at the 2005 Annual Meeting of the American Philological Association, Boston. Abstract available at http://www.apaclassics. org/AnnualMeeting/05mtg/abstracts/Iezzi.html

Hardy, D.A. and A.C. Renfrew (eds.) 1990. Thera and the Aegean World III. Volume 3, chronology (Proceedings of the Third International Congress, Santorini, Greece, 3-9 September 1989), London Heurtley, W.A. 1923-1925. “Notes on the harbours of S. Boeotia, and sea-trade between Boeotia and Corinth in prehistoric times,” BSA 26, 38-45 1926-27: “A prehistoric site in western Macedonia and the Dorian invasion,” BSA 28, 158-194 Higgins, M.D. and R. Higgins. 1996. A geological companion to Greece and the Aegean, Ithaca Hood, S. 1978. The arts in prehistoric Greece, New Haven Hope Simpson, R. 1965. A gazetteer and atlas of Mycenaean sites, London 179

Immerwahr, S.A. 1966. “The use of tin on Mycenaean vases,” Hesperia 35, 381-396

Kanta, A. 1980. The Late Minoan III period in Crete. A survey of sites, pottery, and their distribution (SIMA 58), Goteborg

Institute of Geology and Mineral Exploration, Division of General Geology and Economic Geology. 1983. Geological map of Greece (1:500.000), Athens

Kardulias, P.N. 1999. “Flaked stone and the role of the palaces in the Mycenaean world system,” in: M.L. Galaty and W.A. Parkinson (eds.), Rethinking Mycenaean palaces. New Interpretations of an old idea, Los Angeles, 6171

Jacob-Felsch, M. 1987. “Bericht zur spätmykenischen und submykenischen Keramik,” in: Felsch, R.C.S. et al. 1987: “Kalapodi. Bericht über die Grabungen im Heiligtum der Artemis Elaphebolos und des Apollon von Hyampolis 1978-1982,” AA, 26-35 1988. “Compass-drawn concentric circles in vase painting. A problem of relative chronology at the end of the Bronze Age,” in: E.B. French and K.A. Wardle (eds.), Problems in Greek prehistory. Papers presented at the Centenary Conference of the British School of Archaeology at Athens, Manchester April 1986, 193-199, Bristol 1996. “Die spätmykenische bis frühprotogeometrische Keramik,” in: Felsch, R.C.S. (ed.), Kalapodi. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen im Heiligtum der Artemis und des Apollon von Hyampolis in der antiken Phokis, Band I, Mainz, 1-213 1999. “  ,” in: 

Katsonopoulou, D. 1990. “Studies of the eastern cities of Opuntian Lokris: Halai, Kyrtones, Korseia, Bumelitaia” (unpublished dissertation, Cornell University) Kearsley, R. 1989. The pendent semi-circle skyphos. A study of its development and chronology and an examination of it as evidence for Euboean activity at Al Mina (BICS 44), London Keenan, D.J. 2002. “Why early-historical radiocarbon dates downwind from the Mediterranean are too early,” Radiocarbon 44, 225-237 Keller, D.R. and D.W. Rupp (eds.) 1983. Archaeological survey in the Mediterranean (BAR Int. Series 155), Oxford

 , Lamia, 157-161

Kenny, E.J.A. 1935. “The ancient drainage of the Copais,” Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 22, 189-206 Kiel, M. and F. Sauerwein. 1994. Ost-Lokris in türkischer und neugriechischer Zeit (1460-1981): Persistenz und Zäsuren in der Siedlungsentwicklung und demographischen Geschichte Mittel-Griechenlands auf Grund osmanisch-türkischer und neugriechischer administrativer Quellen, Passauer Mittelmeerstudien 6, Passau

Jalkotzi, S. and Ph. Dakoronia. 1992. “Elateia, die antike Phokis und das Ausklingen der mykenischen Kultur in Mittelgriechenland,” Archäologie Österreichs 3, 67-71 Jameson, M.H., C.N. Runnels and T.H. van Andel. 1994. A Greek countryside: the southern Argolid from prehistory to the present day, Stanford

Kilian, K. 1978. “Nordwestgriechische Keramik aus der Argolis und ihre Entsprechungen in der Supappeninfacies,” Atti della XX riunione scientifica dell'Istituto italiano di preistoria e protostoria in Basilicata, 1976, Florence, 311320

Jansen, A.G. 2002. A study of the remains of Mycenaean roads and stations of Bronze-Age Greece, Lewiston Jones, G.M. 1995. “Charred grain from Late Bronze Age Gla, Boiotia,” BSA 90, 235-238

Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. 1997. Alt-Ägina IV,3: Das mittelbronzezeitliche Schachtgrab von Ägina, Mainz

Jones, R.E. 1986. Greek and Cypriot pottery. A review of scientific studies, Athens 1996. “Appendix: chemical analysis of Mycenaean and Submycenaean pottery from Kalapodi,” in: R.C.S. Felsch (ed.), Kalapodi. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen im Heiligtum der Artemis und des Apollon von Hyampolis in der antiken Phokis, Band I, Mainz, 115-120

Killen, J.T. 1985. “The Linear B tablets and the Mycenaean economy,” in: A. Morpurgo-Davies and Y. Duhoux (eds.), Linear B: A 1984 survey, 241-305

180

 

Kitchen, K.A. 1987. “The basics of Egyptian chronology in relation to the Bronze Age,” in: P. Åström (ed.), High, middle or low? Parts I-II (SIMA pocketbooks 56, 57), Göteborg, 37-55

forthcoming(b) “ 

  

Konstantinidi, E.M. 2001. Jewellery revealed in the burial contexts of the Greek Bronze Age (BAR Int. Series 912), Oxford

forthcoming(c) “ ,” in: 

Kraft, J.C., G.R. Rapp and S.E. Aschenbrenner. 1980. “Late Holocene paleogeomorphic reconstructions in the area of the Bay of Navarino: Sandy Pylos,” Journal of Archaeological Science 7, 187-210



 Lambeck, K. 1995. “Late Pleistocene and Holocene sealevel changes in Greece and south-western Turkey: a separation of eustatic, isostatic and tectonic contributions,” Geophysical J. International 122, 1022-1044. 1996. “Sea-level change and shore-line evolution in Aegean Greece since Upper Palaeolithic time,” Antiquity 70, 588-611

Kramer-Hajos, M. 2002. “Bronze Age Mitrou in East Lokris, Greece”, AJA 106, 278 (abstract) 2005a. “Mycenaean East Lokris” (unpublished dissertation, Cornell University) 2005b. “Mycenaean East Lokris” (paper delivered at the AIA Annual Meeting in Boston, 2005; abstract available in AIA‟s online abstract Archive at www.archaeological.org) 2006. “A man from Halai? Problems with a-ra-o in the Theban Linear B tablets,” Kadmos 45, 85-92

Leake, W.M. 1835. Travels in northern Greece II, London Lemos, I.S. 1998. “Euboea and its Aegean koine,” in: M. Bats and B. d‟Agostino (eds.), Euboica. L’Eubea e la presenza euboica in Calcidica e in Occidente, Napoli, 45-58 1999. “Some aspects of the transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age in Central Greece,” in: 

Kramer-Hajos, M. and K.N. O‟Neill. Forthcoming. “The Bronze Age site of Mitrou in East Lokris: finds from the 1988-1989 surface survey,” Hesperia 77(2) 2008

 , Lamia, 21-26

Kroll,

H. 1982. “Kulturpflanzen von Tiryns,” Archäologischer Anzeiger, 467-485 1983. Kastanas, Ausgrabungen in einen Siedlungshügel der Bronze- und Eisenzeit Makedoniens 1975-1979: die Pflanzen-funde, Berlin

2002. The Protogeometric Aegean: the archaeology of the late eleventh and tenth centuries BC, Oxford Lewartowski, K. 2000. Late Helladic simple graves: a study of Mycenaean burial customs (BAR Int. Series 878), Oxford

Kuniholm, P.I., B. Kromer, S.W. Manning, M. Newton, C.E. Latini and M.J. Bruce. 1996. “Anatolian tree rings and the absolute chronology of the eastern Mediterranean, 2220-718 B.C.,” Nature 381, 780-783

Loader, N.C. 1998. Building in Cyclopean masonry, with special reference to the Mycenaean fortifications on mainland Greece (SIMA Pocket-book 148), Jonsered

Kuniholm, P.I., M.W. Newton, C.B. Griggs and P.J. Sullivan. 2005. “Dendrochronological dating in Anatolia: the second millennium BC,” Der Anschnitt 18, 41-47

Lolling, H.G. 1876. “Die Insel Atalante bei Opus,” Ath.Mitt. 1, 253-255 Manning, S.W. 1995. The absolute chronology of the Aegean Early Bronze Age: archaeology, history and radiocarbon, Sheffield 1999. A test of time: the volcano of Thera and the chronology and history of the Aegean and east Mediterranean in the mid second millennium B.C., Oxford 2007. “Clarifying the “high” v. “low” Aegean/Cypriot chronology for the mid second millennium BC: assessing the evidence,

Kyriazi, O. 2002. “The first stages of the Mycenaean period in the region of Phthiotis,” 8th EAA Annual Meeting, 24-29 September 2002, Thessaloniki (abstracts book) forthcoming(a) “  

 

181

interpretive frameworks, and current state of the debate,” in: M. Bietak and E. Czerny, The synchronisation of civilisations in the eastern Mediterranean in the second millennium B.C. III. Proceedings of the SCIEM 2000 - 2nd EuroConference, Vienna 28th of May - 1st of June 2003, 101-137

Milojcic, V. 1948-49. “Die dorische Wanderung im Lichte der vorgeschichtlichen Funde,” AA, 1236 Ministry of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1983. Soil map of Greece: land resource map, 1:50.000, Athens Mitsopoulos, K. 1894. Die Erdbeben von Theben und Lokris in der Jahren 1893 und 1894, Abdruck aus Dr. A. Petermanns Geogr. Mitteilungen 10, 1-11 1895. The Mega-earthquake of Lokris in April 1894, Athens

Manning, S.W., C. Bronk Ramsey, W. Kutschera, T. Higham, B. Kromer, P. Steier and E.M. Wild. 2006. “Chronology for the Aegean Late Bronze Age 1700-1400 B.C.,” Science 312 (5773), 565569 Maran, J. 1992. Die deutschen Ausgrabungen auf der Pevkakia-Magula in Thessalien III, Die Mittlere Bronzezeit Teil I, Bonn 1992

Mountjoy, P.A. 1983a. “The Ephyraean goblet reviewed,” BSA 78, 265-271 1983b. Orchomenos V. Mycenaean pottery from Orchomenos, Eutresis and other Boeotian sites (Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 89), München 1986. Mycenaean decorated pottery: a guide to identification (SIMA 73), Göteborg 1988. “LH IIIC Late versus Submycenaean: the Kerameikos Pompeion cemetery reviewed,” JdI 103, 1-33 1993. Mycenaean pottery: an introduction, Oxford 1999. Regional Mycenaean decorated pottery, Rahden (2. vols.) 2005. “Mycenaean connections with the Near East in LH IIIC: ships and Sea Peoples,” in R. Laffineur and E. Greco (eds.), EMPORIA. Aegeans in the Central and Eastern Mediterranean (Aegaeum 25), Liège/Austin, 423-427

Marinatos, N. 2000. The goddess and the warrior. The naked goddess and Mistress of Animals in early Greek religion, London and New York Mazarakis Ainian, A. 1997. From rulers´ dwellings to temples: architecture, religion and society in Early Iron Age Greece (1100-700 B.C.) (SIMA 121), Jonsered McDonald, W.A. and G.R. Rapp. 1972. The Minnesota Messenia Expedition: reconstructing a Bronze Age regional environment, Minneapolis 1972 McDonald, W.A., G.R. Rapp and S.E. Aschenbrenner. 1992. Excavations at Nichoria in southwest Greece, vol. II: the Bronze Age occupation, Minneapolis

Muhly, J.D. 1985. “Sources of tin and the beginnings of bronze metallurgy,” AJA 89, 275-291

McDonald, W.A., W.D.E. Coulson and J. Rosser (eds.) 1983. Excavations at Nichoria in southwest Greece, vol. III: Dark Age and Byzantine occupation, Minneapolis

Murray, W. 1990. The “tou Pethamenou” quarries and ancient sea level. Preliminary report (unpublished) (n.y.) East Lokris survey project: recent investigations at ancient Halai (unpublished)

McGeehan Liritzis, V. 1996. The role and development of metallurgy in the late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age of Greece, Jonsered

Musgrave, J.H. and M. Popham. 1991. “The Late Helladic IIIC intramural burials at Lefkandi, Euboea,” BSA 86, 273-291

McInerney, J. 1999. The folds of Parnassos. Land and ethnicity in ancient Phokis, Austin

Naval Intelligence. 1945. Geographical handbook series, Greece, vol. III, regional geography

Mee, C.B. and W.G. Cavanagh. 1984. “Mycenaean tombs as evidence for social and political organisation,” Oxford Journal of Archaeology 3, 45-64 1990. “The spatial distribution of Mycenaean tombs,” BSA 85, 225-243

Nikolaou, E. 1999. “ „intra muros‟  ” in: 

 ,

Military Information Division, Adjudant General‟s Office, War Department. 1897. Map of the kingdom of Greece (1:300.000), sheet no. 2

Lamia, 153-156

182

Nilsson, M.P. 1967. Geschichte der griechischen Religion 1: Die Religion Griechenlands bis auf die griechische Weltherrschaft (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft V.2.1), München

Papavassiliou, A. 1894a. “Sur le tremblement de terre de Locride (Grèce) du mois d‟avril 1894,” Comptes Rendus Acad. Sci. Paris 19, 112-4 1894b. “Sur la nature de la grande crevasse produite à la suite du dernier tremblement de terre de Locride,” Comptes Rendus Acad. Sci. Paris 19, 380-1

Oldfather, W.A. 1908. “Lokrika. Sagengeschichtliche Untersuchungen,” Philologus 67, 411-472 1916a. “Studies in the history and topography of Lokris,” AJA 20, 32-61 1916b. “Studies in the history and topography of Lokris,” AJA 20, 154-172 1925. RE 12, s.v. “Kynos,” 29-33 1926. RE 13.1, Halbband 25, s.v. “Lokris,” 11351288

Parkinson, W. A. 1999. “Chipping away at a Mycenaean economy: obsidian exchange, Linear B, and palatial control in Late Bronze Age Messenia,” in M. L. Galaty and W. A. Parkinson (eds.), Rethinking Mycenaean palaces: new interpretations of an old idea, Los Angeles, 7385

Onassoglou, A. 1989a. “Nouveaux cachets mycéniens,” PACT 23 (Technology and Analysis of Ancient Gemstones, Ravello, European University Centre for Cultural Heritage, November 13-16, 1987), 125-45 1989b. “ ,” AD 36(1981)A, Athens, 1-57

Payne, S. 1985. “Zoo-archaeology in Greece: a reader‟s guide,” in: N.C. Wilkie and W.D.E. Coulson (eds.), Contributions to Aegean archaeology: studies in honor of William A. McDonald, Minneapolis, 212-244 Pearce, N.J.G., J. Westgate, S. Preece, W. Eastwood and W. Perkins. 2004. “Identification of Aniakchak (Alaska) tephra in Greenland ice core challenges the 1645 B.C. date for Minoan eruption of Santorini,” Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems 5:3

Page, D.L. 1959. History and the Homeric Iliad, Berkely and Los Angeles Palaima, Th.G. 2004. “Sacrificial feasting in the Linear B documents,” in: J.C. Wright (ed.), The Mycenaean feast, Princeton, 87-126

Pendlebury, J.D.S., H.W. Pendlebury and M.B. MoneyCoutts. 1938. “Excavations in the plain of Lasithi III: Karphi: a city of refuge of the Early Iron Age of Crete,” BSA 38, 57-145

Pantosti, D., P.M. De Martini, D. Papanastassiou, N. Palyvos, F. Lemeille and G. Stavrakakis. 2001. “A reappraisal of the 1894 Atalanti earthquake surface ruptures, central Greece,” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 91 (4), 760780

Philippson, A. 1894. “Das dies jahrige Erdbeben in Lokris,” Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft für Erdkunde zu Berlin 21, 332-4 1951. Die griechischen Landschaften: eine Landeskunde, Band I: Der Nordosten der griechischen Halbinsel, Teil II: das östliche Mittelgriechenland und die Insel Euboea, Frankfurt 1951, 329-362

Papadimitriou, N. 2001. Built chamber tombs of Middle and Late Bronze Age date in mainland Greece and the islands (BAR Int. Series 925), Oxford Papakonstantinou, M.-Ph. 1996. “Early Mycenaean tumuli at Glypha in Phthiotis (ancient Antron),” BICS 41, 137-138 1999a. “ ,” in: 

Pirazzoli, P.A., S.C. Stiros, M. Arnold, J. Laborel and F. Laborel-Deguen. 1999. “Late Holocene coseismic vertical displacements and tsunami deposits near Kynos, Gulf of Euboea, central Greece,” Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 24, 361-367

 ,

Lamia, 171-180 1999b. “The grave circle B of Antron. Preliminary report,” in: Meletemata, Studies in Aegean Archaeology presented to Malcolm H. Wiener as he enters his 65th year (Aegaeum 20), Liege, 626-631

Popham, M.R., P.G. Calligas and L.H. Sackett. 1993. Lefkandi II.2. The Protogeometric building at Toumba: the excavation, architecture and finds, BSA Suppl. 23, London Popham, M.R. and I.S. Lemos. 1996. Lefkandi III: the Toumba cemetery. The excavations of 1981, 1984, 1986 and 1992-4, BSA Suppl. 29, London

183

Popham, M.R. and E. Milburn. 1971. “Late Helladic IIIC pottery of Xeropolis (Lefkandi), a summary,” BSA 66, 333-352

Renfrew, C. and M. Wagstaff. 1982. An island polity. The archaeology of exploitation in Melos, Cambridge

Popham, M.R. and L.H. Sackett (eds.) 1968. Excavations at Lefkandi, Euboea 1964-66. A preliminary report, London

Romey, K. 2003. “The Vogelbarke of Medinet Habu” (unpublished MA thesis, Texas A&M University)

Popham, M.R., L.H. Sackett and P.G. Themelis. 1980. Lefkandi I: the Iron Age. BSA Suppl. 11, London

Runnels, C. and J. Hansen. 1986. “The olive in the prehistoric Aegean: the evidence for domestication in the Early Bronze Age,” Oxford Journal of Archaeology 5, 299-308

Preziosi, D. and L.A. Hitchcock. 1999. Aegean art and architecture, Oxford

Runnels, C., D.J. Pullen and S. Langdon (eds.) 1995. Artifact and assemblage. The finds from a regional survey of the southern Argolid, Greece, vol. I: the prehistoric and Early Iron Age pottery and the lithic artifacts, Stanford

Price, S., T. Higham, L. Nixon and J. Moody. 2002. “Relative sea-level changes in Crete: Reassessment of radiocarbon dates from Sphakia and West Crete,” BSA 97, 171-200 Pritchett, W. Kendrick. 1965. Studies in Ancient Greek topography part I (Classical Studies Vol. 1), Berkeley 1980. “Ancient Greek roads,” in: Studies in ancient Greek topography part III (roads) (Classical Studies Vol. 22), Berkeley etc., 143-96 1982. “Passes from Thermopylai to Elateia,” in: Studies in ancient Greek topography part IV (passes) (Classical Studies Vol. 28), Berkeley etc., 123-175 1985. “East Lokris revisited,” in: Studies in ancient Greek topography part V (Classical Studies Vol. 31), Berkeley etc., 166-89 1989. “The upper Larymna road,” in: Studies in ancient Greek topography part VI (Classical Studies Vol. 33), Berkeley etc., 114-5

Rutter, J.B. 1975. “Ceramic evidence for northern intruders in southern Greece at the beginning of the Late Helladic IIIC period,” AJA 79, 17-32 1976. “"Non-Mycenaean" pottery: a reply to Gisela Walberg,” AJA 80, 187-188 1977. “Late Helladic IIIC pottery and some historical implications,” in E. Davis (ed.), Symposium on the Dark Ages in Greece, New York, 1-20 1978. “A plea for the abandonment of the term „Submycenaean‟,” Temple University Aegean Symposium 3, 58-65 1983. “Some thoughts on the analysis of ceramic data generated by site surveys,” in: Keller and Rupp (eds.) Archaeological survey in the Mediterranean (BAR Int. Series 155), Oxford, 137-142 1990. “Some comments on interpreting the darksurfaced Handmade Burnished Pottery of the 13th and 12th century Aegean,” JMA 3, 29-49 1993. “A group of Late Helladic IIA pottery from Tsoungiza,” Hesperia 62, 53-93 2003. “The nature and potential significance of Minoan features in the earliest Late Helladic IIIC ceramic assemblages of the central and southern Greek mainland,” in S. Deger-Jalkotzy and M. Zavadil (eds.), LH IIIC chronology and synchronisms, Vienna, 193-216 Forthcoming. “How different is LH III C Middle at Mitrou? An initial comparison with Kalapody, Kynos, and Lefkandi,” in: in S. Deger-Jalkotzy and M. Zavadil (eds.), LH IIIC chronology and synchronisms II: LH IIIC Middle (29-30 October, 2004), Vienna

Pullen, D.J. 1992. “Ox and plough in the Early Bronze Age Aegean,” AJA 96, 45-54 Rackham, O. 1982. “Land use and the native vegetation of Greece,” in: M. Bell and S. Limbrey (eds.), Archaeological aspects of woodland ecology, 177-98, Oxford (BAR S146) 1983. “Observations on the historical ecology of Boeotia,” BSA 78, 291-351 Rapp, G.R Jr. and S.E. Aschenbrenner (eds.) 1978. Excavations at Nichoria in southwest Greece, Vol. I: site, environs, and techniques, Minneapolis Renfrew, C. 1972. The emergence of civilisation: the Cyclades and the Aegean in the third millennium BC, London 1996. “Kings, tree rings and the Old World,” Nature 381, 733-734

Sackett, L.H., V. Hankey, R.J. Howell, T.W. Jacobsen and M.R. Popham. 1966. “Prehistoric Euboea: contributions toward a survey,” BSA 61, 33-112

Renfrew, C. and P. Bahn. 32000. Archaeology. Theories methods and practice, New York 184

Sarpaki, A. 1990. “Small fields or big fields? That is the question,” in: Thera and the Aegean World III, 422-431 1992. “The palaeoethnobotanical approach. The Mediterranean triad or is it a quartet?” in: B. Wells, Agriculture in Ancient Greece. Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 16-17 May, 1990, Stockholm, 61-76

Smith, H. and G. Jones. 1990. “Experiments on the effects of charring on cultivated grape seeds,” Journal of Archaeological Science 17, 317-327 Snodgrass, A.M. 22000. The Dark Age of Greece. An archaeological survey of the eleventh to the eighth centuries BC, New York Soles, J.S. and C. Davaras. 1990. “Theran ash in Minoan Crete: new excavations on Mochlos,” in: D.A. Hardy and A.C. Renfrew (eds.), Thera and the Aegean World III. Volume 3, chronology (Proceedings of the Third International Congress, Santorini, Greece, 3-9 September 1989), London, 89-95

Schachermeyr, F. 1976a. Die ägäische Frühzeit. Forschungsbericht über die Ausgrabungen im letzten Jahrzehnt und über ihre Ergebnisse für unser Geschichtsbild, 1. Band: Die vormykenischen Perioden des griechischen Festlandes und der Kykladen, Vienna (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Sitzungsberichte 303. Band) 1976b. Die ägäische Frühzeit. Forschungsbericht über die Ausgrabungen im letzten Jahrzehnt und über ihre Ergebnisse für unser Geschichtsbild, 2. Band: Die mykenische Zeit und die Gesittung von Thera, Vienna (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Sitzungsberichte 309. Band) 1980. Die ägäische Frühzeit. SB, IV, Vienna 1983. Die griechische Rückerinnerung im Lichte neuer Forschungen, Vienna (Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Sitzungsberichte 404. Band)

Soter, S., V. Murphy, D. Katsonopoulou and R.D. Reeves. Forthcoming. “Magnetometer survey on the island of Mitrou, Euboean Gulf, Greece,” Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Ancient Helike and Aigialeia: Archaeological Sites in Geologically Active Regions. Nikolaiika Diakoptou, Greece. 6-9 October 2000 Stanzel, M. 1991. Die Tierreste aus dem Artemis/Apollon-Heiligtum bei Kalapodi in Böotien/Griechenland, Munich Stieglitz, R.R. 1979. “Commodity prices at Ugarit,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 99, 15-23 1994. “The Minoan origin of Tyrian purple,” The Biblical Archaeologist 57, 46-54

Shelmerdine, C.W. 1985. The perfume industry of Mycenaean Pylos (SIMA Pocket-book 34), Göteborg 1997. “Review of Aegean prehistory VI: the palatial Bronze Age of the southern and central Greek mainland,” AJA 101, 537-585

Stiros, S.C. and F. Dakoronia. 1989. “Rulo storico e identificazione di antichi terremoti nei siti della Grecia,” in: E. Guidoboni (ed.), I terremoti prima del Mille in Italia e nell’ area mediterranea, SGA Storia-Geofisica-Ambiente, Bologna, 422-38

Sipsie-Eschbach, M. 1998. “Ein aussergewöhnlicher Krater aus Iolkos,” AD 48 (1992) A, Athens, 308-311 Sjöberg, B.L. 2004. Asine and the Argolid in the Late Helladic III period. A socio-economic study (BAR Int. Series 1225), Oxford

Stocker, S.R. and J.L. Davis. 2004. “Animal sacrifice, archives, and feasting at the Palace of Nestor,” in: J.C. Wright (ed.), The Mycenaean feast, Princeton, 59-75

Skouphos, T. 1894. “Die zwei grossen Erdbeben in Lokris am 8/20 und 15/27 April 1894,” Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft für Erdkunde zu Berlin 24, 409-74

Symeonoglou, S. 1973. Kadmeia I: Mycenaean finds from Thebes, Greece. Excavation at 14 Oedipus St. (SIMA 35), Göteborg 1985. The topography of Thebes from the Bronze Age to modern times, Princeton

Small, D.B. 1990. “Handmade Burnished Ware and prehistoric Aegean economies: an argument for indigenous appearance,” JMA 3, 3-25 1997. “Can we move forward? Comments on the current debate over Handmade Burnished Ware,” JMA 10, 223-228

Taylor,

R.E. 1987. Radiocarbon dating. archaeological perspective, Orlando

Taylour, Lord W. 21983. The Mycenaeans, London

185

An

Thomas, N.R. 1999. “The war animal: three days in the life of the Mycenaean lion,” in: R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos. Le context guerrier en Égée à l’âge du bronze II (Aegaeum 19), 297-312

Van de Moortel, A. 2006. “Mitrou: season II” (Newsletter of the Department of Classics at the University of Tennessee) 2007. “Mitrou: season III” (Newsletter of the Department of Classics at the University of Tennessee)

Thomas, P.M. 2004. “Some observations on the “Zygouries” Kylix and Late Helladic IIIB chronology,” in: A.P. Chapin (ed.), Charis. Essays in Honor of Sara A. Immerwahr (Hesperia Suppl. 33), 207-224

Van de Moortel, A. and E. Zahou. 2005. “2004 excavations at Mitrou, East Lokris,” AEA 7 (2003-2004), 39-48

Thomas, C.G. and C. Conant. 1999. Citadel to city state. The transformation of Greece, 1200-700 B.C.E., Bloomington and Indianapolis

Van Zeist, W. and Bottema, S. 1982. “Vegetational history of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Near East during the last 20,000 years,” in: J.L. Bintliff & W. van Zeist (eds.), Palaeoclimates, palaeoenvironments and human communities in the Eastern Mediterranean region in later prehistory, part II (BAR Int. Series 133), 277321

Tomlinson, R.A. 1995. “Archaeology in Greece 199596,” Archaeological Reports 42, 1-47 Tournavitou, I. 1992. “Practical use and social function: a neglected aspect of Mycenaean pottery,” BSA 87, 181-210

Vanschoonwinkel, J. 1991. L’égée et la Méditerranée orientale à la fin du IIe millénaire. Témôignages, archéologiques et sources écrites, Louvain-la Neuve

Turner, J. and J.R.A. Greig. 1975. “Some Holocene pollen diagrams from Greece,” Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 20, 171-204

Ventris, M. and J. Chadwick. 1973. Documents in Mycenaean Greek, Cambridge

Tzedakis, P.C. 1993. “Long-term tree populations in northwest Greece through multiple Quaternary climatic cycles,” Nature 364, 437-440 1994. “Vegetation change through glacialinterglacial cycles: a long pollen sequence perspective,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B345, 403-432 1999. “The last climatic cycle at Kopais, central Greece,” Journal of the Geological Society

Vermeule, E. 1974. Götterkult, Archaeologica Homerica III Vermeule, E. And V. Karageorghis. 1982. Mycenaean pictorial vase painting, Cambridge Visser, E. 1997. Homers Katalog der Schiffe, Stuttgart and Leipzig

Tzedakis, Y. and H. Martlew (eds.) 1999. Minoans and Mycenaeans: flavours of their time (National Archaeological Museum 12 July – 27 November 1999), Athens

Von den Driesch, A. and J. Boessneck. 1990. “Die Tierreste von der Mykenischen Burg Tiryns bei Nauplion/Peloponnes,” in: H.-J. Weisshaar, I. Weber-Hiden, A. von den Driesch, J. Boessneck, A. Rieger and W. Böser, Tiryns Forschungen und Berichte II, Mainz, 87-164

Van Andel, T.H. 1989. “Late Quaternary sea-level changes and archaeology,” Antiquity 63, 733-64 1990. “Addendum to „Late Quaternary sea-level changes and archaeology,‟” Antiquity 64, 1990, 151-152

Voutsaki, S. 2001. “Economic control, power and prestige in the Mycenaean world: the archaeological evidence,” in: S. Voutsaki and J. Killen (eds.), Economy and politics in the Mycenaean palace states. Proceedings of a conference held on 1-3 July 1999 in the Faculty of Classics, Cambridge (The Cambridge Philological Society Suppl. Vol. 27), 195-213

Van Andel, T.H. and C. Runnels. 1987. Beyond the Acropolis. A rural Greek past, Stanford 1988. "An essay on the 'emergence of civilization' in the Aegean world," Antiquity 62, 234-247 Van Andel, T.H., and J.C. Shackleton. 1982. “Late Paleolithic and Mesolithic coastlines of Greece and the Aegean,” JFA 9, 445-54

Wachsmann, S. 1998. Seagoing ships and seamanship in the Bronze Age Levant, College Station

Van Andel, T.H., E. Zangger and A. Demitrack. 1990. “Land use and soil erosion in prehistoric and historical Greece,” JFA 17, 379-396

Walberg, G. 1976. “Northern intruders in Mycenaean IIIC?” AJA 80, 186-187

186

2007. Midea: the megaron complex and shrine area. Excavations on the Lower Terraces 1994-1997, Philadelphia

New Haven, Yale University, 18-21 April 2002, Aegaeum 24, Liège, 363-399 2003b. “The absolute chronology of Late Helladic IIIA2 revisited,” BSA 98, 239-250

Warren, P. 1984. “Absolute dating of the Bronze Age Eruption of Thera (Santorini),” Nature 308(5959), 492-493 1987. “Absolute dating of the Aegean Late Bronze Age,” Archaeometry 29, 205-211 1990-91. “The Minoan civilisation of Crete and the volcano of Thera,” Journal of the Ancient Chronology Forum 4, 29-39 1996. “The Aegean and the limits of radiocarbon dating,” in K. Randsborg (ed.), Absolute chronology: archaeological Europe 2500-500 B.C., Copenhagen, 283-290 1998. “Aegean Late Bronze 1-2 absolute chronology: some new contributions,” in M. S. Balmuth and R. H. Tykot (eds.), Sardinian and Aegean chronology: towards the resolution of relative and absolute dating in the Mediterranean, Oxford, 323-331 1999. “LM IA: Knossos, Thera, Gournia,” in P. P. Betancourt, V. Karageorghis, R. Laffineur, and W.-D. Niemeier (eds.), MELETEMATA: studies in Aegean archaeology presented to Malcolm H. Wiener as he enters his 65th year [Aegaeum 20], Liège/Austin, 893-903.

Wijmstra, T.A. 1969. “Palynology of the first 30 metres of a 120 m deep section in northern Greece,” Acta Botanica Neerlandica 18, 511-527 Wijmstra, T.A. and A. Smit. 1976. “Palynology of the middle part (30-78 metres) of the 120 m deep section in northern Greece (Macedonia),” Acta Botanica Neerlandica 25, 297-312 Willis, K.J. 1992a. “The Late Quaternary vegetational history of northwest Greece, I. Lake Gramoutsi,” New Phytologist 121, 101-117 1992b. “The Late Quaternary vegetational history of northwest Greece, II. Rezina Marsh,” New Phytologist 121, 119-138 1992c. “The Late Quaternary vegetational history of northwest Greece, III. A comparative study of two contrasting sites,” New Phytologist 121, 139-155 Winter, F.A. 1977. “An historically derived model for the Dorian invasion,” in E. Davis (ed.), Symposium on the Dark Ages in Greece, New York, 60-76 Wood, M. 21998. In search of the Trojan War, New York

Warren, P. and V. Hankey. 1989. Aegean Bronze Age chronology, Bristol

Wright, H.E. 1968. “Climatic change in Mycenaean Greece,” Antiquity 42, 123-127 1972. “Vegetation history,” in: W.A. McDonald and G.R. Rapp (eds.), The Minnesota Messenia Expedition: reconstructing a Bronze Age regional environment, Minneapolis, 188-199 1985. “Palaeoecology, climatic change and Aegean prehistory,” in: N.C. Wilkie and W.D.E. Coulson (eds.), Contributions to Aegean archaeology: studies in honor of William E. Mcdonald, Minneapolis, 183-195

Watrous, L.V. 1977. “Aegean settlements and transhumance,” Temple University Aegean Symposium 2, 2-6 1982. Lasithi: a history of settlement on a highland plain in Crete, Hesperia Suppl. 18 Wedde, M. 1999. “War at sea: the Mycenaean and Early Iron Age oared galley,” in: R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos. Le context guerrier en Égée à l’âge du bronze. Actes de la 7e Rencontre égéenne internationale Université de Liège, 14-17 avril 1998. II (Aegaeum 19), Liège/Austin, 465-476

Wright, J.C. 1995. “Empty cups and empty jugs: the social role of wine in Minoan and Mycenaean societies,” in: P. McGovern, S. Fleming and S. Katz (eds.), The origins and ancient history of Wine, Amsterdam, 287-309 2004a. “Mycenaean drinking services and standards of etiquette,” in: P. Halstead and J.C. Barrett (eds.) Food, cuisine and society in prehistoric Greece (SSAA), Oxford, 90-104 2004b. “A survey of evidence for feasting in Mycenaean society,” in: J.C. Wright (ed.), The Mycenaean feast, Princeton, 13-58

Wells, B., C. Runnels and E. Zangger. 1990. “The Berbati-Limnes Archaeological Survey. The 1988 season,” Opuscula Atheniensia 18, 207-38 Whitley, J. 2001. The Archaeology of Ancient Greece, Cambridge 2002. “Archaeology in Greece 2002-2003,” Archaeological Reports 49, 1-88 Wiener, M.H. 2003a. “Time out: the current impasse in Bronze Age archaeological dating,” in: K.P. Foster and R. Laffineur (eds.), Metron: Measuring the Aegean Bronze Age, proceedings of the Ninth International Aegean Conference,

Yorke, W.W. 1896. “Excavations at Abae and Hyampolis in Phocis,” JHS 16, 291-312

187

Zangger, E. 1991. “Prehistoric coastal environments in Greece: the vanished landscapes of Dimini Bay and Lake Lerna,” JFA 18, 1-16 1992a. “Neolithic to present soil erosion in Greece,” in: J. Boardman and M. Bell (eds.), Past and present soil erosion, Oxford, 133-147 1992b. “Prehistoric and historic soils in Greece: assessing the natural resources for agriculture,” in: B. Wells, Agriculture in Ancient Greece. Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 16-17 May, 1990, Stockholm, 13-19

188