Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T08:15:46.778Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Minoan thalassocracy reconsidered: provenance studies of LH II A/LM I B pottery from Phylakopi, Ay. Irini and Athens1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2013

P. A. Mountjoy  and
M. J. Ponting
P. A. Mountjoy
Affiliation:
British School at Athens
M. J. Ponting
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Chemical analysis by ICP at the Fitch Laboratory (British School at Athens) is used to see if the imported LB II pottery at Phylakopi on Melos is Minoan or Mycenaean. The possibility of a Minoan thalassocracy and of Minoan colonies in the Cyclades is reconsidered in the light of this new evidence, trade routes to the Cyclades are examined, the nature of the Mycenaean presence in the Cyclades is briefly discussed and the evidence for a LM I B horizon at Kastri on Kythera reinvestigated.

Type
Articles
Information
Annual of the British School at Athens , Volume 95 , November 2000 , pp. 141 - 184
Copyright
Copyright © The Council, British School at Athens 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 OpArch 6 (1950), 150–271Google Scholar.

3 Furumark did not handle the pottery from Phylakopi (personal communication from Å. Åkerström). but based his conclusions on published photographs. However, LM I B pottery can only be separated from that of LH II A by an examination of the fabric.

4 See RMDP 21–2 for a discussion of this class.

5 See Kythera, 302–3 for a definition of the Alternating Style and RMDP 23 for the Arcade Group.

6 Argolid, Prosymna: one bell cup and Kokla: one bell cup and one rounded cup, all in the Alternating Style, were analysed Wace and Blegen, 76–80; Thessaly, Volos: LH II B/LM II vases with a burial in T.188 including an Arcade Group jug A. Delt. 40A (1985), 67–70Google Scholar; Kea, Ay. Irini: GCP 455 Table 6.5 nos. 37, 41–2, 44–7, 49, 51; Marine Style from the Mainland and the Aegean islands BSA 73 (1978), 168–9Google Scholar.

7 Keos III, 146.

8 Athens Wells, passim.

9 BSA 69 (1974), 5Google Scholar.

10 R. Barber, in Thalassocracy, 180.

11 BSA 69 (1974), 5Google Scholar.

12 Ibid. 46–7.

13 BSA 17 (1910–1911), LM I B pl. 11. 137, 140, 163, LH II A 15 fig. 2. 96, 82Google Scholar.

14 BSA 73 (1978), 163Google Scholar.

15 RMDP Messenia nos. 9–10, Kea nos 11–12, Boeotia, ThebesA. Delt. 3 (1917), 200Google Scholar fig. 144.1, Argolid, Kokla K. Demakopoulou, in Wace, and Blegen, pl. 5. 12.

16 Excavations have been carried out by T. D. Atkinson et al. 1896–9, R. M. Dawkins 1910 and A. C. Renfrew 1974–77.

17 See BSA 67 (1972), 103–12Google Scholar lor a definition of these classes.

18 BSA 69 (1974), 5Google Scholar.

19 OpArch 6 (1950), 193–4Google Scholar.

20 Atkinson et al., pl. 31. 2, 8, 3.

21 Ibid., pl. 31. 12.

22 Ibid., pl. 31. 5.

23 Ibid., pl. 31. 14, 10.

24 The first colour always refers to clay. Added white paint is shown by dotting.

25 See esp. House A Room 18 Keos, III, pls. 61–5.

26 Ibid., 143–4 n. 14. The destruetion is daled to LH II A rather than LH II B, since there are many LH II A imports and very few LH 11 B pieces, so that the material cannot be described as a LH II B deposit.

27 Schofield, E., in MacGillivray, J. A. and Barber, R. L. N. (eds), The Prehistoric Cyclades (Edinburgh, 1984), 179–83Google Scholar.

28 Keos, III, 146.

29 Ibid., passim.

30 Athens Wells, passim.

31 Furumark, A., Mycenaean Pottery: Analysis and Classification (Stockholm, 1941), 588Google Scholar.

32 Mountjoy, P. A., Mycenaean Athens (Jonscred, 1995), 16Google Scholar.

33 Hiller, S., Alt-Aigina IV.1: Mykenische Keramik (Mainz, 1975), especially pls 10–22Google Scholar.

34 Buchholz, H. G. and Karageorghis, V., Allägais und Altkypros (Tübingen, 1971), no. 903Google Scholar.

35 Benzi, M., Ceramica micenea in Attica (Milan, 1975), nos 568–71Google Scholar, Servais, J., Thorikos, VIII (Ghent, 1984), figs. 29, 31Google Scholar.

36 Maran, J., Kiapha Thiti: Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen, ii. 2Google Scholar: 2. Jahrtausend v.Chr. Keramik und Kleinfunde (Marburg, 1992), 207–11Google Scholar, pls. 1–2. 1–51, 6. 210–24, 8–9. 292–314, 10–11. 379–86. There are just a lew sherds from vases of the palatial class: Ibid. pls. 2.72, 4.130, 11. 403, 413 and one from the pseudo-Minoan class, pl. 5. 190 (Arcade Group).

37 C. Zerner, in Wace and Blegen, 48.

38 BSA 71 (1976), 98Google Scholar.

39 Potts, P. J., A Handbook of Silicate Rock Analysis (London, 1995), 52–3Google Scholar, Hughes, M. J. et al. , ‘Atomic absorption techniques in archaeology’, Archaeometry, 18 (1976), 31CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 Pollard, A. M. and Heron, C., Archaeological Chemistry (Cambridge, 1996), 48Google Scholar.

41 ICPS and glass, 143–54.

42 Potts (n. 39), 183.

43 ICPS and glass, 146.

44 Ibid.

45 Baxter, M.J., Exploratory Multivariate Analysis in Archaeology (Edinburgh, 1994), 45–6Google Scholar.

46 Ibid. 76.

47 Glascock, M. D., ‘Characterization of archaeological ceramics at MURR by neutron activation analysis and multivariate statistics’, in Neff, H. (ed.), Chemical Characterization of Ceramic Pastes in Archaeology (Monographs in World Archaeology 7; Madison, Wis., 1992), 11–26Google Scholar.

48 BSA 73 (1978), 143–71Google Scholar.

49 Ibid., 163.

50 Ibid., 161, table IV no. 50.

51 Ibid., 162.

52 Ibid., 163 Melos nos. 41–8.

53 GCP 448, 454.

54 RMDP 888.

55 Ibid.

56 Kalogeropoulos, K., Die frühmykenichen Grabfunde von Analipsis (südötliches Arkadien) (Athens, 1998), pl. 32Google Scholara–b.

57 OpArch 6 (1950), 198–9Google Scholar.

58 This raises questions on the LM I B burnt destruction tentatively assigned by R. Barber in Thalassocracy, 180, to Mycenaeans who then built a megaron. Since the preponderance of LH II A pottery suggests very good trading relations, if not a Mycenaean presence, there seems to be no obvious reason lor the Mycenaeaus to destroy the settlement.

59 RMDP 863.

60 Ibid.

61 GCP 454–6 tables 6.2–3.

62 Keos, III, appendix K1052 and GCP, table 6.2, sample no. 34, table 6.5.

63 Ibid., 456 and table 6.3 sample no. 17.

64 OpArch 6 (1950), 195–9Google Scholar.

65 BSA 73 (1978), 168Google Scholar.

66 Ibid., 163.

67 Ibid.

68 Immerwahr, S. A., The Athenian Agora, xiii: The Neolithic and Bronze Ages (Princeton, 1971), 150Google Scholar; Pantelidou, M., Αἰ πραῖστορικαἰ ῾Αθῆναι (Athens, 1975), 86, 222Google Scholar.

69 See Lolos, I., in TAW III. 51–6Google Scholar and M. Marthari, Ibid. 57–70 for the date.

70 RMDP 21–2, 24.

71 See Baurain, C., in Laffineur, R. and Basch, L. (eds) Thalassa (Aegaeum 7; Liege, 1991), 255–66Google Scholar for an extended discussion of this point.

72 OpArch 6 (1950), 181–203Google Scholar.

73 Ibid., 192.

74 Ibid., 200.

75 Ibid.

76 Thalassocracy, passim.

77 S. Hiller, Ibid., 27–31, S. Hood, Ibid., 33–4, J. MacGillivray, Ibid., 157, I. and E. Sakellarakis, Ibid., 197–203, W.-D. Niemeier, Ibid., 207–8, TAW III.1 267–84. I. and E. Sakellarakis, loc. cit. and Niemeier, W.-D., TAW III. 1–279Google Scholar use the depictions of Keftiu processions and inscriptions on Egyptian tomb paintings to support the idea of Cretan hegemony over the islands, since they refer to Crete as part of an island complex. However, although this may be true of earlier Egyptian sources, the tombs in question (Senmut, Useramon, and Rekhmire) date to LM I B, when, according to the hypothesis presented here, the thalassocracy, if it ever existed, was already defunct.

78 AA 1982, 5–14.

79 P. Warren, in Thalassocracy, 39–44, N. Platon, Ibid., 66, N. Marinatos, Ibid., 176.

80 G. Cadogan, Ibid., 15 (makes the point that there was not a thalassocracy as it implies a navy), E. Schofield, Ibid., 47, K. Branigan, Ibid., 49–52, J. Davis, Ibid., 165.

81 N. and Z. Gale, Ibid., 63.

82 C. Starr, Ibid., 217.

83 P. Warren, Ibid., 218.

84 For example G. Cadogan, Ibid., 15, M. Wiener, Ibid., 17, W.-D. Niemeier, Ibid., 214.

85 I. Ström, Ibid., 191–5.

86 Ibid., 194.

87 BSA 75 (1981), 23–33Google Scholar.

88 K. Branigan, in Thalassocracy. 51–2.

89 See Ibid., passim for opposing views and for lists ot what defines a Minoan colony.

90 Niemeier, W.-D., in TAW III.1. 279Google Scholar.

91 E. Schofield, in Thalassocracy, 47–8, J. Davis, Ibid., 165–6.

92 See Ibid., passim for opposing views.

93 See M. Wiener, Ibid., 17 for the Versailles effect. Wiener Ibid., 19–20 argues that the vast numbers of conical cups at Ay. Irini and Phylakopi are not the result of a Versailles effect but suggest that Minoans were actually present.

94 J. Davis, Ibid., 160.

95 M. Caskey, Ibid., 166.

96 E. Schofield, Ibid., 47.

97 P. Warren, Ibid., 42–3.

98 N. and Z. Gale, Ibid., 63.

99 (iii) Stone vases: Ay. Irini Period VI, M. Caskey, publication forthcoming. Phylakopi R. Barber, in Thalassocracy, 180: (iv) lead weights: Keos, 111, 140, Phylakopi, II; (v) Linear A: Ay. Irini, Sehoep, I., Aegean Archaeology, 2 (1995), 55Google Scholar, Phylakopi, TAW, II.1418Google Scholar; (vi) loomweights: Ay. Irini, J. Davis, in Thalassocracy, 161–3, Phylakopi, Renfrew, A. C., The Archaeology of Cult (BSA supp. vol. 18; London, 1985), 331Google Scholar; (vii) Minoan cooking pots: Irini, Ay., Keos, III, 140Google Scholar Room 18, Cherry, J. and Davis, J., Phylakopi, IIGoogle Scholar; (viii) conical cups: Irini, Ay., Period, VI, Keos, III, 140–1Google Scholar, Phylakopi, Cherry, J. and Davis, J., in MacGillivray, J. A. and Barber, R. L. N. (eds), The Prehistoric Cyclades (Edinburgh, 1984) 148–61Google Scholar.

100 Irini, Ay., Keos, III, 145Google Scholar, Phylakopi, R. Barber, in Thalassocracy, 181.

101 Keos, III, stone vases 39, conical cups 140–1.

102 Although the evidence for Minoan control does not rest on pottery alone, in this case it plays an important role; it is by far the largest group of material and it can be dated relatively finely in contrast to the other features.

103 See Wiener, M., in TAW III.1145–6Google Scholar and N. and Z. Gale, in Thalassocracy, 59–64 for overviews.

104 See Driessen, J. and Macdonald, C., The Troubled Island (Aegaeum 17; Liège, 1997), 61–4Google Scholar for the most recent survey.

105 Wiener, M., in TAW III.i146–7Google Scholar.

106 Davis, J., in Davis, J. and Cherry, J. (eds.), Papers in Cycladic Prehistory (Los Angeles, 1979), 143–57Google Scholar.

107 W-D. Niemeier, in Thalassocracy, 206.

108 Watrous, V., Kommos III. The Late Bronze Age Pottery (Princeton, 1992), 178Google Scholar.

109 Ibid., 177.

110 H. Georgiou, in R. Laffineur and L. Basch (n. 71), 61–72.

111 Driessen and Macdonald (n. 104), 115, 254.

112 See AJA 86 (1982), 339–40Google Scholar for a discussion of tramping in LB I–II.

113 See M. Wiener, in Thalassocracy, 23–4 for a discussion of Mycenaeans at Thera with references. In her summary of the Mycenaean presence in the Cyclades Schallin, A–L., Islands under Influence (SIMA 111; Jonsered, 1993), 164, 169–70Google Scholar lists nothing Mycenaean for the early LBA except pottery. For LH I/LC I pottery in the Cyclades see Cherry, J. and Davis, J., AJA 86 (1982), 333–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar with particular reference to the non-LH I Style imports.

114 Sec RMDP 963 with references.

115 BSA 84 (1989), 215Google Scholar a stirrup jar pl. 40 b called LM I B, but as likely to be LH II A.

116 Paroikia, AM 42 (1917), 71Google Scholar fig. 79 LH II A bell cup of local fabric.

117 de Santerre, H. Gallet, Delos primitive et archaïque (Paris, 1958)Google Scholar, pl. 11. fig. 22 a Type II Vapheio cup LH I or LH II A.

118 Grotta: AA (1968), 387 figs. 20 f (Marine Style), 21 b; BSA 84 (1989), pl. 40Google Scholarb Marine Style, 40 c Reed Style (the latter possibly LM I B, but not necessarily); OJA 17 (1998), 134, 135Google Scholar fig. 9. Vigla, Mikre: BSA 84 (1989), 108Google Scholar fig. 22. 415.

119 Kythera, 309, J. N. Coldstream and G. E. Huxley, in Thalassocracy, 107.

120 K. Branigan, Ibid., 49.

121 Kythera, 57–64, Deposit ζ, 104–5, Deposit θ 115, Deposit η 120–1, Deposit ι 123–4, Deposit κ 125, Deposit λ 126.

122 TAW II.1 392–5.

123 Four sherds decorated with hatched loop assigned to LH I Kythera, Deposit θ pl. 31. 25, Deposit ω pls. 52. 93, 56. 236–7 would nowadays be dated to LH II A.

124 Ibid., Deposit μ 128, Deposit ν 134, Deposit ξ 139.

125 Ibid., 292.

126 For example Ibid., LH II A bridge-spouted jug pl. 34 μ 44, LM I B hole-mouthed jar pl. 34 μ 48.

127 RDMP 249.

128 BSA 73 (1978), 169–70Google Scholar no. 55, 79 (1984), 201 Kastri no. 10.

129 GCP 213–15, 227–32, 465–8.

130 Kythera, 302–3.

131 Knossos, TAW II.1397Google Scholar fig. 9, Archanes PAE (1980), 385 fig. 1.

132 For example Kythera, fig. 42 μ 1. Compare, BSA 79 (1984), 187Google Scholar fig. 15 Kastri no. 24 with Knossos nos. 90–6.

133 TAW II.1 398.

134 For opposing views see Warren, P.. Antiquity, 42 (1972), 321–3Google Scholar, Popham, M., AntJ 54 (1974), 320–1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

135 TAW II.i 398–400.

136 Kythera, 296.

137 See BSA 73 (1978), 143Google Scholar for a definition of Type C.

138 Kythera, 292.

139 for example, the motifs on a cup from Palaikastro are simplified but they are still set against a crowded background: BSA 79 (1984), 187Google Scholar fig. 15 PK no. 44. See Ibid., 161–219 for octopus and argonaut Type C at Knossos and Ibid. pl. 27 g at Archanes.

140 One vase is published AR 1980–1, 83–4, a cup rhyton decorated with squills and figure of eight shields.

141 Betancourt, P., The History of Minoan Pottery (Princeton, 1985), pl. 22GGoogle Scholar.

142 BSA 79 (1984), 186Google Scholar fig. 14 Knossos no. 86, Kastri no. 18, Irini, Ay.Keos, III, pl. 60. 683Google Scholar.

143 BSA 79 (1984), 186Google Scholar fig. 14 Nichoria no. 2, Prosymna no. 2; Kokla K. Demakopoulou, in Wace and Blegen, pl. 7. 25.

144 Kythera, Deposit ζ 139, pl. 39. 83.

145 For example Ibid., Deposit, ζ pl. 33. 3–11, Deposit ξ pl. 38. 18–19, 23, pl. 39. 78–9, 81.

146 For example Ibid., Deposit ξ pl. 38. 1–4, 8 9.

147 For example Phaistos, Zakro, Betaneourt (n. 141), pl. 21 A, C.

148 Compare BSA 79 (1984.), 186Google Scholar fig. 14 Phylakopi no. 30 to Ibid., pl. 23 a top left of vase.

149 Kythera, Deposit V pl. 36. 34, 35–6, Deposit ξ pl. 40. 123.

150 Ibid., Deposit pl. 33. μ, pl. 34. 43. These vessels are in the same deposit as the restored hole-mouthed jar decorated in the open ground Alternating Style Ibid., Deposit μ pl. 34. 48.

151 For example from Zakros Platon, N., Crete (London, 1970), pl. 44Google Scholar.

152 See also Keos, III, 142 n. 7. That the Arcade Group may be a later development within LM I B is clear from the fact that an Arcade Group jug in the open field Alternating Style has been found with a burial in T. 188 at Volos with LH II B and LM II vases A. Dell. 40 A (1985), 67–70Google Scholar.

153 Kythera, 303.

154 Keos, III, 143.

155 RMDP 16 with references.

156 A. Delt. 9 (1922–5) Parartema 19, fig. 1 second from left, right, fig. 3 left.

157 R. Jones, in Wace and Blegen, 79. A bell cup in crowded Alternating Style from Irini, Ay.Keos, III, pl. 60. 682Google Scholar has also been analysed by AAS and found to have a provenance close to the Prosymna vase GCP table 6. 3 K 4123 sample no. 30 (by OES), Jones, loc. cit.

158 Archaeometry, 19 (1977), 218Google Scholar. Clay analysis has suggest that most of the large amount of LH I Minoanizing material at Ay. Stephanos was locally made not imported from Kastr or Crete Ibid., 211–19, GCP 420–4.

159 For example Niemeier, W-D., Die Palastslilkeramik von Knossos (Berlin, 1983), 227Google Scholar.

160 Driessen and Macdonald (n. 104), passim.