Cretan Mariti in the Cretan Maritime Activities The

MASARYK UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF ARTS

Department of Archaeology and Museology

Classical Archaeology

CRETAN MARITIME ACTIVITIES IN THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

Master’s Diploma Thesis

Bc. et Bc. Iveta Navrátilová

Supervisor : Mgr. Věra Klontza, Ph.D.

Brno 2016 I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography.

______I would like to thank my supervisor Dr Věra Klontza for her help and suggestions with my thesis and for believing in me during my studies. I would like to give special thanks to Dr Conor Trainor for his willingness to consult with me the pottery assemblage from Knossos and Priniatikos Pyrgos. My thanks belong also to my friends for their endless support. And finally to my friend Klára – thank you for being there for me in the past year. I will remember it forever. Table of contents

Table of contents ...... 4 List of illustrations ...... 6 Figures ...... 6 Plates ...... 7 1. Introduction ...... 9 2. Hellenistic Cretan poleis and harbours ...... 12 2.1 Historical overview ...... 14 2.2 Gazetteer of harbours ...... 16 2.2.1 Itanos ...... 16 2.2.2 Trypetos ...... 18 2.2.3 Lato (pros Kamara)...... 20 2.2.4 Phalasarna ...... 21 2.2.5 Ierapytnian hegemony ...... 25 2.2.5.1 Istron and Priniatikos Pyrgos ...... 26 2.2.5.2 Mochlos ...... 30 2.2.6 Conclusions ...... 31 3. Transport amphorae ...... 33 3.1 Knossos...... 37 3.2 Phalasarna ...... 40 3.3 Trypetos ...... 41 3.4 Mochlos ...... 43 3.5 East Cretan Cream Ware (ECCW) ...... 45 3.6 Ierapetra ...... 46 3.7 Agios Nicholaos ...... 49 3.8 Priniatikos Pyrgos ...... 50 3.9 Conclusions ...... 57 4. Crete in context of the maritime trade routes ...... 60 4.1 Maritime routes ...... 62 4.2 Shipwrecks and cargoes...... 65 4.2.1 Kyrenia shipwreck and its replica ...... 67 4.2.2 Antikythera shipwreck ...... 70 4.2.3 Addendum ...... 71 5. Conclusion ...... 72 6. Resumé ...... 77 6.1 Krétské poleis a přístavy ...... 79 6.2 Transportní amfory ...... 80 6.3 Námořní trasy ...... 81 Abbreviations ...... 84 Bibliography ...... 85 Online sources ...... 95 Plates ...... 96

List of illustrations

Figures

1. Map of Hellenistic sites in Crete (author), p. 8. 2. Plan of the Itanos site (Coutsinas 2010, 197 ), p. 17 . 3. Plan of buildings on the site of Trypetos (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2011, 410 ), p. 19 . 4. Plan of the site Phalasarna (Hadjidaki 1988, 470 ), p. 23 . 5. Reconstruction of Ierapytna’s expansion (Gallimore 2015, 25 ), p. 26 . 6. Plan of sites in the Mirabello Bay with Priniatikos Pyrgos and Nisi Pandeleimon (Hayden 2004, Fig. 23), p. 27 . 7. Possible location of Ierapytna’s harbour (Gallimore 2015, 14 ), p. 29 . 8. Plan of the Mochlos site (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2014, Fig. 3), p. 31 . 9. Chart presenting the various imports on Cretan sites (author), p. 35. 10. Marangou-Lerat’s AC7 type (Marangou-Lerat 1995, Pl. 1), p. 37. 11. First type of amphora from Trypetos (Vogeikoff-Brogan, Nodarou and Boileau 2008, 329 ), p. 41. 12. Second type of amphora from Trypetos (Vogeikoff-Brogan, Nodarou and Boileau 2008, 329 ), p. 42 . 13. Koan amphora from Mochlos (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2014, Fig. 25), p. 44. 14. ECCW type 1 amphora from Mochlos (Vogeikogg-Brogan 2014, Fig. 23), p. 45. 15. Hellenistic types of amphorae distinguished by A. Marangou-Lerat (Empereur et al 1992, 645 ), p. 47. 16. ECCW amphora from Ierapetra (Gallimore 2011, 609 ), p. 48. 17. Marangou-Lerat’s AC6 type (Marangou 1995, Pl. 22), p. 49 . 18. AC6 type amphorae from Stavros and Potamos cemetery in Agios Nicholaos (Vogeikoff-Brogan and Apostolakou 2002, 419 ), p. 50. 19. Plan of Priniatikos Pyrgos trenches from 2005–2006 (Hayden – Tsipopoulou 2012, 509 ), p. 53. 20. V. R. Grace’s amphorae from Alexandria (1) and Koroni peninsula (2) (Grace 1963, 323 ), p. 53. 21. Scheme of the main sea routes, directions of imports (arrows) and hypothetical routes of the Antikythera and Kyrenia shipwreck with the way around Levantine (dots, by author), p. 62. 22. Wind directions around the island of Crete (Davis 2008, 299 ), p. 64. 23. Kyrenia II fully-loaded with amphorae (kyreniaship.org), p. 68. 24. Reconstruction of the Kyrenia ship (Katzev 2005, 77 ), p. 69 . 25. Distribution of ancient shipwrecks (Parker 1992, Fig. 4), p. 71.

Plates

Priniatikos Pyrgos assemblage

1. Rhodian amphora 2. Stamped Rhodian amphora handle 3. Amphora type AC6 4. Toes from transport amphorae from Knidos (1) and of unknown provenance (2); double-barrelled handle (3) 5. Hellenistic amphora tip knob

Fig. 1: Map of Hellenistic sites in Crete 8

1. Introduction

When the overarching narrative is less clear, when the processes of new state formation are lost in the mists of time, when the most important city of the period (Alexandria) is nearly entirely absent from the historical record, and with such great diversity in state size and organization, Hellenistic trade can be dismissed as a kind of “little tradition” compared to the “great tradition” of Roman trade […]. (Manning 2015, 101 )

Maritime trade routes might seem to be an invisible mark in the ancient history and economics. However, archaeology helps to bring the information about them back to light by tracking the imports unearthed on various sites. The most valuable information lay in the hands of nautical archaeologists. Since the discovery of the Antikythera shipwreck in 1900 the underwater surveys revelaed significant results about sunken ships and the trade of their cargoes.

The island of Crete was in the past overlooked by historians and scholars, while research was focused mainly on the Cretan Bronze Age. The previous situation partially relied on the writings of ancient authors, such as Polybius, who supported the theory that Crete was only a periphery, a pirate nest with nothing to recommend besides the efficient mercenaries. Therefore we are still facing the problem of insufficient research and lack publications about this topic. Despite the fact that many publications take into account the historical part of the matter, the archaeological ones are almost absent. Fortunately in

the last couple of years the situation of the pottery research getting better, mostly thanks to the extensive work of N. Vogeikoff-Brogan and S. Gallimore, who published new results about sites in the East Crete. Still, from the archaeological point of view, several ancient sites inhabited in this period remain nearly silent, such as Olous and generally sites situated in the south- western part of Crete.

The aim of the presented thesis is to clarify the maritime activities of Crete during the Hellenistic period. A major attention will be given to the trade with ceramics, especially with the transport amphorae. The thesis will furthermore observe how the results can bring help with better understanding of Cretan economy. The main question is what part Crete played in the context of the Eastern Mediterranean trade. Because of the high durability of pottery more than 50% of cargo from all the ancient shipwrecks consists of amphorae and fine ceramic wares. It is also the most common find on every land excavation. For that reason I have chosen pottery to be the main focus of this essay. Another aim of the thesis is to map hypothetical sea routes and directions of trade, which were crossing the Cretan seas.

Subsequently, for the purpose of this thesis, the comparative approach has been chosen. The historical information and available results of the archaeological excavations in Crete are the main sources. Namely the sites of Phalasarna, Knossos, Agios Nicholaos, Trypetos, Itanos, Ierapetra, Mochlos and others are discussed. The main emphasis is put on the site of Priniatikos Pyrgos 1 in Istron, where my research is based. Therefore a catalogue of the amphora fragments from the site is listed in the third chapter with the illustrations displayed in plates. I had participated in the Priniatikos Pyrgos project since 2013 and in the last years visited most of the mentioned sites, including the Antikythera excavation season in 2014. For that reason I use my own research and information, which are unquoted in this thesis.

1 I would like to thank the project director Barry Molloy, co-directors Joanna Day and Věra Klontza and also Sue Bridgeford for the opportunity to work with the project’s ceramic material.

After the historical overview, the individual ports are presented with the proposal for further underwater research. Because of the tectonic movements, several sites are nowadays partially submerged. The following chapter deals with the transport amphorae uncovered at Cretan sites. Since no wreck located around the Cretan coast is directly dated into the Hellenistic period, in the last chapter the thesis focus on the well-researched wrecks, Kyrenia and Antikythera, which are related to Crete through the similar ceramic material they transported. This chapter also deals with the strategy of sailing and cargo loading and place Crete in the context of Mediterranean trade routes.

All numbers written in bold stand for the figures. Numbers in italic refer to number of page in particular publication, the names of the publications are written in italic as well. Greek words are kept in the Greek alphabet with the exception of names of authors and places. After the final conclusion, Czech resume follows in order to summarize the results.

Despite the fact that this research is only preliminary, it is important to focus on this part of history which may have been one of the most significant in the history of Crete. If I should quote M. Rostovtzeff (1998, 247 ), “Crete, with its singular history and its complicated social and economic development calls for special notice.”

2. Hellenistic Cretan poleis and harbours

In the topic of Hellenistic Crete our knowledge lacks enough of archaeological evidence since the beginning of the Classical period, which is on the island represented only scarce 2. If we should delineate this period, its beginning would be marked with the year 323 BC like elsewhere, the year of Alexander the Great’s death. This is the date shared with the other parts of the Hellenistic world. However the period ends earlier here, in 67 BC, when Romans conquered the whole island.

With an insight into the problematic of Cretan maritime history we come across interesting verdicts of ancient authors, such as: “Cretans do not love the sea” (Viviers and Tsingarida 2014, 165 ) or “the Cretan ignores the sea” (Spyridakis 1970, 27 ). But how in fact was Crete involved in the maritime trade and what contacts the island used to have with the rest of the Mediterranean during the Hellenistic period? This issue will be discussed in this thesis, on the basis of the archaeological evidence which could bring a new light to the previous negativism. The statements showed above were usually based on the distribution of cities in Crete, where only a minority of

2 The centre of Hellenistic Knossos was not united but scattered to separate parts, thus it was never fully explored. E.g. in Coldstream, J. – Eiring, L. J. 2001: The Late Archaic and Classical Periods. In: Knossos pottery handbook: Greek and Roman . London: British School at Athens.

the settlements used to be on the coastline ––much bigger number of cities and towns was positioned inland. According to Homer’s Iliad , there had to be several cities on the island, as he speaks about Crete and calls it έκατόµπολις. During the Dark Ages there is evidence of hundreds of sites and some of them even exist in later periods as well (Hayden 2004; see Fig. 6). Surface surveys have proved that many of the sites in Crete persist to the Hellenistic period, even on the coastal line, although the results remain unpublished. Therefore the statements may not be as true as previously expected. Other scholars explain the statements, starting “it was applied to those who claimed ignorance of matters they knew well” 3 (Spyridakis 1970, 20–27 ). W. Harris compares the situation of Cretan cities with the problem of piracy and claims that Cretans protected themselves from possible piratical attacks by living far from the sea-line (Harris 1999, 356 ). But perhaps we should consider the mountainous character of the island, with fertile lands 4 concentrated more towards the inland. This might demonstrate something about inhabitation of Crete.

From antiquity it is believed that Hellenistic Crete “was a primitive, pirate- infested, aristocratic, Dorian ghetto, with nothing to recommend it beyond its ability to produce very effective mercenaries“ (De Souza 1998, 112 ). Yet it still does not alter the fact that Crete served as an important connection point. Crete interacted not only with other Greek islands, as the studies of pottery will show in the next chapter, but the island also served as a bridge between Near East and Egypt and the rest of Europe. Ceramics produced in Crete were unique and excavations on Cretan sites brought results of vast interest in maritime trade and socio-political connections between the Cretan city-states and other islands. For those reasons the reality could be much more different.

This chapter will focus on the history and the main events happening on Crete during the Hellenistic period. Special attention will be paid to the harbours and information which can bring an understanding of their connections with

3 See also Ephoros in Strabo, 10.4.17. 4 Cretan interest in wine production is well known, for the wine-growing activity see Marangou-Lerat 1999, 272 .

other parts of the Eastern Mediterranean. All of the listed sites are sorted on the basis of their hypothetical connections. Due to the lack of available sources the majority of the mentioned cities or harbours are located on the eastern part of Crete with the exception of Phalasarna. Unfortunately not much of attention has been given to sites in south-western part of the island, thus they are not mentioned in this thesis either. Before we proceed to the individual city-states and their harbours, brief history of Crete will be discussed.

2.1 Historical overview

During the Hellenistic era Crete was not unified and the period was characterized by inner wars, such as the Cretan war in ca. 204–201 BC (Spyridakis 1970, 38 ). S. Spyridakis calls it the “Period of conflicts”, which speaks for itself. Cretan poleis were formed into unions with other cities. At the beginning of the 3rd century BC, four Cretan alliances operated on the island, the union of Phaistos, Gortyn, Knossos and union of mountain cities. Knossian union included 20 cities, recorded in the treaty between Knossos and Miletos between 293–292 BC, among other cities there was also Istron. Nevertheless, the main centres were formed around Knossos and Gortyn, two most powerful cities of this period. For instance, Phaistos was destroyed by Gortynians at the end of the 3rd century BC (De Souza 1998, 114 ). Unfortunately even though the historical sources speak about political strength of these two city-states, the archaeological sources are almost absent. Ceramic evidence from the excavations in Knossos and Gortyn will be discussed in the next chapter.

Two dates for the absolute chronology for Knossos are the destruction of Apollonia by Kydonians in 171 BC, who completely destroyed the city, killed the men, and the rest of the inhabitants were enslaved (Spyridakis 1970, 40 ); and the destruction of Lyttos in 220 BC, which until then resisted the unions of Knossos and Gortyn. As the result, Lyttos was abandoned and the survivors found a shelter in a nearby city of Lappa (Eiring 2001, 91 ).

There is also a historical evidence of Cretan contacts with Sparta 5 and Egypt which constituted a protectorate in Itanos from 270 BC, lasting approximately two centuries (Detorakis 1990, 84–95 ). Romans became important for Cretan politics since ca. 196 BC when Gortyn had asked Rome for assistance in war against Knossos. Since then Crete has faced Roman military attacks, for example in 72 BC with M. Antonius Creticus, but was completely conquered in 69–7 BC by Q. Caecilius Metellus Creticus and his three legions (De Souza 1998, 112 ).

In terms of ports, we have evidence that two important maritime cities were Ierapytna and Praisos, situated on the south-eastern Crete. However, when speaking of harbours, the main parts of Crete were the extremities on the east and west and also the northern coastline. The north of Crete was also a place where the greatest ports were located. By way of Antikythera and Kythera from the western coast, it was an easy route to mainland and trough the Southern Sporades to Anatolia. The case of Thera should be mentioned at this point, because on clear days it was possible to see Crete on the horizon, but the way to Libya led from the western ports of Crete (Spyridakis 1970, 10 ). But when we consider the fact that Cyrene was one of the main sources of corn production for Crete, what it says about connections with ancient Libya and Egypt? Despite it had to be a very common route (and the discoveries of plausible Cretan Hadra ware in Alexandria confirm it 6), to reach one of the northern ports, ship probably had to sail around the island (Ibid. 2). The reason for that can be found in unfavourable coastal conditions:

“Although the island lies halfway between central Greece and Libya, its shores are not equally accessible to these neighbors. The southern coast is forbidding and almost totally lacking in natural harbors and anchorages, with the notable exception of the Bay of Messara. The steep and narrow mountain range which forms its spinal column falls sharply into the sea along most of the southern coast and creates conditions unfavorable for the development of navigation;

5 In 273 BC Spartan king Areos was an ally of Gortyn in fight against Knossos (see Detorakis 1990, 86 ). 6 For the Hadra ware plausibly from Knossos see Callaghan and Jones 1985.

however, there is evidence that ships cruised along this coast in ancient times. Saint Paul was shipwrecked on this shore during his long journey from Caesarea to Ostia.” (Ibid. 2)

At this place it should be mentioned that the Sea of Crete is still very tempestuous and it was equally risky even in the ancient times. The calmest routes are without any doubts to the east (Ibid.). The best source for Cretan maritime routes is still Spyridakis’ publication, even though published in 1970. For that reason this topic calls for a special attention and further research. The navigation around Crete is partially mentioned in dissertation of D. Davis from 2009. However, for the purpose of this thesis it does not bring other information than are mentioned by Spyridakis.

2.2 Gazetteer of harbours

2.2.1 Itanos

Near the contemporary Vai in the northeast Crete one of the main ancient ports, Itanos, is located. During the Hellenistic times the city had connections with Egypt 7 and the Near East as well. Thanks to the natural conditions it became more important and more accessible from the sea than from the bay of Palaikastro, in previous periods inhabited, which was not ideal for marine activities. Itanos became a key point for inland and coastal traffic. Even today, during a stormy weather, it is still only possible to dock at Itanos. D. Viviers and A. Tsingarida describe it as a “natural cross-road between north and south, east and west“ (Viviers and Tsingarida 2014, 169 ).

7 Eleutherna, Phalasarna, Dreros, Olous and Rhitymna-Aptera were also associated with Egypt at this time. Another evidence of contacts with Egypt comes from cult of Isis worshiped in Itanos, Ierapytna; or Sarapis in Olous and Gortyna, which was also inhabited by Jewish population that probably came from Alexandria (see Spyridakis 1970; 47 , 101–2).

Fig. 2: Plan of the Itanos site

In the Iron Age, it was city of Kommos which most likely served as a trading port with Phoenicians. These connections were discovered in Itanos as well –– we can find them either in cult of Leukothea, “a divine patroness to sailors, the daughter of Kadmos“ (Ibid.), not very common deity in Crete, or in preserved coinage which also depicts marine world and similarities can be found in coins from Aradus in Phoenicia as well (Ibid. 171 ).

During the Hellenistic period, Itanos was under the influence of the Egyptian supremacy. Ptolemies used the city as their base and constituted there a protectorate. This is considered to be a move which provided Egypt with supplies and military reinforcements (Spyridakis 1970, 3).

From the maritime point of view, Itanos was a good point of departure to island of Kasos which is only 20 miles away. Then the Karpathos could have been reached, divided from Kasos only by shallow body of water. Then the route to Rhodes was opened and Asia Minor could be reached without major difficulties. In order to get to Egypt, ships could go around the coasts of

Cyprus and Anatolia without sailing the open sea. This points to a quite safe but also significant trade route. Furthermore, it shows that Crete was deeply involved in a long-distance trade. S. Spyridakis also speaks of the East of Crete as of the origin of Cretan habitation. It is known as the land of the original, autochthonous Cretans, so called Eteocretans (Ibid. 2–3; Hayden 2004 , 225 ).

In general, the site of Itanos has a long history of inhabitation, from Archaic period to the Byzantine times. Many architectural elements from Hellenistic period were discovered at this site, such as necropolis and two acropoleis protected by defensive features, fortification wall and three watch-towers with optical control of the whole bay (Fig. 2). The wall encircles the whole site, which means the city had a great control over anyone entering the harbour or leaving the city to go to the mainland. The fortification elements date back to the 3rd century, which corresponds with the arrival of Ptolemies in 270–260 BC (Coutsinas 2010, 190 ).

2.2.2 Trypetos

Trypetos is one of the coastal sites, located approximately 3 kilometres from Sitea 8, which may have served as another important port. The excavations that were in progress until the year 2000, unearthed Hellenistic settlement with several houses, parts of a fortification wall and a city gate. What is imposing about this site is the fact it is consistent one-period site. Based on the pottery we can set the dates from the second half of the 3 rd century to the half of the 2 nd century BC. This points to a quite short period of habitation, only around 75 to 100 years (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2011, 410 ). Although there is a lack of historical evidence of Trypetos, it might have been one of the significant poleis of Crete:

8 Ancient sources refer only to polis of Ητεία; for further information see Vogeikoff-Brogan 2011a, 549 .

„The presence of a considerable number of bronze coins carrying the abbreviation ΠΟ – a type that does not appear elsewhere on Crete or in the Aegean – suggests that the Hellenistic town of Trypitos was an autonomous polis issuing her own coinage.“ (Ibid. 411 )

N. Vogeikoff-Brogan suggests that the abandonment of Trypetos in the 2 nd century BC might be linked to the destruction of Praisos by the polis of Ierapytna (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2011a, 550 ). It is also possible, based on their proximity, that Trypetos could be one of the ports of Praisos (Vogeikoff-Brogan et al. 2008, 327 ).

Fig. 3: Plan of buildings on the site of Trypetos

2.2.3 Lato (pros Kamara)

Near the today’s city of Agios Nikolaos, on the chain of ridge called Goulas, lays the ancient city of Lato, the believed birth-place of Nearchos, admiral of Alexander the Great and satrap of Lycia and Pamphylia in Asia Minor. The results of excavations were profusely published by P. Ducrey and O. Picard in the series of their Recherches à Latô in the Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique . However, the last paper came out almost thirty years ago and since then only some of new information about the site is available 9.

The city was originally founded in the LM IIIC period, according to the pottery and surface finds. Unfortunately activity of the later periods probably destroyed most of the architectural remains of the LM III-PG periods (Nowicki 2000, 119 ). What is certain is the fact that it gained its importance during the 8th and 6 th centuries BC. D. Viviers and A. Tsingarida’s article speaks about its conservatism: it does not follow the Hellenistic city traditions and is more Archaic in its urban style. According to the authors it could be explained by the lack of economic growth, distinctive social organisation or it could be a choice to keep the local identity (Viviers and Tsingarida 2014, 165 ). When one looks at the ceramics and other observations of the island, Crete was keeping its individuality during the whole Hellenistic period, producing unusual pottery types, which definitely speaks for the strong local identity; and the topography with various gorges and mountain ranges supports it (Navrátilová 2014, 42 ).

Lato was a significant Dorian city. For Dorians the settlements on poorly accessible hilltops, such as Lato, were very common. Its position between two hills granted the protection against potential danger, but it also offered a great visual contact with the entire Bay of Mirabello. Named after goddess Leto 10 , it is mentioned even in the Linear B tablets as RA-TO. However, on the coins of the city the goddess Eileithyia is depicted, therefore it must have been one of

9 E.g. see Gaignerot-Driessen, F. 2012: The ‘Temple House’ at Lato Reconsidered. In: Oxford Journal of Archaeology , p. 59–82. 10 Lato is the Doric version of name Leto (Apostolakou 2012).

the main worshiped deities (Apostolakou 2012). Based on the epigraphic evidence, during the 3rd and 2 nd century BC, Lato was politically active as a part of Knossian alliance and also treated with other Cretan cities, such as Olous, Hierapytna, Lyttos or Eleutherna. The most important contacts were without a doubt the ones with Asia Minor, e.g. Miletus or Pergamon kings Eumenes II or Attalos I. 11

The mountain metropolis of Lato was gradually abandoned during the 2 nd century BC for its lower part, the port Kamara, distant only few kilometres from the hilltop. The evidence of the port and polis of Kamara can be found in the inscriptions. The oldest is dated to the year 201 BC. However, archaeologists proved even older habitation in the 3rd century and during the excavations three large cemeteries were discovered with findings of transport amphorae (see p. 49). During the 2nd century the lower city began to flourish thanks to its advantageous position and the maritime trade (Baldwin-Bowsky 1989, 115 ).

2.2.4 Phalasarna

One of the most interesting and complex sites of Cretan harbours is Phalasarna in the west. Lying on the neck of Cape Grambousa, or so called Korykos in the antiquity, it was without any doubt a city of strategic significance. From this part of the island led frequently used route, around Antikythera and Kythera, to Lakonia. The ceramic evidence indicates that Phalasarna was connected even with Carthage and the area around Mount Vesuvius (Hadjidaki 1988, 476 ).

The relation between Phalasarna and Antikythera, ancient Aegilia, is even stronger. Based on the archaeological evidence, Aegilia may have been occupied by Phalasarna. Bronze coins with Phalasarnian Φ on one side and dolphin on the other, and sling bullets from Phalasarna were found on this

11 This Information is from the archaeological site of Lato.

island as well (Tsaravopoulos 2012). Even Aris Tsaravopoulos, the director of the excavations of the Hellenistic settlement and Kastro of Antikythera, agrees with the theory that the island could have been Phalasarnian domain 12 . Based on my research during my participation in the excavation season in Antikythera in 2014 I came to conclusion that the island was a common stop on a route between the Crete and the Peloponnese, but that it was also a sacred place with religious objects dedicated to Gods. On the way to Kastro many niches are still visible. The sacred processions could go around to the temple of Apollo, whose remains with the statue of this deity were uncovered nearby. For the relations to Apollo and symbols of dolphins it is sometimes connected to Delphi 13 on the mainland; however there is not enough of evidence for it. The site has several small votive or sanctuary-like objects, at least that is how they are determined, with a well preserved ship shed and fortified Kastro, that was very common during this period as a defensive element of the cities against the well know piracy in the Aegean. Stairs cut into the rock, which are located on the top of the fortification, are still in a good condition and may have led to the watch towers or observation points. Without any doubt the city suffered many attacks which the finds of sling bullets confirm. Parts of the architecture can be also seen in the shallow water around the site. The parts possibly eroded or were thrown down from the cliff.

Returning to Phalasarna, the pottery found at the site helped to determine that the fortifications on the site were built in between 335–330 BC; therefore the correlations between these two locations could take place in the 4th century (Sekunda 2010, 598 ). Nevertheless the pottery from the both sites lacks better research and proper publication, so dating is only preliminary at this stage.

The site of Phalasarna is unique even in its structures. For example, the excavated walls were built in isodomic style. One of the fortification towers used to have metal rings for tying ships up along the quay (Hadjidaki 1988,

12 I would like to thank Aris Tsaravopoulos for information about this island during the excavation season 2014. 13 Aris Tsaravopoulos, personal communication.

464 ). According to E. Hadjidaki, the port includes two cut channels connected to the sea, with basin, κώθων, and artificial closed harbour, λιµήν κλειστός, which would probably allow only one ship to enter or exit at the time (Ibid. 463–6); with structures what could be remains of ship sheds (Frost and Hadjidaki 1990, 524 ). Also an unfamiliar object, possibly a cistern, was found; it was used probably for supplying the ships and crews (Ibid. 517 ).

Fig. 4: Plan of the site Phalasarna

Although the site is mostly Hellenistic, it is not consistent since pottery from earlier periods 14 has been discovered. Earlier as well is the large necropolis with ca. ninety excavated graves with offerings dated to the 6th century of Archaic period and to the late 4 th century BC (Ibid.). It proves that the location

14 For instance acroplis on Cape Koutri used to be encircled with fortification wall, shards from FN/EMI, LM IIIC and PG-G period with obsidian flakes have been found there (Nowicki 2000, 222 ).

was an important place since the Bronze Age, which the contacts with Carthage confirm, assuming they had existed even before the Hellenistic period, whereas the trade between North Africa and Crete during the Bronze Age is well known. 15

Based on the presence of military architecture around the harbour and because the surrounding coastal plain most likely could not produce the resources to finance such construction, E. Hadjidaki interprets the site as one of the famous pirate nests of Crete. Parallels to this site support this hypothesis, because similar structures were found in Halae in Boeotia, the residency of Locrian pirates (Ibid. 474 ). It was discussed that Ierapytna, Knossos and Kydonia could have been centres of piracy in Crete (Spyridakis 1970, 38 ). Still, the Cretan piracy is questionable. In antiquity Strabo used the same term for pirates and merchants, which came to ports to sell goods (Manning 2015, 135 ). Therefore the matter of piracy could be partially a misconception.

Phalasarna appears in the ancient sources, such as in the writings of Scylax of Carianda, ca. 350 BC, who writes about „a day's sail from Lacedaemonia to the Cape of Crete on which the first town is situated toward the setting sun and is called Phalasarna“ (Hadjidaki 1988, 467 ). The name could be also found in the inscription from the late 4 th or early 3 rd century, describing treaty between Phalasarna and Polyrrhenia, with depiction of Dictyna and nymph Phalasarne with unknown ship in between (Ibid. 467–8).

The site probably persisted till the invasion of Caecilius Metellus in 67 BC, who destroyed several pirates’ strongholds in Crete (Ibid. 476 ).

One important issue has to be discussed at this point and that is the change of coastal line. Since the Roman period it transformed significantly. Western coast, where Phalasarna is situated, has elevated by 6 to 9 metres above the sea level, while the eastern coast was submerged (Hadjidaki 1988, 466 ). This

15 E.g. see the frescoes from Tell el-Daba (in publications of Manfred Bietak).

fact is confirmed in Phalasarna, because it is now located ca. 150–200 metres inland (Ibid.). When one takes a look on the opposite part of the island, port of Itanos is now almost completely under water; and the part, where Istron or Mochlos are located, had been submerged ca. by half. This event brings excellent opportunity for future underwater surveys, because these parts of the coastal sites have been examined only scarce. However, it is still not clear, whether the change was instant or whether it was formed during several days. According to N. C. Flemming, the process of elevation is still reshaping the coastal lines until today (Ibid.).

The natural changes are determined to happen around 535 AD, when earthquake hit Egypt. The date is also confirmed by C14 and recorded by ancient historian called Masaud. 16 S. Spyridakis shares his view of this theory (1970, 10 ). P. A. Pirazzoli and collective estimated the date with the help of two tsunamis, which hit the island after earthquakes in 66 AD and 365 AD, covering the whole harbour with thick layer of soil (Pirazzoli 1992, 371 ). In any case, Crete has been affected by tectonic movements for the last several million years and the change of the coastline had an impact on Antikythera too, whereas a large lithosphere block of ca. 200 km, including west coast of Crete and Antikythera, was uplifted during this change (Ibid. 372 ).

2.2.5 Ierapytnian hegemony

On the south coast of Crete, on the location of today’s Ierapetra, was located the nautically and politically powerful city of Ierapytna. Its political strength can be demonstrated by its expansion from the 3rd century onward to the Sanctuary of Zeus Dictaios on the west and to Istron on the northern coast (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2012, 82 ), where sites of Priniatikos Pyrgos, Mochlos and Tholos are located. Later conquest of Praisos by Ierapytnians around 140 BC led to expansion to the east coast of Crete, near Itanos (Vogeikoff-Brogan

16 More precisely the radiocarbon method determined the time of the event to 1530 +/- 40 years B. P. (see Pirazzoli et. al. 1992).

2014, 70 ). We also have evidence of the treaty between poleis of Ierapytna and Lato in 111/110 BC, which set the area of Istron as a border between them (Gallimore 2011, 114 ). Nevertheless, Ierapytna controlled the largest part of the East Crete in the 2 nd and 1 st centuries BC (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2004, 214 ; Fig. 5).

Fig. 5: Reconstruction of Ierapytna ’s expansion

2.2.5.1 Istron and Priniatikos Pyrgos

According to B. Hayden and M. Tsipopoulou (2012, 556 ), the expansion of Ierapytna during the 2 nd century BC ended the existence of Istron as an independent polis. Hellenistic p ottery assemblage from Priniatikos Pyrgos has been so far dated back to the late 3 rd and 2nd century BC, wh ich confirms the theory, but the research still continues. Because of its size, locatio n and pottery finds Priniatikos Pyrgos may have served as a port facility (Muhly et al 2000, 147 ).

Rubble walls along the eastern side of Priniatikos Pyrgos , which might be according to Hayden contemporary or Roman, are however similar to the

Greek ones from Nisi Pandeleimon (Hayden 2004, 169 ). She also argues that after the Roman conquest of Ierapytna in 67 BC Priniatikos Pyrgos must have remained as a port town and one of the most important sites after the demise of Istron (Ibid. 224 ). Hellenistic contexts from this site are situated mostly on the western part of the coastal projection and include collapsed wall with remains of buildings, which are thought to be found even in the area presently under water (see Fig. 18).

Fig. 6: Plan of sites in the Mirabello Bay with Priniatikos Pyrgos and Nisi Pandeleimon

The extremity of Nisi Pandeleimon, divided from the Priniatikos Pyrgos by beach, contains some architectural elements of Hellenistic settlement. At area near Katevati and Visalo submerged walls has been reported, previously interpreted as a ship sheds, but now labelled as habitation houses. Eastern beach of Nisi Pandeleimon was protected from the winds, thus Hayden assumes, that ships could be pulled up on the shore at this side. This beach continues approximately 100 metres with shallow water into the sea, where the beach could be found in antiquity. Also the Istron River valley, Istron and Oleros city-states were associated with the Nisi Pandeleimon (Ibid. 168 ).

Hayden places ancient Istron to the hill of Vrokastro, however not in the Hellenistic era. The shift to coastal line is assumed to happen during the 7 th and the 6th centuries BC. It was a similar situation as happened in the city of Lato (Ibid. 191 ). The contemporary town lies in its surroundings, spreading from villages of Kalo Chorio and Pyrgos, to the foot of the Vrokastro itself. According to Hayden, and I support this theory, the beach at Nisi Pandeleimon might have been one of the ports of Istron (Ibid. 168 ). Even today it is still used by local fishermen, even though in a much smaller scale. One more thing should be mentioned about the whole coastal line of Istron: in antiquity it had very fertile soils, ideal for grain, olives and legumes production (Ibid. 167 ); and it is still so since then.

Returning to Ierapytna, it was lying strategically between the Aegean and North Africa, on the route between Rhodes and Alexandria. The position brought to the city significant incomes:

“Strategically located at a harbor that benefited from trade between Rhodes and Alexandria, the city of Hierapytna, like other Cretan cities (e.g., Itanos), increased her revenues by collecting harborage fees and levies on non-Cretan products in transit [...].” (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2014, 70 )

As the quantities of Rhodian stamped amphorae found in Egypt indicate, Alexandria exported grain in return for Rhodian wine. But what is interesting is the fact that Rhodian amphorae were imitated by local production at Ierapytna, plausibly filled with local wine (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2012, 83 ). This indicates that Ierapytna was most likely actively involved in these transports. Also around 200–197 BC Ierapytna concluded alliance with Rhodes, according to S. Spyridakis to eliminate piratical activities (Spyridakis 1970, 38 ). This treaty allowed Rhodians to use Ierapytna’s harbours and naval stations (Gallimore 2011, 114 ).

Although there is no evidence of Hellenistic structures in Ierapetra, K. Lehmann-Hartleben tried to locate Ierapytna’s harbour and connected it with a small lagoon near Viglia and Aliki districts in south-west Ierapetra (Ibid. 107; Fig. 7). It measures ca. 0.4 ha in size; S. Gallimore therefore assumes

that only “a small number of ships could feasibly dock in this lagoon at one time” (Ibid. 399 ). He also adds that “Ierapetra appears to have maintained a naval fleet in the Hellenistic period since the city is credited with launching

Fig. 7: Possible location of Ierapytna ’s harbour two military expeditions against Kos and Kalymnos in 206/205 BC” (Ibid.). That leads to the conclusion that the main harbour of Ierapytna is yet to be found.

The expansion of the city, according to K. Chalikias, absorbed contemporary Chryssi Island where several Hellenistic structures were excavated. He assumes that it may have been established by the city of Ierapytna to take the advantage of its natural resources 17 such as salt, timber, sponges, juniper berries and purple dye. And also to use it as a control point of the sea routes on the south coast of Crete (Chalikias 2011; 95, 102 ).

17 A similar situation happened between the city of Gortyn and Gavdos (see Chalikias 2011, 102 ).

Ierapytna is considered to have been engaged in piracy as well as Phalasarna; this opinion is shared by P. Brulé and F. Guizzi, who have assumed piracy as part of the economic base of the city. The inner lagoon is similar to the one from Phalasarna; nevertheless any remains of Hellenistic fortification, which could be sign of piratical activity, were not found (although they may had existed). Because of the lack of direct sources Gallimore argues that Ierapytna kept its honest economic ratio (Gallimore 2011, 125–127 ). The question also is, whether city fortifications should be automatically associated with piracy or more likely to beconsidered as a common defensive element of this period.

2.2.5.2 Mochlos

Another location, which was probably absorbed by Ierapytna, is the extensively explored site of Mochlos. At present it is a little island situated a few dozen metres from northern coast, but, quoting N. Vogeikoff-Brogan, “until some in late antiquity, a narrow isthmus connected the small island to the mainland, thus offering to passing ships a shelter on both sides of the isthmus” (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2015, 1).

The settlement from the late Hellenistic period has been discovered on the south slope of the island, with surrounding circuit wall, which runs along the northern, southern and eastern side of the island. The western side is formed by cliffs, representing a natural fortification (Ibid. 70 ).

The habitation on Mochlos during the Hellenistic period was quite short, similar to Trypetos, only ca. 100 years between the end of the 2 nd century and the first half of the 1 st (Ibid.). N. Vogeikoff-Brogan discusses the function of Hellenistic Mochlos and supposes it was resettled by the folk of Ierapytna during its expansion. This confirms the pottery evidence of East Cretan Cream Ware that originated on the south coast of the island. By gaining this port, Ierapytna may have won control over the whole Bay of Mirabello and got another source for goods (Gallimore 2011, 123 ). It should be mentioned that Mochlos may not have been Ierapytna’s first choice of port; it could had been

gained after unsuccessful attempts to control other ports, such as Tholos or Pacheia Ammos (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2014, 71 ). The abandonment of the site dates back probably to 67 BC as other sites in Crete. Then Tholos probably gained the same function as a port since the 1st century AD (Ibid.).

Fig. 8: Plan of the Mochlos site

2.2.6 Conclusions

Historical and archaeological sources reveal that Crete was actively involved in the maritime trade once we consider that the island communicated with many parts of the Mediterranean, such as Egypt and Libya, and was an important connection point. We can mention Ierapytna, a harbour to dock at on a route between Rhodes-Alexandria; or Phalasarna’s contacts with Carthage. More about trade between Crete and Rhodes, Kos and Knidos will be discussed in the next chapter.

One thing also needs to be mentioned that many sites in Crete, persistent since Bronze Age, still existed even in the Hellenistic times, such as Kommos or Phaistos, but not many research about Hellenistic period on these sites has been published. One of the important harbours, perhaps the most crucial one, may have been the harbour used by a city of Knossos at the present city of Irakleio: if one considers that Knossos had its own Hellenistic kiln which produced Hadra ware for export (Callaghan and Jones 1985). The only mention about Knossian harbour is by M. Bowsky. She states that it is now unfortunately located within the urban area:

“The modern coastline is around 1,5 m lower than in antiquity, with the result that the ancient port is to be found within modern Heraklion, in an area bounded by Idomeneus (or more likely Ariadne), Milatos, August 25 th and possibly Merambello Streets.” (Bowsky 2012, 331 )

I would also suggest modern port of Kissamos/Kastelli, that could have been significant and benefited from its location even in antiquity. I have noticed some archaeological activity at this area, such as ongoing excavations or Hellenistic vessels of a good quality in the local museum. However, the results remain again unpublished. Moreover, another archaeological site on the hilltop, existing already in the Hellenistic period, which had optical connection with the entire Mirabello bay, Olous and even Monastiraki Katalimata, which proves its importance, is project Oxa 18 . It is located near today’s Elounda, still waiting to be excavated.

18 Project of Masaryk University in Brno, Czech Republic; the directors are Věra Klontza and Emmanouil Klontzas.

3. Transport amphorae

In this chapter the main interest will be given to transport amphorae from several locations in Crete. Despite the fact that many sites on this island brought evidence of habitation during the Hellenistic period, including pottery, to light; transport amphorae remain mostly a matter of coastal sites, perhaps because scholars started studying them more closely only in the last dozens of years. In addition to this, manufacture of the Hellenistic amphorae is not as well-known as Roman production on Crete, but the situation has improved in the last couple of years 19 .

Among other scholars the main credit must be given to Natalia Vogeikoff- Brogan, who published most of the new information about the research of amphorae from Crete, mainly from the sites of Mochlos, Trypetos and Agios Nicholaos.

When dealing with Hellenistic Crete, we operate only with small number of vessels or their fragments, which is usually not enough for any statistics or final conclusion. However, it does not mean that the material has not existed before; maybe it is still unpublished or unexcavated, which does not exclude extensive economic activity of the island. In the early years of excavations, considerable percentage of pottery assemblage was simply thrown away or

19 For instance see the work of N. Vogeikoff Brogan, S. Gallimore, M. Baldwin-Bowsky and E. Gavrilaki in the bibliography.

discarded, especially unstamped amphora fragments, until J. A. Riley and J. Y. Empereur demonstrated their importance (Eiring and Lund 2004, 11 ). Therefore we are still working with hypothetical understanding about amount of excavated Cretan ceramics.

Still, the aim of this chapter is to present an overview about the Hellenistic transport amphorae in Crete. All of the available articles and publications, which are known to me, were quoted, as well as my own research. A tool used for the purpose of dating Rhodian stamps is the online database of Alexandria, Le Centre Alexandrin d’Etude des Amphores , so called Amphoralex. Since the material on every site varies, it presents supposed connections with other parts of Greece. Overview all the different types of amphorae are marked in the chart for reader’s convenience (Fig. 9).

Cretan sites, which have provided material for this chapter, are Knossos, Ierapetra, Mochlos, Trypetos, Phalasarna and Agios Nicholaos. The main part is the material and the catalogue of pottery from Priniatikos Pyrgos in Istron, where my research is based. Partial information is derived from Gortyn, but only for the idea of imports uncovered on the site. Catalogue of pottery from Gortyn was published by N. Allegro and M. Ricciardi (1999); however the amount of mentioned amphora specimens was not enough to dedicate a whole section for it. The first intention to study Gortynian amphorae was given by J. Y. Empereur and A. Marangou-Lerat (1989–92), who distinguished among others two types of amphorae locally produced in Gortyn, labelled Amphore Crètoise (henceforth AC) type 5 and 8 (Fig. 15). AC5 type is dated to be produced in the third century BC, AC8 type in the first century BC (Empereur et al 1991, 522 ). To this topic duo N. Allegro and M. Ricciardi brought information about appearance of imports of transport amphorae from Rhodes and Kos on the site of Gortyn (see Allegro and Ricciardi 1999).

In the paper of M. Baldwin-Bowsky and E. Gavrilaki amphora stamps are mentioned from Kos, Knidos and Rhodes, that were found at Lappa which date mainly to the second and first century BC (Baldwin-Bowsky and Gavrilaki 2010, 196 ). Lappa is one of the sites in the western part of Crete, which is finally mentioned in the relevant literature.

Overall, the most common amphorae in Crete are various types of local vessels, such as AC5 to AC8 types or amphorae of East Cretan Cream Ware. Local imitations of amphorae from the other islands also appear on sites. When considering the fact that shape of an amphora was a trademark of the city, as much as civic coinage (Lawall 2011, 46 ), the purpose of the imitations is still to be answered. The most numerous imports in Crete are vessels from Rhodes, because Rhodian stamps and other fragments are found on almost

Fig. 9: Chart presenting the various imports on Cretan sites

every site. In this matter P. Perlman published 44 Rhodian handles from several locations 20 in Crete, including sites to the west (Phalanna and Sybrita), which were not fully explored until now (Pearlman 1999, 154–157 ). Fragments in the assemblages are often from Knidos and Kos, followed by locations as Corinth, Thasos or Italy. Other, such as Chios, Cyprus Mende, Paros and Peparethos are very rare (see Fig. 9).

20 All of the locations from Perlman’s article are Knossos, Gortyn, Phaistos, Kommos, Apollonia, Praisos, Xerokambos, Kouphonisi and Phalanna and Sybrita (Perlman 1999).

One should also bear in mind that transport amphorae were not only used for carrying and storage of wine and oils. Characteristic feature of amphorae is they are relatively a resilient type of vessel, hence commonly reused for other purposes or for containing commodities such as nuts, preserved fish, garum, meat or dairy products like cheese; as well as wool, textiles and variety of moist substances like pitch, beer and water. One other kind of secondary purpose was to use amphorae as urns or coffins for infants (with a section cut off). Therefore they tend to accumulate in houses as gasoline cans do nowadays (Whitbread 1995, Grace 1979).

In addition to this, on the basis of DNA samples, team of B. P. Foley and collective revealed more ingredients stored in the transport amphorae. For the analysis they used artefacts from shipwrecks, where the conditions of preservation were better. Water protected the vessels from DNA-destroying ultraviolet light and contamination with land plant DNA (Foley et al 2011, 391 ). Besides the common residues of olive and grapes, Lamiaceae herbs were determined (such as mint, thyme, rosemary, sage or oregano) and also mastic, juniper, pine and ginger ( Zingiberaceae ) were distinguished (Ibid. 389 ). For that reasons the scale of commodities transported in amphorae was of a wide range.

Evidence of reusing amphorae is for instance from Phaistos (Gallimore 2011, 410 ) and Mochlos, where Koan amphora was probably reused for water (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2014, 21 ). Even in antiquity Herodotos in the 5 th century reported large-scale reuse of wine jars for carrying water from Egypt to Syria (Grace 1979).

Arguably, amphorae used for storing olive oil probably were not reused because oil inclined to go rancid. Therefore the question is if they were discarded, thrown in a waste dump or what else happened with those vessels. The famous Monte Testaccio, located in Rome, is a mound compiled completely from fragments of broken amphorae. They were dumped because of the rancid oil, however placed there systematically. Naturally one cannot assume dump in Crete in such an extent as in Rome, although it had to be located on some place in every polis. Dumping grounds are usually found at

coastal lines or near rivers, associated with production of ceramic workshops or with docks for loading the amphorae on the ships (Finkielsztejn 2004a, 121 ; Marangou-Lerat 1999, 273 ). In this matter, G. Finkielsztejn points out that because of the secondary use of amphorae, scholars have to bear in mind that date of amphorae in domestic contexts can differ up to 20 years, thus dating for other types of pottery in the same contexts should be lowered (Finkielsztejn 2004, 287 ).

3.1 Knossos

The site of Knossos, a polis with the strongest influence in the Hellenistic times, will be mentioned as the first one. However, according to the publications (e.g. Eiring et al 2002), not many imports were uncovered here; most of the transport amphorae are local or local imitations of Rhodian, Koan, Knidian or Parian amphorae. It seems that only imports are from Kos and

Fig. 10: Marangou -Lerat ’s AC7 type

Paros. Examples of local amphora are fragments most similar to Marangou- Lerat’s type AC7, produced in workshop at Xeratokambos in eastern Crete. This type is characteristic by thickened rim, broad handles and button-like toe

(Ibid. 61 ; Fig. 10 ). Although the fragment found in Knossos was made in Knossian clay (Eiring 2001, 129 ).

The imitations of Rhodian amphorae in local clay found in the so called ‘Unexplored Mansion’ are dated mostly to the second and first centuries BC. The specimens of Koan imitations are amphorae with double-barrelled handles. Three defined fabric groups of these amphorae are very similar to Whitbread’s definition of Koan fabric classes (Whitbread 1995, 86–93 ). The similarities within the clays could be explained by comparable geological conditions on the islands (Eiring et al. 2002, 62 ). According to Eiring, original amphorae from Kos can be recognized by a small depression inside where the handles are attached, which the local ones do not have (Eiring 2001, 129 ).

Most of the fragments of amphorae at Knossos are from the three excavated pottery kilns on the south-west of the city, with pottery dated from the early 4th to late 2 nd century BC (Eiring et al. 2002, 60 ). Samples 21 of amphorae from Knossos, Mochlos and Myrtos Pyrgos were tested in Fitch Laboratory in Athens and the petrographic analysis distinguished two local sites of production. One was located in central Crete using fossiliferous sand- tempered clay, mostly found in Knossos. The second was situated near modern Ierapetra, which was probably supplying the area of eastern Crete. This clay has inclusions of amphibolite and volcanic rock, which the samples from Mochlos and Myrtos Pyrgos also have in common. It has been labelled as East Cretan Cream Ware (henceforth ECCW), which for some reason does not appear in Knossos. (Ibid. 59–60 )

In Knossos pottery workshop 22 in 2016 I was able to see some material from the area. In the pottery assemblage there are definitely stamped amphora handles from Rhodes 23 and exemplars of Knidian amphora toes and one

21 Overall 81 samples were tested; 35 from Mochlos, 28 from Knossos, 18 from Myrtos Pyrgos (Eiring et al. 2002, 60 ). 22 I would like to thank very much Dr Conor Trainor for the information about the Hellenistic and Roman pottery assemblage in Knossos. 23 One of the handles bears a name of eponym Ευάνορ, dated to 120–108 BC; another one name of manufacturer Γαλέστης from the second half of 2nd century BC. Published in

stamp. Among the assemblage is one stamped fragment of Thasian amphora and stamped handle of Corinthian B’ amphora as well. One stamped handle is from possible Late Hellenistic amphora from Italy (Brindisi), but may also be Early Roman.

Considering the fact that Knossos was the major centre in the Hellenistic period as it was in the Bronze Age, one would expect more findings. The lack of material of amphorae in Knossos does not have to be caused only by the low degree of participation of this polis in the maritime trade. Transport amphorae are frequently uncovered at harbours or coastal areas. Therefore there is a possibility that goods were transported from the harbour to Knossos in smaller vessels or for some reasons the amphorae in Knossos are just not preserved. The harbour of Knossos, today within the urban area of Heraklion, could bring interesting information, in case it will be excavated in the future.

One more type of pottery should be mentioned: Hadra ware. Hydriae, discovered for the first time in 19 th century on cemetery in Alexadria, were originally produced in area of Knossos. Despite the fact that they are not preserved in large numbers on this site as they are in Alexandria, fabric analysis of the hydriae from Hadra confirmed Cretan production. Another thing is that in the Hellenistic period, the main custom of burials in Crete is inhumation; however, in Alexandria, deceased were cremated and remains imposed in these vessels. The theory of Hadra hydriae transportation is that the cremated individuals were mercenaries, soldiers or Greco-Macedonian inhabitants. They may have brought hydriae with them or these vessels were imported for the needs of these people to be buried in ‘homeland soil’. Either way, the inscriptions on the hydriae they are chronologically sensitive and can be dated very precisely; the ones from Hadra cemetery were probably produced from 260 to 97 BC (Callahan and Jones 1985; Navrátilová 2014, 13–15 ). Moreover, they were unearthed in the Black Sea area24 , Rhodes, Cyprus,

Coldstream, J. N. 1999: Knossos 1951-61: Classical and Hellenistic Pottery from the Town. In: The Annual of the British School at Athens , Vol. 94, pp. 321–351. 24 In the Black Sea Area they were unearthed in Olbia, Chersonesos, Myrmekion, Callatis, Kalos Limen, Taman, Tyras etc. (see Lungu and Dupont 2014).

Athens, Cyrenaica, Kelenderis and other places (Lund 2014, 300). Without any doubt, it is the most massively exported Cretan ceramic product of the Hellenistic period

3.2 Phalasarna

As a next site, Phalasarna will be mentioned. Unfortunately, we do not have enough published articles about this site dealing with the transport amphorae. Although imports of other ceramic types from Phalasarna have been uncovered in Antikythera; and in Phalasarna itself there is evidence of the ECCW fabric. However, fragments of amphorae dated to 335–330 BC imported from Rhodes, Chios, Peparethos, Mende, Kos 25 and Thasos were excavated in the area around the tower (Hadjidaki 2000, 55 ). Grave offerings from the necropolis provided imported fine wares 26 from Athens and Corinth; thus technically speaking Phalasarna was without any doubt somehow involved in the maritime trade with many places in the Aegean.

For the listed reasons E. Hadjidaki assumes that during the Hellenistic period the city of Phalasarna was economically strong, had its own pottery workshops, and minted its own coins as well (Ibid. 56 ). To this matter P. De Souza added that Phalasarna was involved in various forms of exchange, such as export of fish, building stone material and operated a small naval force. The city also traded with Knossos and he claims that the high quality of the stonework in the harbour and the defensive architecture indicate a highly prosperous community (De Souza 1998, 115 ).

25 Double-barrelled handle of Koan amphora was dated to the 2 nd or 1 st century BC (Hadjidaki 1988, 475 ). 26 The pottery assemblage found in Phalasarna is dated between 320 and 170 BC (see Hadjidaki 2000, 59 ).

3.3 Trypetos

Moving to the sites of East Crete, the site of Trypetos is not exceptional only by its one-period operation, so its contexts are not mixed with other periods; the main thing is that it was plausibly a centre of amphora production. The earliest type of local amphora 27 known from this site is dated to late 3 rd century BC (Vogeikoff-Brogan and Apostolakou 2004, 426 ).

Two types of local amphorae were distinguished at this site. First type is approximately 60 cm of height; characterised by round rim, cylindrical neck, ovoid body and ring toe, with short handles, elliptical in section ( Fig. 11). Fabric is reddish yellow (5YR 6/8) with abundant amount of gray rock fragments, probably schist, and golden mica as a temper. This fabric was observed in the areas of nearby Achladia, west of Trypetos, or on the Minoan site of Petras (Vogeikoff-Brogan, Nodarou and Boileau 2008, 326–328 ).

Second type, which might be locally produced in Trypetos displays characteristic mushroom rim. The fabric is gritty, reddish yellow (7.5 YR 6/6) with lighter core, with inclusions of golden mica (Fig. 12). The origins of the

Fig. 11: First type of amphora from Trypetos

27 The vessel is contemporary with Ierapytnian stamped handles found in Egypt, one example was found in Trypetos (Vogeikoff-Brogan and Apostolakou 2004, 426).

mushroom rim point to the southeast Aegean. Both types are dated to the late 3rd or 2 nd centuries after contexts they have been found in; the second type could be earlier though (Ibid.). The petrographic analysis showed production of the wine amphorae from the 3 rd century BC in two areas in eastern Crete, most plausibly in the Achladia valley and Myrtos for the production of ECCW. The amphorae from Trypetos (but also Mochlos and Myrtos Pyrgos) tend to imitate the shape of Koan amphorae, which preliminary determines what they were used for ––the wine. (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2011a, 555 )

Fig. 12: Second type of amphora from Trypetos

Transport amphorae excavated in Trypetos are of a considerable number and come from various islands in the Aegean, what confirms the site as a key location on a trade route ending in Egypt or in the ports to the west (Ibid. 554 ). These amphorae come from Rhodes, Kos, Knidos, but also from Corinth. It seems that the uncovered Corinthian type A’ does not appear in other places of the Eastern Mediterranean, which makes Trypetos possibly a place of a special interest in wine (Vogeikoff-Brogan and Apostolakou 2004, 426 ). Other types of pottery were also imported, such as Phoenician amphoriskoi or unguentaria with domed mouth, probably of Cypriot or Carian origin. However N. Vogeikoff-Brogan argues, that some of the imported vessels could reach the East Crete as a “profitable ballast” in the cargo of the transport wine amphorae (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2011a, 553–6), thus it does not have to mean frequent source of trade.

Complex E on this site was rich in finds of transport amphorae, including amphorae from Kos with double-barrelled handles, Knidian and Rhodian vessels, which are similar in shape with the examples from the Athenian Agora

dated to the late 3 rd or 2 nd centuries BC. Most of the Rhodian stamped handles from Trypetos are dated to 225–175 BC, two of which bear a name of eponym ∆ορκυλιδασ and Θαρσίπολισ, dated to the very end of 2 nd century 28 (Vogeikoff- Brogan and Apostolakou 2004, 426 ).

3.4 Mochlos

Majority of the pottery from Mochlos is made in the so called East Cretan Cream Ware, which is described as a soft, sandy fabric of yellow or pale green colour. Several types of tableware and transport amphorae are made in this fabric. The most common type of amphora has a height of ca. 65 cm, triangular rim, short cylindrical neck, ovoid body with ring toe and short handles, elliptical in section (Vogeikoff-Brogan, Nodarou and Boileau 2008, 329 ).

In addition to this, the same type of fabric has been found in Myrtos Pyrgos. After an analysis in Fitch Laboratory in Athens it has been set that the Myrtos valley, ca. 15 km from Ierapetra, is the source of clay used for the ECCW.

The most numerous imports of transport amphorae in Mochlos come from Kos. More than dozen of Koan amphorae were found in the so called Beam- Press Complex, which suggest that cultivation of olive trees and export of oil took place in this area (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2014, 3) . The items were identified as Koan by shape and by petrographic analysis as well; they are similar to Koan amphorae from destruction layer of 69 BC on Delos and also to vessels of Koan origin from the Antikythera shipwreck (Grace 1965, no. 6; ca. 80–50 BC). The best preserved sample of Koan amphorae from Mochlos ( Fig. 13) is ca. 65 cm of height and has a round, out turned rim, long neck with the offset steep shoulder and characteristic double-barrelled handles (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2014; 28, 40 ). Some of the vessels match Whitbread’s Koan fabric class 3 and 4 (Whitbread 1995, 89–93 ).

28 More precisely they are dated to 198 and 196 BC.

The pottery assemblage of this site contains also amphorae from Rhodes, equal to Whitbread’s Rhodian fabrics 1 and 2 (Ibid. 60–62 ). Large percentage of transport amphorae in Mochlos are of local production (ECCW).

Fig. 13: Koan amphora from Mochlos

3.5 East Cretan Cream Ware (ECCW)

ECCW is a name for different types and shapes of pottery with homogenous fabric. It was recognized for the first time by N. Vogeikoff-Brogan and J. Eiring during fabric analysis at Mochlos and Myrtos Pyrgos. The fabric is described as soft and silty in several hues depending on the degree of firing; usually yellow to pale green (Munsell 2.5Y 8/2; 10YR 8/2). The clay is very fine, tempered with sand and composed of amphibolite and volcanic rock fragments (Gallimore 2011, 182–3; Vogeikoff-Brogan 2014, 29 ).

At least four types of amphorae produced in ECCW were found and distinguished in Mochlos. First type has a folded, triangular rim, short cylindrical neck with elliptical handles and ovoid body with piriform toe ( Fig. 14). Type 2 imitates the shape of Rhodian amphorae with the angle of its handles. The same case is Type 3, which imitates the Koan amphore with the double-barrelled handles. The fourth type is characterised by out turned rim with straight end, longer neck with strap handles, which are ridged in the middle (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2014, 38–39 ). All of these types were most likely used to store wine.

Fig. 14: EC CW type 1 amphora from Mochlos

At least two types, EC1 and EC2, were unearthed in Ierapetra, however this fabric does not appear anywhere in central or western Crete, not even in Knossos. The clay of ECCW was most likely manufactured in Ierapytna, since it was the main polis of the eastern Crete. Variety of shapes were used here in this fabric, such as cups, bowls, kantharoi, plates, basins, jugs, pithoi, lamps and mainly stamped amphorae; what makes the East Cretan Cream Ware the most common type of fabric (Gallimore 2011, 183 ). Moreover, as the fabric appears in Mochlos as well, it could verify the theory of the Ierapytna’s expansion. The petrographic analysis established surroundings of Myrtos as a source of this fabric, located in the large area, which was in antiquity under Ierapytna’s control (see Fig. 5).

3.6 Ierapetra

Material from the ancient Ierapetra was published by S. Gallimore. In his dissertation and later publication (Gallimore 2011 and 2015) he deals with the Hellenistic and Roman transport amphorae with detailed catalogue. Therefore he brought to the light the idea of ceramic assemblage in this ancient polis. Amphorae found in Ierapetra come mainly from rescue excavations in Viglia district, called Asariotaki plot, Pangalou plot and Yiomelaki plot (Gallimore 2011, 161 ).

The most common imports of amphorae are from Knidos, mostly preserved in fragments, including toes and stamped amphora handles. The same situation appears in Athens, where Knidian amphorae are the most common type from the 2nd century BC onwards (Ibid. 238 ). Since 2 nd century BC Knidos was a good source of cheap wine, popular in Athens and Delos (Grace 1979).

The Knidian amphora stamps found in Ierapetra are mainly dated to 150–110 BC and 110–50 BC, which corresponds with Athens. For that reason we can assume the highest interest in Knidian wine was during this time.

Right after Knidian, amphorae from Rhodes 29 are the second prevailing imported type. One example comes from Thasos, dated after 250 BC. Another example is the Late Hellenistic Dressel 1B type amphora from Italy. Despite the fact that vessels from Ierapetra seem to imitate Koan shapes, amphorae from Kos are very rare at this site and generally in Crete. A few exemplars were found only in Chania and Trypetos (Ibid. 239–240 ).

Amphorae of local production were also unearthed, namely East Cretan amphorae type EC2 and EC1. These two types are similar to Marangou-Lerat’s definition of AC7 and AC5 type. The EC1/AC5 amphora was probably produced by Gortyn and was found also in Phaistos (Ibid. 235 ).

Fig. 15: Hellenistic types of a mphorae distinguished by A. Marangou -Lerat

Ierapytna also had important production of its own stamped amphorae dated ca. from the mid-third to the half of the 2 nd century BC, carrying the name of an individual and indication Ἱαραπυτνίων or Ἱεραπυτνίων, in a style similar to the Rhodian stamps. Therefore it is the only site where the evidence of the wine production in Crete can be found. The stamped amphora handles from Ierapytna have been found in variety of places, which can be considered to be an evidence of the city’s trade activity or movement of local residents or merchants; known examples are from Callatis along the Black Sea, Alexandria in Egypt and from a site in Isthmus of Ierapetra, Mochlos and Trypetos in

29 For eponyms see Gallimore 2011, 243–244 .

Crete (Gallimore 2011, 122 ). Because of the low appearance in Crete and the region of Ierapetra, J. Y. Empereur and A. Marangou suggested that these amphorae should be considered only for export (1992, 639–642 ). The shape of these amphorae unfortunately still remains unknown, however the fabric seems to differ from the East Cretan Cream Ware. One exemplar of Ierapytna’s amphorae found in Mochlos and Egypt bears an image of a bee, N. Vogeikoff- Brogan therefore assumes that they may have been a civic device used by Ierapytna (2004, 216 ).

She also supports the theory of commercial specialization and wine trade in the East Crete since the 2nd century BC, while the large production of ECCW suggests that “Ierapytna had moved beyond subsistence economy, trading wine for commercial profit” (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2014, 4).

Sufficient imports of other pottery types, such as Grey ware from Ephesus, were identified in the area of Ierapetra as well. This fact signifies that the polis of Ierapytna might have been a stopover between the exchange routes of Aegean and North Africa; therefore foreign ships probably visited the city regularly (Gallimore 2011, 398–399 ).

Fig. 16: ECCW amphora from Ierapetra

3.7 Agios Nicholaos

As mentioned above, Kamara, or Lato pros Kamara served as a harbour for the city of Lato. Nowadays, the modern city of Agios Nicholaos is located in the same area. On the basis of excavations it is argued that Kamara was already settled in the 3 rd century, which was supported by unearthed inscriptions, sculptures, cemeteries and so forth (Vogeikoff-Brogan and Apostolakou 2004, 418 ). Three cemeteries were excavated in the past, i.e. Stavros, Kazarma, Potamos; with more than 300 graves dated from Hellenistic to Roman period. The types of graves are mostly pit burials or graves covered with tiles, which provided unique finds of amphorae offerings. Next to the deceased, an amphora or two were placed, sometimes with a jug, plausibly filled with goods. These amphorae were imported or local in clay; some of them imitating Rhodian shape. In the excavated assemblage, types EC1 and EC2 appear, which are now stored in the archaeological museum of Agios Nicholaos (Gallimore 2011, 237 ). A significant number of Marangou-Lerat’s AC6 type of amphorae was found in these graves as well ( Fig. 17, 18 ). This type can be described as slightly smaller (ca. 50 cm), with cylindrical neck, ovoid body and piriform toe in cream coloured clay. A. Marangou-Lerat assumed that this type belongs to the 1st century BC to 1 st century AD, however recently an older date was suggested, possibly late 4 th century (Vogeikoff-Brogan and Apostolakou 2004, 420–421 ).

Fig. 17: Marangou -Lerat ’s AC6 type

The Stavros cemetery brought to light two amphorae of Hellenistic shape, similar to one exemplar from the Priniatikos Pyrgos, which seems to be the same type ( Pl. 3 ). Nevertheless, local production near the area of Kamara was indicated.

Fig. 18: AC6 typ e amphorae from Stavros and Potam os cemetery in Agios Nicholaos

3.8 Priniatikos Pyrgos

The site of Priniatikos Pyrgos lays on a small peninsula near the Karavostasi beach in Istron. It was spotted for the first time by E. Hall, who excavated the refugee settlement of Vrokastro and thought that Minoan harbour town was located on the peninsula. Observations done by B. Hayden revealed two kilns eroding out of the western scarp of the site, probably prehistoric in date (Hayden 2004). Nevertheless, several over-fired shards appear in the Hellenistic contexts as well, which are also mostly located in the western part of the site (Area G, Fig. 19). Last excavation season at Priniatikos Pyrgos was carried out in 2010 and although the site is not yet fully excavated, the past seasons brought interesting assemblage of transport amphorae in well state of

preservation. Further excavation projects could uncover more of the unique finds.

Fig. 19: Plan of Priniatikos Pyrgos trenches from 2005 –2006

Even though the pottery assemblage from the site includes various shards of amphorae, only a small percentage could be distinguished for the purpose of this thesis. In spite of that, the excavated ceramics contains significant fragments of imported amphorae which connect the site with other parts of the Aegean.

The Hellenistic pottery assemblage from Priniatikos Pyrgos seems so far to be continual from the 4th century BC. In the case of transport amphorae, one example is well preserved AC6 type (3, Pl. 3 ), similar to the grave offerings from Agios Nicholaos, as mentioned before (p. 49). This amphora is smaller in

size with the capacity around 10–12 litres. New dating has ranked the amphora at the end of 4 th century BC. My personal opinion is that the AC6 type perhaps imitates Knidian amphorae (similar is II-B pythoid variant; see Monachov 1999) because their shapes seem to be very similar. Nevertheless, the II-B specimens are dated to the late 4 th or early 3 rd century BC as well.

From the mid-third century BC there is the Rhodian amphora ( 1, Pl. 1 ), probably rare in Crete. It was definitely made in Rhodian fabric, although the handles are unstamped. Only the top part is preserved, with mushroom rim, narrow neck and thick arched handles. I have not seen it in any of the Cretan assemblages, but resemblance of the shape can be found in S. J. Monachov’s Rhodian long-necked amphorae of I-B type, dated to the second quarter of the 3rd century BC, with capacity of approximately 26–27 litres (Monachov 2005, 74 ). A similar type appears in V. R. Grace’s so called Proto-Rhodian amphorae because they do not have the standardised shape 30 . These vessels are dated to ca. 275 BC and were found in Koroni peninsula (Attica) and in the Benachi collection in Alexandria as well (Grace 1963, 322–324 ).

The amphora found in Alexandria is stamped with a name of eponym Πολυάρατος, which is dated according to Amphoralex to period Ib (ca. 270–247 BC). Interesting thing is that it was found most likely in the Hadra cemetery. Naturally it is not possible to link one vessel with the whole maritime trade routes between Rhodes, Knossos and its Hadra ware with Alexandria. Yet still, it could be another piece of a puzzle of the economic activities, clearing the picture of the Cretan trade. Because these Proto-Rhodian amphorae 31 are dated to the same decades as the Hadra ware, maybe we are speaking of an era with the largest transportation of goods and commodities in Crete. And in addition to this, there is still a possibility that more of these amphorae will be excavated at the Priniatikos Pyrgos in the future.

30 The standardised type is described as amphora with cylindrical neck and outward rolled rim, ovoid body, rounded shoulders and cylindrical neck; dated from the mid-third century to the second century BC (Ariel and Finkielsztejn 2003, 138 ). 31 Amphora from Koroni peninsula bears a stamp with eponym Αγριος, dated to the same, Ib period (see Grace 1963, 333 ).

Stamped Rhodian handle from the end of the 3 rd century ( 2, Pl. 2 ) has a round matrix of eponym Σιµυλίνος. The central depiction of rose is encircled with characters of his name. First sigma of the stamp is in reverse, although not visible on this fragment, last sigma is made as a crescent. Dating of this eponym in Amphoralex is to the period IIb, 219–210 BC.

The rest of the material from Priniatikos Pyrgos is more difficult to determine. Several amphora body shards and handles appear in contexts of Trench II and III, including double-barrelled handles (6, Pl. 4.3 ), and fragments in orange, imported fabric. Further analysis will determine their origin. The next fragment, amphora toe, is of Knidian origin (4, Pl. 4.1 ), readily identifiable by its typical conical shape with rounded ledge. Judging by the tip knobs from the whole vessels, potential date of this toe is the mid-third century BC. Another amphora tip knob is the fragment of unknown origin ( 5, Pl. 4.2 ), although toe of the same shape was found in Phalasarna (Tsaravopoulos et al 2014, Pl. 99) and is described as Koan, most likely from the 4 th century BC. Last piece from the presented catalogue is well preserved amphorae base with ring-shaped toe with nipple in the middle; definitely Hellenistic, but more specifying dating is yet to be determined (7, Pl. 5 ).

Fig. 20: V. R. Grace ’s amphorae from Alexandria (1) and Koroni peninsula (2)

1. Rhodian amphora Pl. 1 Cat. no. 10-6763, Trench 3, C 558, layer 003-613. Mushroom rim, mouth is 10 cm in diameter, narrow neck, thick arched handles. Fine, reddish yellow clay surface (5YR 6/6) with minimum of inclusions, very pale brown slip (10YR 7/3), porosity 10%. Comparanda : examples attested in Koroni peninsula in Attica and Hadra in Alexandria, ‘Proto-Rhodian’ type (Grace 1963, 322–324 ) and in Rhodian long-necked amphorae of I-B type (Monachov 2005, 74 ). Date : first half of the 3rd century BC.

2. Stamped Rhodian handle Pl. 2.1 Cat. no. 06-0229, Trench G5011.1. Stamp : round, 2.3 cm in diameter, inscription Σιµυλίνος sic! . Pink to reddish yellow clay surface (7.5YR 7/4 – 7/6) with mica sparkles and brown pebbles, aplastic 10%, porosity 10%. Comparanda : Brugnone 1986–2, 36 , nu. 51. Twenty four matrices of this eponym are in Amphoralex, the same one is no. RE-ΣΙΜΥΛΙΝΟΣ- 008, inv. no. ALEX ABC 0211.27 (MGR P. 20020). Σιµυλίνος is also mentioned as a no. 146 (H.259; N.376) in Grace 1953, 123. Date : 219–210 BC.

3. Amphora type AC6 Pl. 3 Cat. no. 06-0372, Trench G4005.6. Rounded rim, mouth 8.3 cm in diameter, long cylindrical neck, slightly thin handles attached to the shoulders and ovoid body. Medium to fine clay of light reddish brown colour (5YR 6/4), with slip in very pale brown or light yellowish brown (10YR 7/4 – 6/4), aplastic 10% with granodiorite, limestone and pieces of pottery as a temper, porosity 10%.

Comparanda : Vogeikoff-Brogan and Apostolakou 2004, 419, 421; Callaghan 1992, 102–103 . Date : Late 4 th century BC.

4. Knidian amphora toe Pl. 4.1 Cat. no. 12-7438, Trench 2, C 916, layer 002-953. Broken amphora toe of Knidian origin with rounded ledge, preserved height is 10.5 cm. Clay surface is of reddish yellow colour (7.5YR 7/6), medium coarse clay with 10% of inclusions (biotite, brown pebbles). Date : Mid-third century BC.

5. Amphora toe Pl. 4.2 Cat. no. 10-7037, Trench 2, C 713, layer 002-806. Very worn amphora toe of unknown origin, width is in diameter ca. 5 cm. Medium coarse fabric, clay surface is in light yellowish brown or brownish yellow colour (10YR 6/4 – 6/6), porosity 5%. Comparanda : Koan toe from Phalasarna, 4 th century BC (Tsaravopoulos et al 2014, Pl. 99). Date : Hellenistic.

6. Double-barrelled handle Pl. 4.3 Cat. no. 06-0398, Trench 2, C 11, layer 002-170. Double barrelled handle (Koan?), burned underneath, preserved length is 7.3 cm. Clay surface is reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) with whitish slip (10YR 8/3 very pale brown), aplastic 10%, high percentage of inclusion of biotite sparkles and flakes. Date : Hellenistic.

7. Base of amphora with tip knob Pl. 5 Cat. no. 06-0332, Trench A5017.2. Base of the smaller amphora with typical Hellenistic toe. Preserved height of the fragment is 10 cm, toe is of ring shape with small nipple in the centre, ca. 6 cm in diameter. Clay is medium coarse in reddish yellow colour (7.5YR 7/6), calcareous with biotite sparkles and calc cups (lime spalling); aplastic 5% with brown pebbles as a temper. Date : Hellenistic.

3.9 Conclusions

Although the evidence of the transport amphorae in Crete is sometimes scarce, the image of economic and trade activity of Crete in the Hellenistic period is quite unusual. Knossos was involved in international transportation of Hadra ware into Alexandria, Aegean or Black Seas in large quantities. Meanwhile Phalasarna was dealing with other islands in the Aegean, either in piratical or profitable sense, contacts with North Africa are not excluded as well. Large percentage of imports was found in Trypetos, which together with Mochlos had been since the 2nd century BC probably under the control of polis of Ierapytna.

Cretans were producing wine for export, as Ierapytnian stamped amphorae indicate. Vessels of Ierapytnian origin have been found in the Black Sea area, Egypt and the Cretan sites of Mochlos and Trypetos. In Alexandria, few of the stamped Ierapytnian handles were found, but on the site of Marina El-Alamein in Egypt, Cretan amphorae reach about 10–15% of the entire assemblage. Therefore the town seems to be one of the biggest places consuming Cretan products since 1 st century BC which continues in the Roman period (Majcherek and Zych 2011, 361 ).

Cretan amphorae did not have to storage and export only wine, but as it is stated in the Egyptian papyrus from the mid-third century BC, so called µέλη κρητικών was very popular in Egypt. Apiculture in Crete is well known matter between the archaeologists, since several fragments of beehives have been found in ceramic assemblages in the Bronze Age context in Knossos but which also appear in the 2nd century BC (Gallimore 2015, 271 ).

The political control of the island by Ptolemaic rulers and contacts with Egypt can be seen in the case of the Hadra vases, exported to Alexandria, where they “became such a fashion […] that their production was undertaken on a massive scale in the local ceramic workshops” (Majcherek and Zych 2011, 371 ). Also because Hadra ware is not very common in the other parts of Crete and the same can be said about Ierapytnian stamped amphorae, it seems that every polis kept its individual business separately.

P. De Souza arguments, that Crete was during this period probably strong enough to resist the domination of Roman businessmen (De Souza 1998, 114 ), which local production of ECCW and the other types of pottery indicates. Besides the previously discussed Hadra ware we can mention lagynoi found in Cyprus. J. Hayes divided Cypriot lagynoi into 9 series, while no. 5 is in the matrix similar to Cretan Hadra vessels, so he assumes it was also made locally in Crete (Hayes 1991, 18–22 ).

The production of transport amphorae in Crete is now attested in Knossos (late Hellenistic), Gortyn (150 BC to 1 st c. BC), Kommos, Keratokambos-west (1 st c. BC), Ierapetra and Mochlos (late 2 nd to 1 st c. BC), Lato pros Kamara (2 nd to 1 st c. BC), Matala, Trypetos (2 nd c. BC). (Chaniotis 1999, 167) Chaniotis suggests that before 110 BC the production was focused primarily to satisfy the local needs, although finds of Ierapytnian handles and Hadra ware is of the earlier date, for which he assumes it was produced only for the needs of Cretan mercenaries, who in thousands served in all the major Hellenistic armies. After the war between Cretan poleis stopped, the island was open for the growth of international contacts (Hadjisavvas and Chaniotis 2012, 166-7).

However it seems unlikely that all of the finds should be related only with movement of troops. Moreover, small accumulations of amphorae and vessels on a site could be a sign of short-distant, port-to-port trade; and a larger amount of vessels of the trade between more distant centres (Whitbread 1995, 20 ). M. Lawall is right when arguing that amphora from the site x found at site y indicates absolutely no connections between the two sites. He suggests the indirect shipping as an option, when the large cargo is off-loaded at one point, from which different merchant takes a specific part and takes it to another location. So then the original exporter and eventual importer could be without any relation to each other (Lawall 2005, 193 ).

The main issue remains, that higher intention should be given to study Cretan amphorae, although the situation is getting better with the recent publications. Usually the amphora handles are found unstamped, which is another problem. When Hellenistic Cretan amphorae tend to imitate Koan, Knidian or Rhodian shapes, they are not easily recognized and outside of the

island almost impossible to acknowledge. The question also is, what kind of wine the vessels contained; if it was imported or locally produced wine of Koan/Rhodian origin (Gallimore 2011, 124 ) or if the amphora was carrying completely different commodity despite imitating wine amphorae. Nevertheless, transport amphorae on Cretan sites show similarities in the dating, hence they indicate that since the mid-third century BC the island’s economy begun to flourish and maritime trade was a part of Cretan economy than was previously expected.

4. Crete in context of the maritime trade routes

Amphorae assemblages and other ceramic imports imply that since the Hellenistic period the maritime trade experienced a massive increase, as well as the changes in the ship technologies and construction of harbours (Wilson 2011, 39 ). This chapter will focus on the overall situation in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean; namely on the important events on other islands which had an impact on Cretan export. Attention will be also given to the trade routes, shipwrecks, and modern information from underwater surveys.

J. Manning in his paper Hellenistic Trade(rs) suggested that the Hellenistic era may have been a time of higher risk, hence undertaking longer routes to new places ––after the discovery of monsoonal winds, commodities were imported from India into the Mediterranean. However, higher risks mean increased costs in transportation and heightened risk for the ship to be wrecked. In addition, at the same time the tendencies were to lower the transaction costs (Manning 2015, 104 ).

The Hellenistic period saw more ambitions basically towards every sphere of trade and transportation. Harbours were constructed on an enormous scale. For example the harbour at Alexandria is notable in this context because it had “breakwaters and moles linking offshore islands and reefs to create a massive sheltered basin two km across, further subdivided into smaller port sections by artificial works and breakwaters, and equipped with the massive Pharos to signal the approach” (Wilson 2011, 47 ). Harbour construction itself

became a science, one significant enough that Philo of Byzantium (ca. 280– 220 BC) wrote an entire book about this topic, named Limenopoeica , which is now unfortunately lost. Moreover, this expansion in scale saw cranes starting to be used in the harbours for loading and unloading of heavy cargoes such as timber or stone, but also of Tunisian or Tripolitan amphorae, filled with olive oil or salted fish, with capacities of over 60 litres (Ibid. 47–51 ).

In any attempt to date transport amphorae or estimate the hypothetical trade routes, one has to consider events which may have had impact on export of the goods. First is the case of Rhodes and its amphora fragments which are found almost on every site; in Alexandria the amphora assemblage is at least 85% of Rhodian origin. The consumption of wine from Rhodes or Knidos was apparently not by particular selective choice, but most likely because of its availability and cheap price. For instance it is argued to be consumed by the troops (Grace 1979). The same situation appears in Athens, where Knidos was the major source of imported wine (67.1%) and Rhodian wine follows with 19.2% of the total assemblage (Koehler and Wallace 2004, 163 ).

In addition to this, the Rhodian stamps are well known for the names of eponyms, authorities of Rhodes and possibly the priests of god Helios (see Grace 1953, Badoud 2014) or manufacturers of the vessels. Knidian amphorae bear stamps of phrourarchs instead of eponyms, although during the phrourachy in ca. 188–167 BC the Knidian vessels were probably made in Rhodes because the clay is indistinguishable from the Rhodian (Koehler and Wallace 2004, 167 ).

Rhodes after the Peace of Apameia in 188 BC gained sizeable territorial possession on the mainland in Caria and Lycia (Ibid. 164 ), and resultantly saw the most flourishing era of the island in terms of trade (ca. 200–175 BC). Nevertheless this changed in 166 BC, when Romans converted Delos into a free port and, as a consequence, the Rhodian trade started to decline (Manning 2015, 132 ). Delos was a centre for the slave market, which begun to grow in the 2 nd century BC. The island benefited greatly from its tax-free status, whereas Rhodes previously associated with piracy, lost a large part of its business (Fairbank 2008, 88 ). A few years later a Rhodian envoy

complained to the Roman senate that this decision caused the island drop of income from one million to 150,000 drachmas (Gabrielsen 1997, 64 ). Nevertheless, Rhodes still produced amphorae until 1 st century BC and had a leading role in the grain trade (Ibid. 68 ).

Other important events worth noting for their impact on Mediterranean trade are the complete destruction of Corinth and Carthage in 146 BC, and the 86 BC destruction of Athens under order of Sulla (Grace 1979, Koehler and Wallace 2004).

4.1 Maritime routes

The most frequent maritime routes, without any doubt, intersected with the major islands, such as Crete, Rhodes and Cyprus. The question asked by scholars still remains, if the trade was organised by cabotage, sailing from

Fig. 21: Scheme of the main sea routes, directions of imports (arrows) and hypothetical routes of the Antikythera and Kyrenia shipwreck with the way around Levantine (dots)

a port to port, perhaps around coastal lines; or if it was planned as a long- distance trade between major ports (Wilson 2011, 53 ). Because of the density of islands in the Aegean we can presume that in good weather conditions the land was almost always in sight, therefore any ship could undertake more stops if needed. However the situation could have been more difficult during the longer routes to Cyrene, Alexandria or Rome. The answer maybe lies in the historical sources. Eratosthenes of Cyrene (3rd century BC) “saw coastal voyaging as a practice of mythical antiquity, practised by Jason and the Argonauts, whereas in his day open-water sailing was the norm for long- distance merchant voyages” (Ibid. 54 ).

In case of Crete we can presume both types of shipping. From the western harbours it was easy to sail to Antikythera, Kythera and Peloponnese, whereas from the eastern part of Crete to Rhodes, Cyprus 32 , Asia Minor, Egypt or other Aegean islands, such as Kos and Knidos. From these lands the sea route was open to the Black Seas (Fig. 21). In the treaty between Praisos and Siteia in the early 3 rd century BC, it is mentioned that: “ships regularly sailed along the south coast, from the south coast to the north coast, and from Crete to other regions” (Gallimore 2011, 124 ).

Ships had to sail the open sea from Crete to Cyrene or Alexandria, although they could also undertake the easier route through Rhodes around the coast of Levantine. The route by Rhodes was about 325 nautical miles long and took ca. 3.5 days (Manning 2015, 116 ). The scheme of the trade routes was probably more complex and individual islands traded and negotiated between each other. For example, precisely how the Ierapytnian amphorae and Hadra vasses got to the Black Sea region is a question. Naturally the trade of commodities was carried on a land as well, so they might have been partially transported by sea and also on mainland, although it would have been complicated and time consuming. In addition, Ierapytnian amphorae are absent on the island of Delos despite the fact it served as one of the largest

32 Nea Paphos in Cyprus was a common stop on the way to Alexandria, what is demonstrated by finds of many types of amphorae from different locations (see Baker 2004, 76 ).

centres of trade in the Hellenistic times. For this reason Crete was possibly not a wine supplier (Gallimore 2011, 122 ).

Another question is what exactly Crete may have exported in the Hellenistic times besides wine which was famous for its sweetness 33 . Cretan honey was mentioned above (p. 57), listed in the Egyptian papyrus from the middle of 3rd century BC; as well as the Hadra hydriae exported from Knossos (p. 39). Although Hadra ware is still referred by scholars to be brought with the troops who served in the Ptolemaic army in Alexandria and in the Macedonian party in Eretria (Chaniotis 1999a, 184 ). Nevertheless, it should be noted that the other Cretan commodities are also found outside the island, such as lagynoi in Cyprus or the so called Medusa bowls in Italy and Egypt, which are considered to imitate Medusa Rondanini donated to Athens by Antiochus III in the 3 rd century (Callaghan 1981; Navrátilová 2014, 24 ). Another article is the cypress wood, known to have been exported in this period. However Chaniotis argues “these exports were related to a few building programs and cannot be regarded

Fig - 22: Wind directions around the island of Crete

33 Romans called it vinum passum; see Marangou-Lerat 1999, 271.

as a constant economic factor“. The same can be said about wool trade and Cretan herbs, such as sage, favourably used in antiquity from Archaic to Roman period; nonetheless it is plausible that they have been traded. Chaniotis adds to this matter that Crete mainly exchanged slaves and captured persons (Ibid. 184–5, 210 ; Viviers 1999).

The contacts with Pergamon were established by Crete in the 2nd century, when in 183 BC several Cretan poleis concluded a treaty with Eumenes II. Thirty-one poleis are listed, such as Knossos, Phaistos, Gortyn, Lyttos, Rhaukos or Ierapytna (Ibid. 106 ). Ptolemies were able to sail the waters between Alexandria, Cyprus and Rhodes and this territory expanded even more after they had started to control the harbour at Itanos. Egyptian supremacy lasted till 145 BC when Ptolemy IV Philometor died and the troops withdrew from Itanos (Vogeikoff-Brogan 2014, 37 ).

4.2 Shipwrecks and cargoes

Shipwrecks are one of the main sources if one wants to reconstruct the strategy of transportation, how the cargo was loaded onto the ship or how big the crew might have been. The ship itself does not have to be well preserved for estimating the ship size, sometimes only the goods are preserved. In this scenario the cargo arrangement or earthen impression helps to provide a hypothetical reconstruction of the ship layout or its individual parts. If the shipwreck is quickly covered with protective sediment, the conservation is almost as effective as in the glacial conditions (Parker 1992).

The development of ships was quite slow; human lives were in stake, thus the craftsmen tried to calculate the capacity very precisely. Naturally to make the space for cargo as big as possible while the rest of the ship remain compact was highly requested. The size of the ships remained nearly the same between the 5th century BC and 12 th century AD, but the largest ones were used at the turn of the 1 st century BC and 1 st century AD (Parker 1992, 26 ). Two opinions exist about how the construction was made. The first one is the plank by

plank method when the frame shape evolved during the progress; the other one is that the design of the hull was predetermined since the beginning, because it had to be known how many of amphorae or other commodity could have been loaded on (Steffy 1994; 8, 77 ).

When speaking of the large ships at the turn of the centuries, La Madrague de Giens can be noted. Sunken around 70–50 BC in the area of the south-eastern France, this ship carried nearly 400 tons of cargo with approximately 7000 amphorae. The most striking is its length of 40 m which might be expected to stock all the cargo inside (Parker 1992, 249 , no. 616).

The essential publication for shipwrecks is still A. J. Parker’s Ancient Shipwrecks of the Mediterranean and the Roman Provinces. The catalogue for Hellenistic shipwrecks in the Eastern Mediterranean, completed of unpublished wrecks, was done by L. Vidličková (2011) in her thesis.

From the shipwrecks sunken near the coast of Crete, three can be mentioned, whose dating is the closest to the Hellenistic period, although they are more likely Early Roman. One is unpublished Gavdopoula, loaded with Italian products (Micha 2005, 86 ); second is the wreck at the bay of Matala dated to ca. 50 BC to 110 AD, about which there are inadequate information, except of the reports of amphorae (Parker 1992, 270 , no. 681). The last shipwreck is Dhia A, possibly from 1 st century AD with the cargo of Rhodian, Koan and Nubian amphorae and amphorae types Dressel 18 and 25 (Ibid. 162 , 359). Overall the location of each of these wrecks 34 near Cretan coast corresponds with the scheme of the main sea routes (see Fig. 21), on the north, east and south-western part of Crete.

34 Other Cretan shipwrecks are Dhia B and C from the 10 th and 12 th century AD (Parker 1992, 162 , no. 359–61); Cape Sidero A and B from Roman and Byzantine period (Ibid. 111 , no. 214–5), Agia Galini from 276–290 AD (Ibid. 62 , no. 68) and Minoan Pseira shipwreck from MM IIB period (Bonn-Muller 2010).

4.2.1 Kyrenia shipwreck and its replica

In the attempt to describe how the amphorae may have been stowed, the Kyrenia shipwreck has to be noted here as an example. Although it is not directly connected with Crete, with the exception of Cretan amphorae, it is one of the most extensively studied ships with three replicas reconstructed according to the original shipwreck for the purpose of testing the tenon, characteristics of sailing, cargo storage and other archaeological experiments.

This ancient merchantman was built in the 4 th century and sailed the seas for few decades until it sunk in the 295–285 BC less than a mile from Kyrenia harbour at Cyprus. The reason of the sinking remains unresolved; a pirate attack is one possibility because only a small amount of coins and other personal possessions have been found. Of course an alternative narrative to this is that the belongings could have been taken by the crew before the accident (Katzev 2005, 78 ).

The shipwreck was excavated in 1968–9 under the direction of M. Katzev but since then a wide range of information was brought to light. The Kyrenia shipwreck was an amphora carrier with length of 14 m and ca. 4.2 m wide. The size of the ship was quite average with a crew of 4 people (captain and three sailors), which we can indicate from personal possessions of 4 oil jugs, cups or wooden spoons (Ibid. 76 ). The number of the crew usually ranged from 4–6 members (Parker 1992, 20 ).

The shipwreck contained at least 400 vessels of 8 different types including amphorae from Rhodes, Samos, Paros, Palestine and Crete (Parker 1992, 231 , no. 563). Several of the Samian amphorae still contained ca. 10,000 almonds preserved in their shells. The amphorae were swirled inside with black pine pitch to make them watertight, and most likely took on the resin flavour (as modern Greek ‘retsina’) and the wine they contained was exported all the way to the Black Sea and Egypt (Ibid.).

Fig. 23: Kyrenia II fully -loaded with amphorae

The first full size replica called Kyrenia II was tested on the sea as well. Scholars sometimes point out that ships had to sail and orientate by winds (Fig. 22). However, experimental voyages undertaken by the Kyrenia II proved that 4–5 crew members and captain could live on the board without problems and that the ancient merchantmen could sail to the west even during the winter. The crew have been able to handle the ship and sail it at night as well. Thus the manageability and choice of routes were depending much more on a choice than weather conditions (Harpster 2012).

The experiments with the amphorae were also made. The Kyrenia team have discovered that single amphora, which when it is filled it weights almost 49 kg, can be loaded aboard by four men only in 20 seconds, which makes all of the cargo only matter of 2–3 hours in total (Katzev 2005, 76 ). It has been also proved that amphorae had to be full to remain in the shipwreck; otherwise they would float away (Katzev 2008, 80 ). In general, the logistics of cargo loading in the most cases was basically stock the heavy goods (ingots, stone) at the bottom of the ship and the pottery on the top of them. The amphorae could be stowed from one to nine layers (Parker 1992, 28 ) which can be

demonstrated on the test journey of Kyrenia II. Even though the deck was quite crowded after all the amphorae were loaded on ( Fig. 23 ), sailing the ship was still manageable, with the cargo staying in place even during the stormy weather. Another test was carried out to find the right amphora stopper that was used in Kyrenia. The most common materials of stoppers are wood, cork, bark, pinecone and raw or fired clay, however no remains of stoppers were preserved in the shipwreck. The team found that thin goat skin, soaked overnight in water, for the amphora mouth works best. When tied with twine just under the lip, then there was absolutely no leakage even when the amphora was inverted (Katzev 2008, 80 ).

Fig. 24: Reconstruction of the Kyrenia ship

4.2.2 Antikythera shipwreck

Last wreck to be noted here is the Antikythera shipwreck, first ancient ship discovered in 1900 by sponge divers and later explored by J. Y. Cousteau in 1976. Located near the north-east side of the Antikythera island, dating of the shipwreck is based on the famous Antikythera mechanism, which was set on the astronomical situations which corresponds with date around 80 BC (Parker 1992, 55 , no. 44). Other finds, such as coins from Pergamon (85–67 BC) or Ephesus (70–60 BC) provide terminus post quem for the ship (Vidličková 2011, 64 ). The cargo was full of luxury objects, such as statues, glass vessels, gold bars, jewels etc. The amphora assemblage includes vessels from Rhodes, Italy (Lamboglia 2 type) and Kos, which are of the same type as amphorae found on Mochlos (see p. 43). Usually interpreted as a Roman loot ship or Roman merchant carrier, the route of the ship led most likely from Pergamon to Rome, sailing around the northern coast of Crete. It is not excluded that the ship docked at one of the Cretan harbours, such as the one for Knossos.

The team of B. P. Foley got permission to return to the Antikythera shipwreck in 2012 and since then the new interesting information was brought. The current opinion on the ship is that it was of huge dimensions, around 50 metres of length with oversized utilities for rigging. On the basis of available evidence, such as the planks were made from Greek wood and one fragment of Megarian bowl bears and inscription of a Greek name; it is suggested that this ship was not of Roman origin. All the new information indicates that the Antikythera shipwreck was a grain ship repurposed to carry luxury objects, leaving from Delos to Rome. The choice of the grain ship may have been because of the transportation of such a quantity of cargo, or as a means to camouflage and hide so many of expensive objects in the grain (Foley 2016). Either way, future seasons will bring for sure further fascinating results.

4.2.3 Addendum

To the present day nearly 90% of the world trade is carried by sea, even when we can use air transportation and other kinds of cartage. The transport amphorae because of their high durability appear almost in every ancient shipwreck and constitute more than a 50% of the entire cargoes (Parker 1992, 20 ). On the Parker’s graph a distribution of the ancient shipwrecks by period is shown (Fig. 25 ). One is able to see that the majority of wrecks belong to 150 BC to 150 AD. The number of wrecks can be also correlated with the higher risks or climate conditions. Consequently it means that for the further research of Hellenistic economy of trade we operate with large number of data. Approximetaly 2000 ancient shipwrecks have been found, which only covers around 0.27% of an estimated total of 750,000 shipwrecks; the remaining wrecks locations are currently unknown (Foley 2016) but hopefully it will change in the near future.

Fig. 25: Distribution o f ancient shipwrecks

5. Conclusion

The aim of this thesis was to clarify the position of Crete in the Hellenistic world. The negative arguments towards Crete in the past described the island as a pirate nest playing host to little else than effective mercenaries who served in the Ptolemaic and Macedonian armies. On the other hand, archaeological finds indicate a different situation. From the historical sources and surface surveys it is known that many of the settlements have operated in Crete during the Hellenistic period. A truth is that the Cretan environment has a very mountainous character, therefore it might appear easy to suppose that the island’s geography lent to a disunited political and economic landscape. Despite this, however, the fact remains that Cretan poleis were at times formed into alliances; for example this period is known to face internal conflicts such as the Cretan war in 204–201 BC.

If one should look for the answer in history, several treaties points to connections outside the Crete. In the 273 BC contract with Spartian king Areos was concluded, who was militarily involved in the conquest against Knossos. A few years later in 270 BC Ptolemies had begun to occupy eastern part of Crete. They conducted a protectorate in Itanos and used the city as a source for goods and military reinforcements. The position of Itanos was quite beneficial for Egypt, with harbour at the leeward side of the island. Consequently Ptolemies could control another part of the Mediterranean, with harbours at Rhodes and Cyprus as well. Egyptian supremacy lasted on Crete

till the mid-second century BC when the Ptolemy VI Philometor died and the troops left the island for good.

Due to the steep character of southern coastline of Crete and its wind conditions on the northern, the major harbours were situated on the island’s extremity on the east and west. It is also the case of Itanos, mentioned above. From this part of the island a safe sea route leads by Kasos and Karpathos to Rhodes. Then the options are open and ship can sail either to other Greek islands, Asia Minor or Black Seas. The opposite direction from Rhodes goes to Cyprus or Alexandria. Merchantmen could sail the open sea directly to Northern Africa, or choose the easier route following the of Levantine coast.

The other port on the East Crete is Trypetos. Located near the modern city of Siteia, it most likely served as a port for the nearby polis. It was probably one of the ports in which Rhodes was interested in, because transport amphorae from various parts of Greece were uncovered at this place. Among the assemblage are amphorae from Rhodes, Kos, Knidos or Corinth or vessels of local production. Because Trypetos is one-period site, dated from the mid- third to second century BC, its contexts are not mixed and originate only from the Hellenistic period.

Moving to harbour for city of Lato, Kamara, contacts with Asia Minor might be noted. The city resettled because of the harbour towards the coast line in the 2nd century BC. Lato was dealing with other Cretan cities, such as Olous, Knossos, Eleutherna or Lyttos, but also with Asia Minor. Namely it entered into a contract with Miletos and Pergamon kings Eumenes II or Attalos I.

The most speculative remains Phalasarna on the western coast of Crete. Notwithstanding it may have had contacts with Carthage or Italy, which ceramic finds imply, it is still argued that Phalasarna was a pirate nest. The discussion is still ongoing, if we should connect defensive elements of architecture on Cretan sites with piracy. The fact is that ancient historians connected Crete with piratical activity. However, Strabo tended to use the same word for pirates and merchants as well. The amphora fragments on this

site are imported from Rhodes, Kos, Thasos and contacts with Knossos are also possible.

One of the most powerful poleis was Ierapytna on the south-eastern coast of the island. From the 3 rd century BC it expanded its political power to the very end of the eastern Crete and also to the northern coast. On this place the sites of Mochlos and Priniatikos Pyrgos are situated. Both of the sites were active during the Prehistory and the settlement on the Priniatikos Pyrgos was resettled again around the 6 th century AD till the Byzantine period. The sites are located on the coast, thus they plausibly served as the ports during the antiquity, perhaps under the control of Ierapytna.

Nevertheless, one of the major harbours had to be the one located in the current capital city of Heraklion, serving for the needs of Knossos. As it was the main centre in the Bronze Age, Knossos was still the most dominant polis even during the Hellenistic times. Near the ‘Little palace’ the Hellenistic kilns were excavated which possibly produced the local imitations of various transport amphorae and Hadra ware hydriae which were found in hundreds of exemplars in the Alexandria’s necropolis and on smaller scale in the other parts of Aegean and the Black Sea area.

Since in the Hellenistic period we operate only with a small amount of ceramic material from Cretan sites, for the purpose of this thesis information about amphora assemblages were used mainly from Knossos, Phalasarna, Agios Nicholaos, Mochlos, Trypetos and Ierapetra. Major attention was paid to the Priniatikos Pyrgos site in Istron where I have participated since 2013. After all the data was gathered, the results determined that the main percentage of transport amphorae in Crete are of the local production, e.g. types AC5, AC6, AC7 and AC8, which were distinguished by A. Marangou-Lerat. Other types locally produced in Crete were from the region around Ierapetra, most likely from Myrtos. This type of pottery in a yellow to greenish fabric was labelled East Cretan Cream Ware, recognised for the first time by N. Vogeikoff-Brogan and J. Eiring. So far four types of amphorae were identified in this fabric, two of which imitate Rhodian and Koan shapes.

The main imports here are definitely amphora fragments from Rhodes, followed by Knidos and Kos. Transport amphorae of other origin were also uncovered on these sites, such as amphorae from Thasos, Peparethos, Mende, Corinth, Knidos, Paros, Chios, Cyprus or Italy, but are represented among the assemblages only rarely.

The main articles in the Cretan wine trade were probably stamped Ierapytnian amphorae which were also found in Alexandria or Callatis in the Black Seas. Because they appear on Crete only sporadically, it is assumed that they were intended mainly for the export. One other vessel of the local produce is AC6 type of amphora which was found in necropoleis in Agios Nicholaos or in the Priniatikos Pyrgos site. Because it is dated to the end of the 4th century BC, it determined probably the oldest known wine production in Crete. Unique Rhodian amphora was found at the site of Priniatikos Pyrgos, dated to ca. 275 BC. It is yet the only example of this type in Crete, but similar amphorae were also unearthed in Hadra necropolis in Alexandria. Even though it is so far the only vessel of this type, it could bring new information about the question of the trade between Cretan Hadra ware and Egypt.

Without any doubt the main routes of long-distance trade in the antiquity lead around the island of Rhodes, Cyprus and Crete. Crete served as a connection point between Peloponnese, Asia Minor and North Africa. What kind of commodities could Crete exported is still a puzzle. Among the possibilities are sweet Cretan wine and honey, because archaeology proved that apiculture was in Crete widespread since the Bronze Age. Other goods that may have been traded are wool, cypress wood or herbs, popular since the Archaic period. Despite the arguments that ships were stowed with Cretan products only as a profitable burden, pottery of Cretan origin is spread to other parts of the Eastern Mediterranean. Besides Hadra ware we can mention lagynoi found in Cyprus, Medusa bowls in Italy or Egypt and finally Ierapytnian amphorae in the Black Seas.

On the basis of the Kyrenia shipwreck, the navigating and sailing merchantmen in the antiquity was discussed, which did not have to be dependent on the wind conditions as much as was previously expected. The

crew of four members could load the cargo of hundreds of amphorae aboard in 2 or 3 hours and even though the deck was quite full, the ship was still easy to manage even during the night. The Kyrenia was shipping among other commodities amphorae from Crete as well. The famous shipwreck of Antikythera could sail around the northern coast of Crete and it is not excluded it docked at one of the island’s harbours. For all the mentioned facts above I would suggest that Crete was plausibly actively involved in the international trade.

In modernity around 90% of the world’s trade is transported in shipping containers, and this practice finds its roots in antiquity, when packaged trade by sea had to be a considerable part of the commercial sphere. To conclude this matter, the question about Cretan maritime activities during the Hellenistic period can be answered positively. The importance of Crete begun to increase in the 3 rd century BC, which is indicated by various ceramic finds on the island’s sites. Crete held onto its individuality even after the conquest of Roman Empire in the 1 st century BC and still exported goods from the island. Wheter or not the Cretan export trade was on large or small scale is now irrelevant, Crete still had a strategic position in the Eastern Mediterranean trade routes and importance of the island and its economic activity should not be underestimated.

6. Resumé

Námořní obchodní trasy tvoří jakoby neviditelnou stopu v historii, přesto lze vysledovat určité množství dat díky importům objevených na archeologických nalezištích. Největší možnosti pro současné znalosti o strategii obchodu leží v rukou vědců, kteří pracují v odvětví podmořské archeologie. Od roku 1900, kdy byl poprvé objeven antický vrak, a to žádný jiný než slavný vrak z Antikythery, přinesla archeologie řadu výsledků o potopených lodích a jejich nákladech. V helénistickém období námořní obchod jen vzkvétal. Lodě byly daleko masivnější a přístavy pochopitelně daleko větší. Konstrukce přístavů se stala vědou, které Filón z Byzantia ve 3. století př. n. l. věnoval celou knihu zvanou Limenopoeica. A to vše za účelem transportu co největšího množství nákladu a zboží. Delší cesty přes otevřené moře si vynutily daleko větší rizika, z čehož vyplývala hrozba vyšších nákladů doprovázená častějším potopením lodi.

Tato diplomová práce se zabývá námořními aktivitami Kréty v helénistickém období. Mapuje přístavy působící během tohoto období, importované a lokální transportní amfory objevené na tomto ostrově. Dále se zabývá hypotetickými námořními obchodními trasami a hlavními proudy importovaného keramického zboží, stejně jako strategiemi transportu. Hlavní otázkou, kterou si předkládaná práce klade, je jakou roli hrála Kréta v kontextu námořních tras a ekonomiky helénistického období ve východním Středomoří.

Při práci s keramickým materiálem helénistického období se zde naskýtá problém nedostatečného publikování nálezů, jelikož do nedávna se tímto tématem zabývala jen hrstka autorů. Největší pozornost se věnovala době bronzové a mladší keramické nálezy byly často ničeny za účelem uvolnění prostoru pro další nálezy, což platí zejména u nekolkovaných uch z transportních amfor. Situace se obrátila po tom, co J. A. Riley a J. Y. Empereur demonstrovali důležitost studia tohoto materiálu. V současnosti se tomuto tématu začíná věnovat čím dál více expertů. Nejvíce poznatků z posledních výzkumů přinesla N. Vogeikoff-Brogan a S. Gallimore o lokalitách nacházejících se na východě Kréty.

Helénistické období začíná na Krétě úmrtím Alexandra Velikého roku 323 př. n. l. podobně jako na ostatních lokalitách, končí ovšem rokem 67 př. n. l., kdy si Římané ostrov kompletně podmanili. Do nedávna o Krétě ve spojení s helénistickým obdobím panovaly převážně negativní názory. Zejména ve smyslu, že se jedná o ostrov obsazený piráty, který se ekonomicky ani politicky aktivně neangažoval a kromě žoldáků, kteří bojovali v ptolemaiských či makedonských armádách, nebyl ničím zajímavý. Archeologické nálezy však ukazují na téměř opačnou situaci. Z historických zdrojů a povrchových průzkumů je známo, že na Krétě působila řada sídlišť, která však byla často oddělena horami, pročež mohla působit nejednotně. Dalším z důvodů je fakt, že v průběhu tohoto období byla Kréta rozdělená do jednotlivých poleis, které spolu sice tvořily spolky, ale zároveň vedly nesčetné výboje, jako např. tzv. Krétská válka v období 204–201 př. n. l.

Pokud bychom měli čerpat z historických pramenů, v řadě písemných dohod jsou zmínky o kontaktech mimo ostrov, jako např. v roce 273 se spartským králem Areem, který se vojensky účastnil výbojů proti městu Knóssos. O pár let později, v roce 270, území východní Kréty obsadili Ptolemaiovci, kteří ve městě Itanos ustanovili protektorát a působili zde až do roku 145 př. n. l., kdy zemřel Ptolemaios VI. Filométor a egyptská vojska definitivně opustila ostrov.

6.1 Krétské poleis a přístavy

Kvůli hornatému charakteru jižního pobřeží Kréty a špatným povětrnostním podmínkám na severu ostrova byly nejaktivnější přístavy situovány na západním a východním pobřeží. Jedním z nich byl již zmíněný Itanos na východě, pro který je i dnes charakteristické relativní závětří. Z tohoto přístavu vede bezpečná cesta na východ přes Kasos a Karpathos až na ostrov Rhodos, z nějž je poté možné plout do Malé Asie, či přes Kypr do Levanty či Alexandrie. Dalším z přístavů na východě je Trypetos, poblíž města Siteia, které bylo v antice pravděpodobně jednou z významných polis. Tato lokalita je zajímavá tím, že má poměrně krátkou dobu osídlení od poloviny 3. do poloviny 2. století př. n. l. Díky tomu zdejší materiál není smíchán s dalšími obdobími a pochází pouze z helénistického období. Transportní amfory z této lokality jsou jak z lokální krétské produkce, tak importované z Rhodu, Kósu, Knidu či z Korintu.

Třetím krétským přístavem je Kamara, který patřil městu Lató. To bylo v průběhu 2. století př. n. l. postupně opouštěno ve prospěch přístavu, ve kterém místní obyvatelstvo vybudovalo nové osídlení. Lató bylo v kontaktu nejenom s ostatními městy, jako např. s Olous, Knóssem, Eleuthernou či Lyttem, ale také s Malou Asií, konkrétně s městem Milétos a pergamskými králi Eumenem II. a Attalem I.

Spekulativní lokalitou je Phalasarna na západním pobřeží Kréty. Přestože na základně keramických nálezů se uvažuje nad kontakty s Itálií, Kartágem, ale také s ostrovem Rhodos, Kós či Thasos a pravděpodobné jsou také styky s Knóssem, převažující názor na tuto lokalitu je, že sloužila jako hnízdo pirátů. Toto tvrzení se vyvozuje z obranných architektonických prvků, které jsou podobné lokalitě Halae v Bojótii, sídlu lokrijských pirátů. Kréta byla skutečně již od antiky spojována s pirátstvím, i když pravdivost těchto výroků je stále otázkou. Například Strabón totiž použil stejné označení pro piráty či obchodníky, kteří po připlutí do přístavu prodávali zboží.

Jednou z nejmocnějších krétských poleis byla Ierapytna na jihovýchodním pobřeží. Ta od 3. století expandovala natolik, že její politická pravomoc

zasahovala až na severovýchodní pobřeží. Zde se dnes nachází lokality Priniatikos Pyrgos či Mochlos. Jejich působení se datuje převážně od 3. do 2. století př. n. l. v případě lokality Priniatikos Pyrgos; v případě Mochlu od konce 2. do 1. století. Obě lokality ovšem fungovaly již v prehistorii a Priniatikos Pyrgos byl znovu osídlen kolem 6. století, což přetrvalo i během byzantského období. Jelikož se v obou případech jedná o pobřežní naleziště, fungovaly pravděpodobně taktéž jako přístavy, nejspíše pod kontrolou Ierapytny. Jeden z největších přístavů musel být ovšem přístav pro město Knóssos nacházející se dnes v městské zástavbě hlavního města Heraklion. Knóssos byl již od doby bronzové jednou z nejvýznamnějších polis, která si vypalovala vlastní keramiku, o čemž svědčí amfory z lokální hlíny či hadrijské hydrie, poprvé objevené na pohřebišti Hadra v Alexandrii, ovšem analýza prokázala produkci v okolí města Knóssos.

6.2 Transportní amfory

Jak již bylo zmíněno, v rámci helénistické keramiky operujeme na Krétě pouze se zlomkem nálezů. V rámci této diplomové práce byly shromážděny všechny dostupné informace; transportní amfory jsou publikovány z lokalit Knóssos, Phalasarna, Agios Nicholaos, Mochlos, Trypetos a Ierapetra. Částečně se vycházelo i z materiálu lokalit Lappa a Gortýna. Hlavní záměr byl věnován lokalitě Priniatikos Pyrgos, na němž autorka spolupracuje od roku 2013. V rámci třetí kapitoly je prezentován katalog transportních amfor včetně ilustrací umístěných v příloze.

Po shromáždění dat vyplynulo jasně najevo, že nejčastějším typem transportních amfor na Krétě jsou amfory lokální produkce, zejména typy AC5 až AC8, které byly v minulosti definovány A. Marangou-Lerat, nebo tzv. East Cretan Cream Ware . Tento typ keramiky byl produkován v okolí Ierapetry, pravděpodobně v okolí města Myrtos. Nejméně čtyři typy amfor byly vyráběny v ECCW, dva z nich pravděpodobně imitují amfory z Rhodu a Kósu. Objevují se zde taktéž lokální imitace amfor z jiných ostrovů. Nejčastějšími importy jsou definitivně amfory z ostrova Rhodos, následovány materiálem z Knidu a Kósu.

Ostatní lokality, jako Thasos, Peparethos, Korint, Mende, Chios, Kypr, Paros či importy z Itálie jsou v průběhu tohoto období zastoupeny pouze sporadicky.

Nejvýznamnějším artiklem lokální produkce byly nejspíše transportní amfory vyráběné v Ierapytně s kolkovanými uchy. Jelikož jejich nálezy na Krétě nejsou tak časté jako např. v Alexandrii či na lokalitě Callatis v Černomoří, usuzuje se, že byly vyráběny převážně pro export. Dalším lokálním produktem je amfora typu AC6, která je menších rozměrů (cca 50 cm) a datovaná do konce 4. století př. n. l. Našla se na pohřebištích v Agios Nicholaos i na lokalitě Priniatikos Pyrgos. Předpokládá se, že byla produkována právě v této části ostrova na konci 4. století, což představuje nejstarší známý důkaz o produkci helénistických amfor na Krétě. Lokalita Priniatikos Pyrgos přinesla další zajímavý nález, který zatím nebyl na jiném místě na Krétě zaznamenán. Jedná se o rhodskou amforu, jejíž obdoby byly nalezeny v Atice či Alexandrii, datované kolem roku 275 př. n. l. V Alexandrii byla tato amfora objevená na pohřebišti Hadra, což by mohlo přinést nové informace k otázce obchodu s krétskými hydriemi z Hadry, o kterých se předpokládá, že se do Alexandrie dostaly pouze s krétskými žoldáky.

6.3 Námořní trasy

Co se týče událostí ve zbytku Středomoří, podstatnou roli zde hrál Rhodos. Nejenže se angažoval do proti-pirátských aktivit a kontaktoval s Ierapytnou a přístavy na severu ostrova, ale také amfory z ostrova Rhodu byly nalezeny téměř na každé lokalitě. Např. v Alexandrii tvoří až 85 % z celkového množství transportních amfor. Jeho role v námořním obchodu byla nicméně oslabena v roce 166 př. n. l., kdy Římané ustanovili Délos přístavem osvobozeným od poplatků. Délos naopak úročil z nově nabytého statusu a stal se centrem pro obchod s otroky. Další důležitá data, která mohla ovlivnit námořní obchod v antice, jsou rok 146 př. n. l., kdy byl zničen Korint a Kartágo a rok 86 př. n. l., kdy byly zničeny Athény.

Nejdůležitější námořní trasy vedly v helénistickém období beze sporu kolem Kréty a ostrovů Rhodos a Kypr. Ze západních přístavů Kréty bylo moře otevřené přes Antikytheru na Peloponés a do zbytku Evropy, zatímco z východních přes Rhodos do Malé Asie či Černomoří a kolem ostrova Kypr do Alexandrie. Je otázkou, zda lodě pluly na otevřené moře nebo volily snazší cestu kolem břehů Levanty. Nejspíše to byla otázka volby a používaly se obě trasy. V případě řeckých ostrovů byla za dobré viditelnosti na obzoru vždy pevnina, takže loď mohla kotvit ve více přístavech po cestě.

Jaké zboží Kréta exportovala, je další otázkou. Kromě sladkého krétského vína se mohlo obchodovat s medem, který je zmíněn v egyptském papyru z poloviny 3. století, či s cypřišovým dřevem, vlnou nebo krétskými bylinami, které byly v oblibě již od archaického období. Přestože se stále objevují názory, že krétské produkty se dostaly mimo ostrov pouze jako zátěž, aby loď nejela s prázdnou, keramické výrobky jsou dalším důkazem k přehodnocení této teorie. Jsou jimi již zmíněné hadrijské hydrie, lagynoi původem z Kréty objevené J. Hayesem na Kypru, či misky s Medúzou nalezené v Egyptě či Itálii.

V poslední části předkládané práce jsou diskutovány řecké vraky. Jelikož kolem břehů Kréty se nenachází žádný vrak datovaný přímo do helénistického období, jsou stručně zmíněny vraky Kyrenia a Antikythera. Kyrenia je zatím jedním z nejstudovanějších vraků vůbec, jelikož byly zhotoveny 3 její repliky, aby testovaly možnosti ovladatelnosti lodi, nakládání zboží a další experimenty. Výsledky přinesly překvapivé zjištění, že přestože loď byla plně naložena, byla stále dobře ovladatelná i v noci a posádka 4 členů mohla bez problému strávit několik dní na palubě. Také její ovladatelnost nezávisela tolik na proudění větru, jak se dříve předpokládalo a celý náklad mohl být posádkou naložen během 2–3 hodin. Kyrenia také obsahovala krétské amfory, zatímco amfory z vraku Antikythera jsou shodné s kóskými amforami nalezenými na lokalitě Mochlos.

V dnešní době stále 90 % veškerého světového obchodu využívá přepravy po moři. Tudíž v antice se muselo taktéž jednat o nezanedbatelnou část obchodní sféry. Největší procento vraků spadá do období 150 př. n. l. až 150. n. l., přičemž amfory tvoří více než 50 % veškerého nákladu antických obchodních

lodí. Prozkoumáno bylo zatím necelé jedno procento antických vraků, několik stovek tisíc tedy stále čeká na objevení.

Celkově lze na otázku, zda se Kréta v období helénismu aktivně účastnila námořního obchodu, odpovědět pozitivně. Její důležitost rostla od 3. století př. n. l., o čemž svědčí řada keramických nálezů. Svoji roli si udržela i v 1. století, kdy ostrov obsadili Římané. I v rámci římského období si Kréta stále zachovávala svoji individualitu a exportovala výrobky lokální produkce. Ať už byl export krétských výrobků ve větší či menší míře, rozhodně se v období helénismu nejednalo o ostrov, který by byl v rámci ekonomických aktivit opomenut, nýbrž ležel na strategické pozici námořních tras východního Středomoří.

Abbreviations

C Context ca. circa Cat. no. Catalogue number cm centimetres ECCW East Cretan Cream Ware EM I Early Minoan FN Final Neolithic Fig. figure G Geometric ha hectare Inv. no. Inventory number km kilometres LM Late Minoan m metres MM IIB Middle Minoan IIB PG Proto-Geometric Pl. plate

Bibliography

Allegro, N. and M. Ricciardi 1999 Gortina IV: Le Fortificazioni di età Ellenistica . Monografie Della Scuola Archeologica di Atene e Delle Missioni Italiane in Oriente, Padova. Ariel, T. and G. Finkielsztein 2003 Amphora Stamps and Imported Amphoras. In: Maresha Excavations Final report I: Subterranean Complexes 21, 44, 70 , Jerusalem: IAA Reports 17, pp. 137–151. Apostolakou, V. 2012 Lato [online]. Accessed 2016-03-05, http://odysseus.culture.gr/h/3/eh351.jsp?obj_id=2444. Badoud, N. 2014 The Contribution of Inscriptions to the Chronology of Rhodian Amphora Eponyms. In: In: P. Guldager-Bilder and M. Lawall (eds), Pottery, Peoples and Places: Study and Interpretation of Late Hellenistic Pottery , BSS 16, Aarhus University Press, pp. 17–28. Baldwin-Bowsky, M. W. 1989 Epigrams to an Elder Statesman and a Young Noble from Lato pros Kamara (Crete). In: Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens . Vol. 58, No. 1, pp. 115–129.

1994 Cretan Connections: The Transformation of Hierapytna. In: Cretan Studies 4 , pp. 1–44.

2012 Four inscriptions from Greater Knossos and the road to its port at Heraklion (Crete). In: The Annual of the British School at Athens , Vol. 107, pp. 313–339. Baldwin-Bowsky, M.W. and E. Gavrilaki 2010 Klio’s Clay: Inscribed Instrumenta Domestica from Lappa (Crete). In: Creta Antica 11 (2010) , pp. 173–253 . Barker, C. 2004 The Use of Rhodian Amphorae in Hellenistic Graves at Nea Paphos, Cyprus. In: J. Eiring, J. Lund (2004), pp. 73–97. Bonn-Muller, E.

2010 First Minoan Shipwreck. In: Archaeology, A publication of the Archaeological Institute of America , Jan/Feb 2010, Vol. 63, No. 1. Brugnone, A. 1986-2 Altri bolli anforari dalla Necropoli di Lilibeo. In: Kokalos , Vol. 32, p. 101–113. Callaghan, P. J. 1981 The Medusa Rondanini and Antiochus III. In: The Annual of the British School at Athens , Vol. 76, pp. 59–70.

1992 Archaic to Hellenistic Pottery. In: L. H. Sackett, Knossos, From Greek City to Roman Colony , London, 89–136. Callaghan, P. J. and R. E. Jones 1985 Hadra Hydriae and Central Crete: A Fabric Analysis. In: The Annual of the British School at Athens , Vol. 80, pp. 1–17. Casson, L. 1973 Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World . Princeton University Press, New Jersey. Coldstream, J. N. 1999 Knossos 1951-61: Classical and Hellenistic Pottery from the Town. In: The Annual of the British School at Athens , Vol. 94, pp. 321–351. Chalikias, K. 2011 Settlement Patterns and Socio-Economic Change in the Ierapetra Region from the Bronze Age to the Ottoman Period: Chryssi Island – A Case Study . Dissertation, University of Ruprecht – Karls Universität Heidelberg. Chaniotis, A. 1999 From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders: Sidelights on the Economy of Ancient Crete . Stuttgart.

1999a Milking the Mountains: Economic Activities on the Cretan Uplands in the Classical and Hellenistic Period. In: A. Chaniotis (1999), pp. 181–220. Coutsinas, N. 2010 Η άµυνα της Ιτάνου (άστυ και χώρα) και οι οχυρωµένες πόλεις της κλασικής και ελληνιστικής περιόδου στην Ανατολική Κρήτη. In: Andrianakis, M. (ed.), ΑΡΧΑΙΟΛΟΓΙΚΟ ΕΡΓΟ ΚΡΗΤΗΣ 1 , Πρακτικά της 1ης Συνάντησης, Ρέθυµνο, 28-30 Νοεµβρίου 2008. Davidson-Weinberg, G. 1965 Introduction. In: G. Davidson-Weinberg, V. R. Grace, G. R. Edwards, H. S. Robinson, P. Throckmorton and E. K. Ralph, The Antikythera Shipwreck Reconsidered, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 55, No. 3 (1965), pp. 3–4. Davis, D. L. 2009 Commercial Navigation in Greek and Roman World . Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin. De Souza, P. 1998 Late Hellenistic Crete and the Roman Conquest. In: British School at Athens Studies . Vol. 2, pp. 112–116. Detorakis, T. 1990 Ιστορία της Κρήτης. Ηράκλειο. Eiring, L. J. 2001 The Hellenistic Period. In: J. Coldstream, L. J. Eiring, G. Forster, Knossos pottery handbook: Greek and Roman . London: British School at Athens. Eiring, J., Boileau, M. C. and I. Whitbread 2002 Local and imported transport amphorae from a Hellenistic kiln site at Knossos. The results of petrographic analyses. In: F. Blondé, P. Ballet, J. F. Salles (eds), Céramiques hellénistiques et romaines, productions et diffusion en Méditerranée orientale (Chypre, Égypte et côte syro-palestinienne) , TMO 35, pp. 59–65. Eiring, J. and J. Lund 2004 Transport Amphorae and Trade in the Eastern Mediterranean . Acts of the International Colloquium at the Danish Institute at Athens, September 26 –29, 2002. Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens, vol. 5. Aarhus. Empereur, J. Y., Marangou, A. and Ch. B. Kritzas 1991 Recherches sur les amphores crétoises II: les centres de fabrication d'amphores en Crete centrale. In: Bulletin de correspondance héllenique , Vol. 115, pp. 481–523.

Empereur, J. Y., Marangou, A. and S. Markoulaki 1989 Recherches sur les centres de fabrication d'amphores de Crète Centrale. In: Bulletin de correspondance héllenique , Vol. 113, pp. 551–580. Empereur, J. Y., Marangou, A. and N. Papadakis 1992 Recherches sur les amphores crétoises III. In: Bulletin de correspondance héllenique, Vol. 116, pp. 633–648. Erickson, B. L. 2010 Priniatikos Pyrgos and the Classical period in Eastern Crete: Feasting and Island Identities. In : Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens . Vol. 79, pp. 305– 349. Fairbank, K. 2008 The Strength of Rhodes and the Cilician Pirate Crisis. In: Studia Antiqua , Vol. 6, No. 1, Article 15, pp. 87–93. Finkielsztejn, G. 2004 Interests and Limits of Amphorae to date Other Pottery in Hellenistic Contexts. In: ΣΤ΄ Επιστηµονική συνάντηση για την ελληνιστική κεραµική (Βολος 17–23 Απριλιου 2000), Athens, pp. 285–290.

2004a Establishing the Chronology of Rhodian Amphora Stamps: the Next Steps. In: J. Eiring, J. Lund (2004), pp. 117–121. Foley, B. P. 2016 Re-Excavating the Antikythera Shipwreck. Lecture on Feb 18, 2016, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Foley, B. P., Hansson, M. C., Kourkoumelis, D. P. and T. A. Theodoulou 2011 Aspects of ancient Greek trade re-evaluated with amphora DNA evidence. In: Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012), pp. 389– 398. Frost, F. J. and E. Hadjidaki 1990 Excavations at the Harbor of Phalasarna in Crete: The 1988 Season. In: Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens , Vol. 59, No. 3, pp. 513–527. Gabrielsen, V. 1997 The Naval Aristocracy of Hellenistic Rhodes . Aarhus. Gallimore, S. Ch. 2011 An Island Economy: Ierapetra and Crete in the Roman Empire . Dissertation, University at Buffalo, State University of New York. 2015 An Island Economy: Hellenistic and Roman Pottery from Hierapytna, Crete . Peter Lang Publishing, New York. Grace, V. R. 1953 The Eponyms named on Rhodian amphora stamps. In: Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens , Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 116–128.

1963 Notes on the Amphoras from the Koroni Peninsula. In: Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens , Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 319–334.

1965 The Commercial Amphoras from the Antikythera Shipwreck. In: G. Davidson-Weinberg, V. R. Grace, G. R. Edwards, H. S. Robinson, P. Throckmorton and E. K. Ralph, The Antikythera Shipwreck Reconsidered, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 55, No. 3 (1965), pp. 5–17.

1979 Amphoras and the Ancient Wine Trade . Excavations of the Athenian Agora, Picture Book No. 6, American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Hadjidaki, E. 1988 Preliminary Report of Excavations at the Harbor of Phalasarna in West Crete. In: American Journal of Archaeology , Vol. 92, No. 4, pp. 463–479. Hadjidaki, E. and H. Iniotakis 2000 Hellenistic Ceramics from Phalasarna Found from 1986–1990. In: Ancient World , Vol. 31, pp. 54–73. Hadjisavvas, S. and A. Chaniotis 2012 Wine and Olive Oil in Crete and Cyprus: Socioeconomic Aspects. In: C. Cadogan, M. Iacovou, K. Kopaka, J. Whitley, Parallel Lives: Ancient Island Societies in Crete and Cyprus , British School at Athens (BSA Studies 20), London, pp. 157–173. Harris, W. V. 1999 Crete in the Hellenistic and Roman Economies: A Comment. In: A. Chaniotis (ed.), From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders: Sidelights on the Economy of Ancient Crete , pp. 354–358. Harpster, M. 2012 The Kyrenia Shipwreck Collection Restoration Progam [online]. Accessed 2016-04-30, http://www.kyrenia-collection.org. Hayden, B. J. 2004 Reports on the Vrokastro area, eastern Crete. Volume 2: The Settlement History of the Vrokastro Area and Related Studies. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. Hayden, B. J. and M. Tsipopoulou 2012 The Priniatikos Pyrgos project. Preliminary Report on the Rescue Excavation of 2005–2006. In: Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens . Vol. 81. No. 4, pp. 507–584. Hayes, J. W. 1991 Paphos Vol. III: The Hellenistic and Roman pottery . Nicosia. Katzev, S. 2005 Resurrecting an Ancient Greek Ship: Kyrenia, Cyprus. In: G. Bass (ed), Beneath the Seven Seas , pp. 72–79.

2008 The Kyrenia Ship: Her Recent Journey. In: Near Eastern Archaeology 71 , pp. 76–81. Katzev, S. and M. Katzev 1974 Last Harbor for the Oldest Ship. In: National Geographic 146 , pp. 618–625. Koehler, C. G. and P. M. Wallace-Matheson 2004 Knidian Amphora Chronology, Pergamon to Corinth. In: J. Eiring, J. Lund (2004), pp. 163–169. Lawall, M. L. 2005 Amphoras and Hellenistic Economies: Addressing the (Over)Emphasis on Stamped Amphora Handles. In: Z. H. Archibald, J. K. Davies and V. Gabrielsen (eds), Making, Moving and Managing: The New World of Ancient Economies, 323–31 BC , Oxford.

2011 Imitative Amphoras in the Greek World. In: M. L. Lawall and P. van Alfen (eds), Caveat Emptor: A Collection of Papers on Imitations in Ancient Greco-Roman Commerce, Marburger Beiträge zur Antiken Handels-, Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte 28 (2010) , Rahden/Westf, pp. 45–88. Lund, J. 2014 Pots and Politics: Reflection on the Circulation of Pottery in the Ptolemaic in Seleukid Kingdoms. In: P. Guldager-Bilder and M. Lawall (eds), Pottery, Peoples and Places: Study and Interpretation of Late Hellenistic Pottery , BSS 16, Aarhus University Press, pp. 297–305. Lungu, V. and P. Dupont 2014 Imports and Local Imitations of Hellenistic Pottery in the Northwest Black Sea Area: Hadra and Pseudo-Hadra Wares. In: P. Guldager-Bilder and M. Lawall (eds), Pottery, Peoples and Places: Study and Interpretation of Late Hellenistic Pottery , BSS 16, Aarhus University Press, pp. 233–254. Majcherek, G. and I. Zych 2011 The evidence for Cretan presence in the ancient town of Marina el-Alamein. In: Classica orientalia: Essays presented to Wiktor Andrzej Daszewski on his 75th birthday , Warszawa, pp. 357–378. Manning, J. G. 2015 Hellenistic Traders. In: T. Howe (ed.), Traders in the Ancient Mediterranean . Chicago, Illinois, pp. 101–139. Marangou-Lerat, A. 1995 Le vin et les amphores de Crète de l'époque classique à l'époque impériale. In: Études Cretoises 30 , Athènes.

1999 Wine in the Cretan Economy. In: From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders: Sidelights on the Economy of Ancient Crete, pp. 267–278. Micha, P. 2005 Amphora Shipwrecks in the Aegean – A Database of the Ephorate of Underwater Antiquities. In: Skyllis 7 , 2005-06, pp. 82–93. Monachov, S. J. 1999 Towards a typology of Knidian amphoras of 4 th –2nd century BC. [K tipologii knidskikh amfor IV-II vv. do n.e.]. In: The Bosporan phenomenon: Greek culture on the periphery of the ancient world [Bosporskii fenomenon: grecheskaia kul'tura na periferii antichnogo mira ], St Petersburg, pp. 161–172.

2005 Rhodian Amphoras: Developments in Form and Measurements. In: V. Stolba (ed.), Chronologies of the Black Sea area in the period c. 400–100 BC , Aarhus. Muhly, J. D. and E. Silkla 2000 One hundred years of American archaeological work on Crete . American School of Classical studies at Athens. Munsell Color Company 2009 Munsell Soil Color Charts: With Genuine Munsell Color Chips . Navrátilová, I. 2014 Helénistická keramika na Krétě . Bachelor’s thesis, Masaryk University in Brno. Nowicki, K. 2000 Defensible sites in Crete c. 1200–800 B.C. (LM IIIB/IIIC through early Geometric) . Liège: Université de Liège, Histoire de l'art et archéologie de la Grèce antique, 2000. Orton, C. and M. Hughes 2013 Pottery in Archaeology . Cambridge University Press. Parker, A. J. 1992 Ancient Shipwrecks of the Mediterranean and the Roman Provinces . BAR International Series 580, Oxford. Perlman, P. 1999 KRHTES AEI LHISTAI? The Marginalization of Crete in Greek Thought and the Role of Piracy in the Outbreak of the First Cretan War. In V. Gabrielsen et al (eds), Hellenistic Rhodes: Politics, Culture, and Society , Aarhus 1999, pp. 132–161. Pirazzoli, P. A., Ausseil-Badie, J., Giresse, P., Hadjidaki, E. and M. Arnold 1992 Historical Environmental Changes at Phalasarna Harbor, West Crete. In: Geoarchaeology: An International Journal, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 371–392. Rostovtzeff, M. 1998 Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World . Oxford, Clarendon Press. Sekunda, N.

2010 The Date and Circumstances of the Construction of the Fortifications at Phalasarna. In: ΗΟΡΟΣ: Ενα αρχαιογνωστικό περιοδικό , Vol. 17–21, Αθήνα. Spyridakis, S. 1970 Ptolemaic Itanos and Hellenistic Crete . London. Steffy, R. J. 1994 Wooden Ship Building and the Interpretation of Shipwrecks . Texas University press. Tsaravopoulos, A. 2012 Inscribed sling bullets from ‘Kastro’ in Antikythera (Greece). In: Gdańskie studia archeologiczne , No. 2, Instytut archeologii Uniwersytetu Gdanskiego, pp. 207–220. Tsaravopoulos, A., Fragou, E., Tsiloggiani, P. and A. Alexandridou 2014 Ελληνιστική κεραµική από την αρχαία Αιγιλία και τη Φαλάσαρνα: Συγκριτική παρουσίαση. In: H΄ Επιστηµονική συνάντηση για την ελληνιστική κεραµική (Ιοάννινα 5-9 Μα ΐου 2009), Athens, pp. 285–290. Vidličková, L. S. 2011 Eastern Mediterranean shipwrecks as indicators of ancient trade in the late fourth to the mid first century BC . Master’s thesis, University of Crete. Viviers, D. 1999 Economy and Territorial Dynamics in Crete from the Archaic to the Hellenistic Period. In: From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders: Sidelights on the Economy of Ancient Crete, pp. 227–232. Viviers, D. and A. Tsingarida 2014 Facing the Sea: Cretan Identity in a Harbour city-Context. In: F. Gaignerot-Driessen, J. Driessen, Cretan Cities: Formation and Transformation . Presses Universitaires De Louvain, pp. 165–182. Vogeikoff-Brogan, N. 2004 The Late Hellenistic Period in East Crete. In: L. Preston Day, M. S. Mook, J. D. Muhly (eds), Crete Beyond the Palaces: Proceedings of the Crete 2000 Conference . INSTAP Academic Press, pp. 213– 220.

2011 Domestic Assemblages from Trypitos, Siteia: Private and Communal Aspects. In : ΣΤΕΓΑ: The Archaeology of Houses and Households in Ancient Crete . Hesperia Supplement 44, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, pp. 409–419.

2011a Domestic Pottery from Trypitos Siteias in East Crete. In: Ζ'Επιστοµονική Συνάντηση για την Ελληνιστική Κεραµεική, Αίγιο 4–9 Αµπιλίου 2005: Πρακτικά . Athens, pp. 549–560.

2012 Hellenistic and Roman Periods: Expansion of the Isthmus in an International Era. In: L. V. Watrous et al., An Archaeological Survey of the Gournia Landscape: A Regional History of the Mirabello Bay, Crete, in Antiquity , pp. 81–93.

2014 Mochlos III: Late Hellenistic Settlement . The Beam-Press Complex . INSTAP Academic Press. Vogeikoff-Brogan, N. and S. Apostolakou 2004 New Evidence of Wine Production in East Crete in the Hellenistic period. In: J. Eiring, J. Lund (2004), pp. 417–427. Vogeikoff-Brogan, N. – Nodarou, E. and M. C. Boileau 2008 New Evidence for Amphora Production in East Crete in the Hellenistic Period: An Integrated Approach of Typology and Thin Section Petrography. In: Y. Facorellis, N. Zacharias, K. Polikreti (eds), Proceedings of the 4 th Symposium of the Hellenic Society for Archaeometry . BAR Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 327–334. Wilson, A. 2011 Developments in Mediterranean shipping and maritime trade from the Hellenistic period to AD 1000. In: D. Robinson, A. Wilson (eds), Maritime Archaeology and Ancient Trade in the Mediterranean . Oxford Centre for Maritime Archaeology, pp. 33– 59. Whitbread, Ι. Κ. 1995 Greek Transport Amphorae: A Petrological and Archaeological Study . The British School at Athens, Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 4, Athens. Online sources

Amphoralex Le Centre Alexandrin d’Etude des Amphores [online]. Accessed 2016-03-16, http://www.amphoralex.org. The Kyrenia Shipwreck The Kyrenia Shipwreck Collection Restoration Program [online]. Accessed 2016-04-30, http://www.kyrenia-collection.org The Priniatikos Pyrgos project official webpage Priniatikos Pyrgos: Excavating 5000 years of heritage in Crete [online]. Accessed 2016-04-18, http://priniatikos-pyrgos.eu.

Plates

Priniatikos Pyrgos assemblage

Plate 1: Rhodian amphora

Plate 2: Stamped Rhodian amphora handle

Plate 3: Amphora type AC6

2 1

Plate 4: Toes from transport amphorae from Knidos (1) and of unknown provenance (2); double-barrelled handle (3)

Plate 5: Hellenistic amphora tip knob