Crete beyond the Palaces (Prehistory Monographs) [Illustrated] 1931534098, 9781931534093

Citation preview

Crete Beyond the Palaces: Proceedings of the Crete 2000 Conference

Crete Beyond the Palaces: Proceedings of the Crete 2000 Conference

PREHISTORY MONOGRAPHS 10

Crete Beyond the Palaces: Proceedings of the Crete 2000 Conference

edited by Leslie Preston Day Margaret S. Mook James D. Muhly

Published by INSTAP Academic Press Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 2004

Design and Production INSTAP Academic Press Printing Sun Printing House, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Binding Hoster Bindery, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Crete 2000 Conference (2000 : Athens, Greece) Crete beyond the palaces : proceedings of the Crete 2000 Conference / edited by Leslie Preston Day, Margaret S. Mook, James D. Muhly. p. cm. — (Prehistory monographs ; 10) “This book presents the papers from the conference Crete 2000 ... held in Athens from July 10-12, 2000”—ECIP data view sheet. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 1-931534-09-8 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Crete (Greece)—Antiquities—Congresses. 2. Excavations (Archaeology)—Greece—Crete—Congresses. I. Day, Leslie Preston. II. Mook, Margaret S., 1960- III. Muhly, James David. IV. Title. V. Series. DF261.C8C74 2000 939’.18—dc22 2004007506

Copyright © 2004 INSTAP Academic Press Philadelphia, Pennsylvania All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America

Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................................................vii LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................................................................xiii PREFACE..................................................................................................................................................................xv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.................................................................................................................................xvii CONFERENCE PROGRAM.................................................................................................................................xix OPENING REMARKS James D. Muhly, Director, American School of Classical Studies at Athens.......................................xxiii Theodoros Pangalos, Minister of Culture ................................................................................................xxiv Nicholas Burns, American Ambassador to Greece .................................................................................xxiv Jeremy A. Sabloff, Williams Director, University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology .....................................................................................................xxvi INTRODUCTION History of American Excavations on Crete: Geraldine C. Gesell..................................................................1 PART I: TRADE 1. Pseira and Knossos: The Transformation of an East Cretan Seaport: Philip P. Betancourt.............21 2. The Incised and Relief Lily Jars from Mochlos: Thomas M. Brogan...................................................29 3. Kommos: The Sea-Gate to Southern Crete: Joseph W. Shaw................................................................43 4. A Possible Minoan Harbor on South Crete: Elpida Hadjidaki .............................................................53 PART II: SOCIETY AND RELIGION 5. The “Big House” at Vronda and the “Great House” at Karphi: Evidence for Social Structure in LM IIIC Crete: Leslie Preston Day and Lynn M. Snyder ..............................................63 6. Gournia, Vronda Kavousi, Kephala Vasilikis: A Triad of Interrelated Shrines of the Expiring Minoan Age on the Isthmus of Ierapetra: Theodore Eliopoulos.......................................81 7. The Architecture of the Late Minoan IIIC Shrine (Building G) at Vronda, Kavousi: Nancy L. Klein ........................................................................................................................................91 8. Halasmenos, Destroyed but not Invisible: New Insights on the LM IIIC Period in the Isthmus of Ierapetra. First Presentation of the Pottery from the 1992–1997 Campaigns: Metaxia Tsipopoulou .............................................................................................................................103

vi

CRETE BEYOND THE PALACES

9. Household Analysis in Dark Age Crete: Kevin T. Glowacki ..............................................................125 10. Religion at Minoan Kommos: Maria C. Shaw .....................................................................................137 PART III: CHRONOLOGY AND HISTORY 11. New Construction at Mochlos in the LM IB Period: Jeffrey S. Soles ................................................153 12. From Foundation to Abandonment: New Ceramic Phasing for the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age on the Kastro at Kavousi: Margaret S. Mook ........................................163 13. Writing on the Walls. The Architectural Context of Archaic Cretan Laws: Paula J. Perlman ......181 14 Eleutherna and the Greek World, ca. 600–400 B.C.: Brice Erickson ...................................................199 15. The Late Hellenistic Period in East Crete: Natalia Vogeikoff-Brogan ................................................213 PART IV: LANDSCAPE AND SURVEY 16. Past and Present Perspectives on the Archaeological Landscapes of Mirabello: Donald C. Haggis..................................................................................................................................223 17. Vrokastro and the Settlement Pattern of the LM IIIA–Geometric Periods: Barbara J. Hayden .................................................................................................................................233 18. Western Crete in the Bronze Age: A Survey of the Evidence: Jennifer Moody ...............................247 19. South of Kavousi, East of Mochlos: The West Siteia Mountains at the End of the Bronze Age: Krzysztof Nowicki ...............................................................................................265 PART V: TECHNOLOGY AND PRODUCTION 20. Chrysokamino and the Beginnings of Metal Technology on Crete and in the Aegean: James D. Muhly.....................................................................................................................283 21. Mochlos and Melos: A Special Relationship? Creating Identity and Status in Minoan Crete: Tristan Carter .........................................................................................................291 22. Late Minoan III Mochlos and the Regional Consumption of Pottery: R. Angus K. Smith...........309

List of Figures Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5. Figure 6. Figure 7. Figure 8. Figure 9. Figure 10. Figure 11. Figure 12. Figure 13. Figure 14. Figure 1.1. Figure 1.2.

Harriet Boyd and her potsherds, 1902 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xxvii Richard Seager on a white horse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Edith Hall on a pony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Among the group riding wooden saddles: Harriet Boyd, Blanche Wheeler, Aristides, Aristides’ mother . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Aloni Notebook, page 7: excavation notes of Tomb I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Harriet Boyd directing the pot washers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Roadway to the Gournia Shrine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Gournia Shrine equipment during excavation, showing five snake tubes and the tripod altar in situ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 Gournia Shrine artifacts after conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 Harriet Boyd awarding the prizes at the games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 East Ascent A and Quarter C houses at Gournia from the east . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Entrance to the Gournia Palace from the south . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Adelene Moffat on pack animal at fountain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 Pithos burial found at Pacheia Ammos in 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Figure 1.4.

Knossian Special Palatial Tradition vases imported into Pseira during LM IB . . . . . . . . .23 Knossian Special Palatial Tradition vases and a bull-shaped vessel, all from Room BQ 1, Building BQ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 A. Plan of Building BC showing the numbers of the spaces; B. Drawing of one of the local sandstone blocks used in the pier-and-door partition wall . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Bull-shaped vessel from the “House of the Rhyta” at Pseira . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

Figure 2.1. Figure 2.2. Figure 2.3. Figure 2.4. Figure 2.5. Figure 2.6. Figure 2.7. Figure 2.8.

Type 1 Lily Jar profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 Type 2 Lily Jar profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 Type 1 Images of Incised Lily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 Type 2 Images of Incised Lily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 Type 3 Image of Relief Lily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33 Lily Jars at Coast Mochlos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34 Lily Jars at Chalinomouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34 Lily Jars on the Island of Mochlos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35

Figure 1.3.

viii

CRETE BEYOND THE PALACES

Figure 2.9. Figure 2.10.

Ierapetra Museum No. 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 Ierapetra Museum No. 86 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38

Figure 3.1. Figure 3.2. Figure 3.3. Figure 3.4. Figure 3.5. Figure 3.6. Figure 3.7. Figure 3.8. Figure 3.9. Figure 3.10. Figure 3.11.

View of Kommos site, from south . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 Plan of Southern Area showing architectural periods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45 Elevation of Building P, containing probable ship-sheds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46 Cypriot White-Painted IV juglet C 6112 from the Kommos settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46 Cypriot pithos C 9013 from LM IIIA:2 House X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46 Imported Canaanite/Syrian, Egyptian, Mycenaean, and Cypriot pottery . . . . . . . . . . . . .47 Syrian composite stone anchor from a LM IIIA:2 context in Southern Area . . . . . . . . . . . .47 Tripillar Phoenician-influenced shrine from Geometric Temple B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 Faience figurine of Egyptian Goddess Sekhmet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 Tapering Cypriot pillar surmounted by head of Egyptian God Bes, in the Louvre . . . . . .49 Inscribed East Greek amphora or hydria handle I 46 from Building Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49

Figure 4.1. Figure 4.2. Figure 4.3. Figure 4.4. Figure 4.5. Figure 4.6. Figure 4.7. Figure 4.8. Figure 4.9. Figure 4.10. Figure 4.11.

Anchor underwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 Anchor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 Cape Plaka with Minoan buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 Minoan “mole” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 EM III–MM I closed vessel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 MM conical cup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 EM III pithos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57 Minoan building on the shore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57 Minoan building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Minoan walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Minoan “mole” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59

Figure 5.1. Figure 5.2. Figure 5.3. Figure 5.4. Figure 5.5. Figure 5.6. Figure 5.7. Figure 5.8.

Plan of the LM IIIC settlement at Vronda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64 Plan of the Big House at Vronda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65 Pithoi from the Vronda settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66 Pithos smashed on floor of Vronda, Building B, Room 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67 Field sketch plan of Vronda room B 4 during excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67 Pottery from early deposits in Vronda, Building B, Rooms 4 and 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68 Butchering and food debris recovered from northern portion of B 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 Cattle skulls and agrimi horn cores, in situ during excavation in the southern part of B 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 Agrimi horn cores from Vronda B 4 and Kastro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71 Reconstructed cattle skull from Vronda B 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71 Pottery from later deposits in Vronda, Building B, Room 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72 Plan of the Karphi Settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74 Pottery from the Great House at Karphi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76 Plans of the Great House at Karphi and the Big House at Vronda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77

Figure 5.9. Figure 5.10. Figure 5.11. Figure 5.12. Figure 5.13. Figure 5.14.

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 6.1. Figure 6.2. Figure 6.3. Figure 6.4. Figure 6.5. Figure 6.6. Figure 6.7. Figure 6.8. Figure 6.9.

ix

The area of the Isthmus of Ierapetra, Eastern Crete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82 Kephala Vasilikis, temple complex (Building E). Room E 4, northern bench with curved contour and cult objects in situ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83 Kephala Vasilikis, temple complex (Building E). Close Style krater from rooms E 5–E 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83 The Vronda shrine, Building G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .84 Kephala Vasilikis temple complex (Building E) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85 Kephala Vasilikis, temple complex (Building E). Goddess No. 2 from room E 4, eastern bench . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86 Kephala Vasilikis, temple complex (Building E). Lower part of snake tube from room E 4, eastern bench . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86 Kephala Vasilikis, temple complex (Building E). Rectangular fenestrated stand from room E 4, northern bench . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87 Kephala Vasilikis, temple complex (Building E). Part of a plaque from the fill of room E 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87

Figure 7.1. Figure 7.2. Figure 7.3. Figure 7.4. Figure 7.5. Figure 7.6. Figure 7.7. Figure 7.8.

Kavousi Vronda: state plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .92 Kavousi Vronda: excavation of snake tubes in Building G, Room 2, 1988 . . . . . . . . . . . . .93 Kavousi Vronda: Shrine (Building G) from the west . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94 Kavousi Vronda: plan of Shrine (Building G) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95 Kavousi Vronda: plan of Building C-D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .97 Kavousi Vronda: Building D from north . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .98 Gournia: plan of the Shrine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99 Karphi: plan of the Temple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100

Figure 8.1. Figure 8.2. Figure 8.3. Figure 8.4. Figure 8.5. Figure 8.6. Figure 8.7. Figure 8.8. Figure 8.9. Figure 8.10. Figure 8.11. Figure 8.12. Figure 8.13.

Halasmenos settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .104 Vessel fabrics and shapes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .105 Pithoi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109 Amphoras, jugs, and feeding bottles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .110 Stirrup jars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111 Pyxides, amphoriskoi, and stands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .112 Tripod cooking vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .113 Cooking amphoras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .114 Cooking trays, dishes, and bowls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .116 Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .117 Krateriskoi and deep bowls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .118 Kalathoi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .119 Kylikes and cups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .121

Figure 9.1. Figure 9.2. Figure 9.3. Figure 9.4. Figure 9.5. Figure 9.6.

Kavousi Vronda. Plan of the LM IIIC settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126 Building Complex I-O-N. State plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .128 Building Complex I-O-N. Block plan (walls partially restored) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .128 Building I. State plan. LG graves indicated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .129 Building I, Room 3. Oven from south . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .129 Recreation of a small oven by Mr. Manolis Maniadakis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .130

x

CRETE BEYOND THE PALACES

Figure 9.7. Building I, Room 3. Pyxis and pithos during excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .130 Figure 9.8. Comparison of pithoi from I 3 and B 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .130 Figure 9.9. Stone tools from floor surface of Room I 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .131 Figure 9.10. Building N, Room 5. Oven . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .131 Figure 9.11. Building Complex I-O-N. Distribution of pottery types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .132 Figure 9.12. Building Complex I-O-N. Distribution of stone tool types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .132 Figure 10.1. Figure 10.2. Figure 10.3. Figure 10.4. Figure 10.5. Figure 10.6. Figure 10.7. Figure 10.8. Figure 10.9. Figure 10.10. Figure 10.11.

Plan of Kommos: the Southern Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138 Plan of the Northern Hilltop of the town at Kommos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .139 Plan of the Central Hillside of the town at Kommos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .140 MM II bull head rhyton from the Central Hillside . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .140 Figurines from the area of the town at Kommos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .142 The shrine in House X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .143 Seal with bird-woman found in LM III level in the shrine in House X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .144 LM III shrine in the house with the snake tube in the Central Hillside at Kommos . . . .145 Snake tube from the shrine illustrated in Fig. 10.8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .146 Restored plan of Neopalatial Palace Building T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .147 Plaster offering table from the area of the monumental buildings at Kommos . . . . . . . .147

Figure 11.1. Mochlos Coastal Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .154 Figure 11.2. The Artisans’ Quarter, Mochlos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .156 Figure 11.3. The Main Settlement, Mochlos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .157 Figure 12.1. Kavousi village and the Kastro from the west . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .164 Figure 12.2. Boyd’s 1900, and the Kavousi Project’s 2002, plans of the Kastro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .165 Figure 12.3. East-west section of the area east of Room 24, Room 24, Room 35, and Room 31 from the north . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .166 Figure 12.4. Late Minoan IIIB:2-style pottery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .167 Figure 12.5. The pottery from a Phase I, Late Minoan IIIC, deposit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .168 Figure 12.6. The pottery from a Phase II, Late Minoan IIIC, deposit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .170 Figure 12.7. Phase IV, Early Protogeometric, skyphoi and a krater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .171 Figure 12.8. Phase V, Protogeometric, skyphoi and cups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .172 Figure 12.9. The pottery from two Phase VI, Subprotogeometric, deposits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .174 Figure 12.10. The pottery from a Phase VII, Geometric, deposit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .175 Figure 12.11. Phase VIII, Late Geometric, open and closed pottery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .176 Figure 12.12. Phase IX, Orientalizing, open and closed pottery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .177 Figure 13.1. Figure 13.2. Figure 13.3. Figure 13.4. Figure 13.5.

Inscriptions from the Temple of Apollo Pythios, Gortyn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .183, 184 I.Cret. IV 22B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .185 I.Cret. IV 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .187 Inscriptions from the Temple of Apollo Delphinios, Dreros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .193 “Indications of Completeness” in the Delphinion Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .194

Figure 14.1. Eleutherna, high-necked cup (6th century) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .202 Figure 14.2. Eleutherna, Corinthian imports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .203

LIST OF FIGURES

xi

Figure 14.3. Figure 14.4. Figure 14.5. Figure 14.6.

Eleutherna, Laconian imports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .203 Eleutherna, Attic imports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .204 Laconian imports to Crete (6th century) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .205 Eleutherna, Cretan imports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .208

Figure 15.1. Figure 15.2. Figure 15.3.

Classical and Hellenistic sites in East Crete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .215 Amphoras from Mochlos made with ECCW fabric. Types 2 and 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .217 Amphoras from Mochlos made with ECCW fabric. Type 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .218

Figure 16.1.

Roman granary at Tholos Bay; view from south looking toward the Isthmus of Ierapetra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .224 The Kastro and Mt. Papoura from the Avgo valley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .224 A trapetum and orbis in an abandoned house in Monastiraki . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .225 The Kastro and Chondrovolakes from Kavousi village . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .226 Foundations of a Minoan (MM II–LM I) building at Tholos bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .227 Minoan house walls at Ayios Antonios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .227 Chrysokamino, Mt. Chalepa, and the southeast corner of the Bay of Mirabello . . . . . . .228 EM III–MM II building at Chondrovolakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .229

Figure 16.2. Figure 16.3. Figure 16.4. Figure 16.5. Figure 16.6. Figure 16.7. Figure 16.8. Figure 17.1. Figure 17.2. Figure 17.3. Figure 17.4. Figure 17.5. Figure 17.6. Figure 17.7. Figure 17.8. Figure 17.9. Figure 18.1. Figure 18.2. Figure 18.3. Figure 18.4. Figure 18.5. Figure 18.6. Figure 18.7. Figure 18.8. Figure 19.1. Figure 19.2. Figure 19.3. Figure 19.4.

Vrokastro survey area, showing toponyms and location of the settlement of Vrokastro, and the Istron or Kalo Chorio Valley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .234 Summit and north slope of Vrokastro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .235 View to the summit of Vrokastro from the Chavga ravine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .236 Area around the settlement of Vrokastro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .237 Vrokastro survey area, showing location of LM IIIA–IIIB settlements and tombs . . . . .238 Vrokastro survey area, showing location of LM IIIC sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .239 Elias to Nisi promontory, showing location of enclosure wall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .241 Vrokastro survey area, showing location of Protogeometric–Geometric sites . . . . . . . . .242 Plan of the Geometric settlement on the summit of Vrokastro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .243 Minoan Palace Period sites in Western Crete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .248 Final Palatial sites in Western Crete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .248 Final and Postpalatial sites in Western Crete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .249 Dark Age sites in Western Crete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .249 Profiles of Lake Van, Gulf of Oman, Soreq Cave, Dead Sea level cores, glacial advances in the Alps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .250 Locations of environmental data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .251 Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .252 Preliminary data—climate changes and Cretan prehistory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .252 Mirabello Bay and the Siteia Peninsula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .266, 267 Southwestern part of the West Siteia Mountains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .268 A. Katalimata Ayios Ioannis: from South; B. Katalimata Ayios Ioannis: Areas C and D as seen from Kale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .269 Sketch of Katalimata Ayios Ioannis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .270

xii

CRETE BEYOND THE PALACES

Figure 19.5. Figure 19.6. Figure 19.7. Figure 19.8. Figure 19.9. Figure 19.10.

Pottery from surface of Katalimata Ayios Ioannis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .272 Pottery from surface of Katalimata Ayios Ioannis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .273 Sketch of Stavromenos Vainia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .274 Pottery from surface of Karphi Koutsounari . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .275 Mochlos Plain and Orno Mountains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .277 Area of Chalinomouri and Kastello . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .278

Figure 20.1. Figure 20.2. Figure 20.3. Figure 20.4.

HN 4671, Tomb 217. Dagger, rounded heel with three rivet holes; no midrib . . . . . . . .286 HN 4670, Tomb 216. Long dagger, tapering blade with pronounced central midrib . . . . .286 HN 4658, Tomb 2. Long dagger, tapering blade with central midrib . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .286 HN 4673, Tomb 217. Saw, tapering blade with small teeth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .286

Figure 21.1. Figure 21.2. Figure 21.3. Figure 21.4. Figure 21.5. Figure 21.6.

Location of Building/Tomb N in the Prepalatial cemetery, Mochlos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .292 EM II sites mentioned in the text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .293 Location of EM IIB and LM IB core caches, Mochlos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .294 Selection of blade-cores from EM IIB cache, Mochlos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .295 EB II Southern Aegean, showing sites mentioned in text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .297 Generic reconstruction of the “Minoan”/Southern Aegean obsidian pressure-flaked blade manufacturing sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .299 Figure 21.7. Comparing lengths of blade-cores from Mochlos EM IIB cache, Mallia’s EM IIB “atelier des tailleurs d’obsidienne,” and EM Palaikastro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .300 Figure 21.8. East Crete, showing LM IB sites mentioned in the text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .301 Figure 21.9. Quantity of obsidian from LM IB structures at Mochlos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .301 Figure 21.10. Plan of Building B2’s east wing, Mochlos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .303 Figure 21.11. Selection of obsidian from the Hall over the Pillar Rooms, Building B2, Mochlos . . . . . . .304 Figure 21.12. Obsidian from the Hall over the Pillar Rooms, Building B2, Mochlos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .305

Figure 22.1.

Plan of the Mochlos coastal plain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .310

Figure 22.2. Figure 22.3. Figure 22.4. Figure 22.5. Figure 22.6. Figure 22.7.

Inter-site shape correspondences measured as percentages of similar shape types . . . .311 Percentages of various shape types by region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .312 Kylix from the Mochlos Cemetery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .312 Pulled-rim bowls from the Mochlos Cemetery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .313 Rounded handleless cup from the Mochlos Cemetery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .313 Trefoil-mouthed jug from the Mochlos Cemetery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .313

List of Tables Table 2.1.

Lily Jars distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

Table 5.1.

Comparison of floor space in large buildings at Vronda and Karphi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66

Table 8.1.

Provisional functional typology of ceramics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106

Table 21.1.

Obsidian from Mochlos’ Building B2, east wing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .302

Preface This volume, Crete Beyond the Palaces, includes the papers from the conference “Crete 2000: A Centennial Celebration of American Archaeological Work on Crete (1900–2000),” held in Athens from July 10–12, 2000. James Muhly, then Director of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, had the idea for the conference, and he joined with Leslie Day and Margaret Mook to solicit papers and arrange the program. The American School of Classical Studies at Athens and the Institute for Aegean Prehistory (INSTAP) Study Center for East Crete organized the conference. Natalia Vogeikoff-Brogan, archivist of the American School, curated the exhibition, “Breaking Ground: Pioneer American Archaeologists in Crete,” which accompanied the conference. James Muhly and Evangelia Sikla were the editors of Crete 2000: A Centennial Celebration of American Archaeological Work on Crete (1900–2000), the heavily illustrated volume accompanying the exhibition. There was an excursion to the sites of American excavations on Crete, both past and present, following the conference from July 13–15, 2000. Both senior and junior scholars participating in the American and joint GreekAmerican excavations on Crete or studying material from these excavations were invited to present papers at the conference. Many scholars doing serious research on Crete not related directly to these excavations, therefore, could not be included. All but two of the participants have submitted papers for this volume; they are presented in the order in which they were given. Leslie Day and Margaret Mook initially organized the papers, and Leslie Day did the format editing before the papers were sent for publication. So many people were involved in organizing this conference that it is difficult to thank them all, and many are mentioned in the introductory remarks. Liz Papageorgiou handled most of the arrangements in Athens, with help from members of the staff of the American School, and we are most grateful to them. Special thanks go to the Gennadeion Library and its Director Haris Kalligas for allowing us to use the facilities of the library for the conference, and to Natalia Vogeikoff-Brogan and her staff who prepared the exhibition there. On Crete, Thomas Brogan organized the site visits and travel arrangements; he also oversaw the cleaning of these sites and arranged to have explanatory signs set up. Eleanor Huffman handled the production of the signs, with texts and images provided by the excavators of the various sites. Special thanks also go to Stavroula Apostolakou of the 24th Ephoreia for her help in preparing the Greek text for the signs. All of the excavators and staff members of the various American excavations on Crete gave unstintingly of their time and expertise to make the site visits entertaining and informative. The grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Harriet Boyd Hawes were present at the conference and, by sharing stories about her, provided a

xvi

CRETE BEYOND THE PALACES

special connection between the earliest excavators on Crete and those of today. Thanks also must go to the American School and the Institute for Aegean Prehistory, especially to Malcolm Wiener, as well as to Richard and Jeanette Sias, for providing financial support for this conference. Finally, our gratitude goes to William Coulson, who offered much useful advice but, unfortunately, was prevented from participating in the conference by what turned out to be a fatal illness. As director of the American School and as co-director of both the Kavousi and Halasmenos Projects, he did so much to promote American archaeological interests in Crete. He will be sorely missed by the archaeological community and all of his friends on Crete. Leslie Preston Day May 2002

List of Abbreviations The editors have followed the Guidelines for Authors used by Hesperia and other publications of the American School of Classical Studies. The following additional abbreviations are used in the text: LN = Late Neolithic FN = Final Neolithic EM = Early Minoan MM = Middle Minoan LM = Late Minoan EC = Early Cycladic EBA = Early Bronze Age LB = Late Bronze Age SM = Subminoan PG = Protogeometric EG = Early Geometric MG = Middle Geometric LG = Late Geometric. Abbreviations of journal titles and standard works conform to the list in The American Journal of Archaeology 95 (1991), 1–16, with one exception: I.Cret. instead of IC for Inscriptiones Creticae. Munsell refers to Munsell Soil Color Charts. For the most part, the system for transliterating Greek described in JHS 89 (1969), 1–6 is employed. This attempt to keep familiar spellings of sites has resulted in some inconsistency in transliteration, particularly the letter Chi. For the most part, Chi is transliterated as Ch, but occasionally in appears as H or Kh.

Conference Program Crete 2000: A Centennial Celebration of American Archaeological Work On Crete (1900–2000) Monday, July 10 WELCOMING ADDRESSES James Muhly, Director of the American School of Classical Studies Theodoros Pangalos, Minister of Culture Nicholas Burns, American Ambassador to Greece Jeremy A. Sabloff, Williams Director, University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology

KEYNOTE ADDRESS Geraldine C. Gesell

Tuesday, July 11 SESSION I: TRADE (MALCOLM WIENER, CHAIR) Philip P. Betancourt Pseira and Knossos: The Transformation of an East Cretan Seaport Thomas M. Brogan Pottery Production and the Limits of Local Exchange: The Lily Jars from LM IB Levels at Mochlos and the Surrounding Coastal Plain Joseph W. Shaw Kommos as a Gateway to South Crete Elpida Hadjidaki A Possible Minoan Harbor on South Crete

xx

CRETE BEYOND THE PALACES

SESSION II: SOCIETY AND RELIGION (YIANNIS TZEDAKIS, CHAIR) Leslie Preston Day and Lynn M. Snyder The “Big House” at Vronda, Kavousi, and the “Great House” at Karphi: Evidence for Social Structure in LM IIIC Crete Theodore Eliopoulos Gournia, Vronda, Kephala Vasilikis: A Triad of Interrelated Shrines of the Expiring Minoan Age on the Isthmus of Ierapetra Nancy L. Klein The Architecture of the LM IIIC Shrine (Building G) at Vronda, Kavousi Metaxia Tsipopoulou Halasmenos. Destroyed but not Invisible: New Insights on the LM IIIC Period in the Isthmus of Ierapetra Kevin T. Glowacki Household Analysis in Dark Age Crete Maria C. Shaw Minoan Religion at Kommos

SESSION III: CHRONOLOGY AND HISTORY (NANNO MARINATOS, CHAIR) Jeffrey S. Soles New LM IB Construction at Mochlos Ann Nicgorski A New Larnax with Figural Decoration from the LM III Cemetery at Mochlos Margaret S. Mook From Foundation to Abandonment: New Ceramic Phasing for the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age on the Kastro at Kavousi Paula Perlman Writing on the Walls: The Architectural Context of Archaic Greek Inscriptions Brice Erickson Crete and the Greek World in the 6th and 5th Centuries B.C. Natalia Vogeikoff-Brogan The Late Hellenistic Period in East Crete

Wednesday, July 12 SESSION IV: LANDSCAPE AND SURVEY (ELENI HATZAKI, CHAIR) Donald C. Haggis Past and Present Perspectives on Archaeological Landscapes of Mirabello Vance Watrous The Bronze Age Landscape around Gournia Barbara J. Hayden The Nature of Settlement from LM III through the Early Iron Age in the Vrokastro Area

CONFERENCE PROGRAM

Jennifer Moody American Archaeological Survey Work in West Crete Krzysztof Nowicki South of Kavousi, East of Mochlos: The West Siteia Mountains at the End of the Bronze Age

SESSION V: TECHNOLOGY (MARIA ANDREADAKI-VLAZAKI, CHAIR) James Muhly Chrysokamino and the Beginnings of Metal Technology on Crete and in the Aegean Tristan Carter Mochlos and Melos. A Special Relationship? Creating Identity and Status in Minoan Crete R. Angus K. Smith LM III Mochlos and the Regional Consumption of Pottery

EXCURSIONS TO THE CRETAN SITES

Thursday, July 13 Kavousi: Chrysokamino or Kastro, Vronda

Friday, July 14 Pseira, Mochlos

Saturday, July 15 Pacheia Ammos (Seager’s Villa), Gournia, Kommos

xxi

Opening Remarks James Muhly, Director American School of Classical Studies at Athens In December of 1979, the Archaeological Institute of America celebrated its centennial in Boston. It was the creation of the AIA in 1879 that made possible the establishment, two years later in 1881, of a School of Classical Studies in Athens. We are the child of the AIA. At our parent’s centennial, one of our most remarkable members, the late Homer Thompson, delivered an address entitled, “In Pursuit of the Past: The American Role 1879–1979.” In describing the contribution of American excavators to our understanding of Aegean prehistory, Thompson said: The earliest and one of the most significant was Harriet Boyd’s excavation of Gournia in Crete in the years 1901–1904. Gournia still stands as the best preserved, most complete and, one might say, most likeable example of what must have been a normal Minoan town. Both the excavation and the publication were exemplary. Miss Boyd was the first of a succession of extremely competent women who have directed American expeditions . . . (Praise from Caesar is high praise, indeed.) We have a number of these women on the program of this conference. We have even managed to find room for a few male archaeologists (in order to be politically correct). Right from the start of planning, some three years ago, I wanted this centennial celebration to be, first and foremost, a tribute to Harriet Boyd Hawes, one of the most remarkable figures in the history of the American School and of American archaeology in Greece. She might have been short of stature, but she was long on everything that mattered. She did not, of course, work alone. The names of Richard Seager and Edith Hall are mentioned again and again in the conference papers. Nor could I ever have worked alone in organizing this centennial celebration. I cannot possibly mention everyone who contributed to the success of this conference, but special mention must be made of Liz Papageorgiou, who handled all details relating to the conference and the program; of Evi Sikla, who did most of the work on the accompanying book that actually arrived from the printer in time for the opening of the conference; of Natalia Vogeikoff-Brogan, who organized the exhibition in the Gennadius Library and arranged for the loan of all the materials displayed in it; and to her husband Tom Brogan who arranged the trip to Crete and the reception at the INSTAP Study Center. I cannot forget my colleagues on the Program Committee, Leslie Day and Peggy Mook. None of this would have been possible without the support of Malcolm Wiener, Trustee of the School and founder of INSTAP and of the East Crete Study Center.

xxiv

CRETE BEYOND THE PALACES

Finally, my friend and colleague Philip Betancourt. We all have great plans; Phil has great plans. But Phil also knows how to make those plans become reality. Every Bronze Age archaeologist now working in Greece owes a great debt to Philip Betancourt. I am delighted that we, here at the School, were able to share in celebrating his recent honorary degree from the University of Athens. I want to welcome all of you to Athens on behalf of the American School and to thank all of you for coming out this evening for the opening of our Crete 2000 celebration. I am sure that all will go well, in spite of the heat, and that we will all profit from what will be presented to us in the days ahead.

Theodoros Pangalos Minister of Culture Dear Friends, I heard with great interest of the International Conference “Crete 2000” organized by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Unfortunately, for reasons beyond my control, I cannot be present at the opening of the conference in the Gennadius Library of the School. The work that the American School has accomplished in Greece is of great importance. The positive results of its excavations and the preservation of Greek monuments have made the School an important cultural organization in Athens and all of Greece. The School’s academic programs help the students learn more about Greek civilization and the lofty Greek Spirit, thus contributing to intercultural contacts among peoples. It is of great significance to encourage students to come in direct contact with the ancient Greek heritage that provides means of improving the quality of human development and advancing a deeper intellectual understanding. The School, through its important work, contributes to our efforts toward cultural development and progress, which, in combination with the improvement of social life, do not constitute elements of luxury in contemporary societies, but rather an essential for safeguarding human existence. With these thoughts, I send you my greetings and best wishes for the success of the conference.

Nicholas Burns American Ambassador to Greece It is a great pleasure and an honor to participate in the opening of the centennial tribute to the American School of Classical Studies’ work on Crete. The year 2000 has spawned seemingly thousands of millennial and centennial celebrations of one kind or another around the world. Few that I know of, however, can rival this celebration, which serves to mark three great achievements simultaneously. We celebrate the practical and path-breaking archaeological work done on Crete in Mochlos, Pseira, Vrokastro, Kavousi, Gournia, and several other sites. We also

OPENING REMARKS

recognize the extraordinary efforts of one woman, Ms. Harriet Boyd, who smashed the glass ceiling for women in this institution a century ago. And we are here to pay homage to one hundred years of archaeological, social, and political bridge-building by the American School, which not only carries out academic research but strengthens U.S.-Greek relations. When Harriet Boyd arrived in Crete in 1900, the island had only two years earlier won partial autonomy from Turkish rule. Cretans were intent on building a new era for themselves as modern and free Greeks. The American School’s initial efforts in 1900, along with those of Sir Arthur Evans at Knossos, gave Cretans a newfound sense of pride in their rich and substantial past. In this sense, the American School’s fabulous work between 1900 and 1914 deserves to be remembered by us today. So, too, do the most recent excavations since 1978, which phenomenally add to these achievements. With 20/20 hindsight and the perspective of a century, we also commemorate the personal accomplishments of Ms. Harriet Boyd, against extraordinary odds. Few Americans in the second century of U.S.-Greek relations have overcome such great obstacles to achieve such historic results. Before Harriet Boyd began her archaeological sojourn on Crete, she volunteered as a Red Cross nurse in Epirus. Her subsequent three-year supervision of the dig at Gournia, against the wishes of the American School’s director and without his assistance, stands as one of the most inspiring and courageous acts by an American in Greece. Harriet Boyd’s resolve was remarkable, and the publication of her final excavation report in 1908 was awe-inspiring as the first in the history of Cretan archaeology. As a Bostonian, I am proud that Harriet Boyd hailed from the city that we call “The Athens of America.” In fact, Ms. Boyd, later in her career, even taught art history at Wellesley College, only one mile from my parents’ home. Anyone who cares about the opportunities for young women in both Greece and the U.S. should pause today to thank the life and memory of Harriet Boyd for advancing both archaeology and the cause of women’s rights a century ago. She literally broke archaeology’s glass ceiling and led the way for women in the field one hundred years ago. Finally, in addition to the work on Crete, and Harriet Boyd’s achievements, there is a final accomplishment of the American School that we honor—the magnificent contribution to relations between Greece and the United States of America. After two and a half years as the American ambassador, I am convinced of one thing: that the contributions of private American groups, such as the American School, to the construction of a strong and lasting friendship between our two countries exceeds in value what those in government can only hope to achieve. On behalf of all the American ambassadors to Greece during the past century, let me thank and congratulate all of you for all that you have done. The American School has helped the Greek people to retrieve and rediscover the awesome richness of their history, literature, and culture through its centurylong excavations at the Athenian Agora, Corinth, Samothrace, and on Crete. One of my predecessors, Edward Capps, was so well respected for the work he had done for the American School that he was named Minister to Greece at a critical time just after the First World War (1920–1921). He was a distinguished minister and later returned to the School as Chairman of the Managing Committee for twenty years (1919–1939). Capps, Carl Blegen, Homer Thompson, Harriet Boyd, Eugene Vanderpool, John Travlos, Lucy Talbott, and Alison Frantz all gave the School an extraordinary strong foundation. During the Second World War, the School, especially Loring Hall, was a refuge for American diplomats stranded in Greece after the closure of our legation during

xxv

xxvi

CRETE BEYOND THE PALACES

the German occupation. Since the War and continuing into our new century, John Camp, Steve Miller, Jim Muhly, Malcolm Wiener, and many others are leading the way toward a second century of scholarly and human achievement. American ambassadors, generals, journalists, and business people all come and go as we serve the United States in Greece. However, it is those of you as archaeologists who return year after year, and sometimes even decade after decade, who make the greatest difference in the long course of U.S.-Greek relations and leave a true American imprint on Greece. You have transformed America’s image of the Greek past and transported us all to a higher level of friendship between our two countries than we could ever have reached without you. I want to thank you for that and for all that you will continue to do in the months and years ahead as you live and write the history of our relations with the Greek people in the 21st century.

Jeremy A. Sabloff Williams Director, University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology It is an honor and a privilege to be here for this centennial celebration. The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology was established in 1887, and the Museum’s curators and staff are justly proud of its many accomplishments over the past 113 years. From its initial work at Nippur in 1887, to its path-breaking studies at Pachacamac, Memphis, Ur, Gordion, Gibeon, Tikal, and Ban Chiang, among more than 350 expeditions, to its active field research this year in 18 different countries around the globe from Mongolia to Bolivia, and its cutting-edge analytic laboratory analyses, such as the recent discovery of the contents of King Midas’ funerary feast, the Museum has established itself as one of the great museums of its type in the world. Of all of its distinguished fieldwork, however, one of the research areas for which it is most proud is the work that the University of Pennsylvania Museum sponsored on Crete in the early part of this century. The work of renowned pioneers like Harriet Boyd (Hawes), Edith Hall (Dohan)—who was to become curator of the Museum’s Mediterranean Section—and Richard Seager in the first two decades of the 20th century helped throw significant new light on archaeological understandings of Crete’s ancient history. This fieldwork and the subsequent generosity of the Greek government allowed the Museum to build one of the most important documented collections of excavated archaeological materials from Crete outside of Greece and to publish a series of important archaeological monographs. Our collection from Crete remains of significant utility to students and scholars from around the world. This important tradition of University of Pennsylvania Museum-sponsored research on Crete continues today with the studies of Dr. Barbara Hayden, who is a senior research scientist at the Museum, at Vrokastro and its region. The Museum also is pleased to be associated in a small way with the research of Dr. Philip Betancourt and Dr. James Muhly. In broader terms, the Museum is also proud of its terrific Classical Greece gallery that opened six years ago, as well as its award-winning web site which is now receiving approximately 15 million hits a year. This site (www.upenn.edu/museum)

OPENING REMARKS

features a well-illustrated section on the ancient Greek world with text in both English and Modern Greek. The site also has a section on the origins of the Olympic games and one on the ongoing remote-sensing studies of Dr. David Romano and his colleagues at Corinth. As regards this great site, the Museum is delighted to share the distinction with the American School of Classical Studies of having the distinguished scholar, Dr. Charles K. Williams II, as an important long-standing member of its Board. As a student of ancient Maya civilization, I naturally find the Minoan, Mycenaean, and later civilizations of Greece quite different from the Maya. Nevertheless, scholars studying the civilizations of Mexico and northern Central America, on the one hand, and scholars studying past Greek civilizations do share a deep appreciation of the great achievements of the peoples of these ancient civilizations, a strong interest in knowing more about them and preserving their remains, and an unwavering commitment to bring understanding of the accomplishments of these fascinating ancient cultures to modern peoples around the globe. Again, I am very happy to be here and pleased to add my words of welcome to everyone on behalf of the University of Pennsylvania Museum.

xxvii

Figure 1. Harriet Boyd and her potsherds, 1902 (Archaeology 18 [1965], 94).

Introduction

History of American Excavations on Crete Geraldine C. Gesell

The Crete 2000 conference was a celebration of the American archaeological work in Crete between 1900 and 2000. This historical review emphasizes the work and experiences of the early American excavators on Crete, particularly Harriet Boyd Hawes (Fig. 1), Richard Seager (Fig. 2), and Edith Hall Dohan (Fig. 3), who worked in the first decade of the century. Other authors in this volume show how those who work in Crete today have taken the results and conclusions of these pioneer archaeologists as a base and are building on it. Contributors also consider the results of excavations in other parts of Crete by Greek colleagues and those from the other foreign schools. Reading the publications of the early excavators, one is amazed at how much their work, both in survey and excavation, is the forerunner of work that is done today. All three published their excavations promptly, and much of the information used here comes from these publications. The excavators also left a picture of themselves and

their lives in their papers and letters now housed in the Archives of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Smith College, and the University of Pennsylvania Museum. Harriet Boyd’s letters and documents are particularly good at giving a picture of life in Crete at the time. Edith Hall’s letters portray life at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens and on the Cretan excavations, enlivened with her personal comments to her family. Seager’s letters to Hall give some idea of life on his excavations at Pseira and Mochlos and much information about the finds. He also makes clear Hall’s role in seeing his manuscripts into print. First, it is important to look at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens as it functioned in the 1899–1900 academic year. In many ways, the program was similar to that of today: school trips; lectures on site, at museums, and at the various archaeological schools; excavations; and school papers. It was an active place. There

2

GESELL

Figure 2. Richard Seager on a white horse (Smith College Archives, Smith College).

were fifteen students, eight of whom were women. Of those, three would work in Crete: Harriet Boyd, Ida Thallon, and Lida Shaw King. Students came to the American School with various degrees of preparation. Many students went to Germany before the session to polish their German and took modern Greek lessons in Athens. The majority had a B.A., and many were in graduate school. Some had taught high school or lectured in college. The director was Rufus Richardson, a man with definite opinions about women. I mention his opinions because they were the motivating force for the first excavations in Crete. In Richardson’s first report to the Managing Committee in 1893, he said, “Women cannot well travel in the interior of Greece, nor share in the active work of excavation” (Lord 1947, 94). The women chafed at his attitude and were quick to prove him wrong. In the letters to her mother, Ida Thallon comments, “The Americans continue at Corinth. I am afraid that they are

not going to ask the girls to help boss the affairs, but that’s what comes of being a girl” (Thallon 1900a). She continued: Whenever Mr. Richardson rather slights the girls, Mrs. Richardson asks us to dinner or something. This time he has gone to Corinth to excavate without us. Not that we care much, for we have enough to do and they say that the work will be very stupid this year, but it is funny as the girls belong to the school as much as the men. (Thallon 1900b) An item in her journal (Thallon 1900c) significantly notes that Miss Boyd and Miss Patton also were invited to this dinner. Ida Thallon was not the only one who resented Richardson’s actions; Harriet Boyd, however, once characterized by Ida Thallon in a letter to her mother (Thallon 1900d) as “one of the cleverest women I have ever seen, brimful of ideas and energy,” was

HISTORY OF AMERICAN EXCAVATIONS ON CRETE

Figure 3. Edith Hall on a pony (University of Pennsylvania Museum, neg. #S4-139740).

3

4

GESELL

the one with the experience, gumption, and means to act. And act she did. Her actions resulted in the first American excavations in Crete in 1900. However, there had been already an American presence in Crete before that time. In the 1893–1894 academic year, the Archaeological Institute of America supported the work of Federico Halbherr in finding and recording inscriptions in Crete. The Institute also had sent a young American Harvard graduate, John Alden, to assist Halbherr in the excavation of the Agora at Gortyn. No excavation was possible on account of the political situation; however, they were able to conduct an epigraphical exploration of Pediada and a reconnaissance of Central Crete. During the survey, they discovered the site on the Patela near Prinias, north of Gortyn; Halbherr wrote of their findings in “Report on the Expedition of the Institute to Crete,” AJA 11 (Halbherr 1896). After this, Alden joined the American School in Athens. Some of his photographs and copies of inscriptions were published in Halbherr’s “Inscriptions from Various Cretan Cities,” AJA 8 (Halbherr 1893). Although Alden’s work was brief and not an excavation, it was the forerunner of Paula Perlman’s work on Cretan inscriptions (see Chapter 13) and Brice Erickson’s work on Cretan pottery of the 6th and 5th centuries B.C. (Erickson 2002; see Chapter 14). Next came Harriet Boyd and the first American excavations. Harriet Boyd was a student at the American School in the 1896–1897 academic year. When war broke out with Turkey, she gave up her studies to serve as a nurse at the front. This provided her with considerable experience in the interior of Greece, and she also made the acquaintance of an Epirote refugee who later would serve as the foreman for her excavations. In 1898, she won the School fellowship given by the Archaeological Institute of America and returned to her studies. In 1899, she received the Hoppin Memorial Fellowship for women for a second year. She wanted to participate in the School’s excavation at Corinth, but only the male students were invited. Frustrated by the refusal of Richardson to allow women to excavate at Corinth, she saved half of her fellowship funds and set out to have her own excavation. During the 1899–1900 academic year, the opportunity of excavating in Crete opened up. It was an exciting time of great discoveries. Arthur Evans began excavating the palace of Minos at Knossos that year, and Federico Halbherr had located and was about to dig the palace at Phaistos. Encouraged by

David Hogarth, director of the British School at Athens, Arthur Evans, and Mrs. Schliemann, and with Richardson’s permission to excavate under the auspices of the American School, Boyd set off on April 10, 1900. She was accompanied by Jean Patton, a botanist studying in Germany, her Epirote foreman, Aristides, and his mother. In Herakleion, they stayed in the British School town house and visited Knossos on the day that the throne was uncovered. She and her party made an exploration trip south, stopping at Ayia Deka, where Halbherr showed them the inscription at Gortyn. They continued southeast to Ano Vianno and Ierapetra; then they turned north across the Isthmus of Ierapetra to Kavousi, the site suggested to Boyd by Arthur Evans. They spent their first night in the carpenter’s shop. The next day up they went to see the site of the Geometric tomb, whose pottery Evans had obtained for the Herakleion Museum several years earlier. Boyd chose the Kavousi area for her excavation. She returned to Herakleion, sixty miles in two days, quite fast for mules and wooden saddles (Fig. 4), and met with Dr. Hazzidakis, the Ephor of Antiquities, to obtain the permit for excavation in the neighborhood of Kavousi and Episkopi. Back in Kavousi, they rented the shopkeeper’s house. Located on a rocky path, it had a courtyard with sheds and a kitchen. There was a stair to the roof, off which Boyd and Patton had a room, one of two in the village with a wooden floor, her main requirement. They were well off for food. They always had sheep’s milk, eggs, and bread, often lamb, kid, and chicken, and artichokes and large beans. Tinned foods were used only for lunch at the excavations. The view over the plains made up for any lack of variety in their diet. Boyd worked for about a month, starting with a survey near the sea. She dug trial trenches at Ayios Antonios, where she found Bronze Age sherds but no settlement. She worked for a week at Azoria Hill and found a perplexing circular construction over other walls. Then after several days exploring the Kastro, she found what she called a Chieftain’s house of thirteen rooms and also a well-preserved tholos tomb covered by a farmer’s house at nearby Skouriasmenos. Finally, she spent a week at Vronda, where she found eight small tholos tombs and some walls which later turned out to be a settlement on the ridge. Although she found some Bronze Age sherds at Ayios Antonios, the remaining sites appeared to be

HISTORY OF AMERICAN EXCAVATIONS ON CRETE

5

Figure 4. Among the group riding wooden saddles: Harriet Boyd, Blanche Wheeler, Aristides, Aristides’ mother (C.H. Hawes Archive of the Duckworth Collection, Department of Biological Anthropology, University of Cambridge).

later, mostly Early Iron Age. She published these sites (Boyd 1901), but she set aside the vases from the Vronda Tombs for Ida Thallon and Lida Shaw King. Thallon (1901) describes their work in the Herakleion Museum, but no manuscript was ever completed for publication. In 1978, Leslie Day, William Coulson, and I organized the Kavousi Project to re-examine the Kavousi area. From 1987 to 1992, we conducted new excavations on the Kastro and Vronda sites (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 2000). The final publication of the Kavousi Excavations is under preparation. Boyd’s reports attracted the support of the American Exploration Society of Philadelphia, which funded her return to Kavousi in 1901. During that season, Blanche Wheeler was her assistant. The excavation of the palaces at Knossos and Phaistos influenced Boyd to seek a site of the Minoan “Golden Age of Crete.” She began her search at Avgo, a fertile mountain valley above Kavousi, where she had noticed a Cyclopean wall near the Panayia church. Although she had little luck there,

four tholos tombs were found at Aloni, close to the citadel of Kastro (Fig. 5) (Boyd 1904, 15–20). The poor living conditions—a small one room hut— constant heavy rain, and the limited finds of the Geometric Period depressed her. So she continued to survey the plain and neighboring coastal hills for the Minoan site of her dreams. At last, George Perakis, a farmer of Vasiliki, sent word that at a place called Gournia, four miles west of Kavousi, there was a hill close to the sea with walls and sherds. On May 19, 1901, Boyd and Wheeler met Perakis at the roadside khan near Pacheia Ammos and proceeded to Gournia. They found Minoan sherds amidst the walls in the undergrowth. The decision was then made to move the excavation to Gournia (Watrous 2000b). The first day at Gournia turned up a perfect bronze spear point, a curved bronze knife, Minoan potsherds, stone vases, a well-paved road, a threshold, and a clay gutter. Immediately, Boyd petitioned the Cretan government for permission to excavate this site for the American Exploration

6

GESELL

Figure 5. Aloni Notebook, page 7: excavation notes of Tomb I (Smith College Archives, Smith College).

Society, and it was granted. She dug with a force of one hundred men and hired twelve girls to wash the pottery (Fig. 6). The first week they returned to Kavousi each night, but then Boyd obtained a house at Pacheia Ammos. It had only two rooms, one to serve as kitchen and sleeping quarters for Aristides’ mother, and one for Boyd and Wheeler. A dining room was set up in a bower of oleanders on the top of a nearby shed. The discoveries that

season included a shrine that was later published by Blanche Wheeler, now Williams (Figs. 7, 8, 9) (Williams 1908). The season ended with a glendi including Olympic-style games (Fig. 10). Boyd dug at Gournia for two more seasons. She uncovered many houses (Fig. 11) and a small palace of the Golden Age (Fig. 12). She also found evidence of Early, Middle, and Late Minoan III settlements and tombs. In 1903, she was assisted by

HISTORY OF AMERICAN EXCAVATIONS ON CRETE

7

Figure 6. Harriet Boyd (far right) directing the pot washers (C.H. Hawes Archive of the Duckworth Collection, Department of Biological Anthropology, University of Cambridge).

Richard Seager, Harold Hastings, and Adelene Moffat (Fig. 13) as artist. In 1904, Boyd was assisted by Richard Seager and Edith Hall. Seager is known to have done photographic work on the site, and he and Boyd developed the film. Richard Seager had followed an unusual path to archaeology. He attended Harvard College but left for health reasons. He was advised to go to the Mediterranean area, where he joined Boyd’s excavation at Gournia in 1903 and 1904 as an assistant. In 1904, he directed his own excavation at Vasiliki. Since his preparation was not academic, he learned as he worked on the sites. Edith Hall first came to the American School in 1903 as the Hoppin Fellow. From her letters (1903– 1905), we learn that the activities of the School members included not only the usual scholarly ones, but also numerous teas, dinners, and balls. Such social activities were considered obligatory in the society of the School, and they even included invitations to the palace balls (Hall 1904a). Although she regaled her mother and father with these activities, she confessed at least once to her sister that the balls were boring (Hall 1904c).

Figure 7. Roadway to the Gournia Shrine (University of Pennsylvania Museum, neg. #S4-142952).

8

GESELL

Miss Boyd near the excavations, where we will live with three servants and entertain the scholars who come to pay visits to the excavations. Who would ever have thought that I would have come to this— to balls and excavations” (Hall 1904b). Before the excavation at Gournia, Boyd, Hall, and Seager made a trip to West Crete looking for a site to dig another year (Hall 1904f). Starting at Chania, they went as far west as Phalaserna, a site on the northwest corner of Crete. It had been a harbor in ancient times, but now the area had risen and it was all dry land. Hall said they longed to put in a spade (Hall 1904g), but it wasn’t until 1988 that a Greek-American synergasia with Elpida Hadjidaki and Frank Frost was able to put in that spade and excavate that harbor (Frost and Hadjidaki 2000). Boyd made final preparations at Herakleion. While waiting for a sailboat to take them east, she put Hall to work. Hall learned immediately that much of the work on excavations was purely mechanical, like pasting pictures in dig notebooks (Hall 1904h). They had to buy digging equipment, supplies, and some canned food. The excavation began on April 18, 1904. Hall described her experiences:

Figure 8. Gournia Shrine equipment during excavation, showing five snake tubes and the tripod altar in situ (University of Pennsylvania Museum, neg. #S4-143114).

More significant for Cretan excavation history, she began to talk of Richard Seager (Hall 1904a) and of being invited to Gournia (Hall 1904b). A preliminary trip to Crete, in which she studied Mycenaean designs in the Herakleion Museum for her school paper and made trips to Knossos, Phaistos, and Ayia Triada, prepared her for working at Gournia. She noted that Halbherr conducted her around Ayia Triada and served tea from a tea service at the site (Hall 1904d). The director of the American School, T.W. Heermance, in a letter to James Rignall Wheeler, chairman of the Managing Committee, commented on Edith Hall, “she seems a sensible, clear-headed girl” and “she would be useful on an excavation” (Heermance 1903). Hall herself wrote about going to Gournia, “Mr. Seager will go. We will have a comfortable house built by

My first day’s work was to measure and locate every large terracotta jar and stone basin. The day begins on site at 7:30 A.M., directing until noon, then lunch and return at 3 P.M. and stay until sunset. Then a horseback gallop and dinner. Aristides had orders to put out the light at 9 P.M. (Hall 1904i) Hall also learned about the recording which had to be done. “Things have to be cleaned, measured, and labeled according to the exact spot and depth at which they were found” (Hall 1904i). She described the house with servants’ rooms below and three rooms upstairs—one for grain and mice; the second for Hall and Boyd furnished with camp beds, two boxes for a wash stand and bureau, trunk and suitcases for clothes; and the third, the living room where the lamp was (Hall 1904j). At night, Seager read aloud, and Hall and Boyd drew sherds (Hall 1904k). Hall wrote of several interesting trips. The first was to Kavousi, where they were greeted by a crowd of thirty men. “We shook hands and received bouquets. Drank coffee at the kafeneion and admired the little library of 40 books which Boyd had obtained for them” (Hall 1904k). On May 11, Dr. Wilhelm Dörpfeld arrived with his island tour. Hall wrote, “We were ready with our American

HISTORY OF AMERICAN EXCAVATIONS ON CRETE

9

Figure 9. Gournia Shrine artifacts after conservation (University of Pennsylvania Museum, neg. #S4-143111).

Figure 10. Harriet Boyd (far right) awarding the prizes at the games (C.H. Hawes Archive of the Duckworth Collection, Department of Physical Anthropology, University of Cambridge).

10

GESELL

Figure 11. East Ascent A and Quarter C houses at Gournia from the east (University of Pennsylvania Museum, neg. #S4-143117).

flag flying a welcome from the balcony” (Hall 1904l). After the Gournia tour, Boyd and Hall went with them to Palaikastro. The boat left at 10 A.M. and arrived at Palaikastro at 3 P.M., where they were received for a tour and tea. They rode back to Gournia the next day. Meanwhile, Seager took all of the workmen and made a trial at Vasiliki. He found a large amount of red and black pottery (Hall 1904l), which he called Vasiliki Ware. Seager came down with a fever and left for Herakleion (Hall 1904m). Hall remained to pack pots in seaweed and newspaper. She and Boyd camped out to excavate the caves at Ferma near Ayios Ioannis in late June (Hall 1904m; Betancourt 2000a). Then Hall left to supervise the arrival of the finds in Herakleion (Hall 1904n; 1904o), while Boyd stayed searching for more

tombs. At the end of the season, Boyd spent three weeks in Herakleion to mend, catalog, and take photographs of her finds in the museum, and ship a representative collection to the University of Pennsylvania Museum. Katalimata in the Cha Gorge was one of the other sites identified by Boyd in her surveys of the Kavousi and Gournia area. Situated on the ledges in the gorge, this was the only one she did not visit herself; she identified it as a Geometric site from the sherds brought down by Aristides. Nearly a hundred years later, it was excavated by Metaxia Tsipopoulou and William Coulson as part of the Halasmenos project (Tsipopoulou and Coulson 2000). The intrepid archaeologist who actually climbed up there every day was Krzysztof Nowicki. In recent years, Donald Haggis (2000a) in the

HISTORY OF AMERICAN EXCAVATIONS ON CRETE

11

Figure 12. Entrance to the Gournia Palace from the south (University of Pennsylvania Museum, neg. #139121).

Kavousi area and Vance Watrous in the Gournia area have conducted surveys which have added to the list of Harriet Boyd’s sites. In March 1905, Edith Hall, Leslie Shear, a firstyear student at the School, and a Miss Boyle set out to conduct a trial excavation in West Crete (Hall 1905a). They spent about a week looking for sites and digging in caves. They found some Mycenaean sherds in a cave, and obsidian and Neolithic sherds at a site near the end of the Dictynna peninsula (Hall 1905b). Their sherds were stored in the Museum in Chania, and they returned to Athens (Hall 1905c). That same year, Boyd had a study season to prepare the Gournia material for publication. She worked at the site to complete the plan and the description of the architecture, and in the Herakleion Museum to finish the description of the finds. The results were published in the Transactions of the Department of Archaeology, Free Museum of Science and Art I (Boyd 1904), and in a large folio volume, Gournia, Vasiliki, and Other Prehistoric Sites on the Isthmus of Hierapetra, Crete (Hawes et al. 1908). Wheeler (now Williams), Seager, and Hall have chapters in this volume.

After Boyd became engaged to Charles Hawes in 1905, she transferred her permit to excavate in the name of the American Exploration Society to Richard Seager. He then was in charge of the excavations in the area of the Isthmus of Ierapetra. In 1906, Seager continued his excavation at Vasiliki, including tombs at Ayios Theodoros and Episkopi. In his excavations at Vasiliki, he found houses from the Early, Middle, and Late Minoan I periods and some Roman remains. One look at the Vasiliki Plate in Gournia (Seager 1908) shows that Seager’s love was the shape and designs on the pottery, and the stratigraphy it would elucidate, not the architectural plans of the buildings and the settlement. Seager’s love of pottery and its decoration was to provide his greatest contribution to Minoan archaeology. The East Cretan sequence he developed is the basis of what is used today. Seager’s work at Vasiliki is published in Transactions of the Department of Archaeology, Free Museum of Science and Art I (Seager 1905) and II (Seager 1907) and in a chapter in Gournia (Seager 1908). In 1970, Antonios Zois opened new excavations at Vasiliki to clarify Seager’s work (Betancourt 2000b).

12

GESELL

Figure 13. Adelene Moffat on pack animal at fountain (Smith College Archives, Smith College).

At the end of the 1906 season, Seager felt that he had uncovered enough architecture and artifacts to characterize the site of Vasiliki and was ready to move on to another site. He had been attracted to the island of Pseira since an investigatory trip in 1903, so he made a three-day trial on the island at the end of the Vasiliki season. In 1907, still excavating for the American Exploration Society, he returned and conducted a two-month season at Pseira, uncovering a large settlement on a spit of land. The buildings contained fine pottery and even frescoes. However, the difficulties of the excavation were great. Water had to be brought by boat from springs on the mainland opposite the island. “Except on one occasion,” he said, “we were able to keep a two-day supply” (Seager 1910, 5). He commented on the problem in antiquity, mentioning cisterns and a single well, now brackish. Aside from the water problem, the men made themselves fairly comfortable in bush huts, returning to their villages only to lay in their weekly stock of provisions. Seager and his uncle, Benjamin Berry,

who served as architect, registrar, and artist, lived in tents. Seager found that the site was occupied from the EM II to the MM I period, but the main periods of occupation were MM III and LM I. Although a plan was drawn and architecture described, most of the pages of the publication, Excavations on the Island of Pseira, Crete (Seager 1910), were dedicated to the pottery and other finds. The cemetery, which he excavated, contained house tombs, rock shelters, and cist graves. He left this to be published later but never returned to it. A new excavation of the site and a study of the entire island were conducted between 1985–1991 by a Greek-American synergasia directed by Philip Betancourt and Costis Davaras (2000). A disagreement with the American Exploration Society over funding led Seager to change sites and excavate nearby Mochlos under the auspices of the American School. He had already conducted a trial there in 1907. Seager recognized the Minoan walls on both sides of the water and theorized that the island was once joined to the mainland. He found

HISTORY OF AMERICAN EXCAVATIONS ON CRETE

a LM I Minoan settlement covered with Roman houses, but after excavating several, he became discouraged and stopped. He was unable to get an architect, so he never made a plan of the site. He published the settlement in an article in the 1909 AJA (Seager 1909). He was more excited about the EM tombs, however, which contained rich grave goods, including gold jewelry, bronze vessels, and stone vases. These were published in a book, Explorations in the Island of Mochlos (Seager 1912). Since 1989 a Greek-American synergasia of Jeffrey Soles and Costis Davaras has been working at Mochlos, both on the island and the mainland opposite (Soles and Davaras 2000). In 1910, Hall joined Seager to excavate Sphoungaras near Gournia. Seager brought Lady Waldron, whom Edith Hall described as a middle-aged friend of his (Hall 1904e), as a chaperone. They went by boat to Pacheia Ammos, but Hall went by horseback in two days, stopping at Neapolis overnight. Seager had built a new house in Pacheia Ammos in 1909. Hall found the house nicer than expected, built of stone and concrete with a plain outer façade and interior court. They found the cemetery at Sphoungaras on the first day of excavation. Many of the burials had been made in overturned pithoi. During the study season, Seager and Hall looked for a new site. Among those which they visited and rejected were a return to Pseira, and Chrysokamino, noted earlier by Boyd as a metallurgical site. It has been excavated recently by Philip Betancourt and James Muhly (2000). Near Chrysokamino, Hall dug a cave, probably Kolonospilio, for two days (Hall 1910a; 1910b). Hall ended the 1910 season with a three-week excavation at Vrokastro. She lived in a tent on the heights and worked on the summit in the hope of locating a shrine but found only houses of the settlement. Seager visited once or twice a week and gave Hall full responsibility for the publication of both sites, Sphoungaras and Vrokastro. She published the former in Excavations in Eastern Crete: Sphoungaras (Hall 1912) and the latter in Excavations in Eastern Crete: Vrokastro (Hall 1914). Seager left Pacheia Ammos early, leaving her to finish up the season, pack away the excavation equipment at Pacheia Ammos, arrange for photographs and drawings, send finds to Herakleion, and choose objects for the University Museum by herself. In May and June of 1912, she returned to conduct a full season with Eleanor Rowland. She raised the money herself from the University Museum and

13

took full control. As the weather was poor, she dug several tombs below Kavousi and a burial cave at Ayios Antonios in the area near the sea (Haggis 2000b). At Vrokastro that year, the north slope of the settlement and a number of tombs south of the peak were uncovered. Everywhere she tested, she found house walls of the settlement. They were mostly Geometric, but in a few places she found Minoan remains. Her last excavation was at Priniatikos Pyrgos, where there was an extensive Minoan settlement, but she was discouraged by the Roman deposit above it (Hayden 2000a). Begun in 1986, the Vrokastro Survey Project, directed by Barbara Hayden and Jennifer Moody, is greatly increasing the understanding of the Vrokastro area. Although no further excavation has occurred at Vrokastro, in recent years Hayden has made new plans and reconstructions of the site, and a detailed study of the pottery and the figurines (Hayden 2000b; 2003). In the spring of 1914, Seager conducted his last excavation in the Isthmus of Ierapetra area. The previous fall, a great storm had dug a channel through the Pacheia Ammos beach to the sea, uncovering a number of pithos burials. Seager dug in the beach for a month, finding 213 burial jars and six larnakes with very few grave gifts. He was not able to return to complete his study because of the war, so his publication, The Cemetery of Pachyammos, Crete, is incomplete (Seager 1916; Watrous 2000a). In recent years when new buildings have been put up on the beach at Pacheia Ammos, pithos burials have been uncovered (Fig. 14). In 1924, Seager conducted a short dig near Kato Zakro (Muhly 2000a); it was the last of the American excavations in Crete by the early excavators. Seager died in 1925, and at his death the American excavations in Crete ceased for thirty-five years. In the 1930s Americans continued to visit Crete. One of the best teatime stories I heard in my early days at the American School was that told by Eugene Vanderpool of his journey to Crete. He and Rodney Young planned a trip with other American School students including perhaps Virginia Grace, who once told me that she had stayed at Seager’s house when it was run as a guest house by a woman in the village. Seager had wanted to leave his house for archaeologists to stay in, and so he had bequeathed it to a man in Kavousi for this purpose. Vanderpool and Young decided to fly on the British Royal Overseas Airways flying boat, which took eight days from London to India. One leg of the trip was Phaleron to the Bay of Mirabello, a direct flight which cannot be made today. The rest of the group

14

GESELL

Figure 14. Pithos burial found at Pacheia Ammos in 1986 (photograph by the author).

went in the ordinary way by boat. Vanderpool told of taking off at Phaleron and how the pilot took the plane out to sea and made a run back to take off in the bouncing waves. They landed in the Bay of Mirabello near Elounda. The trip to Pacheia Ammos was faster then than now. In 1959, Gladys Weinberg became the first American to excavate in the new series of projects after World War II. She dug for two months at Tarrha, looking unsuccessfully for a glass factory (Muhly 2000b). From 1964–1970, Joseph Shaw worked as an architect on Nikolaos Platon’s excavation of the palace of Zakros, which was financed by the Americans Leon and Harriet Pomerance (Platon 1971, 5). This led him to a study of Minoan architecture (Shaw 1971), and eventually, under the auspices of the American School, Joseph and Maria Shaw began the excavations at Kommos, a site identified by

Arthur Evans as a Minoan harbor town (Shaw and Shaw 2000). I worked on the Greek Swedish Excavation at Chania in 1970 and the Greek excavation at Ayia Pelagia in 1971 and 1972. The beginning of work in the Isthmus of Ierapetra area can be traced back to the trips made by Jeffrey Soles and me when we were working on our dissertations in 1970 and 1971. During a visit to Gournia, we found a kernos stone near one of the unpublished house tombs. A visit to Costis Davaras, then the ephor of East Crete, to discuss this led to his suggestion that the tombs should be cleaned and published. I wish to honor him in particular for his scholarly understanding of the need for the old sites to be cleaned and restudied, new plans to be drawn, and stratigraphy to be brought up to date. He also understood that we, as American archaeologists, felt it was our responsibility to do this work, especially on the sites excavated by Americans earlier in the century. When there were not enough American permits available, he participated personally so that the work could be done more quickly. This led to the original cleaning work at Kavousi and Mochlos, and the eventual excavations at Mochlos and Pseira. In 1974, Leslie Day and I began to visit and study the sites mentioned in Harriet Boyd’s publications. William Coulson joined us in 1978 to publish the pottery from the Kavousi tombs. Beginning in 1987, this led to the formation of the Kavousi Project to excavate the sites of Kastro and Vronda (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 2000). Already Philip Betancourt had joined with Costis Davaras to excavate Pseira in 1985 (Betancourt and Davaras 2000) and later joined with James Muhly to investigate the metallurgical site at Chrysokamino in 1987 (Muhly and Betancourt 2000). Other members of the East Crete ephoria also have been very helpful, even to the point of active participation. Metaxia Tsipopoulou has conducted a synergasia with William Coulson at Halasmenos (Tsipopoulou and Coulson 2000); Stavroula Apostolakou participated in the Kavousi cleaning operations. In recent years, the proistamenos of the ephoria, Nikos Papadakis, has been very supportive of all the American teams working in his area, including the Kavousi (Haggis 2000a; Mook 2000), Gournia (under study), and Vrokastro (Hayden 2000b; 2003) survey teams, and has seen his dream of an American study center come to pass. At this point, I would like to mention that there have been American survey teams working in other areas of the East, Central, and West Crete ephorias—Vance

HISTORY OF AMERICAN EXCAVATIONS ON CRETE

Watrous in the Lasithi Plain (Watrous 2000c), Vance Watrous and Despina Vallianou in the Mesara (Watrous 2000d), and Jennifer Moody in the Chania area and Sphakia, the last with Lucia Nixon (Moody 2000). In summary, it is important to note how the interests of all the first excavators in Crete—Boyd, Seager, and Hall—but particularly Boyd, were not limited simply to excavation. They saw their sites as a part of a whole. They understood the importance of surveying the area, not just looking for sites to dig, but for understanding their relationships both in time and space. They all realized the importance of determining the chronology of the pottery to clarify the stratigraphy of the sites and the need to relate one to another. Boyd studied the history of the area both in the ancient Greek and Roman authors, and also in Venetian writers and northern European travelers. Remains of all prehistorical and historical periods were recorded—not only Greek but Roman, Byzantine, Venetian, and Turkish. She studied the topography and geography of the area as it was in the early 20th century and learned how the people who lived in the area at that time adapted to living in it— what crops, implements, types of pots were in use at the time—and she made appropriate comparisons with those of the Bronze and Early Iron Ages. Although understandably she longed for a palace like that at Knossos or Phaistos, she understood the value of an ordinary town populated by ordinary people and filled with objects used in daily life. She carefully published not only the beautiful designs of the painted pottery, but also all the various shapes of the practical everyday coarse ware pottery, as well as stone and metal tools and vessels. She realized that she had uncovered important evidence for recreating the everyday life of the common Minoans, and she published it accordingly. Seager and Hall also made their contributions. Seager was interested particularly in the stratigraphy of the sites he dug and their relationship of one

15

to another based on the pottery designs of fine ware. Hall added much to our knowledge of Geometric Crete with her excavation at Vrokastro. Last, I want to emphasize the great collegiality that is reflected in the letters and journals of the early American excavators. Boyd particularly mentioned the great helpfulness of her Greek colleagues, especially Joseph Hazzidakis and Stephanos Xanthoudides; Cretan officials; the Cretan people, especially her workmen; her British colleagues, particularly Arthur Evans at Knossos, David Hogarth, and R.C. Bosanquet; and her Italian colleague, Federico Halbherr. Hall and Thallon, too, mention the unfailing courtesy, assistance, and cooperation of all these colleagues and their sharing of information on new discoveries. I know I speak for all my colleagues, especially those whose chapters appear in this volume, and the friends who attended the conference, when I say that we are striving to keep the same tradition of collegiality of scholars—sharing and exchanging information on material, ideas, and techniques alive today. This collegiality is nurtured and assisted by the INSTAP Study Center for East Crete in Pacheia Ammos, founded by Malcolm Wiener (Brogan 2000). Most of us use its facilities, services, and technological help in conservation, drawing, and photography. This new Center is the greatest step forward in American archaeology in the Isthmus of Ierapetra area. One wonders what Harriet Boyd, Richard Seager, and Edith Hall would think if they could see the new library when they lamented the lack of books, the photographic studio, conservation lab, and drafting room when they had only their small living quarters. Computers were not even dreamed of. I wish that we could look ahead and see what will happen in the next hundred years. Would that the archaeologists of that time will be able to build on our work and take it to a higher level just as we have built on the work of Harriet Boyd, Richard Seager, and Edith Hall over the past hundred years.

Acknowledgments Much of the information given in this paper came from letters, journals, and manuscripts of the early excavators and directors of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Some letters,

notebooks, and photographs of Harriet Boyd are in the Smith College Archives and the C.H. Hawes Archive in the Duckworth Collection of the Department of Biological Anthropology at the

16

GESELL

University of Cambridge, but most are in the archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. The letters and photographs of Richard Seager and Edith Hall are also in the archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum. The letters and journals of Ida Thallon and the letters of T.H. Heermance are in the archives of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. I thank these institutions for allowing me to use these materials and their archivists, particularly Natalia Vogeikoff-Brogan at the American School and Alex Pezzati at the University of Pennsylvania Museum, for their help. I also wish to thank Vasso Fotou for her invaluable help in general with this material and in particular for calling my attention to the C.H. Hawes Archives and taking me to meet Mary Allsebrook, Harriet Boyd Hawes’ daughter; Caroline Houser at Smith College for her assistance in finding photographs at Smith College; and Sue Hawes for her help with family photographs. Many of Harriet Boyd’s letters and personal materials have been published in Archaeology 18

(1965) 94–101, 268–276 and Born to Rebel: The Life of Harriet Boyd Hawes by Mary Allsebrook. Much of the information pertaining to excavation and publication in the letters of Richard Seager and Edith Hall is included in Richard Berry Seager: Pioneer Archaeologist and Proper Gentleman by Marshall Becker and Philip Betancourt. A few letters of Edith Hall are published in Archaeology 31(2) (1978) 5–11. The letters and journals of Ida Thallon, the letters of T.W. Heermance, and most of the letters of Richard Seager and Edith Hall are unpublished. General information about the American School of Classical Studies at Athens is available in A History of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 1882– 1942, An Intercollegiate Project by Louis Lord. The oral presentation of this paper at the Crete 2000 conference was illustrated with a large number of slides, only a limited number of which are reproduced here. The rest already have been reproduced in the volume Crete 2000: A Centennial Celebration of Archaeological Work on Crete (1900–2000) edited by James Muhly and Evangelia Sikla, Athens, 2000.

Bibliography Allsebrook, M. 1992. Born to Rebel: The Life of Harriet Boyd Hawes, Annie Allsebrook, ed., Oxford. Becker, M., and P. Betancourt. 1997. Richard Berry Seager: Pioneer Archaeologist and Proper Gentleman, Philadelphia. Betancourt, P.P. 2000a. “Ayia Photia Ierapetras,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, p. 117. ———. 2000b. “Vasiliki,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 118–121. Betancourt, P.P., and C. Davaras. 2000. “Pseira,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 38–57. Betancourt, P.P., and J.D. Muhly. 2000. “Chrysokamino: The Metallurgical Workshop,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 70–74. Boyd, H.A. 1901. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, in 1900,” AJA 5, pp. 125–157. ———. 1904. “Gournia: Report of the American Exploration Society’s Excavations at Gournia, Crete, 1901– 1903,” in Transactions of the Department of Archaeology, Free Museum of Science and Art, University of Pennsylvania I.1 and I.2, Philadelphia, pp. 7–44.

———. 1905. “Gournia: Report of the American Exploration Society’s Excavations at Gournia, Crete, 1904,” in Transactions of the Department of Archaeology, Free Museum of Science and Art, University of Pennsylvania I.3, Philadelphia, pp. 177–189. Brogan, T.M. 2000. “American Research Facilities on the North Isthmus of Ierapetra: Richard Seager’s Villa and the INSTAP Study Center for East Crete,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 196–200. Erickson, B. 2002. “Aphrati and Kato Syme: Pottery, Continuity, and Cult in Late Archaic and Classical Crete,” Hesperia 71, pp. 41–90. Frost, F.J., and E. Hadjidaki. 2000. “Phalasarna,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 192–195. Gesell, G.C., L.P. Day, and W.D.E. Coulson. 2000. “Kavousi,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 76–87. Haggis, D.C. 2000a. “Archaeological Survey at Kavousi,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 88–93. ———. 2000b. “Ayios Antonios,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, 58–61.

HISTORY OF AMERICAN EXCAVATIONS ON CRETE Halbherr, F. 1893. “Inscriptions from Various Cretan Cities,” AJA 8, pp. 539–601. ———. 1896. “Report on the Expedition of the Institute to Crete,” AJA 11, pp. 525–538. Hall, E. 1904a. Letter to Father and Mother. 18 January 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1904b. Letter to Father and Mother. 15 February 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1904c. Letter to Sister. 23 February 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1904d. Letter to Father and Mother. 29 February 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1904e. Letter to Father and Mother. ca. 14 March 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1904f. Letter to Father and Mother. 20 March 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1904g. Letter to Mother and Father. 28 March 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia.

17

———. 1905a. Letter to Father and Mother. 4 March 1905. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1905b. Letter to Father and Mother. 18 March 1905. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1905c. Letter to Father and Mother. 25 March 1905. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1910a. Letter to Father and Mother. 24 April 1910. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1910b. Letter to Father and Mother. 1 May 1910. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1912. Excavations in Eastern Crete: Sphoungaras (University of Pennsylvania Museum, Anthropological Publications III.2), Philadelphia. ———. 1914. Excavations in Eastern Crete: Vrokastro (University of Pennsylvania Museum, Anthropological Publications III.3), Philadelphia. ———. 1978. “Memoirs of an Archaeologist in Crete,” Katharine Page, ed., Archaeology 31(2), pp. 5–11. Hawes, H.B. 1965. “Memoirs of a Pioneer Excavator in Crete,” Archaeology 18, pp. 94–101, 268–276.

———. 1904h. Letter to Sister, Anne. 12 April 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia.

Hawes, H.B., B.E. Williams, R.B. Seager, and E.H. Hall. 1908. Gournia, Vasiliki and Other Prehistoric Sites on the Isthmus of Hierapetra, Crete, Philadelphia.

———. 1904i. Letter to Sister, Anne. 13 April 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia.

Hayden, B.J. 2000a. “Priniatikos Pyrgos,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 146–151.

———. 1904j. Letter to Mother and Father. 18 April 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1904k. Letter to Mother and Father. 8 May 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1904l. Letter to Mother and Father. 16 May 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1904m. Letter to Father and Mother. 5 June 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1904n. Letter to Father. 27 June 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. ———. 1904o. Letter to Mother and Sister. 29 June 1904. Archives of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia.

———. 2000b. “Vrokastro,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 136–145. ———. 2003. Reports on the Vrokastro Area, Eastern Crete. Vol. 1: Catalogue of Pottery from the Bronze and Early Iron Age Settlement of Vrokastro in the Collections of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology and the Archaeological Museum, Herakleion, Crete (University Museum Monograph 113), Philadelphia. Heermance, T.W. 1903. Letter to James Rignall Wheeler. 2 October 1903. Archives of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Lord, L. 1947. A History of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 1882–1942: An Intercollegiate Project, Cambridge, Mass. Moody, J. 2000. “Archaeological Survey Work in Western Crete,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 181– 191.

18

GESELL

Mook, M.S. 2000. “Traditional Architecture and Archaeological Reconstruction at Kavousi,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 94–100. Muhly, J.D. 2000a. “Zakros,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, p. 20. ———. 2000b. “Tarrha,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, p. 179. Muhly, J.D., and E. Sikla, eds. 2000. Crete 2000: A Centennial Celebration of American Archaeological Work on Crete, Athens. Platon, N. 1971. Zakros: The Discovery of a Lost Palace of Ancient Crete, New York. Seager, R.B. 1905. “Excavations at Vasiliki, 1904,” in Transactions of the Department of Archaeology, Free Museum of Science and Art, University of Pennsylvania I.3, Philadelphia, pp. 207–220. ———. 1907. “Excavations at Vasiliki, Crete, in 1906,” in Transactions of the Department of Archaeology, Free Museum of Science and Art, University of Pennsylvania II.2, Philadelphia, pp. 111–132. ———. 1908. “Excavations at Vasiliki,” in Hawes et al., 1908, pp. 49–50, pl. 12. ———. 1909. “Excavations on the Island of Mochlos, Crete, in 1908,” AJA 13, pp. 272–303. ———. 1910. Excavations on the Island of Pseira, Crete (University of Pennsylvania Museum, Anthropological Publications III.1), Philadelphia. ———. 1912. Explorations in the Island of Mochlos, Boston and New York. ———. 1916. The Cemetery of Pachyammos, Crete (University of Pennsylvania Museum, Anthropological Publications VII.1), Philadelphia.

Shaw, J. 1971. “Minoan Architecture: Materials and Techniques,” ASAtene 33, pp. 5–256. Shaw, J., and M.C. Shaw. 2000. “Kommos,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 160–178. Soles, J.S., and C. Davaras. 2000. “Mochlos,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 22–37. Thallon, I. 1900a. Letter to Mother. 19 February 1900. Archives of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. ———. 1900b. Letter to Mother. 5 April 1900. Archives of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. ———. 1900c. Journal Entry. 5 April 1900. Archives of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. ———. 1900d. Letter to Mother. 11 May 1900. Archives of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. ———. 1901. Journal Entries. 22 March–5 April 1901. Archives of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Tsipopoulou, M., and W.D.E. Coulson. 2000. “Halasmenos-Kataleimata,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 102–115. Watrous, L.V. 2000a. “Pacheia Ammos,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 123–125. ———. 2000b. “Gournia,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 126–135. ———. 2000c. “Lasithi,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 152–154. ———. 2000d. “Western Mesara Plain,” in Muhly and Sikla, eds., 2000, pp. 157–159. Williams, B. 1908. “Cult Objects,” in Hawes et al., 1908, pp. 47–48.

PA RT I Trade

1 Pseira and Knossos: The Transformation of an East Cretan Seaport Philip P. Betancourt

Pseira is a small island off the coast of Crete on the eastern side of the Gulf of Mirabello. It has a Minoan town of substantial size, which was excavated in two campaigns. Richard Seager (1910) examined it in 1906 and 1907. More recently, the settlement has been investigated in a synergasia directed by Costis Davaras and the author (Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1995; 1998; 1999; 2002; 2003; Floyd 1998; McEnroe 2001). The early excavations uncovered portions of more than fifty structures, and the modern project excavated six buildings in the town. Fundamental changes can be recognized at Pseira between MM II and LM IB. They are visible in many aspects of the material culture, and they involve not only the development of new styles but also a series of deep-seated transformations in such basic cultural traits as burial customs, architectural planning, and religion. The roots of these changes lie not in Eastern Crete but in Central Crete, and the gradual encroachment of Central Cretan features into Pseiran life is one of the most important aspects of that eastern city’s history during this period. The changes can be best appreciated by

examining three periods in Pseiran history: MM IIB, MM III/LM IA, and LM IB. In MM IIB, Pseira already had a long history. It had been founded in the Final Neolithic period, and it had gradually grown until it was a mediumsized town. Exploitation of the small island for agricultural purposes provided some of the town’s livelihood (Betancourt and Hope Simpson 1992), but the harbor and its access to trade probably helped determine the community’s success. Pseira was a busy seaport. Its houses were set on a peninsula at the eastern side of a harbor facing toward mainland Crete. The island of Pseira protected the harbor from northern winds, making the small cove safe even during fall and winter storms. The town was arranged in irregular blocks of buildings around an open plateia, and narrow lanes provided access to doorways. The houses had many rooms. They were built of local stones using roughly hewn blocks, and they had thick walls and flat roofs. Buildings were often on steeply sloping ground, so that more than one terrace was needed. When paving was required, the

22

BETANCOURT

island provided slabs of phyllite and metacarbonate, two stones that break naturally into flat slabs. Soil helped bond the building blocks together. The town was never fortified. Pseira’s residents buried their dead in a cemetery west of the town. Their small-sized tombs were communal and were used for many hundreds of years. The dead were sent to the next life with modest grave goods, almost all of them ordinary household objects. Tombs were cleaned out periodically to make room for later burials, and the earlier offerings were either discarded or swept aside to make room for the new arrival in the tomb. The Pseirans imported almost all of their pottery, as well as many other items, from nearby parts of Crete, including the region of Gournia, but a few products came from farther away. Obsidian blades and other tools were made locally from imported Melian obsidian. Pseirans farmed the land extensively, raised a few sheep and goats, and did a little shallow-water fishing. In their leisure time, they made craft items, including many stone vases. The manufacturers of the stone vessels preferred mottled serpentinite and banded marble as raw materials, perhaps because both stones were easily worked, and they were available on nearby Crete (Betancourt 1990b). At the end of MM IIB, the town was completely destroyed from unknown causes. Whether the destruction was from war or earthquake cannot be determined from the surviving evidence, but there was some continuity of habitation because MM IIB vases were buried under the floors of the next building phase as foundation deposits. In spite of this continuity, the new town’s plan was changed completely. Spatially, it now spread to the adjoining hill on the western side of the harbor. Streets were laid out along new lines, and the look of the entire community changed except that important locations, like the plateia, remained where they had always been. The traditional cemetery was abandoned. We do not know where the MM III and later people were buried because their cemetery has not been found. Little MM III pottery is present at the site, and it is likely that the population was very small for a short time before the reconstruction of the town was completed and people were able to live there again. During the LM I period of Pseira, influences from Central Crete, especially Knossos, gradually became more and more important in the island community. By the end of LM IB, the complexion of

the town was altered dramatically. That these influences were not the result of simple trade is shown by their depth. They can be traced in several changes within the community, some of which were cultural, deep-seated alterations in basic ways of living and thinking. New pottery styles appeared on Pseira in LM I. In MM IIB Pseira, the conical cup had been uncommon, and few straight-sided cups with handles were used. The carinated cup was the main local drinking vessel. The situation at Pseira contrasted markedly with the contemporary situation throughout Central Crete where the conical cup without a handle was extremely common, and the straight-sided cup was the most common drinking vessel with a handle (compare the statistics from Kommos, Betancourt 1990a). By LM I, the Central Cretan tastes had spread to Pseira. By then the carinated cup had become unfashionable throughout Crete, so it cannot be used as a factor in comparing different regions, but the sudden rise in popularity of the conical cup with no handle has to be explained. The residents of Pseira now felt the need for dozens of examples in each household, making it the most common ceramic shape (for the vessel as a Minoan cultural indicator, see Wiener 1984). Other popular Central Cretan pottery shapes, like the straight-sided cup and the bell cup, also increased in popularity, and they were joined by actual imports from Knossos. Among these imports, the rhyton was the most dramatic of the new shapes. Knossian Special Palatial Tradition vases with Floral Style and Marine Style decoration were among the finest pieces at the site (Figs. 1.1 and 1.2), and other Knossian pottery was also shipped to Pseira. The Knossian pottery must have made a dramatic visual impact in the town. An important aspect of its presence is its distribution; it comes from houses throughout the town, and in addition to isolated single examples of Special Palatial Tradition vases, groups of rhyta (including local vases as well as imported ones) were also present in hoards, presumably waiting to be brought out on special occasions. Fresco painting is another Knossian tradition that begins at Pseira in LM I. Elaborately dressed ladies on a wall painting from Building AC are molded in high relief in a technique whose best iconographic parallels are from Knossos (Shaw 1998). The style of the painting, with a miniaturist technique and complex designs, is also Knossian, as is the pose and the general concept of a group

PSEIRA AND KNOSSOS: THE TRANSFORMATION OF AN EAST CRETAN SEAPORT

Figure 1.1. Knossian Special Palatial Tradition vases imported into Pseira during LM IB. A. Marine Style bridge-spouted jug from Space BE 5 in Building BE. B. Rhyton decorated with palms from Room AB 12 in Building AB. C. Jar decorated with ivy garlands from Room BQ 1, Building BQ. D. Basket-shaped rhyton decorated with double axes from Room BQ 1, Building BQ.

23

24

BETANCOURT

Figure 1.2. Knossian Special Palatial Tradition vases and a bull-shaped vessel, all from Room BQ 1, Building BQ.

PSEIRA AND KNOSSOS: THE TRANSFORMATION OF AN EAST CRETAN SEAPORT

of two or more elaborately dressed women in conversation. In architecture, new concepts were adopted. A new engineering knowledge was first attested in LM I, as evidenced by stone dams built across ravines to retain water. We do not know where the knowledge came from; the two dams from Pseira are the earliest published examples from Crete, but the building skill was mature, not tentative or experimental, so it was developed elsewhere. Other new architectural ideas were more elegant. The pier-and-door partition wall was one of the defining characteristics of Knossian architecture. By constructing multiple doorways, the tradition allowed a wall to be either entirely open or selectively closed by opening or closing selected doors. This architectural detail began in Central Crete in MM II, and by LM I it spread throughout Crete. It was used especially in ashlar buildings with other central Cretan features like “lustral basins.” The typical piers were made of T-shaped and G-shaped blocks that leave no doubt about how the doors were closed against them. At Pseira, a multiple doorway-system was built in Building BC (Fig. 1.3), executed in local architectural blocks instead of the more formal blocks used by the originators of the concept (McEnroe 1990; 2001, 62–63). The bases were of local East Cretan sandstone, quarried at nearby Mochlos (Soles and Davaras 1983). The Pseiran pier-and-door partitions in Building BC represent a local stone-working tradition. The use of a local system of stone-working for a foreign architectural style is important for our interpretation of the history of the site because the new influence is conceptual, incorporating the idea without the architectural vocabulary. It means that the local people desired the arrangement for its designated purpose, and that they understood the architectural result, not that they were simply copying a nonlocal style without its meaning. Many other examples of Knossian-Pseiran relations exist in LM IB. One of the most interesting is a pair of stone vases. Two almost identical breccia rhyta are known: one was found at Pseira (Betancourt 1999, no. CB 1), the other at Knossos (Warren 1969, Shape 34B2 no. HM 36). The two pieces were surely made in the same workshop, perhaps even by the same hand. Wherever that workshop was located, the only two examples of the shape in this material come from Knossos and Pseira. If the Knossians were expanding and their influences were being felt at Pseira, what was the

25

motivation? The evidence suggests two possibilities, and they both may be explanations for the situation. The first possible motivation for Central Cretan expansion to the east is trade. Pseira’s harbor was always a valuable asset because it faces southeast, away from the prevailing winds in this part of the Aegean. Especially in the late summer and in the fall, the north wind (the meltemi) blows almost every day. Exposed harbors on the north coast of Crete must be closed for many days of the sailing season, but whoever had access to Pseira would always have had a secure landing place in almost any weather. In fact, the evidence for trade at LM IB Pseira is much more intense than for previous periods. LM IB Pseira imported pottery and its contents from Cyprus, the Syro-Palestinian coast, and the extreme eastern end of Crete. Obsidian from Gyali indicates trade with the Dodecanese (Betancourt 1997). In the other direction, of course, many pieces of pottery came from Knossos. If the palace at Knossos was interested in increasing its volume of trade with the east, it would have required stopping points along the north coast of Crete. Pseira would have provided an important port. A second possible motivation for the Knossian presence at Pseira is religious expansion. The rhyta and the other attractive Knossian ceramic imports are especially common in Pseiran contexts that have ritual objects of other classes, like stone chalices and offering tables. Pseira has new evidence for symbolic activity in LM I, and the new rituals required special equipment that survives in the archaeological record. Three substantial hoards of rhyta come from the LM IB town. In addition to the buildings with rhyton hoards, several other structures also have examples of new imported Knossian symbolic equipment. By contrast, the nearby town of Mochlos, which also had a busy port at this period, has not yielded any rhyton hoards, and Knossian LM IB pottery is not as common as at Pseira. None of these symbolic vessels were present at Pseira before LM I, suggesting that the residents of the community were doing something new. One of the most important new symbolic images in LM I Pseira was the bull. The animal was never important at Pseira before LM I. Unlike several other sites, bull imagery was not common at Pseira in MM II. In LM I, however, it suddenly became significant, and the site has produced a large number of bull-shaped vessels (see the list of

26

BETANCOURT

BC 4

BC 2

BC 3

BC 7

BC 5

BC 8

BC 9

BC 10

BC 6

A

B A

34.9 cm

A-A Upper Surface

B-B

B

40.0 cm

BUILDING BC: BASE 1 Height 30 cm

A

B Figure 1.3. A. Plan of Building BC showing the numbers of the spaces, with a pier-and-door partition wall on two sides of Space BC 2. B. Drawing of one of the local sandstone blocks used in the pier-and-door partition wall.

PSEIRA AND KNOSSOS: THE TRANSFORMATION OF AN EAST CRETAN SEAPORT

27

Figure 1.4. Bull-shaped vessel from the “House of the Rhyta” at Pseira.

Miller 1983, 387). Clay bulls were in all three of the LM IB rhyton hoards mentioned above. The bull was even used as a religious symbol on nonKnossian pottery imported into Pseira (Banou 1995, 35–36, no. AB 10). The bull had a long history as a religious and almost certainly political symbol at Knossos (the literature is extensive; see especially Younger 1995; Hallager and Hallager 1995; and Shaw 1997, 497–501, all with additional bibliography). The animal was a special symbol at this palace, and illustrations of bulls and bull-leaping were more common there than at any other Minoan site. It is not a surprise that the adoption of the bull as a symbolic image at Pseira accompanies the introduction of large amounts of Knossian influence in other areas. The iconography of the Pseiran bulls indicates that their use was religious rather than secular. An example of the animal from the upstairs room in the “House of the Rhyta,” for example, is a hollow vessel that was painted white with a net shown over its back (Fig. 1.4). Its horns have leafy garlands around them. This is not a work animal or a beast in the wild, but a specially decorated animal ready for a ceremony that probably includes its sacrifice, either actual or symbolic. The animal bones found

at Pseira show that cattle were not raised there. Sheep and goats were the animals of choice for such a bare landscape with little pasture land. The beef from cattle would have been an important and desirable feast, fit for a religious holiday. The figurines, all of which are animal-shaped rhyta, show that the bull was charged with symbolic meaning. Knossian expansion in MM III–LM I would have been a complex endeavor. Increased overseas trade, especially with the East, would have required stopping-places along the trade routes. Pseira must have been one of these harbor stops. If these posts were to be secure, they would need to be tied to the palace by more than economics. They would need to be staffed by people who were emotionally attached to the proposition of Knossian centrality and its hopes for prosperity for all. The evidence suggests that religious beliefs (whose exact nature we do not know) were one of the aspects of the link between Knossos and Pseira. They were an important part of the Knossian expansion, serving to join the people at the periphery with those at the center. A shared belief-system and a shared identity can form a crucial part of political control, making fortifications unnecessary and leading to increased affluence at towns like Pseira.

28

BETANCOURT

Bibliography Banou, E.S. 1995. “The Pottery, Building AB,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1995, pp. 33–41. Betancourt, P.P. 1990a. Kommos II. The Final Neolithic through Middle Minoan III Pottery, Princeton. ———. 1990b. “The Stone Vessels of Pseira,” Expedition 32(3), pp. 15–21. ———. 1997. “The Trade Route for Ghyali Obsidian,” in Laffineur and Betancourt, eds., 1997, pp. 171–176. ———. 1999. “The Stone Vessel, Area CB,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1999, pp. 244–245. Betancourt, P.P., and C. Davaras, eds. 1995. Pseira I. The Minoan Buildings on the West Side of Area A, Philadelphia. ———. 1998. Pseira II. Building AC (the “Shrine”) and Other Buildings in Area A, Philadelphia. ———. 1999. Pseira IV. Minoan Buildings in Areas B, C, D, and F, Philadelphia. ———. 2002. Pseira VI. The Pseira Cemetery 1. The Surface Survey, Philadelphia. ———. 2003. Pseira VII. The Pseira Cemetery 2. Excavation of the Tombs, Philadelphia. Betancourt, P. P., and R. Hope Simpson. 1992. “The Agricultural System of Bronze Age Pseira,” Cretan Studies 3, pp. 47–54. Darcque, P., and R. Treuil, eds. 1990. L’Habitat égéen préhistorique (BCH Supplement 19), Paris. Floyd, C.R. 1998. Pseira III. The Plateia Building. P.P. Betancourt and C. Davaras, eds., Philadelphia. Hallager, B.P., and E. Hallager. 1995. “The Knossian Bull. Political Propaganda in Neo-Palatial Crete,” in Laffineur and Niemeier, eds., 1995, pp. 547–555.

Laffineur, R., and P.P. Betancourt, eds. 1997. TEXNH. Craftsmen, Craftswomen and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 16), Austin and Liège. Laffineur, R., and W.-D. Niemeier, eds. 1995. POLITEIA. Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 12), Liège. McEnroe, J.C. 1990. “The Significance of Local Styles in Minoan Vernacular Architecture,” in Darcque and Treuil, eds., 1990, pp. 195–202. ———. 2001. Pseira V. The Architecture of Pseira. P.P. Betancourt and C. Davaras, eds., Philadelphia. Miller, E.B. 1983. Zoomorphic Vases in the Bronze Age Aegean, Ph.D. diss., Institute of Fine Arts, New York University. Seager, R.B. 1910. Excavations on the Island of Pseira, Crete, Philadelphia. Shaw, M.C. 1997. “Aegean Sponsors and Artists,” in Laffineur and Betancourt, eds., 1997, pp. 481–503. ———. 1998. “The Painted Plaster Reliefs from Pseira,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, pp. 55–76. Soles, J.S., and C. Davaras. 1983. “A Bronze Age Quarry in Eastern Crete,” JFA 10, pp. 33–46. Warren, P.M. 1969. Minoan Stone Vases, Cambridge. Wiener, M.H. 1984. “Crete and the Cyclades in LM I: The Tale of the Conical Cups,” in The Minoan Thalassocracy, Myth and Reality, R. Hägg and N. Marinatos, eds., Stockholm, pp. 17–25. Younger, J.G. 1995. “Bronze Age Representations of Aegean Bull-Games, III,” in Laffineur and Niemeier, eds., 1995, pp. 506–545.

2 The Incised and Relief Lily Jars from Mochlos Thomas M. Brogan

For most of the 20th century, excavators of Minoan sites have relied heavily on decorated pottery (most often fine wares) to address questions of chronology and ceramic production and exchange. Given the more detailed excavation methods now employed at most prehistoric Cretan sites (e.g., the aim to recover 100% of the material record and process complete ceramic assemblages), it will come as no surprise that approaches to Minoan pottery are changing. One gauge is provided by the heightened value that scholars now assign to pottery in coarse fabrics (e.g., Moody 1985, 51–65; Haggis and Mook 1993, 265–293). With the aid of petrographic analysis of coarse tempers (e.g., Day 1991; 1995, 149–175) and systematic statistical counts of fabrics in ceramic assemblages (e.g., Floyd 1998, 25–76, 235–297, App. A–E; Banou, Betancourt, and Floyd 1999, 311–324, App. A; Barnard and Brogan 2003), coarse ware studies are now providing important information for dating sites found in surface surveys (e.g., Moody 1985, 51–65; Haggis 1992, 37–53;

Haggis and Mook 1993, 265–293) and for studying ceramic production and exchange at all levels of Minoan society (e.g., Day 1997, 219–228). The present study considers a group of coarse ware jars decorated with images of lilies as evidence for exchange at the level of town, workshop, and farmstead at Neopalatial Mochlos. The corpus of lily jars forms a nice link in this celebration of American work on Crete because all were found by American and Greek-American teams excavating at Mochlos and Gournia in the first and last decades of the previous century. Seager and Boyd recovered at least three examples in their early excavations, but these discoveries largely have escaped notice. In room 14 of House D from the LM I town at Mochlos, Seager describes finding a jar that was not painted but had a crude lily incised on the shoulder while the clay was still moist (Seager 1909, 299–300). That no illustration was provided in the report is unfortunate because the incised jar does not appear to have been transferred

30

BROGAN

to the Herakleion Museum with the other finds from Mochlos, and its present location is unknown. While digging at Gournia between 1901 and 1904, Boyd found two more fragments of lily jars. The first carries the image of a lily flower and two buds in low relief (Zervos 1956, pl. 770), but it was not included in Boyd’s publication of the site. Another incised fragment of what can now be recognized as an image of a lily was illustrated in the Gournia publication (Hawes et al. 1908, 37, fig. 16:14), but its meaning eluded the excavator. The discovery of 15 more lily jars during the recent Greek-American excavations at Mochlos between 1989–1994 (Soles and Davaras 1992, 413– 445; 1994, 391–436; 1996a, 175–230) provides the necessary evidence for a detailed re-examination of these enigmatic vases (Table 2.1). Their consistent shape, fabric, decoration, and context all point to a single production center, and there is strong evidence to suggest that it was located at Mochlos.

Excavations behind the modern village have revealed an artisans’ quarter (Soles 1997, 425–432) with abundant evidence for pottery manufacture (including wheels, pits for storing wet clay, piles of dry clay, a throwing room with pivot stone, and updraft kilns). In essence, we are not creating a workshop on the basis of a group of pots but rather investigating the products of a known craft center. The arguments for dating the pottery to the final phase of Neopalatial Mochlos, which is described as either Final LM IB or LM IB/LM II, are presented in detail elsewhere (Brogan, Smith, and Soles 2002; Barnard and Brogan 2003). For the purposes of this chapter, it is important to emphasize that all lily jars from Mochlos belong to the same destruction horizon. Their contexts provide a useful starting point for an investigation of the function of the jars and the possible meaning of the lilies. The distribution of the vessels also may be a useful tool for interpreting the economy in the Mirabello area in

INVENTORY NO.

CONTEXT

JAR TYPE

LILY TYPE

Seager 1909, p. 298

Mochlos House D.1.14-ground floor

?

?

P 4201

Mochlos House D.5-surface find

?

Type 1?

P 832

Mochlos House C.7-second story

Type 1

Type 2

P 851

Mochlos House C.3-upper story

?

Type 2?

P 3901

Mochlos House C.3-upper story?

?

Type 1?

P 2080

Mochlos House C.3-upper story?

?

?

P 3439

Mochlos House C.3-ground floor

Type 2

Type 1

P 4171

Mochlos House B.2-ground floor

?

Type 1?

P 376

Coast Mochlos B.2-ground floor

Type 1

Type 1

P 1053

Coast Mochlos B.4-ground floor

Type 1

Type 2

P 3163

Coast Mochlos B.6-ground floor

?

Relief

P 1627

Coast Mochlos B-rear yard

?

?

P 511

Coast Mochlos A.1-ground floor

Type 1

Type 2?

P 475

Chalinomouri 2-buried in ground floor

Type 1

Type 2

P 2586

Chalinomouri 2-buried in ground floor

Type 2?

Relief

P 1243

Chalinomouri 5-ground floor

Type 1?

Type 1

Ier. Mus. No. 22

?

Type 2

Type 1

Ier. Mus. No. 86

?

Type 2

Type 2

Hawes 1908, fig. 14:16

Gournia

?

Type 1?

Zervos 1956, pl. 770

Gournia

?

Relief

X 1844

Chrysokamino Farmstead

?

Relief

Table 2.1.

Lily Jars distribution.

THE INCISED AND RELIEF JARS FROM MOCHLOS

P 1053

P 832

31

P 475

Figure 2.1. Type 1 Lily Jar profiles.

LM IB, when some argue that Gournia operated as an administrative center for second-order settlements at Mochlos and Pseira and their dependencies (e.g., Soles 1991). Finally, given the conference

theme, I would like to suggest the possible location of Seager’s lily jar, which is presumed to have been lost.

Formal Analysis of the Jars: Shape, Decoration, and Date The fabric is a particularly helpful starting point. The jars are made with clay that fires reddish yellow and is tempered with phyllites. Outcrops of this temper were readily available at Mochlos where the stone forms much of the coastline. This coarse fabric, referred to as Coarse Ware: Type 1 in Mochlos pottery studies, makes up the overwhelming majority of coarse wares of any Neopalatial assemblage at Mochlos (Barnard and Brogan 2003). The wheel-made jars were formed in two or three sections and have a piriform or pithoid shape with four vertical handles. Two types of jar are distinguished by the shape of the rim and neck. The more common (Fig. 2.1) has a continuous profile with a thickened, outturned rim and a tall, slightly concave neck. One example carries three horizontal bands of rope decoration below the handles. The second variety (Fig. 2.2) is rendered more plastically with a folded rim and collared neck forming

a prominent ridge at the join with the shoulder of the jar. Although the jars exhibit strong similarities on a general level, they vary in size, measuring from 0.31 to 0.52 m in height. Undecorated versions of both types of piriform jars also exist in the Neopalatial levels at Mochlos; however, from the statistical analysis of the three coastal Neopalatial buildings, we can report that the incised versions represent over 50% of the total output for this shape (Barnard and Brogan 2003). It is also worth noting that the more common coarse ware jar shape from these assemblages, the hole-mouth jar (e.g., Soles and Davaras 1994, pl. 101.a), is never decorated with incised lilies. The form, size, and number of the lilies incised on the piriform jars also show considerable variation. The image of the lily always is placed diagonally on the upper shoulder filling the space between two handles. Where the upper half of the

32

BROGAN

IM 86

IM 22

P 3439

Figure 2.2. Type 2 Lily Jar profiles.

pot is preserved, six examples carry a single image of a lily between the handles (P 376, P 475, P 511, P 3439; Ierapetra Museum [hereafter IM] 22, and IM 86). Two more jars have two images of lilies, each between different handles (P 832 and P 1053), while a unique example carries four lilies, each set between a pair of handles (P 1243). As with the shape of the piriform jars, two versions of the flower can be distinguished. The depiction of the lily usually includes a portion of the stem and leaves with one flower placed at the upper right-hand corner of the composition. The more common type employs a single incised line, often hastily drawn, to outline a stylized image of the flower (Fig. 2.3). The second uses two

P 3439

P 1627

Figure 2.3. Type 1 Images of Incised Lily.

IM 22

deeper, incised lines to create a more detailed and voluminous flower and occasionally lily buds (Fig. 2.4: P 1053). In several cases, three or four stamens are indicated in the blossom (IM 22 has five stamens); twice lily buds are placed on separate stems (Fig. 2.4). Although most flowers on the Mochlos jars are easily recognized, the identification of one incised image is controversial. P 511 (Soles and Davaras 1994, 418, fig. 14, pl. 101:b) carries a much smaller image than the other jars. The mark originally was identified as a Linear A inscription, sign AB 04 (Soles and Davaras 1994, 417, n. 33); however, because of the large number of hatchmarks on the stem, the idea has not met with widespread

P 832

P 475

P 1053

Figure 2.4. Type 2 Images of Incised Lily.

THE INCISED AND RELIEF JARS FROM MOCHLOS

acceptance. Could P 511 instead have a simple, hastily drawn lily? The jar shape and the position of the image support such a hypothesis, and one of the lilies decorating P 832 has the leaves marked with similar downward strokes. It is really the small size of the lily on P 511 that causes a problem. A smaller group of coarse jars at Mochlos was decorated with elaborate lilies in appliqué relief, like the one found by Boyd at Gournia (Zervos 1956, pl. 770). The only complete image is preserved on P 2586 (Fig. 2.5). The flower and buds are shaped in clay and applied to the vase; the remaining stem and leaves are incised. Fragments of at least one more bud have been found at Mochlos (P 3163), and in 2000, Cheryl Floyd discovered another possible fragment in a deposit from the farmhouse at Chrysokamino (unpublished, X 1844). Scholars (e.g., Rackham 1978, 755–764; Cerceau 1985, 181; Shaw 1993, 664; Sarpaki 2000, 659–660) have argued convincingly that two types of lilies were recognized by Bronze Age artists working on Crete and in the Cyclades, and both flowers are native to the area. The first is the red lily (Lilium chalcedonicum) characterized by a drooping flower with recurved petals and a sharp distinction between the upper and lower stem leaves (e.g., Huxley and Taylor 1984, pl. 338). The second is the white Madonna lily (Lilium candidum) which has upright flowers, spreading petals, and a gradual distinction between the upper and lower leaves (e.g., Müller 1997, 149, fig. 79). In depictions of lilies on wall paintings and pottery, it appears that Minoan artists often combined aspects of the two species (Rackham 1978, 756; Sarpaki 2000, 659; at Kommos, see Shaw and Shaw 2000, 167, fig. 219). At Mochlos, there is clear evidence for the depiction of the two different flower types (Figs. 2.3 and 2.4). One possible explanation is that the variation of the jar shape and lily designs is the result of different artists’ hands or workshop traditions. One cannot rule out, however, the intriguing possibility that the different lily designs were intended to distinguish red and white lilies (Type 1 for red lilies and Type 2 for white lilies). While the depiction of white lilies (Type 2) is consistent with the flower, it should be noted that the suggested depiction of the red lilies (Type 1) is a combination of the recurved petals of a red lily with upright flower position of the white lily. Foster’s work on Minoan relief pottery demonstrates that vegetal embellishments were almost never rendered in relief on Neopalatial ceramics

33

(Foster 1982, 113–114, chart 14). Apart from the lily vases at Mochlos and Gournia, the use of figural relief on ceramics was restricted to images of agrimi and felines (Foster 1982, 145; Platon 1997, 194, fig. 14; Davaras 1997, 128, fig. 21) or abstract designs of raised rope decoration (e.g., at Palaikastro House N: Sackett and Popham 1970, fig. 19:70 and 121; at the villa at Profitis Elias: Platon 1997, 199, fig. 28). The Mochlos potters also applied raised rope decoration in small geometric designs between the handles of jars and pithoi. The uniqueness of the incised lily jars at Mochlos also is confirmed by discussions with excavators of Neopalatial sites in Eastern Crete (e.g., Mallia, Myrtos Pyrgos, Makrygialos, Petras, and Palaikastro) where none are reported. It is interesting that the local Mochlos workshop’s use of incision is not limited to lily jars. A pithos from House C.3 on the island of Mochlos is incised with a large ship fitted with a broad sail, and wavy lines occasionally were incised on unpainted bowls and straight-sided jars (Barnard and Brogan 2003). Elsewhere, the use of incision in LM I is limited to a small number of vessels with Linear A (twenty examples are noted in Floyd 1995; two more from the LM I town of Mochlos, P 3704 and P 3901, can now be added) or with potter’s marks (e.g., at Kea: Bikaki 1984, 42–44, esp. pl. 10). Although there is abundant evidence for the destruction date of the Mochlos workshop, its beginnings are less certain. So far the lily jars from Mochlos all come from the Final LM IB or LM

P 2586 Figure 2.5. Type 3 Image of Relief Lily.

34

Figure 2.6. Lily Jars at Coast Mochlos.

Figure 2.7. Lily Jars at Chalinomouri.

BROGAN

THE INCISED AND RELIEF JARS FROM MOCHLOS

Current Excavation Seager’s Excavation Roads

35

The Town of Mochlos in the Late Minoan IB Period

Lily Jar LM I

Figure 2.8. Lily Jars on the Island of Mochlos.

IB/LM II destruction levels of the town and coastal buildings or in later fills (Table 2.1); however, the certainty of this observation is weakened by the fact that so little excavation was carried out below these floor levels. Both fragments from Boyd’s excavations at Gournia are without provenience, but future consultation with the Gournia excavation notebooks may provide additional contextual information. There is, however, an unusual piece of evidence from Gournia, which might offer some help. In a small room of House C.P, Boyd found fragments of four molds, one of which was for a complicated relief of a lily stalk. The image from this mold is very different from the relief lilies on the Mochlos and Gournia jars. The mold, in fact,

produces an image that resembles the compositions of lilies on Minoan wall paintings at Amnissos (Schäfer 1992) and Akrotiri on Thera (Marinatos 1984, 48, fig. 29; 50), and on pottery from Knossos (Evans 1935, 455). This similarity with images of MM III–LM IA paintings and pottery is less surprising, however, given the possibility of a LM IA date for Gournia House C.P and the surrounding houses (e.g., Niemeier 1979, 19; Driessen and Macdonald 1997, 214–215). In such a context, the mold would provide evidence for the production of relief lilies at Gournia already in LM IA. Whether such production also existed at Mochlos or only began there with the expansion of the settlement in LM IB (see Soles, Chapter 11) are matters that will require further excavation at Gournia and Mochlos.

Contextual and Iconographic Analysis To explore the function of the jars and meaning of the lilies, I would like to turn to the physical contexts of the vessels and then to the broader iconographic contexts of lilies in Minoan art. The common horizon for the lily jars at Mochlos is the Final LM IB or LM IB/LM II destruction level of the Neopalatial settlement, including the main town, the artisans’ quarters, and rural farmsteads (Figs. 2.6, 2.7, 2.8). Three jars were found at the

Chalinomouri farmstead (Soles and Davaras 1996b, 387–389). In Room 2, two were sunk into the ground with their mouths at floor level—the lilies would not have been visible (P 475 and P 2586)— and another lay in Room 5 (P 1243). Four more were found in and outside Building B of the artisans’ quarters at Coast Mochlos. One was found in Room 2 (P 376), a large workroom associated with stone vase making and weaving; another lay in Room 4 (P

36

BROGAN

1053) associated with pottery manufacture; a fragment with a relief lily bud (P 3136) was recovered in Room 6, a possible storage room; and another lily jar (P 1627) was found outside Building B. One more (P 511) was recovered in Room 1 of Building A at Coast Mochlos, a storage and work room. On the island, four were found in House C.3. Three had fallen in the collapse from the upper story (P 2080, 3439, 3901), including one (P 2080) recovered in an alley next to the house, and a fourth lay in a basement storeroom (P 851). The jar in House C.7 (P 832) was discovered in the debris from the second-story floor. In a small, groundfloor storage room of House D.1, Seager found a lily jar with three larger jars (two painted with lilies), and another fragment was found on the surface near House D.5 (P 4201). The last fragment to make this survey was recovered on the ground floor of B.2 (P 4171), but it is almost certain that more examples will come to light as detailed pottery studies of more houses are conducted. So far, such research has been carried out only for Chalinomouri, Coast Mochlos Buildings A and B, and most of House C.3, which explains, in part, why so many lily jars come from these contexts. These houses also represent the best-preserved and most complete assemblages, factors that will need to be considered when assessing any potential bias in the distribution of the vases. The types of contexts vary. In many cases, it was storage, not surprising given the fabric and shape, but the contents of the jars are never preserved. In other cases, the jars were used in upper-story rooms where poor preservation usually obscures clear interpretations of what were probably multipurpose rooms (refer to the Plateia Building at Pseira: Floyd 1998, 201–204). One also should keep in mind the possibility that these contexts may represent a mix of primary and secondary use of this utilitarian shape. There is, however, nothing unique about the contexts to suggest a specific social ritual. Given the intriguing presence of lilies on these jars, one would like to know any connection between the lilies and the jars, and the broader meaning of the flower for the inhabitants of Mochlos. Inquiries into the possible use of the lily at Mochlos begin with physical evidence. Lilies are native to Crete, but there is no physical evidence for white or red lilies in the existing palaeobotanical record (in general Sarpaki 2000, 666–667; for Mochlos, personal communication with Sarpaki). Sarpaki, however, cautions that this result is not conclusive

proof of their absence, but perhaps has more to do with the fact that only cut flowers would have been present in Minoan houses rather than actual lily bulbs, which if carbonized would be preserved in the archaeological record. Better information about the existence and possible Minoan (or Aegean) use of lilies comes from the rich iconography preserved on wall painting and seals where lilies are recognized from the Protopalatial period (Walberg 1992, 242–243). The lilies appear in a number of settings: in landscapes, as flowers in pots (cut or in soil, Shaw 1993, 663, n. 14), or as images decorating religious settings such as altars and shrines (e.g., Marinatos 1984, 90–91, fig. 62; 48, fig. 29; 75, fig. 53). Marinatos notes the flower’s profound role as a symbol of rebirth in spring and relevance for ceremonies connected with cults of fertility and afterlife (Marinatos 1984, 48, 74–75). Sarpaki also believes that the flowers conveyed a deep symbolic message whose meaning eludes us. She suggests that white lilies were viewed as signs of purity, and red lilies perhaps indicated passion. While it is not necessary to deduce the same meanings for the crude representations of lilies on coarse ware jars at Mochlos, one must be aware of the probable significance of flowers in Minoan culture. In his important study, Goody takes both a diachronic and global view of the role of flowers in society. With such a broad scope, however, he moves quickly from the Egyptian and Biblical worlds to later Greek and Roman civilizations. In doing so he overlooks what is clearly a vibrant Minoan culture of flowers (Goody 1993, 28–72). A more careful study addressing the origins, form, and function of the Minoan culture of flowers clearly is needed when placing objects like the Mochlos lily jars into their specific and broader social contexts. As a starting point, one could take Goody’s characterization of a hierarchical Egyptian use of flowers: It was the upper rather than the lower sectors of society that engaged in extravagant banquets, in elaborate funeral rituals, and in complex behaviors . . . Such situations breed conflict of a cognitive kind which becomes more acute with the growing of what to some will appear as “useless” flowers in preference to edible fruit, in private gardens rather that in public spaces. While the watered gardens of palaces and temples served a variety of

THE INCISED AND RELIEF JARS FROM MOCHLOS

purposes they were always manifestations of luxury, places of conspicuous consumption and display . . . (Goody 1993, 44) A similar Minoan elite attitude may be indicated by the abundant display of lilies in the iconography of wall paintings in palaces and villas, and on the gold finger rings where flowers (in particular lilies) play a prominent role in scenes connected with cult, performance, and landscape. One important and distinctive feature of the Aegean iconographic tradition, however, is that Aegean images of flowers are connected more closely with the natural landscape (Chapin 1997) than the constructed and cultivated Oriental garden that Goody describes (for the possible Egyptianizing influences at Amnissos, see Schäfer 1992, 85–87). The existence and form of Minoan gardens, most likely in connection with elite villas and palaces (e.g., at Amnissos: Schäfer 1992, 85–87; and at Phaistos: Shaw 1993, 680–685), are challenging topics, particularly if one is searching for an Egyptian variety. Shaw’s reconstruction and interpretation of a rock garden in the palace of Phaistos provides an intriguing solution. She suggests that Phaistos contained . . . a sacred garden that was also cultivated, one in which the naturalness of the original landscape was largely maintained. Had such a garden been portrayed in a fresco, it might well have appeared not as a real garden, but as an untamed landscape. . . (Shaw 1993, 685) Even in constructed elite settings, the Aegean reference to the landscape is paramount (Marinatos 1984, 85–96; Immerwahr 1990, 40–50; Chapin 1997; Sarpaki 2000, 657–667). Unlike the lilies on wall paintings and gold rings, there are no such contextual and material criteria to suggest that the lily jars at Mochlos were produced for such an elite market; in fact, they were probably intended for non-elite consumption. Perhaps this reveals something about the importance of flowers at all levels of Minoan society. In his review of later Greek and Roman cultures of flowers (and as an attempt to draw contrast to the contribution of Egypt and the Orient), Goody observes that . . . the power of prince and priest was less in evidence and the (Greek and Roman) culture of flowers took on a more secular, bourgeois and perhaps demotic aspect, owing partly to the extension of knowledge, partly to the diffusion of wealth, partly to the advent of some democracy and partly to the growth of

37

new technology . . . There was (also) a proliferation in the kinds of flowers being cultivated in the Eastern Mediterranean at this time. (Goody 1993, 55–56) I would suggest that much of the Greek and Roman culture of flowers was borrowed from the local prehistoric cultures in Greece and Italy, a tradition that already differed from that of Egypt in the Bronze Age. Although certain elite practices of Greek Bronze Age cultures may have had Near Eastern influences (particularly the idea of the palatial garden, e.g., Schäfer 1992, 885–887), the subtext and appearance were dependent largely on local factors, particularly the available flora. Returning to Mochlos and the meaning of the incised and relief images, it is worth pointing out that lilies are equally popular as motifs on painted pottery (another topic in itself). The five large bucket jars from Gournia and Mochlos provide the closest corpus restricting shape and decoration (e.g., Seager 1909, pl. 6). The widespread use of the flower by the local craftsmen (probably at Mochlos and Gournia for the painted versions) suggests that the lily was just as popular an image among local consumers. In contrast, the lily is not found on the stone seals recovered from Neopalatial levels at Mochlos, suggesting that the flower was less important as an administrative or personal symbol. Although their use as simple decoration on jars cannot be discounted, I still find the restriction of the incised and relief lilies to the piriform jars to be important. Could they have had some symbolic reference to the local administration (perhaps less likely given the absence of lilies on local seals) or some local religious event or practice? Were the jars produced simply as containers, or was a more specific relationship between the contents and the images of the flowers imagined? Perhaps as symbols of purity, they were thought to give some magical protection to the contents of the jars. The possibility that the flowers were used as potters’ marks identifying products of the local workshop also should be considered. But any search for such meaning will always need to be tempered with observations like that by Walberg: . . . The only safe conclusions we can draw is that some Minoan floral motifs (lilies, palms, crocus, and possibly ivy) have a special importance for the Minoans and that they may have had a religious symbolism in some contexts. (Walberg 1992, 246)

38

BROGAN

IM 22 Figure 2.9. Ierapetra Museum No. 22.

IM 86 Figure 2.10. Ierapetra Museum No. 86.

THE INCISED AND RELIEF JARS FROM MOCHLOS

39

Conclusions: The Limits of Exchange and the Location of Seager’s Lily Jar At present the lily jars offer an informative glimpse into a specific production at Mochlos that was widely consumed at the local level. This picture would seem to support earlier descriptions of an independent group of craftsmen at Mochlos (Soles 1997, 425–433). When we move outside Mochlos to the neighboring LM I towns, three sites, Gournia, Pseira, and Chrysokamino, provide evidence for the circulation of the lily jars at the regional level. In comparison with Mochlos, the number of jars found at these sites is small— two at Gournia, one at Pseira (Betancourt and Davaras, eds. 1999, 32, BC 18, fig. 4, pl. 5), and one at Chrysokamino—suggesting that the main market was the immediate Mochlos community. The distribution outside Mochlos is, however, quite significant for another reason, namely that the jars reached three different community levels in the regional hierarchy (e.g., Soles 1991, 71–76): the first order town and palace at Gournia, the second order town of Pseira, and the third order farmstead of Chrysokamino. A more precise model for the direction of these local exchanges is not possible within the confines of this chapter, but a future study would benefit from comparisons with the circulation of the entire range of products from the Mochlos workshops (i.e., in ceramic, stone, and metal). For the moment, these coarse jars beautifully illustrate one limit of local production and consumption. While one must not forget the possibility of secondary use of such vessels and the

possible impact of such events on pottery circulation, I predict that future excavation and study in the region will only strengthen the emerging local pattern of distribution. To conclude, I would like to return to Seager’s missing lily jar. Two candidates recently were put on display in the Ierapetra museum (Table 2.1: IM 22 and 8, Figs. 2.9 and 2.10). Their fabric, shape, and decoration mark them as products of the Mochlos workshop, but their findspots are unknown. While visiting Seager’s villa in Pacheia Ammos, I noticed a series of cement stubs flanking the interior court walls and imbedded into the cobbled court at intervals of 1.0 m. When I examined the stubs more closely, I realized that they were remains of cement used by Seager to anchor the ancient pots which once decorated the interior court of his villa. The lower portion of IM 86 is filled with similar cement, implying that at some point it had decorated Seager’s villa. This observation, when combined with Seager’s report of the excavations of Mochlos, strongly suggests the lily jars in Ierapetra were found by Seager at Mochlos, one presumably in Room 14 of House D. The vases were not taken to the Herakleion Museum when Seager died because they were part of the fabric of his villa. At some later point, someone must have recognized their importance and delivered them to Ierapetra.

Addendum Since writing this paper in 2000, I recognized the fragment of a lily jar in House BC at Pseira, which is included here in the conclusion but not in Table

2.1. Further pottery studies of houses from Blocks B and C at Mochlos have also identified more lily jar fragments, including P 4670 and P 5246.

40

BROGAN

Acknowledgments I would like to thank J. S. Soles and C. Davaras for permission to study and publish the large group of lily jars from the recent excavations at Mochlos as part of a larger study by K. Barnard and myself of the Neopalatial pottery from coastal settlements at Mochlos. I also am grateful to the 24th Ephoreia, particularly the late N. Papadakis, for permission to publish the two lily jars in the Ierapetra Collection: IM 22 and 86. I also have

benefited from the support of my colleagues at the INSTAP Study Center for East Crete, particularly D. Faulmann, who made the drawings, E. Huffman who made the plan, and K. May, who took the photographs. Because most of the research was conducted at the INSTAP Study Center, I would also like to thank both M.H. Wiener and P.P. Betancourt who in different ways made this resource possible.

Appendix Because this article serves as the primary publication of the lily jars in the Ierapetra Collection, catalog entries are provided for these vases.

IM 22 Jar. H. pres. 0.257, d. rim 0.14, d base. 0.117. Coarse phyllite fabric. Piriform body profile with folded rim, concave neck, ridge at juncture of neck and shoulder, four vertical handles, and molded base. Exterior buffslipped with one lily incised diagonally on shoulder between two handles. Flower with five stamens between recurved petals outlined in one line and diagonal slashes marking leaves on stem below.

IM 86 Jar. H. pres. 0.52, d. rim 0.225, d. base 0.17. Coarse phyllite fabric. Piriform body profile with outturned rim, concave neck, raised band of rope decoration at juncture of neck and shoulder, and four vertical handles. Lower third of interior filled with cement. Exterior buff-slipped with one lily incised diagonally on shoulder between two handles. Flower with three stamens between open petals outlined in two lines on longer central stem with diagonal slashes below marking leaves on two shorter stems ending in lily buds.

Bibliography Banou, E.S., P.P. Betancourt, and C.R. Floyd. 1999. “Statistical Tables for Pottery,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1999, Philadelphia, pp. 311–324. Barnard, K.A., and T.M. Brogan. 2003. Mochlos IB. Period III. Neopalatial Settlement on the Coast: The Artisans’ Quarter and the Farmhouse at Chalinomouri. The Neopalatial Pottery, J.S. Soles and C. Davaras, eds., Philadelphia. Betancourt, P.P., and C. Davaras, eds. 1999. Pseira IV. Minoan Buildings in Areas B, C, D, and F, Philadelphia. Bikaki, A.H. 1984. Keos IV. Aghia Irini: The Potters’ Marks, Mainz. Brogan, T.M., R.A.K. Smith, and J.S. Soles. 2002. “Mycenaeans at Mochlos? Exploring Culture and Identity in the LM IB to IIIA Transition,” Aegean

Archaeology 6, 2002 [2003], pp. 89–118. Cerceau, I. 1985. “Les représentations végétales dans l’art égéen: problémes d’identification,” in L’Iconographie Minoenne (BCH Supplement 11), P. Darcque and J-Cl. Poursat, eds., Paris, pp. 181–184. Chapin, A.P. 1997. “The Floral Fresco at Knossos,” BSA 92, pp. 1–24. Davaras, C. 1997. “The ‘Cult Villa’ at Makrygialos,” in The Function of the “Minoan Villa,” R. Hägg, ed., Stockholm, pp. 117–135. Day, P.M. 1991. A Petrographic Approach to the Study of Pottery in Neopalatial East Crete, Ph.D. diss., University of Cambridge. ———. 1995. “Pottery Production and Consumption in

THE INCISED AND RELIEF JARS FROM MOCHLOS the Sitia Bay Area During the New Palace Period,” in Achladia: Scavi e ricerche della Missione greco-italiana in Creta orientale. 1991–1992 (Incunabula Graeca 97), M. Tsipopoulou and E.L. Vagnetti, eds., Rome, pp. 149– 176. ———. 1997. “Ceramic Exchange between Towns and Outlying Settlements,” in The Function of the “Minoan Villa,” R. Hägg, ed., Stockholm, pp. 219–228. Driessen, J., and C.F. Macdonald. 1997. The Troubled Island: Minoan Crete Before and After the Santorini Eruption (Aegaeum 17), Liège. Evans, A. 1935. The Palace of Minos at Knossos II. London. Floyd, C.R. 1995. “Fragments from Two Pithoi with Linear A Inscriptions from Pseira,” Kadmos 34, pp. 39–48. ———. 1998. Pseira III. The Plateia Building. P.P. Betancourt and C. Davaras, eds., Philadelphia. Foster, K.P. 1982. Minoan Ceramic Relief (SIMA 64), Göteborg. Goody, J. 1993. The Culture of Flowers, Cambridge. Haggis, D.C. 1992. The Kavousi-Thriphti Survey: An Analysis of Settlement Pattern in an Area of Eastern Crete in the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age, Ph.D. diss., University of Minnesota. Haggis, D.C., and M.S. Mook. 1993. “The Kavousi Coarse Wares: A Bronze Age Chronology for Survey in the Mirabello Area, East Crete,” AJA 97, pp. 265–293. Hawes, H.B., B.E. Williams, R.B. Seager, and E.H. Hall. 1908. Gournia, Vasiliki and other Prehistoric Sites on the Isthmus of Hierapetra, Crete, Philadelphia.

41

Platon, L. 1997. “The Minoan Villa in Eastern Crete. Riza, Akhladia, and Prophetes Elias, Praissos: Two Specimens of One Category?” in The Function of the “Minoan Villa,” R. Hägg, ed., Stockholm, pp. 187–202. Rackham, O. 1978. “The Flora and Vegetation of Thera and Crete Before and After the Great Eruption,” in Thera and the Aegean World I, C.G. Doumas, ed., London, pp. 755–764. Sackett, L.H., and M. Popham. 1970. “Excavations at Palaikastro VII,” BSA 64, pp. 203–242, pls. 33–65. Sarpaki, A. 2000. “Plants Chosen to Be Depicted on Theran Wall Paintings: Tentative Interpretations,” in The Wall Paintings of Thera II, S. Sherratt, ed., Athens, pp. 657–680. Schäfer, J. 1992. “The Role of ‘Gardens’ in Minoan Civilization,” in Proceedings of an International Symposium: The Civilizations of the Aegean and Their Diffusion in Cyprus and the Eastern Mediterranean, 2000–600 B.C., V. Karageorghis, ed., Larnaca, pp. 85–87. Seager, R.B. 1909. “Excavations on the Island of Mochlos, Crete in 1908,” AJA 13, pp. 272–303. Shaw, J., and M. Shaw. 2000. “Kommos,” in Crete 2000: One Hundred Years of American Archaeological Work on Crete, J.D. Muhly and E. Sikla, eds., Athens, pp. 160– 178. Shaw, M. 1993. “The Aegean Garden,” AJA 97, pp. 661– 685 Soles, J.S. 1991. “The Gournia Palace,” AJA 95, pp. 17–78.

Huxley, A., and W. Taylor. 1984. Flowers of Greece and the Aegean, London.

———. 1997. “A Community of Craft Specialists,” in TEXNH. Craftsmen, Craftswomen and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 16), R. Laffineur and P.P. Betancourt, eds., Liège, pp. 425–433.

Immerwahr, S.A. 1990. Aegean Painting in the Bronze Age, University Park, Md.

Soles, J.S., and C. Davaras. 1992. “Excavations at Mochlos, 1989,” Hesperia 61, pp. 413–445.

Marinatos, N. 1984. Art and Religion in Thera, Reconstructing a Bronze Age Society, Athens.

———. 1994. “Excavations at Mochlos, 1990–1991,” Hesperia 63, pp. 391–436.

Moody, J.A. 1985. “The Development of a Bronze Age Coarse Ware Chronology for the Khania Region of West Crete,” TUAS 10, pp. 51–65.

———. 1996a. “Excavations at Mochlos, 1992–1993,” Hesperia 65, pp. 175–230.

Müller, W. 1997. Kretische Tongefässe mit Meeresdekor. Entwicklung und Stellung innerhalb der feinen Keramik von Spätminoisch IB auf Kreta (ArchForsch 19), Berlin. Niemeier, W.-D. 1979. “The Master of the Gournia Octopus Stirrup Jar and a Late Minoan I Pottery Workshop at Gournia Exporting to Thera,” TUAS 4, pp. 18–26.

———. 1996b. “Excavations of a Minoan Farmhouse at Chalinomouri,” AJA 100, p. 387. Walberg, G. 1992. “Minoan Floral Iconography,” in EIKON. Aegean Bronze Age Iconography: Shaping a Methodology (Aegaeum 8), R. Laffineur and J. Crowley, eds., Liège, pp. 241–246. Zervos, C. 1956. L’art de la Crète: néolithique et minoenne, Paris.

3 Kommos: The Sea-Gate to Southern Crete Joseph W. Shaw

for Sir Arthur Evans

Kommos (Fig. 3.1), a harbor-town like Ugarit in Syria or Kition in Cyprus, can serve as a focus for study of east-west connections (see also Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1996, 8–11, 379–398; and, after which this now updated article is taken, Shaw 1998). At Kommos, evidence for interconnections covers a broad spectrum from ca. 1800 B.C. to 600 B.C., some 1200 years. The site was first settled in MM IB. The two major periods are Minoan and Greek (Fig. 3.2). For the Middle and Late Bronze Age, there are three large civic buildings, at least partially designed for storage, bordered on the north by a town. The first two structures, MM II Building AA and LM I Building T, are palatial in character, with stoas and a large central court. The third, LM IIIA:2/IIIB Building P (Fig. 3.3), with broad galleries, may have been used to store ships during the winter months (Shaw and Shaw 1999). Our chief evidence for interconnections during MM and LM is ceramic, in particular pottery from Cyprus, Egypt, Sardinia, Western Anatolia, and

Syria/Palestine. For the period 1000–600 B.C., when a rural sanctuary was in use, our information also is mainly ceramic in nature (Phoenician and East Greek pottery), but an actual built structure and graffiti on local pottery testify to foreign presence. In the Southern Area, where the civic buildings would be constructed later, a few smaller structures were built at apparently random points. Building AA (Fig. 3.2, all of the area marked MM) was constructed upon a huge built platform. Within the fill of the platform, the Minoan pottery ranges from MM IB to MM IIB. Of particular interest are the numerous ceramic imports, especially at least fifty pieces of Cypriot pottery, the largest and earliest such group found in the Aegean, and also the earliest imports at Kommos. Aleydis Van de Moortel is studying these imports, mainly jugs and flasks, for the forthcoming Volume V in the Kommos series. There is also a large Cypriot lentoid jug from the destruction level of AA. The finds from AA confirm

44

SHAW

Figure 3.1. View of Kommos site, from south (photograph by J.W. Shaw).

the basic Cypriot/Minoan commercial interaction at least as early as MM IB. A Middle Cypriot jug of the White Painted IV–VI Cross Line Style (Fig. 3.4) from the general Early Palatial Period was recovered in one of the MM houses on the Central Hillside (Russell 1985). For the MM III–LM III period, studied by P. Betancourt (1990), V. Watrous (1989, 1992), and, now, by J. Rutter (1999; see also Bennet 1994, 1996), there is rich and varied ceramic evidence for international contact. This begins in MM III, peaks in LM IIIA:1 and continues, but at a reduced pace, into LM IIIB. Indeed, the total number of foreign sherds or entire vessels (usually the former), over 250, surpasses those from any other Aegean site (see Cline 1994). There are at least eighty-one pieces of the Cypriot ware, making it the most numerous import during this period. These include thirty-one bowls, at least twenty jugs, and ten pithoi (Fig. 3.5 for the latter). White Slip II milk bowls (twenty-nine examples; Fig. 3.6) predominate, but there are White Painted and Base Ring I and II wares, Monochrome Ware, and even a Red Lustrous Ware Spindle Bottle (Fig. 3.6). The Cypriot pottery is distributed

throughout the site but with slightly more in the Southern Area than on the Central Hillside, or at the Hilltop Houses. There were forty-three fragments of Egyptian pottery (Fig. 3.6), but no complete vessels, distributed throughout the site. Of the three main shapes present—amphoras, flasks, and transport vessels— the flasks are found in connection with the residences, and the transport vessels are restricted to the Civic Area on the south. The Canaanite pottery (forty-eight items; an example in Fig. 3.6), with a number of complete vessels, consists entirely of transport amphoras. They are about twice as numerous in the Civic Area as in the town to the north. Both these and the Egyptian transport vessels were used in the commercial exchange and storage that took place there. Sardinian wares (fifty-three examples) began to arrive at Kommos later than the others, toward the end of LM IIIA:1. At first, there were only a few, but their number multiplies, much like the pottery at Kommos from Chania in Western Crete. By LM IIIB, they far outnumber other foreign wares. Indeed, these imports from the Western Mediterranean

KOMMOS: THE SEA-GATE TO SOUTHERN CRETE

45

Figure 3.2. Plan of Southern Area showing architectural periods (by G. Bianco and M. Nelson).

replace those from the East. In terms of shape, the Sardinian vessels are chiefly jars with bowls being used as lids. The Western Anatolian wares (twentythree items) are mainly jugs and jars imported during the Postpalatial Period. Some of the foreign pottery, especially the semiclosed shapes such as jars, amphoras, and pithoi, was probably obtained for its contents, for visual appeal, or for utilitarian use in the household. Since

the Egyptian and Canaanite containers were almost exclusively closed shapes, it is likely that their contents were of primary importance. These vessels also could be reused when empty. The Cypriot pottery has a different character; many are open cups and bowls, especially the decorated White Slip Ware examples. These could have been brought from Cyprus stacked up inside of pithoi, ready to be exchanged, like those found in the Uluburun

46

SHAW

Figure 3.3. Elevation of Building P, containing probable ship-sheds (by G. Bianco).

wreck (Bass 1986). There are also Cypriot jugs and jars, however, and even the ten pithoi that, aside from any intrinsic appeal, may have contained something special. Watrous (1992, 182) has suggested that scrap metal was brought from Sardinia in the closed vessels at a time when copper and tin were harder to come by. The open shapes, chiefly bowls, appear to be for ordinary household use. Aside from the pottery, two stone anchors (Fig. 3.7; J. Shaw 1995) are of particular interest. They were found reused as building material in an LM IIIA:2 context in the Civic Area. Their significance is twofold. First, since each weighs 75 kg, they show

Figure 3.5. Cypriot pithos C 9013 from LM IIIA:2 House X (photograph by T. Dabney).

Figure 3.4. Cypriot White-Painted IV juglet C 6112 from the Kommos settlement (photograph by T. Dabney).

that the harbor was visited by at least mediumsized ships. Secondly, they are of a type rare in Aegean archaeological contexts (four from off the shore at Chania are described by Hadjidaki, Chapter 4), a composite anchor with three holes that occurs chiefly in Cyprus and along the Syrian littoral near Ugarit. At this point, Ugarit seems the most likely source since some of the anchors there are as early as, or earlier than, the two from Kommos. That the anchors are actually from the East can be shown through geological analysis of their stone, which contains microfossils of a type that occurs in that area rather than in Crete. Thus, they were brought by ship and either exchanged or abandoned somewhere near the harborside—unusual objects of exclusively marine use.

KOMMOS: THE SEA-GATE TO SOUTHERN CRETE

Figure 3.6. Imported Canaanite/Syrian (C 2924, amphora handle), Egyptian (C 287, jar), Mycenaean (C 2949, stirrup jar), and Cypriot (C 2753, Red Polished Spindle Bottle) (C 665, C 2141, both White Slip II) pottery.

Figure 3.7. Syrian composite stone anchor from a LM IIIA:2 context in Southern Area (drawing by G. Bianco).

47

48

SHAW

After ca. 1250 B.C., there is a hiatus at the site. The town and civic buildings remain deserted, with only a few local visitors during the 12th century. During the Subminoan period toward the end of the 11th century, a small rectangular building, open to the east, was constructed upon the ruins of the Minoan civic structures (Shaw and Shaw eds., 2000). It seems that this was a small temple or shrine within which meals were eaten by people sitting on a bench. Terracotta figurines and bronze arrowheads were among the offerings dedicated to a still unknown divinity. In turn, toward the end of the 9th century, this building, which we have called “Temple A,” was replaced by another structure, “Temple B.” It was set at a higher level and was larger; Temple B lasted until the end of the 7th century B.C. It had three successive architectural/stratigraphic phases. Temple B also was open to the east, like A, but it had a pillar at its center on axis. Temple B was

Figure 3.9. Faience figurine of Egyptian Goddess Sekhmet (watercolor by G. Bianco).

Figure 3.8. Tripillar Phoenician-influenced shrine from Geometric Temple B (drawing by G. Bianco).

larger and had a hearth west of the pillar. West of the hearth was a most unusual structure made up of three tapering pillars socketed into rectangular mortices cut in a row, north-south, into the top of a large triangular block (Fig. 3.8). A bronze horse, facing east, was wedged between the two southern pillars. A faience figurine of Sekhmet (Fig. 3.9), the Egyptian goddess of war, was above the horse. Between the two northern pillars was a faience figurine of a male, possibly of Nefertum, son of Sekhmet. East of, and behind, the pillars were the remains of a bronze shield that had been held in position by slabs set on edge, and in front of the pillars were numerous offerings, including a bronze bull and a large quantity of decorated pottery. The closest parallels to this arrangement in Temple B are shrines with multiple free-standing pillars shown in later Punic reliefs. A tapering 7th century B.C. pillar inscribed with Phoenician

KOMMOS: THE SEA-GATE TO SOUTHERN CRETE

Figure 3.10. Tapering Cypriot pillar surmounted by head of Egyptian God Bes, in the Louvre (Hermary 1986, pl. 41.1–41.2).

letters (Fig. 3.10; Hermary 1986, 405–406, pl. 41.1– 41.2) shows that actual pillars were known in the Eastern Mediterranean, where the tradition first developed. The “Tripillar” Shrine at Kommos, therefore, clearly is part of the Phoenician tradition (J. Shaw 1989). The identification of the shrine as Phoenician-inspired is reinforced by Phoenician pottery found scattered within Temples A and B and in stratified dumps to the south. Most of the some three hundred sherds (no entire pots were recovered) are from storage jars like those in Temple A (Bikai 2000), but a number of them are from jugs. Bikai remarks that the discovery of this early 9th century B.C. pottery makes the first expansion of Phoenicians toward the Western Mediterranean earlier by perhaps a full century. While intermediaries remain a possibility, it appears that Phoenicians actually set up this shrine according to their own customs. Of particular importance for understanding the context is that the shrine is actually a built structure and, to that extent, is unique. In contrast, Easterners usually brought only portable items, such as pottery, to the Aegean. Its very permanence is surprising—a strong religious and cultural statement. At Kommos, there was water and a fair harbor, also access

49

to inland areas and to the people living there. Probably in collaboration with local Cretans, whose pottery and artifacts suggest that the major use of both Temples A and B was by the indigenous population, the Phoenicians decided to participate in the building of a new temple. Perhaps the inspiration for Temple B was Phoenician—we may never know—but certainly the scheme for the Tripillar Shrine seems to have been theirs. Probably before the Phoenicians departed, other traders arrived. Again, the evidence has to do with ceramics, this time concentrated in the mid to late 7th century. Perhaps most indicative is a group of ten graffiti (Csapo 1991; 1992; Csapo, Johnston, and Geagan 2000); many of these come from a single lens of earth containing ash and the remnants of meals in the Temple B dump. Most of the graffiti are on cups of a southern Cretan fabric and, therefore, probably were acquired and inscribed at Kommos. The cups themselves are ordinary tableware, most decorated only with black glaze. The inscriptions are neither long nor complete. A few proper names are readable; the individual letter forms point to merchants or sailors (or both) from Northern Boeotia, Lokris, or Phokis—perhaps to a mercantile association involving various members from those areas. One large hydria was

Figure 3.11. Inscribed East Greek amphora or hydria handle I 46 from Building Q (photograph by T. Dabney).

50

SHAW

reserved for Nikagoras, perhaps an Athenian or a Boeotian. Another pot was reserved for Admainon or ‘Admatos. The [graffiti] allow us a glimpse at the international character of this . . . port of call, where Cretans, Central Greeks, probably other Greeks, perhaps even Phoenicians lied to each other over wine and limpets at the seaside shrine and left their cups, possibly for reuse on the return journey. (Csapo 1991, 215) A somewhat different view is provided by the contents of a late 7th century building, “Q,” which lies south of Temple B (Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2000, 31–35). Building Q was over 40 m in length, only 5 m or so wide, and oriented east-west. Its single entrance, facing the shore, provided controlled access to five rooms which appear to have stored goods, especially pottery, local as well as a variety of other imported wares. This building no doubt serviced the nearby cult, being its “china cupboard” as Alan Johnston (1993) observed, but the number of fragments of imported transport amphoras (e.g., the handle in Fig. 3.11) give the

impression of a trading post that serviced local needs and then some. The transport amphoras are of various styles: Attic SOS type (possibly Laconian), a few Corinthian examples, and also East Greek groups (Lesbian, Chian, Samian, Milesian), and Cypriot pieces. There were also a variety of Phoenician items manufactured outside the Levant, perhaps in North Africa. Presumably, these transport amphoras carried wine and/or oil—other contents are possible as well, however. These were from the last decade of the 7th century, before Temple B was abandoned and the sanctuary largely went out of use. Who were the merchants in charge of Q? They could have been local inhabitants, but some Northern Greek traders probably played a role. Johnston suspects that the East Greek pottery was carried in East Greek ships (1993, 377). He is also tempted to connect the exchanges with North Africa, especially with the settling of Cyrenaica and the founding of Cyrene and Tocra, which had to be provisioned from outside until their vines and olives were established.

Conclusion During the Bronze Age, Kommos reflects contact primarily with the Levant, especially with Cyprus. Trade begins as early as the Middle Minoan period, but the real peak in interchange comes later, during LM IIIA:1. Late connections with Sardinia during LM IIIA:2/B should not be forgotten. Afterwards, there is the early Phoenician presence, intense enough during the late 9th and early 8th centuries on the occasion of the building of a unique “foreign shrine” on Cretan soil. Later, during the 7th century, the sanctuary grows physically to become an unusual center for trade with East Greece, playing a significant role for the first time as the Levant seems to fade from the picture.

Arthur Evans first formally pointed out the Kommos site in 1928 (Evans 1928, 88–92; Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1995, 8–10). He thought it was the international port for Ayia Triada and Phaistos from earliest Minoan times, and was set at the southern end of a transit road linking the Mesara with Knossos. While investigations have pointed out errors in some of his actual attributions, his almost prescient understanding of the basic function of Kommos during the prehistoric period is confirmed. It is to him, therefore, that this short article is dedicated.

KOMMOS: THE SEA-GATE TO SOUTHERN CRETE

51

Bibliography Bass, G. 1986. “A Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun (Ka s ): 1984 Campaign,” AJA 90, pp. 269–296. Bennet, J. 1994. “Two New Marks on Bronze Age Pottery from Kommos,” Kadmos 33, pp. 153–159. ———. 1996. “Catalogue of Miscellaneous Finds: Marks on Bronze Age Pottery from Kommos,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1996, pp. 313–321. Betancourt, P.P. 1990. Kommos II. The Final Neolithic through the Middle Minoan III Pottery. J.W. Shaw and M.C. Shaw, eds., Princeton. Bikai, P. 2000. “Phoenician Ceramics from the Greek Sanctuary,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2000, pp. 305– 312. Cline, E. 1994. Sailing the Wine-Dark Sea: International Trade and the Late Bronze Age Aegean (BAR International Series 591), Oxford. Csapo, E. 1991. “An International Community of Traders in Late 8th–7th c. B.C. Kommos in Southern Crete,” ZPE 88, pp. 211–216.

Rutter, J. 1999. “Cretan External Relations during LM IIIA2–B (ca. 1370–1200 B.C.): A View from the Mesara,” in The Point Iria Wreck: Interconnections in the Mediterranean ca. 1200 B.C., W. Phelps, Y. Lolos, and Y. Vichos, eds., Athens, pp. 139–186. Shaw, J. 1989. “Phoenicians in Southern Crete,” AJA 93, pp. 165–183. ———. 1995. “Two Three-Holed Stone Anchors from Kommos, Crete: their Context, Type, and Origin,” IJNA 24, pp. 279–291. ———. 1998. “Kommos in Southern Crete, An Aegean Barometer for East-West Interconnections,” in Eastern Mediterranean: Cyprus-Dodecanese-Crete, 16th–6th Cent. B.C., N. Stampolidis, A. Karetsou, and A. Kanta, eds., Athens, pp. 13–27. Shaw, J., and M.C. Shaw. 1999. “A Proposal for Bronze Age Aegean Ship-Sheds in Crete,” in Tropis V. 5th International Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity, H. Tzalas, ed., pp. 369–382.

———. 1992. “A Postscript to ‘An International Community of Traders in Late 8th–7th c. B.C. Kommos in Southern Crete,’” ZPE 96, pp. 235–236.

Shaw, J.W., and M.C. Shaw, eds. 1995. Kommos I. The Kommos Region and Houses of the Minoan Town, Part 1, The Kommos Region, Ecology, and the Minoan Industries, Princeton.

Csapo, E., A. Johnston, and D. Geagan. 2000. “The Iron Age Inscriptions,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2000, pp. 101–134.

———. 1996. Kommos I. The Kommos Region and Houses of the Minoan Town, Part 2, The Houses of the Minoan Town, Princeton.

Evans, A. 1928. The Palace of Minos at Knossos I, London.

———. 2000. Kommos IV. The Greek Sanctuary, Princeton.

Hermary, A. 1986. “Influences orientales et occidentals sur l’iconographie des divinités chypriotes (VII–IIIe s. av. J.-C.),” in Acts of the International Archaeological Symposium “Cyprus Between the Orient and the Occident” 1985, V. Karageorghis, ed., Nicosia, pp. 405–410.

Watrous, L.V. 1989. “A Preliminary Report on Imported ‘Italian’ Wares from the Late Bronze Age Site of Kommos on Crete,” SMEA 27, pp. 69–79.

Johnston, A. 1993. “Pottery from Archaic Building Q at Kommos,” Hesperia 62, pp. 339–382. Russell, P.J. 1985. “A Middle Cypriote Jug from Kommos, Crete,” TUAS 10, pp. 42–50.

———. 1992. Kommos III. The Late Bronze Age Pottery. J.W. Shaw and M.C. Shaw, eds., Princeton.

4 A Possible Minoan Harbor on South Crete Elpida Hadjidaki

The recent discovery of a group of three stone anchors off the coast of Crete, combined with the evidence for a possible Minoan harbor on the south coast of the island, provide new insights into the nature and extent of Minoan seafaring and trade.

This paper will discuss two finds with a bearing on Minoan seafaring and trade. Since as yet we have conducted only surveys in the tentative harbor area, many questions still remain to be resolved.

Anchors Very few prehistoric anchors have been found on Crete. Frost (1963, 38) identified a pierced, gray pebble-stone found in the sea at Mochlos as probably a small sand anchor. Two large stone anchors found at Mallia (Frost 1963, 46, pl. 8) and six more found at Kommos (Shaw 1995; Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1995, 8–14; Wachsmann 1988, 279–283) have been excavated on land, although they may have been used originally on ships.

In the summer of 1999, three more stone anchors were discovered by a local sports diver who relayed the information to the Maritime Antiquities Department (Fig. 4.1). They were situated at a depth of 30–35 m in the Bay of Stavros in the Chania region. The three anchors are of almost identical construction and size, and they were found about 50 m apart. One was removed for cleaning and further study. The anchor is

54

HADJIDAKI

Figure 4.1. Anchor underwater (photograph by I. Glabedakis).

trapezoidal, measures 0.78 x 0.64 x 0.15 m, weighs 130 kg, and has three cylindrical holes (Fig. 4.2). It is made of sandstone, probably local. The shape is most similar to the limestone anchors found on land at Kommos in a LM III context, but this anchor is much bigger and heavier. Of course, it is not yet possible to prove that these anchors came from a Minoan or Mycenaean ship. They provide additional direct evidence, however, for large transport ships off Crete during the Bronze Age. This statement should come as no surprise. As Thucydides (1.4) wrote: . . . the first person known to us by tradition as having established a navy is Minos. He made himself master of what is now called the Greek sea, and ruled over the Cyclades, into most of which he sent the first colonies,

Figure 4.2. Anchor (drawing by D. Timologos).

expelling the Carians and appointing his own sons as governors; and thus did his best to put down piracy in those waters, a necessary step to secure the revenues for his own use. Chester Starr has written with particular skepticism about this passage, saying that “. . . there is not one shred of evidence to support the myth of Minoan thalassocracy, and much to weigh against its acceptance” (Starr 1989, 13). Anchors themselves cannot settle such a debate. The greater the evidence becomes that large cargo ships were commonplace off the Cretan shores, however, the more likely it is that Thucydides’ myth corresponds to historical facts. A similar comment also applies to the possible Minoan harbor off the south coast of Crete.

The Harbor at Plaka Plaka is the site of a Minoan settlement about 40 km southeast of Phaistos on the south shores of Crete. Until recently, it was accessible only by boat

but can now be reached by a narrow dirt road. The nearest place to receive mention is a peak sanctuary at Kophinas that was active during Middle

A POSSIBLE MINOAN HARBOR ON SOUTH CRETE

55

Figure 4.3. Cape Plaka with Minoan buildings (drawing by K. Tagoniou).

Minoan times. Minoan remains are located in an area of about 500 m along the seashore (Fig. 4.3) and then extend another 600 m back toward the mountains. Many buildings were clustered on two capes, Ponta and Plaka. The buildings on Plaka provide a unique example of a Minoan harbor site that has neither been overbuilt nor has it been completely obliterated by the dramatic seismic activity of Crete. When I first visited the Bay of Plaka at the request of the local Department of Antiquities, I immediately was struck by a reef extending about 38 m into the water (Fig. 4.4). Lines of stones at its northern end indicated that it could not be entirely natural. Thus, at the beginning of August 1999, I returned for a more complete survey with the assistance of diving personnel from the Department of Maritime Antiquities. Over the course of a week, we mapped the exterior remains of a structure that I believe is a breakwater or a mole and as many seaside buildings as the short time allowed us. We located a total of 21 structures, but this is only half of what probably could be found in a more complete survey.

As a result of the recent plowing, it is particularly easy to find very large quantities of badly broken Minoan pottery. We found fragments of the famous Vasiliki ware (EM II) with its orange-brown clay identifiable by the distinctive metallic sheen of its glaze (Betancourt et al. 1979). Other pottery included fragments from closed vessels (Fig. 4.5; Betancourt 1990, fig. 12:34), conical cups (Fig. 4.6), fragments from pithoi with rope patterns below the rim (Fig. 4.7; Levi 1976, pl. 167: d), and legs of tripod cooking pots with sections varying from the flat circular to oval (Betancourt 1985, 48–93; Betancourt and Silverman 1991, 22, fig. 397). They are all handmade from coarse ware fabric and date to EM II and MM III, possibly continuing into the Late Minoan period. These are the periods likely for the occupation of the site. There is no evidence of any serious later occupation, apart from the small cluster of very recent buildings which form the modern village. Of the 21 seaside buildings so far located on Plaka alone, most continue on to the rocky beach or have collapsed into the sea as its level rose and winter storms eroded the cape and its shores (Figs. 4.3

56

HADJIDAKI

Figure 4.4. Minoan “mole” (photograph by E. Hadjidaki).

and 4.8). Their walls are easily visible without excavation, and they may be remains of warehouses and public buildings. Several of the buildings have walls over 8 m long and 0.60 m wide, built from double lines of small stones (Figs. 4.9 and 4.10). The stones are around 0.30 m wide and 0.50 m long, their exterior surfaces flattened, and the interiors left rough. There is a stone paved floor made of

Figure 4.5. EM III–MM I closed vessel (drawing by E. Piskardelis).

Figure 4.6. MM conical cup (drawing by E. Piskardelis).

stones about 0.15–0.20 m in diameter with the flattened upper surface. The quality of the stonework is more like that of a courtyard than a road. The most interesting structure is the man-made mole or breakwater built on top of a natural 7 m wide reef. There are several lines of large boulders with diameters between 0.70 m and 1 m (Fig. 4.11). In between the stones are concretions with small fragments of embedded pottery that have not yet been analyzed. These boulders sit at the current sea level. To establish that this structure was a mole, it is necessary to understand the sea level in Minoan times. On West Crete, the sea level was about 6–9 m higher than the present level (Pirazzoli et al. 1992, 383); on the east of the island, it was 3–4 m below the present level (Flemming, Czartoryska, and Hunter 1973, 47–65). There are two indications that near Plaka, the sea was about 1.00–1.20 m lower in the Minoan period than it is today. The first is a Roman breakwater about 20 km away at Lasaia; its base is still below water and the surviving part of its surface is still above (Blackman and Branigan 1975, 28–29). At least since Roman times, the sea level has not changed much. Furthermore, along the beach at Plaka there is a layer of beach rock, at a depth of 1 m below water level, with many small, concreted fragments of Minoan pottery (Fig. 4.3). This beach rock is likely to have been right at the

A POSSIBLE MINOAN HARBOR ON SOUTH CRETE

57

Figure 4.7. EM III pithos (drawing by E. Piskardelis).

Figure 4.8. Minoan building on the shore (photograph by E. Hadjidaki).

shoreline at the time when pottery was abundant. If so, the waters adjacent to the mole would have been around 1 m deep, and the man-made walls on

it would have been around 1 m above sea level. Assistance from geologists is necessary to investigate this point further.

Conclusions There are two opposing positions on Bronze Age trade. The “minimalist” position advocated, for example, by Snodgrass (1991) holds that trade involved almost entirely the exchange of goods by

command of princes and kings. Bronze Age ships carried presents to and from royal palaces, and also transported the metals needed for royal armies (Bass 1986; 1991; Pulak 1988; 1997; 1999). The other

58

HADJIDAKI

Figure 4.9. Minoan building (drawing by K. Tagoniou).

Figure 4.10. Minoan walls (drawing by K. Tagoniou).

view is that Bronze Age trade also involved the broader exchange of goods between anonymous parties with the assistance of a merchant class. Peter Warren (1969, 189–190; 1984, 39–43; 1991, 295–300) has argued that the large number of Egyptian vessels found at Knossos supports this theory. The possible harbor at Plaka offers additional evidence of a different kind. A large Minoan harbor installation, separated by over 40 km from the nearest palace at Phaistos, most naturally is explained

by the existence of merchant trade. It is difficult to believe that a palace required a spot as remote as Plaka to conduct its business. The settlement at Plaka extends over a large area, but there is nothing to suggest building on a scale such as, for example, the Kommos port, which was associated with palaces. The settlement is situated on a narrow strip of land cut off by mountains on three sides and by the sea on the fourth. Neither today nor in antiquity was there much room for cultivation. There is,

A POSSIBLE MINOAN HARBOR ON SOUTH CRETE

59

however, no lack of fresh water. Springs let out all along the coastline, and a Minoan well has been found just east of Ponta. All these observations provide indirect evidence that this Minoan settlement depended upon trade. But trade with whom? The great palaces seem too far away. Just beyond the mountains to the north, however, is the plain of Messara—a large, flat, and fertile valley. Plaka may well have been supplying goods from Egypt and elsewhere to inhabitants of the valley in exchange for agricultural products. Taken together, the discovery of anchors and Minoan harbor works far removed from any palace begins to provide direct evidence for the existence of a Minoan merchant class. Continued mapping of the remaining buildings in the area may enable us to provide more direct evidence on this matter; but rescue excavations should be carried out soon, before the remaining walls are plowed under.

Figure 4.11. Minoan “mole” (drawing by K. Tagoniou).

Acknowledgments The personnel for the August 1999 survey consisted of diving architect Ms. K. Tagonidou, diver

Mr. M. Tzefronis, and Prof. M. Marder and Ms. N. Marder as assistants.

Bibliography Bass, G.F. 1986. “A Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun: 1984 Campaign,” AJA 90, pp. 269–296. ———. 1991. “Evidence of Trade from Bronze Age Shipwrecks,” in Bronze Age Trade in the Mediterranean (SIMA 90), N.H. Gale, ed., Jonsered, pp. 69–82. Betancourt, P.P. 1985. The History of Minoan Pottery, Princeton. ———. 1990. Kommos II. The Final Neolithic through Middle Minoan Pottery. J.W. Shaw and M.C. Shaw, eds., Princeton. Betancourt, P.P., and J.S. Silverman. 1991. Pottery from Gournia: The Cretan Collection in the University Museum, Philadelphia. Betancourt, P.P., et al. 1979. Vasilike Ware (SIMA 56), Göteborg.

Blackman, D.J., and K. Branigan. 1975. “An Archaeological Survey on the South Coast of Crete, between the Ayiofarango and Chrisostomos,” BSA 70, pp. 17–36. Flemming, N., N. Czartoryska, and P. Hunter. 1973. “Archaeological Evidence for Vertical Earth Movement in the Region of the Aegean Island Arc,” Science Diving International, London, pp. 47–65. Frost, H. 1963. Under the Mediterranean, London. Levi, D. 1976. Festòs e la civiltà minoica, Rome. Pirazzoli, P., et al. 1992. “Historical Environmental Changes at Phalasarna Harbor, West Crete,” Geoarchaeology 7, pp. 371–392. Pulak, C. 1988. “The Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun, Turkey: 1985 Campaign,” AJA 92, pp. 1–37.

60

HADJIDAKI

———. 1997. “The Ulu Burun Shipwreck,” in Res Maritimae: Cyprus and the Eastern Mediterranean from Prehistory to Late Antiquity (ASOR Archaeological Reports 4), S. Swiny, R.L. Hohlfelder, and H.W. Swiny, eds., Atlanta, pp. 233–262. ———. 1999. “The Late Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun: Aspects of Hull Construction,” in The Point Iria Wreck: Interconnection in the Mediterranean ca. 1200 B.C., W. Phelps, Y. Lolos, and Y. Vichos, eds., Athens, pp. 209–238. Shaw, J.W. 1995. “Two Three-Holed Stone Anchors from Kommos, Crete: Their Context, Type and Origin,” IJNA 24, pp. 279–291. Shaw, J.W., and H. Blitzer. 1983. “Stone Weight Anchors from Kommos, Crete,” IJNA 12, pp. 91–100. Shaw, J.W., and M.C. Shaw, eds. 1995. Kommos I. The Kommos Region and Houses of the Minoan Town, Princeton.

Snodgrass, A.M. 1991. “Bronze Age Exchange: A Minimalist Position,” in Bronze Age Trade in the Mediterranean (SIMA 90), N.H. Gale, ed., Jonsered, pp. 15–20. Starr, C.G. 1989. The Influence of Sea Power on Ancient History, Oxford. Wachsmann, S. 1998. Seagoing Ships and Seamanship in the Bronze Age Levant, College Station, Texas. Warren, P. 1969. Minoan Stone Vases, Cambridge. ———. 1984. “The Place of Crete in the Thalassocracy of Minos” in The Minoan Thalassocracy: Myth and Reality, R. Hägg and N. Marinatos, eds., Stockholm, pp. 39–44. ———. 1991. “A Merchant Class in Bronze Age Crete? The Evidence of Egyptian Stone Vases from the City of Knossos,” in Bronze Age Trade in the Mediterranean (SIMA 90) N.H. Gale, ed., Jonsered, pp. 295–301.

PA RT I I Society and Religion

5 The “Big House” at Vronda and the “Great House” at Karphi: Evidence for Social Structure in LM IIIC Crete Leslie Preston Day and Lynn M. Snyder

We are indebted to the early archaeologists on Crete for first revealing the island’s cultures and for establishing the basic chronology, but the limitations of their work are evident today because of the expansion of knowledge from a century of excavation and survey and advances in archaeological methods and theory. A good example of both the value and limitations of the pioneer work on Crete can be seen in the excavations of Harriet Boyd (Hawes) at Vronda Kavousi over a hundred years ago, and the comparisons provided by more recent investigation of the site. The material recovered from the new excavations, including traditional architectural and artifactual analysis and study of non-artifactual remains, along with information from other contemporary sites, can suggest something of the social, political, and religious organization of Early Iron Age Crete. In the final week of her first season of excavation on Crete in 1900, Harriet Boyd explored the ridge called Vronda in the mountains south of the

modern village of Kavousi. On the summit of the ridge, she excavated an area of 15 x 20 m where many walls were still showing on the surface (Boyd 1901, 131). To the southeast of the crest of the hill stood a large wall with a storeroom above it containing fragments of “three large pithoi with molded designs of the common serpentine patterns” (Boyd 1901, 132). Although Boyd recognized that the principal building on the summit was a large house with a forecourt, she could not make out its plan. One room produced a “considerable amount of iron, including a pick, an axehead, a sword, and other fragments” (Boyd 1901, 132). While the rest of the workmen were engaged in cleaning the summit, “with little reward for their labor” (Boyd 1901, 132), tholos tombs were discovered nearby. In all, Boyd cleared eight tholos tombs. All but one were completely or partially robbed; they contained simple metal objects and pottery belonging to “a transitional period between the Mycenaean era and the Geometric age” (Boyd

64

DAY AND SNYDER

Figure 5.1. Plan of the LM IIIC settlement at Vronda.

1901, 135). Having seen the splendid remains being excavated at Knossos, Boyd understandably felt discouraged by the quantity and quality of the finds, and she abandoned her investigations at Vronda after only one season. She thought that she had found only a poor settlement and cemetery of the period after the fall of the great palaces of Minoan Crete.

Renewed excavations at Vronda in the 1980s and 1990s have revealed more of the site and of the building that was first investigated by Boyd (Fig. 5.1). We now recognize that the site is a small settlement of LM IIIC date with some earlier remains of EM, MM II, and MM III–LM IA below the houses and later burials both in the SM–PG tholoi found by Harriet Boyd and in cremation cists of the

THE “BIG HOUSE” AT VRONDA AND THE “GREAT HOUSE” AT KARPHI

Geometric Period in the collapsed houses. The LM IIIC town contained 15–20 houses arranged in clusters on the ridge. On the southwest was a shrine of the Goddess with Upraised Hands (Building G), and on the summit was Boyd’s building (Building A-B), which ironically now can be seen as the

65

largest and most significant on the site. The settlement was in use for about three to four generations, approximately 100–150 years, before it was abandoned without apparent violence. Why the inhabitants left and where they went are still unknown.

Building A-B at Vronda The largest structure at Vronda, Building A-B, lies on the southeast side of the summit and was supported by a massive terrace wall on the east. This building consists of two sections (Fig. 5.2). Building A is a two-room structure, consisting of a large room with a hearth in the center (A 1) and a smaller room to the north (A 2); additional rooms may have existed to the east. Although the bestpreserved east wall of A 1 is of finer construction, the building is constructed mainly of rubble masonry similar to that found in other houses on the site. The poor preservation of the other walls makes it impossible to determine the location of the doorways into and within Building A, and whether it could be classified as a “megaron.” The preserved portion of the north wall of A 2 shows that there was no doorway into this room on the axis of the building, but one may have existed into A 1 from the south. At any rate, the building is extraordinary for the size of the main room. The rooms identified as Building B seem to belong to the same structure, although the walls are too jumbled at their juncture to be certain. Building B is better preserved and shows an unusual plan for Vronda and for the period. The rooms lack doorways, and the floors are deeper than those in Building A. The rooms were probably entered by ladders from a second story above. Two of the rooms (B 1/2 and B 3) are long and narrow, resembling the magazines of earlier palatial structures of Minoan Crete; Room 3 had an elegant paved floor. The other two rooms (B 4 and B 7) are different in size and shape. The two sections of the building (A and B) may have faced onto an open courtyard on the south. The position, size, and architectural sophistication mark Building A-B as different from the other structures on the site. The building sits on top of the summit of the hill, rising higher than any other house. It is the largest building on the site

and contains the largest single room (A 1) (Table 5.1). The presence of a second story over the storerooms is unusual for the site and the period, when single-storied structures were the norm. The long, narrow form of B 1/2 and B 3 suggests that they were built to serve as storage magazines, and confirmation of this function can be seen from the massive pithoi found in them. Boyd mentioned three pithoi (Boyd 1901, 131) from Room 1/2; three more came from B 3 and another from B 7. The rooms in all the other houses on Vronda were

Figure 5.2. Plan of the Big House at Vronda.

66

DAY AND SNYDER

SITE AND BUILDING

TOTAL FLOOR SPACE

FLOOR SPACE OF LARGEST ROOM

Vronda, Building A

90.3 square meters

A 1: 71.4 square meters

Vronda, Building B

31.95 square meters

B 1: 9.72 square meters

Vronda, Building D

82.39 square meters

D 1: 37.23 square meters

Karphi, Great House

62.94 square meters

K 9: 24.08 square meters

Karphi, Megaron

50.22 square meters

K 139: 29.61 square meters

Karphi, Priest’s House

69.82 square meters

K 61: 31.96 square meters

Table 5.1.

Comparison of floor space in large buildings at Vronda and Karphi.

BUILDING J, ROOM 1

BUILDING B, ROOM 7 Figure 5.3. Pithoi from the Vronda settlement.

BUILDING N, ROOM 2

BUILDING B, ROOM 3

BUILDING I, ROOM 3

BUILDING B, ROOM 3

THE “BIG HOUSE” AT VRONDA AND THE “GREAT HOUSE” AT KARPHI

67

Figure 5.4. Pithos smashed on the floor of Vronda, Building B, Room 3.

multi-functional, serving for storage, food preparation and consumption, sleeping, and other activities; only Building A-B had rooms with a specialized function of storage. The pithoi from these rooms are also unusual, not because of their form, but because of their size, which is much greater than those from other buildings (Fig. 5.3). In addition to the pithoi, the other contents of the rooms of this complex give a clue to the extraordinary nature of the building. Pottery comprises the majority of the material, and other types of objects are scanty, especially in Building A, which lay so close to the surface for so many centuries. It is unlikely that the iron hoard mentioned by Boyd actually belongs with this building. The objects described and illustrated (Boyd 1901, 132) resemble the material from the Geometric cremations scattered around the site; such cremations are difficult to recognize, and Boyd’s workmen may have excavated one unknowingly. There is little information about the contents of B 1/2. Rooms B 3, B 4, and B 7, however, produced much material that may shed light on the date and function of the building. In one case (B 4), this material was deliberately dumped or fell in, but that found in other rooms was left behind when the building was abandoned. Thus, what was found in the rooms cannot be taken as definitely representative of the assemblages used in the rooms; many factors of selection and preservation do not allow such an assumption (LaMotta and Schiffer 1999). It is likely that the whole or nearly complete pottery, however, was found close to its original position; this is especially true of the pithoi, which were found smashed, but “articulated,” on the floors (Fig. 5.4).

Figure 5.5. Field sketch plan of Vronda room B 4 during excavation.

Even though part of the same building, the four rooms of Building B had different histories that were not immediately recognized. Room 4 and the lower levels of Room 7 had been completely (Room 4) or partially (Room 7) filled in before the rest of the building and contain material from an earlier phase than the other rooms. Although the basement of Room 7 continued in use at a higher level, Room 4 apparently was abandoned after this time. Room 3 was used throughout the settlement’s history, as Room 1/2 also may have been. Thus, there are two distinct chronological phases in Building B,

68

DAY AND SNYDER

Figure 5.6. Pottery from early deposits in Vronda, Building B, Rooms 4 and 7.

THE “BIG HOUSE” AT VRONDA AND THE “GREAT HOUSE” AT KARPHI

one from the earlier part of the LM IIIC period, the other from late LM IIIC just before the settlement was abandoned. The material from each of these

69

phases can be analyzed as evidence for the function of the rooms and can be compared for changes over time. Some interesting patterns emerge.

Building B, Early Phase: Pottery The early deposit in Room 4 was embedded in roofing material similar to that from other rooms and buildings at Vronda. It is unclear if this was a deliberate dump or the collapse from a ceiling (Fig. 5.5). Included among the large number of fine vessels in this deposit were a “champagne cup” (Fig. 5.6: 2) and other cups with blob decoration (Fig. 5.6: 1), many deep bowls (Fig. 5.6: 4), a basket kalathos (Fig. 5.6: 9), a huge and elaborately decorated krater with horns of consecration and interlocking quatrefoil leaf pattern, octopus stirrup jars (Fig. 5.6: 7), and a number of jugs. Vessels of coarse fabrics included kalathoi (Fig. 5.6: 10), several cooking dishes (Fig. 5.6: 13), trays (Fig. 5.6: 11 and 12), and tripod cooking pots. The lower deposit in Room 7 produced a similar assemblage, and there were several cross-joins with

the material from Room 4. Fine ware included cups, “champagne cups” with blob decoration (Fig. 5.6: 3), many deep bowls (Fig. 5.6: 5 and 6), and two octopus stirrup jars (Fig. 5.6: 8). Coarse ware cooking dishes and trays, tripod cooking pots, scuttles, and kalathoi also were found. All of the pottery from B 4 and the lower deposit in B 7 dates to an early phase of LM IIIC, contemporary with Phase II at Kastro Kavousi (Mook and Coulson 1997). Clearly, the pottery in these early deposits has to do with the preparation of food (cooking vessels) and the consumption of food and drink (deep bowls, cups and champagne cups, krater). The extraordinary amount of pottery with elaborate decoration suggests that the equipment for this eating and drinking was meant to impress.

Building B, Early Phase: Animal Bones In general, the animal bone debris recovered from Building A-B is similar to that found across the Vronda settlement (Klippel and Snyder 1991), consisting of a light scatter of disarticulated and fragmentary sheep, goat, cow, and pig bones. The careful excavation and exposure of the entire early deposit in situ in Room 4 (see Fig. 5.5) reveals, however, a very interesting and non-random distribution of animal remains. The bone deposit in Room 4 appears to represent at least two separate depositional episodes. In the northern half of the room, the usual array of butchering and food debris occurred. Butchering discards include sheep and goat lower leg and foot bones and a mandible fragment, and an isolated pig lower canine or tusk (Fig. 5.7: a, c, and d, right). The remains from meals eaten in or near this room are illustrated by an articulated sheep or goat innominate and proximal femur (Fig. 5.7: e). These bones represent a meaty cut at the end of the loin, one commonly seen today in Arnaki sto

phourno (lamb from the oven). Front shoulder cuts also are indicated by scapula and humerus segments (Fig. 5.7: d, left). The deposit from the southern third of Room 4, however, contained only one food bone and virtually no butchering debris. Rather, the southern portion of the room is dominated by a number of cattle skulls (Fig. 5.8). Although heavily weathered and eroded, probably by post-depositional processes, both the modifications to these skulls and their apparent arrangement are puzzling. At least two of the skulls originally may have formed part of a rough circular or semi-circular arrangement (Figs. 5.5: A, C and 5.8), which also contained a pair of heavily eroded agrimi (Capra aegagrus) or wild goat horn cores (Figs. 5.5: B and 5.8). The agrimi horns had been chopped free of the skull, but they remain articulated as a pair by a portion of frontal bone. Pairs of wild goat horns treated in a similar manner have been found elsewhere at Vronda (Fig. 5.9,

70

DAY AND SNYDER

Figure 5.7. Butchering and food debris recovered from northern portion of B 4.

right) and nearby Kastro (Fig. 5.9, left). In the Room 4 deposit, they are placed in an inverted position and about equidistant between Skulls A and C. Other cattle skulls were more randomly scattered in the deposit (Fig. 5.5: D).

Figure 5.8. Cattle skulls and agrimi horn cores, in situ during excavation in the southern part of B 4, viewed from north.

The cattle skulls in Room 4 also appear to have been deliberately modified. When recovered, these skulls had been fragmented badly by post-depositional processes. Nonetheless, at least two of them were partially reconstructable (Fig. 5.10). After extensive sessions of refitting and reconstruction, it was apparent that the skulls from Room 4 consisted of frontals and horn cores only—the upper part of the cattle skull. The lower portions, including the maxillae, palate, tooth row, and occipital were completely missing from the Room 4 skulls. Not a single cattle tooth, tooth fragment, or occipital condyle (the heavy knob-like protrusions at the lower back of the skull to which the vertebral column attaches) was recovered from Room 4. Maxillary teeth and occipital condyles are among the densest portions of the skeleton. In sites with very poor bone preservation, they are sometimes the only indicators that cranial materials were once present; hence their absence here is significant. It would appear that the cattle skulls found in Room 4 were modified deliberately to remove the back and lower portions of the skull, leaving only the horn cores and frontals; this produced a flat,

THE “BIG HOUSE” AT VRONDA AND THE “GREAT HOUSE” AT KARPHI

71

Figure 5.10. Reconstructed cattle skull from Vronda B 4.

store them together with pottery of fine quality inside his home, unless there was a religious reason. (1997, 295–296)

Figure 5.9.

Agrimi horn cores from Vronda B 4 (right) and Kastro (left).

partial, but recognizable cattle skull. Because of the generally poor preservation of all bones from the Vronda site, no edge modification could be detected on these fragmented skulls. It seems likely, however, that each skull was carefully cut and shaped to produce the flat “plaque-like” segments recovered. Mazarakis Ainian has suggested that the animal bones from Room 4 may represent the remains of ritual sacrifice: . . . in one of the house’s dependencies (Room 4 of Unit B) animal skulls and sheep and goat bones were recovered. These might have belonged to victims sacrificed during religious ceremonies, after which the skulls and bones would have acquired some special religious significance; indeed, why would anyone

That the scattered postcranial bones found in Room 4 represent the remains of ritual sacrifice and/or dining is not supported by the small quantity of bone present, nor is there the restricted and redundant range of bone that might be taken to indicate large-scale feasting or dining (e.g., Reese 1987; Frame, Russell, and Martin 1999; Russell and Martin 1998). Rather, these scattered bones most likely represent waste that was dumped in the room after its early phase of use. The cattle skulls and agrimi horns, however, appear to have come to rest in the room by a different process, one more directly related to the special status and function of the building. Their modification to produce a flat plaque-like surface suggests that they indeed might have special meaning and purpose. In an early LM IIIC context, where representations of horns of consecration are so often found, it seems possible that they were intended for display as wall decoration or hangings. The numerous cattle skulls and horn cores found at Çatal Höyük, many still encased partially in wall plaster, might serve as an apt analogy (Mellaart 1967; Russell, Martin, and LeBlanc 1996; Martin and Russell 1997).

Building B, Later Phase The pottery from Room 3 and the upper layer in Room 7 come from the building’s last phase; many of the fragments were sealed by the collapse of the pithoi upon them. In addition to the three large

pithoi, the material from B 3 included fragments of a rhyton (Fig. 5.11: 9), six to eight kylikes (Fig. 5.11: 1–8), and six coarse kalathoi (Fig. 5.11: 10). The presence of the rhyton suggests a religious libation

72

DAY AND SNYDER

Figure 5.11. Pottery from later deposits in Vronda, Building B, Room 3.

THE “BIG HOUSE” AT VRONDA AND THE “GREAT HOUSE” AT KARPHI

accompanying other activities. The kalathoi also may have served a ritual function although the shape seems to be multi-functional. Because of their number and size, the kylikes are of greatest significance. It seems likely, given the presence of kylikes in the later deposits and of champagne cups and cups in the earlier levels, that the kylix replaced the champagne cup and cup as the most popular drinking vessel during the LM IIIC period. The same phenomenon also may be seen at Karphi. More important, however, is the size of these vessels. Because of their huge bowls, the kylikes cannot stand easily on their small feet; this fact suggests use in a drinking ritual, possibly competitive, that involved drinking down the entire contents before turning the vessel over to stand upside-down. Although

73

kylikes do occur in some of the other Vronda houses, they are never so plentiful and rarely as large. Other finds in the building were scanty, but one was extraordinary. Fragments of a large decorated terracotta window frame were picked up with the pithos from the upper levels of Room 7 (Day 1999). From the find spots of additional pieces in Rooms B 8 and E 1, it looks as if the frame had been hung on the east wall of Room 7 although it is not certain whether it was on the exterior or interior of the wall. Window frames normally were made of wood, and this unique example, pierced for affixing to a wooden frame, is not merely functional. Its position and appearance may have made a symbolic statement about the status of the individual(s) who lived in the house.

Interpretation of Social and Political Structure at Vronda It is clear from this account that Building A-B was an extraordinary structure with unusual contents throughout the history of the Vronda settlement. No other building in the settlement, about 90% of which has been explored, is of the same size or importance. Standing on top of the ridge, rising two stories high, it must have dominated the village. The capacity for storage, both in specialized storerooms and in large pithoi, indicates control over a surplus of goods, so that the building should be interpreted as either a community storage/ redistribution center or the dwelling of an elite individual or group. The fact that the building shares common features with other houses on the site (especially the large room with a hearth that seems to be the defining feature of the local domestic architecture) suggests that it was not a community center. The pottery shows continuity of function throughout the building’s use: drinking, cooking, and eating, and in the later phases, also storage. The cattle skull plaques and agrimi horns from the southern portion of Room 4 in the early phase are

not remains of a meal; rather they may have been used in ritual activity. They may have served as wall decoration and made a symbolic statement about the house or its inhabitants. The window frame possibly served a similar function in the later phase. The presence of so many vessels for drinking suggests that the consumption of drink, probably wine, was an important activity in the building and may have been used to reinforce power in the community, possibly in competitive drinking contests (Dietler 1989; Joffe 1997; Arnold 1999). The evidence, then, points to Building A-B as the central building in a ranked society. How does the Vronda settlement and its organization fit in with what is known in the rest of Crete for this period? We should not expect uniformity in a period with such regional variation, but it is instructive to look at contemporary sites for comparable buildings. Despite recent work at a number of LM IIIC sites, the best comparison remains the settlement at Karphi because about one-fifth of it has been uncovered (Nowicki 1987, 244).

Karphi The excavators of Karphi thought that one building stood out as superior to the others, and they labeled it the “Great House” (Rooms 8–9, 11–18)

(Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1937– 1938, 77–78) (Fig. 5.12). They observed that it is in the most sheltered position on the site, is the largest

Figure 5.12. Plan of the Karphi Settlement.

74 DAY AND SNYDER

THE “BIG HOUSE” AT VRONDA AND THE “GREAT HOUSE” AT KARPHI

building of the period, and is the most elaborate in terms of arrangement. In addition, the building was constructed of fine cut blocks of limestone with especially elaborate doorjambs (Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1937–1938, pl. 18: 1–4). There were at least three phases of construction: Room 9 was built first, then 11 and 14 were added on, and finally Rooms 8 (an anteroom) and 12–13 (basement storerooms). Although Rooms 15–18 were assigned to this complex, they probably do not belong (Gesell 1985, 79). Rooms 15–17 produced cult equipment, including fragments of goddess statues and snake tubes. These three rooms may have served a religious function, although some of this material may have come from a garbage dump underneath (Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1937–1938, 135). There is no definite connection with the rest of the Great House. Even without these rooms, the building is unusual for its size (see Table 5.1). It also produced luxury objects; these were not as numerous as those found in some other houses but showed a greater variety. A bronze ring, a figurine, and oyster shells were recovered in Room 9. Room 12 produced a hoard of bronze tools and weapons (dagger, sickle, saw, chisel, nail, needle, and fragments that may have been a plate fibula), lead fragments, a glass bead, and a faience bead (Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1937–1938, 77–79). The pottery from Room 8 included a decorated pyxis (Fig. 5.13: 5). Room 9 also produced a pyxis (Fig. 5.13: 4), fragments of a krater, at least three huge kylikes (Fig. 5.13: 1–3) similar to those found in Vronda Room B 3, many pithoi, cooking vessels, and a kalathos (Fig. 5.13: 9). More kylix fragments were found in Room 11, with fine jugs (Fig. 5.13: 7 and 8). Room 14 produced a fine decorated pyxis (Fig. 5.13: 6) and a tripod cookpot (Fig. 5.13: 10). Little pottery was found on the floors of Room 12 or Room 13. The large kylikes from Room 9 and Room 11, comparatively rare in the Karphi assemblage, suggest a similarity to Building A-B at Vronda. The situation at Karphi is different, however, from that at Vronda. It is a much larger site, and there is more than one large structure. Two other buildings have been suggested as equally good candidates for the ruler’s dwelling at Karphi (Nowicki 1999). The first of these is the “Megaron,” Rooms 138–140, part of a series of megaron-like buildings that make up the Eastern Block. Although the whole block has been identified as a single unit (Mazarakis Ainian 1997, 219–220), it looks

75

as though there are three separate structures, each with its own hearth (Rooms 135–136, Rooms 137 and 141, Rooms 138–140). Many scholars have linked these buildings to a Greek population (Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1937– 1938, 137–138; Mazarakis Ainian 1997, 219; Nowicki 1999, 147), and have identified the Megaron as the house of the Greek ruler of the site. The regularity and plan may have more to do with topography than ethnicity, and the Megaron is not as large as the Great House (Table 5.1), nor does it show equivalent architectural refinements. The few finds from the building (two stone beads or spindle whorls and a figurine fragment) and the pottery tell us little (Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and MoneyCoutts 1937–1938, 71–72). Much has been made of the bronze tripod leg found next door in Room 137 (Mazarakis Ainian 1997, 220), but that room probably belongs to another megaron-style house. Similarly, a faience fragment found nearby in Room 135 is not directly associated with the Megaron. The Megaron had a large capacity for storage (at least eight pithoi and seven pithoid jars) although not extraordinary for the site. Fine vessels included a pyxis and a large kylix (from Room 140) similar to those from the Great House. The same sort of drinking ritual proposed for Building A-B at Vronda also may have gone on here, but there are fewer drinking vessels than in the Great House or at Vronda. Finally, Nowicki has argued recently that the “Priest’s House” (Rooms 59–61, Room 80) is a better candidate for the ruler’s dwelling, if one existed (Nowicki 1999, 149). It is larger than the Megaron but still smaller than the Great House (Table 5.1). Again, there are no visible refinements in architecture except for the size of one of the rooms (Room 61), which is the largest on the site. The Priest’s House is associated with a room interpreted as a small shrine (Room 58) because of the unusual cylindrical stands it contained (Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1937–1938, pl. 35.7). Pottery from other rooms of the building included a large number of storage jars and cooking vessels, and seven kalathoi from Room 80. There was no unusual fine ware, and no large kylikes were found. Other objects included bronze fragments and a stone bead from Room 61, three beads in Room 80, and a bit of bronze in Room 59 (Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1937–1938, 85–86). Also of interest are the horns of ox, deer, and goat from Room 61 that may be analogous to the animal heads found in B 4 at Vronda, but these

76

DAY AND SNYDER

3 2

1

4

5

6

7

9 Figure 5.13. Pottery from the Great House at Karphi.

8

10

THE “BIG HOUSE” AT VRONDA AND THE “GREAT HOUSE” AT KARPHI

were not studied and unfortunately are no longer extant. No single large building at Karphi can be identified securely as the ruler’s dwelling. It is possible that the ruler’s house is still unexcavated, and that the large buildings discussed above are dwellings of elite individuals, possibly religious figures because both the Great House and the Priest’s House are associated with areas of cult practice. Although there was a large shrine, religious material

77

was also found in different areas around the Karphi settlement, and political power might similarly have been spread. It is possible that the ruler’s dwelling shifted over time as power moved from one individual or family to another. Of the three possible candidates for the Karphi ruler’s dwelling, the Great House seems to be the most convincing because of its size, refinements, and greater variety of luxury and imported goods.

Comparative Interpretations of Vronda and Karphi Karphi’s Great House and Vronda’s Big House show few similarities. The plans of the buildings and their sizes are not comparable (Fig. 5.14). The concentration of the storage capacity of Vronda Building A-B is not seen at Karphi, where many other buildings show greater storage capacity (to judge from numbers of pithoi and pithoid jars found in the rooms) than the Great House. On the

other hand, the Great House at Karphi shows a connection with religion because of its proximity to a cult area (Rooms 15–17), an association that is not found at Vronda. The size and quantity of the kylikes found in the Great House, however, are analogous to Building B at Vronda, and suggest that similar drinking events took place in both. In short, the Great House at Karphi provides parallels

Figure 5.14. Plans of the Great House at Karphi and the Big House at Vronda.

78

DAY AND SNYDER

for drinking rituals in large elite houses, but otherwise it is more complex and different from what is found at Vronda. The social organization of the Vronda settlement can be interpreted in the following way. The houses suggest the importance of families (possibly nuclear families) (Day, Glowacki, and Klein 2000). To judge from the size of the shrine and the amount of cult equipment, religion was centralized and important. Political power also apparently was centralized in the person or family inhabiting Building A-B. This group controlled and stored surplus goods (probably agricultural products) and provided drinking and possibly eating rituals for at least some of the community; these rituals may have served to reinforce the power of the ruler(s) and the solidarity of the male members of the community. The window frame may suggest that the ruler(s) felt a need to advertise their position, and the animal heads, which possibly hung on the walls of B 4, may have served a similar symbolic function at an earlier time. The social organization was certainly ranked, but there is no clear evidence as to whether it could be categorized as a big-man system, a rank society, or a chiefdom (Wason 1994, 43–47). Since it was probably smaller than the contemporary settlement at Kastro, its size argues against it being the center of a chiefdom. At the moment, there is little evidence that it controlled a large territory as chiefdoms usually do (Earle 1989, 84). Whitley (1991, 348–352) has argued that the remains at Vronda are in keeping with the “big-man” social system, one in which the power of the ruler is based on his personal qualities and alliances rather than on heredity. While the investment in display and the instability of such societies seem to fit the picture

provided by the rather short-lived Vronda settlement, the expenditure in permanent building does not, nor does the continuity of function. The general description of the structure as a ruler’s dwelling seems more accurate. Karphi shows a more complex and less centralized pattern, or if centralized, then the ruler’s dwelling has not yet been uncovered. Religion also was less consolidated at Karphi; many small cult centers were scattered around the site in addition to the temple. Given the amount of regional variation that seems to have existed in the period, the dissimilar patterns in political and religious organization at Karphi and Vronda are not surprising. Karphi also appears to show evidence for a different type of ranked society than that found at Vronda, one in which power may have shifted over time from one individual or family to another (Wason 1994, 45). Boyd found the ruler’s dwelling at Vronda, but in the early part of the century, she could not have had the necessary archaeological context or tools to appreciate her discovery. Nearly forty years later, the British excavators of Karphi, aided by local ethnographic parallels and a greater understanding of the history and archaeology of Crete, used the architecture, pottery, and other objects to suggest the varying functions of buildings and groups of buildings. Almost 100 years after Boyd’s work in East Crete, the recent excavators at Kavousi have provided additional evidence, including zooarchaeological materials, with which to use anthropological theory to move beyond a mere description of the finds. Thus, we now look for the very structure of society to understand the way the people of the Early Iron Age lived.

Acknowledgments The Kavousi Project (1978–2000) conducted cleaning and excavation at Kavousi under the auspices of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, sponsored by the University of Tennessee, and with the support of INSTAP, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the National Geographic Society, the University of Minnesota, Wabash College, and numerous private donors.

The discussion of Karphi is based upon Day’s new study of the pottery, with the permission of the Managing Committee of the British School at Athens, the help of Alexandra Karetsou (Director of the Archaeological Institute of Crete) and Colin Macdonald (former Curator of the Stratigraphic Museum at Knossos), and support from INSTAP and Wabash College.

THE “BIG HOUSE” AT VRONDA AND THE “GREAT HOUSE” AT KARPHI

79

Bibliography Arnold, B. 1999. “‘Drinking the Feast’: Alcohol and the Legitimization of Power in Celtic Europe,” CAJ 9(1), pp. 71–93.

Klippel, W., and L.M. Snyder. 1991. “Dark-Age Fauna from Kavousi, Crete: The Vertebrates from the 1987 and 1988 Excavations,” Hesperia 60, pp. 179–186.

Boyd, H.A. 1901. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, in 1900,” AJA 5, pp. 125–157.

LaMotta, V.M., and M.B. Schiffer. 1999. “Formation Processes of House Floor Assemblages,” in The Archaeology of Household Activities, P.M. Allison, ed., London and New York, pp. 19–29.

Day, L.P. 1997. “The Late Minoan IIIC Period at Vronda, Kavousi,” in La Crète mycénienne (BCH Supplement 30), J. Driessen and A. Farnoux, eds., Athens, pp. 391–406. ———. 1999. “A Late Minoan IIIC Window Frame from Vronda, Kavousi,” in MELETEMATA. Studies in Aegean Archaeology Presented to Malcolm H. Wiener (Aegaeum 20), P. Betancourt et al., eds., Liège and Austin, pp. 185– 190. Day, L.P., W.D.E. Coulson, and G.C. Gesell. 1986. “Kavousi, 1983–1984: The Settlement at Vronda,” Hesperia 55, pp. 355–387. Day, L.P., K.T. Glowacki, and N.L. Klein. 2000. “Cooking and Dining in Late Minoan IIIC Vronda, Kavousi,” in Pepragmevna tou H‘ Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou I, Herakleion, pp. 115–125. Dietler, M. 1990. “Driven by Drink: The Role of Drinking in the Political Economy and the Case of Early Iron Age France,” JAnthArch 9, pp. 352–406. Earle, T. 1989. “The Evolution of Chiefdoms,” CurrAnth 30, pp. 84–88. Frame, S., N. Russell, and L. Martin. 1999. “Animal Bone Report,” Çatalhöyük 1999 Archive Report. http://catal.arch.cam.ac.uk. Gesell, G.C. 1985. Town, Palace, and House Cult in Minoan Crete (SIMA 47), Göteborg. Gesell, G.C., W.D.E. Coulson, and L.P. Day. 1991. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1988,” Hesperia 60, pp. 145– 177. Gesell, G.C., L.P. Day, and W.D.E. Coulson. 1983. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1978–1981,” Hesperia 52, pp. 389–420. ———. 1988. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1987,” Hesperia 57, pp. 279–301. ———. 1995. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1989 and 1990,” Hesperia 64, pp. 67–120. Joffe, A.H. 1998. “Alcohol and Social Complexity in Ancient Western Asia,” CurrAnth 39, pp. 297–322.

Martin, L., and N. Russell. 1997. “Animal Bone Report,” Çatalhöyük 1997 Archive Report. http://catal.arch.cam.ac.uk. Mazarakis Ainian, A. 1997. From Ruler’s Dwelling to Temples: Architecture, Religion, and Society in Early Iron Age Crete (1100–700 B.C.) (SIMA 121), Jonsered. Mellaart, J. 1967. Çatal Hüyük. A Neolithic Town in Anatolia, London. Mook, M.S., and W.D.E. Coulson. 1997. “Late Minoan IIIC Pottery from the Kastro at Kavousi,” in Late Minoan III Pottery. Chronology and Terminology, E. Hallager and B.P. Hallager, eds., Athens, pp. 337–370. Nowicki, K. 1987. “The History and Setting of the Town of Karphi,” SMEA 26, pp. 235–256. ———. 1999. “Economy of Refugees: Life in the Cretan Mountains at the Turn of the Bronze and Iron Ages,” in From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders: Sidelights on the Economy of Ancient Greece, A. Chaniotis, ed., Stuttgart, pp. 145–171. Pendlebury, J.D.S., H.W. Pendlebury, and M.B. MoneyCoutts. 1937–1938. “Investigations in the Plain of Lasithi III. Karphi. A City of Refuge of the Early Iron Age in Crete,” BSA 38, pp. 57–145. Reese, D. 1987. “A Bone Assemblage at Corinth of the Second Century After Christ,” Hesperia 56, pp. 255– 267. Russell, N., and L. Martin 1998. “Çatalhöyük Animal Bone Report,” Çatalhöyük 1998 Archive Report. http://catal.arch.cam.ac.uk. Russell, N., L. Martin, and L. LeBlanc. 1996. “Çatalhöyük Animal Bone Report,” Çatalhöyük 1996 Archive Report. http://catal.arch.cam.ac.uk Wason, P.K. 1994. The Archaeology of Rank, Cambridge. Whitley, J. 1991. “Social Diversity in Dark Age Greece,” BSA 86, pp. 341–364.

6 Gournia, Vronda Kavousi, Kephala Vasilikis: A Triad of Interrelated Shrines of the Expiring Minoan Age on the Isthmus of Ierapetra Theodore Eliopoulos

By rare luck, excavators over the last century have brought to light, in a geographical radius of only 3 km, three shrines belonging to the last days of Minoan civilization. American excavations at Gournia at the beginning of the 20th century and at Vronda Kavousi towards its close, and the excavation of the East Crete ephoreia at Kephala Vasilikis in 1994–1996 (Fig. 6.1), have provided the opportunity not only to study these shrines as individual buildings and as part of their urban and geographical settings, but also to investigate their relations to neighboring shrines and other contemporary religious buildings. Moreover, thanks to the exhaustive American surveys of the Isthmus area, we have a reasonably clear picture of habitation of the area in the Dark Ages. Surprises, of course, may occur in the future, but without a doubt this area is the best studied so far for the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron Age in the Aegean. It is also a

key point for understanding religion from the end of the Bronze Age into the Early Iron Age. An examination of the interrelation of these shrines should begin with the earliest, the shrine of Gournia. The dating of one of the first cult centers found in Minoan archaeology, the shrine of Gournia, continued to be problematic for some time after its discovery. The excavators were inclined to place it in LM I (Hawes et al. 1908, 47; see also Nilsson 1950, 82), but Marinatos (1937, 289 and n. 2) showed that it must belong to LM III (see also Alexiou 1958, 185–187 and Gesell 1985, 43). Pamela Russell offered some convincing architectural observations that date the room to the “reoccupation” period because it actually was built on Neopalatial architectural elements, mainly the paving of House Fj, that lie immediately north of the shrine (Russell 1979, 28). The small shrine continues the Minoan tradition of small adyton rooms,

82

ELIOPOULOS

comparable to the LM III shrine at Knossos, and it has been characterized as a Minoan town-shrine (Hood 1977; Rutkowski 1987a). It is hard, however, to understand its location in the general frame of the LM III re-occupation of Gournia. Since we are here interested in the architectural links between this shrine and the neighboring temples at Vronda and Kephala, it is important to understand the context of the Gournia shrine within the site. Since the stratigraphy of this area cannot be checked, only architectural observations are now possible, and these are hindered by the restoration work of the 1960s and early 1970s. Nevertheless, we add the following observations to those made earlier by Russell. First, other walls contemporary with the shrine, i.e., LM III, apparently lie adjacent to it. This impression is given by a north-south wall, bonded at right angles to the room’s northeast corner and extending northward. This wall (seen on the aerial plan in Myers, Myers, and Cadogan 1992, fig. 13:6) does not appear on the Gournia general plan

KAVOUSI GOURNIA VRONDA KEPHALA VASILIKIS

KASTRO

HALASMENOS

IERAPETRA

Figure 6.1. The area of the Isthmus of Ierapetra, Eastern Crete.

(Hawes et al. 1908, pl. 1), but it cannot belong to the restoration work; it might be either a retaining wall or the wall of a building, or perhaps it combined these two functions. With the addition of this wall, the LM III shrine resembles the Gazi shrine, where walls emerge from the excavated room at right angles to it (Marinatos 1937, 279, fig. 2). Therefore, one should imagine the Gournia shrine as part of a larger LM III building or complex. Second, the trench supervisor Blanche E. Williams mentions three steps in front of the shrine (in Hawes et al. 1908, 47; these are shown in Boyd’s plan), ascending from the cobbled street. There are actually only two steps. Russell points in the right direction by observing that the first step (the lowest and westernmost) seems contemporary with the street, i.e., Neopalatial; the second was part of the LM III modification (Russell 1979, 29). It is strange that she does not complete her observations with the obvious fact that the third and highest step, through which one enters the room, is not a step at all but a wall. The result is that the room is closed from the west, and there is no entrance. Perhaps an entrance once existed here and then was blocked, but this cannot be verified due to the restoration and the mediocre preservation of the walls. Finally, the only probable bench in the shrine lies along the southern wall. This raised row of stones, however, is completely different in appearance from the benches of the Kephala shrine, which possess a surface of large flat slabs, suitable for depositing the statues and other cult objects (Fig. 6.2). As Williams comments, the stones are irregular, and one would suppose that they were plastered (Hawes et al. 1908, 47; see also Russell 1979, 27). This is somewhat improbable. These observations weaken the interpretation of the building as an isolated, single-room public shrine. The area of the shrine should be re-examined with the working hypothesis that the room belonged to a larger cultic building, or to a house (for further related architectural observations on the Gournia shrine, see Rutkowski 1987a and the studies cited by Whittaker 1997, 186, n. 13; see also Fotou 1993, 91–92 for some unpublished excavation data). Until the 1980s, the Gournia shrine, which is an early shrine of the Goddess with Upraised Arms, remained an isolated case in eastern Crete. After the excavations of shrines at neighboring Vronda and Kephala, however, we possess the data to appreciate its chronological, religious, and “territorial” significance. The small Gournia shrine, a tiny

GOURNIA, VRONDA KAVOUSI, KEPHALA VASILIKIS: A TRIAD OF INTERRELATED SHRINES

83

Figure 6.2. Kephala Vasilikis, temple complex (Building E). Room E 4, northern bench with curved contour and cult objects in situ. From south.

room lost between re-occupation walls in the center of an older Minoan town, is different in almost every aspect from the two temples of Vronda and Kephala, which belong to two new settlements of the 12th century B.C. The final abandonment of Gournia in LM IIIB seems to be followed immediately (ca. 1200 B.C.) by the foundation of new settlements around the northern end of the Isthmus of Ierapetra: Vronda and Kastro at Kavousi, Kephala Vasilikis, and others. A major historical change took place in this area, initiating a “New Era” which is part of wider changes that occurred in Mainland and insular Greece after the fall of the palaces. It is wrong to characterize these times as the beginning of the “Dark Ages.” If we assign these events to ancient heroic genealogies, then the shrine of Gournia belongs to the generation before the Trojan expedition; those of Vronda and Kephala Vasilikis to the generation of the warriors who fought with Idomeneus at Troy and returned home with the nostoi. The question remains if there ever was a period of time at the beginning of the 12th century B.C., however brief, during which the Gournia shrine and the Vronda and Kephala temples co-existed. Archaeological evidence does little to elucidate the question of whether the fleeing LM IIIB population of the Gournia area actually moved to the Kavousi heights and/or Kephala (for the late IIIB/early IIIC pottery from the Kastro of Kavousi see Mook and Coulson 1997, 342–344; early IIIC sherds also have been found at the Kephala temple but discarded just outside Room E 1. The settlement pattern in

this phase will certainly be clarified by the forthcoming publication of Watrous’ survey of the Gournia area). What is obvious, however, is the new dynamic trend of settlement in the area at this time. The settlements at Vronda and Kephala (also Kastro, which seems even to antedate Vronda a little, Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1995, 116–117) were built on new sites (older EM and MM strata at Vronda and Kephala are irrelevant for this discussion since there was a long gap in their use). The positioning of their two temples, which are now independent structures, was part of their original town plans.

Figure 6.3. Kephala Vasilikis, temple complex (Building E). Close Style krater from rooms E 5–E 8. Rim diameter 0.55 m.

84

ELIOPOULOS

Figure 6.4. The Vronda shrine, Building G (after Gesell, Day, Coulson 1995, fig. 3).

Vronda and Kephala are contemporary settlements; they have many elements in common but also many differences. Their floruit is the mature IIIC, the period of the flourishing of the Close Style, Schachermeyr’s “East Cretan Noble Ware” (Schachermeyr 1979a; 1979b). The best example of this style from the Kephala temple is an octopus krater (Fig. 6.3) found scattered in rooms E 5 and E 8. Life seems to continue with little change into the 11th

century. Toward the end of this period Vronda was abandoned, but Kephala appears to have continued into the 10th century since bell skyphoi and a Protogeometric cup (for the latter, compare Coldstream 1996, 385–387) appear among the pottery. The culture of the area at this point should be viewed as “early Greek.” With some daring, it can be compared to the foundation of a small Greek colonial community in the first migration period,

GOURNIA, VRONDA KAVOUSI, KEPHALA VASILIKIS: A TRIAD OF INTERRELATED SHRINES

which is close to this in date. Like every later Greek polis, these two settlements had their shrines, at which the deities were placed that oversaw and protected every aspect of life as long as the settlement existed (a general recent survey of the function of sacred space in Greek colonial communities is de Polignac 1995, esp. Chap. 3). The abode of these divinities is different from that of mortals. The level of material culture was already poor, provincial, and conservative, and the configuration of the settlements is similar to that of Byzantine or Early Modern villages of the traditional culture. The size, setting, and layout of the two settlements is very different, and these differences are reflected in their two respective temples, Building G at Vronda (Fig. 6.4) and Building Epsilon at Kephala (Fig. 6.5). The medium-sized Vronda settlement, situated on a ridge backed up against the Kavousi heights for protection, possesses a medium-sized two-room Temple (Gesell, Coulson, and Day 1991, 161–163; Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1995, 79–80, fig. 3, pls. 21–23; Day 1997, 401–403, figs. 8–11). This building, 11 x 4 m, is situated on the edge of the settlement against a rocky outcrop. Unfortunately, later disturbance of the fill makes it difficult to determine its internal organization and the placement of the statues within. The shrine was approached from the settlement and was clearly a distinct building. The excavation of Vronda has revealed a large, connected, and well-preserved part of the 12th–11th century settlement. The architecture of the temple and the interpretation of its history and integration in the settlement by the excavators will no doubt provide much data (see Klein, Chapter 7, and Glowacki, Chapter 9). It is evident, however, that this building has a clear external space around it, defining and differentiating it from the settlement. The existence of an external built bench should be particularly noted. An original trait for Cretan shrines (as pointed out by the excavators, Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1995, 79, n. 30), the external bench is characteristic of many one-room Byzantine and later chapels in this area. At Vronda there is a feeling for a rural conservation of resources and manpower, neither more nor less than life’s necessities demand. The shrine of the village is now recognizable from the outside. In contrast, the Kephala settlement is built in a broad and relaxed layout. The town spreads over the whole large plateau of its hill and enjoys a strong and commanding position, exhibiting not fear but imposition. Similarly, its temple is a large

85

Figure 6.5. Kephala Vasilikis temple complex (Building E).

eight-room structure of 25 x 17 m, situated also on the edge of the settlement but completely free standing and visible all around (Rehak and Younger 1998, 168; Eliopoulos 1998). It is not hidden among the other houses. Rather, it possesses a large eastern approach for the public and a southern open area at the edge of the cliff, perhaps for hypaethral carrying and exhibition of its cult images and equipment. The recent excavations at Vronda and Kephala have revealed the size and character of Cretan temples of the Goddess with Upraised Arms, known until recently only from the Karphi Temple (Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1937– 1938, 75; Rutkowski 1987b). The new finds provide information on the contexts of the Goddesses,

86

ELIOPOULOS

The increasing size, however, is evident. The Goddess of Gournia is only 0.365 m tall and belongs rather to the tradition of small Minoan figurines of Palatial times (aptly observed by Marinatos 1937, 290). At Vronda and Kephala, the Goddesses are taller. It seems that throughout the 12th century these statues grew in height, reaching almost 1.0 m in late LM IIIC Karphi. The circumstances of excavation and preservation of the cult apparatus at Vronda and Kephala again are very different, and for this reason complement each other, so as to give an overall idea of a shrine of this period. At Vronda, the wealth of material is great and its preservation good, with a large number of Goddesses (the number keeps rising from the last excavated report of seventeen; Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1995, 80). There are also a large number of well-preserved snake tubes and pinakes (plaques). Most of this material, however, was found discarded and dispersed outside of the Temple (Gesell, Coulson, and Day 1991, 161–163; Gesell and Saupe 1997, 123; much new information and interpretation will appear in the final publication). At the Kephala Temple Complex the situation is reversed: the finds are fewer and poorly preserved, but the basic architectural (benches, hearths, altarlike constructions) and movable elements permit secure interpretations. There are definitely five or six Goddesses. The bases of their cylindrical skirts, and also the bases of one or two snake tubes and of two fenestrated stands, were found in situ, clearly

Figure 6.6. Kephala Vasilikis, temple complex (Building E). Goddess No. 2 from room E 4, eastern bench. Height 0.75 m.

which until now have been found out of their original context, in a poor architectural environment or in “re-occupation” buildings. It is clear that these goddesses, even though found earlier, are a hallmark of LM IIIC (Rethemiotakis 1998, 75–95). The contents of the two contemporary shrines are very similar, in fact, almost identical. The main cult objects, indeed the focus of the ritual, are the clay statues of the Goddess with Upraised Arms. If we analyze the statues and apparatus of the Vronda and Kephala temples, we observe that the evolution from the type found in the Gournia shrine is less distinct than the architectural development.

Figure 6.7. Kephala Vasilikis, temple complex (Building E). Lower part of snake tube from room E 4, eastern bench. Preserved height 0.17 m.

GOURNIA, VRONDA KAVOUSI, KEPHALA VASILIKIS: A TRIAD OF INTERRELATED SHRINES

standing on the benches of room E 4. On the eastern bench, from north to south (only the northern part of the bench was occupied) rested the enthroned Goddess No. 1, Goddess No. 2 (Fig. 6.6), and the lower part of a snake tube made of the same red, gritty, crumbly clay as Goddess No. 1. (Fig. 6.7). On the northern bench, from west to east (this bench was fully occupied) stood the following: Goddess No. 3 with parts of her snake tube, a rectangular fenestrated stand (Fig. 6.8), an amphora with linear decoration, a circular fenestrated stand, and parts of Goddess No. 4. Kalathoi were found among the Goddesses on the bench, some with horned projections on the rims, as well as cups, bowls, trays, and handles of “lamps” or “braziers.” Pebbles were scattered around them on the surface of the bench, as in the Shrine of the Double Axes at Knossos. In the fill of the room was found a fragmentary plaque (Fig. 6.9), and also a few fragments of another Goddess, No. 5 (parts of the cylindrical skirt, a raised arm, and parts of the neck); in the adjcent room E 5 was a complete plaque (Eliopoulos 1998, 309, fig. 18). If we knew the names of the Vronda or Kephala goddesses, we probably would see a Minoan-Mycenaean syncretism that was already under way in

Figure 6.8. Kephala Vasilikis, temple complex (Building E). Rectangular fenestrated stand from room E 4, northern bench. Preserved height 0.195 m.

87

Figure 6.9. Kephala Vasilikis, temple complex (Building E). Part of a plaque from the fill of room E 4. Preserved dimensions 0.33 x 0.23 m.

the 15th century B.C. The multiplication of goddess figures in Cretan Dark Age shrines reached a climax at Vronda, with the statues counted in the dozens. Surprisingly, at Kephala, we have a unique large enthroned Goddess with Upraised Arms (Goddess No. 1). A final reconstruction of this figure has been made on paper through the close study of the numerous fragments, most of them in a desperate state of preservation. The Goddess, 0.75–0.80 m tall, is fashioned in one piece with a hollow cubical throne with arm rests and curved latticed back (Eliopoulos 1998, 308–309, fig. 14 as found). It is noteworthy that the curving forms of the latticed back of the throne and of the footstool extend also to the very bench of Room E 4 where she was found in situ. This bench has a peculiar curved contour seen from above, as does the bench in the adjacent Room E 5, which was found empty. Her upper body copies that of a typical standing Goddess, but the coroplast fashioned the knees, legs, and toes resting on a curved footstool. There is a great difference in scale between the upper and lower body of the Goddess. The raised hands are half life-size, but the legs and toes are much smaller. She wears a tiara with three triangular tongues which is inclined forward like that of Goddess No. 2 (Fig. 6.6). This enthroned Goddess cannot be understood without taking into account the whole tradition of Aegean palatial iconography of the enthroned

88

ELIOPOULOS

Minoan and Mycenaean goddess (Rehak 1995). She foreshadows the earliest Archaic seated statues (see Jung 1982 on early Greek seated figures in archaeology and Homer, often overcritical) and the various xoana of the Dark Ages and Geometric Period. The evolution to the ancient seated statue of Athena Polias from the Athenian Acropolis can be thought of as continuous (see, however, the problems posed by the traditions on this statue, Kroll 1982). The enthroned Goddess of Kephala Vasilikis was clearly the patron deity of her Temple. The fact that she is shown for the first time seated raises fascinating speculations. Dare we imagine that she was also the patron deity of the whole Isthmus of Ierapetra in the 12th–11th centuries B.C.? In any case, she belongs to an exceptional shrine, and her form and the force that instigated her creation must be examined with her excavation context. Otherwise, the rest of the cult equipment is very similar to that of Vronda. The small rectangular fenestrated stand of the northern bench of Room E 4 (Fig. 6.8, not yet fully mended) is noteworthy for the rarity of its shape. It is two-storied (preserved height 0.195 m, which is almost the original height), with serpentine handles on the lateral sides and apparently a circular aperture on top to receive a small vase, cup, or bowl. Cups and bowls of the same clay were found near it. The closest published parallel is the stand or “altar” from Karphi Room 57 (Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1937–1938, pl. 34). Another comes from Ayia Triada (Gesell 1985, 51), and many fragments of such stands have also been found in the Idaean Cave (but are as yet unpublished). At Vronda, circular fenestrated stands are reported as common (Gesell, Coulson, and Day 1991, 150, fig. 3-1; Day 1997, 398, fig. 7, not from cultic contexts). In the coming years, the full publication of the Kephala and Vronda temples certainly will provide a source of information for the reconstruction of the religion of LM IIIC (recent studies of Mycenaean urban shrines in the LH III period are Albers 1994 and Whittaker 1997; the latter extends to LM III Crete, but as is natural is already dated). Even at the start, we can hypothesize that so many changes in religious architecture in Crete after 1200 B.C., coupled with the pervasive appearance of statues of the Goddess with Upraised Arms, must point to a religious evolution. Their developments are based on Minoan and Mycenaean traditions but open a new chapter. Even with so many new finds, the way the ritual act was carried out is still unclear. In this matter,

Vronda will not take us much further than Karphi, due to the disturbed state of the finds. More can be gathered from Kephala, where it is certain that the main ritual action was carried out in the building, chiefly in the large Room E 3 around the large tablelike altar with the ovoid baetylic stone imbedded in it (Eliopoulos 1998, 307, fig. 10; for the altar of room E 3 see also Eliopoulos, forthcoming). The Goddesses were housed where they were found in E 4, the smaller room with benches, and perhaps were carried out to E 3 during the rituals. On festive occasions they also may have been carried out of the complex, for open-air cult ceremonies (Eliopoulos 1998, 310). LM IIIC is perhaps still too early for sacrifice outside the temples, and certainly no burnt deposits or offerings were found in or around the Kephala temple nor any traces of animal sacrifice. There is a only a deposit of bones to the west of Room E 3 (the room of the altar), still not studied, which may throw some light on the issue. The negative evidence for burnt animal sacrifices must not be taken as absolute, however, or form the basis for conclusions (as done by Bergquist 1988, who denies burnt sacrifices in the Bronze Age. For an excavator’s confident view on LH III burnt offerings, see e.g., Caskey 1981, 127 for the Keos Temple. Even more convincing seems the case of the Maleatas sanctuary at Epidauros, Lambrinoudakis 1981). The shrines of this period are few, and our understanding of them still at an early stage. Traces of sacrifices may disappear easily, something that has happened in many Greek shrines where thousands of animals are known to have been offered. By the LM IIIC period, the Minoan and Aegean tradition of palace and house cult in small chambers had died out. These small shrines were not replaced in Crete by the Greek temple form until later. The 8th–7th century temples of Dreros and Prinias must have been much like an enlarged Vronda. Also, the idea of carrying on the main ritual act outside, leaving the temple as only the house of the deity as was common in later Greek religion, developed late on Crete. Even at Dreros and Prinias, the importance of interior space with the hearths and benches is closer to 12th century Kephala than to the Archaic and Classical temples. The Kephala and Vronda temples of the 12th–11th centuries B.C. are closer in turn to 8th century Dreros than to 13th century Gournia. To recapitulate, all data support the assumption that the Gournia shrine is a crucial connecting link between the Minoan civilization, whose traditions it clearly still embodies rather than reflects, and

GOURNIA, VRONDA KAVOUSI, KEPHALA VASILIKIS: A TRIAD OF INTERRELATED SHRINES

the early Greek civilization, to which I think both the Vronda and Kephala temples are now oriented and should be assigned. Vronda, with its simplicity of layout, is perhaps even more in the Greek tradition than Kephala. The chronological distance between the shrine at Gournia and the temples at Vronda and Kephala, however, does not span more than a few decades. So, a significant change must have taken place in the Isthmus of Ierapetra around the year 1200 B.C.—the formation of large, autonomous temples with large rooms, some with internal columns (rooms E 6 and E 2 of the Kephala temple), and a multitude of Goddesses, some

89

showing a tendency to approach a quasi-monumental height. It is now clear that this evolution did not stop from the early LM IIIC onward. Of course, it was not restricted to the Isthmus area but should be found all over Crete. It seems that Crete had an early start in LM IIIC in the process that led to the formation of the Greek temple. The progress for the next four centuries, however, until the late Geometric/early Archaic temples of Dreros and Prinias, was at a very slow pace. For historical reasons, the evolution of the classical naos was left to other Greek lands.

Acknowledgments I would like to thank Professor Leslie Day for improving my English text. I have profited from discussions and information from L. Day, G. Gesell and M. Mook about the Kavousi (Vronda and Kastro) excavations. The conservation and study of the material from the Kephala Vasilikis excavation was assisted by an INSTAP grant. The title of this paper, but hopefully not its content, is outdated.

Now we must talk about a “quartet” of shrines in the northern part of the Isthmus of Ierapetra, since relevant finds came to light in 2000 at the nearby LMIIIC site of Halasmenos, underlining in a most emphatic way the importance of this small area in our understanding of the evolution of Aegean religion from the latest Minoan period through the Dark Ages.

Bibliography Albers, G. 1994. Spätmykenische Stadtheiligtümer: Systematische Analyse und vergleichende Auswertung der archäologischen Befunde (BAR International Series 596), London. Alexiou, S. 1958. “H minwi>khv qeav meqV uywmevnwn ceirwvn,” CretChron 12, pp. 179–299. Bergquist, B. 1988. “The Archaeology of Sacrifice: Minoan-Mycenaean versus Greek,” in Early Greek Cult Practice, R. Hägg, N. Marinatos, and G.C. Nordquist, eds., Stockholm, pp. 21–34. Caskey, M.E. 1981. “Ayia Irini, Kea: The Terracotta Statues and the Cult in the Temple,” in Sanctuaries and Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, R. Hägg and N. Marinatos, eds., Stockholm, pp. 127–135. Coldstream, J.N. 1996. “The Protogeometric and Geometric Pottery,” in Knossos North Cemetery, Early Greek Tombs, II (BSA Supplement 28), J.N. Coldstream and H.W. Catling, eds., London, pp. 311–420.

Day, L. 1997. “The Late Minoan IIIC Period at Vronda, Kavousi,” in La Crète mycénienne (BCH Supplement 30), J. Driessen and A. Farnoux, eds., Athens, pp. 391–406. de Polignac, F. 1995. La naissance de la cité grecque 2, Paris. Eliopoulos, T. 1998. “A Preliminary Report on the Discovery of a Temple Complex of the Dark Ages at Kephala Vasilikis,” in Eastern Mediterranean. CyprusDodecanese-Crete, 16th–6th cent. B.C., V. Karageorghis and N. Stampolidis, eds., Athens, pp. 301–313. ———. 2003. “O Usterominwi>kov" IIIG ‘omfalovei" ’ bwmov" th" Kefavla" Basilikhv",” in Argonauvth": Timhtikov" tovmo" gia ton kaqhghthv Cristov G. Ntouvma, A. Vlachopoulos and K. Birtacha, eds., Athens, pp. 389–408. Fotou, V. 1993. New Light on Gournia (Aegaeum 9), Liège. Gesell, G. 1985. Town, Palace and House Cult in Minoan Crete (SIMA 67), Göteborg.

90

ELIOPOULOS

Gesell, G.C., W.D.E. Coulson, and L.P. Day. 1991. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1988,” Hesperia 60, pp. 145–177. Gesell, G.C., L.P. Day, and W.D.E. Coulson. 1995. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1989 and 1990,” Hesperia 64, pp. 67–120. Gesell, G.C., and T.C. Saupe. 1997. “Methods used in the Construction of Ceramic Objects from the Shrine of the Goddess with Up-Raised Hands at Kavousi,” in TEXNH. Craftsmen, Craftswomen and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 16), R. Laffineur and P. Betancourt, eds., Liège, pp. 123–126. Hawes, H.B., B.E. Williams, R.B. Seager, and E.H. Hall. 1908. Gournia, Vasiliki and Other Prehistoric Sites on the Isthmus of Hierapetra, Crete, Philadelphia. Hood, M.S.F. 1977. “Minoan Town-Shrines?” in Greece and the Eastern Mediterranean in Ancient History and Prehistory. Studies Presented to Fritz Schachermeyr, K.H. Kinzl, ed., Berlin, pp. 156–172. Jung, H. 1982. Thronende und sitzende Götter. Zum griechischen Götterbild und Menschenideal in geometrischer und früharchaischer Zeit, Bonn. Kroll, J. 1982. “The Archaic Image of Athena Polias,” in Studies in Athenian Architecture, Sculpture and Topography Presented to H. Thompson (Hesperia Supplement 20), pp. 65–76. Lambrinoudakis, V. 1981. “Remains of the Mycenaean Period in the Sanctuary of Apollon Maleatas,” in Sanctuaries and Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, R. Hägg and N. Marinatos, eds., pp. 59–63, Stockholm. Marinatos, Sp. 1937. “Ai Minwi>kaiv Qeaiv tou Gavzi,” ArchEph 1937, pp. 278–291. Mook, M., and W.D.E. Coulson. 1997. “Late Minoan IIIC Pottery from the Kastro at Kavousi,” in Late Minoan III Pottery. Chronology and Terminology, E. Hallager and B.P. Hallager, eds., Athens, pp. 337–365. Myers, J., E. Myers, and G. Cadogan. 1992. The Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete, Berkeley and Los Angeles.

Nilsson, M.P. 1950. Minoan-Mycenaean Religion and its Survival in Greek Religion2, Lund. Pendlebury, J.D.S., H.W. Pendlebury, and M.B. MoneyCoutts. 1937–1938. “Excavations in the Plain of Lasithi, III. Karphi. A City of Refuge of the Early Iron Age in Crete,” BSA 38, pp. 57–145. Rehak, P. 1995. “Enthroned Figures in Aegean Art and the Function of the Mycenaean Megaron,” in The Role of the Ruler in the Prehistoric Aegean (Aegaeum 11), P. Rehak, ed., Liège, pp. 95–118. Rehak, P., and J.G. Younger. 1998. “Review of Aegean Prehistory VII: Neopalatial, Final Palatial, and Postpalatial Crete,” AJA 102, pp. 91–173. Rethemiotakis, G. 1998. Anqrwpomorfikhv phloplastikhvn sthn Krhvth apov th neoanaktorikhv evw" thn upominwikhv perivodo, Athens. Russell, P. 1979. “The Date of the Gournia Shrine,” TUAS 4, pp. 27–33. Rutkowski, B. 1987a. “Das Stadtheiligtum von Gournia [Kreta],” in Kolloquium zur ägäischen Vorgeschichte, Mannheim 20–22.2.1986, Schriften des Deutschen Archäologen-Verbandes, Mannheim, pp. 58–62. ———. 1987b, “The Temple at Karphi,” SMEA 26, pp. 257–279. Schachermeyr, F. 1979a. Die ägäische Frühzeit III. Kreta zur Zeit der Wanderungen, Vienna. ———. 1979b, “The Pleonastic Pottery Style of Cretan Middle IIIC and its Cypriote Relations,” in Acts of the International Archaeological Symposium “The Relations between Cyprus and Crete, ca. 2000–500 B.C.,” V. Karageorghis, ed., Nicosia, pp. 204–214. Whittaker, H. 1997. Mycenaean Cult Buildings. A Study of their Architecture and Function in the Context of the Aegean and the Eastern Mediterranean, Bergen.

7 The Architecture of the Late Minoan IIIC Shrine (Building G) at Vronda, Kavousi Nancy L. Klein

When Harriet Boyd began to excavate at Kavousi in 1900, she was among the first to investigate the archaeological sites of Eastern Crete. At that time, the scholars involved with the fledgling study of Aegean prehistory were occupied with the tasks of preliminary identification and classification not only of sites, but of pottery and architecture. Boyd’s work at Vronda brought to light remains from the Bronze to Early Iron Ages and initiated a discussion of this transitional period after the fall of the Minoan palaces. Although she did not produce a plan of the site, she seems to have concentrated on the summit of the hill where she discovered “an excellent stretch of wall,” a storeroom with pithoi, and a large house with forecourt, one room of which held several iron weapons and tools (Boyd 1901, 131–136). On the slopes to the north and west, Boyd also found several Late Minoan tholos tombs; many of these had been plundered, but some contained pottery and small finds. Despite the brevity of her work at

Vronda, Boyd’s excavations contributed to the growing understanding of the “sub-Mycenaean” period on Crete, and the site became known for its large house, its cache of iron weapons, and the Late Minoan tholos tombs. In the eighty-plus years between Boyd’s initial reconnaissance of the Vronda hilltop and the renewal of fieldwork by the members of the Kavousi Project, our understanding of Aegean prehistory and the archaeology of Crete has grown exponentially. Geraldine Gesell, Leslie Day, and William Coulson conceived the Kavousi Project in order to re-explore Boyd’s excavations at Vronda and Kastro with the advantages of increased knowledge and modern excavation techniques. One of the primary goals was to reinvestigate the tombs and settlement at Vronda (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1983). In 1983, cleaning work located Boyd’s house (Building A) and the storerooms containing pithoi (Building B). During a second season in 1984, more extensive architectural remains on the western and

92

Figure 7.1. Kavousi Vronda: state plan.

KLEIN

THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE LATE MINOAN IIIC SHRINE (BUILDING G) AT VRONDA, KAVOUSI

93

Figure 7.2. Kavousi Vronda: excavation of snake tubes in Building G, Room 2, 1988.

southern slopes were revealed (Day, Coulson, and Gesell 1986). Four full seasons of excavation (1987– 1990) and a final cleaning effort (1992) uncovered material from the Early, Middle, and Late Minoan periods, especially an extensive LM IIIC settlement, later Geometric burials within the settlement, and Byzantine remains nearby (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1988; Gesell, Coulson, and Day 1991; Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1995). Improved methodologies of excavation, material recovery, and analysis allowed the Kavousi project to elicit detailed information about many aspects of life and death on the Vronda hilltop. One fundamental contribution is the systematic study of the architecture and planning of the LM IIIC settlement. Based on architectural forms and artifact analysis, we can now identify several different types of buildings, the “Big House” (A-B); houses or “building complexes,” such as C-D, E, I-O-N, J-K, and L-M; and the Shrine to the Minoan Goddess with Upraised Arms (G) (Fig. 7.1). In 1987, the discovery of fragments of cult equipment, including statues of the Goddess with Upraised Arms and snake tubes, was a clear sign of cult activity on the southwest slope of the Vronda hilltop (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1988, 289–290).

The fact that these objects were discovered near Building G immediately raised the probability that it was the Shrine, but, unfortunately, the interior of the two-room structure was badly disturbed prior to excavation. A Geometric grave (Grave 19) had been dug in the eastern half of Room 1 through rock tumble down to the level of the floor, and, in more recent times, a large pit was dug to plant an olive tree above the eastern wall. These intrusive activities probably account for the wide dispersion of shrine material outside of the building itself. In addition, the slope of the hillside led to heavy erosion along the western side of the building. In 1988, however, an undisturbed LM IIIC stratum was discovered in Room 2 of Building G (Gesell, Coulson, and Day 1991, 162) (Fig. 7.2). Several snake tubes were found as they had fallen from the bench or platform above, and they had been covered by the subsequent collapse of the building itself. This fact, along with the distribution of cult material in and around Building G, led to the positive identification of this structure as the Shrine. (The cult equipment found at Vronda is being studied by Prof. G. Gesell [1995; 1996] and will be published in the volume dedicated to the Shrine in the Kavousi publication series.)

94

KLEIN

Figure 7.3. Kavousi Vronda: Shrine (Building G) from the west.

Description of the Architecture Building G is a free-standing structure with two rooms on the southwest slope of the Vronda hill (Fig. 7.3). It is simply built, made of rubble masonry with limestone and breccia boulders. The stones are unworked but were selected for their manageable size and suitable shape. The northsouth orientation of the building takes advantage of the natural terrain. It is situated on a natural terrace and uses a steeply sloping hillside as foundation and support on its eastern side. The eastern walls have an interior face of trimmed bedrock with rubble facing but no exterior face. By contrast, the western wall stands on soil, either the natural topsoil or fill brought in to level the area prior to building. This wall is constructed of exceptionally large boulders, has a well-built exterior face, and bonds with both the northern and southern returns. The interior faces of the north, south, and west walls are lacking, except for a short stretch of the western wall between Rooms 1

and 2. A large, long bench abuts the exterior face of the western wall, beyond which is a peculiar bedrock outcrop. The purpose of this feature is unknown at present. Building G has a simple design with two interior rooms (Fig. 7.4). Room 1 (to the south) is roughly rectangular in shape, with interior dimensions ca. 3.5 x 6.5 m (total area ca. 22.75 m2). This area had been badly disturbed by the planting of an olive tree and the construction of a Geometric grave (Grave 19). The western half of the building was badly eroded, and no recognizable floor surfaces were preserved. The only apparently undisturbed stratum, a layer of clay from the collapsed roof, was found in the northeast corner. The east and west walls are unbroken, but the southern wall is incompletely preserved and may have had a doorway. At the north is a short cross-wall which bonds with the eastern wall. A stretch of the western wall with the interior face preserved

THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE LATE MINOAN IIIC SHRINE (BUILDING G) AT VRONDA, KAVOUSI

Figure 7.4. Kavousi Vronda: plan of Shrine (Building G).

95

96

KLEIN

demonstrates that this cross-wall did not extend the entire width of the building. This suggests that there was an offset opening or doorway between the rooms, and that it was possible to move directly from one room to another within the building. There is a rectangular platform in the northeast corner of Room 1 and a low, narrow bench along the northern part of the eastern wall. These features are built using the same techniques and materials as the walls themselves. Room 2 (to the north) is smaller than Room 1 with interior dimensions ca. 3.25 x 4 m. The western half of Room 2 is badly eroded, but the eastern half is the best-preserved area of the building. A series of snake tubes was discovered here in the final days of the 1988 excavation season (Fig. 7.2). As in Room 1, the eastern wall has an interior face

of trimmed bedrock with rubble facing. The northern wall is built against the bedrock in the northeast and so has a preserved interior, but no exterior, face. By contrast, the northwest corner is well-preserved on the exterior, but the interior faces are missing. The existence of a door in this northern wall is possible because the wall is not completely preserved. Along the eastern half of the northern and southern walls are stone-built benches, and on the east wall is a bench and a platform. On the east, it also appears that the bedrock (wall face) has been trimmed back for a short distance above and behind the bench. A patch of burned red soil is all that remains of a simple hearth, without curbstone or lining, in the center of the room (Fig. 7.4).

Relation to Other Buildings at Vronda, Kavousi In many ways, the architecture of the Shrine is closely comparable to that of other buildings at Vronda. The example of Building C-D (Fig. 7.5) serves to explore three architectural concerns: topographical setting and plan, building material, and construction techniques. Building C-D is situated on the western edge of the Vronda hilltop just to the north of the Shrine and is a domestic complex with ten rooms. It is bordered on the east by the Big House (Building A-B) and by J-K to the northeast. At the west is a terrace wall built along a steep drop in the ground level. In the area of Building C-D, the ground level slopes from northeast to southwest, a factor exploited in the orientation and disposition of the rooms. Both Building C and Building D have a primary entrance at the north with the principal rooms disposed along the northeast to southwest axis. This allows for the rooms to be built along natural terrace lines with bedrock used in foundations and walls when possible (Fig. 7.6). The advantage of such topographical considerations can be observed along the western side of Building C-D. Here the bedrock has been trimmed to serve as the foundation and lowest part of the wall between the rooms on the lower terrace and those on the upper terrace. This was observed previously in the construction of the eastern wall of Building G (Fig. 7.3). The materials used in Building C-D are limestone and breccia

boulders. The stones come from the surrounding landscape and show no toolmarks but were probably chosen for their manageable size (easily moved by one to two people) and useful shape. Last, the construction techniques are the same as found throughout the settlement. The walls are often founded on bedrock, which is sometimes trimmed for the purpose, and occasionally on soil, especially on the “downhill” sides of the building. The wall faces are straight and even, and the best examples have alternating courses of limestone slabs arranged flat or on edge. Larger boulders are used frequently at the corners and at the ends of walls. Platforms and benches are made with stone cobbles and mud packing. Although there are many similarities between Building G and other structures at Vronda, the architectural and topographical differences point to its specialized function. Building G was constructed with an intentionally impressive western façade. The wall uses larger boulders than are found elsewhere on site, and the exterior bench, the only one found at Vronda, further emphasizes its importance. The design of Building G, with only two rooms, is in marked contrast to the multiple rooms of the Big House (A-B) and the household complexes (C-D, E, I-O-N, and J-K) throughout the site. Building G also stands in a relatively isolated position with regard to the other buildings. Its

THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE LATE MINOAN IIIC SHRINE (BUILDING G) AT VRONDA, KAVOUSI

97

Figure 7.5. Kavousi Vronda: plan of Building C-D.

topographical setting on the southwest slope of the hill argues against it having a special connection to any other structure (contra Mazarakis Ainian 1997, 210). Furthermore, the western façade looks out over an open hillside on which

only a large kiln was discovered, but the area is devoid of any buildings. These characteristics serve to point to the distinctive function of the Shrine compared to the typical domestic buildings at Vronda.

98

KLEIN

Figure 7.6. Kavousi Vronda: Building D from north.

Comparison to Other Late Minoan Shrines Today we are in a fortunate position to study Late Minoan religious architecture. Thanks to the work of Harriet Boyd and others, we have several sites to consider along with the Vronda Shrine. When Boyd completed her work at Kavousi, she undertook the excavation of nearby Gournia. Her work there uncovered an extensive town with remarkable preservation of architecture and finds. Among her discoveries was a Postpalatial shrine to the Goddess with Upraised Arms (Hawes et al. 1908, 47–48; Gesell 1985, 72). The shrine (Fig. 7.7) is located on the western side of the site and is approached by a cobble road leading to the door on the west. The free-standing building has a single rectangular room with interior dimensions ca. 4.0 x 3.0 m. There is a bench along the southern wall and an “offering table” (comparable to the platforms in Building G) in the northeastern corner. Boyd also was fortunate to discover several snake tubes on top of this offering table, which confirmed the identification of this building as a

shrine. A date in LM IIIB is suggested for its final period of use. In the Late Minoan IIIC period, there are three other important shrines to consider: Karphi, Kephala Vasilikis, and Halasmenos. The extensive LM IIIC settlement at Karphi in the Lasithi plateau was excavated by the British School at Athens from 1937–1939 and has several areas of religious activity (Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1937–1938). Small public shrines (Rooms 27, 57, 58) and domestic shrines (Rooms 116, 89, 79) are found throughout the settlement (Gesell 1985, 45). The most important is the “Temple” (Fig. 7.8). It stands at the northern edge of the settlement, overlooking the rest of the site to the south and the cliff edge to the northern coastline of Crete. Room 1 is almost rectangular in shape, ca. 5.0 x 8.0 m, with a single door at the east approached by steps. The interior plan shows a bench along the southern wall, a shelf along the west wall, and an “altar” or offering table in the northern part of the room (Gesell 1985, 79).

THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE LATE MINOAN IIIC SHRINE (BUILDING G) AT VRONDA, KAVOUSI

Although Pendlebury suggested that the lack of roofing material implied an unroofed area, the interior dimensions could, in fact, be spanned without difficulty, and there is no reason to suppose a hypaethral arrangement (Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1937–1938, 75; Rutkowski 1987, 261). Several adjoining rooms to the west of Room 1 have been identified as annexes, including one to the southwest and another to the northwest where a statuette of the Goddess with Upraised Arms was found. This discovery suggests that at Karphi, the “Temple” may indeed have been a complex of rooms with a shared purpose. The relationship between the “Temple,” the Great House, and the definition of a broader “sacred area,” however, has not been satisfactorily demonstrated (contra Rutkowski 1987, 261–263). In Eastern Crete in the Isthmus of Ierapetra, excavators have discovered two more shrines to the Goddess with Upraised Arms. Th. Eliopoulos conducted excavations at Kephala Vasilikis from 1994– 1996 and uncovered ten buildings from the Late Minoan IIIC period (Eliopoulos 1998). Among these, Building Epsilon has been identified as a temple complex of eight rooms. The building can be divided into three wings, each with a different function. Most of the cult equipment, however, was found in the Southern Wing (Rooms 4, 5, and 8), especially E 4. This room has interior dimensions of ca. 5 x 4 m and is entered through a single door on the southwest. There are benches along all of the walls, a small hearth lies in the northwest corner, and a base in the center of the room may be an altar. The discovery of Goddess statuettes, fenestrated stands, kalathoi, and pottery in situ on the northern bench, and an enthroned Goddess and a snake tube on the northern end of the eastern bench in E 4, signals its function in a dramatic fashion. Finally, in

99

Figure 7.7. Gournia: plan of the Shrine (after Hawes et al. 1908, Plan).

the summer of 2000, M. Tsipopoulou and W. Coulson uncovered yet another shrine building at nearby Halasmenos. Rectangular in plan like the Vronda Shrine, and also containing fragments of Goddesses, snake tubes, and plaques, this new discovery will certainly further our understanding of LM IIIC religious architecture in Eastern Crete (Harrington 2000).

Conclusions Where does all this evidence, past and recent discoveries, leave us in our understanding of the Shrine at Vronda Kavousi and its contribution to the study of Late Minoan religious architecture? In the years since the Kavousi Project completed excavation at Vronda, analyses of the archaeological evidence have produced exciting results. It has been possible to restore several examples of the Goddess with Upraised Arms and to calculate the

existence of dozens more. The study of the other (non-cult) ceramic material has shown a lack of cooking and storage vessels throughout this area, and thus the likelihood that cooking and dining did not take place within the Shrine, although evidence for food preparation, storage and consumption is common almost everywhere else on site. The Goddesses, snake tubes, kalathoi, and plaques are outstanding examples of Late Minoan cult

100

KLEIN

Figure 7.8. Karphi: plan of the Temple (after Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1937–1938, Plate 9).

equipment and demonstrate the connections between the Vronda shrine and the other shrines of the Minoan goddess. But although the cult equipment has many aspects in common, the architecture at each site shows great variety. Architectural features such as benches and platforms are found at Gournia, Karphi, Kephala Vasilikis, and Vronda, but each building has a different plan and relation to its surroundings. At Vronda, Building G was constructed in the Late Minoan IIIC period to serve a single function, as a shrine of the Goddess. The construction techniques and materials used in Building G are found throughout the LM IIIC settlement, but its architecture stands out in certain regards. First, it is the only free-standing two-room structure on the site. It stands in close proximity to the settlement but

clearly does not have an exclusive relationship with any one building. Second, the western wall was made of particularly large boulders along its entire length and not simply at the corners or doorways. This indicates a much greater effort expended in its construction than in other buildings of the settlement. Third, Building G has an impressive bench along the western façade, another unique feature at Vronda. The presence of the bench and the great care taken in the building of the wall suggest to me that the western façade of the building merited special attention and may have been a place of assembly or display. Although this face of the Shrine may appear to look away from the other buildings at Vronda, it faces a large open area suitable for congregation and stands watch over a commanding view of the Isthmus and Eastern Crete.

THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE LATE MINOAN IIIC SHRINE (BUILDING G) AT VRONDA, KAVOUSI

101

Acknowledgments I would like to thank the directors of the Kavousi Project, Professor Geraldine C. Gesell (University of Tennessee), Professor Leslie Preston Day (Wabash College), and Professor William D.E. Coulson, for the opportunity to study the architecture of the

Shrine (Building G) at Vronda, Kavousi. The presentation of this paper in Athens was made possible by a grant from the Edward A. Schrader Fund, Indiana University

Bibliography Boyd, H.A. 1901. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete in 1900,” AJA 5, pp. 125–157. Day, L.P., W.D.E. Coulson, and G.C. Gesell. 1986. “Kavousi, 1983–1984: The Settlement at Vronda,” Hesperia 55, pp. 355–387. Eliopoulos, T. 1998. “A Preliminary Report on the Discovery of a Temple Complex of the Dark Ages at Kephala Vasiliki,” in Proceedings of the International Symposium: Eastern Mediterranean: Cyprus-DodecaneseCrete 16th–6th c. B.C., V. Karageorghis, ed., Athens, pp. 301–313. Gesell, G.C. 1985. Town, Palace, and House Cult in Minoan Crete (SIMA 67), Göteborg. ———. 1995. “The Shrine at Kavousi Vronda,” (paper, Atlanta 1994), abstract in AJA 99, p. 335. ———. 1996. “Snake Tubes and Other Ritual Vessels in the Shrines of the Goddess with Upraised Hands,” (paper, San Diego 1995), abstract in AJA 100, p. 404. Gesell, G.C., W.D.E. Coulson, and L.P. Day. 1991. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1988,” Hesperia 60, pp. 145–177.

Gesell, G.C., L.P. Day, and W.D.E. Coulson. 1983. “Excavations and Survey at Kavousi, Crete, 1978–1981,” Hesperia 52, pp. 389–420. ———. 1988. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1987,” Hesperia 57, pp. 279–301. ———. 1995. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1989 and 1990,” Hesperia 64, pp. 67–120. Harrington, S.P.M. 2000. “Cretan Shrine Discovered,” Archaeology 53, p. 17. Hawes, H.B., B.E. Williams, R.B. Seager, and E.H. Hall. 1908. Gournia, Vasiliki and Other Prehistoric Sites on the Isthmus of Hierapetra, Crete, Philadelphia. 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. Pendlebury, J.D.S., H.W. Pendlebury, and M.B. MoneyCoutts. 1937–1938. “Excavations in the Plain of Lasithi, III. Karphi. A City of Refuge of the Early Iron Age in Crete,” BSA 38, pp. 57–145. Rutkowski, B. 1987. “The Temple at Karphi,” SMEA 26, pp. 257–279.

8 Halasmenos, Destroyed but not Invisible: New Insights on the LM IIIC Period in the Isthmus of Ierapetra. First Presentation of the Pottery from the 1992–1997 Campaigns Metaxia Tsipopoulou

The Late Minoan IIIC settlement at Halasmenos belongs to a dense pattern of occupation of the wider Northern Ierapetra isthmus, known from sites excavated or reported by survey. After seven field and two study seasons beginning in 1992, we are in a position to proceed with an initial synthesis. From its very beginning, the project has been a multinational synergasia in its true sense and, consequently, this paper owes much to the input of a dedicated and hard-working team. Halasmenos, although not a unique occurrence (Coulson and Tsipopoulou 1994), adds two significant new elements to our knowledge of the area. First, our site, contrary to Kastro Kavousi, Vrokastro, and Kephala Vasilikis, testifies to a single, short phase of occupation in its largest part. This leads to interesting chronological comparisons since we are dealing with a closed middle LM IIIC occupation. Other parts of Halasmenos see a slightly later reoccupation, which, fortunately, is distinguished

easily stratigraphically. The second remarkable result of our research is that the participation of Krzystzof Nowicki, whom Peter Warren has characterized as “the Pendlebury of the late 20th century,” enabled us to investigate Katalimata. This eagle’s aerie on the vertical wall of the Cha gorge rightly lays claim to being the sole excavated refuge settlement in Crete. Halasmenos lies on a rocky and relatively steep hill (Fig. 8.1), some 240 m high, immediately to the south of the entrance to the Cha gorge. Unlike other neighboring sites, it was completely unknown until 1989 when a fire cleared the vegetation. Its extent, some seven to eight acres, places it among the largest settlements in the area. Together with Kavousi and Kephala Vasilikis, Halasmenos controlled the major axes converging on the fertile plain of the Northern Ierapetra isthmus and had visual control of the sea-routes of both the Cretan and the Libyan seas.

104

TSIPOPOULOU

HALASMENOS 1992–2000

Figure 8.1. Halasmenos settlement.

Figure 8.2. Vessel fabrics and shapes.

Halasmenos Fabrics and Shapes

HALASMENOS, DESTROYED BUT NOT INVISIBLE 105

106

TSIPOPOULOU

The settlement is divided into three sectors (Fig. 8.1), each on a distinct terrace: A, B, and G. Until 1997, all of B, and a large part of A, together some 2500 m2, had been excavated. The rooms are oriented consistently north-northwest to southsoutheast. The houses are single-story structures, usually with three rooms, and the general plan is agglomerative.

A small tholos tomb, without dromos and with a chamber 1.6 m in diameter, was discovered 200 m to the south of the settlement, indicating the position of the cemetery. It was unplundered and offered important information on the physical health of five individuals and on the funerary practices. It contained twenty-seven vases of various tpypes but no other finds (Tsipopoulou and Coulson 1994, 86, fig. 17).

The Pottery Functional Typology The pottery prior to the 2000 season (from Sectors A and B and the tomb) is presented here in its entirety. Of the 838 bags collected, 699 bags or 808 kg (35,027 sherds or 84%) were studied. The complete vases and such specimens which preserve a full profile were added. Sector A produced 18,499 sherds and B 18,533. The criteria adopted to define what constitutes diagnostic sherds were stringent, as we are dealing essentially with a single phase. This resulted in a relatively low number, i.e., 8086 for A and 7841 for B, available for further typological study.

We attempted to construct a functional typology based on the obvious function of most of the shapes. We are not unaware of the problems and shortcomings of every conventional typological scheme nor of the subsequent limitations resulting from the non-recognizability of certain shapes. The simplest possible scheme was adopted, at least for the initial presentation (Table 8.1). Storage vessels (17%) are sub-divided into two categories for permanent or temporary storage based chiefly on the size and the ease of transport. The term larnax is used for storage chests. Some of the vases are used exclusively for liquids (amphora,

PROVISIONAL FUNCTIONAL TYPOLOGY Short-Term Storage

Long-Term Storage

Food Preparation

Serving/ Consumption

Special Activities

1. Pithoid

1. Pithos

1. Tripod cooking pot

1. Jug

1. Lamp

2. Pyxis

2. Larnax

2. Cooking pot

2. Thelastron

2. Stand

3. Lid

3. Lid

3. Cooking tray

3. Krater

3. Incense burner

4. Basin

4. Kalathos

4. Amphora 5. Hydria

5. Dish

6. Stirrup jar

6. Bowl

7. Amphoriskos

7. Kylix

8. Alabastron

8. Deep bowl 9. One handled cup 10. Stemmed cup 11. Tankard 12. Handleless cup

Table 8.1.

Provisional functional typology of ceramics.

HALASMENOS, DESTROYED BUT NOT INVISIBLE

hydria, stirrup jar), while others, especially large vessels, but also pithoid jars, pyxides, amphoriskoi, and alabastra, could have contained various products, in some cases other than agricultural. Lids were used both for large pithoi and for smaller vessels such as pithoid jars and pyxides. The percentage of vessels employed for food preparation is by far the largest (57%), thus reflecting both a real cultural situation and also the easy recognizability of cooking pots from sherds. It is obvious that some of the short-term storage vessels (such as amphoras, especially of small size) could have been used for serving purposes as well. These were not included here, as the principal function of the shape was storage. The fourth category, specialized vases (less than 1%), requires further elaboration. In this paper, only three shapes are used. The examination of the storage vessels shows that short- and long-term storage needs were served, respectively, by pithoid jars (36%) and pithoi (39%): that is, shapes that could be used for various products. The third most common shape, amphoras (21%), could also be used for various liquids. Of the remaining shapes, stirrup jars represent 2%, and hydrias, amphoriskoi, pyxides, and alabastra are less than 1% of the total. This offers an interesting glimpse of the storage approaches of an agrarian society from generalized, multi-purpose to specialized. Vessels employed for food preparation (57% of the total) consist overwhelmingly (86%) of tripod cooking pots. The legless variant is most rare (2%), although there is difficulty in identifying this shape from all but base sherds. Tripod cooking trays represent another 2%. In the absence of greater precision, basins are also included in this category, representing 10% of the group population. Shapes for serving food and drink (26%) exhibit a great variety, although one cannot determine whether the different types of cups (12% for the one-handled variety), kylikes (less than 1%), and deep bowls (43%) were used for different liquids, or whether they might suggest an elementary social differentiation. The tomb contained all types of drinking vessels, except kylikes. Among vases for serving food, the bowls are prominent (17%), but plates (less than 1%) are rare, possibly due to a parallel use of wood in the latter case. The more numerous kalathoi (4%) do not provide clear indications of their content.

107

The last category (less than 1% of the total sherds) comprises only three shapes, namely, lamps (20%), stands (70%), and vases connected with fire (10%). It is certain that other clay vessels were used for specialized agricultural or domestic purposes.

Fabrics and Decoration Macroscopic examination defined six clay types, although an argument can be made for reducing these to four. Although petrographic analyses have not been conducted, they constitute a research priority for the immediate future. All clay types appear in fine, medium, and coarse variants according to the inclusions, but the percentages vary greatly. The six types are: pinkish buff, orange buff, yellowish buff, brownish red, red, and dark brown. Types 1 and 2 are the most common in the fine and medium variety, especially 2; Type 5 is much more common in the coarse variety. Types 4 and 6 have no fine variety. Type 6 is extremely rare and probably imported. There are two very characteristic, probably local, clays. Orange buff clay is usually fine, and was used for small open shapes (deep bowls, cups, conical cups, dishes, and bowls), most amphoras, jugs, basins, pithoid jars, and big coarse pithoi. Red clay was used especially for cooking pots and to a lesser degree for kalathoi, dishes, and other serving shapes. The exact correspondence of shapes and clay types appears in Fig. 8.2. The use of slips is universal; they are usually thin and of the same color as the clay. More rarely, especially on open decorated specimens, the slip is thick, almost creamy, of a slightly different color from the clay. The percentage of the decorated pottery comprises only 8% of the total. Three different types of decoration are encountered: relief (5%), incised (7%), and painted, either as a monochrome surface (68%), as bands (13%), or as motifs (7%). A combination of relief and incised decoration, or of bands and motifs, cannot be excluded; indeed, it was rather common, but it is now difficult to establish its percentage due to the fragmentary state of the material. The most noteworthy characteristic of the decoration at Halasmenos is the high percentage of monochrome specimens. Given the relatively low quality of the wares and their firing, this is the easiest way to improve a vessel aesthetically and functionally. The color of the majority of monochrome vases ranges from black to reddish or dark brown. For bands and motifs, the paint used is black, more rarely brown.

108

TSIPOPOULOU

Shapes Pithoi (9% of the total, Fig. 8.3) are of two types, as known from other contemporary Cretan sites. The first, typically Minoan, has a relatively narrow torus base and oval body, usually taller than 1 m, with a high out-curving rim of elliptical or trapezoidal section, a relatively narrow cylindrical neck, and handles of circular or elliptical section on the lower and upper body. The decoration consists of the typical relief zones with incised herringbone patterns and cross-hatching in various combinations. Zones of fingerprints also are present, especially on the bases and on the lower parts of the necks. The second type is cylindrical, 40–70 cm in height, with a flat or torus base, straight or slightly curved profile, horizontal out-curving rim with a ridge, and vertical handles of elliptical section, placed on the upper part of the body. These small pithoi, always undecorated, sometimes called also “open jars,” are very common in LM IIIC settlements in the area (Kanta 1980, fig. 57:6 from Kavousi). The type starts in LM IIIB (Watrous 1992, 68, fig. 43). The pithoi have flat lids (less than 1%) made of coarse clay with incised and relief decoration. Very few specimens are preserved, suggesting a parallel use of wood. Pithoid jars (8%) constitute a very conservative type with little differentiation from the Neopalatial period onwards. There are no complete specimens, but the sherds suggest ovoid bodies and thin, horizontal or elliptical, in-curving or slightly out-curving rims. Some are monochrome. Amphoras (Fig. 8.4), 25–35 cm in height, are numerous (5%) and play a significant role in defining an advanced phase of IIIC. They have wide, usually flat and sometimes slightly raised bases, ovoid or more globular bodies, relatively low and narrow or wide necks, and arch-shaped handles of circular or elliptical section from the rim to the shoulder (see also Watrous 1992, fig. 59, 1585 for a LM IIIB example). The few decorated specimens have widely spaced bands on the body, the neck, and the rim, and a carelessly executed motif on the shoulder, usually curvilinear (see also Mountjoy 1986, fig. 171, LH IIIC early). Stirrup jars (1%) (Fig. 8.5) appear in two sizes, large (ca. 30 cm in height) and small, (ca. 15 cm). They are always decorated, belong to typical East Cretan types, and constitute useful chronological indicators. Large (transport) stirrup jars, more common at the settlement but with one example coming

from the tholos tomb, have wide bases, ovoid bodies, and, frequently, a hole on the disc (see also Kanta 1980, figs. 68:3, 69:3–4). In the middle of the body all specimens have a wide zone carrying a carelessly drawn wavy band and a spiral on the disc. The shoulder zones are decorated with simple curvilinear motifs, similar to those encountered on the shoulders of amphoras. Small stirrup jars, more frequent in the tomb but also present at the settlement, have conical bases hollow underneath and Close Style decoration. Two identical complete examples found in the tomb (2-6 and 92-11) have dense thin bands on the body and a combination of arcs, crosshatching, and fringes on the shoulder. The type is very common at all sites in the Mirabello and Siteia areas. The earliest, experimental examples are found at Kritsa. They lack the bands on the body, have a lower base, and are decorated in a more free style. From the settlement came a rare example of a monochrome stirrup jar (92-13). Pyxides are represented by a few characteristic cylindrical examples (less than 1%) preserved in a fragmentary state (Fig. 8.6: 97-4). These are small vases (probably ca. 15 cm in height) with angular shoulders, horizontal handles, and a high, slightly out-curving rim. One larger example has a less pronounced in-curving rim. The decoration is Close Style, using combinations of triangles and arches in zones separated by horizontal bands (Kanta 1980, 282). One specimen has a clear cylindrical body, no definition of the shoulder, and a rim that accommodates the lid. Amphoriskoi (Fig. 8.6: 95-71) are rare. They have a wide base, a spherical body, a height of ca. 13–15 cm, a low neck, an out-curving rim, and highplaced horizontal handles. The decoration consists of widely spaced horizontal bands on the body, neck, and rim. The shape is Mycenaean; examples are known already in LH IIIB with simple linear decoration (Mountjoy 1986, fig. 150). Tripod cooking pots (Fig. 8.7) (86%) display two types. The larger (95-397, 96-415) has a deep spherical body and is usually about 30 cm high; the smaller (97-218) has a more oval shape (about 20–22 cm high). The rim is usually high and outcurving, the legs tall and circular in section with one or three deep vertical grooves, and most of the handles are high-placed and horizontal. No cooking pots with one handle were found at Halasmenos. Finger impressions on the upper parts of the legs are very common on both varieties. Room B 5 in Sector B produced a dozen tripod cooking pots of the first type with an impressive capacity of

HALASMENOS, DESTROYED BUT NOT INVISIBLE

92-70

92-43

Figure 8.3. Pithoi.

109

110

TSIPOPOULOU

97-27 96-358

95-58

95-484

93-116

97-16 Figure 8.4. Amphoras, jugs, and feeding bottles.

98-71-1

98-88

HALASMENOS, DESTROYED BUT NOT INVISIBLE

92-11

92-6

92-13

92-9 Figure 8.5. Stirrup jars.

111

112

TSIPOPOULOU

97-4 95-71

95-294

92-135

Figure 8.6. Pyxides, amphoriskoi, and stands.

HALASMENOS, DESTROYED BUT NOT INVISIBLE

96-415

97-30

Figure 8.7. Tripod cooking vessels.

113

95-397

97-218

114

TSIPOPOULOU

96-33

95-329

93-71

93-47 96-347 Figure 8.8. Cooking amphoras.

HALASMENOS, DESTROYED BUT NOT INVISIBLE

12–13 liters each (compare similar big tripod cooking pots from Kastro Kavousi: Mook and Coulson 1997, fig. 17:39). Cooking amphoras (Fig. 8.8) of Mycenaean type are very rare (2%), but it is difficult to identify this shape when the bases are not preserved; in form and clay they differ little from the footed variant. Larger specimens (95-329, 96-347), 28–32 cm high, have horizontal handles. Those of the smaller variety (96-33, 93-71, 93-47), 15–17 cm high, have vertical ones which are elliptical in section. Bases are usually wide, and rims high and out-curving (see also Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 102:71). Cooking trays and dishes (2%) are also present in the assemblage of food preparation vessels. Trays (Fig. 8.7) have a shallow body, 3–5 cm high, are angular in profile, and have a flat base. Rims are either wide and horizontal or thin and vertical; diameters vary from 35–42 cm. Legs are thin and elliptical. Usually, horizontal handles are preserved below the rim. This is a Minoan vase type with a long tradition and practically no evolution from the Neopalatial period onwards. The second type (Fig. 8.9: 93-34, 96-426, 95-521, 92-28-1, 92-41-1), which appears to have been placed directly on the fire, is about 5–8 cm tall. It has a conical or slightly curved profile, thinner walls, and a thin or slightly rounded rim. In one case (92-28-1), there is a row of holes below the rim. Bases, which are not preserved because of the extremely thin and fragile walls, were probably curved. Most of the cooking dishes are elliptical and handmade. Their diameters are usually more than 40 cm. This type also has a long Minoan ancestry and is present in every Minoan site from the Protopalatial period onwards, although usually very fragmentary (compare, for example, Watrous 1992, fig. 28, 661; Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 90:55). Basins (Fig. 8.10), both shallow (ca. 15 cm high) and deep (between 30 and 44 cm), are very common (10%) and always undecorated. They are big vessels with a wide base, either flat or torus-like; a more or less conical body, usually with a slightly curving profile, especially on deep specimens; and a horizontal rim with a ridge below. Sometimes, they have shallow spouts. Handles are usually horizontal and elliptical in section; they are always placed under the rim. Jugs (16%) (Fig. 8.4) occur in various sizes, between 5 and 35 cm high, with a wide base, big ovoid body, and narrow neck, or with a small raised base and spherical-ovoid body. Some specimens have a high oblique spout. One decorated example

115

has bands on the body and two zones, one with a careless wavy line and the other with an S-pattern. This decorative scheme is identical to that on amphoras (compare a similar example from Vronda Kavousi: Day, Coulson, and Gesell 1986, fig. 13:33). Some juglets are monochrome. A miniature handmade specimen comes from the domestic cult deposit in Sector A of the settlement (Tsipopoulou and Nowicki in press). A handle, probably from a jug, bears the only potter’s mark known from Halasmenos, a branch. The feeding bottles are related to the jugs. There is one complete example (Fig. 8.4: 97-16) and a few more sherds are from the settlement (less than 1%). The complete bottle has a raised base, globular body, rather wide neck, and a basket handle; it is undecorated. No pedestalled kraters are found at Halasmenos. Very few examples of bell-shaped krateriskoi are known (1%) (Fig. 8.11: 95-295). They have a slightly raised base, conical body, height of ca. 15–17 cm, thin out-curving rims, and horizontal handles placed under the rim. One specimen was probably monochrome. The term kalathos (3%) (Fig. 8.12) includes three different types of serving vessels. The first, with fewer examples (97-52) and of probably domestic use in this case, has a clear conical profile, is about 15 cm high, is made of medium clay, and belongs to a long Minoan tradition. (The 2000 excavation of the shrine produced more kalathoi of this type.) These kalathoi are indistinguishable from their Neopalatial predecessors. The second type is often decorated and stands 15–20 cm high. It has a flat, slightly raised or torus base, usually a convex body profile, and a horizontal rim. At the rim, basket handles are attached with occasional protrusions or small conical cups. These kalathoi often are associated with cult, as they are generally common in tombs or shrines. At Halasmenos, they have been found both in the tholos tomb and in burned domestic cult deposits, together with figurines. The body is decorated externally with bands and a zone in the middle; the interior surface either has concentric bands or is monochrome. The flat rim is decorated with groups of lines or concentric arcs. The under-surface of the base very often is decorated with spirals or concentric bands. The two most interesting specimens of this type of kalathos, probably works of the same hand, come from the tomb (92-18), and from the ritual deposit in Sector A (96-227), (Tsipopoulou and Nowicki in press), thus offering a chronological

116

TSIPOPOULOU

95-18-1 95-116-1

95-196-2 94-183

93-114 95-57-1

93-34

96-426

95-521

92-28-1

92-41-1 Figure 8.9. Cooking trays, dishes, and bowls.

HALASMENOS, DESTROYED BUT NOT INVISIBLE

97-229

97-5

95-579

Figure 8.10. Basins.

117

118

TSIPOPOULOU

95-295

92-16

92-10

95-365

92-137

92-15 Figure 8.11. Krateriskoi and deep bowls.

HALASMENOS, DESTROYED BUT NOT INVISIBLE

119

92-18

95-227 95-226

97-114

92-68 Figure 8.12. Kalathoi.

97-52

120

TSIPOPOULOU

connection between the two parts of the excavation. The wide decorative band on the body has vertical triglyph-like elements and metopes filled with pomegranates or poppy fruits, both motifs loaded with ritual significance. The third type of kalathos is very similar to the basins (92-68, 95-226) but of a smaller size (10–12 cm high) and always decorated. It has a wide base, a relatively shallow conical-cylindrical body, sometimes with a slightly curving profile, a horizontal rim with a ridge, and handles, either horizontal or vertical, placed just below the rim. The decoration is organized in bands or zones. The interior surface is either monochrome or with bands. In one case, the base has concentric bands (see also Day, Coulson, and Gesell 1986 for an example from Vronda Kavousi). Dishes and bowls (Fig. 8.9) (less than 1%) have either a clearly conical or curving profile. Their heights vary from 3–12 cm, and diameters are from 15–30 cm. Rims are horizontal, especially on shallow specimens, or merely continue the line of the body. The decoration is limited to bands on the upper part of the body, usually on both surfaces. Monochrome examples also are found. In one example, the decoration consists of a zone with concentric semicircles (95-57-1). There is also a miniature hand-made specimen (93-114). Kylikes (Fig. 8.13) are rare (1%), as is generally the case in LM III Eastern Crete. No complete examples have been found, but the fragmentary instances offer interesting profiles. The bodies are deep (15–17 cm) and conical; the rims are high, angular, and out-curving; and the handles vertical. The preserved stems have a thickening at midheight. The most common decoration consists of bands on the body and the stem, but there are also monochrome or unpainted kylikes. The interior surfaces are also monochrome. Interestingly enough, at Halasmenos there are no examples of kylikes with painted motifs similar to those found at the contemporary settlement of Vronda Kavousi (Day 1997, fig. 5). The most common drinking vessels are deep bowls (Fig. 8.11) (43%) with a raised base, 8–10 cm deep body, and a thin, out-curving rim. The handles are placed high on the body. There are three types of decoration: monochrome, dipped in glaze twice, or decorated with bands on the lower body and a zone of motifs, usually running spirals, between the handles. One bowl is decorated with a band on the rim and paint dribbles. Interior surfaces are always monochrome, usually with a

reserved band at the rim. Related to the deep bowl is the unique specimen of a small lekanis of Mycenaean type (92-16), also dipped in glaze; it was found in the tomb. Cups are very numerous (Fig. 8.13) (12% for the one-handled variety, less than 1% for the spouted cups, less than 1% for the tankards), mostly monochrome or dipped in glaze twice. They have a ring or slightly conical base, semi-globular or almost angular profile, rather deep (8–11 cm) body, and outcurving rim. The semi-globular examples usually have a single vertical handle, circular or elliptical in section; those with an angular profile, however, are handleless. There are good parallels from Vronda Kavousi (Day 1997, fig. 6). Both types follow a long tradition starting in LM I. There are a few rare examples of a third variant, cups with raised bases and conical convex profiles, usually unpainted. The small, one-handled spouted cups have either a depressed globular body, or a conical one with a convex profile. There are also two coarse hand-made specimens, one decorated with finger impressions and the other a miniature one-handled example, which was found in connection with a female figurine in room B 13 (Tsipopoulou and Nowicki in press). The quintessential Minoan drinking vessel, the handless conical cup or skouteli, is, of course, not absent from our assemblage, although it appears in small numbers (less than 1%). It has a low raised base, and a rather shallow conical or slightly convex body. The most characteristic of the specialized shapes is the stand (Fig. 8.6). There are at least two types represented. One has a cylindrical or slightly convex body and horizontal rim, and the other, of which only fragments have appeared, is fenestrated (for the latter see Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 102: 72) Various vessels, such as scoops, were employed in the transport of fire. They were in too fragmentary a state to be drawn; the same applies to the few examples of lamps. There is one other specialized shape, which was also connected to fire or smoke (Fig. 8.6: 95-294); it is similar to vessels which have been associated with bee-keeping (compare an earlier example from Zakros: Georgiou 1983, pls. 3–4). This short preliminary presentation of the ceramic assemblage establishes the chronological range of the Halasmenos pottery as the middle phase of LM IIIC and confirms its place within the framework of other settlements of the area, such as Vronda Kavousi. Comparison with the pottery from the neighboring Kastro Kavousi settlement shows that the

HALASMENOS, DESTROYED BUT NOT INVISIBLE

92-150

92-72

92-2

92-17

92-225 92-351

92-37

95-73

92-149 95-190

95-303 94-180 Figure 8.13. Kylikes and cups.

121

122

TSIPOPOULOU

initial phase there is earlier, namely the beginning of the LM IIIC phase. Halasmenos seems contemporary with Kastro Phase II. An important issue not touched upon here, namely the spatial distribution of the various vessel shapes within the settlement, is necessary before areas with specialized functions can be identified securely (see Glowacki, Chapter 9). This particular study, important for the comprehension of the architecture and of the social organization of the settlement, is still in progress. During the extensive 2000 season at Halasmenos, excavators brought to light important architectural units with megaron plans and a shrine with terracotta Goddesses with Upraised Arms. These are both very interesting and somehow unexpected. No magazines of pithoi have been identified at Halasmenos, although it is possible that a new building to the southwest of the shrine has big pithoi. Were storage activities limited to a household scale, with no attempt at centralized storage areas? Also, most of Area B was used for food preparation, but the big megaron was not

connected with a kitchen. Is this possibly evidence for food consumption on a communal scale? The shrine produced a few new pottery types, such as snake tubes, and more simple conical kalathoi. Halasmenos, always visible at long distance from many vantage points, served as a significant settlement in the region in the mid 12th century B.C. Its ceramic repertory reflects both the mainstream of LM IIIC trends as well as the idiosyncracies of a particular settlement. The “Mycenaean” elements in the types of vessels used, as well as in the architectural models, raise questions as to whether or not individuals or families there were direct descendants of earlier immigrants from the Mainland, or simply influenced by the spread of the cultural traits of this “ethnic” group through the island. When the excavation of the shrine and the megara are completed, the full analysis of the enlarged ceramic assemblages and spatial distribution should provide an excellent window on many aspects of life at the end of the Bronze Age in Eastern Crete.

Acknowledgments The title of this paper has been suggested by David Rupp. The excavation at Halasmenos was conducted under the direction of Drs. Metaxia Tsipopoulou and the late William D.E. Coulson. Participants of the project: Area supervisors: Dr. Krzystzof Nowicki (Katalimata); Dr. Michael Wedde (Sector B); Dr. David W. Rupp (Sector A 1997, Sector G 2000) Specialists: Richard Anderson (architect, 1992); Dr. Heidi Dierckx (ground stone tools); Dr. Kimberly Flint (palaeobotany); Lisa Little (skeletal material); Dr. Lynn Snyder (faunal remains). Participants: Cesare d’Annibale (study season 1998); Katerina Aspradaki (Sector A 1995); Dr. Tom Brogan (Sector A 1992, 2000); Claudia Fugalli (Sector B 1994– 1996); Dr. Marta Gudzowska (study season 1999, Sector A 2000); Eleanor Huffman (Sector A 1997); Dr. Angeliki Kosmopoulou (Sector B 1995); Richard Kvistbo (Sector B 1996, 1998); Lucy Lancelotti (Sector A 1997); Mireille Lee (Sector A 1995); Lisa Little (Sector B 1994); Dr. Yiannis Lolos (Sector A 1995); Bjorn Loven (Sector A 1997); Dr. Ann Nicgorski (Sector A 1992); Barbara Olsen (Sector A 1995); Kostas Paschalidis (study season 1999, Sector A 2000); Evi Saliaka (Sector B 1996,

1998, study season 1999, Sector A 2000); Dr. Lena Sjogren (Sectors B and A 1995–1997, study season 1999); Giorgos Charoulis (Sector B 1993, 1994); Dr. Kostas Christakis (Tomb and Sector B 1992); Dr. Saro Wallace (Sector A 1997, 2000, study season 1999); Dr. Assaf Yassur-Landau (study season 1999, Sector A 2000). Conservators: Karolina Androutsaki (1993–1995); Ann Brysbaert (1996); Kleio Zervaki (1994–2000); Alekos Nikakis (1999); Stephania Chlouveraki (2000). Photographers: M. Tsipopoulou and W. Coulson (site); Kathy May and M. Tsipopoulou (finds); Giorgos Maravelias (processing). Foremen: Pantelis Kampanos and Nikos Spiliarotis. Our gratitude goes to the Greek Ministry of Culture and the American School of Classical Studies, for the permits and financial support, the Institute for Aegean Prehistory for financial support, the 24th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities, the INSTAP Study Center, and the friendly people of Pacheia Ammos. For the present paper, I thank very warmly David Rupp for many useful discussions and corrections of the English text, and Stephania Chlouveraki for helping with the final version of the plates.

HALASMENOS, DESTROYED BUT NOT INVISIBLE

123

Bibliography Coulson, W.D.E., and M. Tsipopoulou. 1994. “Preliminary Investigations at Halasmenos, Crete, 1992–93,” Aegean Archaeology 1, pp. 65–97. Day, L.P. 1997. “The Late Minoan III Period at Vronda, Kavousi,” in La Crète mycénienne, J. Driessen and A. Farnoux, eds., Athens, pp. 391–406. Day, L.P., W.D.E. Coulson, and G.C. Gesell. 1986. “Kavousi, 1983–1984: The Settlement at Vronda,” Hesperia 55, pp. 355–387. Georgiou, H. 1983. “Minoan Coarse Wares and Minoan Technology,” in Minoan Society, O. Krzyszkowska and L. Nixon, eds., Bristol, pp. 75–92. Kanta, A. 1980. The Late Minoan III Period in Crete, Göteborg. Mook, M.S., and W.D.E. Coulson. 1997. “Late Minoan IIIC Pottery from the Kastro at Kavousi,” in Late

Minoan III Pottery. Chronology and Terminology, E. Hallager and B.P. Hallager, eds., Athens, pp. 337–364. Mountjoy, P.A. 1986. Mycenaean Decorated Pottery, Göteborg. Tsipopoulou, M., and K. Nowicki. in press. “Calasmevno" kai Kataleivmata Ieravpetra"ò Minwivte" kai Mukhvnaioi sto tevlo" th" Epochv" tou Calkouv sthn Anatolikhv Krhvth,” in 2nd Dieqnouv" Sunedrivou H Perifeireiva tou Mukhnai>kouv Kovsmou, Lamia 1999. Tzedakis, Y., and H. Martlew. 1999. Mycenaeans and Minoans. Flavours of their Times, Athens. Watrous, L.V. 1992. Kommos III. The Late Bronze Age Pottery. J.W. Shaw and M.C. Shaw, eds., Princeton.

9 Household Analysis in Dark Age Crete Kevin T. Glowacki

Several authors in this volume discuss extraordinary buildings, such as communal shrines or ruler’s dwellings; in contrast, I focus on the “notso-big houses” of Dark Age Crete and the interpretation of domestic activities that took place within them. “Household analysis” or “household archaeology” is currently a topic of great interest to researchers in many parts of the world. There is a large (and still growing) literature covering not only specific sites and methods of analysis, but also dealing with important theoretical frameworks for understanding site formation processes and their effect on house floor assemblages and the interpretation of past household behavior (e.g., Wilk and Ashmore 1988; Blanton 1994; Wallace-Hadrill 1994; Coupland and Banning 1996;

Schiffer 1996; Allison 1999; Nevett 1999). As these studies have made clear, the challenge for archaeologists is to find a meaningful relationship between the “house” or “dwelling”—the physical, architectural structures and associated features most commonly encountered in the archaeological record—and the “household”—the people and groups who lived, worked, and interacted in these areas. Additionally, recent work has stressed the importance of a multi-faceted approach to the archaeological remains of houses. It is important to consider not only architecture or ceramics, but also the spatial patterning of these structures and all associated material remains, in order to throw light on household behavior and organization (e.g., Whitelaw 1983; Ault and Nevett 1999).

126

GLOWACKI

Figure 9.1. Kavousi Vronda. Plan of the LM IIIC settlement.

Houses in Dark Age Crete: Vrokastro and Kavousi The study of houses in Eastern Crete has a long and distinguished tradition; it began with our pioneering predecessors in the early 20th century and continues with what Gesell (see Introduction) has called the “second series” of American archaeologists to work in Crete. By asking new questions of the sites and material first discovered by Boyd, Hall, and Seager, archaeologists working today have been able to develop a much more thorough picture of house architecture, settlement, and society in Dark Age Crete. For example, at the Early Iron Age site of Vrokastro, Hall uncovered a substantial settlement of tightly packed houses grouped in at least two areas (Hall 1914). Though

Hall never published a full state plan or description of the material found within these houses, Hayden has plausibly identified over a dozen individual dwellings, ranging from simple, oneroom constructions to units of two, three, or more contiguous rooms (Hayden 1983). Her thorough re-examination of the architecture at Vrokastro, therefore, has added much to our understanding of the settlement on this mountainous site and to the variety of house forms in the Iron Age (see also Hayden, Chapter 17). In 1900, Harriet Boyd excavated thirteen rooms of what she interpreted as a large house belonging to an early chieftain constructed on the “almost

HOUSEHOLD ANALYSIS IN DARK AGE CRETE

inaccessible height” of Kastro at Kavousi (Boyd 1901, 137–143). In fact, Boyd recognized that these rooms, constructed on several different terraces, probably did not all belong to one house, but she found few household objects to help clarify the existence of separate dwellings or the functions of the individual rooms. Ceramic evidence from Boyd’s brief excavation indicated that the building(s) dated to the Geometric period. The new Kavousi excavations by Gesell, Day, and Coulson have shown that the Kastro settlement is much more extensive, long-lived, and complicated than previously thought (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1985; 1995, 117–119; Coulson et al. 1997). These excavations have provided a great opportunity to study domestic architecture, house planning, and construction from early LM IIIC through the end of the Orientalizing period. Particularly noteworthy in this regard is Mook’s diachronic analysis of the Northwest Building (Mook 1998). This domestic complex grew from an initial two-room house in LM IIIC through a variety of expansions and contractions in the Protogeometric, Geometric, and Orientalizing periods, exemplifying not only the range of vernacular building traditions but also reflecting the evolution of households on Kastro. Although the majority of the best-preserved architecture on Kastro dates from the Late Geometric period, as recognized by Boyd, the site is of major importance for its long sequence of habitation and the information it provides about village life and domestic activities throughout most of the Dark Age in Eastern Crete.

127

At Vronda, on the other hand, Boyd uncovered “a house and a necropolis of small tholos tombs” all dating to what she called the “sub-Mycenaean epoch, transitional between the Bronze Age and the Iron Age” (Boyd 1901, 131–137). On the summit of the hill was a large house with a forecourt, a storeroom with fragments of three large pithoi, and a massive terrace wall on the east. The “ruined condition of the walls,” however, prevented Boyd from distinguishing the plan of the building, and most of her work seems to have been concentrated on the cleaning of eight “beehive” tombs to the north and northeast. The second series of excavations at Vronda has provided a much more thorough picture of this settlement (Fig. 9.1), which now can be dated confidently to the LM IIIC period (Day, Coulson, and Gesell 1986; Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1995; see also Day and Snyder, Chapter 5, and Klein, Chapter 7). In addition to a better understanding of Boyd’s “large house” and storeroom (Building A-B), this picture also includes buildings of a public and communal nature (Building G), a kiln for ceramic production, as well as a number of houses (C-D, E, I-O-N, J-K, L-M). Whereas Kastro is notable for its long sequence of habitation and construction, Vronda provides a valuable opportunity to examine a Dark Age village from essentially a single period. The domestic aspects of the Vronda settlement and the importance of household analysis in the interpretation of the entire site can be explored in further detail by focusing on one of the complexes not previously investigated by Boyd.

Building I-O-N at Kavousi Vronda Building Complex I-O-N (Figs. 9.2 and 9.3) is located on the western side of Vronda, approximately 20–30 m from the summit where Boyd excavated in 1900. Architectural analysis of Building I-O-N indicates that the complex grew in three main building phases, expanding downslope on successive terraces from east to west (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1991, 163–167; 1995, 82–91). The oldest section of the complex is Building I, a five-room structure built in the mid LM IIIC period. The next in sequence was Building O to the west, with four preserved rooms, and finally building N, with at least five rooms. The extent of the complex is

clearest on the eastern and southern sides; the northern and western areas have suffered from erosion and the construction of modern terrace walls. Several portions of the structure, including both interior and exterior spaces, also were disturbed by later Geometric burials. On the whole, however, the preservation of the Late Bronze Age remains is excellent and provides one of the most instructive examples of LM IIIC domestic architecture at the site. Our analysis, based not only on architecture but also on the spatial distribution of household artifacts and domestic installations, suggests that at the time the Vronda settlement was abandoned in

128

GLOWACKI

N

Figure 9.2. Building Complex I-O-N. State plan.

Figure 9.3. Building Complex I-O-N. Block plan (walls partially restored).

HOUSEHOLD ANALYSIS IN DARK AGE CRETE

129

Figure 9.4. Building I. State plan. LG graves indicated.

Figure 9.5. Building I, Room 3. Oven from south.

late LM IIIC, Building Complex I-O-N was used by four, possibly five, separate households (Day and Glowacki 1993). In form, Building I (Fig. 9.4) was originally a rectangular, three-room structure (Rooms I 4, I 3, and I 5; combined interior area of ca. 31.30 m2) with an exterior courtyard to the north. At some later time, but still within LM IIIC, two auxiliary rooms (Rooms I 1 and I 2; combined interior area of ca. 8.49 m2) were added to the east. Room I 4 is a narrow porch or anteroom, entered from the courtyard though a central doorway. Room I 4 then gave access to Room I 3, which apparently was the main room of the house. Room I 5, entered only from I 3, probably was used for storage and contained the remains of at least two pithoi. Rooms I 1 and I 2 were disturbed by later Geometric cremation burials and contained little or no evidence for LM IIIC domestic activities. The largest and best preserved room of this building is I 3, a rectangular area measuring ca. 4.7 x 3.8 m (17.86 m2) (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1991, 163–165, pls. 64d, 65a–d). This room has a

long, well-built stone bench along the eastern side, a small platform in the northeast corner, and a slab enclosure (or bin) at the south next to the door leading into Room I 5. In the center of the room is a roughly oval patch of burned red soil indicating the remains of a fixed hearth, the location of which suggests a connection with heating and lighting as well as cooking. In addition to the central hearth, another type of cooking installation was found in Room I 3. A small, clay-lined oven was built in the angle formed by the bench and the platform in the northeast corner of the room (Fig. 9.5). A third side of the oven (on the west) was formed by an upright slab; the mouth (on the south) was marked off by a row of rectangular cobbles. The floor and sides of the oven were lined with clay, and fragments of a curved, heat-reddened clay superstructure were found collapsed on the eastern side near the bench. Similar small ovens have been found in Buildings O and N (Rooms O 1, O 3, and N 5), as well as in other houses at Vronda (Rooms C 2 and C 5), and have been very important in our reconstructions of

130

GLOWACKI

Figure 9.6. Recreation of a small oven by Mr. Manolis Maniadakis.

individual houses and interpretations of household activities (Day, Glowacki, and Klein 2000) (Fig. 9.6). The artifacts found on the floor surface of Room I 3 included several fragmentary and nearly complete LM IIIC vessels. These were primarily for the preparation and consumption of food and drink, such as a tripod cookpot found beside the central hearth, and several fine, deep bowls and cups from the southern section of the room. Other vessels include an intact, undecorated pyxis and a small pithos smashed upon the floor (Fig. 9.7). Although broken, approximately 90% of this pithos was preserved, and the size and shape can be restored accurately (height ca. 0.82 m). Comparison of this

Figure 9.7. Building I, Room 3. Pyxis and pithos during excavation.

pithos from Room I 3 with a much larger pithos from Room B 7 (height ca. 1.74 m) clearly demonstrates the contrast between the storage vessels found in the “normal” domestic contexts and those from the “Big House” (Building A-B) at Vronda (Fig. 9.8). The architecture, hearth, oven, and ceramic remains from Building I seem to provide clear evidence of its domestic nature: a large, multi-purpose main room for cooking and dining with associated rooms for storage and other functions. Equally important to our reconstruction of household activities has been the study of lithics by H. Dierckx and of animal bones by L. Snyder and W. Klippel (personal communication). For example, the numerous stone tools (Fig. 9.9) recovered from Room I 3 represent an assemblage of pounding, abrading, chopping, and grinding tools that complement the cooking installations and pottery already discussed. Although few floral or faunal remains were preserved from the interior floor levels of Building I, the more abundant animal bones—mostly sheep/goat but also some pig, cow, and rabbit/ hare—from the exterior courtyard to the north provide clear evidence for butchering activities. The architectural features, cooking installations, and artifact assemblages found in Building I are repeated in the other areas of the complex. Although Building I has a rectangular form, often designated as a “megaron” type, the later additions to the complex reveal an aglommerative construction method

Figure 9.8. Comparison of pithoi from I 3 and B 7.

HOUSEHOLD ANALYSIS IN DARK AGE CRETE

131

Figure 9.9. Stone tools from floor surface of Room I 3.

Figure 9.10. Building N, Room 5. Oven.

more dependent upon topography than design (Figs. 9.2 and 9.3). Building O preserves a linear orientation following the gently curving terrace immediately to the west of Building I. The irregular shape of Building N results from the more rapidly sloping contours of the hill in that area. Yet despite differences in plan, the basic features of the houses remain the same; each has one large room which contains a central hearth and communicates with auxiliary spaces. For example, Room N 3 connects with Room N 5 on the lower terrace by means of a built stairway. Like Room I 3, N 5 also contains a central hearth, this time rectangular and with a well-preserved curb. At one end of the hearth is a small oven with a clay-lined interior. In this instance, fragments of the superstructure which could be

“fitted” up to the stone slabs forming the sides of the enclosure were found, showing that the top of this oven was flat (Fig. 9.10). From this room also came a large number of vessels for food preparation, cooking, eating, and drinking, including an LM IIIC Close Style krater (V 90.115), fragments of which were also found in Room N 3 (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1995 90–91, fig. 7:2, pl. 28:b). The function and significance of other vessels, such as a fenestrated stand (V 90.114), found in this hearth room are not quite so clear (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1995 91, pl. 28:e). Although such vessels are sometimes interpreted in terms of household cult, in at least two instances on the Vronda (Rooms N 5 and C 2) fenestrated stands have been found near, and even in, ovens, but neither example shows signs of burning.

Identifying Households and Household Activities The repetitive nature of the architecture, hearths/ovens, and artifact assemblages seems to represent a duplication of household activities and activity areas within the complex. For example, if we plot the findspots of the two most abundant categories of artifacts, pottery and stone tools, found within each room, we can immediately notice some interesting distributional patterns (Figs. 9.11 and

9.12). Within each architectural division, the large rooms with the hearths and ovens contain primarily cooking and fine ware vessels for the consumption of food and drink (Rooms I 3, N 1, N 5, and probably Room O 3 as well, although a large Geometric tomb has covered or destroyed most of the center of this room). Also present are a limited number of storage vessels, for either solids or

132

GLOWACKI

Cooking/Food Preparation Fine Ware/Serving and Consumption Storage Other

Kavousi Vronda Building Complex I-O-N Figure 9.11. Building Complex I-O-N. Distribution of pottery types.

Millstone/Quern Abrading Tool Pounding Tool Chopping Tool Other Work Stone

Kavousi Vronda Building Complex I-O-N Figure 9.12. Building Complex I-O-N. Distribution of stone tool types.

HOUSEHOLD ANALYSIS IN DARK AGE CRETE

liquids, as well as a few shapes such as pyxides (I 3, N 5) or a fenestrated stand (N 5) which are relatively rare at Vronda. In addition, similar groups of stone tools were found in the hearth rooms, whereas the courtyard revealed primarily abrading tools, possibly evidence for the different types of activities taking place there. The recurrent spatial patterns of the archaeological remains within distinct but similar units further refines the architectural analysis of the complex and supports the identification of individual dwellings and households. At the same time, we need to be cautious when using artifact distribution as the primary evidence for the function of any room or area. Recent archaeological and ethnographic research has stressed the importance of understanding the complexity of site formation processes in the interpretation of house floor assemblages (Schiffer 1996; LaMotta and Schiffer 1999). As it applies to the type of household analysis attempted here, the differences and similarities in types of artifacts and their distribution within and around a house can be caused not only by “real” differences in activities carried out in specific areas, but also by the processes of habitation, refuse, destruction, abandonment, and reuse which may create a somewhat “false” picture of human activity in the archaeological record. Unlike the extremely rare archaeological site which has been destroyed by a natural catastrophe—a volcanic eruption, earthquake, or fire—and then never reinhabited or disturbed, a site like Vronda, which has been abandoned with buildings left standing for an undetermined length of time before collapse and then disturbed when many areas were reused for later burials or robbed for building materials, involves an entirely new set of relevant formation processes. These processes affect not only what we find, but where we find it, and the value of that data for our interpretations. For example, the open courtyard to the north of Building I consisted of numerous, stratified layers characterized by large amounts of pottery and animal bone. Since some of the bone material is consistent with butchering debris, it is logical to interpret this as primary refuse, reflecting activities in the courtyard over a period of time. On the other hand, a large proportion of the ceramic material, consisting of small and worn fragments, is more likely to reflect secondary refuse, either material thrown out from the house itself or washed down from surrounding areas. What, then, of the whetstones and other stone tools found in or near the courtyard? Are these further

133

evidence for butchering, or merely tools used elsewhere and discarded here along with other garbage? Likewise, the pithos discovered in Room I 3 is 90% complete, with the base found intact on the floor surface. Since the broken vessel was covered by the collapsed roofing clay, it is tempting to think of the pithos as having been used in the latest phase of the room before abandonment. But how long did it stand “abandoned” before the roof collapsed? Could someone have moved it to that location from another room? What about the fragmentary pithoi found in Room I 5, which are not so completely preserved? Are they good evidence for agricultural storage in that room during the habitation phase of the building, or were they dumped as secondary refuse into an old, unused room because they no longer served any function? Clearly, archaeologists need to distinguish between several possible types of deposits formed during the different stages in the life-cycle of a house: primary and secondary refuse deposition during habitation, de facto or even ritual refuse deposition during the abandonment, and other types of re-use and disturbance during the post-abandonment stage (LaMotta and Schiffer 1999). Cautioned by the examples mentioned above, I would argue that the plans of artifact distribution are useful, first and foremost, for characterizing the range of material found in different locations without necessarily implying any one-to-one correspondence between the use, re-use, storage, or discard of those items in those areas. At the same time, distributional patterns recurring between two or more types of artifacts or architectural features are unlikely to be random and may be used as good evidence for similar activities taking place in those locations. In Building I-O-N, the key areas where this patterning consistently takes place is in the large rooms with fixed hearths and ovens, where we have found the most significant combinations of vessels for food preparation, cooking, and consumption along with a complementary assemblage of stone tools. Therefore, by combining the architectural analysis with the distributional data of artifacts and by using the presence of a hearth/oven as an essential guide, it is possible to recognize at least four or five separate household units present by the time of the building’s abandonment. Each household unit is not only architecturally distinct, but is also characterized by a recurrent association of features and artifacts. These identifying units are I 1–5, O 1–3, N 1–2, and N 3+5. N 4, with its own central hearth,

134

GLOWACKI

has been badly disturbed by a modern terrace, and so its size and relationship to the other rooms of Building N is not certain. It may, therefore, have been part of another, less well-preserved household unit. Likewise, we know there is a room (O 4) to the north of O 3, but the preservation does not allow us to say if it is part of the same house or if it is another building altogether. Furthermore, there is some evidence that Room O 1 may have gone out of use before Rooms O 2 and O 3. In that case, it may be possible to identify an initial household unit consisting of Rooms O 1 and O 2, later modified to include O 2, O 3, and possibly O 4. According to this interpretation, each unit consists of a two-to-five room structure (depending upon population growth and as allowed by the natural topography of the site), forming approximately 30–40 m2 of interior roofed space for each house. Although it is extremely difficult to estimate population sizes accurately based primarily on architectural form, a house of these dimensions may have accommodated a group of four to seven individuals, a number logically assumed to correspond to a nuclear family (e.g., Naroll 1962; Whitelaw 1983; 2001; Kolb 1985; Fletcher 1981; 1986; Wallace-Hadrill 1994, 95–103).

The houses at Vronda also seem to cluster together into separate groups or “blocks” (Fig. 9.1). This is clearly the case with Building I-O-N as well as with Building C-D, another well-preserved domestic complex. Building C-D reveals a similar pattern of central hearths and ovens which complements the architectural study in distinguishing individual household units (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1995, 70–75). This also may have been the case with other, less well-preserved buildings at Vronda, such as Buildings E, J-K, and L-M (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1995, 75–77). If the individual household consists of a nuclear family as a basic social unit, these complexes may each represent a cohesive grouping of the extended family as it expands and changes over time. It is interesting to note that the house clusters do not seem to share facilities, such as ovens. There is no evidence for communal ovens, such as those known in traditional Cretan villages today, serving a larger group than the individual household (Day, Glowacki, and Klein 2000). Therefore, the household clearly seems to be one of the main organizing principles of the LM IIIC Vronda community, an interpretation which has been argued for other Cretan Dark Ages sites as well (e.g., Nowicki 1999, 147).

Conclusion The study of houses and households can provide important insights into the social and economic organization of communities over time. For a “transitional” period such as the Late Bronze/ Early Iron Age in Crete, when significant changes were taking place in a post-palatial society, “household archaeology” is an especially appropriate level of analysis. The individual house can be the starting point for a comparison of other structures, highlighting differences in construction, architectural elaboration, and activities so as to distinguish domestic, non-domestic, specialized, or elite buildings in the community. Moreover, the relationship between the size and form of

a dwelling and the number of people it accommodated can be the basis for a discussion of overall site population. In this way, houses and households reflect the complex social structure and organization of the site as a whole, which in turn sheds light on regional settlement patterns and economy. The last two decades have seen the rapid growth of a substantial body of data to which we can now apply modern interpretive frameworks; this analysis at the household level is but one new avenue of investigation in the overall study and interpretation of life in Dark Age Crete which was begun by Harriet Boyd and her colleagues one hundred years ago.

HOUSEHOLD ANALYSIS IN DARK AGE CRETE

135

Acknowledgments I would like to thank the directors of the Kavousi Project, Professors Geraldine C. Gesell, Leslie P. Day, and W.D.E. Coulson for the opportunity to study Building I-O-N at Vronda Kavousi, and for their many years of help, support, and collaboration on this and other studies. I would also like to express my thanks to the many participants of the Crete 2000 conference who shared their

experience and expertise on Minoan houses and households, especially N. Klein, D. Haggis, M. Mook, K. Nowicki, D. Rupp, L. Snyder, L.V. Watrous, and T. Whitelaw. The presentation of this paper in Athens was made possible by generous grants from Dr. Charles Paget and the Edward A. Schrader Endowed Fund for Classical Archaeology at Indiana University.

Bibliography Allison, P., ed. 1999. The Archaeology of Household Activities, London/New York. Ault, B.A., and L.C. Nevett. 1999. “Digging Houses: Archaeologies of Classical and Hellenistic Greek Domestic Assemblages,” in Allison, ed., 1999, pp. 43–56. Blanton, R. 1994. Houses and Households: A Comparative Study, New York. Boyd, H.A. 1901. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete in 1900,” AJA 5, pp. 125–157.

Gesell, G.C., W.D.E. Coulson, and L.P. Day. 1991. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1988,” Hesperia 60, pp. 145– 177. Gesell, G.C., L.P. Day, and W.D.E. Coulson. 1985. “Kavousi 1982–1983: The Kastro,” Hesperia 55, pp. 355– 388. ———. 1995. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1989 and 1990,” Hesperia 64, pp. 67–120. Hall, E.H. 1914. Excavations in Eastern Crete: Vrokastro, Philadelphia.

Coulson, W.D.E., D.C. Haggis, M.S. Mook, and J.L. Tobin. 1997. “Excavations on the Kastro at Kavousi: An Overview,” Hesperia 67, pp. 315–390.

Hayden, B.J. 1983. “New Plans of the Early Iron Age Settlement of Vrokastro,” Hesperia 52, pp. 367–387.

Coupland, G., and E.B. Banning. 1996. People Who Lived in Big Houses: Archaeological Perspectives on Large Domestic Structures, Madison, Wisc.

Kolb, C. 1985. “Demographic Estimates in Archaeology: Contributions from Ethnoarchaeology on Mesoamerican Peasants,” CurrAnth 26, pp. 581–599.

Day, L.P., W.D.E. Coulson, and G.C. Gesell. 1986. “Kavousi, 1983–1984: The Settlement at Vronda,” Hesperia 55, pp. 355–387.

LaMotta, V.M., and M.B. Schiffer. 1999. “Formation Processes of House Floor Assemblages,” in Allison, ed., 1999, pp. 19–29.

Day, L.P., and K.T. Glowacki. 1993. “Spatial Analysis of a Late Minoan IIIC/Subminoan Domestic Complex in Eastern Crete,” (paper, New Orleans 1992), abstract in AJA 97, p. 349.

Mook. M.S. 1998. “Early Iron Age Domestic Architecture: the Northwest Building on the Kastro at Kavousi,” in Post-Minoan Crete, W.G. Cavanaugh and M. Curtis, eds., London, pp. 45–57.

Day, L.P., K.T. Glowacki, and N.L. Klein. 2000. “Cooking and Dining in Late Minoan IIIC Vronda, Kavousi,” in Pepragmevna tou H’ Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou, Herakleion, pp. 115–125.

Naroll, R. 1962. “Floor Area and Settlement Population,” AmerAnt 27, pp. 587–589.

Fletcher, R. 1981. “People and Space: A Case Study in Material Behaviour,” in Pattern of the Past: Studies in Honour of David Clarke, I. Hodder, G. Isaac, and N. Hammond, eds., Cambridge, pp. 97–128. ———. 1986. “Settlement Archaeology: World-wide Comparisons,” WorldArch 18, pp. 59–83.

Nevett, L.C. 1999. House and Society in the Ancient Greek World, Cambridge. Nowicki, K. 1999. “Economy of Refugees: Life in the Cretan Mountains at the Turn of the Bronze and Iron Ages,” in From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders: Sidelights on the Economy of Ancient Crete, A. Chaniotis, ed., Stuttgart, pp. 145–171.

136

GLOWACKI

Schiffer, M. 1996. Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record, Salt Lake City. Wallace-Hadrill, A. 1994. Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum, Princeton. Whitelaw, T.M. 1983. “The Settlement at Fournou Korifi, Myrtos and Aspects of Early Minoan Social Organization,” in Minoan Society, O. Krzyszkowska and L. Nixon, eds., Bristol, pp. 323–345.

———. 2001. “From Sites to Communities: Defining the Human Dimensions of Minoan Urbanism,” in Urbanism in the Aegean Bronze Age, K. Branigan, ed., Sheffield, pp. 15–38. Wilk, R.R., and W. Ashmore, eds. 1988. Household and Community in the Mesoamerican Past, Albuquerque.

10 Religion at Minoan Kommos Maria C. Shaw

Since 1976, excavations on the south coast of Crete at Kommos have revealed substantial remains of a Minoan settlement. These consist of two main areas: one with monumental buildings to which we refer as the “Civic Center” (Fig. 10.1), the other a town to the north built on a hill (Figs. 10.2 and 10.3). Here, I review evidence for religion and whether there were differences in its conduct at the two locations. My approach somewhat resembles that in an excellent recent article by Peatfield (1992) but is more limited in scope, as I confine myself to Kommos, while he compares palace and public cult throughout Crete. The present study is provisional, since only the town has been published so far (Shaw and Shaw, eds. 1995; 1996). The publication of the remaining areas is presently in preparation. Kommos lends itself well to this kind of analysis, both because of the site’s longevity, which allows one to follow religious practice diachronically, and because there was a clear separation between the two areas, the demarcation line being the broad

slab-paved road that led to and from the seashore (Fig. 10.1: 17). The settlement was excavated in three major sections with areas left untouched in between. We have labeled the sections: the Hilltop (Fig. 10.2), the Central Hillside (Fig. 10.3), and the Southern Area—the latter contains the monumental buildings and large elite House X (Fig 10.1). The Neo- and Post-palatial periods are the best represented, although the Central Hillside yielded information for the Prepalatial era also. With the exception of House X, some Minoan levels were partially out of reach in the Southern Area, due to the presence of a Greek Sanctuary built in part over the Minoan remains (Shaw and Shaw, eds. 2000). The earliest monumental buildings are Protopalatial “AA” and Neopalatial “T.” Of these, T is the best known archaeologically, except where it was built over by LM III Buildings N and P, which appear to have played a major role in international trade (J. Shaw 1986, 261–269; Watrous 1992, 173–183). As far as religion is concerned, most of

138

SHAW

Figure 10.1. Plan of Kommos: the Southern Area (by G. Bianco).

our information comes from the periods of buildings AA and T. In the discussion that follows, I shall begin with the area of the town, listing sporadic or individual finds of likely religious import, then assemblages of objects of the types mentioned that may indicate foci of religious activity. Last, I shall turn to structures or spaces, which, with varying degrees of

probability, can be referred to as “shrines.” Some of my criteria for identifying the last are the presence of religious paraphernalia and permanent features that suggest recurrent ritual activity. In all these efforts, Gesell’s Town, Palace, and House Cult in Minoan Crete (1985), particularly her detailed corpus of religious paraphernalia and types of shrines, has been my most useful guide.

RELIGION AT MINOAN KOMMOS

139

Figure 10.2. Plan of the Northern Hilltop of the town at Kommos (by G. Bianco).

Religion in the Town Pottery naturally takes precedence in this survey, as it constitutes the largest class of finds on any Minoan site. In the town of Kommos, ceramic vessels thought to have ritual connotations (judged by Gesell’s [1985] types) occur in all periods. Those of Protopalatial through MM III dates at Kommos have been published by Betancourt (1990, catalog nos. 1, 549, 745, 965, 1112, 1262, 1358, 1339, 1485–1488, 1554, 1555–1559, 1653, 1968), those of LM I and later dates

by Watrous (1992, catalog nos. 657, 659, 911, 913, 992, 993, 1514, 1558, 1652, 1693, 1909). They include some fruit stands; many rhyta, including a MM II painted bull-head rhyton (Fig. 10.4); snake tubes and other tubular vessels; kalathoi; incense burners; and braziers. Some loose molded clay attachments may come from kernoi. Naturally, some of the vessels mentioned were likely multi-functional, their cultic use being ascertainable only in terms of the

140

SHAW

Figure 10.3. Plan of the Central Hillside of the town at Kommos (by G. Bianco).

Figure 10.4. MM II bull head rhyton from the Central Hillside (drawings by J. Pfaff).

RELIGION AT MINOAN KOMMOS

specific context. It is, nevertheless, useful to list them, as they quantify the presence in the town of specialized vessel shapes that may have been used on special occasions, probably of ceremonial, if not religious, nature. Less ambiguity surrounds an unfortunately poorly preserved terracotta architectural model featuring a possible porch or balcony with columns from a MM III context on the Central Hillside. Comparative analysis points to similarities with other Minoan terracotta architectural models that generally are believed to represent shrines; the more recently discovered examples are from Monastiraki and Archanes, dated respectively to MM II and MM III (M. Shaw 1996, 302). There are also non-ceramic objects with possible religious functions at Kommos. Among those are cupule tables, namely slabs with one or more depressions thought to have been used for libations or for carrying small amounts of offerings (Whittaker 1996). Finally, there are various types of shells, including Triton Trumpets. Clay figurines constitute a class in themselves. Those found in the town cover a range of dates similar to those of the vessels (M. Shaw 1996). They depict, in almost equal numbers, human beings and quadrupeds; the latter are mostly cattle and/or bulls (Fig. 10.5: D, E). Of the human figurines, most are female (Fig. 10.5: A, B), and they were found mostly in Postpalatial contexts, though some may be hangovers from an earlier period. The cruder examples are unpainted and solid; the finer ones usually are painted and were made of separate parts: head, torso, and skirt, the last usually hollow and bell-shaped. A male figurine (C 9136) from House X is noteworthy, even though the only part preserved is his torso. He is considerably larger than any of the female figurines, wears a codpiece or kilt (to judge by the girdle), and has a single long strand of hair running down his back, which could suggest that the rest of his head was shaved. The figurine may represent a youth rather than an effigy of a divinity and could have been made for a coming-of-age ceremony. Distinct hairdos, seen in a variety of representational Minoan art, are thought to reflect occasions of male tonsure rituals, as has been discussed more extensively by Koehl (2000). A terracotta image that must represent the “Goddess with Upraised Arms” unfortunately is represented at Kommos only by a fragment of her crown (Fig. 10.5: C). This crown, from the Hilltop, has the typical cylindrical shape, ending with a

141

scalloped edge at the top and with snakes emerging from its interior. Gesell (1985, 61) remarks that such figures have been found only in public town-sanctuaries. None were located in what can be identified with certainty as domestic shrines. This suggests that there may have been a public shrine in the Hilltop area. If so, such a shrine has either eluded discovery or it was so stripped of its contents in antiquity that its original function could no longer be identified. Before tackling the question of what shrines may have existed at Kommos, it is important to discuss three spaces that may not have been permanent shrines but are nonetheless marked by concentrations of religious paraphernalia. The first is Room 48 on the Hillside (Fig. 10.3) (Wright 1996, 178–180), where a large quern and grinding stones were found, along with the bull’s head rhyton (Fig. 10.4) and a kalathos. On an accumulation of pebbles set upon the surface of an earth floor were a number of vases that had been stacked upside-down. Some scholars believe that vessels thus placed played a votive role. This interpretation may gain support at Kommos, where finds of similarly placed vessels may have served as a kind of foundation deposit. These occur in strata of MM III date, which appear to postdate an earthquake and immediately precede a phase of rebuilding (Betancourt 1990, 46–48). The second space with signs of possible temporary religious activity is tiny Room 012 on the Hilltop area (Fig. 10.2). It is characterized by pshaped slab enclosures of LM III date, some of which served as hearths. A kalathos, a female figurine, and a rhyton also were found in this space, but the disturbed fill makes it hard to ascertain whether these objects actually were used in the room or were part of a dump of objects brought from another space. In LM IIIB, another space on the Hilltop (Fig. 10.2), Room 3, definitely was used as a dump to judge from the makeup of the successive strata and vertical ceramic joins found there. Two clay figurines were found there, one a woman and the other a quadruped, along with a kalathos, a rhyton, a tubular stand, and, most importantly, the aforementioned crown of a Goddess with Upraised Arms—all in a fragmentary state. Even though such finds do not necessarily assign a religious character to the dumping place, collectively they may represent types of objects used in ritual in that area of the town. Such dumps sometimes contain clay figurines along with more recognizable religious paraphernalia, indicating a possible cultic

142

SHAW

A

B

C

D

E Figure 10.5. Figurines from the area of the town at Kommos: human figurines (A–B); fragment of crown of Goddess with Upraised Arms (C); crouching quadruped (D); head of hollow-made bull (E) (drawings by J.P. Clarke).

RELIGION AT MINOAN KOMMOS

significance for the figurines. No figurines of the simple clay type have been found in a shrine at Kommos, and, indeed, figurines are a rare phenomenon in religious contexts in other Minoan settlements (see Gesell 1985, 140–145, charts IV–VIII). In fact, at Kommos, it is hard to explain how and where the figurines were stored or displayed. Aside from being found in dumps, some were discovered within or near houses, including House X; the domestic associations of figurines, both human and animal, are then clear. One tentative scenario is that they were kept in the houses and taken to shrines for special occasions. Of the definite shrines at Kommos, the earliest is the small room X 7 (Shaw and Shaw 1993, 131–161; Fig. 10.1). According to the ongoing examination of the pottery by J.B. Rutter, this shrine goes back at least to the LM II period. Room X 7 was created when what was initially a corridor running north to south through the western area of the house was blocked by a wall. In its last phase, which is also the best documented, the shrine and two other rooms, X 4 and X 5 (Fig. 10.1), were the only ones still in

143

use at this level of the house. A digital reconstruction of this room (Fig. 10.6) conveys a sense of the general ambiance of the space and of the relationships between furniture, religious paraphernalia, and an imaginary female occupant (see Shaw and Shaw 2000, 166–167, figs. 217–219). The entrance to the shrine was just east of the staircase and south of Room X 4. The window fronting a light-well in Room X 4 may have provided some daylight indirectly to Room X 7. Much of the shrine paraphernalia, particularly of the last phase, was found in situ. For example, small stacks of vases were arranged on either side of a little table made of slabs of stone and set in the southwest corner of Room X 7. Special offerings were put on the table: tiny spouted jugs (“milk jugs”), and a small cup containing little pebbles and Glycymeris shells, some of which had spilled over onto the table when the cup tipped over. On the floor of hard-packed earth directly in front of the table was a small flat burnt slab with a Triton Trumpet shell and little pebbles resting on it. When the earth that filled the space under the table was

Figure 10.6. The shrine in House X (digital reconstruction by Chris Dietrich, in consultation with the author).

144

SHAW

cleared, a pair of kalathoi full of ash was revealed. They obviously had been tucked under the table the last time the room was used. Braziers were used in every phase of the shrine. According to Georgiou (1977), such vessels likely were used to carry “coals of long-burning hard woods suited for fuels.” She mentions the case of a resinous substance said by Evans to have been found in a brazier at Knossos, but suggests that this may have been pinewood residue rather than the remains of incense. Thus, it remains a question whether braziers doubled as containers for charcoal and also as thymiateria or incense burners. A rhyton sprinkler, part of a snake tube, bowls, and jugs also were found in the context of the shrine, but the most common shape was the conical cup. Since the character of the pottery from the shrine is still under study by Rutter, I limit myself to a general comment about the vessels and other objects mentioned above. Even the simplest and most utilitarian vessels can acquire special meaning, depending on their context. In this case, the ritualistic display of vessels on and off the table is indicative of the ritual use of the room. It is still difficult to determine, however, what the ritual may have been, or who was being worshipped. Collectively, finds in the shrine still seem to call attention to essential elements of nature: the sea, the earth, and the sky.

Figure 10.7. Seal with bird-woman found in LM III level in the shrine in House X (drawing by the author).

Allusions to the sea are the strongest. These include the variety of shells, the beach pebbles, and a LM II jug painted with what appear to be cuttlefish (Rutter forthcoming a). It may not be coincidental that a seal found in a LM IB dump in a nearby room bears an engraving of two fish swirling around each other with a star looming in the background. Minoan shrines with marine symbols are known in Crete and other areas of the Aegean (Vandenabeele 1991, 239–252; Åström and Reese 1990). With its chthonic associations, the snake tube might be associated with the earth or its subterranean dimension. Some scholars relate even the type of simple and crude tiny “milk jugs” to a snake cult because they have been found occasionally with snake tubes and other specialized vessels (Evans 1935, 136–168; Gesell 1985, 77–79, 101). Such a jug was found recently along with other ritual vessels in what is seen as a LM IB shrine at Mochlos (Soles and Davaras 1994, 425). At Vronda and Kastro Kavousi, similar assemblages continue into LM IIIC (Gesell, Coulson, and Day 1991, 145– 177, pl. 63). The allusion to the third major sphere of nature, the sky, is perhaps the one that has the least evidence to support it. The carved design of another seal (this one found on the very floor of the shrine associated with the stone table) depicts a bird soaring up into the sky. The lower part looks more like a Minoan woman’s flounced skirt than the tail and feet of a bird in flight (Fig. 10.7). The symbol of the “bird-woman” occurs on other Minoan seals and sealings, especially in a LM IB deposit at Kato Zakros, which contains predominantly “demonic” images (Weingarten 1983, 60–63). The term “demonic,” however, may not tell the whole story about the motif of the bird-woman. One possibility is that the depiction recorded the transmutation of the bird into a goddess or the reverse process. Alternatively, there is the opinion of Marinatos (1993, 156), who suggests that the image represents “a merging of the goddess with her attribute [the bird].” A second shrine, located in Room 4 on the Central Hillside (Fig. 10.3), contained less glamorous finds, but it provides both an analogy and a later example than the one represented by the shrine of House X, having been created during a LM III remodeling of a house that was first built in LM I (McEnroe 1996). A reconstruction of Room 4 (Fig. 10.8) illustrates some of the religious paraphernalia from LM IIIB during the shrine’s latest use: a

RELIGION AT MINOAN KOMMOS

145

Figure 10.8. LM III shrine in the house with the snake tube in the Central Hillside at Kommos (restoration drawing by G. Bianco).

clay brazier, still in situ within a p-shaped enclosure made of three upright slabs, and a Snake Tube decorated with little birds perched on its serpentine handles (Fig. 10.9). Farther back in the room, there is a stand built of upright slabs set on a slightly raised stone-paved surface. A large quern and hand-stones found nearby suggest grinding and crushing activities related to food preparation. Food production need not have been an activity that was in conflict with the practice of Minoan ritual. Indeed, divine blessing may have been sought,

especially in times of hardship, which seems to have been the case here, given the dilapidated condition of this house in its last phase. Either then or earlier, the south wall of Room 4 was torn down, making the space visible and presumably accessible to passersby. It is possible, therefore, that the room served as both a household shrine and a town shrine. A Goddess with Upraised Arms may well have been appropriate in such a shrine, but unfortunately none was found.

Religion in the Area of the Monumental Buildings Religious activity here seems to have taken place only in Buildings AA and T (Fig. 10.1). LM III buildings N and P produced virtually no evidence for it, with the exception of a few fragments of large clay

quadrupeds. They were found atop the destruction debris of Building P and may thus belong either to the very last days of this building or after it went out of use (M. Shaw 2000, 135–209).

146

SHAW

Figure 10.9. Snake tube from the shrine illustrated in Fig. 10.8 (photograph by R.K. Vincent, Jr.).

Few figurines were found in Buildings AA and T and of these some small, worn pieces were part of packing fill from floors or from within the walls. The few additional pieces found outside, especially northeast of the buildings, could have been deposited there from the area of the town through erosion on the road that sloped down from north to south (Fig. 10.1: 34). Scarcity of figurines of this simple type in palatial buildings may conform to patterns of distribution common in other Minoan settlements, where apparently they occur mainly in domestic contexts (Gesell 1985, 61; Rethemiotakis 1998, 132–133). Because of its provenance, one small group from

Kommos needs to be mentioned, however, as it may reflect actual use. It consists of a few small pieces of one or more small clay quadrupeds: a leg, part of the body, and a tiny horn found in a MM II–III context directly east of the South Stoa, near the Sottoscala in Space 43 (Fig. 10.1, bottom right), where plaster offering tables also were found. The pottery in the area of the Monumental Buildings (Fig. 10.1) again displays a relative scarcity of religious shapes compared with those from the town. Our impression about such finds may be skewed by the fact that the West Wing of Building T is not preserved, but one might nevertheless expect such vessels to have been used in more than one location. At Kommos, two types of vessels seem relevant to this issue. Both were found in or near the two stoas, which are located at the north and south ends of the Central Court of Building T (Fig. 10.10). One is the rhyton; the few fragments found in the area of the North Stoa were of the ostrich egg variety. The second type is the kalathos, found only in the South Stoa. Van de Moortel, however, believes that most of these kalathoi were fired in the pottery kiln that was built in the South Stoa (Shaw et al. 2001), but a few pieces could predate the kiln and may have been used in that area. Better evidence for the connection of the two stoas with religion is offered by small plaster tables which may have been arrayed along the colonnades on special occasions. The South Stoa is the better preserved. This space was converted in advanced LM IA into an industrial area. Pieces of the plaster tables were found in and below the kiln dumps, indicating that they were in use before the time of the kiln. The tables were constructed by adding successive layers of plaster around a core of unbaked clay and straw. Their tops are rounded or squared. One complete oval top measured ca. 22 x 17 cm. Most of the tables were decorated with geometric or abstract designs painted on the legs, and/or on the upper surface and the vertical sides (Fig. 10.11). There were no signs of burning, and given their small size and fragile character, it is likely that they carried small amounts of light material. It is generally believed that fruits or assortments of grains were placed on such tables (as in Xanthoudides 1922, 16), perhaps as symbolic displays used in ceremonies celebrating the gifts of the earth and agricultural produce. Another interpretation is that these objects were similar to “portable side tables used today for individual serving of food and drink” (Muhly 1996, 202).

RELIGION AT MINOAN KOMMOS

147

Figure 10.10. Restored plan of Neopalatial Palace Building T (by J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco).

The two stoas at Kommos could accommodate numerous people; their elaborate painted decoration of simulations of fancy variegated stones on both the floors and the walls added to the impression that they also were used as showpieces to impress elite visitors. In addition, the stoas occupied the entire west to east width of the Central Court of Building T (Fig. 10.10) and thus afforded full view to those standing within to whatever ceremonies or ritual acts evolved in the Court. Evidence for such gatherings comes in the form of specialized pottery preserved in the North Stoa, which suggests that on some occasions drinking and perhaps feasting took place (Rutter forthcoming b). It is clear that there is a striking contrast in the conduct of faith between the town and the area of the palatial monumental buildings. As might be expected, religious practice in the houses appears to have been more intimate and private; the human and animal figurines likely evoked divine protection for the well-being of the people and their livestock (see Peatfield 2000, 12–13). Ritual activity in

Figure 10.11. Plaster offering table (P 197) from the area of the monumental buildings at Kommos (drawings by J. Pfaff).

148

SHAW

the monumental buildings assumed a more grandiose form, as befits the elite. Building T seems to have hosted special events likely attended by select local individuals and perhaps guests from elsewhere. It has been suggested that celebrating by watching or partaking in ritual performance in Minoan times may have been “designed to reinforce status and authority” (Peatfield 2000, 13). The proposed function of the stoas at Kommos as spaces from which to view ritual performances may well parallel one likely served by the famous Theatral Areas at the Palace of Knossos and in the West Court at Phaistos, in which the built steps would have served as seats. Organized viewing may have

been more widespread in the Minoan world than we imagine, though the arrangement may have varied in each case. A possible example involves two buildings at Ayia Triada, a house (“Complesso della mazza di breccia”) and a tomb (“Tomba degli Ori”), located near each other. Study of the contents and the physical relationship between these two areas has led La Rosa (2000, 146) to believe that ritual objects stored in the house were carried to the tomb on special occasions. The house was built at a higher level and, La Rosa observes, it would have provided a perfect viewing spot of ritual activities taking place below in the area of the tomb.

Aftermath The Minoan settlement at Kommos came to an end in LM IIIB, though there are sporadic signs of human presence during LM IIIC as well. It is now difficult to know how complete a hiatus there may have been between Minoan times and the installation of a shrine, Temple A (Fig. 10.1), over the ruins of the North Wing of Building T in the Subminoan period (11th century B.C.). This one-room structure is the first among a number of temples of what was later to become a major rural Cretan sanctuary (J. Shaw 2000, 8–14; M. Shaw 2000, 149–157). By itself, the act of using Minoan ruins as a platform (almost a pedestal) for Temple A does not necessarily constitute proof for continuity between Bronze and Iron Ages, but there is the additional evidence of wheel-made clay quadrupeds (mostly cattle/bulls), which were among the earliest dedications in the Sanctuary. This kind of sculpture is familiar from other sites in Crete and the Aegean (M. Guggisberg

1996) and, as Nicholls (1970) first pointed out, it constitutes major evidence for religious continuity between the Bronze and Early Iron Ages. One problem as far as drawing similar conclusions at Kommos is that none of the clay figures is known from LM IIIC contexts. The earliest contexts are Subminoan. Possibly, the founders of Temple A came from another Cretan site where the type was already known, such as nearby Ayia Triada or Phaistos (M. Shaw 2000, 172). Whatever the case, another aspect of interest in this type of clay figure is that such clay hollow animals continued to be made in Crete longer than anywhere else, attesting to the island’s religious conservatism, and the tenacity with which it may have tried to cling to its brilliant Minoan past. In the Sanctuary at Kommos, the production of these large hollow animals continued well into the late Hellenistic period.

Acknowledgments I thank J.W. Shaw and J.B. Rutter for their useful comments, though I am responsible for any errors and for my opinions. I am also grateful to Chris Dietrich both for his fine digital rendering of

the Shrine in House X and for his patience as we struggled together to arrive at a convincing and archaeologically informed restoration.

RELIGION AT MINOAN KOMMOS

149

Bibliography Åström, P., and D.S. Reese. 1990. “Triton Shells in Eastern Mediterranean Cults,” JPR 3–4, pp. 5–14. Betancourt, P.P. 1990. Kommos II. The Final Neolithic through Middle Minoan III Pottery. J.W. Shaw and M.C. Shaw, eds., Princeton. Evans, A. 1935. The Palace of Minos IV, London. Georgiou, H.S. 1977. “Analysis of Carbon Samples from Katsamba and Knossos, Crete,” Kritologia 4, pp. 133– 138. Gesell, G.C. 1985. Town, Palace, and House Cult in Minoan Crete (SIMA 67), Göteborg. Gesell, G.C., W.D.E. Coulson, and L.P. Day. 1991. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1988,” Hesperia 60, pp. 145– 177. Guggisberg, M. 1996. Frühgriechische Tierkeramik: zur Entwicklung und Bedeutung der Tiergefässe und der hohlen Tierfiguren in der späten Bronze- und frühen Eisenzeit (ca. 1600–700 v. Chr.), Mainz. Koehl, R.B. 2000. “Ritual Context,” in The Palaikastro Kouros. A Minoan Chryselephantine Statuette and its Aegean Bronze Age Context (BSA 6), J.A. MacGillivray, J.M. Driessen, and L.H. Sackett, eds., London, pp. 131–143. La Rosa, V. 2000, “Preghiere fatte in casa? Altari mobili da un edificio di H. Triada,” in Pepragmevna tou H‘ Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou A2, Herakleion, pp. 137–152. McEnroe, J. 1996. “The Central Hillside at Kommos: The Late Minoan Period,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1996, pp. 199–235. Marinatos, N. 1993. Minoan Religion. Ritual, Image, and Symbol, Columbia, S.C.

Rutter, J.B. forthcoming a. “Multivalent Symbolism on a Late Minoan II Beaked Jug from Kommos,” in Pepragmevna tou q‘ Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou (Elouvnta 1–6 Oktwbrivou 2001). ———. forthcoming b. “Ceramic Sets in Context: One Dimension of Food Preparation and Consumption in a Minoan Palatial Setting,” in Food, Cuisine and Society in Prehistoric Greece (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 5), P. Halstead and J. Barrett, eds. Shaw, J.W. 1986. “Excavations at Kommos (Crete) during 1984–1985,” Hesperia 55, pp. 219–269. ———. 2000. “The Architecture of the Temples and Other Buildings,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2000, pp. 1–100. Shaw, J.W., and M.C. Shaw. 1993. “Excavations at Kommos (Crete) during 1991–1992,” Hesperia 62, pp. 129–190. ———. 2000. “Minoan and Greek Kommos. An Excavation on the South Coast of Crete by Canadian and American Archaeologists,” in Crete 2000. A Centennial Celebration of American Archaeological Work on Crete 1900–2000, J. Muhly and E. Sikla eds., Athens, pp. 160–178. Shaw, J.W., and M.C. Shaw, eds. 1995. Kommos I, 1. The Kommos Region, Ecology, and Minoan Industries, Princeton. ———. 1996. Kommos I, 2. The Kommos Region and the Houses of the Minoan Town, Princeton. ———. 2000. Kommos IV. The Greek Sanctuary, Princeton. ———. in preparation. Kommos V. The Monumental Minoan Buildings.

Muhly, P. 1996. “Furniture from the Shaft Graves: The Occurrence of Wood in Aegean Burials of the Bronze Age,” BSA 91, pp. 197–211.

Shaw, J.W., A. Van de Moortel, P. Day, V. Kilikoglou. 2001. A LM IA Ceramic Kiln in South-central Crete: Function and Pottery Production (Hesperia Supplement 30), Princeton.

Nicholls, R.V. 1970. “Greek Votive Statuettes and Religious Continuity ca. 1200–700 B.C.,” in Auckland Classical Essays Presented to E. M. Blaiklock, B.F. Harris, ed., Auckland, pp. 1–37.

Shaw, M.C. 1996. “Catalogue with Miscellaneous Finds: Terra-cotta Sculpture,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1996, pp. 282–302.

Peatfield, A. 1992. “Rural Ritual in Bronze Age Crete: The Peak Sanctuary at Atsipades,” CAJ 1, pp. 59–87. ———. 2000. “Minoan Religion for Ordinary People,” in Pepragmevna tou H‘ Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou A3, Herakleion, pp. 9–17. Rethemiotakis, G. 1998. Anqrwpomorfikhv phloplastikhv sthn Krhvth apov th neoanaktorikhv evw" thn upominwikhv perivodo, Athens.

———. 2000. “The Sculpture from the Sanctuary,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2000, pp. 135–209. Soles, J.S., and C. Davaras. 1994. “Excavations at Mochlos: 1990–1991,” Hesperia 63, pp. 391–436. Vandenabeele, F. 1991. “Le Monde marin dans les sanctuaires minoens,” in THALASSA. L’Égée préhistorique et la mer (Aegaeum 7), R. Laffineur and L. Basch, eds., Liège, pp. 239–252.

150

SHAW

Watrous, L.V. 1992. Kommos III. The Late Bronze Age Pottery. J.W. Shaw and M.C. Shaw, eds., Princeton. Weingarten, J. 1983. The Zakro Master and his Place in Prehistory (SIMA pocket book 26), Göteborg. Whittaker, H. 1996. “Catalogue with Miscellaneous Finds: Stone Slabs with Depressions,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1996, pp. 321–323.

Wright, J.C. 1996. “The Central Hillside at Kommos: The Middle Minoan Period,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1996, pp. 140–199. Xanthoudides, St. 1922. “Minwi>kovn mevgaron Nivrou,” ArchEph 1922, pp. 1–25.

PA RT I I I Chronology and History

11 New Construction at Mochlos in the LM IB Period Jeffrey S. Soles

The LM IB period at Mochlos is one of considerable growth. There is a great deal of new construction and an expansion of the settlement into new areas. This growth is not an isolated phenomenon, however, but occurs at Gournia and elsewhere around the Bay of Mirabello. The nature of the settlement is transformed throughout the region. Such a change did not occur in a vacuum: the volcano on Santorini erupted just before LM IB, the Mycenaean occupation of Knossos occurred sometime near the end of the period, and the destruction of Minoan Crete took place at its end. The expansion at Mochlos and the transformation of the region is set against these catastrophic events, and is likely to have been affected by them. The construction projects at Mochlos can be documented at two different times in LM IB, when two slightly different styles of LM IB pottery were in use. At the very beginning of the period, the earliest building projects involve either entirely new

construction, often in areas that were not previously occupied, or the rebuilding or renovation of preexisting structures from the LM IA or MM III/LM IA transitional periods. Associated with this building phase is the early LM IB pottery with some lingering LM IA features, especially a fondness for added red and white paint. This assemblage includes numerous examples of semiglobular cups and straight-sided cooking pots. The later building projects, which occur sometime within the LM IB period, involve additions to earlier buildings, which remain largely unaltered; but there are entirely new structures. The later LM IB pottery which accompanies this phase shows little polychrome decoration. There are a few semiglobular cups, but the main shapes are large ogival and rounded cups and more rounded cooking pots. This stylistic change can be documented stratigraphically in superimposed floor deposits, often within the same room of a house.

Figure 11.1. Mochlos Coastal Area (drawing by J. Patton, M. Lewis, and C. Witmore).

154 SOLES

NEW CONSTRUCTION AT MOCHLOS IN THE LM IB PERIOD

In the Late Bronze Age, the island of Mochlos and the promontory of the modern fishing village were still connected. Mochlos lies in a tectonic valley or graben, flanked by mountain blocks or horsts (Fig. 11.1); extension of the earth’s crust is accommodated near the surface by faulting, and when this occurs the area between the two faults drops down with respect to the areas on either side. Mochlos is sinking, sporadically, but sometimes quite sharply. Since 1952 when the elevation of a Late Hellenistic fish tank along the coast was measured (Leatham and Hood 1958–1959), it has sunk nearly 1 m. Since the 1st century B.C. when the tank was functioning it has sunk nearly 2 m. A reverse of this 2 m subsidence would make a connection between the island and Crete, and this land bridge had been in place down through the Hellenistic period. The new construction of the LM IB period took advantage of this connection; new buildings were placed near the isthmus itself, on both its north and south sides, and along the adjacent coastal plain that extends ca. 4 km to the east. These areas were attractive for several reasons. They still lay open, while the main settlement area was becoming crowded; they provided a level terrain, which was easy to build upon, unlike the steep slopes of the main settlement area; and they were closer to water sources and arable land. To the south of the isthmus, a whole new Artisans’ Quarter was erected (Soles and Davaras 1996, 202–207; Soles 1997). The Greek-American excavations uncovered two buildings that belonged to this quarter (Fig. 11.2). They are the southernmost of a number of similar buildings, at least three, that were constructed along the west side of what is now the modern fishing village. In 1908, Richard Seager noted the walls of these buildings (Seager 1909, 273–274), but did not excavate them. In the winter of 1999, the remains of a third structure were exposed beneath modern buildings which could not be excavated. These buildings provided living space for artisans, probably artisan families since they had children, and also workrooms for the production of stone vases, pottery, and bronze working. The evidence for production includes finished and unfinished stone vases, as well as the tools to make them—clay pits, potter’s wheels, kilns, copper ingots, a foundry hoard of broken bronze vessels, used and unused closed clay molds for casting bronze, and small bronze spills. Both workshops were also used for textile production; large numbers of loomweights and also a stand for measuring out the warp of a loom were found.

155

The artisans appear to have been full-time specialists, working apart from any palace center. Instead of working as retainers for an elite employer, they probably worked independently, meeting a general demand for largely utilitarian goods from a population of potential customers. Such a concentration of production, sometimes called a nucleated center, where artifact production is the main activity, usually occurs in response to a regional demand from several different communities which have no resident specialists. The market has to be large enough to support these artisans, larger than what Mochlos alone could have provided; customers probably came from many points around the Bay of Mirabello. This kind of commerce requires good transportation, a stable environment, a growing population, and regional political integration (Costin 1991, 8–10). In the LM IB period, all four were provided by the Bay of Mirabello. During LM IB, a number of small farmhouses were constructed along the plain. One was located at a site called Linares, where there is a modern farmhouse; another was excavated at Chalinomouri (Soles and Davaras 1996, 207–210). Both were adjacent to water sources and controlled small agricultural fields. The farmers at Chalinomouri terraced their land, and botanical remains provide evidence for the crops they grew. These include olive, figs, and pistachio trees, along with vine and legumes, but oddly enough no cereals. In the corner of one of the main rooms in the house at Chalinomouri, a platform was constructed to support a vat which was used for olive oil separation and/or wine production. The farmers used olive timbers extensively in their roof construction and probably had olive groves. The residents at the farm consumed a large amount of sheep/goat, pig, and shellfish, and a smaller quantity of deer, hare, and fish. The sheep/ goat bones come from nineteen individuals, ranging in age from under ten months to 2–3.5 years old. The pig remains come from ten individuals, including adults and specimens less than a year old. There is also some evidence for one cow. Food was available in some abundance. It is surprising that a number of stone drill guides were also found at the site. These are used to hold a drill in place while drilling a stone vase, an activity not normally associated with farmers. A great deal of serpentinite, the most common material for making stone vases at Mochlos in the LM IB period, is located around Chalinomouri,

156

SOLES

Figure 11.2. The Artisans’ Quarter, Mochlos (drawing by D. Faulmann).

however, and this may have attracted a stone vase maker to the site. The remains suggest a small population. Although there are no human skeletal remains from the site, there are reasons for thinking that Chalinomouri was a family farm (Soles 2001). Its occupants were probably small independent farmers engaged largely in subsistence agriculture, producing enough for their own needs. They would have stored surplus produce for hard times in pithoi, which were buried under the floor in one room. They were dependent on the main settlement at Mochlos for bronze tools, however, and the farmers

may well have provided surplus produce and raw material for the stone vase industry in exchange. Mochlos would have been the farmers’ source of social intercourse and also spiritual needs. In LM IB in the main settlement area on what is now the island of Mochlos, at least two other houses also were built in areas that were previously open spaces (Fig. 11.3). Seager excavated one of these in Block D. He found a long L-shaped structure, House D.2, which was constructed in the open space between Houses D.1 and D.3. Set between the west and east façades of these two earlier houses, House D.2 was created between the other two

Figure 11.3. The Main Settlement, Mochlos (drawing by D. Faulmann and D. Cassiano).

NEW CONSTRUCTION AT MOCHLOS IN THE LM IB PERIOD 157

158

SOLES

houses by running walls between the two in an east-west direction to create new rooms. Towards the north the new house turned around the northeast corner of House D.1 and ran along the north side of this house, reusing its north façade for the south wall of the new room. House D.2 was two stories, with at least six rooms on the bottom floor, including one which was paved with large slabs and provided with a stone column base. The room at the northwest corner of the house is remarkable because its upper floor level is still preserved with an interior doorway opening into the adjacent room to its east. The pottery from Seager’s excavations of the house was never published, but a semiglobular cup was found in a small floor deposit in the house during the current project. This cup points to the beginning of the LM IB period for the construction of House D.2, when work was also being carried out in House D.3 to its east (Seager 1909, 296). Another, more pretentious house was laid out at the north end of the isthmus in an open area where it led up into the main settlement area (Soles and Davaras 1992, 434–438). House C.1 was built in the western part of this area, leaving open the eastern part and the entrance to a narrow alley that led north up into the town. Only the remains of the northern part of the house survives; the southern part was destroyed by coastal erosion. House C.1’s doorway still survives with a green limestone threshold. It was once framed with ashlar sandstone blocks; these also were used as quoins in a setback of the façade wall and probably also at the corners of the house. Immediately to the right, as one entered, was an ashlar staircase leading to an upper floor. A room with a central column lay just beyond, and another room with a cooking area lay behind the façade to the north. The house’s architecture is unusual for Mochlos and recalls elements of Theran houses, particularly in its use of ashlar. It is significant, therefore, that one of the LM IA vases buried in a pit underneath the house, in what should probably be identified as a foundation deposit, is a narrow-necked jug, a shape which is extremely popular at Thera (Soles and Davaras 1992, fig. 14; Marinatos 1974, pl. 74a). A second find associated with the house is a prism seal engraved with a very Theran-like ship (Soles and Davaras 1992, pl. 101b). The house sits directly above a thick, airborne layer of Santorini tephra, which was preserved in such good condition because the house was built on top of it shortly after it was deposited (Soles,

Taylor, and Vitaliano 1995). The eruption of Thera clearly had some effect on Mochlos. There was some earthquake damage to existing structures, which provided the stimulus for part of the building activity that followed the eruption. The Theran disaster may also account for some of the population growth that occurred at the site and elsewhere around the Bay of Mirabello. House C.1 looks very much as if it were designed by Therans, and migrants from Thera or elsewhere in the Cyclades, escaping the effects of the Thera eruption, may well have settled at Mochlos and elsewhere in the region. The Artisans’ Quarter, set above Santorini ash and established at exactly the same time as House C.1, contained fragmentary pottery with links to the Cyclades. Its inhabitants, relying on their skills as craftsmen to make a living, were probably also newcomers. The best evidence for earthquake damage associated with the eruption of the volcano is found in House C.3, which lies farther up the hill slope. The whole upper part of its east façade collapsed as a result of this earthquake, and the effects of this collapse can still be seen today. When the wall was rebuilt, its new stone courses were set back from the original face of the wall beneath and blocked a window in the earlier wall, which had opened into a basement storeroom. When the east wall collapsed, most of the house’s uppermost story also must have collapsed. At the time that it was rebuilt, the entrance to the house on the ground floor and the staircase immediately inside were framed with ashlar in the same manner as the entrance and staircase in House C.1. While these repairs to House C.3 were being made, a rectangular structure was added to the southeast corner of the house, and another structure was added to the northeast corner of the adjacent House C.2, making it difficult to access the east-west street that ran between the two houses. These two new additions shared a party wall and were each provided with an entrance opening onto the narrow alley to the east. The northern of the two had two rooms and appears to have been an independent living space. Other houses were expanded and renovated at the same time, probably as a result of the same earthquake damage. House C.7, which lies just to the northeast of House C.3, was expanded to the west. House D.3, which Seager excavated in the easternmost part of the town, was also renovated. “In the later part of L.M. I the central portion of the house was entirely rebuilt and betrays architectural

NEW CONSTRUCTION AT MOCHLOS IN THE LM IB PERIOD

ideas borrowed from the great palace sites” (Seager 1909, 296). The renovation included a lightwell, a door-and-pier partition, and like House C.3, the first use of ashlar masonry in the building’s history. The inhabitants of all these houses were still prospering at the time of the LM IB destructions. Those living in Houses C.3 and C.7 stored metal hoards of copper ingots and recyclable bronze objects in basement storerooms. These were not hidden in the houses but could be easily reached. Most of the ingots, like those in the Artisans’ Quarter, had been broken into small pieces for weighing on a balance pan with lead weights. They formed liquid assets that were available whenever the need arose (Brogan 1998, 391). Each house also had considerable storage capacity; large jars and pithoi were located in various storerooms. A stone vase workshop, which may have specialized in fancy lamps, was located in House C.7, and occupants of these houses may also have been engaged in craft activities. But the trade in metals must have been a primary source of prosperity at this time. Lead isotope analysis indicates that copper ingots were coming to Mochlos from Cyprus at this time, and Mochlos was an important stopping point on the east-west trade route between Crete and Cyprus. Ships sailing east may have stopped at Pseira first, but those coming west with rich cargos of copper stopped first at Mochlos. The most important of the renovated structures in the main settlement area was the new ceremonial building. Building B.2 was erected on either side of a Prepalatial building. It seems to have been designed in such a way as both to honor dead ancestors and provide a cosmological link between the living and the dead (Soles 2001). Earlier buildings on the site were cleared away, especially along the south where a monumental façade was constructed which made extensive use of ashlar masonry. The façade was set back towards the center of the building where the Prepalatial remains were located in order to leave an open space above those ruins. The southwest and southeast wings of the building projected on either side of this space. A terrace wall was constructed along the south face of the southeast wing to provide an approach to this space, which lay at a higher level than the terrace that ran along the south side of the building. A small altar was set in this space directly above the area of the Prepalatial building. Two pillar crypts were located immediately to the east inside the southeast wing of the building and columnar shrines were located in the rooms above. These three areas—outside on

159

the terrace, above the Prepalatial building, and inside in the rooms above the pillar crypts—were used as places of offering. It was this new ceremonial building that most changed the nature of the Mochlos settlement. Mochlos became a religious center which attracted pilgrims from neighboring farmhouses and other sites in the Bay of Mirabello. There was nothing quite like it in the region with the exception, of course, of the palace at Gournia, which was being developed as a major religious center when Building B.2 was built. At the beginning of LM IB, a quarry was opened at Mochlos. Petrographic studies indicate that this stone was used not only for Building B.2, but also as ashlar masonry on the palace at Gournia and on Pseira (Pike and Soles 1998, 377; Soles 1983). The renovation and expansion of the Gournia palace probably was not completed when it was destroyed at the end of the IB period. Even though ashlar masonry had been fitted into its west façade, the palace was still a work in progress. It was being expanded and remodeled to incorporate pre-existing structures on the west side of what was becoming a central court. Important meeting rooms were located here in conjunction with a lustral basin and pillar crypt. Like the construction of B.2, the expansion of this building transformed the nature of the site around it, not only making it an important religious center, but also a major administrative center for a new Minoan polity located around the Bay of Mirabello (Soles 1991, 70–76.) This transformation of the region also must have been driven by population pressures. Recent survey work carried out by American teams at Vrokastro, Kavousi, and Gournia have located a number of LM I sites, indicating that the area was densely occupied (Hayden and Moody 1989; Haggis 1996; Watrous and Blitzer 1995.) The same seems to be true of much of Eastern Crete. Sites like Ayios Georgios or Achladia, which were thought just a few years ago to have been abandoned in LM IA, have been restudied recently and shown to have survived through to the end of the LM IB period (Platon 1997). Mochlos is not exceptional in this respect; it fits the pattern in Eastern Crete where much construction, dating to the LM IA period or earlier, shows signs of renovation and rebuilding at the end of the period, and final destruction occurs only at the end of LM IB. The argument that the Santorini eruption introduced a period of political instability, economic recession, and depopulation throughout Crete, with food in

160

SOLES

short supply, ashlar masonry no longer quarried, monumental architecture no longer built, and bronze and stone artifacts no longer produced (Driessen and Macdonald 1997, 221–225), is simply not supported by the facts. There is little evidence even for a “decline,” especially not in Eastern Crete. There all the evidence points to an expanding population which had overcome whatever environmental challenges the eruption of Santorini had posed, just as it had overcome similar challenges in the past. As Betancourt observes in Chapter 1, Knossos was almost certainly behind much of this renewal. This is particularly true in the building of new religious structures like Building B.2, which reproduced architectural features from Knossos and housed skillfully crafted artifacts imported from Knossos and encapsulating its power (Soles 1995). In the Mirabello region, the most important of these new structures was the palace at Gournia, which was built in imitation of the palace at Knossos. The conscious mimicking of its construction suggests that Knossos is also likely to have been behind the political organization and strengthening of the region in preparation for the challenges that lay ahead. But what of the later LM IB building phase at Mochlos? It is characterized by a more modest expansion of the settlement and by the closing of certain passages. In the Artisans’ Quarter, seven small additions were built onto the façades of the two original buildings (Fig. 11.2). Five of these are single rooms (Building A, Rooms 3, 9, and 10; Building B, Rooms 3 and 9), and one is a two-room complex (Building B, Room 13 East and West). They were built quickly with low stone foundations using mudbrick above and were sometimes placed at an angle to the original façades. Room A.9 was awkwardly located in front of the entrance to Building A and came very close to blocking that entrance. Nearly all the additions contained hearths, a great deal of cooking ware, sandstone basins or mortars, a relatively large amount of animal bones (often with signs of butchering and burning), botanical remains (especially olives), and conical cup lamps. All of these finds indicate that the rooms were used as living spaces where people prepared and consumed food and probably also slept. The additions have very small doorways or none at all. They were entered from the exterior, either from ground level or the roof. The people who lived here did not belong to the original population of the Artisans’ Quarter, but rather to their descendants or to newcomers,

perhaps apprentices, who assisted in the operations of the Quarter. It has not been possible to determine yet exactly when all the LM IB alterations in the main settlement on the island were made (Fig. 11.3). Some of those discussed above clearly date to the beginning; others clearly occurred later. The blocking of several passages inside and outside buildings appears, in most cases, to be a later development. In Block C, the entrance at the southwest corner of House C.7 was walled up late in the LM IB period; this blocking can be dated securely on stratigraphic evidence. The north end of the alleyway leading up through the center of Block C, just outside this entrance, probably was blocked at the same time that a small structure with its own entrance was added in the space between Houses C.3 and C.7. The final closing of the east-west street between Houses C.2 and C.3 also seems to date to this time. Two rooms were added at the eastern end of the road. Each was provided with a small doorway in its western wall, but the eastern of the two could also be approached by a doorway in the south wall of House C.3. The westernmost room resembles the additions made in the Artisans’ Quarter. It contained a sandstone basin. The whole area inside and outside the room was used for cooking, and it may have provided a new kitchen area for the occupants of House C.3. In Block B, an internal corridor in House B.2, which led from the Minoan hall on the eastern side of the building to an interior staircase and dining area towards the center of the building, was also blocked. This forced people entering the building from the east to take a more circuitous route to reach the interior of the structure. This happened sometime after the original LM IB construction of the building, probably at a late date in its history. A main entrance in the western part of B.1, excavated by Seager, was also blocked sometime in the Neopalatial period. There is not a lot of evidence for these final modifications to the site. They suggest some continuing expansion in population, but perhaps also an attempt to make the site less accessible and to control circulation patterns by closing off certain passages and doorways. An attempt to restrict access and control circulation may be observed at other sites in the LM I period (Driessen 1995; Driessen and Macdonald 1997, 45–47), but it is not always possible to pin down the exact time when this occurred. At Gournia, however, it is clear that an earlier entrance to the northeast corner of the palace from

NEW CONSTRUCTION AT MOCHLOS IN THE LM IB PERIOD

the East Ridge Road was blocked, and that a tower was constructed here late in the LM IB period (Soles 1991, 66–70). These alterations correspond to those which occurred at Mochlos, and both may have been undertaken for defensive purposes. By this time, when the same late LM IB pottery was in use at both sites, LM II pottery seems to have been

161

introduced at Knossos (Soles 1999, 59; Barnard and Brogan 2003), and Knossos was again the reason for much of this activity. With the Mycenaean occupation, Knossos was no longer promoting the development of the region, however, so much as threatening it.

Acknowledgments Twenty-nine years ago it was my great good fortune to meet Costis Davaras who had then recently founded the 24th Ephoreia in Eastern Crete. Costis and I have always been strong believers in GreekAmerican collaboration, and it is of course Costis Davaras who deserves a large share of the credit for

the renaissance in American and Greek-American archaeological activity that we are witnessing in Eastern Crete today. It has been my honor to work with him as a colleague on a number of projects, including the Mochlos excavation that we began in 1989.

Bibliography Barnard, K.A., and T.M. Brogan. 2003. Mochlos IB. Period III. Neopalatial Settlement on the Coast: The Artisans’ Quarter and the Farmhouse at Chalinomouri. The Neopalatial Pottery, Philadelphia. Brogan, T.M. 1998. “Minoan Lead Weights and Bronze Scale Pans: Evidence from the LM IB Levels at Mochlos” (paper, Chicago 1997), abstract in AJA 102, p. 391. Costin, C.L. 1991. “Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining, Documenting, and Explaining the Organization of Production,” Archaeological Method and Theory 3, pp. 1–56. Driessen, J. 1995. “Observations on the Modification of the Access Systems of Minoan Palaces,” Aegean Archaeology 2, pp. 67–85. Driessen, J., and C.F. Macdonald. 1997. The Troubled Island, Minoan Crete Before and After the Santorini Eruption (Aegaeum 17), Liège. Haggis, D.C. 1996. “Archaeological Survey at Kavousi, East Crete: Preliminary Report,” Hesperia 65, pp. 373– 432. Hayden, B., and J. Moody. 1989. “The Vrokastro Survey Project: Preliminary Results” (paper, Baltimore 1989), abstract in AJA 93, pp. 252–253. Leatham, J., and M.S.F. Hood. 1958–1959. “Submarine Exploration in Crete, 1955,” BSA 53–54, pp. 263–280.

Marinatos, S. 1974. Excavations at Thera VI (1972 Season), Athens. Pike, S., and J.S. Soles. 1998. “A Petrographic Study of Bronze Age Sandstone Quarries in East Crete and its Application to Minoan Archaeology” (paper, Chicago 1997), abstract in AJA 102, p. 377. Platon, L. 1997. “The Minoan Villa in Eastern Crete. Riza, Akhladia, and Prophetes Elias, Praissos: Two Specimens of One Category?” in The Function of the “Minoan Villa,” R. Hägg, ed., Stockholm, pp. 187–202. Seager, R.B. 1909. “Excavations on the Island of Mochlos, Crete, in 1908,” AJA 13, pp. 273–303. Soles, J.S. 1983. “A Bronze Age Quarry in Eastern Crete,” JFA 10, pp. 33–46. ———. 1991. “The Gournia Palace,” AJA 95, pp. 17–78. ———. 1995. “The Functions of a Cosmological Center: Knossos in Palatial Crete,” in POLITEIA. Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 12), R. Laffineur and W.-D. Niemeier, eds., Liège, pp. 405–414. ———. 1997. “A Community of Craft Specialists at Mochlos,” in TEXNH. Craftsmen, Craftswomen and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 16), P. Betancourt and R. Laffineur, eds., Liège, pp. 425–436. ———. 1999. “The Collapse of Minoan Civilization: the Evidence of the Broken Ashlar,” in POLEMOS. Le

162

SOLES

Contexte Guerrier en Égée à L’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19), R. Laffineur, ed., Liège, pp. 57–67. ———. 2001. “Reverence for Dead Ancestors in Prehistoric Crete,” in POTNIA. Deities and Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 22). R Laffineur and R. Hägg, eds., Brussels and Austin, pp. 229–238. Soles, J.S., and C. Davaras. 1992. “Excavations at Mochlos, 1989,” Hesperia 61, pp. 413–445. ———. 1996. “Excavations at Mochlos, 1992–1993,” Hesperia 65, pp. 175–230.

Soles, J.S., R. Taylor, and C. Vitaliano. 1995. “Tephra Samples from Mochlos and their Implication for the Relative Chronology of Neopalatial Crete,” Archaeometry 37, pp. 385–393. Watrous, L.V., and H. Blitzer. 1995. “The Gournia Survey Project: A Preliminary Report on the 1992–1994 Field Seasons” (paper, Atlanta 1994), abstract in AJA 99, p. 313.

12 From Foundation to Abandonment: New Ceramic Phasing for the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age on the Kastro at Kavousi Margaret S. Mook

Harriet Boyd Hawes spent the third week of her 1900 excavation season in Kavousi digging some 710 m a.s.l., on the peak of the Kastro (Fig. 12.1), which she described as “ . . . a fine, breezy spot overlooking the narrow isthmus from the Cretan to the Libyan sea” (Boyd 1901, 138). There, she uncovered the remains of thirteen rooms situated on seven different levels, but she published only one pot from the site (Boyd 1901, pl. 2). In her general report on the pottery, she concluded, “Many fragments of the pottery prove by their designs that the buildings date from the Geometric period” (Boyd 1901, 143). Relatively little was known about the pottery and specific chronology of the site from Boyd’s very brief excavations; nevertheless, the Kastro became one of the type-sites for upland settlement in Early Iron Age Crete (Desborough 1952, 233; Snodgrass 1971, 81; Desborough 1972, 117; Snodgrass 1987, 172–173).

Our understanding of the chronological extent of habitation on the Kastro has been modified by study of the pottery from full-scale excavations, undertaken by the Kavousi Project from 1987 through 1990 (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1988, 298–301; Gesell, Coulson, and Day 1991, 167–177; Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1995, 92–115, 117–119). The extensive remains from the Kastro (Fig. 12.2) now indicate that the settlement was occupied continuously from the end of the Bronze Age, throughout the subsequent Early Iron Age, and into the Archaic period, that is from the beginning of the 12th century until well into the 7th century B.C. (Coulson et al. 1997). The pottery from the Kastro provides a relative chronology and typology for the duration of this formative cultural transition on Crete. Most models for reconstructing Early Iron Age social, economic, and political organization have suffered from a paucity of specific chronological

164

MOOK

Figure 12.1. Kavousi village and the Kastro from the west.

information from the duration of this formative period (e.g., Hoffman 1997; Haggis 1993; Whitley 1991). Furthermore, the incomplete and dispersed evidence from graves and settlements frequently is treated as representative of a coherent whole by social historians without regard for any temporal cultural dimension, even though the characteristics of the beginning of the Early Iron Age and of its culmination are clearly distinct. The Kastro is the first settlement excavated on Crete with a complete and continuously stratified habitation sequence from the end of the Bronze Age and throughout the Early Iron Age. It can now be demonstrated that there are nine phases of occupation, as defined by the pottery associated with distinct stratigraphic episodes. In addition, the Central Cretan sequence is not a reliable guide for dating pottery from Eastern Crete, since internal development and external contacts were often dissimilar in the two regions (Coldstream and Catling 1996; Betancourt 1985; Coldstream 1968; Desborough 1952). It is because the Kastro is such a well-stratified archaeological site, with a complete habitation record from the beginning of the 12th century until the mid 7th century B.C., that it has yielded data for establishing a ceramic chronology for the Early Iron Age in Eastern Crete. Ceramic material from levels with subsequent or superimposed habitation on the Kastro is usually

very fragmentary, with few restorable complete profiles and fewer intact vessels. Only in the 7th century, when rooms were abandoned at the end of the life of the settlement, are more complete pots found with any frequency. The most complete stratified sequences of habitation on the site were found on the steep slope to the west of the seven rooms excavated by Boyd on the hilltop. This area, the West Slope, is characterized by deep bedrock terraces and contained some of the bestpreserved, continuously stratified deposits (Fig. 12.3). On the Kastro, three phases of LM IIIC can be isolated, spanning approximately the early 12th to late 11th centuries. The two-handled deep bowl is the predominant shape throughout (Mook and Coulson 1997). Phase I is situated very early in LM IIIC, and probably marks the beginning of the 12th century. All Phase I deposits contain some pottery that is LM IIIB:2 in style (Figs. 12.4 and 12.5), suggesting that the Kastro was founded at the beginning of the LM IIIC period when IIIB:2 pottery was still in use (Hallager 2000). No pure LM IIIB deposits were found on the Kastro, but sherds with IIIB characteristics were consistently a component of LM IIIC occupation strata. Fabrics are well-fired and hard, with polished, slipped surfaces and glossy decoration. The Phase I pottery tends to have softer fabrics, and the decoration is seldom glossy, more often matt. Open Style is the norm, and it is in Phase I that

Figure 12.2. Boyd’s 1900 (after Boyd 1901, p. 139, fig. 5), and the Kavousi Project’s 2002, plans of the Kastro.

FROM FOUNDATION TO ABANDONMENT 165

Figure 12.3. East-west section of the area east of Room 24, Room 24, Room 35, and Room 31 from the north.

166 MOOK

FROM FOUNDATION TO ABANDONMENT

B

A

167

C

D

F

E G

J

H

L

I M K Figure 12.4. Late Minoan IIIB:2-style pottery.

168

MOOK

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J K

L

M

N O

R

S

P

T

V U

Y W

X

Figure 12.5. The pottery from a Phase I, Late Minoan IIIC, deposit.

Q

FROM FOUNDATION TO ABANDONMENT

a reserved band at the rim on the interior of deep bowls is first introduced. Although not common, this feature usually appears on at least one vessel in every Phase I deposit. Phase I habitation on the Kastro is restricted to the West Slope and NW Building, in areas where the natural terraces could easily be incorporated into house plans, with upslope walls consisting almost entirely of bedrock. Phase II habitation continues in essentially the same areas, with occasional modification to existing structures. Stylistically, Phase II pottery is close to that of Phase I (Fig. 12.6). The deep bowls tend to be larger, and the motifs are often painted in an imprecise manner, with elements merging and overlapping. The Open Style decoration continues to predominate, although some examples of the Close Style, with fringes and filling arcs, are found. Phase III, LM IIIC late, is a time of expansion on the site; new areas of the Kastro are inhabited for the first time. People continue to live in previously established houses, usually with some modification, while new houses are constructed on the lower terrace of the West Slope, the Northeast section of the site, and the upper terrace of the East slope. Phase III pottery fabrics are generally softer, surfaces are slipped but rarely polished, and when preserved, brown and black decoration frequently has a metallic appearance. A thick, almost vitreous, black to red mottled slip is a feature unique to this phase. Deep bowls maintain the size of those from Phase II, although their profiles are straighter. Reserved bands are now much more common and found on cups as well as deep bowls. Open Style decoration continues, but the Close Style becomes much more prevalent than earlier. The Close Style patterns are characterized by extensive use of filling arcs and dotted elements, sometimes in a paneled arrangement. Although the stratigraphy provides clear evidence of continuous habitation on the site following LM IIIC, as indicated by successive floors with associated habitation debris and the absence of remains of roof-collapse, there is no phase of occupation that could be identified as Subminoan on the basis of the style of the pottery. Initially, the phase between the latest LM IIIC and PG deposits, Phase IV, was identified as LM IIIC–PG Transitional; restudy of much of the relevant pottery indicates that these deposits are best designated Early PG (Fig. 12.7). Miniature bell-skyphoi, smaller versions of the hallmark PG shape, are found in association with stylistically late LM IIIC sherds.

169

After LM IIIC on the Kastro, there exists a stratified horizon of habitation when PG styles are just being introduced on the site, primarily in the form of the bell-skyphos, while pottery in LM IIIC styles continues to be in use. Habitation levels characterized by Subminoan-style pottery are not well documented, even in Central Crete, and indeed, it may be that the notional definition of a Subminoan period, based almost exclusively on tomb groups, is erroneous. Phase IV habitation on the Kastro is found in most of the areas occupied at the end of LM IIIC and dates to the 10th century. Phase V is Protogeometric, and pottery deposits are characterized by the skyphos, now the predominant open shape, completely replacing the Late Minoan deep bowl (Fig. 12.8). Although bell-skyphoi with top-heavy proportions and a slimmer Sshaped profile are the most popular, skyphoi are found in a variety of shapes. Conical feet also vary greatly in form, but typically have pointed-toes with a ridge on the exterior. Partially dipped coating is the usual decoration on the skyphos; other decorative motifs and treatments are rare. Monochrome cups also are found. These cups had flat bases, but it is also possible that some had conical feet. Bell-kraters are more elaborately decorated, sometimes with geometric patterns such as crosshatched lozenges and checkerboard panels. PG decoration tends to be black to brown, rarely red, and dull in appearance. Closed shapes, including amphoras and globular jugs, are decorated in a light-ground style with bands on the lower body, and, most frequently, scrolls or compass-drawn concentric circles on the shoulder. Both fine and medium-coarse fabrics are remarkably soft, and usually buff to pale yellow in color, sometimes with a friable texture. This phase belongs approximately to the late 10th to mid 9th centuries and represents a period of significant building on the Kastro, when substantial multi-room houses are constructed along the natural terraces of the site. Phase VI, the phase of habitation following PG, has been designated Subprotogeometric on the Kastro and probably dates approximately to the second half of the 9th century. Subprotogeometric is a term that has not been elsewhere applied to the Cretan sequence and is employed here because it best describes the character of the associated pottery, which is still largely Protogeometric in nature but with some of the freehand curvilinear decorative elements associated with the PGB–EG sequence at Knossos (Coldstream 1996). Partially dipped conical-footed skyphoi continue

170

MOOK

B

A

C

F D E

H

G

I

J

K

L

M

Q

R

O

N

S

P

T

U

W V

Y X

AA Z Figure 12.6. The pottery from a Phase II, Late Minoan IIIC, deposit.

FROM FOUNDATION TO ABANDONMENT

B

A C

D E

H

F

G

Figure 12.7. Phase IV, Early Protogeometric, skyphoi and a krater.

171

172

MOOK

C

B

D

A E F G H

J

K

I L M N

O P

R

Q

S T U V

W X Y

AA Z

CC

BB

DD

GG EE Figure 12.8. Phase V, Protogeometric, skyphoi and cups.

FF

FROM FOUNDATION TO ABANDONMENT

to be produced, now alongside others with more elaborate rectilinear and curvilinear decoration and flat bases (Fig. 12.9). A broader range of shapes and motifs are in use. Reserved panels are particularly popular, but banding and other rectilinear motifs tend to be haphazardly executed. The contemporary phases at Knossos are PGB and EG, a time when the North-Central plain of Crete is most receptive to foreign ideas, in particular from Attica (Coldstream 1996, 409–420; 1968, 234–239). The PGB style is a peculiarly local Knossian phenomenon that then spread throughout Central Crete as far east as Vrokastro; EG, however, remained confined to Knossos. From PG to LG, the East Cretan ceramic repertoire appears to have continued and developed independently from that of Central Crete, with external influence only occasionally apparent. On the Kastro, little new construction is undertaken during this phase; rather, houses constructed in PG continue to be used with little structural alteration during the Subprotogeometric phase, the mid 9th to early 8th centuries. Perhaps at Dreros, and again only as far east as Vrokastro, did local styles corresponding to Knossian MG evolve (Coldstream 1968, 257–258). Kastro Phase VII, immediately preceding LG, has thus been termed “Geometric,” since little of the material exhibits the strong Atticizing influence that is the essence of Knossian MG. Chronologically, they are essentially equivalent, with Phase VII dated to the first half of the 8th century. Monochrome cups are the most common shape. Both rounded cups with offset and everted rims, predecessors of the LG deep cup, and cups with roughly finished surfaces (particularly in the form of grooves made by chaff temper during turning and scraping), and a somewhat closed profile are found (Fig. 12.10). The latter are particularly distinctive and exclusive to this phase. The monochrome coating on the closed cups is washy brown to brownish black, or occasionally red. On the rounded cups with everted rims, it is most often brownish black to black, sometimes lustrous in appearance. Flat-based skyphoi are still monochrome or decorated with reserved panels. There is a larger array of linear decoration; some standard motifs, such as the zigzag, diagonal hatching in alternate directions, and concentric circles often are executed with great precision. Large vessels are decorated elaborately with increasing frequency. During Phase VII, there is evidence for new construction on the Kastro. Some areas of the

173

Northeast and West Slopes are redesigned, although there are rooms that go out of use by the end of this phase before LG pottery styles are introduced on the site. Phase VIII is Late Geometric, approximately the second half of the 8th century. Monochrome cups with rounded bodies and everted rims are the most prevalent open shape; a taller, and usually smaller-based, version is new in this phase—it is the canonical LG deep cup (Fig. 12.11). Deep cups are particularly thin-walled, and a more lustrous, sometimes metallic, appearance is achieved with a black coating. Elaborately decorated vessels are just as common as monochrome pots. Coldstream has identified a LG style of pottery in Eastern Crete that he calls “Eteocretan Geometric” (Coldstream 1968, 257–261). In the Eteocretan Geometric style, curvilinear motifs predominate over rectilinear, and hatching occurs on the background of curvilinear ornaments. Although this style of pottery is present on the Kastro, it is more fully exploited on the large closed vessels used as funerary offerings in the nearby tombs at Skouriasmenos and Plai tou Kastrou (Boyd 1901, 143–150, pls. III–IV; Levi 1927–1929; Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1983, 412– 413). In LG, there is an increase in the number of vessels that are imported from elsewhere, such as a krater with an off-island fabric. Early in this phase, some rebuilding is undertaken on all areas of the Kastro. The new constructions on the East Slope and hilltop are the most extensive; several areas of the West Slope also are architecturally modified. Before the end of the phase, many rooms and entire buildings, including some of the new constructions, are abandoned. The final period of habitation on the Kastro, Phase IX, is Orientalizing and belongs to the 7th century. Monochrome deep cups and skyphoi have much more sharply everted or substantially taller rims than their LG predecessors and some cups are now plain (Fig. 12.12). The technique of adding decoration in white paint on black-ground vessels becomes very popular in Phase IX, on both open and closed shapes. Kotylai imitating Early Protocorinthian types are prevalent, and the Corinthian fashion of painting numerous thin bands on vessel bodies extends to other open and small closed shapes. Representational and figural decoration consists primarily of birds and floral motifs. Human figures are found on only two vessels from the Kastro—fragments from two different relief pithoi for which the same stamp, depicting hoplites in the Knielauf position, was used. New

T

V

S

U

Figure 12.9. The pottery from two Phase VI, Subprotogeometric, deposits.

R

P

N

K

I

G

E

C

Q

O

M

L

J

H

F

D

B

A

GG

EE

AA

Y

W

DD

CC

HH

FF

BB

Z

X

174 MOOK

DD

Z

V

T

EE

AA

W

U

Q

M

L

P

I

G

F

B

Figure 12.10. The pottery from a Phase VII, Geometric, deposit.

CC

Y

S

O

K

E

A

C

HH

FF II

BB

X

R

N

J

H

D

GG

FROM FOUNDATION TO ABANDONMENT 175

176

MOOK

A

B

D C

F

E

G

H

I

J

K Figure 12.11. Phase VIII, Late Geometric, open and closed pottery.

L

FROM FOUNDATION TO ABANDONMENT

177

B A C

E F

D

H

I

G

L

J

K M N

O

Figure 12.12. Phase IX, Orientalizing, open and closed pottery.

178

MOOK

construction in Phase IX is apparent only in the Northwest Building. Some LG rooms and houses continue to be used elsewhere on the site, until it is completely abandoned sometime around the middle or latter part of the 7th century. Impressions and interpretations of the Kastro have been influenced by Boyd’s short excavations and cursory report. The notion that the settlement reached its floruit in the Late Geometric period was, until recently, guided by the lasting impact of her observations. New insights into the relative chronology and stratigraphic phasing are provided

by the study of the pottery and are illuminating the complex history of settlement on the Kastro. Far from being a single-period site, the Kastro was inhabited for some five-and-a-half centuries. An increased understanding of phases of expanding habitation and of settlement maintenance and retraction is crucial not only for the identification of economic and social changes but also for the very nature of settlement activity on the Kastro, and indeed, in the entire region of the North isthmus at the end of the Bronze Age and throughout the Early Iron Age.

Acknowledgments For William D.E. Coulson I would like to thank the directors of the Kavousi Project, Geraldine C. Gesell (University of Tennessee), Leslie Preston Day (Wabash College), and the late William D.E. Coulson, who was also the field director of excavations on the Kastro, for the opportunity to study and publish the pottery from this site. While my work has profited immensely from discussions with many colleagues who work on Crete, I owe a special debt of gratitude to Willy

Coulson, who first introduced me to the many rewards of pottery study and the joy of working in Eastern Crete. My study of the Kastro pottery also has been supported by funding from Iowa State University, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Institute for Aegean Prehistory, the University of Minnesota, the American School of Classical Studies, and the Archaeological Institute of America.

Bibliography Betancourt, P.P. 1985. The History of Minoan Pottery, Princeton. Boyd, H.A. 1901. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, in 1900,” AJA 5, pp. 125–157. Coldstream, J.N. 1968. Greek Geometric Pottery, Oxford. ———. 1996. “The Protogeometric and Geometric Pottery,” in Coldstream and Catling, eds., 1996, London. Coldstream, J.N., and H.W. Catling, eds. 1996. The Knossos North Cemetery: Early Greek Tombs, London. Coulson, W.D.E., D.C. Haggis, M.S. Mook, and J.L. Tobin. 1997. “Excavations on the Kastro at Kavousi: An Architectural Overview,” Hesperia 66, pp. 315–390. Desborough, V.R. d’A. 1952. Protogeometric Pottery, Oxford.

———. 1972. The Greek Dark Ages, London. Gesell, G.C., W.D.E. Coulson, and L.P. Day. 1991. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1988,” Hesperia 60, pp. 145– 177. Gesell, G.C., L.P. Day, and W.D.E. Coulson. 1983. “Excavations and Survey at Kavousi, 1978–1981,” Hesperia 52, pp. 389–420. ———. 1988. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1987,” Hesperia 57, pp. 279–301. ———. 1995. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1989 and 1990,” Hesperia 64, pp. 67–120. Haggis, D.C. 1993. “Intensive Survey, Traditional Settlement Patterns, and Dark Age Crete: The Case of Early Iron Age Kavousi,” JMA 6, pp. 131–174.

FROM FOUNDATION TO ABANDONMENT Hallager, B.P. 2000. “The Late Minoan IIIC Pottery,” in The Greek-Swedish Excavations at the Agia Aikaterini Square, Katelli, Khania 1970–1987 II, The Late Minoan IIIC Settlement, E. Hallager and B.P. Hallager, eds., Stockholm, pp. 135–174.

179

Mook, M.S., and W.D.E. Coulson. 1997. “Late Minoan IIIC Pottery from the Kastro at Kavousi,” in Late Minoan III Pottery. Chronology and Terminology, E. Hallager and B.P. Hallager, eds., Athens, pp. 337–365. Snodgrass, A.M. 1971. The Dark Age of Greece, Edinburgh.

Hoffman, G.L. 1997. Imports and Immigrants: Near Eastern Contacts with Iron Age Crete, Ann Arbor.

———. 1987. An Archaeology of Greece: The Present State and Future Scope of a Discipline, Berkeley.

Levi, D. 1927–1929. “Arkades: Una città cretese all’alba della civiltà ellenica,” ASAtene 10–12, pp. 15–710.

Whitley, J. 1991. Style and Society in Dark Age Greece, Cambridge.

13 Writing on the Walls. The Architectural Context of Archaic Cretan Laws Paula J. Perlman

At its annual meeting in May 1893, the Council of the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA) chose Crete as a field for exploration and invited the Italian epigrapher and archaeologist Federico Halbherr, of the University of Rome, as project director. Halbherr had been in charge of “the first, the most important and almost the only scientific excavations carried out on Krete, during 1884–6.” During that time he excavated at Gortyn where he discovered “beside many archaic inscriptions, the queen of Greek inscriptions, the Gortyn law code” (“American Expedition to Krete” 1894, 538). In 1893 and 1894, Halbherr and a team of Italian archaeologists explored the island, reporting their discoveries in a series of twenty-one articles in the American Journal of Archaeology for 1896, 1897, 1898, 1901, and 1902. Although these investigations mark the beginning of American support for archaeological research on Crete, the first American to excavate there was Harriet Boyd in 1900. Halbherr’s exploration of Crete and, in particular, his pioneering work at Gortyn in 1884, when he discovered the monumental wall bearing the Gortyn law code,

played a decisive role in launching Boyd’s first expedition to Crete. In the introduction to her report on the first season’s work at Kavousi, Boyd (1901, 125) attributed to Halbherr’s “memorable work in 1893–1894 on behalf of the Institute” her own confidence in gaining approval for her proposal to excavate on the island. In light of the important part played by the Gortyn law code in bringing American archaeologists to Crete, a discussion of the architectural context of the archaic laws of Crete is not out of place in a volume devoted to a century of American archaeological exploration on the island. Quite apart from the relevance afforded this essay by the serendipity of modern excavation history, there is the important fact that an inscription is not only a text but also an artifact. To ignore its archaeological context is to deny the opportunity of asking a range of important questions that bear directly upon the interpretation of the text. During the period ca. 650–500 B.C., nine poleis are known to have written down their laws for public display (Perlman 2002, 187). With very few exceptions, these laws were inscribed on the walls

182

PERLMAN

of public buildings rather than on free-standing monuments such as stelai or kyrbeis. Examination of these inscribed buildings supplies information about the laws themselves, the disposition of the inscriptions on building walls, and the internal organization of the texts. Although almost all archaic Cretan laws were inscribed on the walls of buildings, for the most

part the plan, chronology, function, and even the precise location of these buildings are not known. This is true of the architectural context of the archaic laws from Eleutherna, Eltynia, Knossos, Lyktos, and Phaistos. However, buildings that bore archaic laws have been identified with certainty at Gortyn and with a high degree of likelihood at Axos and Dreros.

Gortyn During the second half of the 7th century B.C., the temple of Apollo Pythios (Pythion) at Gortyn was built some 500 m southeast of the ancient civic center (Di Vita 1991, 315 n. 9). The majority of the first forty entries in the fourth volume of Inscriptiones Creticae (I.Cret.) are legal inscriptions associated with this temple (Fig. 13.1). These texts were inscribed in a piecemeal fashion on the walls of the Pythion. The date assigned to the earliest played a decisive role in determining the date of the construction of the temple (Ricciardi 1986–1987, 56–57). Guarducci (1950, 40–41) dated the texts as a group to ca. 650–500 B.C. Jeffery, however, saw no reason to date any of them as early as the 7th century B.C. (Jeffery 1990, 311–313). On current evidence, the Pythion remains the only structure at Gortyn which was put to this use during the 6th and perhaps late 7th century B.C. (Perlman 2000, 61). At least two of the inscriptions were added to the exterior of the temple during the first half of the 5th century B.C. (I.Cret. IV 78; 79); neither of these, however, is a law stricto sensu. What first impresses the viewer of the Pythion laws is their decorative quality. The letters of the individual inscriptions vary considerably in size but overall are large and deeply incised (Fig. 13.1, col. V). The traces of miltos (red ocher) preserved in many of the letters render them even more striking. These inscriptions were intended to attract an audience. The questions of whether they were meant to be read, and if so, by whom and for what purpose(s) are difficult to answer. The disposition of the texts on the walls of the temple, the organization of the laws, and their syntax suggest that both the drafters of the laws and the masons who inscribed them endeavored to help potential readers navigate and comprehend the texts. Although texts were inscribed on the Pythion over a long period of time, from perhaps as early as

the middle of the 7th century B.C. to the first half of the 5th (Fig. 13.1, col. II), the masons appear to have adhered to a single strategy for the disposition of the inscriptions on the temple. The walls of the Pythion consisted of courses of blocks (perhaps alternating) of a uniform height of 0.28–0.30 m and others varying in height from 0.21–0.65 m, resting on a single course of orthostate blocks, 1.18–1.20 m tall (Ricciardi 1986–1987, 24–33; Fig. 13.1, col. III). Although there are numerous joins between inscribed blocks within a course, no inscriptional joins between courses have been identified—the individual texts appear to have been confined to a single course of blocks. This approach to arranging the texts on the walls is particularly clear in the case of I.Cret. IV 22B, which is inscribed on the narrow east face or end of the orthostate block that forms the northeast corner of the temple. It is squeezed into a space 0.22 m wide between the right edge of the block and the right edge of a torus molding that frames the temple’s east wall. Written in serpentine fashion, the inscription begins at the lower edge of the block and continues up to its top, where it turns back down to the right of the first line as though the join between courses were an inviolable barrier (Fig. 13.2). The laws use punctuation, both sigla to indicate the end of a text—an open rectangle at the end of I.Cret. IV 13 and a vertical stroke at the end of I.Cret. IV 14—and vertical strokes between words and groups of words. The vertical dividing line was ubiquitous in the inscriptions of Gortyn until the end of the 6th century B.C. In some texts, it occurs between every word; in others it is used less often, although the word clusters thus formed do not always correspond to what we might identify as syntactic or even semantic units. One common use of vertical dividing lines at Gortyn seems intended to draw the reader’s attention to the penalty for a

WRITING ON THE WALLS. THE ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT OF ARCHAIC CRETAN LAWS

183

Key for Columns I (inscription number)—I.Cret. IV (van Effenterre and Ruzé; Koerner) II (date)—I.Cret. IV (van Effenterre and Ruzé) C—century e—early m—middle l—late III (disposition of texts on walls)—block type: number of blocks (location in temple) TS—top step O—orthostate A—type A block (stretchers) B—type B block (headers) IV (organization of text)—direction of text (number of units) V (letter size) VI (notes on the disposition of texts on walls) I1

II

III

IV

V

1 (II.22; 116)

C7m–C6l (C7l)

O: 6

lines 1–5 retrograde (5)

0.05–0.12 m

2

C7m–C6l

O: 1

lines 1–3 retrograde (3) line 4?

0.055–0.07 m

3

C7m–C6l

O: 4

lines 1–5 retrograde lines (5) lines 6–8 boustrophedon beginning at right 0.04–0.10 m (1) lines 9–10 boustrophedon beginning at right (1)

4 (II.61; 117)

C7m–C6l (C7l)

B: 2

lines 1–4 retrograde (4)

0.05–0.11 m

5 (II.92)

C7m–C6l (C7l)

B: 2

lines 1–2 retrograde (2)

0.07–0.09 m

(3)2

VI

6

C7m–C6l

B: 2

lines 1–3 retrograde

0.06–0.10 m

7

C7m–C6l

B: 1

line 1 retrograde (1)

0.07–0.08 m

8 (II.11; 118)

C7m–C6l (ca. 600)

A: 15

line 1 retrograde (1)

0.065–0.12 m

11.185 m combined length

9 (II.78; 119)

C7m–C6l (C7l)

TS: 24 line 1 retrograde (1)

0.045–0.12 m

N & W sides

10

C7m–C6l

A: 44

line 1 retrograde (1)

0.17–0.25 m

41.95 m combined length; blocks p*, q*, r* inscribed over an earlier text; new clause (o–p)

11

C7m–C6l

A: 9

line 1 retrograde (1)

0.14–0.24 m

corner block (i)

12

C7m–C6l

B: 22

line 1 retrograde (1)

0.25–0.38 m

13 (I.1; 120)

C7m–C6l (C7l)

A: 12

lines 1–2 boustrophedon beginning at 0.05–0.08 m left (1+)

9+ m combined length; line 2 ends on block a; corner block m may not belong with this text

14 (I.82; 121)

C7m–C6l (C6)

A: 18

lines 1–2 boustrophedon beginning at 0.09–0.15 m right (1)

line 2 ends on block g

15 (II.23)

C7m–C6l (C7l)

A: 3

lines 1–2 boustrophedon beginning at 0.08–0.12 m right (1)

16

C7m–C6l (ca. 500)

B: 1

lines 1–2 boustrophedon beginning at 0.05–0.085 m right (1)

Figure 13.1. Inscriptions from the Temple of Apollo Pythios, Gortyn.

184

PERLMAN

17

C7m–C6l (C6l)

B: 1

lines 1–2 boustrophedon beginning at 0.08–0.11 m left (1+)

18

C7m–C6l

B: 1

lines 1–3 boustrophedon beginning at 0.08–0.10 m right (1+)

19

C7m–C6l

B: 1

lines 1–3 boustrophedon beginning at 0.07–0.11 m right (1+)

20 (II.37; 122)

C7m–C6l (ca. 550)

B: 2

lines 1–4 boustrophedon beginning at 0.06–0.11 m right (1+)

block b (a corner block?) preserves left edge of text

21 (II.38; 123)

C7m–C6l (ca. 550)

O: 2

lines 1–3 retrograde (3) lines 4–5 boustrophedon (1) lines 6–8 boustro- 0.06–0.09 m phedon (1)

NE corner

22A

C7m–C6l (ca. 550)

O: 1

lines 1–3 boustrophedon beginning at 0.075–0.09 m right (1+)

I.Cret. IV 78 inscribed over traces of 22A

22B (II.84; 124) C7m–C6l (ca. 550)

O: 1

2 vertical serpentine lines (1)

0.06–0.08 m

inscribed on NE corner together with right edge of 21; 22A and 78 inscribed on north face of orthostate

23

C7m–C6l (C6l)

O: 1

lines 1–4 retrograde (4) lines 5–8a boustrophedon (1+) lines 8b–10 retro- 0.05–0.11 m grade (3?) line 11 serpentine

left edge of the text is preserved

24

C7m–C6l

?: 1

lines 1–3 boustrophedon beginning at 0.065–0.075 m right (1+)

273

C7m–C6l

B: 1

lines 1–3 boustrophedon beginning at 0.04–0.08 m right (1+)

29

C7m–C6l

?4: 1

lines 1–3 boustrophedon beginning at 0.10–0.12 m left (1+)

30 (II.68)

C7m–C6l (C5m)

?: 1

lines 1–4 boustrophedon beginning at 0.045–0.06 m right (1+)

325

C7m–C6l

B?: 1

1ine 1 retrograde; line 2? (1?)

0.09–0.10 m

78

C5e

O: 1

boustrophedon beginning at left

0.03–0.04 m

NE corner

79

ca. 450

O: 1?

boustrophedon beginning at left

0.02–0.025 m

Cf. I.Cret. IV 144, same text (C5m–C4e) from the Odeion.

1The

small fragments Guarducci grouped together as I.Cret. IV 25 and 26 (25 and 15 fragments respectively) were all found in the vicinity of the Pythion. These fragments clearly belong to more than two texts. I.Cret. 33–38 and 40 are small fragments found reused either in private homes (33–35, 38, 40) or in the Roman Odeion (36 and 37). Their archaic letter forms suggest that they come from the Pythion. The small size of all of these fragments (I.Cret. IV 25–26; 33–38; and 40) precludes further analysis here. I.Cret. IV 28 and 39 come from Hagios Ioannis. I.Cret. IV 31 is not inscribed on a building block. Four blocks bearing inscriptions of the 5th century B.C. (I.Cret. IV 68–69; 89; and 105) were found in the vicinity of the Pythion, but it is not possible to determine conclusively if they come from the temple.

2Line

1 was clearly not inscribed by the same mason who inscribed lines 2–3.

3This

stone was found near the Church of the Mavropapas. Guarducci (I.Cret. IV, p. 83) suggests that it came from the Pythion rather than from the building whose blocks were reused in the Church, insofar as all of the texts inscribed on the latter appear to be no earlier than the 5th century B.C.

4The

block has been recut.

5Contra

Guarducci (I.Cret. IV, p. 86), the height of this block (0.225 m) does not preclude it from coming from the Pythion. For the dimensions of type B blocks, see Ricciardi 1986–1987, 26.

Figure 13.1. (continued) Inscriptions from the Temple of Apollo Pythios, Gortyn.

WRITING ON THE WALLS. THE ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT OF ARCHAIC CRETAN LAWS

Figure 13.2. I.Cret. IV 22B.

185

186

PERLMAN

particular offense by creating a two-word cluster consisting of a cardinal number and a unit of value (e.g., I.Cret. IV 21, lines 7–8: | pevnte levbhta" |; see also I.Cret. IV 1, lines 1d–f and 3d–f; I.Cret. IV 8e–f). The modern comma probably provides the closest parallel for its use. We may at the least conclude that it was meant to serve as an aid to the reader. I.Cret. IV 21 (Fig. 13.3) incorporates several other organizational and syntactic strategies found elsewhere in the Pythion laws. The text is inscribed on two joining blocks of the lowest (orthostate) course at the north corner of the east (front) wall of the temple. A torus molding delimits the right edge of the text. The inscription clearly continued to the left on additional orthostate blocks, although presumably not beyond the doorway of the temple (for a facsimile drawing of I.Cret. IV 21, see Guarducci 1950, 76; for a reconstruction of the façade of the temple, see Ricciardi 1986–1987, fig. 22). The text of I.Cret. IV 21 consists of six retrograde lines (lines 1–4, 6, and 8) and two lines that begin at the left (lines 5 and 7). With but one possible exception (I.Cret. IV 13), all of the archaic inscriptions from Gortyn appear to begin with a retrograde line (Perlman 2002, 189–190). An initial retrograde line may stand alone, or it may be followed by either a line from the left or by another retrograde line or lines. There are no examples of two or more consecutive lines from the left. Jeffery was the first to comprehend the significance of the direction of the writing in these early laws. The texts were written boustrophedon beginning with a retrograde line. If the mason could not accommodate the unit in a single retrograde line, he continued it back again from the left and so on boustrophedon style until he reached the end of the unit. Jeffery called these units clauses—suggesting that she regarded them as separate though related units of a single law— and referred to the system as archaic paragraphing (Jeffery 1990, 44, 50, 311–313). Previous editions of I.Cret. IV 21 indicate through their use of square brackets and dashes that the text extended to the right of the torus molding. In doing so, they obscure two important points: first, that the initial words of the retrograde lines and the final words of the lines from the left are preserved; second, that asyndeton occurs at the beginning of five of the six retrograde lines (lines 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6). Although the upper part of the inscribed surface of the block carrying I.Cret. IV 21 is damaged for most of its length, the original surface and edges of the upper right corner are preserved. If I am correct about the placement of a text on a single course of

blocks, the first preserved line of I.Cret. IV 21 is almost certainly the first line of the law. If so, this text consists of five units (I–V), the beginning of each being indicated by a combination of archaic paragraphing and asyndeton (Fig. 13.3). Gagarin (1982, 135–136) has argued that asyndeton in later laws of Gortyn (I.Cret. IV 41–140) marks the beginning of a separate enactment. He suggests that in the earliest laws (I.Cret. IV 1–40) archaic paragraphing performs much the same function. Do the five units of I.Cret. IV 21 belong to a single coherent law, or are they, as Gagarin suggests, separate enactments? Although it is not possible to determine with certainty that the five units of this text belong to a single law, they do seem to treat a common subject—the rights of adopted children to inherit the property of their adoptive father (Perlman 2002, 191). Furthermore, the letter forms in all five units largely are consistent; minor differences in the shapes of letters and in their size, spacing, and depth may be attributed to the awkwardness of inscribing the lower portion of the stone’s vertical face (van Effenterre and Ruzé 1994–1995, II.38; Perlman 2002, 191–193). Thus, on the basis of content and letter forms, a reasonably strong case can be made in support of the position that the five units of I.Cret. IV 21 were part of a single enactment. Enough of the text survives of two other Pythion laws with archaic paragraphing (I.Cret. IV 1; 3) to conclude, albeit tentatively, that the several units in each belong to a single enactment (Perlman 2002, 192–193). If this observation may be generalized to include the remaining five inscriptions that seem, on the basis of archaic paragraphing, to consist of more than one unit (I.Cret. 4–6; 23; 27), it appears that the masons adhered to the “one course rule” in an attempt to help the reader navigate the laws. They also chose not to “stack” separate enactments one on top of the other on a single course of blocks, preferring instead to place a single enactment within a course on a particular section of the temple’s walls. The “one course rule” for the placement of inscriptions on the temple’s walls, punctuation, and the archaic system of paragraphing together with asyndeton all helped the reader to comprehend the text. Who were these readers? From the comparatively modest evidence for the private use of writing by Cretans before ca. 450 B.C., Whitley concludes that literacy was rare in archaic Crete, by and large restricted to professional scribes (Whitley 1997; see also Stoddart and Whitley 1988). The chronological distribution of public and private

WRITING ON THE WALLS. THE ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT OF ARCHAIC CRETAN LAWS

[. .]n mol[-----------------------------------------] . o[sti" meza[. . .]ioi [--------------------------] to'i ajnpanto'i m h[men ajnkemo[livan ------------] 4

ojmopavthr a[ k h\i kai; ojmomavthr aj[-------------] [--- aij de; k oj m]e;n patro'ia molh'i oj d ajla'i. ai[ k ajnpotevro" i[onti oij maivture["-----------] [--- dikav]ze[n] ajto;" ejpairh'i pevnte levb-

8 I(1) II(2) III(3) IV(4–5) V(6–8)

hta" katasta'sai. aij dev ka mol[h' . i] t[------] The plaintiff? defendant?— Whoever presents himself for arbitration?— Ankemolia does not apply to an adopted son— If a woman with the same father and the same mother—if one contends that the property is paternal and another objects. If witnesses for both are present—(if) he himself chooses? to decide, he (the plaintiff? defendant?) shall deposit 5 cauldrons. But if he contests—

Line 1. [to;]n mol[iv . omenon]? For to;n molivonta, cf. I.Cret. IV 165, line 12. The use of . onta] or [to;]n mol[iv the plural neuter passive participle (ta; moliovmena) in the sense of “pleading” is attested (I.Cret. IV 42B3; 72v44, vi55, xi30), although this use of the singular is not. The use of the vertical line between an article and its substantive is rare. The only other example from the Pythion texts occurs in I.Cret. IV 6, line 2. [o]]]" mol[. - - ]: is also possible, although in legal texts the relative is usually used indefinitely with ke. For an example of its use without ke, see I.Cret. IV 72iii54–55. Line 2 mevza[to"] i[oi: Comparetti and Bechtel in I.Cret. IV, followed by van Effenterre and Ruzé 1994–1995, II.38. Line 3. ajnkemoliva: actions concerning or against a relative? (Martínez-Fernández 1983, 179–180, “no se entablará proceso contra el hijo adoptive.”). Cf. Bile 1988, 351, “procès que l’on engage pour un proche parent”; van Effenterre and Ruzé 1994–1995, II.38, “il n’y a pas d’intervention familiale.” The term also occurs in I.Cret. IV 44, a law concerning heiresses. Line 4. There is a mark to the right of the initial omikron of ojmopavthr which somewhat resembles a lambda—although the horizontal stroke is longer and drawn at a more oblique angle than usual in the Pythion texts—or less closely a gamma. I cannot explain its presence. a[ k : van Effenterre and Ruzé 1994–1995, II.38: “If she has the same father and the same mother”; Hesych. aj dev ka: oJtavn. Line 7. ejpairh'i: van Effenterre and Ruzé 1994–1995, II.38: “être poussé à” or “choisir de”; the subject of the verb may be either the arbitrator of line 2 who receives an honorarium of 5 lebetes or a judge in which case the 5 lebetes should be regarded as a deposit on the fine or as court costs. Figure 13.3. I.Cret. IV 21.

187

188

PERLMAN

writing on Crete, however, indicates an increase in the private use of writing and literacy during the 6th century B.C. (Perlman 2002, 194–196). Furthermore, writing was used for private purposes by members of those communities where the public use of writing also is attested. These two conclusions combine to suggest that literacy was not the exclusive possession of a narrow scribal class as Whitley maintains. At a minimum, it seems likely that the officials who judged cases (kosmos, ksenios kosmos) and those who enforced the penalties (titai) were the intended audience for the Pythion laws (Perlman 2002, 196– 197, 204). The law restricting iteration of the kosmate and other offices (I.Cret. IV 14) excludes a number of Gortynians from consideration each year, which indicates that there was a fairly large pool of community members eligible to hold these positions (Perlman 2002, 197). Furthermore, a provision in a law concerning injuries to or damages caused by livestock (I.Cret. IV 1) indicates that the intended audience may have been broader still. This provision, which seems to address how the plaintiff was to bring an action, suggests that not only Gortynian officials, but also litigants and potential litigants, would have cause to consult the laws. The inscribing of laws on temple walls, perhaps the most tangible expression of the intersection of law and religion, has been explained in terms of divine enforcement. In the early state, only the gods exercised sufficient authority to ensure the enforcement of the laws (Hölkeskamp 1992, 99– 102; Thomas 1995, 73–74). A divine role in lawgiving, a role which is first made explicit by Plato in the Laws (Plat. Laws 624A–625A), has in general been rejected in modern discussions of law and religion in ancient Greece. The gods enforce the laws, but they do not make them (Burkert 1984, 248–249; see also Gagarin 1986, 60). The laws inscribed on the Pythion do not refer to the authorities who were responsible for their formulation or enactment. This is clear in I.Cret. IV 21, which begins abruptly with the first provision of

the law. Although it is not certain that this is the case for the other Pythion laws, it is remarkable that there is no legislative language in any of the numerous surviving fragments. In contrast, four of the eight inscriptions that survive from the walls of the temple of Apollo Delphinios at Dreros begin with the verb e[üade, “[it] found favor with.” In one case, the verb stands alone (Fig. 13.4, no. 2), but in the remaining three, e[üade is either followed or immediately preceded by its dative object. The polis, probably in the sense of citizen assembly, appears in two examples: e[üade povli (Fig. 13.4, no. 1); povli e[üade dialhvsasi pula'si (Fig. 13.4, no. 7). In the fourth example (Fig. 13.4, no. 5) the polis is not mentioned, but rather a group of officials, the ithyntai: e[üade toi'" ijqunta'[s]i. Van Effenterre and Ruzé connect ijqunta'[s]i with ijquvnein (Attic eujquvnein) and suggest the meaning “redresseurs” (van Effenterre and Ruzé 1994–1995, I.27; see also ijqunth'[ra] in I.Cret. IV 323). Apart from Dreros, the same or very similar language occurs at, or close to the beginning of, the public enactments of at least two and possibly three other Cretan poleis during the Archaic period: certainly at Aphrati (SEG XXVII, 631) and Lyktos (SEG XXXV 991A; B), and possibly at Eltynia (I.Cret. I.x.2; see also Axos, I.Cret. II.v.1). On present evidence, e[üade with the dative might be considered the standard enactment formula of the archaic Cretan poleis. The role of the enacting bodies in the legislative process of these archaic Cretan poleis—as drafters of the laws, promulgators, or both—is not clear. Surely it is significant that in contrast to these other poleis where public institutions and the legislative act figure prominently in their publications, the earliest laws of Gortyn do not disclose anything about their genesis. Inscribed on the walls of the temple of Apollo Pythios, the Pythion laws might just as well be understood as divine or oracular pronouncements rather than as legislative acts of the political community. It can only be guessed what this silence suggests about public authority at Gortyn in the late 7th and 6th centuries B.C. or about Gortynian attitudes concerning the writing down of laws.

Axos From October 23 to December 6, 1899, Halbherr and de Sanctis conducted excavations at two locations at the site of ancient Axos on the northern

slopes of Mt. Ida. They dug on the presumed acropolis of the polis, in the vicinity of a group of wall blocks bearing archaic inscriptions (Comparetti

WRITING ON THE WALLS. THE ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT OF ARCHAIC CRETAN LAWS

1888, cols. 129–144 nos. 1–5; cols. 147– 150 nos. 7–8; I.Cret. II.v.1–4, 6–7, 11, and probably I.Cret. II.v.5) and in the saddle below and to the east of the acropolis site. In two brief excavation reports (Halbherr 1899; Savignoni 1900), there was little discussion of the urban context of these buildings. At the acropolis site, Halbherr and de Sanctis excavated the remains of a small, nearly square temple, oriented roughly southwest by northeast. Neither this temple nor the one they excavated in the saddle to its east has been published fully. Indeed, for the acropolis site, in addition to the two excavation reports noted above, there is only a very rough sketch map of the excavated area, a photograph of the southwest corner of the temple, and Levi’s brief description of the excavations (Levi 1930–1931, 44–48, figs. 3, 4). A large open area (ca. 100 m2) extends to the southwest of the temple. The discovery there of a layer of black earth mixed with animal bones, terracotta animal figurines, and fragments of storage jars, together with a stepped altar carved directly out of the bedrock, indicates that the temple probably was entered from this direction, although no trace of a door appears to have been found in the southwest wall of the structure. Additional evidence of sacrifice or dining comes from a cistern located to the northwest of the temple. Excavations there revealed a large number of sherds described by Levi (1930–1931, 48) as “non caratteristici,” and a great quantity of animal remains—deer and gazelle antlers, the jaw bones and horns of agrimi, and boar and cow bones. In 1961, Jeffery indicated that the seven archaic inscriptions from the acropolis site were in the Herakleion Museum (Jeffery 1961, 316 no. 22). In 1990, I was unable to locate them there. Nor are there photographs of the inscriptions, apart from one of a cast of the larger fragment of the right hand block of I.Cret. II.v.1 (Jeffery 1990, pl. 60, no. 22). Halbherr’s facsimile drawings of the inscribed surfaces indicate that, in some cases, the right and left faces of the stones are parallel to each other and perpendicular to the bottom face (I.Cret. II.v.1, 4–7; 11); in others, the side faces are irregular and form a dog-leg (I.Cret. II.v.1). In all cases, the top and bottom faces of the blocks are parallel to each other. This suggests that even though the masonry style was, strictly speaking, polygonal, it is possible nonetheless to refer to masonry courses. The masonry style of the inscribed blocks is very different from the rough polygonal masonry of the blocks that were excavated in situ (Levi 1930–1931,

189

47, fig. 4). The very rough finish of the latter prompted Levi (1930–1931, 46) to question whether the extant portions of the walls were ever visible or if they were, in fact, originally below ground level. This seems unlikely, insofar as at the time of the excavation portions of the southwest wall were preserved to a height of nearly 2.50 m. These observations suggest either that different styles of masonry were used in the walls of the structure, or that the inscribed blocks did not come from the temple. The documentation of the excavation, such as it is, does not reveal where, precisely, the inscribed blocks were found in relation to the temple. Levi (1930–1931, 47) did note that one uninscribed block, located at the northeast corner of the temple, looked like the inscribed blocks that had been found nearby, “ . . . l’unico (sc. the block at the northeast corner) che offriva un aspetto lavorato somigliante a quello dei blocchi poligonali iscritti.” He did not indicate how high up in the wall the block was located. Nor is it possible to determine from his description whether the shape of the block, its surface treatment, or both resembled the inscribed blocks. Jeffery (1990, 314) placed the inscriptions in the final quarter of the 6th century B.C. They provide the only evidence for the date of this temple; if the inscriptions come from another structure in the vicinity of the temple, there is no means of dating it. Nor do we know the identity of the god or gods worshipped there, although Apollo, perhaps surnamed Oaxios or Pythios, is a likely candidate (Perlman 2000, 73–74). No matter from what structure the inscribed blocks at the acropolis site originally came, the letters in all seven inscriptions are very similar in both form (Jeffery 1990, 308: aI, b2, g2, ü5, dI, e2&3, hI, q2, 12, kI, l2, mI, nI, p5, r2&3, u3) and size (0.07–0.09 m), suggesting that they were all inscribed by the same mason and perhaps as part of a single “inscribing program.” Jeffery (1990, 316) maintained that the eight acropolis inscriptions belonged to a “law code” inscribed by a single mason on the walls of the acropolis temple. Because we have neither the stones themselves nor photographs of them, any assessment of letter forms must rely on Halbherr’s drawings. Nonetheless, beyond using the same letter forms, the hand(s) in all seven inscriptions, as drawn by Halbherr, is almost indistinguishable (for facsimile drawings, see Guarducci 1939). Jeffery suggested that the archaic inscriptions of Axos belonged to one of three “codes”: I.Cret. II.v.12–14 (early 6th century B.C., inscribed on the

190

PERLMAN

acropolis temple); I.Cret. II.v.1–7, 11 (ca. 525–500 B.C.?, inscribed on the acropolis temple); Jeffery 1949–1950, 34–36 (ca. 525–500 B.C.?, inscribed on the temple in the saddle). Guarducci attributed I.Cret. II.v.12–14 to either the acropolis temple or the temple in the saddle. Of these inscriptions, the only one with a secure provenience and, at that, a secondary use, is I.Cret. II.v.14c, found re-used in the temple in the saddle. Halbherr, upon whose unpublished notes Guarducci depended in preparing her editions of these inscriptions, did not identify their precise findspots. Except for I.Cret. II.v.14c, they may be earlier than the inscriptions from the acropolis, but there is no reason to associate them with one of the two known structures from Axos nor to suggest that they belong together. Indeed, the style of the letters in e.g., I.Cret. II.v.12A looks very different from the style of those in 12B, and both 12A and 12B look quite unlike the letters in I.Cret. II.v.13. The acropolis texts are inscribed boustrophedon. Insofar as there are no examples of two or more consecutive lines that read in the same direction, it would seem that the masons did not, as was the case at Gortyn and Dreros, employ a system of archaic paragraphing. The vertical dividing line appears in all of the acropolis texts with the possible exception of I.Cret. II.v.3. It tends to occur before the first word of a new clause (I.Cret. II.v.1, lines 4, 11, 12, 14; 2, line 8; 6, line 6), although this is not always the case (I.Cret. II.v.1, lines 5, 7, 11). One text (I.Cret. II.v.1) is inscribed across two joining blocks belonging to the same course. In all other cases where the original left or right edge of the inscribed stone is preserved, it appears that the text continued onto a now missing contiguous block (or blocks) (I.Cret. II.v. 4, 5, 6, 7, 11). Although no joins between blocks belonging to two courses survive, in one case where the upper edge of the block is preserved (I.Cret. II.v.6), the first surviving line begins at the right; in the remaining cases, the first surviving line begins at the left (I.Cret. II.v.1, 4, 7). It is unlikely that texts sometimes began at the left and other times at the right. This pattern, and the observation that in two texts (I.Cret. II.v.5, 7) the letters in the final line appear to be cut off at the bottom, indicate that the masons at Axos did not respect the joins between courses. It is not possible, then, to conclude that the first extant line of any of the archaic inscriptions from Axos is the actual first line of the text, although a case can be made for interpreting the first two lines of I.Cret. II.v.1 as part of an enactment formula: [---]

üko" | i[nanti to'n e³i[---|---]in doke`n ajksiva h[men ta'" t[ropa'" ---], “[---] in the presence of the --- seem to be worthy of tax exemption and sustenance [---].” There are no parallels for this language on Crete; the standard archaic enactment formula across the island was e[üade with the enacting body in the dative. Yet, it should be noted that despite the apparently widespread use of this formula, there is quite a bit of variation within the pattern. Consider, for example, the formula in the late Archaic inscription from Aphrati, the so-called Spensithios Decree (SEG XXVII 631, lines 1–2): e[üade Dataleu'si kai; ejspevnsame" povli"| Spensiqivwi ajpo; pula'n pevnte ajp j ejkavsta", “The following found favor with the Dataleis, and we the polis (represented by) five (men) from each tribe guarantee Spensithios . . .” Disagreement over the interpretation of these lines, especially over the relationship of the Datalei'" and the povli", and the significance of the shift from third person singular (e[üade) to first person plural (ejspevnsame"), continues (van Effenterre and Ruzé 1994–1995, I.2, 102–107). But it usually is agreed that the “five from each tribe” was a representative group that did the pledging (ejspevnsame") on behalf of the povli". The Dataleis enacted the decree and a representative group based upon the tribal organization of the polis pledged to respect the decision. Perhaps an e[üade clause occurred in the missing portion of the first line of I.Cret. II.v.1 or in a line that was inscribed on the block above, together with details concerning a pledge to recognize the decree that was made in the presence (i[nanti) of witnesses. For this use of e[nanti we might compare an early 2nd century B.C. manumission decree from Delphi (SGDI 2072, lines 27–28). Two 3rd century B.C. decrees of Gortyn suggest, as an alternative, that what followed i[nanti was perhaps a reference to the quorum, presumably of the assembly or polis, required for the enactment of a decree (I.Cret. IV 162; 181: yafivddonsi triakativwn pariovntwn, “voting, three hundred being present”). In 1950, Jeffery published part of an archaic text inscribed on two adjoining fragments of hard, dark gray limestone which were said to have come from the acropolis at Axos (Jeffery 1949–1950, 34–36). She dated this inscription to the same period as the acropolis texts (ca. 525–500 B.C.) and identified it as a law. The text is inscribed boustrophedon. The first preserved line begins at the right. Both the boustrophedon style and the treatment of the stone’s left surface suggest that

WRITING ON THE WALLS. THE ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT OF ARCHAIC CRETAN LAWS

the text did not continue on another stone to the left. It is impossible to determine if the same is true of the text to the right of, above, or below the extant stone. The stone bearing this inscription is considerably thinner (0.093 m), and the letters considerably smaller (0.015–0.020 m), than those of the acropolis inscriptions. Despite the stone’s thinness, the fact that the text continues down to its lower edge suggests that the stone is a wall block rather than a free-standing stele. These observations led Jeffery to propose that the stone came from a wall of the temple in the saddle below the acropolis. Although there are no other grounds for associating the block with this temple, there is some reason to suspect that laws were published on its walls during the Archaic period. The temple in the saddle, long and narrow in plan, was oriented north-south with its entrance at the south end (Levi 1930–1931, 49–57, with fig. 6). Two radically different construction techniques indicate that the structure was renovated or remodeled at least once. Levi assigned the earlier of the two phases to the Hellenistic period and the later to the Roman period. A sanctuary was located in this area from at least the beginning of the 7th century B.C., as indicated by deposits of Archaic terracotta figurines mixed together with ash and bone fragments excavated to the south of the temple (Rizza 1967–1968, esp. 274–290; Brookes 1978) and three deposits consisting largely of bronze armor and weapons found outside of the temple to the east of the pronaos and cella (Levi 1930–1931; Hoffmann and Raubitschek 1972, esp. 41–46). The long, narrow plan of the temple, and the reuse of a block bearing part of an archaic inscription (I.Cret. II.v.13c) in the interior of the south wall of the temple, suggest that an archaic temple once stood there. Jeffery dated the inscription, of

191

which only three letters inscribed retrograde (RUK) survive, to the early 6th century B.C., although the forms of the rho (R2) and the upsilon (U3) are the same as those found in the inscriptions from the acropolis that she dated ca. 525–500 B.C. (Jeffery 1990, 316 no. 21). If the inscribed block originally did come from the archaic predecessor of this temple and not from another archaic building at Axos, it provides a terminus ante quem of ca. 500 B.C. for the archaic structure (as well as proof that inscriptions were cut on its walls), and a terminus post quem of ca. 525 B.C. for the earlier phase of remodeling. The figurine types from the sanctuary deposits suggest that the deity worshipped there was a goddess. Rizza (1967–1968, 291–293) proposes that a late Geometric cult of the undifferentiated goddess of nature, fertility, and war became associated with a single function and a single goddess in the course of the early Archaic period. The majority of the figurines belong to the standard Astarte and Kore types. A few of the less common ones indicate that the aspect of the goddess emphasized at the sanctuary was female sexuality. Rizza identifies her as Aphrodite. The deposits of votive armor suggest that the martial aspect of the goddess was also recognized. What is perhaps the earliest of the bronze votives, a mitra that Hoffmann dates ca. 640–630 B.C., is decorated with the incised image of an armed goddess emerging from a tripod (Hoffmann and Raubischek 1972, 36–38, pls. 43, 44, 45). Hoffman identifies her as Athene, although she might just as well be an armed Eastern goddess or Aphrodite. Neither Aphrodite nor Athene is attested in the inscriptions of Axos or depicted on her coins. Whoever the goddess was, if her temple did carry public inscriptions of the archaic polis, hers is the only temple of a goddess known to have done so on Crete.

Dreros What are arguably the earliest inscribed laws of Crete come from Dreros. The urban center of the polis was situated on the north slopes of the two easternmost summits of Timios Stavros and in the saddle between these heights (Xanthoudides 1918; Marinatos 1936; Demargne and van Effenterre 1937a). During the excavation in 1936, thirteen inscribed blocks were uncovered in a large cistern

in the saddle (Demargne and van Effenterre 1937a, 27–32; 1937b; van Effenterre 1946a). A dedication, also found in the fill of the cistern, dates its construction to the kosmate of Kuias, Kephalos, Purhos, Pios, and Bision (Demargne and van Effenterre 1937a, 29–32). The same kosmoi were in office when the civic oath of Dreros (I.Cret. I.ix.1) was enacted, probably at the beginning of the Lyttian

192

PERLMAN

war, ca. 220 B.C. (Chaniotis 1996, 195–201). The destruction of the building whose walls carried the inscriptions is likely to have occurred sometime thereafter. The cistern occupies the center of a large terrace (Demargne and van Effenterre 1937a, pl. 1). The Geometric temple where the famous bronze sphyrelaton figures (of Leto, Apollo, and Artemis?) were found is situated at a higher elevation to the northwest of the terrace. Steps along the south side of the terrace, with short northern returns at both ends, delimited the terrace to the south. Eight steps are preserved in the southwest corner (Demargne and van Effenterre 1937a, 10). A narrow stairway in the northwest corner of the terrace leads directly to a small open area in front of the temple (see Marinatos 1936, 229). The dedication from the cistern appears to acknowledge Apollo Delphinios as the divine patron of the construction project (su;[n t]w'i jApevllwni Delfinivwi . . . sunete(l)evsqh oj lavkko"), and the temple has been identified as belonging to this god (Marinatos 1936, 253–255). He was clearly one of the most important gods of Dreros; his name appears fourth in the list of oath gods in the Hellenistic civic oath of the polis (I.Cret. I.ix.1, lines 15–21). Discussions of the construction techniques, plan, and interior features of the temple abound (most recently Mazarakis Ainian 1997, 216–218, figs. 453–460; with earlier bibliography 216 n. 1705). I limit my discussion here to a few points that directly concern the architectural context of the archaic laws. The inscriptions were cut upon largely unworked though roughly rectangular blocks of dark gray limestone. The blocks found in situ in the east, west, and south walls of the Geometric temple are similarly dressed but smaller (rarely more than 0.70 m long) than the inscribed blocks from the cistern (Marinatos 1936, 222; for the dimensions of the inscribed blocks, see Fig. 13.4, col. III). The blocks from the north wall (façade), on the other hand, do not resemble those found elsewhere in the temple; they form regular courses and are of a larger, more uniform size (0.80 x 0.50 x 0.15–0.20 m) with nicely dressed exterior faces (Marinatos 1936, 221–220). Demargne and van Effenterre (1937b, 333) concluded that the inscribed blocks originally came from the long east wall of the temple, closest to the cistern, and current evidence confirms that this is their most likely context. The temple was not a freestanding structure, but rather was part of a larger architectural complex that kept the exterior of the temple’s west and south walls hidden from public

view (Mazarakis Ainian 1997, 217–218). The east wall would have been visible to people from the lower terrace which, prior to the construction of the cistern at the end of the 3rd century B.C., was most likely an open space where the assembly or other political or judicial bodies of Dreros convened. The stairs along the southern side of the terrace could have accommodated such meetings. Perhaps the temple’s builders used larger blocks in the east wall to give this most visible side of the structure a greater monumentality. Ten of the thirteen inscribed blocks were broken in antiquity, perhaps when thrown into the cistern sometime after the 3rd century B.C. Joins among these ten broken blocks yielded five largely complete blocks. The remaining three blocks are for the most part complete. The thirteen inscribed blocks, then, comprise eight inscriptions. The texts are short; half of them begin at the right and consist of two or three boustrophedon lines (Fig. 13.4, nos. 3, 4, 6, 7). One text (Fig. 13.4, no. 5) is composed of three consecutive retrograde lines. Another, consisting of two boustrophedon lines, begins at the right with the lower of the two lines and then continues back from the left in the upper line (Fig. 13.4, no. 2). The longest and most complex text (Fig. 13.4, no. 1) includes four lines plus the mysterious QIOSOLOION inscribed retrograde in small letters between lines one and two (see van Effenterre and Ruzé 1994–1995, I.81, with earlier bibliography). The first three lines are boustrophedon beginning from the right. A vacat follows the end of line three. Line four begins again at the right with a punctuation sign in the form of a “labrys” to mark the beginning of a new paragraph. This is the only one of the Delphinion texts that uses archaic paragraphing. The vertical line as punctuation is used occasionally, either between individual words or clusters of words. It follows the enactment clause in three of four examples (Fig. 13.4, nos. 1, 2, 7). Asyndeton does not occur, apart from the absence of a coordinating word following the enactment clause in at least two or possibly three cases (Fig. 13.4, nos. 2, 4?, 7). This is not surprising insofar as the majority of the laws are very short, consisting at most of two clauses. Its absence is, however, significant in the longest of the laws (Fig. 13.4, no. 1), where we do find archaic paragraphing. Although most of the texts are quite legible, their interpretation has been the subject of considerable disagreement. This is due in part to uncertainty as to whether the texts began or continued on other, now missing, stones. Did the masons inscribe their

WRITING ON THE WALLS. THE ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT OF ARCHAIC CRETAN LAWS

193

Key for Columns I II III IV V VI

(Figure number)—SEG (ed. prin.; Nomima = van Effenterre and Ruzé 1994–1995) (facsimile) (block)—description; size: w.; h.; th. (organization of text)—direction of text (number of units) (letter size; engraving technique) (subject)

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

1 SEG XXVII 620 (BCH 61 [1937] 333–348; Nomima I.81)

lines 1–3 boustroone block broken in phedon beginning at law on iteration of BCH 61 (1937) 334 two; 1.74 m; 0.25 m; 0.02–0.05 m; chisel right; line 4 retrothe kosmate 0.35 m grade

2 SEG XXIII 530 (BCH 70 [1946] 597–600, no. 3; Nomima I.68, pp. 280–281; Nomima II.89)

one block; 1.31 m; lines 1–2 boustro0.02–0.06 m; punch law concerning the BCH 70 (1946) 597 0.31–0.335 m; 0.27 phedon beginning at and hammer agela or hunting m lower right

3 SEG XV 564 (BCH one block; 0.99 m; 70 [1946] 602–603, BCH 70 (1946) 602 0.23 m; 0.23 m no. 5; Nomima II.10)

lines 1–2 boustro0.02–0.06 m; punch law concerning the phedon beginning at and hammer oath? right

4 (BCH 70 [1946] 588–590, no. 3; Nomima I.66)

one block broken in lines 1–2 boustrolaw? mentioning the BCH 70 (1946) 589 two; 1.08 m; 0.21 m; phedon beginning at 0.02–0.05 m; chisel Milatioi and the 0.35 m right Prepsidai

5 (BCH 70 [1946] 600–602, no. 4; Nomima I.27)

one block broken in 0.035–0.05 m; BCH 70 (1946) 600 two; 0.57 m; 0.195 lines 1–3 retrograde punch and hammer m; 0.24 m

6 (BCH 70 [1946] 603–604, no. 6)

BCH 70 (1946) 603

7 (BCH 70 [1946] 590–597, no. 2; Nomima I.64)

one block broken in lines 1–2 boustro0.02–0.06 m; punch law involving the BCH 70 (1946) 591 two; 1.03 m; 0.20 m; phedon beginning at and hammer “assembler” 0.17 m right

8 (RPhil 20 [1946] 131–138)

one block; 0.75 m; RPhil 20 (1946) 131 0.26 m; 0.245 m

one block; 0.74 m; 0.25 m; 0.30 m

law concerning a salary

lines 1–3 boustro0.02–0.06 m; punch phedon beginning at list of sacrifices? and hammer right

lines 1–2 retrograde; lines 3–5 boustrophe-don beginning at right

Figure 13.4. Inscriptions from the Temple of Apollo Delphinios, Dreros.

lines 1–2: 0.02–0.05 m; chisel; lines 3–5: Eteocretan text 0.015–0.03 m; punch and hammer

194

PERLMAN Fig. 4, no. 1

Fig. 4, no. 2

Fig. 4, no. 3

Fig. 4, no. 4

Fig. 4, no. 5

start

✔

❋

❋

✔

end

✔

✔

✔

✔

wrap-around

✔

✔

✔

✔

Fig. 4, no. 6

Fig. 4, no. 7

Fig. 4, no. 8

✔ ✔

❋

❋

Figure 13.5. “Indications of Completeness” in the Delphinion Laws.

texts across contiguous blocks in a single horizontal “course,” as was the case at Gortyn, did they ignore the joins between courses as the masons of Axos appear to have done, or did they inscribe each enactment on a single block? The disposition of the texts on the walls of the temple is an important matter because it concerns not only how we restore and interpret the texts, but also our understanding of the complexity and style of these earliest inscribed laws. There is no question that Fig. 13.4, no. 1, the longest and most complex of the texts, is complete. Three “indications of completeness” (Fig. 13.5) facilitate an understanding of how the other texts were inscribed on the walls. What may be a complete enactment formula (e[üade alone or with the enacting body in the dative) suggests that the beginning of at least three of the texts is preserved (Fig. 13.4, nos. 1, 5, 7). A vacat follows the final preserved word in five of the inscriptions (Fig. 13.4, nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7). This does not necessarily mean that we have the end of these texts. As already noted, a vacat following the end of Fig. 13.4, no. 1, line 3 represents the end of a paragraph rather than the end of the text. However, in two cases there appears to be room on the stone for another line of text either below (Fig. 13.4, no. 7) or above (Fig. 13.4, no. 2) the final preserved line, which suggests that in these two examples the vacat does indeed mark the end of the text. In the case of three inscriptions (Fig. 13.4, nos. 2, 3, 4), the boustrophedon demonstrates that the text did not continue on a stone to the left. Of the four inscriptions that consist of three or more boustrophedon lines (Fig. 13.4, nos. 1, 3, 6, 8), only in the case of Fig. 13.4, no. 1 does the text certainly wrap around the right edge of the stone. This determination cannot be made in two of the remaining three texts (Fig. 13.4, nos. 3, 8) because the inscribed surface is lost at the right side of the stone. Thus, five of the eight texts possess two of the three features (beginning of text, end of text, wrap-around text), suggesting that the entire text was inscribed on a single stone. If we include in our analysis the less certain “indications of completeness” (marked with an asterisk in Fig. 13.5), then four of the texts

include all three of the indicative features (Fig. 13.4, nos. 1, 2, 4, 7), while an additional two include at least two of them (Fig. 13.4, nos. 3, 5). Only Fig. 13.4, nos. 6 and 8 exhibit none of the indications that the texts were inscribed on a single stone. This is not altogether surprising in the case of no. 8, insofar as the text is probably Eteocretan (Duhoux 1982, 44; see also van Effenterre 1946b). These observations suggest that the masons used the surface of a single block for each text, a theory that is strengthened somewhat by two further points. First, the longest text was inscribed on the largest block (Fig. 13.4, no. 1). Second, the absence of regular courses and dressed surfaces may have discouraged the masons from attempting to inscribe their texts across the irregular joins and faces of two or more blocks. The “one block rule” would have functioned like a column of boustrophedon text by permitting the reader to stand in one spot. It is worth contemplating how these physical constraints may have encouraged those who drafted the laws to keep them concise. Like the laws from the temple of Apollo Pythios at Gortyn, but unlike the acropolis laws from Axos, the laws from Dreros appear to have been inscribed in a piecemeal fashion as the occasion arose. Although the letter size is fairly consistent in all of these inscriptions, as is the alphabet, the letter forms vary somewhat between inscriptions, and two different methods of engraving (with a chisel or with a punch and hammer) were used (Fig. 13.4, col. V). Jeffery (1990, 311) dated the entire group of eight inscriptions from Dreros to ca. 650–600 B.C. Duhoux (1982, 28–29) also placed these inscriptions between ca. 650–600 B.C., arranging them in three chronological groups based upon the criteria of inscribing technique, use of punctuation, and the occurence of early or late features including letter forms, archaic paragraphing, and the “labrys” punctuation mark. His observation that the use of the punch and hammer seems to coincide with late features is intriguing. McDonald (1956, 70) noted that this method of inscribing pulverizes the limestone, leaving much lighter, almost white dots resulting in very clear

WRITING ON THE WALLS. THE ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT OF ARCHAIC CRETAN LAWS

letters that preserved their freshness until they were discovered in the 20th century. If, as seems reasonable, such clarity was the desired effect of the technique, and if Duhoux is correct in identifying the technique as a late feature, it is possible to conclude that after a period of experimentation

195

the masons discovered the best way to render their letters legible. In short, this technique of inscribing suggests, as does the “one block rule,” that the masons of Dreros worked with the reader in mind.

Conclusion This study of the architectural context of archaic Cretan law began with an examination of the laws inscribed on the temple of Apollo Pythios at Gortyn, in particular their arrangement and internal organization. Several characteristics of these laws— their use of punctuation and asyndeton, the system of archaic paragraphing, and the placement of each law on a single course of wall blocks—were interpreted as strategies designed to help a reader isolate and comprehend the individual enactments. A number of these same characteristics, or variations of them, were identified in the archaic laws from Axos and Dreros. Masons at both places used the vertical dividing line as punctuation, although there appear to have been some differences in its position and in the frequency of its use. Archaic paragraphing occurs at Dreros only in the longest of the laws, and asyndeton only follows the enactment formula. Neither paragraphing nor asyndeton appears in the laws of Axos. Reasons for these differences may be local (e.g., Axos possibly never used archaic paragraphing or asyndeton), chronological (e.g., the acropolis texts from Axos are, as a group, the latest of the three corpora of archaic laws examined here), or stylistic (e.g., the majority of the laws from Dreros are simple rules concisely stated). The tendency to fill the available space, sometimes with very large letters, as we find at Gortyn, is paralleled at Dreros with the use of the hammer and punch; both practices contributed to the legibility of the texts. If the objective of these conventions was to produce “user-friendly” texts, this should be taken into account when considering why laws were first written down in public places.

By paying close attention to the disposition of the laws on the walls of the temple of Apollo Pythios at Gortyn, a hitherto unidentified yet distinctive feature, namely the absence of an enactment formula, was recognized. This characteristic suggests that neither the polis as a political community, nor its institutions, was willing (or able?) to take responsibility for the formulation and enactment of laws, even though the laws themselves indicate an advance in the authority of the state over the lives of its members. Dreros, whose earliest laws acknowledge the role of the polis and its institutions in the enactment of its laws, and possibly Axos provide counter-examples and show that the political culture of the early Cretan poleis was not homogeneous across the island. Finally, throughout the Archaic period, each of these three communities inscribed all or most of their laws on a single building. In the case of Gortyn that building was the temple of Apollo Pythios, which was located at some distance from the Archaic agora (Perlman 2000, 72–73). The laws of Dreros were inscribed on the temple of Apollo Delphinios, which was situated adjacent to, and was visible from, an open terrace with theatral steps that may have served as a public meeting place for the early polis. Because so little is known about the topography of ancient Axos, no claims can be made about the urban context of the building—probably a temple and perhaps that of Apollo—that carried most of the archaic laws of this polis. In light of the different urban contexts of these temples, the decision to inscribe laws on them should perhaps be understood as an expression of the linkage of written law and Apollo.

196

PERLMAN

Acknowledgments My talk at the Crete 2000 conference focused on the temple of Apollo Pythios at Gortyn. A considerably longer version of this talk appears as the second of a two-part study of early Gortyn (Perlman 2002). The discussion of the architectural context of

the laws from Axos and Dreros included in this essay was written after the conference. In this essay the upright virgule represents a vertical dividing line (ancient punctuation) and not a line-end (modern editorial convention).

Bibliography “American Expedition to Krete Under Professor Halbherr.” 1894. AJA 9, pp. 538–544.

Hoffmann, H., and A.E. Raubitschek. 1972. Early Cretan Armorers, Mainz on the Rhine.

Bile, M. 1988. Le dialecte crétois anciens (Etudes crétoises 27), Paris.

Hölkeskamp, K.-J. 1992. “Written Law in Archaic Greece,” PCPS n.s. 38, pp. 87–117.

Boyd, H.A. 1901. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete in 1900,” AJA 5, pp. 125–157.

Jeffery, L.H. 1949–1950. “Comments on Some Archaic Greek Inscriptions,” JHS 69–70, pp. 25–38.

Brookes, A.C. 1978. The Chronology and Development of Daedalic Sculpture, Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania.

–––––––. 1961. The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece. A Study of the Origin of the Greek Alphabet and its Development from the Eighth to the Fifth Centuries B.C., Oxford.

Burkert, W. 1984. Greek Religion, Cambridge, Mass.

–––––––. 1990. The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece. A Study of the Origin of the Greek Alphabet and its Development from the Eighth to the Fifth Centuries B.C., revised by A. W. Johnston, Oxford.

Chaniotis, A. 1996. Die Verträge zwischen kretischen Poleis in der hellenistichen Zeit, Stuttgart. Comparetti, D. 1888. “Epigrafi archaiche di varie città cretesi,” in Museo italiano di antiquità classica 2, Florence, cols. 129–180. Demargne, P., and H. van Effenterre. 1937a. “Recherches à Dréros,” BCH 61, pp. 5–32. –––––––. 1937b. “Recherches à Dréros, II. Les inscriptions archaïques,” BCH 61, pp. 333–348. Di Vita, A. 1991. “Gortina in èta geometrica,” in La Transizione dal Miceneo all’Alto Archaismo: dal palazzo alla città, D. Musti, A. Sacconi, and L. Rocchetti, eds., Rome, pp. 309–319. Duhoux, Y. 1982. L’étéocrétois. Les textes, la langue, Amsterdam. Gagarin, M. 1982. “The Organization of the Gortyn Law Code,” GRBS 23, pp. 129–146. –––––––. 1986. Early Greek Law, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London. Guarducci, M. 1939. Inscriptiones Creticae 2, Rome. –––––––. 1950. Inscriptiones Creticae 4, Rome. Halbherr, F. 1899. “Lavori eseguiti in Creta dalla missione archeològica italiana dal 9 giugno al 9 novèmbre 1899,” RAL 8, pp. 537–539.

Levi, D. 1930–1931. “I bronzi di Axos,” ASAtene 13–14, 1930–1931 [1933], pp. 43–146. McDonald, W. A. 1956. “Note on a Fragment of an Archaic Inscription from Dreros,” Hesperia 25, pp. 69–72. Marinatos, S. 1936. “Le temple geométrique de Dréros,” BCH 60, pp. 214–285. Martínez-Fernández, A. 1983. “Nota a la terminología jurídica cretense: ajnkemoliva (I.C. iv.21.3 y 44.7),” in Unidad y pluralidad en el mundo antiguo. Actas del VI Congreso Español de Estudios Clásicos (Sevilla, 6–11 de abril de 1981) II: Comunicaciones, Madrid, pp. 173–182. 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. Perlman, P. 2000. “Gortyn. The First Seven Hundred Years (Part I),” in Polis & Politics. Studies in Ancient Greek History, P. Flensted-Jensen, T. H. Nielsen, and L. Rubinstein, eds., Copenhagen, pp. 59–89. –––––––. 2002. “Gortyn. The First Seven Hundred Years, Part II. The Laws from the Temple of Apollo Pythios,” in Even More Studies in the Ancient Greek Polis (Papers of the Copenhagen Polis Centre 6), T.H. Nielsen, ed., Stuttgart, pp. 187–227.

WRITING ON THE WALLS. THE ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT OF ARCHAIC CRETAN LAWS Ricciardi, M. 1986–1987. “Il tèmpio di Apollo Pizio a Gortina,” ASAtene 64–65, 1986–1987 [1991], pp. 7–131. Rizza, G. 1967–1968. “Le terrecotte di Axos,” ASAtene 45–46, 1967–1968 [1969], pp. 211–302. Savignoni, L. 1900. “Lavori eseguiti in Creta dalla missione archeològica italiana dal 9 novèmbre al 13 dicembre 1899,” RAL 9, pp. 311–312. Stoddart, S., and J. Whitley. 1988. “The Social Context of Literacy in Archaic Greece and Etruria,” Antiquity 62, pp. 761–772. Thomas, R. 1995. “Written in Stone? Liberty, Equality, Orality and the Codification of Law,” BICS 40, pp. 59–74.

197

van Effenterre, H. 1946a. “Inscriptions archaïques crétoises,” BCH 70, pp. 588–606. ———. 1946b. “Une bilingue étéocrétoise?” RPhil 20, pp. 131–138. van Effenterre, H., and F. Ruzé. 1994–1995. Nomima. Recueil d’inscriptions politiques et juridiques de l’archaïsme grec I, II (Collection de l’École française de Rome, 188), Rome. Xanthoudides, St. 1918. “Arcaiologikhv perifereiva. Drhvro",” ArchDelt 4B, pp. 23–30. Whitley, J. 1997. “Cretan Laws and Cretan Literacy,” AJA 101, pp. 635–661.

14 Eleutherna and the Greek World, ca. 600–400 B.C. Brice Erickson

Recent excavations at Eleutherna, a polis in West Crete, bring important new evidence to bear on the related issues of Cretan decline and isolation from overseas markets ca. 600–400 B.C. These two centuries form a poorly understood part of the island’s history. The new evidence from Eleutherna comes from the excavations of the University of Crete at Orthi Petra. Noteworthy among investigated Cretan poleis, Eleutherna provides evidence for continuity of settlement across the 6th and 5th centuries and allows a chronological sequence of local ceramic shapes to be plotted. In addition, finds of imported pottery, both from abroad and from other Cretan production centers, attest to a wide array of overseas and intra-island contacts. These imports raise new questions concerning West Crete’s role in the context of Aegean trade. In conjunction with relevant historical and epigraphical sources, the pottery reveals a Peloponnesian outlook, cultural and economic, governing Eleutherna’s conduct of foreign affairs.

Historians have described the 6th and 5th centuries on Crete variously as a “period of silence,” “the inevitable Cretan terminus,” or, even more pessimistically, as a true “Dark Age” in the island’s history (Stampolidis 1990, 400; Morris 1998, 66–68). The paucity of textual evidence for Cretan history during these periods generated the modern concept of Cretan political, cultural, and commercial isolation. Archaeologists have faced a similar lack of evidence—a mysterious absence of virtually any tombs, sanctuaries, settlements, or other securely dated finds. If this apparent absence of evidence is taken at face value, Crete suffered a major environmental, economic, or military catastrophe on a scale almost unprecedented in ancient Greek history. This circumstance is variously attributed to natural disasters, warfare, or wholesale emigration (Demargne 1947, 348–353). Whether the lacunae in the archaeological record reflect historical reality or a problem of archaeological perception is the question at hand. Inadequate

200

ERICKSON

investigation and publication of Late Archaic and Classical Cretan sites make it hazardous to accept the reported “gaps” at face value. Pottery, which provides the foundation for the dating of all other categories of archaeological evidence, lies at the core of the problem. Pottery specialists working at individual sites on Crete have noted breaks in the ceramic sequence ca. 600–400 B.C., but they have made no effort to assemble the ceramic evidence from across the island to form a comprehensive picture of local or regional developments. Athanasia Kanta’s summary of the current state of knowledge of the Cretan ceramic record deserves repeating:

The 6th and 5th century B.C. pottery from Crete has not been published or studied and is virtually unknown. (Kanta 1991, 500) Without established ceramic sequences, most other categories of archaeological evidence lack a chronological anchor. Eleutherna provides ceramic evidence contrary to the accepted picture of Cretan decline. The results presented here stem from a more comprehensive study of the island pottery styles ca. 600–400 B.C., the subject of my dissertation (Erickson 2000). Space does not permit a discussion of other Cretan pottery sequences or the wider historical implications arising from this new chronological foundation. I limit my discussion here to Eleutherna and West Crete.

Continuity of Cemetery and Settlement Eleutherna lies inland at the northwest base of Mt. Ida where the jagged foothills of the mountain intersect the vast coastal plain of Rethymnon. The site became a popular stopping point for early travelers to Crete, owing to the principal archaeological attractions of an intact Hellenistic bridge and a pair of monumental underground cisterns (Spratt 1865, 194). In the 1920s, Humphrey Payne began modern archaeological exploration of the site with two campaigns of excavation (Payne 1928– 1929, 267–268). Following Payne’s work, Eleutherna remained neglected for more than half a century. Greek archaeologists who returned to the site in the 1980s discovered an ancient cemetery and uncovered portions of the Hellenistic domestic quarters. The discovery of an Iron Age cemetery at Orthi Petra has added greatly to our knowledge of the Geometric and Orientalizing periods (Stampolidis 1990, 398–401). A rich collection of bronzes, ivory, and sculpture from a series of monumental tombs documents the wealth of the inhabitants of Eleutherna in the 9th, 8th, and 7th centuries. Yet the history of the cemetery in the 6th and 5th centuries remains obscure. Burials were thought to have decreased substantially in number after ca. 600 B.C., before ceasing altogether by the second quarter of the 6th century. Indeed, finds from every quarter of the ancient town seemed to dry up in the 6th century, creating a puzzling break in the archaeological record as it has been previously understood. A similar gap has been reported at

Knossos, Prinias, and Aphrati, cities whose rich Orientalizing cemeteries apparently were abandoned in the final quarter of the 7th century (Coldstream and Huxley 1999, 289–292; Rizza 1991, 331– 337; Levi 1945, 18). A review of unpublished finds from Eleutherna, however, indicates that the presumption of an island-wide abandonment is inaccurate. At Orthi Petra, pithos burials continue in the 6th century, but they have attracted scant attention until now because of the poverty of the grave goods and the simple tomb structure. Furthermore, the majority of 6th century burials at Orthi Petra were disturbed by Hellenistic builders when they converted the grounds of the defunct cemetery to a domestic use. The pottery studied here came from the upper levels of the cemetery in clusters likely indicating the position of tombs. The latest intact tombs document a change in burial customs ca. 600–575 B.C. One manifestation of this change is the replacement of a variety of earlier methods of burial in the 8th and 7th centuries, including multiple pyre, trench, and pithos cremations, with the limited options of individual cremation or inhumation in a plain pithos container ca. 600–575 B.C. In addition, lavish stone funerary monuments, sumptuous grave goods, and abundant Near Eastern imports in the Geometric and Orientalizing periods give way to a new era of funerary restraint ca. 600–575 B.C., as far as the expense of the funeral can be detected in the archaeological

ELEUTHERNA AND THE GREEK WORLD

record. In short, the whole panoply of Orientalizing culture at Eleutherna—the works of stone sculpture, bronzes, and ivory—effectively comes to an end in the final quarter of the 7th century. Pottery from 6th century tombs consists of a limited repertoire of shapes. These include unguent containers, small bowls, plates, imported kraters, lamps, jugs, and cups. The types of pots left in 6th century tombs follow a set pattern. Most burials contain a combination of a cup, a lekythos, and either a bowl or a tray. Kraters either stood above the tombs and served as markers or, alternatively, the Eleuthernians included them in the tombs as grave goods. This pattern stands in sharp contrast to the wealth of tomb furnishings and variety of materials characteristic of 7th century burials. Three possible explanations for the smaller number and cheaper material of funerary offerings in the 6th century deserve mention. One possibility is deliberate restraint on the part of the Eleuthernian elite. An alternative theory holds that the Eleuthernian elite became poorer. Finally, if it is not legitimate to assume that the same burial ground was used by 6th century descendants of the richer Orientalizing inhabitants, these offerings reflect the general impoverishment of the local population, however constituted. The finds from Orthi Petra document continuous local production of pottery throughout the 6th and 5th centuries. A complete sequence of local shapes can be plotted at Eleutherna, establishing it as a type site. The most common 6th century shape is a one-handled cup, glazed black or red overall, characterized by an inset rim of variable height, a bowl ranging from a shallow to deep form, a single handle attached vertically at the rim, and a simple base in the form of a low disk foot. This “high-necked” cup is a lineal descendant of a Late Orientalizing version with a tall rim, examples of which are reported in the local repertoire at numerous places on Crete, Eleutherna prominent among them. Chronological distinctions within the 6th century rest on the cup’s morphology and the closed 6th century contexts together with Early and Middle Corinthian pottery (ca. 600–575 B.C.) or, in the case of later cups, Attic imports ca. 500–480 B.C. In the first or second quarter of the 6th century, the compact form and deep bowl of the Late Orientalizing variety gives way to a broad capacious bowl (of uniform maximum diameter ca. 14 cm) of shallow hemispherical proportions (Fig. 14.1: 5–7). The rim of the cup, while never deeply inset on the body,

201

exhibits a sharp junction where it meets the shoulder, a transition marked by a prominent inset notch. This peculiar treatment of the shoulder becomes a hallmark of 6th century Eleuthernian production, a consistent property of cups and larger vessels alike. During the remainder of the 6th century, a progressive deepening of the bowl combined with a consistent narrowing of the shoulder marks a complete reversal of the initial tendency toward squatness. For example, the cup shown in Fig. 14.1: 8, dated ca. 575–525 B.C. on the basis of Late Corinthian pottery, Attic and other associated finds, exhibits a deep bowl with a narrow shoulder. Equally noteworthy is the advent of a true base—a primitive form of disk foot with minimal extension of the outer edge. One measure of the conservatism of Eleuthernian potters is their persistent refusal to part with this simple form of base later in the cup’s history. Even in the 5th and 4th centuries, long after the potters at Knossos and Gortyn had begun experimenting with an extensive line of progressive high conical pedestal supports, the Eleuthernians refused to follow suit. The conservative tone of Eleuthernian cup production makes it exceedingly difficult to ascertain a cup’s date on the evidence of fragmentary supports alone. From the Geometric to the Hellenistic period, Eleuthernian potters fashioned vessels from a distinctive local clay. A bright orange-red fabric (Munsell 5YR 6/8 to 7/8) of chalky consistency with fine white calcite inclusions distinguishes Eleutherna from all other Cretan production centers. Although the exact location of the clay beds remains uncertain, they probably lay in close proximity to the ancient town. Continued exploitation of the same clay beds is not a compelling argument for continuity of population, especially if the beds were readily accessible a short distance from the town. Stylistic analysis, however, provides strong support for continuous occupation of the site by the same population. The Eleuthernian potters remained stubbornly independent of external Cretan and all other foreign influences. Even though they had access to imported Cretan pottery and occasionally copied Classical Gortynian cups in the local fabric, the Eleuthernian potters felt little influence from these quarters. The slow steady development of shapes at Eleutherna suggests an uninterrupted transmission of the craft from one generation of potters to the next.

202

ERICKSON

Prototype, ca. 625–575 B.C.

Type I, ca. 600–575 B.C.

Prototype, ca. 625–575 B.C.

Type I, ca. 600–575 B.C.

Prototype, ca. 625–575 B.C. Type II, ca. 575–525 B.C.

Prototype, ca. 625–575 B.C. Type III, ca. 525–475 B.C.

Type I, ca. 600–575 B.C. Type III, ca. 525–475 B.C. Figure 14.1. Eleutherna, high-necked cup (6th century). Scale 1:3.

ELEUTHERNA AND THE GREEK WORLD

Figure 14.2. Eleutherna, Corinthian imports.

Figure 14.3. Eleutherna, Laconian imports.

203

204

ERICKSON

Overseas Trade in the 6th Century The import record indicates that Eleutherna maintained close trade ties with the Greek mainland throughout the 6th century, contrary to the conventional picture of Cretan isolation. Sixth century Eleutherna is characterized by three successive waves of imported mainland Greek pottery, corresponding to three regional groups. The first group consists almost entirely of Early and Middle Corinthian pottery dated ca. 625–575 B.C. (Fig. 14.2). It includes a restricted range of funerary shapes— small jugs, bowls, and various containers for perfumed oil, among them aryballoi and alabastra. Corinthian imports largely disappear after ca. 575 B.C. (as they do in most other parts of the Greek

Figure 14.4. Eleutherna, Attic imports.

world). Laconian pottery succeeds Corinthian at Eleutherna (Fig. 14.3). Most examples are fully coated black kraters dated within the prime period of Laconian export, ca. 600–550 B.C. An influx of Attic imports at the beginning of the 5th century follows sporadic earlier examples in the middle and first half of the 6th century, when Attic and Laconian imports overlap (Fig. 14.4). Laconian pottery disappears from circulation ca. 500 B.C., whereupon Attic becomes the sole overseas import. The 5th century Attic repertoire includes cups, bowls, dishes, kraters, and lekythoi. The volume of Laconian pottery at Eleutherna requires comment. Laconian kraters were the most

ELEUTHERNA AND THE GREEK WORLD

205

Figure 14.5. Laconian imports to Crete (6th century).

popular category of imported pottery at Orthi Petra in the 6th century. Since the krater is a large open vessel entirely unsuitable for service as a shipping container, such pottery was probably transported to Eleutherna for its intrinsic value rather than as a container for another commodity or a cheap form of ballast. Merchants relied on the amphora to transport wine on board ship. Moreover, the Laconian krater is a fragile vessel whose transport must have involved considerable inconvenience for the shippers. Merchants who transported Laconian kraters presumably did so safe in the knowledge that a dependable market existed for the shape on Crete. The distribution of Laconian kraters on the island is confined exclusively to Central and West Crete at Kydonia, Kastello Varypetrou, Lappa, Eleutherna, and Knossos (Fig. 14.5). Since the western end of the island lies only a short distance from the Peloponnese, it is likely that Peloponnesian traders supplied the Cretan market with these goods. A minor component of this trade, a rarely exported Argive cup found in the company of Laconian kraters at Kydonia, Eleutherna, and Knossos, supports the hypothesis of a direct commercial link between the Peloponnese and Crete. This is in sharp contrast with the pattern of commercial relations in East Crete, where traffic in Late Archaic Cycladic pottery is indicated by unpublished finds at Olous and Itanos. The long east-west axis of the island apparently encouraged the development of two distinct trading networks—one in the west

with a Peloponnesian focus and the other in the east with a Cycladic orientation. Eleutherna occupies an ideal central position for the role of disseminating pottery from abroad elsewhere in West Crete. The distribution of Laconian and Argive pottery on Crete suggests that Eleutherna became a principal transfer point where cargoes were unloaded. Current evidence indicates a greater quantity of Laconian craters at Eleutherna than at any other Cretan site. Twenty-one krater fragments are attested at Eleutherna; only three specimens are known from the rest of the island. Trade in Laconian kraters also had a discernible impact on local production at Eleutherna, as evidenced by a copy of the shape (Fig. 14.3: ix). Port towns in the territory of Eleutherna enabled the inland city to become a western hub for overseas commerce. One port, Pantomatrion, is mentioned by ancient geographers, although its exact location and the date of its foundation remain points of dispute (Guarducci 1939, 142). An “Atticizing” gravestone points to the existence of a flourishing coastal community in Eleuthernian territory at Stavromenos by the middle of the 5th century (Kirsten 1942, 21–23). Commercial activity presumably intensified in the Hellenistic period due to the growth of Rethymnon, a port which still operates today. Eleutherna’s geographical situation helps explain why it became an important crossroads linking East and West Crete with the rest of the Greek

206

ERICKSON

world. Eleutherna overlooks the coastal plain of Rethymnon, one of the island’s principal east-west arteries of communication, where it meets the northern outlet of the Amari valley which connects the fertile Mesara valley to the northern end of the island. Eleutherna apparently profited from its favorable location. The city possesses the richest record of imported 6th and 5th century pottery manufactured at other Cretan production centers, as determined by the identification and sequencing of the various Late Archaic and Classical Cretan styles (Erickson 2000). Pottery from Gortyn, Knossos, Kydonia, and Aphrati were found at Eleutherna. In addition, a small group of imported 6th century lamps arrived at the site by way of a possible island distribution center at Olous. Phalasarna, Kydonia, and other port towns at the extreme western end of the island undoubtedly attracted a fair share of this Peloponnesian trade owing to their proximity to the southern tip of the Peloponnese. Phalasarna, the only safe natural harbor along the west coast, makes an ideal last port of call for vessels rounding the southern side of the island on a voyage north. For merchants willing to undertake a longer journey farther east along the northern coast of the island, a stop at one of Eleutherna’s ports presumably rewarded additional sea travel with proximity to advantageous intra-island overland trade routes. Aside from pottery, what products were traded between the Peloponnese and Crete during the Archaic and Classical periods? Trade in Peloponnesian bronze vessels perhaps accompanied the traffic in their clay counterparts. Boardman (1961, 148) calls attention to finds of 6th century bronze

vessels and handle attachments of either Peloponnesian workmanship or style as exceptions to an otherwise poor record of contemporary bronze work on Crete. Crete was famous in antiquity for its timber, especially fine cypress woods used in the construction of the doors and the roofs of temples. The Athenians may have employed Cretan cedar in their grandest 5th century building, the Parthenon. Evidence for this consists of the Parthenon accounts (IG2 I 388), which mention cedar wood in an uncertain context, and also a reference from a lost comedy (Hermippos, PCG v fr. 63 = Athen. 1.27e– 8a), produced at the beginning of the Peloponnesian War, to Athenian imports of Cretan cedar earmarked for religious purposes. This combination of evidence convinced Meiggs (1982, 200– 201) that the Athenians employed Cretan cedar for the main weight-bearing timbers of the Parthenon. A 4th century temple account from Epidauros (IG2 IV 1.102) records a certain Tychamenes, a Cretan, who won the contract to supply cedar wood in the construction of the Temple of Asclepius at Epidauros. Although his polis is not recorded, Perlman (2000, 123) infers from the fact that his name was common in West Crete that Tychamenes came from one of the poleis in the area. In early modern times, West Crete gained repute as a center for trade in timber owing to the forests on the lower slopes of the White Mountains. Ancient epigraphic and literary sources emphasize ornamental or luxury goods at the expense of mundane but undoubtedly more widely traded commodities. Trade in grapes, grains, and olives escapes notice unless a crisis brings a shortage to attention.

The Historical Context What role did West Crete play in the wider context of 6th century Aegean commerce? Peloponnesian trade with North Africa and Libya has been credited with a profusion of exported Laconian and Corinthian pottery at Naucratis, Tocra, and Cyrene. Grain presumably attracted Peloponnesian merchants to this area. Laconian black-gloss and black-figure pottery began to arrive in North Africa and Libya by the end of the 7th century, shortly after the attested foundations of the Greek

trading station at Naucratis and the Greek colony at Cyrene. Herodotus (2.154) credits Psammetichos I (ca. 620–610 B.C.) for encouraging Greek merchants to form the first permanent settlement of foreign traders in Egypt at a place called Strotopeda on either side of the Pelusian branch of the Nile. The historian’s later testimony (Hdt. 2.178) implies that Naucratis was founded in the reign of Amasis (ca. 570–526 B.C.), but archaeological evidence supports an earlier date for the foundation ranging

ELEUTHERNA AND THE GREEK WORLD

between ca. 620–610 and 590 B.C. (Boardman 1980, 121–125). The earliest Greek pottery at Tocra dates ca. 620 B.C. (Boardman and Hayes 1966, 11–13). Thus, a combination of literary and archaeological evidence points to a date in the last quarter of the 7th century for the earliest stages of Greek penetration into Egyptian markets. Nafissi, in a seminal study of the geographic and chronological distribution of exported Laconian pottery, proposes the existence of a 6th century trade route linking Laconia with Cyrenaica, Egypt, and Samos (Nafissi 1989, 71). The vast majority of exported Archaic Laconian black-gloss and black-figure pottery is confined to these three areas. According to Cartledge’s calculation (1982, 252), Samos alone is responsible for 28% of the 360 Laconian pieces catalogued by Stibbe (1989). Nafissi does not address the question of possible Cretan participation in this trade network. Literary and archaeological evidence suggest that the western end of the island served as a stopping point along the hypothesized trade artery linking Egypt and Libya with the southern coast of the Peloponnese. Thucydides (4.53.3), in a discussion of the strategic importance of Kythera to the Peloponnesian side during the Peloponnesian War, hints at the existence of this trade network, although he does not mention Cretan participation. Their participation is virtually a foregone conclusion given Aegean geography—Crete lies halfway between North Africa and the Peloponnese on a direct sea route. Small quantities of exported 6th century Cretan pottery found at Tocra and Cyrene support the conclusion that Crete did participate in the LaconiaCyrenaica-Egypt-Samos trade circuit, thereby confirming a role inferred on the basis of geography alone. Direct evidence for Cretan involvement has until now remained meager, consisting of approximately 20 exported Cretan pots and fragments—a small collection which includes plain jugs, bowls, cups, and black-figure specimens (Boardman and Hayes 1966, 79–85). Aphrati is the most likely source of these Cretan exports. In addition, the discovery of Archaic Cretan pottery at Kythera testifies to a relationship between the two islands, for which it is tempting to posit a commercial basis (Coldstream and Huxley 1972, 306). Archaeological evidence from Crete itself now testifies to Cretan involvement in this trade network. Previous evidence was scanty. Published finds in support of a Peloponnesian trade connection consisted of a single example of a Laconian

207

krater and a local copy at both Kydonia and Knossos. The addition of the 21 fragmentary Laconian kraters and a Cretan copy of the same shape at Eleutherna provides crucial new evidence for ascertaining Crete’s role in the Laconia-CyrenaicaEgypt-Samos trade network. Although the number of Laconian pots found at Eleutherna pales in comparison to the totals from Tocra or Cyrene, it is exceptional for Crete. Other imports found at Eleutherna bolster the case for Cretan trade ties with North Africa and Libya. A 6th century Cretan black-figure example found at Eleutherna was manufactured at another Cretan production center, probably Aphrati (Fig. 14.6: 3); Cretan pottery from Cyrene offers the best parallel for the fabric and figural style of this piece (Schaus 1985, 10–11). These examples probably derive from the same workshop and date to the second quarter of the 6th century. The prime period of Laconian export in the eastern Mediterranean was ca. 600–550 B.C. In the third quarter of the 6th century, a period of decline follows when many parts of the Greek world witness a substantial reduction in the number of Laconian exports, if not a full stop (Nafissi 1989, 71–73). Laconian exports to Naucratis cease ca. 525 B.C., and at that time Samos also experiences a significant reduction. In contrast to the general decline of Laconian exports ca. 525 B.C., the flow of Laconian pottery to Cyrene increases in the final quarter of the 6th century. Cyrene provides an outlet for Laconian pottery until the beginning of the 5th century, a factor which suggests that Cyrene benefited from the lost commercial opportunities of Naucratis and Samos. To judge from the archaeological context of Laconian kraters at Eleutherna, Crete continued to serve as a stopping point for this later trade in Laconian pottery until ca. 500–480 B.C. The declining number of Laconian exports to Samos ca. 550–525 B.C. invites historical explanations. Herodotus’ account (3.44–3.59) of Samian acts of piracy against Sparta reveals deteriorating political relations between Sparta and Samos which culminated in the attempted overthrow of Polykrates by a joint Spartan and Corinthian force in 524 B.C. Historians often have concluded from Herodotus’ testimony that political disagreements between the two poleis were responsible for the declining amount of exported Laconian pottery to Samos. Cartledge (1982, 243–246) concedes that close personal ties between Spartan and Samian aristocrats fostered a special relationship between the two states during the first half of the 6th century; he

208

ERICKSON

Figure 14.6. Eleutherna, Cretan imports.

emphasizes the purely commercial aspect of the trade in Laconian pottery. For Cartledge, the declining number of Laconian exports to Samos ca. 525 B.C. requires an economic explanation. Commercial incentives may lie behind the establishment of a Samian colony in West Crete. Herodotus (3.59) reports that a group of Samian exiles established a colony at Kydonia in 524 B.C. This interesting epilogue to Herodotus’ account of Samian and Spartan hostilities has sparked little comment in the context of Samian commercial interests. In light of the service of Samian merchants as carriers of Laconian pottery and the inferred importance of West Crete as a stopping point along a major trade artery for the distribution of Laconian

wares to North Africa, the Samian foundation at Kydonia may be interpreted as an effort to secure a foothold for Samian traders in the Peloponnesian trade circuit. The Samians failed to maintain a permanent station on Crete, as evidenced by Herodotus’ account (3.59) of the successful Aeginetan bid five years later to replace the Samians at Kydonia in 519 B.C. It seems that the Samians came under pressure first from Sparta and later from Aegina as these commercial rivals compelled the Samians to relinquish their stake in the Laconia-CreteCyrenaica-Egypt trade circuit. There was just a trickle of Attic imports in the 6th century (Fig. 14.4: 1–5), but by ca. 500–480 B.C., an influx of Attic imports to Eleutherna signaled a

ELEUTHERNA AND THE GREEK WORLD

new chapter in the history of commercial relations. After ca. 500 B.C., Laconian imports disappear altogether, leaving Attic pottery the sole overseas import to this polis. Attic pottery appears in greater number and variety of shapes than previously seen either in the Corinthian or Laconian repertoire (Fig. 14.4: 6–16). Attic imports now appear in greater abundance throughout Crete. Herodotus suggests the historical circumstances of such an alteration in West Cretan trade patterns ca. 500 B.C. He records (Hdt. 3.59) that the Aeginetans won a decisive victory over the Samians at Kydonia in 519 B.C. Strabo (8.376) indicates that the Aeginetans followed up their victory by establishing a new colony in the same location. Archaeological evidence in the form of inscriptions, coins, and pottery tends to confirm the Herodotean tradition and sheds further light on the commercial foundation of the Aeginetan settlement. A pair of inscribed tombstones from Kydonia share a similar formula of commemoration: Aujtomev/deov" ejmi (I.Cret. II.x.7) and Sa'ma Melissiv-/ do" ejmiv (I.Cret. II.x.13). Epigrams of this sort are commonplace on mainland Greece, but inscribed tombstones of any kind remain a rarity in Archaic Crete (Whitley 1997, 649–650). The alphabet is definitely not Cretan, and Guarducci argues that it is probably Aeginetan script (Guarducci 1939, 120–123). The tombstones date to roughly the same period as the attested Aeginetan colonial foundation. On the basis of this evidence, there is strong support for the Aeginetans settling at Kydonia and dying there, as Herodotus’ testimony implies. The fact that one of the epigrams commemorates a deceased female strengthens the hypothesis of Aeginetan residents. Another physical sign of Aeginetan activity in West Crete comes in the discovery of large numbers of Aeginetan coins. Silver Aeginetan coins

209

with turtles on the obverse traveled widely throughout the Peloponnese and Southern Aegean. They are commonly interpreted as generic tokens of trade, irrespective of Aegina. The sheer quantity of the Aeginetan coinage, and the fact that it so completely outnumbered any other non-Cretan issues in the Late Archaic period, suggested independently to Boardman and Figueira that there must have been a special Aeginetan commercial involvement in the area (Boardman 1980, 121; Figueira 1981, 133). Admittedly, the widespread distribution of Aeginetan “turtles” decreases their value as an indication of a special commercial relationship with Crete, let alone evidence of Aeginetan settlers at Kydonia. Confirmation of the Herodotean tradition must therefore be sought elsewhere in the archaeological record. The influx of Attic pottery independently suggests an Aeginetan commercial connection with West Crete, since archaeologists have associated Aeginetan trade elsewhere in the Greek world, in particular Magna Graecia and North Africa, with an increase in imported Attic pottery (Boardman 1980, 121). After 500 B.C., Attic black-gloss and figural pottery begins to appear at Kydonia in substantial quantities. It soon establishes itself as the leading import in funerary, domestic, and sanctuary contexts. In Kydonian tombs, Attic black- and redfigure lekythoi were the favorite grave gifts in the 5th century. From Kastelli, the probable site of the ancient acropolis, a well sealed at the transition of the Archaic and Classical periods contained numerous Attic black-gloss shapes along with “Atticizing” pottery, that is, pottery that closely copies Attic shapes in the local repertoire (Hallager and Hahn 1997, 202–208). A reliance on Aeginetan carriers would explain the switch from Laconian to Attic pottery at Eleutherna and other West Cretan sites.

Fifth Century Import Gap There follows a pronounced gap from ca. 460 to 400 B.C. in the record of overseas imports at Eleutherna and Kydonia. A similar pattern of declining imports, if not a complete cessation, characterizes a number of other places on the island (Erickson 2000). For instance, a gap of similar duration occurs in a series of burials from Phalasarna,

an important port town and independent polis on the northwest coast of Crete (Gondicas 1988, 109–111). As at Kydonia, a handful of 6th century burials, followed without interruption in the first quarter of the 5th century by a fuller series of burials loaded with Attic pottery, comes to an abrupt end ca. 470–460 B.C. This lacuna persists until the

210

ERICKSON

end of the 5th century, when burials at Phalasarna suddenly return in far greater numbers than before. At Eleutherna, this temporary hiatus is particularly noticeable, because at no other time in a long history from ca. 850 to 250 B.C. do the Eleuthernians stop importing. How might this absence of imports be explained? The Peloponnesian commercial outlook described above provides a historical context in which to assess 5th century Cretan developments. The dates draw us intriguingly to the rise of Athenian naval supremacy in the Aegean and raise the possibility that the disruption of trade patterns on Crete is connected with the economy of the Athenian Empire. Perlman (2000, 127) was the first to make this connection explicit by suggesting that the Cretan economy rebounded in response to the dissolution of the Athenian Empire. She argues that supposedly new foundations on the south coast of Crete at the end of the 5th century reflect new commercial opportunities as trade between Crete and Egypt intensified in the aftermath of the Peloponnesian War and removal of Athenian pressure. This presupposes that a disruption of Cretan trade at the height of the Athenian Empire served Athenian interests, an intriguing suggestion offered without the benefit of further corroborating literary or archaeological evidence. Similarly, Figueira proposes that the decline of Aegina in the face of Athenian mercantile competition in the first half of the 5th century led to an economic decline of Crete; in his view this can “probably be associated with the dislocation caused by the removal of Aeginetan economic influence” (Figueira 1981, 279). The fuller archaeological record now available warrants a re-examination of this issue. Following Perlman’s suggestion, I tentatively propose that economic incentive drove a deliberate Athenian policy of isolating Sparta and the Peloponnesian side from North African grain markets by the time of the First Peloponnesian War (ca. 460 B.C.). Crete, as a key stopping point along this major enemy trade artery, suffered as a result. It can be inferred from Thucydides that the Athenians took actions intended to disrupt Peloponnesian trade (MacDonald 1982, 118–120). Both Kythera and Egypt were targeted by major Athenian naval expeditions in the 450s. An Athenian expedition launched against the Kydonians on Crete in 429 B.C. (Thuc. 2.86) might be understood in the same terms. While other Cretan poleis did not necessarily involve themselves in the conflicts between Athens and

Sparta, they remained a potential ally of the Peloponnesians, connected as they were by physical proximity, a common Dorian background, and a tradition of close trade ties. No Cretan poleis appear with certainty on the Athenian tribute lists. A passage in Thucydides (2.9.4) implies that Crete fell outside the Athenian Empire, for it includes among Athens’ allies in the Peloponnesian War the Cycladic islands lying between and to the east of the Peloponnese and Crete. Forcibly keeping Crete on the margins perhaps served Athenian strategic interests by preventing the island from serving as a stepping stone in the context of the North AfricanPeloponnesian grain trade. Accordingly, Athens’ defeat at the end of the Peloponnesian War would have permitted a re-establishment of trade connections with the outside world. If Athenian naval harassment is responsible for Cretan difficulties in obtaining imports in the 5th century, the Eleuthernians coped by taking successful countermeasures. They compensated for a shortfall of overseas imports by fostering new trade channels with other Cretan cities. For example, Eleutherna forged a special trading relationship with Gortyn in the Classical period, as evidenced by numerous imports of Gortynian black-gloss drinking cups (Fig. 14.6: 1). In the Late Archaic and Classical periods, the consistency of Gortynian fine-ware fabric is universally clean and hard; the color varies from pale brown, pale red, to orangebrown. After sporadic earlier examples in the 6th century, Gortynian imports to Eleutherna become increasingly abundant from ca. 475–400 B.C., a time when Eleuthernian potters also began copying Gortynian designs in the local fabric (Fig. 14.6: 2). The Eleuthernian versions duplicate intricate details of Gortynian base construction, such as the adoption of a consistently flat resting surface, the occasional fillet marking the junction with the belly, and the frequent application of a full coat of glaze underneath the base. Gortynian cups exhibit a high standard of potting and fine lustrous gloss, making them a worthy substitute for imported Attic examples. The north-south passage of the Amari valley links the fertile Mesara valley with north side of the island, thereby facilitating trade between Gortyn and Eleutherna. This Cretan enterprise can be viewed as a response to a decline in overseas trade. Imported and local pottery from Eleutherna and Kydonia adds significantly to our knowledge of Cretan commercial relations and internal island developments from 600–400 B.C. Evidence from Eleutherna requires us to modify the long-accepted

ELEUTHERNA AND THE GREEK WORLD

picture of Cretan isolation and decline after ca. 600 B.C. Settlement and trade continued to thrive. The 6th century marks a fundamental re-orientation of West Cretan commercial relations; the former Orientalizing pattern of trade characterized by Near Eastern contacts was replaced by a new Peloponnesian focus. North African markets began to open up to Peloponnesian and Samian traders in the final quarter of the 7th century. West Crete became a major stopping point along this new trade artery, as evidenced by the imported Laconian and Argive pottery at Eleutherna and by finds of

211

exported Cretan pottery in North Africa. In the final quarter of the 6th century, Aegina replaces Samos as the chief conductor of the Cretan share of this trade. Attic pottery attests to the activity of Aeginetan traders in the 5th century. There follows a cessation of imports during the period ca. 460–400 B.C. at Eleutherna, Kydonia, and Phalasarna. Whatever the cause of this disruption, Eleutherna and other Cretan cities answered the implicit challenge of these lost commercial opportunities by intensifying trade within their own shores.

Acknowledgments I owe a debt of gratitude to Prof. N. Stampolidis for inviting me to study and publish the Late Archaic and Classical finds from his excavations.

Bibliography Boardman, J. 1961. The Cretan Collection in Oxford, Oxford. ———. 1980. The Greeks Overseas,/ 3rd ed., London. Boardman, J., and J. Hayes. 1966. Excavations at Tocra 1963–1965: The Archaic Deposits I (BSA Supplement 4), London. Cartledge, P. 1982. “Sparta and Samos: A Special Relationship?” CQ 32, pp. 243–265. Coldstream, J.N., and G.L. Huxley. 1999. “Knossos: The Archaic Gap,” BSA 94, pp. 289–307. Coldstream, J.N., and G.L. Huxley, eds. 1972. Kythera: Excavations and Studies Conducted by the University of Pennsylvania Museum and the British School of Archaeology at Athens, London. Demargne, P. 1947. La Crète dédalique: études sur les origines d’une renaissance, Paris. Erickson, B. 2000. Late Archaic and Classical Crete: Island Pottery Styles in an Age of Historical Transition, Ph.D. diss., University of Texas, Austin. Figueira, T.J. 1981. Aegina: Society and Economy, New York.

Gondicas, D. 1988. Recherches sur la Crète occidentale: de l’époque géométrique à la conquête romaine: inventaire des sources archéologiques et textuelles, position du problème, Amsterdam. Guarducci, M. 1939. Inscriptiones Creticae II: Tituli Cretae Occidentalis, Rome. Hallager, E., and M. Hahn. 1997. “Archaic to Byzantine Periods: Stratigraphy and Catalogues,” in The GreekSwedish Excavations at the Agia Aikaterini Square, Kastelli, Khania, 1970–1987 I.2: From the Geometric to the Modern Greek Period, E. Hallager and B.P. Hallager, eds., Stockholm, pp. 202–208. Kanta, A. 1991. “Cult, Continuity and the Evidence of Pottery at the Sanctuary of Syme Viannou, Crete,” in La Transizione dal Miceneo all’Alto Archaismo: dal palazzo alla città, D. Musti, A. Sacconi, and L. Rocchetti, eds., Rome, pp. 479–505. Kirsten, E. 1942. Das dorische Kreta I: die Insel Kreta im fünften und vierten Jahrhundert, Warzburg. Levi, D. 1945. Early Hellenic Pottery of Crete, Princeton. MacDonald, B.R. 1982. “The Import of Attic Pottery to Corinth and the Question of Trade during the Peloponnesian War,” JHS 102, pp. 113–123.

212

ERICKSON

Meiggs, R. 1982. Trees and Timber in the Ancient Mediterranean World, Oxford. Morris, I. 1998. “Archaeology and Archaic Greek History,” in Archaic Greece: New Approaches and New Evidence, N. Fisher and H. van Wees, eds., London and Swansea, pp. 1–91. Nafissi, M. 1989. “Distribution and Trade,” in Laconian Mixing Bowls, by C.M. Stibbe, Amsterdam, pp. 68–88. Payne, H. 1928–1929. “Annual Meeting of Subscribers: Eleutherna,” BSA 30, pp. 266–268. Perlman, P. 2000. “Kretes aei leistai? The Marginalization of Crete in Greek Thought and the Role of Piracy in the Outbreak of the First Cretan War,” in Hellenistic Rhodus: Politics, Culture and Society, V. Gabrielsen et al., eds., Aarhus, pp. 110–133.

Rizza, G. 1991. “Priniàs: La città arcaica sulla Patela,” in La Transizione dal Miceneo all'Alto Archaismo: dal palazzo alla città, D. Musti, A. Sacconi, and L. Rocchetti, eds., Rome, pp. 331–347. Schaus, G.P. 1985. The Extramural Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone at Cyrene, Libya, Final Reports 2: The East Greek, Island, and Laconian Pottery, Philadelphia. Spratt, T.A.B. 1865. Travels and Researches in Crete, London. Stampolidis, N. 1990. “Eleutherna on Crete: An Interim Report on the Geometric–Archaic Cemetery,” BSA 85, pp. 375–403. Stibbe, C.M. 1989. Laconian Mixing Bowls, Amsterdam. Whitley, J. 1997. “Cretan Laws and Cretan Literacy,” AJA 101, pp. 635–661.

15 The Late Hellenistic Period in East Crete Natalia Vogeikoff-Brogan

Our knowledge about Hellenistic Crete is based largely on the work of historians such as Henri van Effenterre (1991; 1994; van Effenterre and Bougrat 1969), Paul Faure (1989), Stylianos Spyridakis (1970), and, more recently, Angelos Chaniotis (1988; 1996; 1999). The contribution of archaeologists to the subject, particularly the economy of Hellenistic Crete, has been minimal. Most recently, W. Harris commented, “ . . . a great desideratum is that the archaeologists who work on the particulars of Hellenistic and Roman Crete should give more thought to the larger problems of economic history . . . it is depressing to see that some of those who write about Cretan sites have little awareness of

what the real problems are in Hellenistic or Roman economic history” (Harris 1999, 353). The aim of this chapter is to meet Harris’ challenge by placing evidence from recent field and laboratory work in the wider historical context of Hellenistic Crete—in particular the late 2nd to early 1st centuries B.C. in East Crete. A review of the ancient sources provides a context for the recent archaeological work in this area. The recent excavations at Mochlos supply a test case for addressing in a new way political and economic relationships between poleis and smaller settlements in Hellenistic East Crete.

214

VOGEIKOFF-BROGAN

The Written Sources What picture emerges for East Crete in the 2nd century B.C. on the basis of literary and epigraphic testimony? According to both Strabo (10.479) and the well-known treaty between Hierapytna and Itanos, the defining event was the conquest of Praisos by Hierapytna in the 140s (Chaniotis 1996, nos. 47–49, esp. no. 47; Guarducci 1942, III, iv, no. 9, lines 46–49). After Praisos was eliminated, Itanos and Hierapytna—poleis originally with some distance from each other—came to share a common frontier very near the Sanctuary of Zeus Diktaios. When Itanos challenged the Hierapytnian claim to administer the sanctuary which had previously been controlled by Praisos, this new border soon became a source of conflict. Both Hierapytna and Itanos appealed several times to Rome, who adjudicated the quarrel in favor of the latter. The important decree that resulted contains a wealth of detailed information about the former frontiers between Praisos and Itanos (Chaniotis 1996, no. 47; Guarducci 1942, III, iv, no. 9, lines 61–65), and modern historians have used this information to reconstruct the physical line between Hierapytna and Itanos (Chaniotis 1996, 303–306; also Spyridakis 1970, 64). Contemporary with the Hierapytna-Itanos decree is the isopolity treaty between Hierapytna and

Lato in 111/110 B.C. (Chaniotis 1996, no. 59) which defines the northwest boundaries of Hierapytna in similar detail. Van Effenterre, Faure, and Chaniotis have all attempted reconstructions of these boundaries. Although the reconstructions differ in detail, the scholars all agree that the boundary line between the two cities began at the mouth of river Xeropotamos (Kymaios) on the Bay of Mirabello. From there, the line turned to the south before shifting to a northern direction, which left Oleros and the sanctuary of Athena under Hierapytna’s control (van Effenterre and Bougrat 1969, fig. 1; Faure 1972, 238; Chaniotis 1996, no. 59, 338–351, pl. 7). The southwestern boundaries of Hierapytna are less clear in this period. Earlier isopolity treaties with the neighboring poleis of Arkades, Priansos, and possibly Viannos (Chaniotis 1996, nos. 14, 28 and 35) provide information about the limit of Hierapytna’s sovereignty in the coastal and lower elevations of Mount Dikte from the late 3rd to the first half of the 2nd century B.C. There are, however, no sources for the second half of the century, when Hierapytna was rapidly and substantially expanding her territory.

Recent Archaeological Work From the written sources, it appears that Hierapytna gained control over the largest part of East Crete in the 2nd and 1st centuries B.C. Our knowledge of the political and economic administration of this area is, however, very limited. In turning to archaeology for help, it is clear that Hellenistic East Crete is terra incognita. Even the location and size of Hellenistic Hierapytna is uncertain. Limited evidence suggests that it should be located to the west of the modern town, at the area of Viglia, below Roman Hierapytna (Papadakis 1986b, 36). For archaeological information concerning East Crete, the work of Sanders (1982), an extensive survey that is now more than 20 years old, is the main source. Recent excavations of several Hellenistic sites in East Crete remain unpublished. These include

Trypetos, which is tentatively identified with ancient Siteia; Xerokampos, which is associated with ancient Ampelos (perhaps another port of Praisos); and Koufonisi, the ancient site of the island of Leuke (Fig. 15.1). Brief preliminary reports (Papadakis 1976; 1980a; 1980b; 1984; 1985; 1986a; 1986b; 1988; 1994; 1995) suggest the potential contribution of these sites to the puzzle that is Hellenistic East Crete, but it is still far from our desideratum, namely, understanding the larger problems of Hellenistic history. The renewed excavations at Itanos (Greco et al. 1997; 1998) are being watched with great interest, and the publication of the excavations at Syme Viannou (Lembesi 1993; 1997) is expected to contribute to our understanding of that “gray” area between Hierapytna and Gortyn. A number of

THE LATE HELLENISTIC PERIOD IN EAST CRETE

215

Olous Itanos

BAY OF MIRABELLO Trypetos Kamara

Mochlos

Lato

Istron

Praisos

Viannos

Ampelos Myrtos

Hierapytna

Leuke Figure 15.1. Classical and Hellenistic sites in East Crete.

intensive surveys have taken place recently in East Crete. Results from the Vrokastro Survey have clarified our understanding of the northwest borders of Hierapytna and the political status of poleis like Oleros and Istron (Hayden, Moody, and Rackham 1992; Hayden 1995, 139–142). The Gournia Survey should contribute to our understanding of the history of the Isthmus, and has already located ancient Larisa, whose citizens were forced to resettle in the city of Hierapytna (Watrous 1994–1995, 65). Although placing more emphasis on the earlier periods, the Kavousi-Thriphti Project also has contributed to our knowledge of Hierapytna’s territorial influence northward in the Hellenistic period (Haggis 1996, esp. 415–424). To the east and north of Ziros, the intensive survey of the Lamnoni and Katelionas basins has shown a re-occupation of both basins in the Hellenistic period, after a long break from the 12th to the 4th centuries B.C. (Branigan 1998, esp. 87–90). Branigan (1998, 90) speculates that the resettlement of both areas could have been stimulated by the dispersal of the former inhabitants of Praisos in the middle of the 2nd century B.C.

In his survey of Southeastern Crete, Schlager (1991, 23–25) has located a fortified site at Kastri, which he dates to the 1st century B.C. According to Schlager, this settlement should be associated in some way with the neighboring site of Xerokampos (Fig. 15.1), which Papadakis has identified tentatively with ancient Ampelos. Finally, the overall aim of the Praisos survey is to provide a history of the settlement, to place the city within its local context, and, with the results of the other surveys in the area, “to reconstruct a fairly detailed settlement history of Eastern Crete, as a whole and, in particular, of the area that formed the territories of the city-states of Itanos, Praisos, and Hierapytna” (Whitley, Prent, and Thorne 1999, 216). The contribution of the aforementioned surveys is and will be limited as long as East Cretan pottery of the Hellenistic period remains poorly studied and ill-defined. The inability of most of the survey projects in East Crete to subdivide the Hellenistic and the Roman periods poses a serious challenge to the value of their conclusions regarding specific periods (on similar issues, see Alcock 1993, 49–53).

216

VOGEIKOFF-BROGAN

The Contribution of Mochlos In addition to the well-known and extensive Minoan occupation, recent archaeological work at Mochlos (Fig. 15.1) has brought to light remains from at least two historical periods. In trenches on the summit of the island, which during most periods of habitation was united with the shore, walls and pottery dating from the late 5th to early 4th centuries B.C. have been excavated. On the south slope of the island, the remains of several houses, as well as an industrial building, dating from the late 2nd to early 1st centuries B.C. have been found (Soles and Davaras 1996, 222–230; Vogeikoff 2000, 69–70, fig. 1). Dating is based on a number of imported transport amphoras from Kos and Rhodes whose shape can be compared with the amphoras found on the Antikythera shipwreck and in the destruction layer of 69 B.C. at Delos (Vogeikoff 2000, 70) So far, there is no evidence that the site was inhabited between the early 4th and the late 2nd centuries B.C. The majority of the pottery found in the Late Hellenistic houses is made of a soft, sandy, yellow fabric and includes transport amphoras and tableware shapes like jugs, bowls with one handle, plates, and lamps (Vogeikoff 2000, 70–72, pls. 35c, 36a–c). The same fabric and shapes also appear in the small Hellenistic occupation of Myrtos-Pyrgos (Fig. 15.1) west of Ierapetra on the south coast of Crete. The fabric is known as East Cretan Cream Ware (ECCW, hereafter) (Vogeikoff 2000, 70–71; Eiring 2000, 58; Vogeikoff-Brogan et al. forthcoming). A recent petrographic analysis of the fabric by the Fitch Laboratory of the British School has placed the source of the clay near or in the area west of the Myrtos valley (Boileau 1999 is available for consultation at the Fitch Laboratory; for more details of the petrographic analysis see VogeikoffBrogan et al. forthcoming). The Myrtos valley is located approximately 15 km west of ancient Hierapytna (Fig. 15.1). Naturally, the identification of a clay source does not presuppose the location of the workshop, although pottery workshops tend to be close to the clay source (Day 1997, 228). Nothing is known about the history of Myrtos valley, or whether it fell within the boundaries of Hierapytna or belonged to another city’s political territory. Nor is anything understood about the management of clay sources in antiquity. For example, could the potters of Hierapytna have access to clay beds that fell within

the political territory of another city? A number of treaties dealing with the seasonal moving of shepherds imply that trespassing on political territories was a complicated issue for Hellenistic Cretans (Chaniotis 1999). Whether or not the Myrtos valley and the area west of it fell within the political territory of Hellenistic Hierapytna, did potters from the Hierapytnian workshops have access to this clay? In addition to the proximity of the site to the clay source, Hierapytna is the only polis in Hellenistic Crete for which there is evidence for the production and trade of wine amphoras. A small number of stamped amphora handles inscribed with the name IERAPUTNIWN have been found in Egypt, the Black Sea, and at Trypetos in East Crete (Marangou 1999, 270, n. 2; Papadakis 1994). Unfortunately, the shape of these amphoras, which are dated to the 3rd century B.C., remains unknown. The fabric of these stamped handles appears macroscopically to differ from that of the ECCW amphoras; one of the Hierapytnian stamped amphora handles from Egypt bears a device in the shape of a bee (Marangou-Lerat 1995, 123–124, p. 26, fig. 84, E 2). Among the numerous ECCW fabric transport amphoras found at Mochlos, one stamped handle (Fig. 15.2: a) carries the image of a bee. Could the bee have been one of the civic devices (emblems) used by Hierapytna? On the basis of the proximity of Hierapytna to the clay source for the ECCW fabric, the attested production of wine amphoras by the city of Hierapytna, and the presence of the bee on the handle of an ECCW amphora, the entire East Cretan Cream Ware production should be associated with Hierapytna. As mentioned above, Hellenistic Mochlos was a short-lived settlement, occupied in the last decades of the 2nd century B.C. and abandoned some time in the first half of the 1st century B.C. Although the site is not attested in the written sources, the study of the pottery allows its inclusion in the history of East Crete. The fact that the inhabitants used tableware made exclusively from the ECCW fabric, which arguably was produced by Hierapytnian workshops, raises the intriguing possibility that Mochlos was resettled by Hierapytnians at the end of the 2nd century B.C. To explore this question, it is necessary to examine Hierapytna’s interests in such a move. There are several reasons that might have led to the resettlement of Mochlos. One is demographic. According to Chaniotis, the treaties that Hierapytna

THE LATE HELLENISTIC PERIOD IN EAST CRETE

concluded with a number of neighboring cities (e.g., Arkades, Praisos, Itanos, Lato, Priansos, and possibly Viannos) were one of the solutions adopted by Hierapytna to cope with the increase of her population (Chaniotis 1996, 217–221 for Arkades; 234–235, 307–310, 333–337 for Itanos; 303–307 for Praisos; 236–237, 338–351 for Lato; 255–264 for Priansos; 273–274 for Viannos). These treaties concern the seasonal movement of shepherds and herds within the territories of the interested parties, as well as the exemption of the shepherds from taxes during their stay in the foreign land. Chaniotis (1999, 202–204) suspects that the initiative for these treaties was taken by Hierapytna, on account of her interest in settling the surplus of citizen population in the partner cities. Although the resettlement of Mochlos may be related to the demographic problem that Hierapytna appears to have faced, it was probably not the only reason. It is very possible that by the late 2nd century Hierapytna was also interested in creating a northern base on the Bay of Mirabello, the largest part of which (particularly to the west) was controlled by Lato pros Kamara (Fig. 15.1). Mochlos sits at a strategic location controlling the eastern entrance to the bay. According to Seager (1909, 274), “Mochlos must have possessed the best harbor on the coast.” Moreover, Mochlos was fortified already. The recent excavations have shown that both the tower and fortification wall on the summit of the island date to the Late Classical period, if not earlier. From the strategic setting of Mochlos, Hierapytna could have kept an eye on both her northern neighbors, Lato to the west, and Itanos to the east (Fig. 15.1). In addition to the demographic and strategic reasons is the idea that Mochlos was a stopover for transit trade. There are a number of scholars, among them Chaniotis (1999, 182–186), who believe that the subsistence economy of Crete did not allow any large-scale agricultural production and maritime trade before the advent of the Romans. In particular, Chaniotis (1988, 71–72) has argued against the export of Cretan wine in the Hellenistic period on the basis of the very small number of Cretan wine amphoras found outside Crete. There are, however, methodological problems with the interpretation of the archaeological evidence. First, the absence of the Cretan wine amphoras from the Mediterranean markets cannot be used as an argument since the majority of the Cretan Hellenistic pottery remains unpublished, and, as a consequence, is poorly understood. Second, this ignores

217

a P 3507

P 3244

b P 3655

c

Figure 15.2. Amphoras from Mochlos made with ECCW fabric. Types 2 (a–b) and 3 (c). Scale 1:4.

the fact that the majority of amphoras produced in the Hellenistic period were unstamped (VogeikoffBrogan et al. forthcoming). With the help of the petrographic analysis, at least three types of transport amphoras have been distinguished at Mochlos (Figs. 15.2 and 15.3) and Myrtos-Pyrgos. These were apparently products of the Hierapytnian workshops (on the typology, Vogeikoff-Brogan et al. forthcoming). At the excavations at Knossos, a considerable number of local Hellenistic amphoras have also been uncovered (Eiring et al. 2002). Finally, Elpida Hadjidaki reports that large numbers of Cretan amphoras have been found in Phalasarna (pers. comm.). Obviously, in light of this evidence, the issue of production and export of Cretan wine during the Hellenistic period will need to be reconsidered. The silence of the literary sources and the dearth of Cretan stamped amphora handles in deposits off the island are not sufficient reasons to exclude the possibility that Cretan wine was being exported in the Hellenistic period, especially when there is growing archaeological evidence for a sustained production of wine containers. Recently, Viviers (1999) has challenged Chaniotis’ theory supporting a limited subsistence economy in

218

VOGEIKOFF-BROGAN

P 2563

P 2683

P 3531

P 2558

P 2557 Figure 15.3. Amphoras from Mochlos made with ECCW fabric. Type 1. Scale 1:4.

THE LATE HELLENISTIC PERIOD IN EAST CRETE

Crete. Viviers has argued that several treaties among Cretan poleis document a strong interest in taxes gained from sea trade. The Cretans might not themselves have undertaken the transport of their products, but they certainly were aware of the island’s strategic location on Mediterranean trade routes. Harborage fees and levies on non-Cretan products in transit were certainly important sources of revenues for the Cretan poleis (Viviers 1999, 229). Because of Crete’s mountainous appearance, transport by land has been underestimated. While this might be true for several parts of Crete, the Isthmus of Hierapytna would have provided a convenient avenue for transporting goods overland. By the end of the 2nd century B.C., instead of risking a rough trip around the west coast of the island on their way to Egypt, many Aegean traders might have used the harbors on the northern edge

219

of the Isthmus (Minoa and Tholos) for unloading and transporting goods by land to Hierapytna and vice-versa (recently Haggis 1996, 416–424). According to Haggis, the resettlement of Tholos bay in the 1st century B.C. should be associated with “the spread of Hierapytna’s maritime interests to the north coast in the last quarter of the 2nd century” (Haggis 1996, 421). Mochlos might have functioned as another port facility on this northern route. By exploring possible political and economic relationships with the polis of Hierapytna, the small and previously unattested settlement of Mochlos can be placed into the wider regional and historical context of Hellenistic East Crete. New evidence for the production of wine in East Crete calls for a revision of current theories suggesting that the Cretan products were not being exported before the Roman period.

Acknowledgments I would like to thank Jeffrey Soles and Costis Davaras, directors of the Mochlos Excavations, for permission to study and publish the Hellenistic pottery; artist Douglas Faulmann for the drawings;

and Tom Brogan, director of the INSTAP Study Center for East Crete, for facilitating my work at the Center and correcting the English text.

Bibliography Alcock, S.E. 1993. Graecia Capta. The Landscapes of Roman Greece, Cambridge. Boileau, M.-C. 1999. “Hellenistic Amphorae in Crete. Petrographic Analyses of Local and Imported Transport Amphorae from Knossos, Mochlos and Myrtos Pyrgos,” Fitch Laboratory, British School, Unpublished Internal Report, Athens. Branigan, K. 1998. “Prehistoric and Early Historic Settlement in the Ziros Region, Eastern Crete,” BSA 93, pp. 23–90. Chaniotis, A. 1988. “Vinum Creticum Excellens: zum Weinhandel Kretas,” Münstersche Beiträge zur Antiken Handelsgeschichte 7(1), pp. 62–89. ———. 1996. Die Verträge zwischen kretischen Poleis in der hellenistischen Zeit, Stuttgart.

———. 1999. “Milking the Mountains: Economic Activities on the Cretan Uplands in the Classical and Hellenistic Period,” in From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders, A. Chaniotis, ed., Stuttgart, pp.181–220. Day, P.M. 1997. “Ceramic Exchange between Town and Outlying Settlements in Neopalatial East Crete,” in The Function of the “Minoan Villa,” R. Hägg, ed., pp. 219–228. Eiring, J. 2000. “Hellenistic Pottery from Pyrgos at Myrtos, in East Crete,” in E‘ Episthmonikhv Sunavnthsh gia thn Ellhnistikhv Keramikhv, Athens, pp. 53–60. Eiring, J., M.-C. Boileau, and I. Whitbread. 2002. “Local and Imported Transport Amphorae from a Hellenistic Kiln Site at Knossos: The Results of Petrographic Analysis, in Céramiques hellénistiques et romaines, F. Blonde, P. Ballet, J.-F. Salles, eds. (TMO 35), Lyon, pp. 59–63.

220

VOGEIKOFF-BROGAN

Faure, P. 1972. “Neva anavgnwsi" th" epigrafhv" 207 tou Mouseivou Ag. Nikolavou,” Amaltheia 3, pp. 167–180. ———. 1989. Recherches de toponymie crétoise. Opera selecta, Amsterdam. Greco, E., Th. Kalpaxis, A. Schnapp, and D. Viviers. 1997. “Itanos (Crète orientale),” BCH 121, pp. 809–827. ———. 1998. “Itanos (Crète orientale),” BCH 122, pp. 585–602. Guarducci, M. 1942. Inscriptiones Creticae III, Rome. Haggis, D.C. 1996. “Archaeological Survey at Kavousi, Crete: Preliminary Report,” Hesperia 65, pp. 373–432. Hayden, B. 1995. “Rural Settlement of the Orientalizing through Early Classical Period: The Meseleroi Valley, Eastern Crete,” Aegean Archaeology 2, pp. 93–142. Hayden, B., J.A. Moody, and O. Rackham. 1992. “The Vrokastro Survey Project, 1986–1989,” Hesperia 61, pp. 299–353. Harris, W.V. 1999. “Crete in the Hellenistic and Roman Economies: A Comment,” in From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders, A. Chaniotis, ed., Stuttgart, pp. 353– 358. Lembesi, A. 1993. “Suvmh Biavnou: Ierov tou Ermhv kai th" Afrodivth",” Ergon 1993, pp. 100–107. ———. 1997. “To Ierov tou Ermhv kai th" Afrodivth",” Praktika 1997, pp. 191–209.

———. 1988. “ Truphtov" Shteiva", Xerovkampo" Zhvrou, Koufonhvsi Shteiva",” ArchDelt 43, 1988 [1993] (Chronika), pp. 561–563. ———. 1994. “Truphtov" Shteiva",” ArchDelt 49, 1994 [1999] (Chronika), pp. 746–747. ———. 1995. “JAgnwsta nomivsmata mia" neva" autovnomh" krhtikhv" povlh" sth Shteiva,” in Pepragmevna tou Z’ Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou A2, pp. 741–744. Sanders, I.F. 1982. Roman Crete: An Archaeological Survey and Gazeteer of Late Hellenistic, Roman and Early Byzantine Crete, Warminster. Schlager, N. 1991. Archäologische Geländerprospektion Südostkreta. Erste Ergebnisse, Vienna. Seager, R.B. 1909. “Excavations on the Island of Mochlos, Crete, in 1908,” AJA 13, pp. 273–303. Soles, J., and C. Davaras. 1996. “Excavations at Mochlos 1992–1993,” Hesperia 65, pp. 175–230. Spyridakis, S. 1970. Ptolemaic Itanos and Hellenistic Crete, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London. van Effenterre, H. 1991. “Die von den Grenzen der ostkretischen Poleis eingeschlossenen Flächen als Ernährunsspielraum,” in Stuttgarter Kolloquium zur Historischen Geographie des Altertums 2, 1984 und 3, 1987, E. Olshausen and H. Sonnabend, eds., Bonn, 393–406.

Marangou, A. 1999. “Wine in the Cretan Economy,” in From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders, A. Chaniotis, ed., Stuttgart, pp. 269–278.

———. 1994. “La terminologie des bornages frontaliers,” in Stuttgarter Kolloquium zur Historischen Geographie des Altertums 4, 1990, E. Olshausen and H. Sonnabend, eds., Amsterdam, pp. 111–125.

Marangou-Lerat, A. 1995. Le vin et les amphores de Crète (EtCret 30), Athens.

van Effenterre, H., and M. Bougrat. 1969. “Les frontiers de Lato,” CretChron 21, pp. 9–53.

Papadakis, N. 1976. “Koufonhvsi Shteiva",” ArchDelt 31, 1976 [1984] (Chronika), pp. 382–382.

Viviers, D. 1999. “Economy and Territorial Dynamics in Crete from the Archaic to the Hellenistic Period,” in From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders, A. Chaniotis, ed., Stuttgart, pp. 221–233.

———. 1980a. Shteiva. H Patrivda tou Muvsona kai tou Kornavrou, Siteia. ———. 1980b. “Koufonhvsi,” ArchDelt 35, 1980 [1988] (Chronika), pp. 523–524. ———. 1984. “Xerovkampo" Zhvrou,” ArchDelt 39, 1984 [1989] (Chronika), pp. 304–306. ———. 1985. “Shteiva,” ArchDelt 40, 1985 [1990] (Chronika), pp. 300–301. ———. 1986a. “Koufonhvsi Shteiva", Xerovkampo" Zhvrou,” ArchDelt 41, 1986 [1991] (Chronika), pp. 228–232. ———. 1986b. Ierapetra. Bride of the Libyan Sea, trans. J.M. Kafetzaki, Ierapetra.

Vogeikoff, N. 2000. “Late Hellenistic Pottery from Mochlos in East Crete,” in G‘ Episthmonikhv Sunavnthsh gia thn Ellhnistikhv Keramikhv, Athens, pp. 69–74. Vogeikoff-Brogan, N., J. Eiring, M.-C. Boileau, and I.K. Whitbread. forthcoming. “Transport Amphoras and Wine Trade in East Crete in the Late Hellenistic Period. Evidence from Mochlos and Pyrgos Myrtos,” in E‘ Episthmonikhv Sunavnthsh gia thn Ellhnistikhv Keramikhv, Athens. Watrous, L.V. 1994–1995. “Gournia Project,” AR 1994– 1995, p. 65. Whitley, J., M. Prent, and S. Thorne. 1999. “Praisos IV: A Preliminary Report on the 1993 and 1994 Survey Season,” BSA 93, pp. 215–264.

PA RT I V Landscape and Survey

16 Past and Present Perspectives on the Archaeological Landscapes of Mirabello Donald C. Haggis

Our perception of the cultural landscape is formed by two dominant fields of reference, which are independent but equally vivid systemic contexts affecting our interpretation of archaeological remains and informing our inferences about the past. One is the living, contemporary environment—the modern landscape, settlement patterns, communication routes, and so on. The other is the archaeological record itself. The modern landscape has become a conceptual framework for archaeologists; it has not been a definable realm of analogy subjected to methodological scrutiny. It is a vivid picture that assumes not only cultural continuity but also environmental constancy. Perhaps it is difficult to escape the preconceptions derived from what we see around us in our contemporary milieu. The existing environment is perceived as a constant, self-evident eternal snapshot of human-landscape interaction. In many ways, the archaeological

record creates just as vivid a picture and as similar a bias as the modern landscape. This is not merely individual excavated sites and loci, but the entirety of the interpretive discourse that emerges from the sum total of these archaeological units—many of which were established around A.D. 1900. This is not to suggest that observations about the modern landscape generate inherently flawed analogies, nor that the inductively derived reconstruction of the past is necessarily incomplete. The process of conducting archaeology itself—especially in Mirabello—has been guided by notions of the cultural landscape that were created entirely 100 years ago. In many ways, these preconceptions stand in opposition to the potential direction of research indicated by intensive survey. The aim here is to reflect on what archaeology has been done in this region of Crete and comment on future directions.

224

HAGGIS

Figure 16.1. Roman granary at Tholos Bay; view from south looking toward the Isthmus of Ierapetra.

Figure 16.2. The Kastro (right) and Mt. Papoura (left-center) from the Avgo valley.

PAST AND PRESENT PERSPECTIVES ON THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL LANDSCAPES OF MIRABELLO

Men of the Bronze Age chose low hills not far from the sea; their successors, a ruder people of the Iron Age, had strongholds on almost inaccessible mountain heights; Greeks and Romans established trading-stations on the shore; Venetians and Turks built watch-towers and block-houses at commanding points for the purpose of holding the unfortunate Cretans in subjection; modern Cretans still prefer the security of the hills, but a seaward movement has already begun as a result of the peace and order that since the liberation of Crete in 1898 have prevailed throughout the island. (Boyd 1904, 11–12) Harriet Boyd’s observations in 1904 are comments on diachronic settlement patterns and the contemporary north Isthmus of Ierapetra, revealing her unusual interest in the impact of topography on ancient as well as Venetian, Ottoman, and recent settlement. Boyd’s descriptive accounts draw fascinating links between human activity and local environment. Such are the connections that archaeologists, ethnographers, geologists, and historians seek in modern-day multidisciplinary expeditions. After her first season of excavation, she commented, “It appears that the Romans preferred the coast and the low hills to the west of Kavousi for their settlements. Perhaps this land had already been occupied by a primitive people; but this remains a point to be settled by future excavations” (Boyd 1901, 157) (Fig. 16.1). And, in 1904, on the Avgo valley, she wrote, “Bronze Age sites are much pleasanter to explore than the arduous barren heights of the Iron Age . . . This luxuriance is due to abundance of water, greatest of all blessings to Greek and Cretan” (Boyd 1904, 18). To Boyd, the contrasts between the locations of the Early Iron Age settlements of Vronda, Kastro, and Azoria, and the Roman sites of Tholos and Chordakia were striking (Fig. 16.2). Furthermore, the analogous topography of Minoan and Roman sites led Boyd to adopt what amounted to a probabilistic surveying technique. In 1901, before moving her expedition to Gournia, she commented on site locations and environment: “ . . . we rode up and down Kavousi plain and the neighboring coast hills seeking for the Bronze Age settlement which I was convinced lay in these lowlands somewhere near the sea” (Boyd 1904, 30). Disappointed by results of her survey, she contemplated the geomorphology: “From an archaeological as well as

225

agricultural point of view the curse of the Kavousi region is the shallowness of soil . . . “ (Boyd 1904, 30). Of course, the reconstruction of paleoenvironments was not a systematic research endeavor in 1900 any more so than consideration of formation processes, sampling strategies, or ethnography. The early researchers in Mirabello were cognizant, however, of the physical environment (Patten 1908), a changing natural and cultural landscape with stratigraphic dimensions (e.g., Boyd 1904, 10– 11). For Boyd, her contemporary natural and cultural environment was less an “ethnographic present” (see Fotiades 1995) to be compared systematically to the past, than an observable phenomenon in the landscape that could not but affect her interpretation of the archaeology. Boyd’s Kavousi is now for us an archaeological landscape, so much so that present surveys make observations on present-day land use and habitation as part of the documentation of the physical environment, although “traditional” settlement patterns and recently abandoned artifacts are recorded as archaeological remains (Fig. 16.3). That is to say, ethnography rapidly is becoming archaeology as Crete’s recent past disappears in the wake of political and economic change. The traditional hamlets in the Avgo valley, for example, provided Boyd accommodation during her excavation season. For us, they have become well-preserved archaeological sites (Mook and Haggis 1994). In this little corner of Crete, sea, plain, and mountains meet in the perfect combination for which Greek lands are famous. But beauty alone would not have attracted settlers to the spot for three thousand years. The place

Figure 16.3. A trapetum and orbis in an abandoned house in Monastiraki.

226

HAGGIS

Figure 16.4. The Kastro (left) and Chondrovolakes (center) from Kavousi village.

has received another gift from nature—an excellent strategical position commanding four important roads . . . all natural highways and must have been used from the earliest times. (Boyd 1901, 129–130) Harriet Boyd was aware of the extreme differences in the locations of LM I sites near the shore in the Kambos, and LM IIIC–Geometric sites in the Kavousi mountains. She was equally conscious of similarities between Roman trading interests and extensive agriculture, and Venetian Ottoman infrastructure (e.g., Boyd 1904, 12–13). The physical terrain presented natural communication routes, and the topographical setting of the archaeological sites formed an immediate and dramatic context for assessing interregional dynamics and diachronic changes in settlement patterns. Here Nature has made communication between sea and sea not only short but easy, by way of a narrow strip of lowland, lying between the ranges of Dicte in Sitia and Dicte in Lasithi, severing the long mountain chain that forms the backbone of Crete . . . Dwellers on the Isthmus are at the mercy of their upland neighbors and the long existence of unfortified settlements of the Bronze Age . . . points to greater tranquillity in Crete during prehistoric times than we find in later periods. (Hawes et al. 1908, 19)

The early archaeologists’ implicit understanding of interregional interaction and dependence on available natural resources was derived from their observations of the contemporary landscape—an awareness of the layered history of the region, a sense of continuity of land use broken or disrupted only by periodic external factors (see Pendlebury 1939, 368–369). Boyd was interested in how land was exploited, the character of the soil, the types of natural and cultivated vegetation, the location of water supplies, and these were a frequent source of analogy in interpreting ancient remains. In 1896 and 1899, Sir Arthur Evans probably was the first to investigate the archaeology of the Mirabello area. He identified a number of sites including the settlement on the Kastro (Fig. 16.4), a tholos tomb at Plaï tou Kastrou, the Late Roman village at Khordakia, and probably Gournia. In 1900 and 1901, Harriet Boyd (Hawes) carried out the first systematic exploration of the region. She surveyed on foot and horseback, identifying and excavating some fifteen sites. The Early Iron Age sites of Vronda and Kastro and their associated cemeteries were the primary focus of Boyd’s expedition and were the best recorded and published of the sites that she examined. The remarkable chronological and topographical range of her work helped to form an important record and compelling description of the region at the turn of

PAST AND PRESENT PERSPECTIVES ON THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL LANDSCAPES OF MIRABELLO

Figure 16.5. Foundations of a Minoan (MM II–LM I) building at Tholos bay.

Figure 16.6. Minoan house walls at Ayios Antonios.

227

228

HAGGIS

the century. In addition to conducting excavations at Vronda and Kastro, Boyd explored the neighboring Dark Age site of Azoria and a nearby Orientalizing cemetery at Chondrovolakes (Fig. 16.4). In the Avgo valley, she excavated a Minoan house at Panayia, and identified the location of a LM III larnax burial nearby and a tholos tomb on the Trapeza ridge above Panayia. Searching for a major Minoan site to excavate, Boyd dug a test trench in the Roman warehouse at Tholos Bay and identified buildings on the furthest point north of the Roman site (Fig. 16.1). These walls were the remains of the Minoan town that Boyd was seeking, but the shallowness of the deposition and the evidence of Roman-period disturbance of the earlier levels discouraged excavation (Fig. 16.5). At Ayios Antonios, she explored the Minoan settlement but excavated only a portion of an agricultural terrace wall (Fig. 16.6). The intensive surveys of the north Isthmus and Mirabello areas are the continuation of research begun by Harriet Boyd in 1900. Although methods have changed, and knowledge of artifacts and contexts has improved, the aims are much the same. Indeed, it could be argued that the intensive work

conducted in the Mirabello region from 1900 to 1915 has provided the conceptual and methodological framework for a new era of research. These early excavations and surveys essentially have defined the research universe and the sample area, and have drawn the notional boundaries of the regions that we try to define in cultural terms. This has been, however, as much a hindrance as a help, in the same way that a partial excavation sample can both bias the interpretation of the site and future excavation strategies and yet shape historical conclusions. The vagaries inherent in early excavations— often responses to impressions of the landscape— have helped to create a new systemic context of the “published site” and its associated region. How different would our perception be of Mirabello if Azoria had been excavated instead of Vronda; if Protogeometric levels were exposed on the Kastro; if Tholos had been excavated instead of Pseira; if Priniatikos Pyrgos was completely excavated instead of Gournia; or Elatzomouri instead of Vasiliki? The traditional focus on specific sites has greatly affected, if not fundamentally shaped, both the administrative decisions on cultural resource

Figure 16.7. Chrysokamino (center), Mt. Chalepa (upper left), and the southeast corner of the Bay of Mirabello.

PAST AND PRESENT PERSPECTIVES ON THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL LANDSCAPES OF MIRABELLO

229

Figure 16.8. EM III–MM II building at Chondrovolakes.

management by the Greek Ministry of Culture as well as the research orientation of current research projects. Intensive archaeological survey in the area of Mirabello stands in opposition to the static research universe of the excavation (Haggis 1996; Watrous and Blitzer 1994; Hayden, Moody, and Rackham 1992; Hope Simpson and Betancourt 1989). Mirabello provides a context for assessing evidence of human activity in the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age, and intensive survey offers an understanding of intersite relationships on various spatial scales. The purpose of survey has been to examine the effects of regional and islandwide political, economic, and cultural systems on local settlement patterns. Whether conforming to the specific research aims of the investigation of the hinterlands of Vronda, Gournia, Vrokastro, or Vasiliki, the surveys encompassed a much broader chronological and spatial scope than that provided by the neighboring excavations. Survey has taught us that scale is critical in assessing social and political systems, and that those systems change drastically through space

and time. So how far have we come since the definition of Boyd’s study universe? The coastal orientation of Early Bronze I and II sites indicates interregional and off-island connections, and by EM II, there is a two- or three-level hierarchy (Fig. 16.7). The widespread distribution of wares manufactured in the Gournia and Vasiliki areas is also evident. Ceramic petrography, combined with survey, has expanded our notion of the scale of economic systems—as Boyd recognized, the Isthmus corridor and Mirabello Bay were important avenues for exchange. In the Late Prepalatial period at Kavousi, a distinct clustering of sites suggests not only a break from the EM II pattern of nucleated villages, but also a new emphasis on mountain zones. New sites suggest novel agricultural and pastoral resources; houses with substantial foundations eventually may be revealed as special function buildings within the organizational hierarchy of these communities (Fig. 16.8). The metallurgical site of Chrysokamino, located in one of these clusters, suggests the complexity of the economy and social organization (Fig. 16.7). Fortified sites in the

230

HAGGIS

Isthmus and elsewhere on Crete indicate a significant restructuring of the landscape in this period. A priority of excavation in the next century should be to excavate one of these sites. The peak in site density in the Protopalatial period suggests a highly integrated structure—a continuous process of settlement expansion begun in EM III. This peak in density is symptomatic of both increased complexity and unique environmental circumstances—rather than the result of the emergence of a palace-based structure, or the tendency toward urbanization (Figs. 16.6 and 16.8). Palaces are also symptoms, rather than causes, of the expanding scale and increasing complexity of social and economic systems. The political dimensions of the Protopalatial pattern must be explored, not merely as a hierarchy of sites dependent on a palatial infrastructure, but as a form of social structure, a sacred landscape, and an expression of local identity. The Middle Minoan landscape should be more complex than the Neopalatial landscape, if more decentralized than our hierarchical models of the palace-centered states. The study of peak sanctuaries and elite pottery consumption will be central to the next generation of work. Analogies between Neopalatial and Roman settlement patterns—made a century ago by Harriet Boyd—still emphasize the importance of the Isthmus route in linking the Aegean and Mediterranean, as well as the economic and political centrality of Ierapetra (Figs. 16.1 and 16.5). These remain, however, archaeological unknowns. As we await the construction of an airport at Vasiliki and a harbor at Pacheia Ammos (Fig. 16.7), and the expansion of the Ierapetra demos, the Isthmus presents vivid reminders of the impact of modern analogy and the truism of cyclical history. The distribution of Dark Age sites, and the details provided by their intensive excavation, have provided the basis for reconstructing entire

settlement systems. The resulting picture describes communities that inhabit not just individual houses, hamlets, or villages, but entire regions. Social organization is visible through the relationship between buildings, tombs, and the physical landscape, as well as between sites such as Katalimata, Halasmenos, Kephala Vasilikis, and the sites in the Kavousi and Orino valleys. Analogies with late Prepalatial and Protopalatial patterns present interesting possibilities. Territories were delineated and defined by the strategic placement of sites based on control of communication routes and local land and water resources (Fig. 16.2). Cemeteries demarcated lineage-based claims to in-field land. Interregional integration may be linked to a hierarchy of shrines. The questions that Boyd sought to answer in 1900 were not unimportant. Her perception of the region was insightful, and in many ways anticipated the results and issues of modern Cretan archaeology. Although her legacy was the excavation of the single site of Gournia, Boyd directed our gaze across a changing and complex cultural landscape. She advised us to think about the region diachronically, to consider diverse spatial scales of human interaction, and to look further than Mirabello to the Isthmus and to the Aegean and Mediterranean beyond. At the same time, archaeologists today have to visualize the past through the layered haze of the modern landscape, one generated by the results of past archaeologists—a stratigraphy of research that is as convincing in its clarity and simplicity as it is biasing in its definition of political centers, cultural regions, and economic systems. Survey and excavation in Mirabello must be conducted anew. They must essentially disregard the notional region, and exploit the detailed descriptions of remains now lost or destroyed as the landscape itself is transformed.

Bibliography Boyd, H.A. 1901. “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, in 1900,” AJA 5, pp. 125–157. ———. 1904. “Gournia, Report of the American Exploration Society’s Excavations at Gournia, Crete, 1901–1903,” Transactions of the Department of Archaeology: Free Museum of Science and Art University of Pennsylvania I.1 and I.2, Philadelphia, pp. 7–44.

———. 1905. “Gournia, Report of the American Exploration Society’s Excavations at Gournia, Crete in 1904,” Transactions of the Department of Archaeology, Free Museum of Science and Art University of Pennsylvania I.3, Philadelphia, pp. 177–189. Fotiades, M. 1995. “Modernity and the Past-Still-Present: Politics of Time in the Birth of Regional Archaeological Projects in Greece,” AJA 99, pp. 59–78.

PAST AND PRESENT PERSPECTIVES ON THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL LANDSCAPES OF MIRABELLO

231

Haggis, D.C. 1996. “Archaeological Survey at Kavousi, East Crete: Preliminary Report,” Hesperia 65, pp. 373– 432.

Mook, M.S., and D.C. Haggis. 1994. “Aspects of Vernacular Architecture in Postpalatial and Early Iron Age Crete,” AJA 98, p. 307.

Hawes, H.B., B.E. Williams, R.B. Seager, and E.H. Hall. 1908. Gournia, Vasiliki and Other Prehistoric Sites on the Isthmus of Hierapetra, Crete, Philadelphia.

Patten, J.B. 1908. “Spring Flora of the Kavousi Region,” “Appendix F” in H.B. Hawes et al., Gournia, Vasiliki and Other Prehistoric Sites on the Isthmus of Hierapetra, Crete, Philadelphia, p. 58.

Hayden, B.J., J.A. Moody, and O. Rackham. 1992. “The Vrokastro Survey Project, 1986–1989: Research Design and Preliminary Results,” Hesperia 61, pp. 293–353. Hope Simpson, R., and P.P. Betancourt. 1989. “Intensive Survey of Pseira Island, Crete,” (paper, Boston 1989), abstract in AJA 94, 1990, p. 322.

Pendlebury, J.D.S. 1939. The Archaeology of Crete, London. Watrous, L.V., and H. Blitzer. 1994. “The Gournia Survey Project: A Preliminary Report on the 1992–1994 Field Seasons,” (paper, Atlanta 1994), abstract in AJA 99, 1995, p. 313.

17 Vrokastro and the Settlement Pattern of the LM IIIA–Geometric Periods Barbara J. Hayden

In 1903, Richard Seager and Harriet Boyd visited Vrokastro, a 300 m high peak that flanks the coast of the Gulf of Mirabello near its midpoint (Hall 1914, 80) (Figs. 17.1, 17.2, 17.3). Vrokastro is located 2 km east of the fertile, well-watered Kalo Chorio or Istron River Valley, and it is the highest peak in a series of hills and ridges that parallel the coast of the Gulf of Mirabello in this area. Its summit is located at the eastern end of a series of hills (Kopranes) and a long ridge, Karakovilia, that extend west toward the Aphendi Christos and Kalo Chorio Valleys (Figs. 17.1 and 17.4). Seager and Hawes found numerous walls, sherds, and depth of fill sufficient to justify an excavation, which was directed by Edith Hall in 1910 and 1912. Hall (1914, 81) described the entire mountain as strewn with sherds, from summit to sea. The extent of architectural evidence suggested that Vrokastro, at the height of its power, would have appeared like an Italian hill-town (Figs. 17.2 and 17.3). As to the reason for settlement, she noted

its topographical advantages, including a commanding view of the gulf coupled with easy access to the fertile coastal zone and the Kalo Chorio Valley. Hall also noted that the excavated settlement on the peak and north face of Vrokastro was but a portion of the entire settlement area, with tombs and houses extending to the southwest. Hall’s view was simply stated: “A circuit of five kilometers indeed would scarcely include the district where traces of Geometric remains abound. For this entire area as well as for the valley of Kalo Khorio, Vrokastro would have served as a lookout and citadel” (Hall 1914, 82). During the early 1980s investigation of this site was renewed, and a new plan of the Vrokastro settlement was published (Hayden 1983). When the Vrokastro Survey Project was initiated late in the same decade, one major goal was to provide an archaeological or regional context for this important settlement, in order to give reality to the picture presented by Edith Hall early in this century.

Figure 17.1. Vrokastro survey area, showing toponyms and location of the settlement of Vrokastro, and the Istron or Kalo Chorio Valley, to the west of Vrokastro.

234 HAYDEN

VROKASTRO

235

Figure 17.2. Summit and north slope of Vrokastro from the northeast.

The Settlement Pattern in LM IIIA–IIIB The inception of settlement on the peak of Vrokastro may have occurred at the close of the LM IIIB period, near the end of the 13th century B.C. (Popham 1965, 235, n. 15; Davaras 1979, 114–117). This is not, however, the earliest occupation; cooking pots, storage jars, and high-quality Kamares Ware vessels testify to occupation of this high site in the MM I–III periods (Hall 1914, fig. 66). The abandonment of the peak site in the early Neopalatial period is consistent with the regional settlement pattern, in which a retraction occurred in early Neopalatial that would endure until the Postpalatial period. This is also true for other areas in Eastern Crete (see, for example, Haggis 1992, 280). During the Postpalatial period in the Vrokastro area, there were some LM IIIA and IIIB sites that consisted of one locus, probably a habitation, within a larger, earlier settlement (Fig. 17.5). The phenomenon of a smaller Postpalatial site found in a larger, earlier settlement has been revealed through survey in other areas of Eastern Crete (Branigan 1998, 71). It is not a trend toward nucleation but

rather one of population loss, although the regional Vrokastro pattern still speaks of continuity. Isolated LM IIIA–IIIB tombs have been found primarily within the coastal zone or on hills flanking the fertile Kalo Chorio and Aphendi Christos Valleys, just south of the coastal zone. Pottery from these tombs and settlements indicates that the LM IIIA period, especially IIIA:2, is more recognizable in the landscape than LM IIIB. Late Minoan IIIA stemmed cups, conical cups, and stirrup jars were found through survey. The apparent significance of the LM IIIA:2 period accords with other data from Eastern Crete (Warren and MacGillivray 1997, 404; MacGillivray 1997, 275–279). Near Vrokastro, the most important LM IIIA and IIIB settlement is located in the Phanourios area, just 20 minutes walk east of the Vrokastro peak (Fig. 17.1). This settlement is located on a long north-facing slope. Though the area is fertile and has perennial springs, it is not defensible; there is no visibility to the sea from Phanourios. The peak of Vrokastro is nearby, however, dominating the area from the west.

236

HAYDEN

Figure 17.3. View to the summit of Vrokastro from the Chavga ravine, to the southeast.

The Settlement Pattern in LM IIIC The Vrokastro regional settlement pattern expands from the elusive LM IIIB period and is defined primarily by a line of sites located between 1.5–2 km from the sea (Fig. 17.6). This line extends from the Kendromouri hills flanking the west side of the Gournia plain to the southern extent of the Kalo Chorio Valley, close to the western boundary of the survey area. This pattern demonstrates the need for contact with the sea and the continued exploitation of the best deep soils in the northern half of the survey region. One new settlement that belongs to a late phase of LM IIIC is located on a hilltop in the southern extent of the Kalo Chorio Valley, an anchor for other contemporary smaller farms and habitations on hill slopes that encircle the valley. Settlement in Phanourios continues. For the first time, there is extensive evidence for settlement on the Vrokastro summit in the form of pottery that appears to span the entire LM IIIC period as defined by the Kavousi sequence (Hall 1914, 92–93, fig. 49; Mook and Coulson 1997, 337– 370). Shapes are predominantly bowls and cups.

Hall found no tombs to accompany the early to mid LM IIIC settlement of Vrokastro, and this may indicate that the population that moved up to occupy the peak in the 12th century was still burying the dead near the old settlement, possibly in Phanourios. The earliest tombs associated with this site are two LM IIIC (late) pithos burials from the Chavga ravine directly east of Vrokastro (Hall 1914, 172–174, pl. xxvii: 1) and two robbed and damaged corbel-vaulted chamber tombs, 5 and 6, excavated on the lower northwestern slopes of Kopranes. Kanta (1980, 176) places the contents of these corbeled tombs late in LM IIIC. These tombs were not relocated through survey, although a possible LM IIIC site was found on the hill Kato Arniko at the western end of Kopranes, and recently a LM IIIC tomb was excavated nearby. It is probable that these tombs, in the lower western foothills of Kopranes, may not belong to Vrokastro but to a smaller site located in the nearby Aphendi Christos Valley. This small settlement may be the one identified through survey on the hill Kato Arniko.

Figure 17.4. Area around the settlement of Vrokastro, showing the lower slopes of Kopranes below the Karakovilia ridge, and Mazikhortia, Amigthali, where Hall excavated Protogeometric–Geometric tombs and houses.

VROKASTRO

237

238

HAYDEN

Figure 17.5. Vrokastro survey area, showing location of LM IIIA–IIIB settlements and tombs.

VROKASTRO

Figure 17.6. Vrokastro survey area, showing location of LM IIIC sites.

239

240

HAYDEN

Besides their early date, these tombs on the lower slopes of Kopranes contain the earliest cremations in the Vrokastro region. The increase in settlement during LM IIIC and the presence of these cremations could suggest a new population in the area (Snodgrass 1971, 168–169). Vrokastro was established in conjunction with a new walled site on the coast, based on the promontory of Elias to Nisi (Figs. 17.1 and 17.7), where a 6 m thick wall constructed on a leveling course was built in compartments that span wall thickness and retain the rubble fill. This massive enclosure extends across the southern base of the promontory, from its steep western slopes to a cliff on the

southeast side. Interior walls that span wall thickness are also seen in a massive fortification at the LM IIIC and later site of Kastellos, near Kritsa, about 10 km to the east (Nowicki 1987, 234, fig. 8, 223; Hayden, Moody, and Rackham 1992, 328, n. 100). The wall on Elias to Nisi encloses a very damaged LM IIIC and Early Iron Age settlement that was based primarily on the southeastern slopes of the promontory (Fig. 17.7: areas E–F) and descends to a sheltered cove. It is possible that this wall protected a small port, used seasonally, which served the newly established LM IIIC community on the mountain of Vrokastro above.

The Settlement Pattern in the Subminoan/ Protogeometric–Geometric Periods At the close of the LM IIIC period, the settlement pattern appears to collapse toward Vrokastro, leaving a cluster of settlements at Phanourios, Vrokastro, and the coastal promontory of Elias to Nisi (Fig. 17.8). Pithos fragments from the coastal zone and jar fragments found along the base of Kopranes, however, indicate cultivation, and possibly even habitation, within this exposed zone continued outside of the fortified site on Elias to Nisi. Examination of pottery from the Vrokastro settlement within the collection of the University of Pennsylvania Museum indicates that there is less evidence for settlement on the mountain during this period. Indeed, it may be that during the Protogeometric period, the Vrokastro settlement was more dispersed, with families living near the fields that they were cultivating. This is also suggested by the scattered location of tombs belonging to this period that Hall excavated along the Karakovilia ridge atop Kopranes and in other areas (Mazikhortia, Amigthali) near or contiguous to the Vrokastro summit (Fig. 17.4). Hall reinforces this by saying that “trial trenches sunk in the neighborhood . . . revealed nothing but house-walls, and subsequent experience pointed also to the conclusion, that tombs had been interspersed among houses” (Hall 1914, 84). She also describes these possible habitations as being larger and better built

than those structures crowded onto the summit and north slope of the mountain; one of these houses, located southwest of the summit, was exposed by bulldozing in 1987. Some of the PG corbel-vaulted tombs associated with the settlement contained a mix of inhumations and cremations, although according to Hall, cremations are limited to Tombs 1, 4, and 5 (Hall 1914, 175). Overall, she describes 50% of the burials within these corbeled tombs as probable cremations (Hall 1914, 176). These were probably used by families or extended families; some of these tombs appear to have continued in use until the 9th or 8th century B.C. (or they were rediscovered and reused). The local style of much of the pottery from these tombs has been called Subminoan, a regional style concurrent with part (or perhaps all) of the PG style of Central Crete. This chronological overlap is demonstrated by a few vases from Vrokastro tombs that bear evidence of the influence of PG motifs and shapes (for example, pottery from Tombs 1 and 3). Tomb gifts include stemmed cups, bowls, and kraters, possibly forming sets for a banquet or last toast at the tomb, and stirrup jars, flasks, bird askoi, and pitchers. Although some of these tombs were robbed or damaged, and the data are very incomplete, it appears that there are differences in the number and quality of the offerings,

VROKASTRO

241

Figure 17.7. Elias to Nisi promontory, showing location of enclosure wall; the settlement contemporary with the wall is located at E–F.

242

HAYDEN

Figure 17.8. Vrokastro survey area, showing location of Protogeometric–Geometric sites.

Figure 17.9. Plan of the Geometric settlement on the summit of Vrokastro.

VROKASTRO

243

244

HAYDEN

and in the quality of tomb construction. These hint at distinctions in wealth and possibly status between families. From the 9th to the end of the 8th century, there is plentiful evidence for settlement returning to the summit and north slope of the mountain in the form of pottery, beginning with sherds of the Protogeometric B period, and architecture, both on the summit and north slope of the mountain. Plans consist of single rooms, axial buildings, and rectangular structures (Fig. 17.9) composed of several small rooms. Street 2 on the southwestern edge of the upper settlement is flanked by a small shrine, Room 8, with a bench (Hayden 1983). This room contained clay figurines with a nearby deposit of metal tools and weapons (Hayden 1991). More figurines, including a head figurine, were found under a north-south wall located near the south wall of Room 17. Rooms 16 and 17 comprise the largest and most massively built structure on the summit. It is probable that this large structure, or a building that preceded it, did contain a shrine; this has been suggested by Mazarakis Ainian (1997, 213–214, n. 1683). Burials that accompany the 9th and 8th century settlement are in tombs that Hall describes as “bone enclosures,” and one of the earliest of these is the 9th century B.C. Bone Enclosure 6 (see Coldstream 1968, 235; 1977, 102). These are small, poorly built chambers; the walls are one or two courses high. These chambers can be isolated or clustered and contain cremations. Some cremations may have been primary or occurred in situ, as Hall (1914, 118, 155) describes burning on walls and extensive depth of ashy fill. These later cremations appear to be accompanied by more metal tools, weapons, and jewelry, but Hall published less pottery than from the corbeled tombs. The range of vase shapes also is more restricted and includes, most commonly, aryballoi and alabastra for oil, and pitchers, hydrias, cups, and a few jars.

The bone enclosures again are described as interspersed with the earlier corbeled tombs and contemporary habitations, and according to Hall (1914, 84, 118), they are just as widely dispersed across the landscape. They appear to come into fashion as many of the corbeled tombs are going out of use, but the two tomb types do overlap chronologically. Some of the bone enclosures appear to continue into the 7th century B.C. It is most probable that the Vrokastro population moved down to the more exposed coast when conditions permitted. This accords with the scenario suggested by Snodgrass (1991, 8–9) for the close of the 8th century B.C., when better access to land, sea, and water resources outweighs the need for security. The fertile coastal zone was always the preferred location for settlement, and the local LM IIIC through Early Iron Age population made a determined effort to remain in contact with and utilize this zone. They settled on and near the large promontory of Nisi Pandeleimon near the base of the mountain. Survey indicates that this is the most probable location for the small Greek polis of Istron (Hayden 1995, 94–95). Earliest pottery from this site belongs to the 7th century, and Istron continues until the 2nd century B.C. Morris, (1991, 26, 41), Snodgrass (1991, 8), and, more recently Foxhall (1995, 248–249) have suggested polis development might precede the 8th century B.C. If the primary founders of Istron were descendants of the Vrokastro population, as the physical proximity and chronological overlap suggest, then the first stages of political unification may have occurred not with the settlement of Istron but rather with the foundation of, and nucleation around, Vrokastro. That this long developmental sequence was initiated at Vrokastro would be of no surprise to Hall, who recognized the striking topographical advantages of this high site, which is defensible, yet blessed with easy access to the sea and fertile, wellwatered valleys.

Acknowledgments Jennifer Moody and I were co-directors of this project; support came primarily from INSTAP and the University of Pennsylvania Museum, under the auspices of the American School of Classical

Studies at Athens and the 24th Ephoreia. From the Ephoreia, I would especially like to thank Vili Apostolakou, Kostis Davaras, and the late Nikos Papadakis.

VROKASTRO

245

Bibliography Branigan, K., 1998. “Prehistoric and Early Historic Settlement in the Ziros Region, Eastern Crete,” BSA 93, pp. 23–90. Coldstream, J.N. 1968. Greek Geometric Pottery, London. ———. 1977. Geometric Greece, London. Davaras, C. 1979. “A Double Axe-Design (?) from Vrokastro,” ArchEph 1979, pp. 114–117. Foxhall, L. 1995. “Bronze to Iron: Agricultural Systems and Political Structures in Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Greece,” BSA 90, pp. 239–250. Haggis, D.C. 1992. The Kavousi-Thriphti Survey: An Analysis of Settlement Patterns in an Area of Eastern Crete in the Bronze and Early Iron Age, Ph.D. diss., University of Minnesota. Hall, E.H. 1914. Excavations in Eastern Crete, Vrokastro, Philadelphia. Hayden, B.J. 1983. “New Plans of the Early Iron Age Settlement of Vrokastro,” Hesperia 52, pp. 367–387. ———. 1991. “Vrokastro Terracotta Figures, Figurines, and Vase Attachments,” Hesperia 60, pp. 103–144. ———. 1995. “Rural Settlement of the Orientalizing through Early Classical Period: The Meseleroi Valley, Eastern Crete,” Aegean Archaeology 2, pp. 93–144. Hayden, B.J., J. Moody, and O. Rackham. 1992. “The Vrokastro Survey Project 1986–1989: Research Design and Preliminary Results,” Hesperia 61, pp. 293–353.

Kanta, A. 1980. The Late Minoan III Period in Crete (SIMA 58), Göteborg. MacGillivray, J.A. 1997. “The Reoccupation of Eastern Crete in the Late Minoan II–IIIA1/2 Periods,” in La Crète myceniénne (BCH Supplement 30), J. Driessen and A. Farnoux, eds., Athens, pp. 275–279. Mazakaris Ainian, A. 1997. From Rulers’ Dwellings to Temples: Architecture, Religion, and Society in Early Iron Age Greece (1100–700 B.C.) (SIMA 121), Jonsered. Mook, M., and W.D.E. Coulson. 1997. “Late Minoan IIIC from the Kastro at Kavousi,” in Late Minoan III Pottery. Chronology and Terminology, E. Hallager and B.P. Hallager, eds., Athens, pp. 337–370. Morris, I. 1991. “The Early Polis as City and State,” in City and Country in the Ancient World, J. Rich and A. Wallace-Hadrill, eds., London, pp. 25–57. Nowicki, K. 1987. “Topography of Refuge Settlement in Crete,” JRGZM 34, pp. 213–234. Popham, M.R. 1965. “Some Late Minoan III Pottery from Crete,” BSA 60, pp. 316–342. Snodgrass, A.M. 1971. The Dark Age of Greece, Edinburgh. ———. 1991. “Archaeology and the Study of the Greek City,” in City and Country in the Ancient World, J. Rich and A. Wallace-Hadrill, eds., London, pp. 1–23. Warren, P., and J.A. MacGillivray, 1997. “Comments,” in La Crète mycénienne (BCH Supplement 30), J. Driessen and A. Farnoux, eds., Athens, p. 404.

18 Western Crete in the Bronze Age: A Survey of the Evidence Jennifer Moody

In 1939, when Pendlebury called parts of West Crete “the back of beyond,” no one disagreed. Now, however, after nearly 70 years of hard work by the 25th Ephoreia in Chania and Rethymnon, and an international cast of archaeologists (including Swedes, Danes, Italians, Canadians, British, Irish, French, and Americans), it is clear that Pendlebury’s phrase no longer applies. Recent publications by Tzedakis and Martlew (1999), the Hallagers (2000), Andreadaki-Vlasaki (1992a–b; 1997a–d), Godart and Tzedakis (1992), as well as the near completion of four intensive archaeological surveys—the Khania Archaeological Survey Project (KASP) (Moody 1987; 2000; Moody et al. 1996), the Sphakia Survey (Nixon et al. 1988; 1989; 1990; 2000; Moody 2000), the Agios Vasilios Valley Survey Project (Peatfield 1992; Moody et al. 2001; Moody 2000), and the Gavdhos Survey (Kopaka, Drosinou, and Khristodoulakis 1992–1994)—reveal a vibrant human history (Figs. 18.1–18.4).

Our understanding of the environmental conditions that prevailed in prehistoric Crete also has greatly improved in the last ten years. Publication of sediment cores from Lake Van (Lemke and Sturm 1997), the Gulf of Oman (Cullen et al. 2000), caves in Israel (Bar-Mathews, Ayalon, and Kaufman 1997; Frumkin 1991), and several new pollen cores from the South Aegean (Zangger et al. 1997 for PRAP D–4; Atherden, Hall, Wright 1993 for Kleone Kephalari; Bottema 1990 for Koiladha and Halos; Jahns 1993 for Lerna) strengthen the view that a number of century-scale climate shifts have occurred since the beginning of the Neolithic (Weiss 2000) (Figs. 18.5 and 18.6). The task remains to integrate this enhanced environmental and archaeological record and to reconstruct a fuller picture of the landscapes of West Crete. Before this can be done, contemporaneity between the two data sets must be established. Archaeological phases are dated by a variety of

248

MOODY

For Figs. 18.1–18.4: Site distributions from the Sphakia Survey area are not yet available. Site distribution in the Ag. Vasilios Valley survey area represents minimum numbers. The sites shown in the Western Mesara survey area are estimates based on Watrous et al. 1993.

Figure 18.1. Minoan Palace Period sites in Western Crete (MM IB–II, MM III/LM I).

Figure 18.2. Final Palatial sites in Western Crete (LM II–LM IIIA:1).

WESTERN CRETE IN THE BRONZE AGE: A SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE

Figure 18.3. Final and Postpalatial sites in Western Crete (LM IIIA:2–LM IIIB, Early LM IIIC).

Figure 18.4. Dark Age sites in Western Crete (Late LM IIIC, Protogeometric, Early Geometric).

249

250

MOODY

Figure 18.5. Profiles of Lake Van (after Lemke and Sturm 1997); Gulf of Oman (after Cullen et al. 2000); Soreq Cave (after Bar-Mathews, Ayalon, and Kaufman 1997); Dead Sea level cores (after Frumkin 1991); glacial advances in the Alps (after Grove 1997). Glacial advances are indicated in gray and aridity events in diagonal lines. Dashed areas indicate there is an overlap.

means—ceramic seriation, radiocarbon, etc.—and the results are often controversial and ambiguous. Sediment cores, which provide most environmental data, are dated primarily by radiocarbon and are also subject to interpretation. Important exceptions are cores composed of lake varves, which accumulate annually and can be counted. This makes the varved record from Lake Van especially important. Roberts and Wright, Jr. (1993, 201) question the accuracy of the varve record at Lake Van, but the climate changes it manifests conform with those from elsewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean.

In order to reconcile the environmental and archaeological records, I have reconsidered the absolute dates available for the Cretan Neolithic and Bronze Age. The resulting chronology (Fig. 18.7) builds on the work of Warren and Hankey (1989), Watrous (1994), Manning (1995), and Rehak and Younger (1998). Preliminary correlations between the archaeological and environmental records are presented (Fig. 18.8); space and time do not permit a discussion of the Neolithic, Early Bronze Age, and the Early to Middle Bronze Age transition material (Moody and Watrous 2000), but some of this data is included in Figures 18.5 and 18.8.

WESTERN CRETE IN THE BRONZE AGE: A SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE

251

Figure 18.6. Locations of environmental data.

The Proto- and Neopalatial Periods (ca. 1900–1490 B.C., 410 years or about 13 generations) Environmental Setting (Figs. 18.5, 18.6, 18.8) Glacial advances at temperate latitudes around the world characterize the period between ca. 2000/1950–1240 B.C. For the Alps, Grove (1997, 98) observes that “In both extent and duration, and occurrence of several maxima, this was the period most comparable with the [Medieval] Little Ice Age of any of the earlier Holocene phases, but was probably more extreme.” In Europe, the Medieval Little Ice Age was characterized by a cooler and drier climate, and it seems likely that the same was true for the 2nd millennium event. At Lake Van, cooler and drier conditions are indicated by steadily increasing salinity levels and isotope enrichment (Lemke and Sturm 1997, 672–673).

Pollen data from Crete and other sites in the South Aegean show increases in temperate and deciduous trees, indicating an overall increase in available moisture (Moody 1987; Moody and Watrous 2000). Although the pollen record ceases on Crete during the Middle Bronze Age (and does not resume until the Early Byzantine), cores are known from elsewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean and exhibit some evidence that deciduous trees continued to increase, especially after about 1700/1600 B.C. (Bottema and Woldring 1990). On Crete, the discovery of flash flood and debris flow deposits, which seem to date to the Middle and Late Bronze Age, suggest that the increase in moisture was not spread evenly throughout the

252

MOODY

CULTURAL PERIOD

ABSOLUTE DATE

Aceramic

7000–6500 B.C.

Early Neolithic I (early)

6500–6000 B.C.

Early Neolithic I (mid)

6000–5500 B.C.

Early Neolithic I (late)

5500–4800 B.C.

Early Neolithic II

4800–4500 B.C.

Middle Neolithic

4500–4300 B.C.

Late Neolithic

4300–3800 B.C.

Final Neolithic

3800–3300 B.C.

FN/EMI

3300–3050 B.C.

Early Minoan I

3050–2800 B.C.

Early Minoan I/Early Minoan II

2800–2700 B.C.

Early Minoan IIA

2700–2500 B.C.

Early Minoan IIB

2500–2300/2200 B.C.

Early Minoan III

2300/2200–2100 B.C.

Middle Minoan IA–Middle Minoan IB

2100–1900 B.C.

Middle Minoan II

1900–1800 B.C.

Middle Minoan III

1800–1700 B.C.

Late Minoan IA

1700–1580 B.C.

Late Minoan IB

1580–1490 B.C.

Late Minoan II

1490–1430 B.C.

Late Minoan IIIA:1

1430–1370 B.C.

Late Minoan IIIA:2

1370–1320 B.C.

Late Minoan IIIB

1320–1200 B.C.

Late Minoan IIIC

1200–1100 B.C.

Subminoan

1100–970 B.C.

Protogeometric

970–850 B.C.

Geometric

850–750 B.C.

Late Geometric

750–720/680 B.C.

Figure 18.7. Chronology. Dates calibrated using Oxcal 14L.

year but was intense and episodic (Moody 2001). Very similar deposits also have been identified for the Medieval Little Ice Age in Crete (Maas, Macklin, and Kirby 1998; Moody 2001), suggesting that Cretan weather during the two Little Ice Ages may have shared a number of features. On Crete, the Medieval Little Ice Age brought increased winter and spring drought, exceptionally severe winters, and summer rain (Grove and Conterio 1994; 1995). Medieval Little Ice Age weather was not homogeneous throughout its 600 years in Europe or in Crete. Although a time of generally cooler temperatures, it included several intervals of milder conditions, some of which lasted two or three generations (Grove 1988; Grove 1997, 95–97; Grove and Conterio 1994; 1995, 236 fig. 8, 240 fig. 10). Such variability is likely to have characterized the

Figure 18.8. Preliminary data—climate changes and Cretan prehistory.

Little Ice Age event in the 2nd millennium B.C. as well (Grove 1997, 98). The presence of olive oil residues in Proto- and Neopalatial pots from Monasteraki, Apodoulou, and Kastelli Chania (Tzedakis and Martlew 1999) suggests that Little Ice Age temperatures were not so cool as to negate olive growth, at least not for the entire 400 years. It is not certain, however, that shorter-term damage to the olive crop did not occur as it did during the Medieval Little Ice Age (Grove et al. 1991, sect 5.5; Moody 2001). Also visible in pollen cores from Central and Northern Greece, Turkey, and the Levant is a phase of human impact called the “Beysehir Occupation” (Bottema and Woldring 1990). It appears in different places at various times between 1800 and 1237 B.C. and is probably not tied to climate (Roberts et al. 1997). This phase is not a pronounced feature of cores from the Southern Aegean. Underlying these changes is a process termed “the Great Aridization of the Mediterranean” (Grove and Rackham 2001, 145–146). This is the inevitable development of more and more pronounced seasons throughout the Holocene and is attributed largely to cyclic changes in the earth’s orbital parameters. The visible impact of the Holocene phase of increased tectonism—which lasted from ca. 2800

WESTERN CRETE IN THE BRONZE AGE: A SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE B.C.–A.D.

500—became more apparent as Crete became more densely settled (Stiros and Jones 1996). Circa 1721 B.C., a 30 cm subsidence event occurred in the western part of the island and no doubt represents an earthquake that rocked the region (Thommeret et al. 1981, 144 fig. 16). This was, between MM II and MM IIIB, roughly contemporary with a series of site destructions that mark the end of the Protopalatial period, a number of which have been attributed to earthquakes (Watrous 1994, 751). Earthquakes, and in some cases perhaps tsunamis, associated with the Minoan eruption of Santorini ca. 1630 B.C. damaged sites around the island in LM IA (Hood 1978; Macdonald 1990; Driessen and Macdonald 1997; McCoy and Papadopoulos 2001).

Material culture in the Chania and Rethymnon Areas (Fig. 18.1) Western Crete was more densely settled during the Proto- and Neopalatial periods than at any other time in prehistory. Protopalatial Important Protopalatial sites include the palace at Monasteraki (Kanta 1992), a stunning building at Pera Galini (Tsivilaki and Banou 1992–1994), the town at Chamalevri (Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1992– 1994a), the villages of Apodoulou (Godart and Tzedakis 1992) and Nopigia (Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1992–1994b, 1997c), and the peak sanctuaries of Vryssinas (Davaras 1974; currently under study by Niki Prokopiou) and Atsipadhes Korakias (Peatfield 1992). Except for Nopigia, all of these are in the area of Rethymnon. Although an idiosyncratic site, Monasteraki shares a number of features with Protopalatial sites to the east, especially in the Mesara (Kanta 1992; Watrous 1994, 742–744), and has led to Kanta’s suggestion that the site was a dependency of Phaistos (Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 94). Among the finds are 2267 sealings (Godart and Tzedakis 1992, 67– 73). Chemical analyses of pithoi found residues of olive oil and wine. Two pots apparently contained a resinated wine that may have been stored in an oaken barrel. The presence of charred grape pips in a number of pithoi has been interpreted as raki production (Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 94–97, 179). The site’s abandonment and destruction at the end of MM II has been attributed to earthquake. A number of other locations in Rethymnon decline and/or are abandoned at the end of MM II:

253

Apodoulou, Pera Galini, and Atsipadhes Korakias. Exceptions are the peak sanctuary at Vryssinas and the village of Nopigia far to the west. Although Neopalatial remains occur in the vicinity of Chamalevri (Schiering 1982, 39–42), they are represented poorly in the excavated portions of the site, suggesting a decline or break in settlement during the Protopalatial period. Survey in the Agios Vasilios Valley identified a number of Protopalatial settlements whose inhabitants no doubt frequented the rural peak sanctuary at Atsipadhes Korakias (Peatfield 1992; Moody et al. 2001). At least two of these sites did not continue into the Neopalatial (the peak sanctuary and one other). Farther west, the Protopalatial period is less well defined. At Kastelli Chania, most MM IB–II remains were removed during the construction of Neopalatial buildings (Hallager and Tzedakis 1989). Although they exhibit a strong local style and overall conservatism, the ceramics are of high quality. At Nopigia, problems in ceramic phasing obscure the sequence of events (Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1992–1994b, 28 n. 24). Although fewer Protopalatial sites than Neopalatial are known from the Chania Region as a whole, this may not be an accurate reflection of activity. Intensive survey on the Akrotiri found 14% more Protopalatial sites than Neopalatial (Moody 1987, 3, catalog). Similar results have been noted for the western Mesara and elsewhere (Watrous et al. 1993, 226 and n. 7). In the Agios Vasilios Valley (Moody 2000; Moody et al. 2001), however, Neopalatial sites outnumber Protopalatial ones; this may also be true in Sphakia. One of the oddities of the Palace Period in the West is the apparent absence of Minoan peak sanctuaries west of Vrissynas and Atsipadhes Korakias (Peatfield 1983). Although some scholars believe this is due to uneven fieldwork, it seems unlikely. Neither the KASP nor Sphakia Survey have identified sites of this nature, and recent excavations by Sakellarakis on Mt. Mana, the prominent peak overlooking the coastal plain of Phalasarna, failed to reveal any Minoan remains. His discovery of a peak sanctuary on Kythera makes the absence of this type of site in West Crete all the more intriguing (Watrous 1994, 733). Two unconfirmed possibilities remain: Drapanokephalo and Sklokas. But even if these two locations prove to be Protopalatial peak sanctuaries, the distribution of such sites in the West will continue to be very different from the rest of Crete.

254

MOODY

Neopalatial The Neopalatial phase at Kastelli Chania is wellpublished (Tzedakis and Kanta 1978; Tzedakis and Hallager 1979; 1983; Hallager and Tzedakis 1982; 1984; 1989). In addition to the Linear A archives, ashlar buildings, open areas, and cobbled streets, in the last ten years excavations have revealed a lustral basin (Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1989) and a complex cult area excavated by Andreadaki-Vlasaki (Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 104–109). The lustral basin, located at the base of the east slope of the Kastelli, is especially significant as it is the only example found outside of palatial or “ritual” contexts and hints at a nearby location for the elusive Minoan palace. The basin’s walls were decorated with frescoes of “marble” pattern and running spirals. Although badly damaged by fire in MM IIIB/LM IA, it was reused in LM IA. The cult area, which includes circular platforms and a votive deposit, is within 50 m of the lustral basin. The entire complex went out of use at the end of LM IB, when much of the Kastelli was destroyed by fire. Literacy was not confined to the urban center at Chania. Linear A inscriptions occur at five other sites in the west: Apodoulou, Armenoi, Nerokourou, Pangalokhori, and Vryssinas (Godart and Tzedakis 1992, 123–127). The inscription from Pangalokhori is particularly interesting; it seems to combine Linear A and hieroglyphic features and is similar to examples from Archanes, Knossos, and Moni Odigitria (Godart and Tzedakis 1992, 121– 122; Baxevani-Kouzioni and Markoulaki 1996). The site at Nerokourou, with its lightwell and Minoan hall, fits the category of Minoan villa (Sacconi and Tzedakis 1989; Chrysoulaki 1997). It was established in MM IB and abandoned at the end of LM IB (Kanta and Rocchetti 1989). Sometime in LM IB, the house was modified in a way that suggests a decline in prosperity or a change in function. Whether or not the Minoan house at Vrysses was also a villa remains unclear (Zois 1974). The ceramic traditions at both sites are more conservative than at Kastelli Chania (Kanta and Rocchetti 1989). Both Nerokourou and Nopigia were damaged and/or abandoned at the end of LM IA (Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1992–1994b, 34).

The survey data from West Crete does not differentiate between LM IA and LM IB; it is impossible to say without excavation what other sites declined and/or were abandoned at the end of LM IA. All excavated sites in the area were destroyed or damaged, however, at the end of LM IB.

Discussion The simultaneity of the “rise of the palaces” on Crete and significant changes in the climate cannot be ignored. The inexorable march of the Great Aridization created increasingly pronounced wet and dry seasons (Grove and Rackham 2001, 145–146). The advent of a global Little Ice Age probably resulted in more and more extreme weather. Although the climate proxy data indicates an increase in available moisture, precipitation likely became more episodic, resulting in the flash flood and debris flow deposits identified on Crete. A documented response to such unpredictable conditions is diversification and increased food storage (Forbes 1976; Halstead and O’Shea 1989; Halstead 1990; Halstead and Jones 1996). Such changes in lifestyle are unlikely to be instantaneous, but rather the result of experimentation and adaptation over several generations. The development of increasingly complex storage facilities is a striking feature of Proto- and Neopalatial Crete (Halstead 1981; 1997; Strasser 1997). Although the diversification of agricultural crops cannot be documented, the proliferation of “luxury” goods, as well as increased indicators for trade, argue for a diversification of the economy in general. These features do not appear suddenly in Minoan Crete but gradually accrue over a period of several hundred years during MM IA and MM IB–III (Watrous 1994, 720–736, 752). Some scholars propose that the LM IB destructions on Crete were the result of internecine war following a decline initiated by the eruption of Santorini (Driessen and Macdonald 1997). Other experts favor earthquakes (Warren 2001) or invasion. These events cannot as yet be related to climatic fluctuations. Whatever the cause, West Crete suffered as much as the rest of the island.

WESTERN CRETE IN THE BRONZE AGE: A SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE

255

“Final Palatial,” Postpalatial and Dark Age: LM II–Protogeometric (ca. 1490–970 B.C., 520 years or about 17 generations) Environmental setting (Figs. 18.5, 18.6, 18.8) Climate proxy data from Crete do not exist for this period. Indicators from elsewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean suggest that initially Neopalatial conditions continued, but it is hard to know for sure. Beginning about 1450 B.C., however, the climate begins to change and does not restabilize until ca. 1050 B.C. Some isotope levels at Lake Van begin to rise sharply about 1450 B.C. Levels at other locations also increase and peak between ca. 1400–1100 B.C. and then suddenly drop (Lemke and Sturm 1997, 663, fig. 2, 672–673). Dead Sea levels peak at ca. 1350 B.C. and then drop until ca. 1000 B.C. (Frumkin 1991). Circa 1237 B.C., the period of glacial advance that characterized the last 700 years also comes to an end in Europe (Grove 1997, 98). This is not so clear globally; the entire period from about 1900 to 0 B.C. (4000–2000 cal B.P.) is often considered to be a single climatic unit, called by some the Neoglacial. Lemke and Sturm (1997, 669, fig. 5, 762–763) reconstruct especially low relative humidity at Lake Van ca. 1200–1050 B.C., most of which they attribute to higher temperatures. The pollen record for the Eastern Mediterranean is ambiguous, but Bottema (1990, 138) notes that, “The pollen record of Greece, the Eastern Mediterranean, and the Near East invariably points to the end of the fourth millennium B.P. [radiocarbon years] as a conspicuous transition in terms of vegetation and climate, but especially crucial in the prehistory of man.” During LM III, flooding and debris flows may have increased. Debris flows possibly dating to LM III are known from Pylos (Zangger et al. 1997) and the Frangokastello Plain (Nemec and Postma 1993, fig. 8; Moody 2001, 57–58, figs. 4:8 and 4:9). Flood deposits have been noted at Tiryns (Zangger 1994) and in the Agios Vasilios Valley in Crete (Moody 2001, 57–58, fig. 4:10). Some scholars think that earthquake damage at sites on the Greek mainland becomes more apparent during these centuries (Zangger 1994, 207– 211; Stiros and Jones 1996); however, not all agree on this point (Drews 1993). The lack of burning in some LM IIIA destruction levels on Crete has resulted in their being attributed to earthquake

(Andreadaki-Vlasaki and Papadopoulou 1997, 146). This period of climatic flux, especially from 1350–1050 B.C., is a time of cultural upheaval throughout the Eastern Mediterranean, similar in extent and intensity to that at the end of the Early Bronze Age (Bouzek 1996; Moody and Watrous 2000).

Material Culture in the Chania and Rethymnon Areas Late Minoan II–IIIA:1 LM II pottery is known from only four sites in West Crete: Kastelli Chania (B. Hallager 1990), Stylos (Kanta 1984, 211), Rethymnon (Kanta 1980, 211), and Armenoi (Godart and Tzedakis 1992, 89) (Fig. 18.2). At Kastelli Chania, LM II–IIIA:1 remains occur on top of the LM IB destruction horizon or in spaces cleared of debris. Though not terribly substantial, it suggests that little or no time elapsed between the destruction and the re-occupation (Hallager and Tzedakis 1989; E. Hallager 1997). At Armenoi, LM II was identified in a tholos tomb where a steatite pendant with Linear A inscription was found (Godart and Tzedakis 1992, 89, pl. 146). Andreadaki-Vlasaki and Papadopoulou (1997, 144–149) recently summarized the LM IIIA:1 period in West Crete. Although not abundant, there is a significant increase in the number of sites: settlements at Kastelli Chania (B. Hallager 1988), Stylos (Kanta 1984, 12–13), Modi (Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1992a), Nopigia, Chamalevri, and Kavousi; tombs at Armenoi, Arsani, and Pigi; caves at Keramos Cave (Fig. 18.2). They note that LM IIIA:1 pottery at Chamalevri exhibits a strong Knossian influence. Knossian influence on the pottery at Chania, although present, is less pronounced. Especially notable in the pottery of West Crete is the influence of Mycenaean styles (Kanta 1980; B. Hallager 1988). Survey material rarely is dated so precisely. The drop in site numbers from MM III/LM I to LM III on the Akrotiri, however, suggests either a decline or break in habitation during LM II–IIIA:1; there may be a similar pattern in Sphakia. In the Agios Vasilios Valley, LM III is the most densely settled period, but whether or not any of those sites date as

256

MOODY

early as LM II or LM IIIA:1 is not known. Site size in the Agios Vasilios Valley and on the Akrotiri increase in the LM III period. The situation in Sphakia is less clear. Kastelli Chania, Modi, and Chamalevri were damaged at the end of LM IIIA:1 (Rehak and Younger 1998, 102) and Nopigia early in LM IIIA:2 (Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1992–1994b, 34). The absence of burning at Chamalevri suggests earthquake destruction (Andreadaki-Vlasaki and Papadopoulou 1997, 146). The other three sites show signs of burning, though not so intense as the LM IB destruction horizon. Late Minoan IIIA:2–IIIB LM IIIA:2–B is a period of economic prosperity in West Crete, marked by numerous imports and exports within Crete and abroad (E. Hallager 1988) (Fig. 18.3). Italian burnished and Gray wares begin to show up in quantity at Kastelli Chania, though a few could be earlier (B. Hallager 1985). At present, the earliest that this distinctive material is found on Crete is LM IIIA:1 at Kommos (Watrous 1992, 175). Output by the Kydonian Workshop peaks in LM IIIB:2, and its products are found throughout Crete and as far away as Cyprus and Sardinia (Tzedakis 1969; Godart and Tzedakis 1992, 35). Evidence for literacy in West Crete are the Linear B tablet fragments from Chania (Hallager, Andreadaki-Vlasaki, and Hallager 1990; Hallager and Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1997) and the Linear B inscribed stirrup-jars produced somewhere in West Crete (Catling et al. 1980). There are a few excavated settlements—Kastelli Chania, Stylos (Davaras 1971a; 1971b; 1973), and Samonas (Kanta 1984), but the period is best known from its tombs. Excluding the cemeteries within the city, at least 17 chamber tombs are known from the vicinity of Chania and also three tholoi: Malame (Davaras 1966; 1967), Stylos, and Phylakoi (Godart and Tzedakis 1992, 59–60). Within the settlement of Chania are three LM III cemeteries with rich and varied finds (Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1981; 1997b; Godart and Tzedakis 1992, 51–56). The cemetery of Odos Palama includes 17 tombs with architecture, grave goods, and human skeletal features foreign to Crete. Scholars cite these burials to support the theory that certain of the LM III towns, such as Chania and Kommos, had foreign residents (Hallager and McGeorge 1992; Kanta forthcoming). Armenoi, the most impressive LM III cemetery on Crete, is located near Rethymnon (Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 56–61, 110–116, 242–258); over 227

chamber tombs have been excavated there. Among the impressive finds are a stunning series of larnakes (Mavriyiannaki 1967–1968; 1972), a boar’s tusk helmet, and a large stirrup-jar with a Linear B inscription wi-na-jo (Godart and Tzedakis 1992, 185, pls. CLII.1, CXL.2). The same scribe wrote on a stirrup-jar found at Knossos, and the same inscription occurs on a stirrup-jar from Midea (Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 56). Chemical analyses of two skeletons show that the diet enjoyed by the LM IIIA–B population was very similar to that of the Late Neolithic population at Gerani Cave some 2700 years before (Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 246–247). At least 26 other chamber tombs and 9 tholoi (Armenoi, Mesi, and seven in the vicinity of Apodoulou) (Pologiorgi 1987; Prokopiou, Godart, and Tzigounaki 1990), are known from the Rethymnon area (Kanta 1980; Godart and Tzedakis 1992). Comparative analysis of LM III human remains from Chania and Armenoi reveal differences between the rural and urban populations of West Crete (McGeorge 1988; 1990; Hallager and McGeorge 1992, 43–47). The rural population enjoyed better health. The poor health exhibited by the urban population “suggests deterioration in the diet of the urban dwellers, who lived in densities not previously experienced and subsisted on food not of their own production and over the supply of which they had little control” (Hallager and McGeorge 1992, 47). The urban sample also preserves some evidence for epidemic disease. Late Minoan IIIB–IIIC (Fig. 18.4) The end of the LM IIIB period in Western Crete exhibits signs of decline; by the middle of LM IIIC most lowland areas had been abandoned. At Chania, there are subtle signs of decreasing prosperity. The productivity level of the Kydonian Workshop drops from 36% to 5% of the excavated pottery, and long distance trade is much reduced. The lack of rich floor deposits and of evidence of a burned destruction suggests that the abandonment was orderly and probably gradual. No LM IIIC burials have been found in the city, suggesting that the site may not have been permanently inhabited prior to its abandonment (Hallager and Hallager 2000, 173–174). There are contemporary LM IIIC:1 remains from Chamalevri. A building and a number of pits have been excavated on Tsikouriana hill (AndreadakiVlasaki 1992–1994a, 260–261; Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 62). The pits contained prodigious amounts of animal bones. The majority belonged to

WESTERN CRETE IN THE BRONZE AGE: A SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE

caprines, mostly goats. As much as 15–20% of the faunal remains may be deer; the finding of dog remains also indicates significant hunting activity, though no more than had occurred in Protopalatial times (Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 64–68). The absence of pig pelvis and thigh bones suggests the production of hams. On the Akrotiri, no certain LM IIIC sherds have been identified, but three sites have produced limited amounts of Early Iron Age (EIA) material, suggesting that a larger Dark Age settlement may yet be found in the Akrotiri Mountains. The upland areas of Sphakia and especially Agios Vasilios, where site numbers increase, present a more dynamic picture. In Sphakia, the citadel of Kolokasia Kastello overlooks the fertile Frangokastello Plain (Nowicki 1995; 2000, 210–213; Nixon and Moody et al. 2000). The number of EIA sites definitely increases in the mountains, though there are lowland sites near or on the coast (Nixon 1996). The well-watered valley of Agios Vasilios contains two citadels—Frati Kephala and Myrthios Kirimianou (Nowicki 1987; 1995; 2000)—and numerous lower and smaller sites such as Phonisses (Hood and Warren 1966, 178). The important early LM IIIC cremation cemetery at Atsipadhes Pezoulos contains a number of Cypriot features, suggesting that immigrants may have settled in the valley during LM III (Angelarakis, Kanta, and Moody 2001). Other EIA settlements in the west include the citadels of Vrysses Ayios Georgos, Grimviliana, Thronos Sybrita (Prokopiou 1991), Orne (discussed by Kanta in Hallager and Hallager 1997, 398), perhaps the site of Varypetron Kastello, and Ayios Ioannis Kartsalis (Tzedakis and Godart 1994/1996, 311). The citadel at Thronos Sybrita was established very early in LM IIIC and is probably contemporary with the last phases at the lowland sites of Kastelli Chania and Chamalevri (Prokopiou 1997; Anna Lucia d’Agata pers. comm.). Taken together, the evidence suggests that in West Crete the process of moving into the uplands began no earlier than LM IIIB/C and did not finish until the middle of LM IIIC.

Protogeometric and Beyond The Protogeometric and Geometric periods in West Crete have been admirably summarized by Andreadaki-Vlasaki (1985; 1991; 1997d) and are largely beyond the scope of this paper. Some important sites around Rethymnon are Sybrita (Rocchetti 1994), Eleutherna, Axos, and the cult cave of Hermes Kraniou (Ayios Antonios cave) near Patsos,

257

which may have been used continuously from Late Minoan to Roman times, though the main phase seems to have been Geometric (Kourou and Karetsou 1994, 81–164; Niniou-Kindeli 1992–1994, 307). All these sites survive into later antiquity. In Agios Vasilios, little Geometric has been recognized, but analyses are still incomplete. Nevertheless, by the Archaic period there is little evidence of activity at the important Early Iron Age citadels. The lower down, well-watered acropolis of Ambelos becomes the main settlement. In Chania, the Kastelli again becomes the center of a major settlement in Late Geometric times. Cemeteries have been located at Modi-Vrysses, Gavalomouri-Vouves, and Kavousi in the far west; all date from ca. 750–700 B.C. and are contemporary with the initial resettlement of Kastelli Chania (Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1985; 1997c). By Archaic times in Sphakia, the lower hilltop of Patsianos Kephala has replaced the Dark Age citadel of Kolokasia Kastello (Nixon 1996; Nixon and Moody et al. 2000; Nowicki 2000, 213–214).

Discussion The dearth of LM II sites in the west is paralleled throughout the island (Bennet 1990). No LM II and only a few LM IIIA:1 sites were noted in the western Mesara. Neither LM II nor LM IIIA:1 were recognized in the Lasithi (Watrous 1982), Vrokastro (Hayden, Moody, and Rackham 1992), or Kavousi (Haggis 1996) surveys. This break in settlement usually is attributed to warfare of one kind or another, and the review of the environmental data does not suggest otherwise. By the end of LM IIIA:1 and into LM IIIC the situation is different. Climate proxy data suggest that the Eastern Mediterranean, especially its southern margins, experienced significant fluctuations in moisture beginning ca. 1450/1400 B.C. It is suggestive that these fluctuations correspond to a change in the direction of trade at Kommos. Previously, the majority of the site’s ceramic imports came from Knossos and the Near East, but in LM IIIA:2–B Chania and West Crete dominate (Watrous 1992, 182). This change has been attributed to a decline in power at Knossos, but it may be that climatic factors began to disrupt trade in the Near East, causing repercussions in Crete. This climate shift may also have been accompanied by increased tectonism, if we are to believe in the earthquake destructions during LM IIIA:1 and LM IIIB. Between 1200 and 1050 B.C., conditions may have been at their driest. These were centuries of

258

MOODY

tremendous cultural upheaval in the Mediterranean world (Ward and Joukowsky, eds. 1992). The well-known saga of the Sea Peoples begins ca. 1230 B.C. and lasts until ca. 1150 B.C.; the large administrative centers on Crete and the Greek mainland cease to function ca.1300–1200 B.C. Troy is destroyed ca. 1300 and again ca. 1100 B.C. The list is long and well-known. The changes in settlement pattern on Crete between LM IIIB and the LM IIIC–Subminoan period are also well known (Nowicki 1987). Although intensive surveys and recent excavations have proven that the coasts and lowlands were not entirely abandoned during this period, suggesting that the “flight to the hills” was not all-encompassing, there is, nevertheless, a clear island-wide preference for upland environments (Haggis 1996; Hallager and Hallager 1997, 397–399, 405–506). The upland surveys of Kavousi, Vrokastro, and Agios Vasilios all

show increased numbers of sites between LM IIIC and PG; this may also be true of the mountains of Sphakia. The surveyed lowlands of the Akrotiri and the western Mesara do not show these increases. During this period, an interesting difference between East and West Crete may be in timing. Although the main break in settlement in East Crete seems to come within, or at the end of, LM IIIB, in West and Central Crete it comes in early to mid LM IIIC, perhaps a generation or so later (Hallager and Hallager 1997, discussions). In most cases, sites are abandoned without being destroyed, suggesting a gradual, purposeful movement to new locations. In Kavousi and elsewhere, these new locations are in arable pockets near perennial springs (Nowicki 1987; Haggis 1996). New sites in the Agios Vasilios valley are similarly situated. These cultural changes are compatible with the increase in aridity suggested by the environmental data.

Conclusion The environmental data clearly show that significant century-scale climate shifts occurred on Crete during the Bronze Age (Fig. 18.8). Although an apparent increase in flash floods provides some insight into the annual distribution of moisture, exactly how these shifts were manifested on the island is a matter for sophisticated computer simulations and should be the next step of investigation (Bryson and Bryson 1997). Near the beginning of the 2nd millennium B.C., the continued march of the Great Aridization, together with the onset of a global Little Ice Age event, led to the development of a more seasonal and more episodic precipitation regime on Crete. This instigated changes in cultural organization which, several generations later, manifested as the Minoan Palace System. No doubt other factors came into play, since previous and subsequent Little Ice Age events did not have the same outcome, but without this climate change Minoan civilization would not have evolved as it did. The dissolution of the 2nd millennium Little Ice Age between ca. 1300 and 1100 B.C., together with continuing aridization, resulted in drier and even

more seasonal conditions in the Eastern Mediterranean, perhaps approaching the modern climate. This increase in aridity and seasonality required further adaptations in subsistence and cultural organization such as are manifest on Crete in LM III–PG. The idea that drought contributed to the break-up of Aegean Bronze Age civilization is not new, and it certainly was not my intention, when I began this research, to resurrect a modified version of Carpenter’s theory (Carpenter 1966; Bryson et al. 1974). But the data speak for themselves. Although the vagaries of Bronze Age cultures in Crete may not all be attributable to climatic fluctuations, it is well to keep them in mind. When combined with the unstable tectonics of the period, the capricious character of the natural environment— especially after EM IIB—becomes a very powerful force for shaping human culture. In West Crete, such effects will have been more or less pronounced because of the precipitation gradient, but the situation is far from clear. Future refinements in ceramic phasing and absolute dating will do much to clarify the picture.

WESTERN CRETE IN THE BRONZE AGE: A SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE

259

Acknowledgments This paper is dedicated to the memory of William A. McDonald and Jean M. Grove. McDonald started me down the archaeological survey road over 25 years ago, and I have never looked back. Grove inspired me to look at the landscape in a more dynamic way, and her ideas have directed much of my research over the last 12 years. The loss of these wonderful mentors is profound. This paper is very much in debt to my involvement in three archaeological survey projects in West Crete, and two climate and landscape history projects. Archaeological Surveys: the Khania Archaeological Survey Project 1978–1982, conducted by the author under the auspices of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens (Moody 1987; 2000; Moody et al. 1996); the Sphakia Survey (SS) 1987–1996, co-directed by the author and Lucia Nixon under the auspices of the Canadian Archaeological Institute at Athens (Nixon et al. 1988; 1989; 1990; 2000; Moody 2000); the Agios Vasilios Valley Survey Project (AVVSP) 1991–1997, a synergasia under the general direction of Alan Peatfield and Stavroula Markoulaki, and field and museum direction of the author, and under the auspices of the British School of Archaeology at Athens and the Greek Archaeological Service (Peatfield 1992; Moody et al. 2001; Moody 2000). Climate and Landscape History: Crete and the Aegean Islands: Effects of the Changing Climate on the Environment 1988–1990, directed by A.T. Grove and N. Margaris under the auspices of the Commission on Environmental Strategy and Planning of the European Union (Grove et al. 1991); Threatened Mediterranean Landscapes: West Crete 1991–1993, directed by A.T. Grove and V. Papanastasis under

the auspices of the EPOCH program of DGXII of the European Commission (Grove et al. 1993). I am especially indebted to the directors, co-directors, and participants on these projects, especially Oliver Rackham, Dick and Jean Grove, Barbara Hayden, Lucia Nixon, Alan Peatfield, Stavroula Markoulaki, N.S. Margaris, Wick Dossett, Simon Price, Harriet L. Robinson, Julie Clark, Holly Raab, Erin Lopp, Marie Archambeault, Jerolyn Morrison, Heather Garner, Russ Hogg, Danny Moody, Andrew Moody, Michael Moody, Genevieve Gilbraeth, Erik Jenson, Suzan Sengoz, Chris Treadwell, and those unnamed whose valiant efforts in the field and out contributed to the ideas presented here. I am also very grateful to the members of the 25th Ephoreia in Chania and Rethymnon, the Greek Archaeological Service in Athens, the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, the British School of Archaeology at Athens, the Canadian Archaeological Institute at Athens, and the Department of Environmental Research of the European Union, without whose support these projects would never have taken place. Enormous thanks go to the Institute for Aegean Prehistory and other financial sources, who have generously funded these projects and other research of mine over the years. Special thanks must also go to Marie Archambeault for helping put together the maps. Finally and with deep affection, I thank the people of Crete for their hospitality and patience over the years, when I would appear unannounced on their doorsteps, thirsty, disheveled, and asking endless questions.

Bibliography Andreadaki-Vlasaki, M. 1981. “Arcaiologikev" qevsei" sthn povlh twn Canivwn,” Khania (Leuvkwma tou Dhvmou ) 1981, Chania, pp. 52–57. ———. 1985. “Geometrikav nekrotafeiva sto nomov Canivwn,” in Pepragmevna tou E vDieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou, Herakleion, pp. 10–35. ———. 1989. “Sunken Adyton or ‘Lustral Basin,’” AAA 21, 1989 [1993], pp. 56–76.

———. 1991. “The Khania Area, ca. 1200–700 B.C.,” in La Transizione dal Miceneo all’Alto Archaismo: dal palazzo alla città, D. Musti, A. Sacconi, and L. Rocchetti, eds., Rome, pp. 403–424. ———. 1992a. “Anaskafikev" ergasive"v . Nomov"v Canivwn: Movdi Kudwniva",” ArchDelt 47, 1992 [1997] (Chronika), p. 577.

260

MOODY

———. 1992b. “Anaskafikev" ergasive"v . Nomov"v Requvmnh": Camaleuvri,” ArchDelt 47, 1992 [1997] (Chronika), pp. 583–591.

in Franchthi Paralia 6. The Sediments, Stratigraphy and Offshore Investigations, T. Wilkinson and S. Duhon, eds., Bloomington and Indianapolis, pp. 117–138.

———. 1992–1994a. “Camaleuvri,” Krhtikh Estia 5, 1992– 1994 [1994/1996], pp. 251–264.

Bottema, S., and H. Woldring. 1990. “Anthropogenic Indicators in the Pollen Record of the Eastern Mediterraean,” in Man’s Role in the Shaping of the Eastern Mediterranean Landscape, S. Bottema, G. Entjes-Nieborg, and W. van Zeist, eds., Rotterdam, pp. 231–265.

———. 1992–1994b. “Proi>storikov" oikismovv" sta Nophvgeia Kisavmou,” Kritiki Estia 5, 1992–1994 [1994/1996], pp. 11–46. ———. 1997a. “Craftsmanship at MM Khamalevri in Rethymnon,” in TEXNH. Craftsmen, Craftswomen and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 16), R. Laffineur and P. Betancourt, eds., Liège and Austin, pp. 37–44. ———. 1997b. “La nécropole du Minoen Récent III de la ville de la Canee,” in La Crète mycénienne (BCH Supplement 30), J. Driessen and A. Farnoux, eds., Paris, pp. 487–509. ———. 1997c. The County of Khania through its Monuments: From the Prehistoric Period to Roman Times, Athens. ———. 1997d. “The Geometric Remains. The Pottery,” in The Greek Swedish Excavations at the Agia Aikaterini Square, Kastelli, Khania 1970–1987 I, From the Geometric to the Modern Greek Period, E. Hallager and B.P. Hallager, eds., Stockholm, pp. 229–240. Andreadaki-Vlasaki, M., and E. Papadopoulou. 1997. “LMIIIA:1 Pottery from Khamalevri, Rethymnon,” in Late Minoan III Pottery. Chronology and Terminology, E. Hallager and B.P. Hallager, eds., Athens, pp. 111–151. Angelarakis, A., A. Kanta, and J. Moody. 2002. “Cremation Burial in LMIIIC–Sub Minoan Crete and the Cemetery at Pézoulos Atsipádhes,” in Proceedings of the Conference on Cremation in the Aegean, Cyprus 1999. N. Stampolides, ed., Athens, pp. 69–82. Atherden, M., J. Hall, and J. Wright. 1993. “A Pollen Diagram from Northeast Peloponnese, Greece: Implications for Vegetation History and Archaeology,” The Holocene 3, pp. 351–356. Bar-Mathews, M., A. Ayalon, and A. Kaufman. 1997. “Late Quaternary Paleoclimate in the Eastern Mediterranean Region from Stable Isotope Analysis of Speleothems at Soreq Cave, Israel,” Quaternary Research 47, pp. 155–168. Baxevani-Kouzioni, K., and S. Markoulaki. 1996. “Un tombe à chambre MRIII à Pankalochori (nome de Réthymnon),” BCH 120, pp. 641–703. Bennet, J. 1990. “Knossos in Context: Comparative Perspectives on the Linear B Administration of LM II–LM III Crete,” AJA 94, pp. 193–211. Bottema, S. 1990. “Holocene Environment of the Southern Argolid: A Pollen Core from Kiladha Bay,”

Bouzek, J. 1996. “Mycenaean Greece and Minoan Crete: The Problem of Migrations,” Cretan Studies 5, pp. 85– 90. Bryson, R.A., and R. Bryson. 1997. “High Resolution Simulations of Regional Holocene Climate: North Africa and the Near East,” in Dalfes, Kukla, and Weiss, eds., 1997, pp. 565–593. Bryson, R.A., H.H. Lamb, and D.L. Donlry. 1974. “Drought and the Decline of Mycenae,”Antiquity 48, pp. 46–50. Carpenter, R. 1966. Discontinuity in Greek Civilization, Cambridge. Catling, H.W., J. Cherry, R.E. Jones, and J.T. Killen. 1980. “The Linear B Inscribed Stirrup-jars and Western Crete,” BSA 75, pp. 49–113. Chrysoulaki, S. 1997. “Nerokourou Building I and its Place in Neopalatial Crete,” in The Functions of the “Minoan Villa,” R. Hägg, ed., Stockholm, pp. 27–32. Cullen, H.M., P.B. deMenocal, S. Hemming, G. Hemming, F.H. Brown, T. Guilderson, and F. Sirocko. 2000. “Climate Change and the Collapse of the Akkadian Empire: Evidence from the Deep Sea,” Geology 28(4), pp. 379–382. Dalfes, H.N., G. Kukla, and H. Weiss, eds. 1997. Third Millennium B.C. Climate Change and Old World Collapse, Berlin and Heidelberg. Davaras, C. 1966. “Anaskafhv qolwtouv tavfou Mavleme,” Praktika 1966, pp. 185–188. ———. 1967. “Krhvth (Mavleme Kudwniva"),” Ergon 1966, pp. 144–151. ———. 1971a. “Anaskafaiv ei" Stuvlon Apokorwvnou,” AAA 4, pp. 42–44. ———. 1971b. “Anaskafhv ei" Stuvlon Apokorwvnou,” ArchDelt 26B, 1971 [1975], pp. 517–519. ———. 1973. “Minwi>khv kerameikhv kavmino" ei" Stuvlon Canivwn,” ArchEph 1973, pp. 75–80. ———. 1974. “Anaskafaiv MM Ierouv Korufhv" Bruvsina Requvmnh",” AAA 7, pp. 210–213. Drews, R. 1993. The End of the Bronze Age, Princeton.

WESTERN CRETE IN THE BRONZE AGE: A SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE

261

Driessen, J., and C. Macdonald. 1997. The Troubled Island: Minoan Crete before and after the Santorini Eruption (Aegaeum 17), Liège and Austin.

———. 1990. “LM II and Chania,” in Pepragmevna tou ST v Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou A2, Chania, pp. 77–83.

Forbes, H. 1976. “‘We have a little of everything’: The Ecological Basis of Some Agricultural Practices in Methana, Trizinia,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 268, pp. 236–250.

Hallager, B.P., and P.J.P. McGeorge. 1992. Late Minoan III Burials at Chania: The Tombs, Finds and Deceased in Odos Palama (SIMA 92), Göteborg.

Francis, J., S. Price, J. Moody, and L. Nixon. 2000. “Agiasmatsi: A Greek Cave Sanctuary in Sphakia, SW Crete,” BSA 95, pp. 427–471. Frumkin, A. 1991. “The Holocene Climate Record of the Salt Caves of Mount Sedom, Israel,” The Holocene 1, pp. 191–200. Godart, L., and Y. Tzedakis. 1992. Témoignages archéologiques et epigraphiques en Crète occidentale du Néolithique au Minoen Récent IIIB (Incunabula Graeca 93), Rome. Grove, A.T., I. Ispikoudis, M. Karteris, A. Kazaklis, J.A. Moody, V. Papanastasis, and O. Rackham. 1993. Threatened Mediterranean Landscapes: West Crete. Project Report to the European Commission (EV4CCT90-0112). Grove, A.T., J. Moody, and O. Rackham, eds. 1991. Crete and the South Aegean Islands: Effects of Changing Climate on the Environment. Project Report to the European Commission (EV4C-0073-UK). Grove, A.T., and O. Rackham. 2001. The Nature of Mediterranean Europe: An Ecological History, New Haven and London. Grove, J.M. 1988. The Little Ice Age, London. Grove, J.M. 1997. “The Spatial and Temporal Variations of Glaciers during the Holocene in the Alps, Pyrenees, Tatra and Caucasus,” in Glacier Fluctuations during the Holocene (Paleoklimaforschungen/Paleoclimatic Research 24), B. Frenzel, ed., Stuttgart, pp. 95–103. Grove, J.M., and A.L. Conterio. 1994. “Climate in the Eastern and Central Mediterranean 1675–1715,” Climate Trends and Anomalies in Europe 1675–1715 (Paleoklimaforschungen/Paleoclimatic Research 13), B. Frenzel, B. Glaser, and C. Pfister, eds., Champaign, Ill., pp. 274–285. ———. 1995. “The Climate of Crete in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries,” Climatic Change 30, pp. 223– 247. Haggis, D. 1996. “Archaeological Survey at Kavousi, East Crete. Preliminary Report,” Hesperia 65, pp. 373–432. Hallager, B.P. 1985. “Crete and Italy in the Late Bronze Age III Period,” AJA 89, pp. 293–305. ———. 1988. “Mycenaean Pottery in LMIIIA1 deposits at Chania,” in Problems in Greek Prehistory, E. French and K. Wardle, eds., Bristol, pp. 173–183.

Hallager, E. 1988. “Chania and Crete ca. 1375–1200 B.C.,” Cretan Studies 1, pp. 115–123. ———. 1997. “Architecture of the LM II/III Settlement in Chania,” in La Crète mycénienne (BCH Supplement 30), J. Driessen and A. Farnoux, eds., Paris, pp. 175–185. Hallager, E., and M. Andreadaki-Vlazaki. 1997. “New Linear B Tablets from Chania,” in La Crète mycénienne (BCH Supplement 30), J. Driessen and A. Farnoux, eds., Paris, pp. 169–174. Hallager, E., M. Andreadaki-Vlazaki, and B.P. Hallager. 1990. “The First Linear B Tablet(s) from Chania,” Kadmos 29, pp. 24–34. Hallager, E., and B.P. Hallager, eds. 1997. Late Minoan III Pottery. Chronology and Terminology, Athens. ———. 2000. Greek Swedish Excavations at the Agia Aikaterini Square, Kastelli, Khania 1970–1987 II, The Late Minoan IIIC Settlement, Stockholm. Hallager, E., and J. Tzedakis. 1982. “The Greek-Swedish Excavations at Kastelli: Khania (1978–1979),” AAA 16, pp. 21–30. ———. 1984. “The Greek-Swedish Excavations at Kastelli: Khania (1982–1983),” AAA 18, pp. 3–30. ———. 1989. “The Greek-Swedish Excavations at Kastelli, Khania 1989, 1990,” AAA 21, 1989 [1993], pp. 15–55. Halstead, P. 1981. “From Determinism to Uncertainty: Social Storage and the Rise of the Minoan Palace,” in Economic Archaeology (BAR International Series 96), A. Sheridan and G. Bailey, eds., Oxford, pp. 187–213. ———. 1990. “Waste not, Want not: Traditional Responses to Crop Failure in Greece,” Rural History 1, pp. 147–164. ———. 1997. “Storage Strategies and States on Prehistoric Crete: A Reply to Strasser,” JMA 10, pp. 103–107. Halstead, P., and G. Jones. 1996. “Agrarian Ecology in the Greek Islands: Time Stress, Scale and Risk,” in Aegean Strategies. Studies of Culture and Environment on the European Fringe, N. Kardulias and M. Shutes, eds., Lanham, Md., pp. 271–294. Halstead, P., and J. O’Shea, eds. 1989. Bad Year Economics, Cambridge.

262

MOODY

Hayden, B., J. Moody, and O. Rackham. 1992. “The Vrokastro Survey Project 1986–1989,” Hesperia 61, pp. 293–353.

Mavriyiannaki, K. 1967–1968. “Incinerazione del Tardo Minoico III nella Creta Occidental,” ASAtene 1967–1968 [1969], pp. 167–179.

Hood, S. 1978. “Traces of the Eruption outside Thera,” in Thera and the Aegean World I, C. Doumas, ed., London, pp. 681–690.

———. 1972. Recherches sur les larnakes minoennes de la Crète occidentale (Incunabula Graeca 54), Rome.

Hood, S., and P. Warren. 1966. “Ancient Sites in the Province of Ayios Vasilios, Crete,” BSA 61, pp. 163–191. Jahns, S. 1993. “On the Holocene Vegetation of the Argive Plain (Peloponnese, Southern Greece),” Vegetation History and Archeobotany 2, pp. 187–203. Kanta, A. 1980. The Late Minoan III Period in Crete (SIMA 58), Göteborg. ———. 1984. “The Minoan Settlement of the Northern Part of the District of Apokoronas and Minoan APATAWA,” in Aux origines de l’Hellénisme: la Crète et la Grèce. Hommage à Henri van Effenterre, C. Nicolet, ed., Paris, pp. 9–15. ———. 1992. “Monasteraki,” in The Aerial Atlas of Crete, J. Myers, E. Myers, and G. Cadogan, eds., Berkeley, pp. 194–197. ———. forthcoming. “The Cremation Cemetery at Olous and the Custom of Cremation in Bronze Age Crete.” Kanta, A., and L. Rocchetti. 1989. “La Ceramica del Primo Edificio” in Scavi A Nerokourou, Kydonias I (Incunabula Graeca 91), A. Sacconi and Y. Tzedakis, eds., Rome, pp. 101–280. Kopaka, K., P. Drosinou, and Y. Khristodoulakis. 1992– 1994. “Gaudo" (epifaneiakhv evreuna),” Kritiki Estia 5, 1992–1994 [1994/1996], pp. 242–243. Kourou, N., and A. Karetsou. 1994. “To Ierov tou Ermouv Kranaivou sthn Pastov Amarivou,” (with English summary) in Rocchetti, ed., 1994, pp. 81–164. Lemke, G., and M. Sturm. 1997. “ 18O and Trace Element Measurements as Proxy for the Reconstruction of Climate Changes at Lake Van (Turkey): Preliminary Results,” in Dalfes, Kukla, and Weiss, eds., 1997, pp. 178–196. Maas, G.S., M.G. Macklin, and M.J. Kirby. 1998. “Late Pleistocene and Holocene River Development in Mediterranean Steepland Environments, Southwest Crete, Greece,” in Paleohydrology and Environmental Change, G. Benito, V. R. Baker, and K. J. Gregory, eds., London, pp. 153–165. Macdonald, C. 1990. “Destruction and Construction in the Palace at Knossos: LM IA–B,” in Thera and the Aegean World III, 3, Chronology, D. Hardy and C. Renfrew, eds., London, pp. 82–88. Manning, S. 1995. The Absolute Chronology of the Aegean Early Bronze Age, Sheffield.

McCoy, F.W., and G.A. Papadopoulos. 2001. “Tsunami Generated during the Late Bronze Age Eruption of Thera: Evidence from Tsunami Deposits on Thera, Crete, Western Turkey and the Deep Sea,” (paper, San Diego 2001), abstract in AJA 105, pp. 258–259. McGeorge, P.J.P. 1988. “Health and Diet in Minoan Times,” in New Aspects of Archaeological Science in Greece (Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 3), R. Jones and H.W. Catling, eds., Athens, pp. 47–54. ———. 1990. “A Comparative Study of the Mean Life Expectation of the Minoans,” in Pepragmevna tou ST v Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou, A1, Chania, pp. 419–428. Moody, J. 1987. The Environmental and Cultural Prehistory of the Chania Region of West Crete. Neolithic through Late Minoan III, Ph.D. diss., University of Minnesota. ———. 2000. “Archaeological Survey in Western Crete,” in Crete 2000: One Hundred Years of American Archaeological Work on Crete, J.D. Muhly and E. Sikla, eds., Athens, pp. 180–191. ———. 2001. “Holocene Climate Change in Crete: An Archaeologist’s View,” in Landscape and Land Use in Postglacial Greece, C. Frederick and P. Halstead, eds., Sheffield, pp. 52–61. Moody, J., L. Nixon, S. Price, and O. Rackham. 1998. “Surveying Larger Sites in Sphakia”, in Post-Minoan Crete (BSA Studies 2), W. Cavanagh and M. Curtis, eds., London, pp. 87–95. Moody, J., A. Peatfield, and S. Markoulaki. 2000. “Report from the Agios Vasilios Valley Survey,” in Pepragmevna tou H v Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou, Herakleion, pp. 359–372. Moody, J., O. Rackham, and G. Rapp, Jr. 1996. “Paleoenvironmental Studies of the Prehistoric Akrotiri Peninsula, Crete,” JFA 3, pp. 273–297. Moody, J., and L.V. Watrous. 2000. “Climate Change and the Aegean Bronze Age,” paper presented at the 2nd International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Copenhagen, 2000. Nemec, W., and G. Postma. 1993. “Quaternary Alluvial Fans in Southwestern Crete: Sedimentation Processes and Geomorphic Evolution,” Special Publication International Association of Sedimentologists 17, pp. 235–276. Niniou-Kindeli, V. 1992–1994. “Patso",” Kritiki Estia 5, 1992–1994 [1994/1996], p. 307.

WESTERN CRETE IN THE BRONZE AGE: A SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE

263

Nixon, L. 1996. “The Early Iron Age in Sphakia,” unpublished paper presented at the Pepragmevna tou H vDieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou, Herakleion, 1996.

Roberts, N., W. Eastwood, H. Lamb, and J. Tibby. 1997. “The Age and Causes of Mid-Late Holocene Environmental Change in Southwest Turkey,” in Dalfes, Kukla, and Weiss, eds., 1997, pp. 409–430.

Nixon, L., J. Moody, V. Niniou-Kindeli, S. Price, and O. Rackham. 1990. “Archaeological Survey in Sphakia, Crete,” Classical Views 34(9), pp. 213–220.

Roberts, N. and H.E. Wright, Jr. 1993. “Vegetational, Lake-Level and Climatic History of the Near East and Southwest Asia,” in Global Climates Since the Last Glacial Maximum, H.E. Wright, Jr. et al., eds., Minneapolis, pp. 194–220.

Nixon, L., J. Moody, S. Price, and O. Rackham. 1998. “Rural Settlement in Sphakia Crete”, in Structures rurales et sociétés antiques, P. Doukellis and L. Mendoni, eds., Paris, pp. 255–264.

Rocchetti, L., ed. 1994. Sybrita. La Valle di Amari fra Bronzo e Ferro (Incunabula Graeca 96), Rome.

———. 2000. Sphakia Survey: The Internet Edition. http://sphakia.classics.ox.ac.uk/.

Sacconi, A. and Y. Tzedakis, eds. 1989. Scavi A Nerokourou, Kydonias I (Incunabula Graeca 91), Rome.

Nixon, L., J. Moody, and O. Rackham. 1988. “Archaeological Survey in Sphakia, Crete,” Classical Views 32(7), pp. 201–215.

Schiering, W. 1982. “Landbegehungen im Rethymnon und Umgebung” AA 1982, pp. 15–54.

Nixon, L., J. Moody, O. Rackham, and S. Price. 1989. “Archaeological Survey in Sphakia, Crete,” Classical Views 33(8), pp. 159–173. Nowicki, K. 1987. “Topography of refuge settlement in Crete,” JRGZM 34, pp. 213–234. ———. 1995. “Report on Investigations in Greece X, Studies in 1993 and 1994,” Archaeologia 66, pp. 63–70. ———. 2000. Defensible Sites in Crete c. 1200–800 B.C.: LMIIIB–C through Early Protogeometric (Aegaeum 21), Liège and Austin. Peatfield, A. 1983. “The Topography of Minoan Peak Sanctuaries,” BSA 78, pp. 273–280. ———. 1992. “Rural Ritual in Bronze Age Crete: The Peak Sanctuary at Atsipadhes,” CAJ 2(1), pp. 59–87. Pologiorgi, M. 1987. “Arcaiovthte" sthn periochv tou cwriouv Apodouvlou Amarivou Requvmnou,” SMEA 26, pp. 125–160. Prokopiou, N. 1991. “Sybrita Amariou: First Indications for a New LM IIIC Site,” in La Transizione dal Miceneo all’Alto Archaismo: dal palazzo alla città, D. Musti, A. Sacconi, L. Rocchetti, eds., Rome, pp. 373–402. ———. 1997. “Late Minoan III Pottery from the GreekItalian Excavations at Sybritos Amariou,” in Late Minoan III Pottery. Chronology and Terminology, E. Hallager and B.P. Hallager, eds., Athens, pp. 371–394. Prokopiou, N., L. Godart, and A. Tzigounaki. 1990. “LM Tholos Tomb Sátas Amariou Rethymnou,” in Pepragmevna tou Z v Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou, A2, Rethymnon, pp. 185–205. Rehak, P., and J.G. Younger. 1998. “Review of Aegean Prehistory VII: Neopalatial, Final Palatial and Postpalatial Crete,” AJA 102, pp. 91–173.

Stiros, S., and R.E. Jones, eds. 1996. Archaeoseismology (Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 7), Athens. Strasser, T.F. 1997. “Storage and States on Prehistoric Crete: The Function of the Koulouras in the First Minoan Palaces,” JMA 10(1), pp. 73–100. Thommeret, Y., J. Thommeret, J. Laborel, L.F. Montaggioni, and P.A. Pirazzoli. 1981. “Late Holocene Shoreline Changes and Seismo-tectonic Displacements in Western Crete,” in Neotectonics (Z. Geomorph. N.F., Suppl.-Bd. 40), Berlin-Stuttgart, pp. 127–149. Tsivilaki, E., and E. Banou. 1992–1994. “Pera Galhnoi,” Kritiki Estia 5, 1992–1994 [1994/1996], pp. 293–294. Tzedakis, Y. 1969. “L’atelier de céramique postpalatiale à Kydônia,” BCH 93, pp. 396–418. Tzedakis, Y., and E. Hallager. 1979. “The Greek-Swedish Excavations at Kastelli, Khania 1976–1977,” AAA 11, pp. 31–46. ———. 1983. “The Greek-Swedish Excavations at Kastelli, Khania 1980–81,” AAA 16, pp. 27–38. Tzedakis, Y., and A. Kanta. 1978. Kastelli Khanion 1966 (Incunabula Graeca 66), Rome. Tzedakis, Y., and H. Martlew, eds. 1999. Minoans and Mycenaeans. Flavours of their Time, Athens. Ward, W.A., and M. Joukowsky, eds. 1992. The Crisis Years: The 12th Century B.C. from Beyond the Danube to the Tigris, Dubuque, Iowa. Warren, P. 2001. “Review of ‘The Troubled Island: Minoan Crete before and after the Santorini Eruption’ by J. Driessen and C. Macdonald 1997,” AJA 105, pp. 115– 118. Warren P., and V. Hankey. 1989. Aegean Bronze Age Chronology, Bristol.

264

MOODY

Watrous, L.V. 1982. Lasithi. A History of Settlement on a Highland Mountain Plain in Crete (Hesperia Supplement 18), Princeton. ———. 1992. Kommos III. The Late Bronze Age Pottery. J.W. Shaw and M.C. Shaw, eds., Princeton. ———. 1994. “Crete from Earliest Prehistory through the Protopalatial,” AJA 98, pp. 695–753. Watrous, L.V., et al. 1993. “A Survey of the Western Mesara Plain in Crete: Preliminary Report of the 1984, 1986 and 1987 Field Seasons,” Hesperia 62, pp. 191–248. Weiss, H. 2000. “Beyond the Younger Dryas. Collapse as Adaptation to Abrupt Climate Change in Ancient West

Asia and the Eastern Mediterranean,” in Confronting Natural Disaster: Engaging the Past to Understand the Future, G. Bawden and R. Reycraft, eds., Albuquerque, pp. 75–98. Zangger, E. 1994. “Landscape Changes around Tiryns during the Bronze Age,” AJA 98, pp. 189–121. Zangger, E., et al. 1997. “The Pylos Regional Archaeological Project. Part II: Landscape Evolution and Site Preservation,” Hesperia 66, pp. 549–641. Zois, A. 1974. Anaskafhv Bruswvn Kudwniva" I, Athens.

19 South of Kavousi, East of Mochlos: The West Siteia Mountains at the End of the Bronze Age Krzysztof Nowicki

During the last two-and-a-half decades, several excavations and intensive surveys have been undertaken by American archaeologists in the Mirabello area. Although they covered mainly sites and areas already investigated at the beginning of this century, new methods, a better knowledge of the archaeology of Crete, and a more complex understanding of Minoan society allowed not only reexamination of the archaeological evidence and clarification of some chronological problems but also shed new light on several key questions concerning the Cretan Bronze Age. In this chapter, I address only a few selected problems that are in some way related to that activity and that cover the end of that period, namely LM IIIC. New evidence for dramatic changes in the settlement pattern at the end of LM IIIB and in LM IIIC was brought to light by the excavations at Vronda and Kastro at Kavousi (Gesell, Day, and Coulson 1983; 1985; Day, Coulson, and Gesell 1986; Coulson 1997; Day 1997; Mook and Coulson 1997),

Halasmenos and Katalimata Monastiraki (Coulson and Tsipopoulou 1994), and Kephala Vasilikis (Eliopoulos 1998). This list is complemented by the excavations in Mochlos and Pseira, which yielded either slightly earlier or even roughly contemporaneous material related to the subject (Betancourt, Banou, and Floyd 1997; Soles and Davaras 2000). No less important are the results of surveys undertaken by Haggis in the vicinity of Kavousi (Haggis 1993; 1996), by Watrous in the northern part of the Isthmus of Ierapetra, and by Hayden and Moody at Vrokastro (Hayden 1983; Hayden, Moody, and Rackham 1992). There is no doubt that the eastern part of Mirabello Bay is the most thoroughly researched region of the Aegean for the transition between the Bronze and Iron Ages (Fig. 19.1). All the aforementioned projects, however, cover the areas around the Mirabello coast and do not penetrate the vast mountainous hinterland behind it, nor do they extend to the southern coast of the Isthmus of Ierapetra. From the geographical point

Figure 19.1. Mirabello Bay and the Siteia Peninsula.

transitional LM IIIB/C or at the very beginning LM IIIC.

C. Settlements founded in the

B. Land above 800 m a.s.l.

A. Land above 400 m a.s.l.

IIIB or in LM IIIB/C

F. LM IIIA–B settlements abandoned in late LM

E. Settlements founded in the middle or late LM IIIC.

of LM IIIC or at latest in the middle LM IIIC.

D. Settlements founded probably at the beginning

266 NOWICKI

SOUTH OF KAVOUSI, EAST OF MOCHLOS

of view, both these areas are related closely to Mirabello Bay. The coastal settlements of the LM I–IIIB period may have been oriented to sea-activity, with the economy based on agriculture, trade, and craft in the coastal plains. A large part of their hinterland, however, must have extended to the mountains. Although herding may have been a dominant element in those areas, the possibility of more or less permanent rural settlements, which eventually became main habitation centers after ca. 1200 B.C. when the coastal plains were deserted, must be considered. Located on the very edge of the mountainous zone of the West Siteia Mountains, the Kavousi cluster of sites is only one of several such mountainous centers. From the end of the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age, other settlement clusters can be found in the valleys south and east of Kavousi. Another problem, especially for the interpretation of Kavousi and Mochlos, is the lack of any systematic field research along the southern coast of the Isthmus of Ierapetra. This area must have been populated densely in the LM I–IIIB periods, but the places most favored by the Bronze Age settlers are either covered by the ancient and modern town of Ierapetra or were almost completely bulldozed during leveling for greenhouses and terraces. The less destroyed zone, which might preserve archaeological sites, starts several kilometers north of the coast in the higher foothills of the mountains.

267

Ten years ago, I tried to summarize the problems of the end of the Bronze Age in that area (Nowicki 1990). At that time, however, I focused my attention on the inner valleys of the West Siteia Mountains, such as Oreino, Chrisopigi, Stavrochori, and Pefki (Nowicki 1994). Several very important sites were unknown, and the southwestern part of the Siteia Mountains was hardly touched by modern archaeological research. Three large field projects, namely excavations at Halasmenos-Katalimata Monastiraki, Kephala Vasilikis, and the Gournia survey had not yet begun. To supplement those earlier studies, this chapter concentrates on a few sites that may be particularly relevant to the American projects undertaken in the Mirabello Bay area. The first area under discussion is the southwest corner of the West Siteia Mountains (Fig. 19.2), which tower over the southern part of the Isthmus of Ierapetra and the south coast between Ierapetra and Makrygialos. A series of LM IIIC settlements identified here is particularly important for understanding the retreat to the mountains at the end of the LM IIIB and beginning of the LM IIIC period. Stavromenos Vainia and Karphi Koutsounari were located on and around rocky knolls, directly above the coastal plain. In the early LM IIIC period west of Ierapetra, similar rocky knolls were occupied, on Kastello Mythoi and Elleniki Koriphi Anatoli. The most interesting, however, seems to be the site of Katalimata Ayios Ioannis (Fig. 19.3), known to the

1. Oxa Elounda

18. Liopetro Chamaizi

2. Vrokastro

19. Ellinika Oreino

3. Kephala Asari

20. Kastri Oreino

4. Kephala Vasilikis

21. Korakia Chrysopigi

5. Prophitis Elias Kato Chorio

22. Kastello Ayios Stephanos

6. Stavromenos Vainia

23. Kastellopoulo Pefki

7. Sto Skouro

24. Stavromenos Pefki

8. Katalimata Ayios Ioannis

25. Ayios Georgios Krya

9. Karphi Koutsounari

26. Kastri Sphakia

10. Halasmenos Monastiraki

27. Praisos

11. Katalimata Monastiraki

28. Kypia Kalamafki

12. Vronda Kavousi

29. Kastri Voila

13. Kastro Kavousi

30. Kastri Goudouras

14. Azoria Kavousi

31. Kastri Palaikastro

15. Vigla Lastros

32. Plakalona Kalamafka Palaikastro

16. Kastri Tourloti

33. Ellinika Zakros Gorge

17. Kastello/Ellinika Myrsini

34. Kato Kastellas Zakros Gorge

Figure 19.1. (continued) Mirabello Bay and the Siteia Peninsula.

268

NOWICKI

A. LM IIIC settlements. B. Modern villages.

Figure 19.2. Southwestern part of the West Siteia Mountains. 1. Katalimata Ayios Ioannis

6. Kephala Vasilikis

2. Karphi Koutsounari

7. Halasmenos Monastiraki

3. Sto Skouro

8. Katalimata Monastiraki

4. Stavromenos Vainia

9. Psychro Ayios Ioannis

5. Prophitis Elias Kato Chorio

locals as Kastrolakkos (Nowicki 2000, 82–84). The Katalimata massif forms the southwesternmost ridge of the West Siteia Mountains, dividing the Ayios Ioannis valley from the Isthmus of Ierapetra. It is the southern extension of the ridges of Kapsas, Papoura, and Lamia which build up the impressive mountainous barrier along the eastern side of the Isthmus of Ierapetra. Katalimata, rising to 802 m a.s.l., dominates the southern coast of Crete between Ierapetra and Ayia Photia (Fig. 19.3). From it, an amazing view sees over Mirabello Bay to the north (with Ayios Nikolaos and Pseira clearly visible) and to the southern coast (with Myrtos, Goudouras and Kouphonisi). The top of Katalimata (Kastrolakkos) has an oblong shape, 20 to 50 m wide, extending about 300 m from southwest to northeast (Fig. 19.4). It is covered with garigue. The highest rocky peak rises in the

center of the summit, and, because of its appearance similar to a castle, it is called Kale. Architectural remains and a great number of sherds cover the flat areas to the north and southwest of Kale. A single building also may have stood on Kale. Some buildings were identified recently also on the lower terrace (Fig. 19.4: E) northeast of Kale, and thus the site probably was somewhat larger than reported in the earlier publication (Nowicki 2000, 83). The houses covered an area of about 12,000–15,000 m2. Moreover, the density of houses indicates that the settlement on the top of Katalimata may have been inhabited by a proportionally larger number of families than comparable (by size) sites in the Oreino valley. On the basis of the probable number of houses, a population of at least 60 to 70 families, and perhaps somewhat more, can be estimated. It seems that the entire

SOUTH OF KAVOUSI, EAST OF MOCHLOS

Figure 19.3. A. Katalimata Ayios Ioannis: from South.

Figure 19.3. B. Katalimata Ayios Ioannis: Areas C and D as seen from Kale.

269

270

Figure 19.4. Sketch of Katalimata Ayios Ioannis.

NOWICKI

SOUTH OF KAVOUSI, EAST OF MOCHLOS

settlement was built during a short period, with the main aim being to fit all the houses within the naturally defended borders of the Katalimata summit. The natural rocky structure of the summit divided the settlement into several units with only narrow communication routes between them. The largest were terraces, Areas B and C, on both sides of the Kale ridge. They were well protected by cliffs along the western and northern sides. Access on the east, where the site abruptly ends along the steep rocky slope, was only slightly easier. East of Area B, however, is a large terrace (Area E) where remains of a few houses were recorded also. These may have been built either as the result of the lack of space on the summit or because of a special function which may have favored their isolation from the main settlement. The southern limit of Area C is formed by the rocky peak of Spathi, an excellent observation point towards the southern coast. Southwest of that peak, there is a small terrace (Area D) bounded on all its sides by cliffs; it too is built on densely. The remains of houses at Katalimata Ayios Ioannis are well preserved, often with walls standing up to 1 m. As a rule, the inner rooms are filled with stones, which fell from collapsed walls, and they are densely overgrown with garigue-type vegetation. The houses were constructed of the local gray limestone in a way known from other LM IIIC settlements (i.e., Karphi), and their plans, as well as sizes, are similar to those recorded in houses at Kastri Oreino and Karphi Kera, consisting of two to three, even four rooms. In some places, roads can be reconstructed between houses and blocks. Very recent activity of illegal diggers has uncovered some details of the walls and brought to light large pieces of cooking and storage vessels. In general, the sherds recorded from the surface can be dated to the LM IIIC period (Figs. 19.5 and 19.6). The quality of the pottery, however, indicates that the settlement was founded at the very beginning of that period, probably contemporary with Phase I in Kastro Kavousi (Mook and Coulson 1997) and the foundation phase of Katalimata Monastiraki. The pottery is relatively well-fired, hard, with a good quality slip (when preserved). The settlement’s main period seems to be early to middle LM IIIC. A few fragments may be dated to very late LM IIIC/PG, but this may have been the result of revisiting the site or prolonged use of some of its houses; it seems that the site was abandoned long before PG. Most of the sherds visible on the surface represent coarse wares, with numerous fragments

271

of cooking pots and storage vessels. A concentration of fine ware was identified on the summit of Kale. Apart from very characteristic bands of hatching and finger impressions, a unique motif was identified, appearing commonly at this site but nowhere else in Crete. It consists of bands of deep V-shaped incisions, varying in size and arrangement (the smallest incisions were 0.4 cm, the largest 1.2 cm in height; Fig. 19.5: A, B, C). All the tripod legs were round in section, with both vertical slashes and finger impressions, but the first type outnumbered significantly the latter. Among the chevrons, many are in an elaborate “floral” style, which is usually more common at very early LM IIIC sites. Only preliminary study of the pottery from the surface was undertaken in situ. A systematic and intensive collection of pottery is needed in order to date the site in a more precise way within the LM IIIC period. Katalimata was probably the main and the highest refuge settlement in the area between Kato Chorio, Ierapetra, Koutsounari, and Ayios Ioannis. Several other sites, including the earlier mentioned Stavromenos Vainia and Karphi Koutsounari, may indicate that the settlement system was very complex here, and that the defensible sites represented the general retreat of population from the Ierapetra coast. The topographical differences between Stavromenos Vainia and Katalimata Ayios Ioannis, however, are considerable. The settlement at Vainia was located around the rocky knoll (ca. 150 m a.s.l.), the southwesternmost extension of the West Siteia Mountains protruding into the Ierapetra plain. In the vicinity, several ancient or medieval sites may have existed due to the same defensive characteristics of the area. The nearest, a Venetian site with ruins of a tower, churches, and houses, is scattered directly north of the LM III site of Stavromenos. A few hundred meters to the north is an Archaic– Classical and Early to Late Bronze Age site on and around a similar rocky knoll. Another knoll, Rousso Charakas above Panagia Paplinou, ca. 1 km to the east, is occupied by a FN/EM I site. Such an arrangement of settlements, some distance from the sea on inaccessible rocky knolls, is characteristic in the area along the south coast between Goudouras and Myrtos. These defensible sites date mostly to the FN–EM, LM IIIC, early Byzantine, and late Venetian periods. The rocky knoll of Stavromenos, at present crowned with a chapel aznd its terrace, was too small to allow room for more than a few houses. It

272

NOWICKI

Figure 19.5. Pottery from surface of Katalimata Ayios Ioannis.

was probably only the upper and most defensible part of the settlement, which, together with Areas C and D, may have been protected additionally by a fortification wall (Fig. 19.7). Houses can be seen also beyond this wall and below the knoll to the west and perhaps a few to the south. Protection of this lower and less defensive part of the settlement may have been achieved by the general location of the site, about 3 km from the coast, and the presence of a fortified citadel above it. Such an arrangement of the settlement is similar to the pattern recorded in the LM IIIC settlement at Kastri Oreino (Nowicki 1990, 170–173). Although so far no fortification walls are known from the area of Kavousi, this phenomenon is not unknown elsewhere in Crete. The existence of a fortification wall was

noted on the promontory of Elias to Nisi below Vrokastro (Hayden 2000), and on Kato Kastellas in the Zakros Gorge (Vokotopoulos 1997–1998; Nowicki 2000, 46–48). The latter sites represent, however, a different type of LM IIIC settlement; these were situated at or very close to the coast and were entirely encircled with fortification walls. Stavromenos Vainia, Kastri Oreino, and, perhaps, Kephala Asari were located at some distance from the sea, and only a part of the settlement was defended by a true fortification wall or by an enclosure, the secondary function of which may have been protection against an enemy attack. Remains of a possible defensive wall also were identified at Sto Skouro, a hilltop site situated about 1.5 km east of Stavromenos Vainia. The

SOUTH OF KAVOUSI, EAST OF MOCHLOS

273

Figure 19.6. Pottery from surface of Katalimata Ayios Ioannis.

mountain is much higher (ca. 400 m a.s.l.) and more defensible than Stavromenos Vainia. From the geographical point of view, Sto Skouro can be described as situated between Stavromenos Vainia and Katalimata Ayios Ioannis—much higher and farther away from the sea than Stavromenos but not on the highest and isolated peak of the mountain, as Katalimata. The site, which measures ca. 100 by 150 m, consists of lower and upper parts. No continuous architectural remains are over this area, but several badly destroyed units can be seen in the southern and eastern part of the summit. The possible remains of a fortification wall were recorded along the southeastern edge of the lower settlement close to the steep and rocky slope, which may have formed a natural boundary. It was apparently

inhabited (at least seasonally) in the Byzantine, Venetian, and Turkish periods, but LM IIIC pottery was noted in the lower settlement. The site calls for more intensive investigations and studies of pottery from the surface (which is unfortunately not abundant). One more LM IIIC site must be mentioned in this context. It is one of the most inaccessible settlements of this kind, located on the rocky knoll of Karphi Koutsounari (for a description of this knoll, see Nowicki 1990, 85; 2000, 84–86). Undertaken in the last decade, illegal excavations have revealed and left on the surface a great number of sherds of large storage vessels (Fig. 19.8). The diggers discovered either a dump or a storage area. The fragments are large and well-preserved, which suggests that

274

NOWICKI

Figure 19.7. Sketch of Stavromenos Vainia.

the vessels were found intact or only slightly damaged. The quality of fabric, the characteristics of surface, and the appearance of incised decoration indicate the very late LM IIIB or transitional LM IIIB/C period for Koutsounari’s foundation, which supports the dating published elsewhere (Nowicki 2000, 86). In general, the pottery from Karphi Koutsounari is very similar to that recorded at Katalimata Ayios Ioannis, which is not surprising considering the proximity of these two sites.

The foundation of these sites (Katalimata Ayios Ioannis, Stavromenos Vainia, Sto Skouro, and Katalimata Koutsounari) must have been related to the beginning of the process that led to the dramatic changes of the LM IIIB settlement pattern. The earliest material from the sites is probably contemporaneous with Phase I in Kastro Kavousi (Mook and Coulson 1997) and the foundation of LM IIIC Katalimata Monastiraki. This more precise dating, within the transitional LM IIIB/C and LM IIIC period,

SOUTH OF KAVOUSI, EAST OF MOCHLOS

275

Figure 19.8. Pottery from surface of Karphi Koutsounari.

is possible because of the recent excavations at Kavousi and Halasmenos-Katalimata Monastiraki. The excavations at Halasmenos and Katalimata, at the mouth of the Cha gorge, show clearly that the LM IIIC settlement pattern took shape by the first half of the 12th century B.C., and in two phases, which can be easily distinguished in the material coming from different sites. The same pattern is represented by the other pair of sites near Kavousi, Kastro and Vronda. In both cases, the earliest material (transitional LM IIIB/C and very early IIIC) has been recorded at the more defensible site (Kastro and Katalimata), whereas the lower sites (Vronda and Halasmenos) probably were settled in a more advanced LM IIIC phase, probably in the mid 12th century B.C. The analysis of the pottery from Katalimata Monastiraki indicates the following features for the transitional LM IIIB/C and very early IIIC (in comparison with more advanced LM IIIC, represented by the material from Halasmenos):

1. In general, painted fine ware is more common with a large number of cups and deep bowls. 2. Stirrup jars and fragments of kylikes are more numerous. 3. Fragments of LM IIIB date with slip and paint of much better quality (sometimes lustrous) are still present in remarkable amounts. 4. Pithos and pithoid jar fragments with relief decoration show more links to the previous LM IIIB period, with some herringbone decoration in a more elaborate “floral” version. 5. Cross-hatching seems to be more common in the very early phases than in later phases of LM IIIC. The bands of finger impressions are sometimes in higher relief than the usual version of this pattern common in the later phases of LM IIIC.

276

NOWICKI

6. Plain tripod legs or those decorated with vertical slashes, usually round in section (although thick oval may appear as well), are much more common than those with finger impressions. This feature changes during the 12th century; finger impressions become at least as common as slashes, and the plain tripod legs disappear by mid LM IIIC. Another part of the West Siteia Mountains is the northern slopes of the Orno Mountains, between Kapsas on the west, and Chamaizi on the east (Fig. 19.9). This long chain of mountains, rising to a height of 1200 m a.s.l., closes off the Mochlos coastal plain on its south. As the old and new American excavations have shown, the Bronze Age settlement in that area focused at and around Mochlos. This was probably due to the environmental factors, found favorable by the Final Neolithic and Early Bronze Age people, which continued through the Late Bronze Age. The presence of arable land, abundance of water (collected in the limestone core of the mountains), and the shape of the coast, which offered bays and beaches used for harbors, invited the first settlers. This FN and EBA occupation is well represented by the coastal/promontory settlements at Mochlos itself and at Chalinomouri. People stayed on the coastal plain through the MM and LM I–IIIA and IIIB periods. Much more work is needed in the hilly country between the sea and the Orno ridge, and in the mountains themselves, to reconstruct interrelations between the coastal settlements and the mountainous hinterland during the Early, Middle, and Late Minoan I–III periods. The geographical links between these two zones and the advantages of their combined exploitation are so obvious that this fact could not be ignored by the Bronze Age people. Only a few sites, however, are known from the Neolithic through LM III periods from the vast area of the West Siteia Mountains. These were isolated farmsteads and small hamlets, which date to the MM I–II, LM I, and LM IIIA–B periods. It is only in the LM IIIC period that the picture of settlement in this area becomes clearer. Although the coastal plains and low hills probably were abandoned, as was the case elsewhere in Crete, the coast, however, in general was not. Around the Mirabello Bay, several peaks directly above the sea were settled at the very beginning of the LM IIIC period. Vrokastro is the best known example, but similar settlements on the summits of

Kastello Myrsini and Liopetro Chamaizi were founded at the same time. The foundation of these sites probably reflects the same phenomenon of the occupation of coastal defensible hills, as represented by Almyrou Kastrokephala and Kastri Palaikastro. The non-local (yet perhaps Cretan) origin of the inhabitants of these settlements is still a tempting hypothesis. Kastello Myrsini, known also as Ellinika, is the ridge which bounds the Mochlos plain on its east. It rises abruptly from the coast directly east of Chalinomouri (Fig. 19.10). Kastello Myrsini belongs to the group of settlements built on the summit of a mountain defended by nature and towering over the coastal plain. This setting is very similar to Vrokastro but apparently different from defensible sites located inland, such as Kastri Tourloti. LM IIIC Kastello Myrsini was located at the very eastern corner of the Mochlos valley; this location was exploited at least from the end of the Neolithic and Early Minoan times. A FN or EM I–II settlement was located on the promontory west of the river bed (Fig. 19.10: 1), and LM I and LM III settlements at Chalinomouri were situated on the spur directly east of the river bed (Fig. 19.10: 3). Evidence of a substantial erosion caused by the sea, which destroyed most of the Early Minoan settlement and a large part of the Late Bronze site, indicates that the appearance of that little bay has changed considerably during the last three thousand years. Chalinomouri was probably a more hospitable place in the Bronze Age, with better access to the sea and a possible small harbor. This eastern edge of the coastal plain, however, never matched the importance of Mochlos until the end of the LM IIIB period. When the problem with security began in the late 13th century B.C., the inhabitants of Mochlos had no chance to survive in their low-lying, non-defended town, and the impressive ridge of Kastello above Chalinomouri must have been an obvious choice for those who looked for safety but were desperate to stay close to the sea. The settlement on Kastello Myrsini was well-defended by a high cliff (to 250 m high) along its western, northern, and northeastern sides. The only approach to the settlement must have led up the steep southern slope. On the east, Kastello is joined to the main massif of Kopranes by a narrow saddle. The area delimited by these natural defensible boundaries is about 200 by 150 m, but only part of it was occupied by the LM IIIC settlement. A particularly wellconstructed building can be seen on the very

SOUTH OF KAVOUSI, EAST OF MOCHLOS

277

A. LM IIIC settlements. B. Modern villages.

Figure 19.9. Mochlos Plain and Orno Mountains. 1. Vigla Lastros

4. Liopetro Chamaizi

2. Kastri Tourloti

5. Mouliana tombs

3. Kastello Myrsini

summit of Kastello. Its eastern wall may suggest some kind of a fortified structure. The sea-oriented part of the Mochlos plain population may have moved to the summit of Kastello, but those who were farmers and shepherds may have fled to the mountains in the south. A similar process of population shift from the coastal settlement to the nearest defensible hill, above the same coast, may have led to the foundation of Vrokastro and Liopetro Chamaizi. It is, however, equally possible that the aforementioned coastal rocky ridges were chosen by newcomers, those bands of people coming by sea from elsewhere in Crete or even

from other parts of the Aegean. The citadels at Koukounaries on Paros, Moulas on Karpathos, Kastri on Astypalea, and Kastri Palaikastro on Crete were very similar in location and general topographical characteristics to Kastello Myrsini and Vrokastro, and they may have been founded by similar groups of people. Kastello Myrsini is the LM IIIC settlement nearest to the well-known tombs at Mouliana excavated by Xanthoudides (1904). The contents of these tombs differed very much from that which usually can be found in tholos tombs excavated near other LM IIIC settlements in Crete, as for example at

278

NOWICKI

Figure 19.10. Area of Chalinomouri and Kastello.

Karphi and Erganos. The richness of the owners of the tombs, who may have been warriors and/or local chieftains, indicates that they came from a community which did not base its economy solely on agriculture and herding. The Mouliana tombs’ contents find some parallels to the rich cemeteries of the LM IIIB period, such as Episkopi, Milatos (Desborough 1964, 177), and the recently excavated LM III cemetery at Mochlos. The LM IIIC date of the Mouliana burials indicates that the earlier (LM IIIA–B) social stratification may have survived the disturbances of the end of LM IIIB and continued into the 12th century B.C. in some areas of Crete. This continuation of the earlier “Mycenaean” hierarchy may have depended on the geographical and historical circumstances in which some settlements were founded. The refuge communities of farmers and shepherds, which moved into the mountainous interior of Crete (such as Katalimata Monastiraki, Katalimata Ayios Ioannis, and Kastri Oreino) were probably much more egalitarian than the groups which settled on the rocky

ridges directly above the sea (such as Vrokastro). The topography of the Kastello Myrsini site indicates, with no doubt, that this settlement belonged to the second group, probably with a substantial part of the population still maintaining their earlier status and properties. It is tempting, therefore, to link the Mouliana tombs with the settlement at Kastello, or at least with the cluster of settlements to which Kastello belonged. The distance between the two sites, however, is about 2 km (40 minutes walk), much farther than any other example of a cemetery belonging to a LM IIIC settlement. The distribution of LM IIIB and IIIC tombs, however, proves that, apart from the regular large cemeteries, there were isolated tombs, pairs of tombs, and small cemeteries consisting of a few tombs scattered through the countryside. It is possible that the tombs of nobles (particularly in early LM IIIC) may have been located in or close to the earlier cemeteries or land belonging to the family in the LM IIIB period. The present state of research does not allow us to go further with the interpretation of

SOUTH OF KAVOUSI, EAST OF MOCHLOS

the settlement context of the Mouliana tombs, apart from marking the location of the tombs on the map (Fig. 19.9: 5) and pointing to the fact that such a context existed and should not be ignored when the contents of the tombs are analyzed. Katalimata Ayios Ioannis and Kastello Myrsini represent different elements of the same process of changes in the settlement pattern in Crete around 1200 B.C. At that time, at least three main types of “defensible” sites with topographical characteristics, which may tell us something about the people who built them, can be identified in the West Siteia Mountains. Group 1 consists of settlements located inland, far away from the coastal plain in inner valleys— such as Oreino, Chrysopigi, Krya, and Pefki. They were built as a result of concentration of population in the areas previously exploited by much smaller groups of people. This new concentration brought people not only from the vicinity but perhaps also from a distant coast. Group 2 consists of settlements located in hardly accessible or easy to defend places (mountains, knolls, and cliffs) around the outer edge of the Siteia Mountains, above the plains and valleys that were previously major inhabited areas. Such were the locations of Kastro Kavousi, Katalimata Monastiraki, Stavromenos Vainia, and Prophitis Elias Kato Chorio. This settlement pattern is similar to that in the Lasithi Mountains, where the largest settlements were located not inside the plateau but on the mountains around it. It suggests that the refugees tried to control and perhaps cultivate the same land as before. The mountains themselves and the deep valleys which penetrated them, however, offered them the security they were seeking. Group 3 consists of settlements located on the rocks directly above the coast. Kastello Myrsini and Liopetro Chamaizi belong to that group, as well as Vrokastro, Kastri Palaikastro, Kastello Milatos, and Kastrokephala Rogdia, all on Crete, Koukounaries on Paros, and Moulas on Karpathos. Such a location indicates that the sea-activity was a very important part of the settlement’s economy. This may suggest that the LM IIIC Cretans were not only the victims, but also the authors, of disturbances within the Aegean at the turn of the 13th century B.C. The co-existence of the coastal “citadels” in the vicinity of the inland and mountainous defensible settlements may explain the way in which some exotic objects found their way to the latter sites. Several decades later, probably in the middle of the 12th century B.C., the fourth type of settlement

279

was added to this scheme. These were the sites located on more gentle hills, often not far away from the sites of Group 2. In this group are Halasmenos Monastiraki, Vronda Kavousi, and Kephala Vasilikis. The foundation of those sites was followed by decline or even abandonment of the most inaccessible sites of Groups 2 and 3, and this was related to the changes of the political situation in and around Crete. By mid LM IIIC, the Cretans seem to have been better organized within clusters of settlements or regional territories with some kind of political identity (Haggis 1993). The mid LM IIIC shift of population to slightly lower and less defensible places did not restore, however, the earlier LM IIIB settlement pattern. Intensive fieldwork undertaken by the American archaeologists at the beginning and the last quarter of the 20th century in Mirabello Bay revealed an enormous amount of evidence for the reconstruction of settlement in that part of Crete during the Bronze and Early Iron Age. The excavations and surveys have shown that settlement was intensive along the coast from the beginning of the Bronze Age through the LM IIIB period, i.e., from ca. 3100 B.C. until ca. 1200 B.C. The LM IA and IB destructions shook the whole system and may considerably have changed the political structure and economic basis of the Mirabello communities. It was only at the end of LM IIIB, however, that the old settlement pattern disappeared and was replaced by a completely new one. All the coastal settlements, which often originated 2000 years earlier, were abandoned, and people moved away from the coast to the hills and mountains. Although those “high” areas were exploited and inhabited earlier, from LM IIIC onwards the number of settlers in the West Siteia Mountains is hardly comparable with any other period. The abundance of EM to LM IIIB sites on the coast is reflected by the scarcity of human activity in the mountains. On the other hand, the abandonment of the coast at the turn of LM IIIB and very early IIIC is followed by a dramatic increase of settlement in the mountains. A similar picture can be reconstructed along the southern coast, too. Here, however, archaeological investigations are much less advanced than around Mirabello Bay and, additionally, the coastal zone is poorly preserved due to enormous destruction caused by farmers and developers during the last few decades. The sudden appearance of defensible sites on the summits of Katalimata Ayios Ioannis, Kastro Kavousi, Kastello Myrsini, Vrokastro, and on the

280

NOWICKI

cliff of the Cha gorge at Katalimata was caused by the same historical factors. This retreat to the mountains, which beginning in ca. 1200 B.C. had a very dramatic character, was followed by a longlasting process of adaptation and development of a new settlement pattern. The American projects in the Kavousi area yielded a huge amount of data for the interpretation of these events, but these should be complemented by more detailed analyses of the situation in the neighboring areas. The sites such as Stavromenos Vainia, Sto Skouro, Katalimata Ayios Ioannis, and Prophitis Elias, to mention only a few, existed in the same historical circumstances and reflected the same phenomenon.

The excavations at Halasmenos and Katalimata showed many similarities to the situation recorded by the American excavations at Kavousi. More parallels probably could be found if the southern sites (such as Stavromenos Vainia, Karphi Koutsounari, and Katalimata Ayios Ioannis) were more intensively investigated and eventually excavated. The historical comparisons to the prolonged occupation of the Kavousi cluster, however, may be found rather at Prophitis Elias Kato Chorio and Liopetro, which are those few defensible settlements that, although founded in the LM IIIC period, continued either into advanced Geometric or Archaic periods and even later.

Bibliography Betancourt, P., E.S. Banou, and C.R. Floyd. 1997. “Provincial LM III at Pseira, Crete,” in Late Minoan III Pottery. Chronology and Terminology, E. Hallager and B.P. Hallager, eds., Athens, pp. 57–82. Coulson, W.D.E. 1997. “The Late Minoan IIIC Period on the Kastro at Kavousi,” in La Crète mycénienne (BCH Supplement 30), A. Farnoux and J. Driessen, eds., Athens, pp. 59–72. Coulson, W.D.E., and M. Tsipopoulou. 1994. “Preliminary Investigations at Halasmenos, Crete, 1992–1993,” Aegean Archaeology 1, pp. 65–97. Day, L.P. 1997. “The Late Minoan IIIC Period at Vronda, Kavousi,” in La Crète mycénienne (BCH Supplement 30), A. Farnoux and J. Driessen, eds., Athens, pp. 391–406. Day, L.P., W.D.E. Coulson, and G.C. Gesell. 1986. “Kavousi, 1983–1984: The Settlement at Vronda,” Hesperia 55, pp. 355–387. Desborough, V.R.d’A. 1964. The Last Mycenaeans and Their Successors, Oxford. Eliopoulos, T. 1998. “A Preliminary Report on the Discovery of a Temple Complex of the Dark Age at Kephala Vasilikis,” in Eastern Mediterranean: CyprusDodecanese-Crete, 16th–6th Century B.C., V. Karageorghis and N. Stampolidis, eds., Athens, pp. 301–313. Gesell, G.C., L.P. Day, and W.D.E. Coulson. 1983. “Excavations and Survey at Kavousi, 1978–1981,” Hesperia 52, pp. 389–420. ———. 1985. “Kavousi, 1982–1983: The Kastro,” Hesperia 54, pp. 327–355. Haggis, D.C. 1993. “Intensive Survey, Traditional Settlement Patterns, and Dark Age Crete: The Case of Early Iron Age Kavousi,” JMA 6, pp. 131–174.

———. 1996. “Archaeological Survey at Kavousi, East Crete. Preliminary Report,” Hesperia 65, pp. 373–432. Hayden, B.J. 1983. “New Plans of the Early Iron Age Settlement of Vrokastro,” Hesperia 52, pp. 367–387. ———. 2000. “Elias to Nisi: A Fortified Coastal Settlement of Possible Late Minoan IIIC Date in the Vrokastro Area, Eastern Crete,” in Defensive Settlements of the Aegean and the Eastern Mediterranean after c. 1200 B.C., V. Karageorghis and C. Morris, eds., Nicosia. Hayden, B.J., J.A. Moody, and O. Rackham. 1992. “The Vrokastro Survey Project, 1986–1989,” Hesperia 61, pp. 293–354. Mook, M.S., and W.D.E. Coulson. 1997. “Late Minoan IIIC Pottery from the Kastro at Kavousi,” in Late Minoan III Pottery. Chronology and Terminology, E. Hallager and B.P. Hallager, eds., Athens, pp. 337–370. Nowicki, K. 1990. “The West Siteia Mountains at the Turn of the Bronze and Iron Ages,” in Aegaeum 6, Liège, pp. 161– 182. ———. 1994. “A Dark Age Refuge Centre near Pefki, East Crete,” BSA 89, pp. 235–268. ———. 2000. Defensible Sites in Crete, c. 1200–800 B.C. (Aegaeum 21), Liège. Soles, J.S., and C. Davaras. 2000. “Mochlos,” in Crete 2000: One Hundred Years of American Archaeological Work on Crete, J. Muhly and E. Sikla, eds., Athens, pp. 23–31. Xanthoudides, S. 1904. “Ek Krhvth",“ ArchEph 21, pp. 1–56. Vokotopoulos, L. 1997–1998. “Kavtw Kavstella" Lenikav ,” Kritiki Estia 6, pp. 237–270.

PA RT V Technology and Production

20 Chrysokamino and the Beginnings of Metal Technology on Crete and in the Aegean James D. Muhly

On several occasions Z. Stos-Gale (1993, 119; 1998, 727) has quoted a remarkable passage from Renfrew’s seminal work The Emergence of Civilisation. It reads: One of the problems concerning the development of Aegean metallurgy is to understand why it underwent its tremendous expansion in the Early Bronze 2 period . . . The appearance of the dagger perhaps presents a clue. For while the Aegean smiths of the final neolithic could make flat axes and awls . . . daggers are not seen . . . anywhere in Europe until the inception of the Aegean Early Bronze 2 period. In Europe and the Near East, daggers and intensive bronze metallurgy are almost Coterminous: the one scarcely exists without the other. The correlation is an extremely striking one . . . (Renfrew 1972, 319– 320) This is a powerful observation but one with a serious flaw: it happens to be all wrong.

The idea that before ca. 2600 B.C. Aegean metallurgy amounted to little or nothing more than the production of a few trinkets has a long history and, especially on Crete, a very pernicious one. At least as early as 1935–1936, Money-Coutts wrote in her publication of the metal finds from the British excavation of the Trapeza Cave that: It must be remembered that until the EM II period metal of any kind was practically unknown in Crete, so that the rapid spread of its use and the skill with which it was worked shew the respectiveness and ingenuity of the early inhabitants of the island. (Pendlebury, Pendlebury, and Money-Coutts 1935–1936, 102) This basic idea of poverty before EM II, followed by a sudden explosion of metallurgical activity in that period, is to be found in all the works of Branigan, especially in his basic catalogue, Aegean Metalwork of the Early and Middle Bronze Age (Branigan 1974, 100). In his review of this book, Warren (1976,

284

MUHLY

95) expressed his general agreement, referring to the beginning of “the great Minoan metallurgical tradition” as being “not necessarily earlier than the beginning of EM II, around 2600 B.C.” As a consequence of this belief, no one wanted to place any metal object from Crete earlier than EM II save, of course, for the famous LN flat axe from Knossos (Evans 1928, 14–15, fig. 3: f; Sakellarakis 1973, 145; J.D. Evans 1971, 115; Branigan 1974, no. 593); that, unfortunately, does not come from a secure context (Evans 1994, 18) and can no longer be located in the Herakleion Museum. Not even this axe should ever have been seen in an isolated context, as already in 1910 Mosso had published two comparable examples from the vicinity of Ierapetra (Mosso 1910, 309–310, figs. 171–172; for an analytical study of such axes see Phelps, Varoufakis, and Jones 1979). This reluctance to accept the existence of early metal artifacts on Crete has resulted in a serious misdating of important bodies of metalwork from Early Minoan Crete. In some cases, we will probably never be certain of exact dates. Some of the metal finds from the Trapeza Cave are probably earlier than EM II, but who can say how early or how many? So also are the metal finds from the Mesara tholoi. What of the 54 metal finds from Ayia Triada, the 56 from Koumasa, or the 95 from Platanos? (For this material see Branigan 1984). No one has ever suggested that any of these objects could be earlier than EM II, or even EM III. Consider the metal finds from the Pyrgos Cave, excavated by Xanthoudides in January of 1918 (Xanthoudides 1918). Everyone agrees that the pottery from this cave is EM I, but no one wants to call the associated metalwork from Pyrgos EM I. Why? Because it includes a series of long daggers (Branigan 1974, nos. 129, 251, 254, and 401), and daggers are not supposed to exist before EM II. The same situation applies in the case of the metal finds from the Kanli Kastelli Cave burials, with at least three long daggers (Branigan 1974, nos. 98, 103, and 405), and also the two long daggers from the Salame tholos (Branigan 1974, nos. 147 and 148). All of these daggers are almost certainly EM I, but no Minoan archaeologist wants to admit this. More interesting are the two small daggers from the Krasi tholos excavated by S. Marinatos in 1929 (Marinatos 1929), because they are made of bronze, with 10% and 6% tin, respectively (SAM 9447, 9449; Branigan 1974, no. 1467). No one wants to acknowledge that these daggers are EM I, yet Marinatos makes it perfectly clear that they came from

the basal layer of the tomb and are, therefore, to be associated with the earliest, EM I, pottery. There is also a silver pendant from this basal layer, containing 99.5% silver and 0.5% copper, perhaps to be compared with two silver pendants from Mochlos (Tombs I and XV), containing 99.8% silver and 0.2% copper and 99.3% silver and 0.7% copper, respectively (Stos-Gale 1985, 372, Table 1). Some scholars might be concerned about the existence of silver in an EM I context, but, in fact, silver is present in some quantity already in the Final Neolithic (or Chalcolithic) deposit in the Alepotrypa Cave (Maran 2000). Watrous (1994, 703) would prefer to regard all of this material from the basal level of the Krasi tholos as EM I–IIA. I believe that it can all be called late EM I, and that the evidence for this comes from the Ayia Photia cemetery, excavated by Davaras in 1971. With some 263 graves, this is the largest Minoan cemetery known at this time (Davaras 1971). P. Day and his colleagues have already demonstrated that all pottery from this cemetery, both Minoan and Cycladic, is actually late EM I, contemporary with the Ayios Onouphrios group on Crete and the Kampos group in the Cyclades (Day, Wilson, and Kiriatzi 1998; and for the Kampos group, see Rambach 2000, 48–57). There is no reason to believe that the metal finds from Ayia Photia, apart from the LM III socketed spearhead, are not also EB IB. This has now been confirmed by the restudy, for publication, of all the material from Ayia Photia, in a synergasia project between Davaras and Betancourt. The appearance of such metal finds in the archaeological record during EB IB is, of course, related to the change in burial customs at that time (Nakou 1995, 7). Anatolian scholars are going to be reluctant to accept this re-dating of the daggers from Ayia Photia. The EBA metal industry of Anatolia, generally considered to be more extensive and more advanced in terms of technology than comparable periods on Crete, does not really have daggers with pronounced midribs before the EB II period (Stronach 1957, 94). The situation, however, is not quite so straightforward. In 1996, a remarkable “royal” tomb dating to ca. 3000 B.C., discovered at Arslantepe-Malatya (eastern Turkey), produced a wealth of metal finds, including some 28 objects made of a copper-silver alloy, containing roughly equal amounts of both metals (Palmieri, Hauptmann, and Hess 1998; Hauptmann et al. 2002). These include a tanged dagger with pronounced

CHRYSOKAMINO AND THE BEGINNINGS OF METAL TECHNOLOGY

midrib (Palmieri, Hauptmann, and Hess 1998, 116, fig. 2). This re-dating of the Ayia Photia metalwork, the realization that all these objects are actually late EM I, and not EM II as maintained by Minoan experts prior to 1998, has profound implications for our understanding of the development of Minoan metallurgical technology in the 3rd millennium B.C. It is now evident that the dagger with three rivets (Fig. 20.1, HN 4671), the long dagger with pronounced central midrib (Fig. 20.2, HN 4670), the long dagger with midrib and surviving patch of cloth (Fig. 20.3, HN 4658), and even the small saw (Fig. 20.4, HN 4673), formerly thought to be a dagger, are all late EM I. So much for daggers and the EB II period in Europe and the Aegean. One must, of course, still recognize the great increase in the number of daggers in the EB II period and the symbolic or emblematic importance of the dagger in the Aegean world (and especially on Crete) in the second half of the 3rd millennium B.C. (Nakou 1995, 9–13). Should these early daggers have come as such a great surprise? Actually not. In 1996, there was a great exhibition at the Goulandris Museum in Athens on Neolithic culture in Greece (Papathanassopoulos 1996). In the exhibition, there were two FN daggers from the Alepotrypa Cave in Laconia (cat. no. 44), a FN dagger from Ayios Dimitrios in Messenia (cat. no. 183), and even two LN daggers from Ayia Marina in Phokis (cat. no. 182). Nor are these all recent finds. The Ayia Marina daggers actually were excavated by Soteriades in 1911. Why should we take seriously the idea that the use of daggers began only in the EB II period? The revisions involved here concern not just daggers but our whole concept of the development of Aegean, especially Cretan, metallurgical technology. Since I last reviewed the evidence (Muhly 1996), important new developments have taken place. I would now argue that the development of metal technology on Crete goes back to the Final Neolithic period and is, in fact, related to the initial settlement of Eastern Crete, especially the Bay of Mirabello, in the Final Neolithic period. Soles (1992, 1) speaks of the arrival of newcomers and the initial settlement of the Bay of Mirabello “at the beginning of the EM II phase of the Prepalatial period . . .” This is simply not correct (as Soles himself now realizes), as all the sites in question now can be shown to have an occupational history beginning in the Final Neolithic. This still poorly understood period (but see now Johnson 1999),

285

extending over some 1200 years or more (ca. 4500–3200 in Papathanassopoulos 1996; from 4500–3700 in Johnson 1999, with a 3700–3300 transitional FN–EBA period) and corresponding to what East European archaeologists know as Die Übergangszeit (and dated to 4000–3300 B.C. in Görsdorf + and Bojadziev 1996, 107; for the development of the European dagger, going back to the early 4th millennium B.C., see Vajsov 1993), now emerges as the first international period in Cretan prehistory (so already Betancourt 1985, 13; for recent surveys, see Vagnetti and Belli 1978; Vagnetti 1996). In Crete and throughout the Aegean, the origins of this metallurgical industry remain obscure. The flat axes or celts from Crete and the Greek mainland, especially Thessaly and Macedonia, argue for connections with Southeastern Europe, the Balkans and Danube area. This is what I argued previously (Muhly 1996). The gold jewelry now known from FN sites in Greece supports the Balkan origins of this Aegean metallurgical industry (see Muhly 2002). Nevertheless in the discussion session following my presentation at Forlì in 1996, the idea of a Balkan origin for early Aegean metallurgy was strongly rejected by Renfrew (in a response even longer than my original paper). Much of this was a repetition of the discussion that dominated the 8th meeting of this congress (in Belgrade, 1971; see Muhly 1996, 80). While I have the greatest respect for Renfrew’s scholarship, I have to state that his position here is no longer tenable (if it ever was). The evidence for the independent invention of Southeast European metallurgy is very convincing (for recent evidence, see Kalicz 1992; Zalai-Gaál 1996), but it does not follow from this that developments were the same in the Aegean. The Balkan connections of the FN flat axes in the Aegean have already been recognized by Nakou (1995, 4, 6) and the European connections of the dagger have now been discussed by S. Sherratt (2000, 69). Nowhere is this re-evaluation of 4th–3rd millennium Crete more dramatic than in our understanding of the tiny metallurgical site of Chrysokamino, in the Bay of Mirabello, Eastern Crete. In 1900, Harriet Boyd first went to the site, when the local inhabitants told her that the name of the locale was Chrysokamino, “Golden Furnace.” She collected a few pieces of copper from the site, noted that the ground was strewn with fragments of an ancient furnace, and reported that traces of copper were to be found in “rock obtained from the adjacent cliff” (Hawes et al.

286

MUHLY

Figure 20.1. HN 4671, Tomb 217. Dagger, rounded heel with three rivet holes; no midrib. Length 18.8 cm. Scale: 1:3.

hole

Figure 20.2. HN 4670, Tomb 216. Long dagger, tapering blade with pronounced central midrib. Length 31.5 cm. Scale: 1:3.

hole hole

fabric remnant

hole

Figure 20.3. HN 4658, Tomb 2. Long dagger, tapering blade with central midrib. Remnant of fabric preserved on blade. Part of blade has well-preserved silvery surface arsenical enrichment (from conservation?). Length 27.0 cm. Scale: 1:3.

Figure 20.4. HN 4673, Tomb 217. Saw, tapering blade with small teeth. Length 16.2 cm. Scale: 1:3.

CHRYSOKAMINO AND THE BEGINNINGS OF METAL TECHNOLOGY

1908, 33). In 1910, Mosso even published a drawing of one of these furnace fragments, although he was convinced that the piece came from an ancient crucible (Mosso 1910, 290–291, fig. 164). Over the course of the entire 20th century, almost every scholar with a serious interest in Minoan metallurgy paid a visit to Chrysokamino. Interpretations of the site varied widely, especially in terms of chronology. Dates for Chrysokamino have ranged from prehistoric to medieval; the site even has been identified as a modern lime kiln (for all this, see Betancourt et al. 1999). Every scholar who went to Chrysokamino picked up pieces of slag and ceramics from the surface of the site, but no one thought the site worthy of serious archaeological investigation. In the summer of 1995, Philip Betancourt and I decided that the time had come to take a serious look at Chrysokamino. At the very worst, we could at least decide that the site was indeed not worth further study. A thorough investigation of the surrounding area that July convinced both of us, as well as the geologists William Farrand and Carola Stearns, that the site merited serious investigation. That investigation amounted to two seasons of fieldwork, during the summers of 1996 and 1997, followed by several study seasons. The basic details of the Chrysokamino project have all been set out in the preliminary report (Betancourt et al. 1999) and need not be repeated here. For our understanding of the early development of Minoan metallurgical technology, the salient points are, that the site was occupied by a copper-smelting workshop, engaged only in the smelting of imported copper ore and in no other metallurgical activity, and that this smelting activity is best documented for the EM III period. That date comes from the sherds of EM III East Cretan White-on-Dark Ware found within an apsidal hut (the only structure on the site) along with fragments of pot bellows (the earliest examples of this distinctive object known from the Mediterranean and the Near East). All this was remarkable enough, but even more incredible was the realization that the apsidal hut was built over a 45 cm accumulation of crushed copper-smelting slag. In other words, the crushing of slag, in order to remove the entrapped prills of metallic copper, had been going on long before the EM III period. Such an observation was in keeping with the presence of sherds of EM IIB Vasiliki Ware, an EM I–IIA globular pyxis, and even FN wares. Chrysokamino, in other words, had a history of

287

copper-smelting activity going back into the Final Neolithic period. I would like to close with a brief discussion about sources of copper ore. Both Boyd and Mosso speak about a copper mine in the vicinity of Chrysokamino. This is very puzzling, for no such mine seems to exist, and we now know that the basic geology of the area rules out the possibility of any local copper mineralization (Betancourt et al. 1999, 352). So what can be said about possible sources of copper ore for the smelting workshop at Chrysokamino? There is general agreement among scholars today that the island of Crete never had any significant deposits of copper ore (Stos-Gale 1993, 119; 1998, 720; Nakou 1995, 17). The ore smelted at Chrysokamino must, therefore, have been brought to the site from somewhere outside Crete. What possible sources of copper ore would have been known (and accessible) to East Cretan EBA metalworkers? At present, the most logical source of copper for Early Minoan Crete seems to be the copper mines located on the nearby Cycladic island of Kythnos. There are several reasons for suggesting Kythnos. First of all, the existence of a copper mine on Kythnos is a well-documented fact (Stos-Gale et al. 1988; Hadjianastasiou and MacGillivray 1988; Gale and Stos-Gale 1989). Secondly, the Kythnos copper deposit is an arsenical copper deposit, and arsenical copper certainly was the dominant alloy in the EBA copper metallurgy of Crete and the Cyclades (Gale and Stos-Gale 1989; Stos-Gale 1998). Thirdly, at least during the EC II period, this arsenical copper ore was being smelted on Kythnos itself. The Skouries copper-smelting site on Kythnos, located just to the north of the copper mine, is the largest EBA metallurgical site in the Eastern Mediterranean. The site was first discovered by Honea in 1975 and currently is being investigated by Philaniotou-Hadjianastasiou and Bassiakos. Finally, preliminary results of the lead isotope analysis of metal finds from Ayia Photia suggests that the copper used in their production came from Kythnos (Stos-Gale 1993). Three important new sites from three different periods: Ayia Photia is EM IB, Skouries on Kythnos is EC II, and Chrysokamino is mainly EM III. What needs to be done now, in order to write the history of Early Bronze Age Aegean metallurgy, is to figure out how all of this comes together to form a real, coherent metallurgical culture.

288

MUHLY

Bibliography Betancourt, P.P. 1985. The History of Minoan Pottery, Princeton. Betancourt, P.P., et al. 1999. “Research and Excavation at Chrysokamino, Crete, 1995–1998,” Hesperia 68, pp. 343–370. Branigan, K. 1974. Aegean Metalwork of the Early and Middle Bronze Age, Oxford. ———. 1984. “Early Minoan Society: The Evidence of the Mesara Tholoi Revisited,” in Aux origins de l’hellénisme: la Crète et la Grèce. Hommage à Henri van Effentere, Paris, pp. 29–37. Davaras, C. 1971. “Arcaivothte" kai Mnhmeiva Anatolikhv" Krhvth" ,” ArchDelt 27 (Chronika), pp. 645–654. Day, P.M., D.E. Wilson, and E. Kiriatzi. 1998. “Pots, Labels and People: Burying Ethnicity in the Cemetery at Aghia Photia, Siteias,” in Cemetery and Society in the Aegean Bronze Age, K. Branigan, ed., Sheffield, pp. 133–149. Evans, A.J. 1928. The Palace of Minos at Knossos II, London. Evans, J.D. 1971. “Neolithic Knossos: The Growth of a Settlement,” PPS 37, pp. 95–117. ———. 1994. “The Early Millennia: Continuity and Change in a Farming Settlement,” in Knossos, A Labyrinth of History. Papers Presented in Honour of Sinclair Hood, D. Evely, H. Hughes-Brock, and N. Momigliano, eds., Athens, pp. 1–21. Gale, N.H., and Z.A. Stos-Gale. 1989. “Some Aspects of Early Cycladic Copper Metallurgy,” in Mineria y metalurgia en la antiguas civilizaciones mediterraneas y europeas I, C. Domergue, ed., Madrid, pp. 21–37. Görsdorf, J., and J. Bojadziev. 1996. “Zur absoluten Chronologie der bulgarischen Urgeschichte,” Eurasia Antiqua 2, pp. 105–173. Hadjianastasiou, O., and S. MacGillivray. 1988. “An Early Bronze Age Copper Smelting Site on the Aegean Island of Kythnos, Part Two: The Archaeological Evidence,” in Aspects of Ancient Mining and Metallurgy, J.E. Jones, ed., Gwynedd, pp. 31–34. Hauptmann, A., S. Schmitt-Strecker, F. Begemann, and A. Palmieri. 2002. “Chemical Composition and Lead Isotopy of Metal Objects from the ‘Royal’ Tomb and Other Related Finds at Arslantepe, Eastern Anatolia,” Paléorient 28(2), pp. 43–69. Hawes, H.B., B.E. Williams, R.B. Seager, and E.H. Hall. 1908. Gournia, Vasiliki and Other Prehistoric Sites on the Isthmus of Hierapetra, Crete, Philadelphia.

Johnson, M. 1999. “Chronology of Greece and Southeast Europe in the Final Neolithic and Early Bronze Age,” PPS 65, pp. 319–336. Kalicz, N. 1992. “The Oldest Metal Finds in Southeastern Europe and the Carpathian Basin from the 6th to 5th Millennia BC,” (in Hungarian, with English summary) Archaeologiai Értesitö 119, pp. 3–14. Maran, J. 2000. “Das ägäische Chalkolithikum und das erste Silber in Europa,”in Studien zur Religion und Kultur Kleinasiens und des ägäischen Bereiches. Festschrift Baki Ögün. C. Isik, ed., (Asia Minor Studien 39), Bonn, pp. 179–193. Marinatos, S. 1929. “Prwtominwikov" qolwtov" tavfo" parav to cwrivon Kravsi Pediavdo",” ArchDelt 2 (Chronika), pp. 102–141. Mosso, A. 1910. The Dawn of Mediterranean Civilisation, London. Muhly, J.D. 1996. “The First Use of Metals in the Aegean,” in The Copper Age in the Near East and Europe, B. Bagolini and F. Lo Schiavo, eds., Forlì, pp. 75–84. ———. 2002. “Early Metallurgy in Greece and Cyprus,” in Anatolian Metal II, Ü. Yalçin, ed., Bochum, pp. 77– 82. Nakou, G. 1995. “The Cutting Edge: A New Look at Early Aegean Metallurgy,” JMA 8(2), pp. 1–32. Palmieri, A.M., A. Hauptmann, and K. Hess. 1998. “The Metal Objects in the ‘Royal’ Tomb Dating From 3000 B.C. found at Arslantepe (Malatya): A New Alloy (CuAg),” in XIII. Arkeometri Sonuçlar Toplant s , Ankara, pp. 115–121. Papathanassopoulos, G.A., ed. 1996. Neolithic Culture in Greece, Athens. Pendlebury, H.W., J.D.S. Pendlebury, and M.B. MoneyCoutts. 1935–1936. “Excavations in the Plain of Lasithi. I. The Cave of Trapeza,” BSA 36, pp. 5–131. Phelps, W.W., G.J. Varoufakis, and R.E. Jones. 1979. “Five Copper Axes from Greece,” BSA 74, pp. 175–184. Rambach, J. 2000. Kykladen II: die frühbronzezeitliche Beigabensitten-Kreise auf den Kykladen. Relative Chronologie und Verbeitung, Bonn. Renfrew, C. 1972. The Emergence of Civilisation, London. Sakellarakis, J.A. 1973. “Neolithic Crete,” in Neolithic Greece, D.R. Theocharis, ed., Athens, pp. 131–146. Sherratt, S. 2000. Catalogue of Cycladic Antiquities in the Ashmolean Museum. The Captive Spirit, Vol. I, Oxford.

CHRYSOKAMINO AND THE BEGINNINGS OF METAL TECHNOLOGY Soles, J.S. 1992. The Prepalatial Cemeteries at Mochlos and Gournia and the House Tombs of Bronze Age Crete (Hesperia Supplement 24), Princeton. Stos-Gale, Z. 1985. “Lead and Silver Sources for Bronze Age, Crete,” in Pepragmevna tou E' Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou A1, Herakleion, pp. 365–372. ———. 1993. “The Origin of Metal Used for Making Weapons in Early and Middle Minoan Crete,” in Trade and Exchange in Prehistoric Europe, C. Scarre and F. Healy, eds., Oxford, pp. 115–130. ———. 1998. “The Role of Kythnos and Other Cycladic Islands in the Origins of Early Minoan Metallurgy,” in Kea-Kythnos: History and Archaeology, L.G. Mendoni and A.J. Mazarakis Ainian, eds., Athens, pp. 717–735. Stos-Gale, Z., N. Gale, and A. Papastamataki. 1988. “An Early Bronze Age Smelting Site on the Aegean Island of Kythnos,” in Aspects of Ancient Mining and Metallurgy, J.E. Jones, ed., Gwynedd, pp. 23–30. Stronach, D.B. 1957. “The Development and Diffusion of Metal Types in Early Bronze Age Anatolia,” AnatSt 7, pp. 89–125.

289

Vagnetti, L. 1996. “The Final Neolithic: Crete Enters the Wider World,” Cretan Studies 5, pp. 29–39. Vagnetti, L., and P. Belli. 1978. “Characters and Problems of the Final Neolithic in Crete,” SMEA 19, pp. 125–163. Vajsov, I. 1993. “Die frühesten Metalldolche Südostund Mitteleuropas,” PZ 68, pp. 103–145. Warren, P. 1976. “Review of Branigan 1974,” AntJ 56, pp. 93–95. Watrous, L.V. 1994. “Review of Aegean Prehistory III: Crete from the Earliest Prehistory through the Protopalatial Period,” AJA 98, pp. 695–753. Xanthoudides, S. 1918. “Mevga" prwtominwi>kov" tavfo" Puvrgou,” ArchDelt 4, 1918 [1921], pp. 136–170. Zalai-Gaál, I. 1996. “Die Kupferfunde der Lengyel-Kultur im südlichen Transdanubien,” ActaArchHung 48, pp. 1–34.

21 Mochlos and Melos: A Special Relationship? Creating Identity and Status in Minoan Crete Tristan Carter

In this chapter, I hope to shed some light on how Mochlos defined itself in its East Cretan, Minoan, and Aegean contexts. It will be argued that during EM II and LM IB, Mochlos was the primary procurer of Melian obsidian in East Crete, an activity

that formed a component in how this community’s elite forged and expressed their political identity. This interpretation is based not only on the quantity of obsidian found at the site, but also on the manner in which it was consumed.

Early Minoan Mochlos Ever since Seager’s (1909; 1912) excavations of the “House Tombs,” the wealth and importance of EM Mochlos has been acknowledged widely (Branigan 1968, 106; Renfrew 1972, 378; Whitelaw 1983, 337–339). Most scholars consider the rise of its elite to have been based on the community’s mercantile activities, as a regional entrepôt or

“gateway community,” controlling the flow of goods in and out of East Crete (Branigan 1991). Moreover, the quantity and distinction of the burial record, gold, and stonework in particular, suggest that Mochlos was also a center for working local and imported raw materials (Branigan 1991, 99–101).

292

CARTER

Figure 21.1. Location of Building/Tomb N in the Prepalatial cemetery, Mochlos (after Soles 1992, Plan 3, with additions).

MOCHLOS AND MELOS: A SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP?

293

Figure 21.2. EM II sites mentioned in the text.

A striking example of Mochlos’ prowess in trade and craft is provided by the huge amount of obsidian recovered from the site. Two assemblages especially serve to illustrate the EM II community’s privileged access to the Melian resource. The first comes from Building/Tomb N in the Prepalatial cemetery (Fig. 21.1), comprising 10.09 kg of obsidian, a mass of material representing all stages of blade production from the decortication of raw nodules onward (Soles and Davaras 1992, 424, pl. 91). Only the end-products are under-represented, the blades having been consumed elsewhere on the site or farther afield. Unfortunately, the structure’s upper levels and surroundings have suffered from erosion, making it difficult to gain a clear image of the deposit’s context—primary or secondary, tomb or workshop. Whatever the interpretation accorded to this assemblage, with more than 12,000 pieces, it is the largest single deposit of obsidian outside of Melos. To give this material a Minoan context (Fig. 21.2), it is twice the weight and four times the size of the assemblage from the EM IIA “workshop” at Knossos (Warren 1972a, 393–394; Torrence 1986, 151–155). The Mochlos deposit also comprises a far greater quantity of obsidian than recovered from other contemporary north coast communities, such as Pseira, Mallia, and Kastelli Chania (Hartmann 1978; van Effenterre and van Effenterre 1969, 17– 21; Tzedakis and Hallager 1983, 6–7). Poros-Kazsambas, the harbor-settlement of Knossos, is the only community importing and working obsidian on a larger scale than Mochlos, though not even the EM II levels of the Sanoudakis Plot have produced a deposit

to compare with that from Building/Tomb N (Dimopoulou 1997, 433–434; pers. obs.). The second major assemblage from EM II Mochlos comes from a hollow in the bedrock under the eastern wing of the later Minoan villa, Building B2—a cache of 251 blade-cores alongside a small Vasiliki Ware jug (Figs. 21.3 and 21.4). In contrast, the “workshops” at EM IIA Knossos and EM IIB Mallia produced only 4 and 20 cores, respectively (Evely 1993, 132–134; Torrence 1986, 150–155). It is not only the deposit’s size which is remarkable, but also the fact that it was highly structured, as most of the cores were exhausted. Furthermore, these nuclei display technical features that distinguish them from contemporary material elsewhere in Crete. Gaining a specifically East Cretan and EM II perspective on these two Mochlos assemblages is not particularly easy. There is no detailed record of the obsidian from Vasiliki, Gournia, or Palaikastro; Pseira and Petras have yielded only limited Prepalatial deposits. Anyone who has excavated or surveyed in the region, however, will appreciate that the evidence suggests strongly that Mochlos enjoyed an unrivalled access to Melian obsidian in EM II. The one context that does provide contemporary data is the village of Myrtos Phournou Koriphi, located ca. 37 km away on the south coast (Fig. 21.2). Despite the fact that the two-phase (EM IIA–B) settlement was excavated almost completely, it produced only 181 pieces of obsidian (Jarman 1972). Given that the assemblage was dominated by end-products, Myrtos well may have been one of the communities that fell within the supply-zone

294

CARTER

Figure 21.3. Location of EM IIB and LM IB core caches, Mochlos (plan by D. Faulmann, with additions).

of the Mochlos obsidian workers (Warren 1972b, 267). This sphere of influence, underwritten by the privileged access to an exotic raw material and the technical know-how with which to work it, would have offered certain Mochlos inhabitants a means of achieving a level of regional renown and status. Is it, therefore, appropriate to conclude that in EM II, Mochlos served a function for East Crete

similar to that of Poros-Katsambas for Central and Southern Crete? Despite their undoubted roles as gateway communities, the answer would have to be no. To explain why these sites are not analogous, it is necessary to look beyond Crete and to examine Mochlos’ relationship with Melos and the nature of Cyclado-Minoan relations in EB II.

MOCHLOS AND MELOS: A SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP?

Figure 21.4. Selection of blade-cores from EM IIB cache, Mochlos.

295

296

CARTER

Crete and the Cyclades in EB II Most of the debate on the emergence of social ranking at early Mochlos has focused on the site itself, or at best, placed it into a Minoan context (Whitelaw 1983, 337–339; Soles 1988; Branigan 1991). Yet, these alleged developments occurred at a time when certain Aegean communities were establishing new long-distance (archaeologically crosscultural) relationships, involving the widespread dissemination of material culture, technologies, and social practices—what Renfrew (1972, 34, 451–455) termed the EB II “international spirit.” In the earlier part of EB II, evidence indicates that it was Cycladic communities that were central to this activity (Fig. 21.5), with four “trader sites” (Ayia Irini, Chalandriani-Kastri, Grotta-Aplomata, and Daskaleio-Kavos), denoted on the basis of their estimated size, rich material culture, and nodal positions in maritime routes (Broodbank 1989, 325– 327; 1993, 316–318; 2000, 211–221). From contemporary demographics, iconography, and ethnographic parallels, it has been argued that status in EC society was achieved partly through establishing multiple long-distance social relations, such as trade partnerships and intermarriage (Broodbank 1989; 1992, 543; 1993; 2000, 237–275). A concomitant of this phenomenon was the outward flow of material culture from the Cyclades, much of it in the form of prestige items (see Getz-Gentle 1996, 59– 61, 77–78 inter alia). Melian obsidian undoubtedly represented a component of this exchange, perhaps occasionally in the form of a meaningful object but mainly as a raw material or preforms, its displacement embedded within more politically significant modes of contact. Early Cycladic imports are known from a number of EM IIA contexts, concentrated among North Cretan sites (Renfrew 1964; Sakellarakis 1977; Karantzali 1996). This distribution owes more to politics than geography, however, for the flow of Cycladic goods was directed to the major settlements of the early EB II Aegean. Yet, there is a striking omission; despite the fact that it seems to have been an important site at this juncture, Mochlos has produced no such material (though see Getz-Gentle 1996, 118, 196–197, n. 249). Such negative evidence can only be considered significant by demonstrating that EM IIA Mochlos represents the type of site where Cycladic imports should have been expected to be found. On the basis of its status and the nature of the deposits

investigated, arguably it can be seen as an appropriate candidate for the import of EC material culture. For instance, four of the six famous “House Tombs” were constructed in EM IIA (Soles 1992, 49–50, 57–60), precisely the type of context to find “Cycladica,” given the evidence from the sites of Ayios Onouphrios, Archanes Tholos E, Palaikastro, Ayios Kosmas, Lithares, Manika, and others (Sakellarakis 1977; Sampson 1988). Furthermore, recent chemical analysis suggests that Mochlos was a center of manufacture for Dark Gray Burnished Ware (Day et al. 1999, 1033) fine drinking and eating vessels, until recently considered to have been the preserve of Knossian potters (Wilson and Day 1994, 75). In turn, Mochlos consumed quantities of Cycladic obsidian and metals (Stos-Gale 1985; StosGale and Gale 1990, 75–76) and is situated on the route along which Cycladic longboats would have had to travel on reaching Crete (Agourides 1997, 9–11). Despite this community’s ability to, and penchant for, accessing and consuming quantities of non-local goods, it remains that the site has produced little evidence for cultural interaction with the Cyclades. Mochlos is, thus, an anomaly in the context of early EB II Cyclado-Minoan relations, operating outside of the political networks that linked Knossos, Poros-Katsambas, Mallia, and Palaikastro with their peers in the islands. It is contended that this isolationist stance was deliberate, forming a core element in the ideology of Mochlos’ elites. Given its estimated population (Whitelaw 1983, 337–339), evidence for social ranking, and concentration of exotica (Soles 1988; Branigan 1991), it can be argued that EM II Mochlos not only had the ability to organize and undertake long-distance voyages but was actively doing so. It is surely no coincidence that after the longboat images from Chalandriani on Syros (Broodbank 1989), the next largest group of EBA boat representations is reported from Mochlos (Seager 1909, 290; although see Wedde 1991, 88, n. 60). Therefore, Mochlos’ procurement of Cycladic resources, such as obsidian, may have involved exploiting the sources directly, without any intermediary exchange, or cultural interaction (see Torrence 1986); hence this chapter’s title, “Mochlos and Melos,” not “Mochlos and Phylakopi.” For further evidence of the community’s idiosyncratic position, it is necessary to return to the cache of 251 cores (Fig. 21.4).

MOCHLOS AND MELOS: A SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP?

Figure 21.5. EB II Southern Aegean, showing sites mentioned in text.

297

298

CARTER

Throughout the Aegean Bronze Age, obsidian was exploited primarily to make blades by a technique called pressure-flaking (Séfériadès 1975, 109–112, pls. 6, 7; Torrence 1979; Van Horn 1980; Evely 1993, 119–141). From the cores’ similar size and the way that they were reduced, it is apparent that knappers in EBA Crete, the southern mainland, Euboea, and the Cyclades were working obsidian in much the same way (Fig. 21.6). Subtle distinctions can be made within these industries, however, some of which have clear temporal, geographic, or contextual associations. In the context of EM II Crete, Mochlos provides us with one such case, with evidence for a rare example of a community-specific technique. The cores from the deposit, while still worked by pressure-flaking, involved a quite distinct method of preparation and reduction. First a cortical cobble (fist-sized or smaller) was knapped into a number of thick flakes, upon which a cursory platform was prepared at one end. The angular form and short length of these flakes permitted a natural edge to be employed as the leading ridge for blade initiation, obviating the need for an artificial arris or crest. In most instances, it only would have been possible to remove a single series

of blades from the core’s face before the platform became too thin to exploit further. The nuclei averaged only 2.43 cm long, 1.3 cm wide, and 0.68 cm thick, notably smaller than cores from other EM sites (Fig. 21.7). Aside from some examples from the Building/Tomb N deposit, the author has found no parallels to this outside of Mochlos. How does one explain the fact that Mochlos’ blade-knappers operated outside of the technological koine that embraced much of Crete at this time (Carter 1998, 71)? It would be simplistic to argue that there was so much obsidian at Mochlos that these workers were too busy to ply their craft elsewhere, thus developing their own tricks of the trade. Perhaps there was a restriction on their movement, i.e., they were attached specialists. Ultimately, one must see the production and exchange of obsidian blades in EM Crete in the context of socio-political relations (Carter 1998, 72). Thus, by circumventing the networks of social relations that engaged some of the most important EM and EC communities of the time, Mochlos also bypassed attendant pools of technical knowledge, resulting in the development of an “in-house” technological tradition.

Later Neopalatial Mochlos It is important to consider briefly the significance of obsidian to the LM IB community. Although the late Neopalatial levels have yet to produce any huge deposits akin to those from EM II, over 2000 pieces of obsidian have been found in LM IB contexts. This is substantially more than the total amount of obsidian recovered from all levels at the region’s other north coast sites (Fig. 21.8), with 417 pieces from Pseira, 1212 from Petras, and ca. 500 from Palaikastro (H.M.C. Dierckx, C. Dannibale, and R.D.G. Evely, pers. comms.). It seems safe to suggest that Mochlos was the main procurer of obsidian in East Crete at this time. As with the EM II community, it is proposed that preferential access to obsidian was of political value to LM IB Mochlos—an argument, once more, based not only on the quantity of material, but also on how it was consumed. Perhaps unexpectedly, obsidian working was not one of the craft activities represented at the Artisans’ Quarters on the coast (Carter 2004; Soles 1997). Instead, blade production was focused in the

settlement, although its intensity and location varied among the houses (Fig. 21.9). By far the greatest amount of obsidian comes from Building B2, Mochlos’ villa, with a current total of nearly 800 pieces. It might be expected that the largest structure would generate the most material, but its distribution is noteworthy (Table 21.1)—over two-thirds of the assemblage came from the ashlar-faced eastern wing (Fig. 21.10), including a number of cores from the impluvium and polythyron (despite the fact that much of this part of the building was disturbed heavily by Hellenistic construction). Noteworthy, too, is a cache of 30 partly worked nuclei from a small cist in a third-floor room, close to where the EM IIB hoard was buried a thousand years earlier (Fig. 21.3). The directly comparable location and structure of these deposits may not be coincidental, though a discussion of this issue must wait until another time. The material from the Minoan hall at the front of the villa provides a telling insight to the political value of obsidian at LM IB Mochlos. At 350+ pieces,

MOCHLOS AND MELOS: A SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP?

299

Figure 21.6. Generic reconstruction of the “Minoan”/Southern Aegean obsidian pressure-flaked blade manufacturing sequence.

300

CARTER

Figure 21.7. Comparing lengths of blade-cores from Mochlos EM IIB cache, Mallia’s EM IIB “atelier des tailleurs d’obsidienne,” and EM Palaikastro (Dawkin’s material).

MOCHLOS AND MELOS: A SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP?

it is easily the largest LM IB assemblage from the site, including 23 cores and over 100 blades, many of which displayed traces of use (Figs. 21.11–21.12). The material also is significant because this area is interpreted as the site’s ceremonial center. Located over the pillar rooms, the room was decorated with red painted plaster and contained a range of ritual paraphernalia with figurine fragments, Marine Style pottery, rhyta, and fine stone drinking vessels (Soles and Davaras 1994, 408, fig. 10; 1996, 189, pl. 52, c; Soles 1999, 57). While the fine obsidian blades obviously fulfilled a functional role within the events performed in the room (cutting, depilation, or blood-letting), it is important to note that these implements also were being made here, i.e., craft as ritual action. Thus, if privileged access to obsidian formed a component of elite ideology at Mochlos, it should be seen not so much in terms of an exotic raw material’s accumulation but in its transformation and consumption. A not entirely dissimilar phenomenon may be noted somewhat later at Phylakopi, with evidence for blade production in the LH IIIB–C cult center at a notably higher level than that within contemporary domestic spaces (Torrence 1985, 473).

301

Figure 21.8. East Crete, showing LM IB sites mentioned in the text.

Figure 21.9. Quantity of obsidian from LM IB structures at Mochlos: solid bars—fully excavated; open bars— excavation ongoing (CHLM—Chalinomouri; AQ—Artisans’ Quarter).

302

CARTER

Context

Total

Core

F1

F2

F3

Prep.

Blade

Rej.

Und.

Vestibule

6

0

0

2

1

0

3

0

0

NW Room

21

18

0

1

1

0

0

1

0

Impluvium

86

15

2

1

22

0

15

7

24

Polythyron

23

7

1

2

3

1

9

0

0

Closet a

4

0

0

1

1

0

2

0

0

Closet b

4

0

0

1

0

0

3

0

0

Closet c

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Pillar Room 1.1

32

3

0

4

11

1

9

4

0

Pillar Room 1.2

45

0

0

3

26

2

13

1

0

Hall over 1.1

257

10

3

35

82

16

91

14

6

Hall over 1.2

71

13

2

6

22

0

25

3

0

TOTALS

549

66

8

56

169

20

170

30

30

Table 21.1.

Obsidian from Mochlos’ Building B2, east wing (up to 2000 season). F1

Primary series flakes (80–100% cortex)

F2

Secondary series flakes (5–80% cortex)

F3

Tertiary series flakes (khv" agroikiva" ei" Zou Shteiva",” Praktika 1956, pp. 232–240. ———. 1959. “H Arcaiologikhv kivnhsi" en Krhvth katav to evto" 1959,” CretChron 1959, pp. 359–393. Popham, M.R. 1980. “A Late Minoan Tomb on Lower Gypsadhes,” BSA 75, pp. 169–173. ———. 1984. The Minoan Unexplored Mansion at Knossos (BSA Supplement 17), Oxford. ———. 1994. “Late Minoan II to the End of the Bronze Age,” in Knossos: A Labyrinth of History, D. Evely, H. Hughes-Brock, and N. Momigliano, eds., Athens, pp. 89–104. Popham, M.R., E.A. Catling, and H.W. Catling. 1974. “Sellopoulo Tombs 3 and 4, Two Late Minoan Graves near Knossos,” BSA 69, pp. 195–257. Rethemiotakis, G. 1997. “A Chest-Shaped Vessel and Other LM IIIC Pottery from Kastelli Pediada,” in La Crète mycénienne (BCH Supplement 30), J. Driessen and A. Farnoux, eds., Athens, pp. 407–421. Sackett, L., and M.R. Popham. 1970. “Excavations at Palaikastro,” BSA 65, pp. 203–242.

LATE MINOAN III MOCHLOS AND THE REGIONAL CONSUMPTION OF POTTERY

317

Schoep, I. 1999. “Tablets and Territories? Reconstructing Late Minoan IB Political Geography through Undeciphered Documents,” AJA 103, pp. 201–221.

Wells, P. 1998. “Identity and Material Culture in the Later Prehistory of Central Europe,” Journal of Archaeological Research 6, pp. 239–298.

Soles, J.S. 2001. “Reverence for Dead Ancestors in Prehistoric Crete,” in POTNIA. Deities and Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 22), R. Laffineur and R. Hägg, eds., Liège, pp. 230–236.

Whitelaw, T., et al. 1997. “Ceramic Traditions at EM IIB Myrtos, Fournou Korifi,” in TEXNH. Craftsmen, Craftswomen and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 16), R. Laffineur and P.P. Betancourt, eds., Liège, pp. 265–274.

Tsipopoulou, M. 1997. “Late Minoan III Reoccupation in the Area of the Palatial Building at Petras, Siteia,” in Hallager and Hallager, eds., 1997, pp. 209–252. Watrous, L.V. 1992. Kommos III. The Late Bronze Age Pottery. J.W. Shaw and M.C. Shaw, eds., Princeton.

Wilson, D.E., and P.M. Day. 1994. “Ceramic Regionalism in Prepalatial Central Crete: The Mesara Imports at EM I to EM IIA Knossos,” BSA 89, pp. 1–88.