DOCSLIB.ORG

A Poor Pick of Pottery?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Poor Pick of Pottery? [Type here] UNIVERSITEIT VAN AMSTERDAM MA Thesis Supervisor Prof. V.V. Stissi KASTRAKI: A POOR PICK OF POTTERY? The Middle Helladic Problem – Reassessing Thessaly’s ‘Dark Age’ Table of Contents List of Figures 2 List of Appendix Material 3 Abstract 5 Introduction 6 (i) Introducing Kastraki- Between the Almiros and Sourpi Plains 9 Chapter One: 9 Excavation and Scholarship on Prehistoric Thessaly: Cultural Context Chapter Two: 15 The Middle Helladic Problem: Ceramics and Chronology Chapter Three: 24 A Thessalian Study: Researching Kastraki Chapter Four: 30 Results of 2016 Study Season: Fabric Groups and Parallels Conclusion 45 Appendix 45 (i) Catalogue 45 (ii) Illustrations 63 (iii) Photographs of Diagnostic Sherds 68 Bibliography 85 1 | P a g e List of Figures Figure 1: Google earth image showing the location of Kastraki, and its surrounding region. 4 Source: Map data 2016 Google Maps 2016 TerraMetrics Figure 2: Hand-drawn map of the Almiros/Sourpi region and surrounding landscape. 9 Source: Wace and Thompson (1912). Figure 1: Computational map of Kastraki (2000/48) and surrounding areas showing elevation. 11 Source: Jitte Waagen (2016). Figure 4: Mycenaean pottery illustrations from Mycenae. 17 Source: Mountjoy (1990), 247. Figure 5: The terrain of Kastraki (2000/48). 29 Source: Jitte Waagen (2016). Figure 6: Finds from the Kastraki excavation. 32 Source: Batziou-Efstathiou (2008), 300. Figure 7: Computational Map of the Kastraki survey area 36 Source: Jitte Waagen (2016). Figure 8: Basic hand-drawn map of survey area. 45 Source: Author (2016). 2 | P a g e List of Appendix Material (i) Catalogue 42 Section A: Photographs of Find-Spot Groupings 43 Section B: Part I 49 Part II 55 (ii) Illustrations 60 Illu. 1 60 Illu. 2 61 Illu. 3 62 Illu. 4 63 Illu. 5 64 (iii) Photographs of Diagnostic Sherds 65 3 | P a g e Kastraki Figure 2: Google earth image showing the location of Kastraki, and its surrounding region. 4 | P a g e Abstract Carol Zerner in the concluding statements of her publication “New Perspectives on Trade in the Middle and Early Late Helladic Periods on the Mainland” highlighted the many enduring questions regarding regional variation, local production and changes in technology (or lack thereof) in Middle Helladic pottery on the mainland. She pointed out the lack of answers for these questions reflects the ‘general characterisation of the Middle Helladic as a culturally backward period in the literature’, whilst simultaneously providing the scope for future study to challenge this concept. The use of the term ‘Dark Ages’ in the title of this paper is controversial- as it is intended to be. The current view of Middle Helladic pottery often circles around the dispersal, consumption and local variations of popular wares such as Minyan, Matt-Painted and Lustrous Decorated ware. The work of Jeremy Rutter in 2007, ‘Reconceptualizing the Middle Helladic Type Site’, addresses the fact that research so far has been dominated by considerations mainly from large, multi-component coastal sites. This means when less significant sites (in terms of production and trade) are discovered, they are often dismissed as ‘poor assemblages’. Rutter states that ‘we need to study small, inland and single component sites’. Only in this way will complications arising from large quantities of imports be removed. Following a discussion on the Middle Helladic problem, this thesis will attempt to address some of the material from the site of Kastraki on the border of the Sourpi and Almiros Plains in Thessaly from this theoretical approach. 5 | P a g e Introduction The Middle Helladic Bronze Age is an under explored and marginally understood phase in Greece’s history1. Thessaly in particular is often considered a peripheral and border area in the Middle Helladic period, and frequently is skimmed over in wider narratives due to a lack of well excavated and clearly stratified sites, and associated diagnostic material. Currently, the evidence which has been gathered from this region has not provided a clear picture of the historical narrative of Thessaly in the Middle Bronze Age. The transitional period from the Early Helladic (EH) into the Middle Helladic (MH) was one which saw significant cultural and economic changes- which have often been considered as a deterioration in cultural progression2. In early publications on the Thessalian region, such as that of Wace and Thompson in 1912, local production was generally characterised as ‘limited’ or ‘bad quality’ in the MH. In fact, the introduction to the principal classes of pottery from Prehistoric Thessaly in Wace and Thompson bluntly stated that “the development or rather degeneration of culture in Thessaly went on gradually without any violent break till the close of the Third Late Minoan period"3. However, modern excavations such as those carried out at Mitrou4 and Pefkakia5 have shown that there is evidence in some areas of Greece, including Thessaly, for a vivid and thriving culture during the MH. With these modern excavations, academic opinion regarding the quality of material culture produced during the Middle Helladic is slowly changing. Nonetheless, Rutter has warned against using evidence only from large centres of habitation like Mitrou and Pefkakia to further develop this opinion, fearing the presence of large quantities of imports at these kinds of sites will obscure the reality of local and regional production6. He suggests that using evidence from these large sites in combination with evidence from small, remote and rural sites will provide a more detailed and complete picture of Middle Helladic Greece. This thesis is an attempt to contribute the material from the site of Kastraki, a small hilltop site which sits on the border between the Almiros and Sourpi plains in Thessaly, to that conversation. Since the early publications of Wace and Thompson, there has been ongoing debate in scholarship regarding the cause of this ‘decline’ of the Middle Bronze Age, considering factors like war, invasion and natural disaster which have been used explained abrupt cultural changes in other periods of history7. However, modern research approaches such as those expressed in the 2004 conference papers “Middle Helladic Pottery and Synchronisms” have begun to recognise that cross cultural and cross period comparison of evidence often yields problematic conclusions for the Middle Helladic period8. This conference and the subsequent publication addressed these abrupt cultural changes, exploring the possibility of more niched explanations for this region. For example, the concept of ‘colonisation’ is often considered as an extreme and all-encompassing cultural phenomenon. Whilst colonisation can often be attributed to large scale cultural developments, Rutter has posited that a small scale occurrence of colonisation may then be harder to detect in the material evidence9. 1 Buck (1966), 193. 2 Buck (1966); Nordquist (1987); Touchais (1989); Zerner (1993), 51-56. 3 Wace and Thompson (1912), 23; NB- the Late Minoan III period roughly corresponds to the Late Helladic III period. 4 Hale (2016). 5 Maran (1992). 6 Rutter (2007), 36. 7 Wace and Thompson (1912); Buck (1966); Dietz (1988); Felten et al. (2007); Zerner (1993); Rutter (2007); Sarri (2010); Choleva (2012); Hale (2016). 8 Felten et al. (2007), 9. 9 Rutter (2007), 43. 6 | P a g e Kastraki is an interesting example through which to examine this concept. Whilst located in Thessaly, which has been recognised since the era of Wace and Thompson as a crossroad of communication in the Bronze Age, Kastraki is situated in the hinterlands of the region, located in a degree of isolation on a steep hilltop10. This may remove, as Rutter expressed, some of the complications that would arrive from significant percentages of imports that would arise in large centres. Additionally, comparison to local material may also illuminate on small scale connections (or perhaps differences) between Kastraki and nearby centres- such as Pefkakia11. The material study of this thesis will therefore address material of local production at the site and comparisons with nearby centres of habitation, whilst the conclusion hopes to delve into this question of regional cultural changes and colonisation. Alongside questioning the cause of cultural changes in the region, modern scholarship (such as Jeremy Rutter’s 2007 ‘Reconceptualizing the Middle Helladic Type-site’) has begun to consider if the impression of technological frugality in MH Thessaly is really an accurate conclusion, or perhaps a biased result of the past research approaches12. Current investigation on the concept of regionalism in the Bronze Age recognises that this area maintains a strongly unique cultural independence during in the late Middle Helladic13. Thessaly becomes a haven for pottery production in the following Mycenaean period with several workshops currently recognised and the potential for other centres to be discovered, considering the range of wares which originate in this period14. The early stages of the Late Helladic period managed to maintain this unique regionalism. The idea that this kind of industry came out of what has historically been considered a technological vacuum during the Middle Helladic is untenable15. There is unfortunately little comparative evidence through which to establish a wide database of ceramics for the Middle Helladic of this region, because much research has been focused on material such as ‘Minyan’, ‘Matt-Painted’ and ‘Lustrous Decorated’ wares, which constitute large percentages of imports during this time in Thessaly. However, if these fine wares are not present in a significant quantity at a site, does this automatically mean limitations in the quality of manufacturing? Or could it more so indicate isolation from large scale trade?16 The general impression from the material17 collected from the area discussed in the following analysis (the coastal Almiros and Sourpi plains), is not indicative of a particularly busy trade and exchange network. These areas do however occupy a strategic position in Thessaly, the thoroughfare between southern and central Greece, and the Northern regions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Earliest Settlements at Eutresis Supplementary
    THE EARLIESTSETTLEMENTS AT EUTRESIS SUPPLEMENTARYEXCAVATIONS, 1958 (PLATES 40-53) E UTRESIS in Boeotia, investigated by Hetty Goldman in the years 1924-1927, continues to be a principal source of our knowledge of the Bronze Age on the Greek mainland. It is a rich, well-stratified site; the excavations were conducted with skill and precision; and the definitive publication1 provides an admirably clear report of what was found. Although much of the hill was left untouched in the campaigns of the 1920's, the areas examined were sufficient to furnish reliable information about the Mycenaean and Middle Helladic settlements and about the remains of the three principal stages of Early Helladic habitations. Only the very earliest strata, lying on and just over virgin soil, proved relatively inaccessible. These were tested in six deep pits; 2 but owing to the presence of later structures, which were scrupulously respected by the excavators, the area at the bottom of the soundings was limited, amounting altogether to no more than 45 square meters. Two of the shafts revealed circular recesses cut in the hardpan, apparently the sites of huts; and the earliest deposits contained broken pottery of Neolithic types, mixed with relatively greater quantities of Early Helladic wares.3 The nature and significance of these earliest remains at Eutresis have been sub- jects of speculation during the past generation of prehistoric research. In the spring of 1958 Miss Goldman visited the site with the authors of this report and discussed the question again. It was agreed that a further test of the most ancient strata was worth undertaking, and a suitable region was noted for another deep sounding, con- siderably larger than any of the pits that had been excavated in 1927.
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns of Exchange and Mobility: the Case of the Grey Ware in Middle and Late Minoan Crete
    PATTERNS OF EXCHANGE AND MOBILITY: THE CASE OF THE GREY WARE IN MIDDLE AND LATE MINOAN CRETE by LUCA GlRELLA * New finds and important contributions have recently offered a fresh overview on wheel-made grey ware on Crete and have also provided an occasion for an update on l pottery imported from outside Crete . As a result the list of Grey Ware (henceforth: GW) in LM III contexts has been expanded, but mentions of such a ware in previous periods have been surprisingly neglected. The aim of this article is to re-examine the evidence of the GW on Crete, from the first appearance of Grey Minyan Ware to the later distribution of GW up to the LM IIIC period (Fig. 1, Table 1)2. As will be understandable from the following overview, most of the information comes from old excavations and publications, when both the identification and terminology of this ware were far from being neatly recognizable (i.e. the use of term bucchero). As a second aim of this contribution, drawing upon GW circulation, we shall inquire into patterns of mobility and exchange; in fact, as a 'foreign ware', the phenomenon of GW on Crete can be the ideal theatre for the exploration of pottery and human mobility. For convenience's sake we shall distinguish four moments with distinct patterns of distribution: (1) the small scale world of the late Prepalatial period, when the unique Minyan bowl from Knossos - a MH I import - confirms the picture of the asymmetrical relationship between the Greek Mainland and Crete, which saw a large quantity of Minoan and Minoanizing pottery at coastal sites of southern and northeastern Peloponnese, but not the contrary.
    [Show full text]
  • Excavations at Lerna, 1954
    EXCAVATIONS AT LERNA, 1954 (PLATES 12-233) I XCAVATION of the ancientsite at the Lernaeanspring was continuedby the American School of Classical Studies in a campaign of about six weeks' dura- tion, from June 28, to August 10, 1954. The staff comprised the field director, four regular supervisors of excavation, an architect, and several friends and colleagues who assisted during parts of the season.' We were housed this year in the village of Myloi, directly overlooking the scene of operations, and this convenience, coupled with the experience of the site which we had gained in preceding campaigns,2greatly facili- tated the work. We would record our gratitude to Mr. J. Papadimitriou, Ephor of the Argolid, and other members of the Greek Archaeological Service for their ready endorsement of this undertaking and their friendly cooperation; to Messrs. George and Panayotis Kotsopoulos for renewing their generous permission to dig on the premises; and to the Managing Committee of the School and many other colleagues for support and encouragement. During the winter of 1953-54, preceding this summer's work, all the material found in the previous season had been examined at Corinth, where the workrooms of the museum provide the necessary space for sorting, mending, and studying the hundreds of lots of pottery and other objects from Lerna that are temporarily housed there. Each of the excavators classified and made notes on the pottery from the areas where he himself had supervised the digging and was personally familiar with the 'The regular members of the staff were: Mrs. Caskey, S. Charitonides, Epimelete of Antiquities for the district, Miss Martha C.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 39 (1935) Index
    AMERICANJOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY MON O V V I MEN RVM TA o oRVnPR 0 INCof THE JOURNAL OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICALINSTITUTE OF AMERICA PUBLISHED QUARTERLY BY THE INSTITUTE VOLUME XXXIX 1935 Printed by The Rumford Press, Concord, N. H. EDITORIAL BOARD MARY HAMILTON SWINDLER, Bryn Mawr College, Editor-in-Chief DAVID M. ROBINSON, Johns Hopkins University, Editor, News, Discussions and Bibliography EDITH IHALL DOHAN, University Museum, Philadelphia, Editor, Book Reviews ADVISORY BOARD OF ASSOCIATE EDITORS GEORGE A. BARTON, University of Pennsylvania (Oriental) CARL W. BLEGEN, University of Cincinnati (Aegean) LACEY D. CASKEY, Boston Museum of Fine Arts (GreekArchaeology: Vase Painting) GEORGE H. CHASE, Harvard University (American School at Athens) WILLIAM B. DINSMOOR, Columbia University (GreekArchaeology: Architecture) GEORGE W. ELDERKIN, Princeton University (Editor, 1924-1931) HETTY GOLDMAN, New York City (New Excavations and Discoveries) BENJAMIN D. MERITT, Johns Hopkins University (Epigraphy) CHARLES RUFUS MOREY, Princeton University (Mediaeval) EDWARD T. NEWELL, Numismatic Society, New York (Numismatics) GISELA M. A. RICHTER, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (GreekArchaeology: Sculpture) MICHAEL I. ROSTOVTZEFF, Yale University (Roman) ALFRED TOZZER, Harvard University (American Archaeology) HONORARY EDITORS EDWARD CAPPS, Princeton University (Chairmanof the Managing Committeeof the School at Athens) LOUIS E. LORD, Oberlin College (President of the Institute) MILLAR BURROWS, Yale University (President of the American School of Oriental Research) CONTRIBUTORS TO ARCHAEOLOGICAL NEWS, DISCUSSIONS, AND BIBLIOGRAPHY SAMUEL E. BASSETT FRANKLINP. JOHNSON Classical Archaeology Classical Archaeology CARROLLN. BROWN ROLAND S. KENT Classical Archaeology Linguistics MARY H. BUCKINGHAM STEPHENB. LUCE Classical Archaeology Classical Archaeology SIDNEY N. DEANE CLARENCE MANNING Classical Archaeology Slavic Archaeology ROBERT E. DENGLER GEORGEE. MYLONAS GreekArchaeology Aegean Archaeology VLADIMIR J.
    [Show full text]
  • Textile Tools and Production at a Mycenaean Secondary Centre
    Textile Tools and Production at a Mycenaean Secondary Centre By Max K. MacDonald B.A., Greek and Roman Studies, University of Victoria, 2015 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of Greek and Roman Studies © Max MacDonald, 2017 All rights reserved. This thesis may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without the permission of the author. ii Supervisory Committee Supervisor: Dr. Brendan Burke, (Department of Greek and Roman Studies) Departmental Member: Dr. Alejandro Sinner, (Department of Greek and Roman Studies) Abstract: This thesis is a study of textile production in the Late Bronze Age, using new evidence uncovered by excavations at Ancient Eleon in Boeotia, Greece. Textile production is a nearly forgotten art. To the Mycenaeans of the Greek Late Bronze Age (ca. 1700-1100 BCE) textiles were nearly a form of currency, and a symbol of power. This thesis begins by examining the Mycenaean administration of textile production, which was systematically controlled by the palatial centres of Greece and Crete. Linear B documents record resources and workers under palatial control, and the amounts of cloth that they were expected to produce. The Mycenaean palace at Thebes was the administrative centre that controlled the region of eastern Boeotia, including sites such as Eleon. No document directly links textile production at Eleon to Thebes, but other Theban tablets and the two sites’ close proximity suggest a similar relationship to other Mycenaean centres and their dependents. Usually, ancient textiles from Greece do not survive in the archaeological record.
    [Show full text]
  • Minoan and Mycenaean Greece Franchthi Cave in Southern Greece
    Troy Mycenae Cycladic Islands Franchthi Cave Crete Minoan and Mycenaean Greece Franchthi Cave in Southern Greece 40,000 BCE Seasonal Habitation 12,000 BCE End of Ice Age (Paleolithic Pd) Hunter Gatherers 6,000 BCE (Neolithic Pd): Domesticated Animal, Pottery and Bead Industry Cycladic Idols 3000-2000 BCE Cycladic Idol 3000-2000 BCE Flute Player (left) Harp Player (right) Cycladic Idols Cycladic Bear (Island of Syros) 2300-2100 BCE Neolithic cup before the use of the potter’s wheel (c.2200 BCE) Neolithic 3700-3300 BCE (above) Neolithic “Sauce Boats” 2500-2200 BCE Grey Minyan Ware First Wheel Made Pottery on Mainland Greece ca 2200 BCE Palace at Knossos (top left & bot. right) Pasiphae and the Minotaur (her son by By King Minos) (left) Bull’s Head Rhyton (cup) from Knossos (above, right) Sir Arthur Evans (1851-1941) opened Excavation on Crete Palace at Knossos (Crete) ca 2000-1700 BCE Knossos Royal Bedroom 1600-1400 BCE (above, left) Minoan Statuettes from Knossos ca 1600 BCE (left) Cycladic ca. 2000-1550 BCE Minoan ca. 1550-1500 (below) Minoan 1500-1450 (above) Minoan Mistress of Animals Minoan Gold Bee Pendant 1700-1550 BCE 1700-1550 BCE Linear B Script Palace Column Capitals Mycenae Lion Gate c.1250 BCE Walled Citadel of Mycenae Palace Column Base Early Mycenaean Vase Exported to Knossos (Crete) ca 1450 (below) Minoan Vase ca 1400 Mycenaean influence View from the Citadel of Mycenae Mycenae from the Air Masks and a Dagger Blade From Grave Circle A 1550-1500 BCE Mycenaean Dagger Blades Mycenaean Tholos Tombs 14 th century Mycenaean Figurines Mycenaean Hedge- hog 16th-15th cent.
    [Show full text]
  • The Annual of the British School at Athens the Pre-Mycenaean Pottery
    The Annual of the British School at Athens http://journals.cambridge.org/ATH Additional services for The Annual of the British School at Athens: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here The Pre-Mycenaean Pottery of the Mainland A. J. B. Wace and C. W. Blegen The Annual of the British School at Athens / Volume 22 / November 1918, pp 175 - 189 DOI: 10.1017/S0068245400009916, Published online: 11 October 2013 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0068245400009916 How to cite this article: A. J. B. Wace and C. W. Blegen (1918). The Pre-Mycenaean Pottery of the Mainland. The Annual of the British School at Athens, 22, pp 175-189 doi:10.1017/ S0068245400009916 Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/ATH, IP address: 128.122.253.212 on 27 Apr 2015 THE PRE-MYCENAEAN POTTERY OF THE MAINLAND. , (PLATES VI.-XI.) ALTHOUGH as long ago as 1876 Schliemann's excavations at Mycenae revealed to us the prehistoric civilisation of the Peloponnese, it is only comparatively recently that its pre-Mycenaean culture has become known. For Crete the epoch-making excavations of Sir Arthur Evans have made clear to us the long pottery sequence which illustrates the development of prehistoric civilisation in that island from the end of neolithic times, through the great age of the palace of Knossps, to its decline and fall in the Third Late Minoan period. For the Cyclades the pottery sequence from Phylakopi, with other finds, provides us with a series parallel to the Cretan; and for Thessaly, too, a provisional series has • been established.
    [Show full text]
  • Excavations on the North Slope of the Acropolis in Athens, 1931-1932
    EXCAVATIONS ON THE NORTH SLOPE OF THE ACROPOLIS IN ATHENS, 1931-1932 PLATE XI In the first volume of Hesperia a brief report was given of the preliminary inves- tigation in the Sanctuary of Eros and Aphrodite discovered in the winter of 1930-1931 on the north slope of the Acropolis in Athens. This first excavation of the site, which was confined to the small area occupied by the sanctuary itself, was followed in the spring of 1931 by another investigation, likewise on a very small scale. The purpose was to test the area in the immediate vicinity in order to seek the solutions to some of the problems that arose from the discovery of the sanctuary. This investigation was continued in the spring of 1932. As a result of this exploratory digging it became apparent that the site was sufficiently important to warrant a more extensive excava- tion, which was undertaken in September, 1932, and continued seven weeks.! It is the puLrpose of this report to set forth the main results of this work and to discuss in a tentative way some of the topographical problems iinvolved. A final study of the mass of pottery and of the small finds must be deferred until the whole area has been cleared. All the inscriptions discovered in the excavation to date, most of which have probably come down from the Acropolis, and a few unpublished fragmeents found elsewhere, will be included in this report. I take pleasure in expressing my obligation to Professor Edward Capps, tllrough whose continued interest in tha work the necessary funds were provided, and to Messrs.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 Greek Pottery,Dark Ages And
    CHAPTER 1 GREEK POTTERY, DARK AGES AND EGYPTIAN CHRONOLOGY: TORR VERSUS PETRIE INTRODUCTION In the 19th century archaeologists were at the cutting edge of a new discipline - archaeology. The public’s interest in the heroic tales of the Mycenaean warriors such as Achilles and the decade long Trojan War between the Greek city-states and Troy recorded in Homer’s Iliad had been heightened by the daring excavations of an amateur archaeologist named Schliemann. The people of Victorian Europe were amazed at his claims. Schliemann’s excavation of a deserted town, Hissarlik, in Turkey and his startling claim that he had discovered the legendary Troy drew widespread public attention. Could this legend actually be true? Later, Evans, an Englishman would excavate Knossos and find the thriving Minoan civilization. This was the home of the legendary Minotaur. Public interest grew and soon funds were raised for further exploration of these ancient and forgotten civilizations. Among the pioneers was a young man with an extraordinary dedication and the unlikely name of Flinders Petrie. He developed the first systematic attempts at separating the strata at ancient sites into historical eras. The first attempt of archaeologists to classify these ancient civilizations was by their metallurgy – the Stone Age was followed by the Copper Age that was, in turn, followed by the several Bronze Ages and finally by the Iron Age. It soon became apparent that these greatly overlapped, which made them indistinct reference points. Styles of pottery, driven by differing cultures, artistic conventions and religious motifs, were much more useful. Layers of occupation or strata 1 were easier to reference by their distinctive pottery.
    [Show full text]
  • The Luvian Invasions of Greece
    THE LUVIAN INVASIONS OF GREECE JN his stimulatingand vigorouslywritten book on the Mycenaeansand Minoans, Professor Leonard R. Palmer, rejecting the generally accepted equation of the first Greek speaking Indo-Europeans to appear in the Mainland of Greece with the Middle Helladic people, maintains that " Greece and Crete were twice invaded by Indo- European people during the second millennium B.C." For the Mainland he states: " first came the Luvians, causing the Middle Helladic revolution; they were followed by the Greeks, who caused the less violent archaeological break at the beginning of Late Helladic." For Crete he maintains that first came the Luvians ca. 1700 .c. and then the Greek-speaking Achaeans at the end of Late Minoan II, ca. 1400 B.c.' I think that archaeologists will do well to study with care Professor Palmer's provocative theory. In it there is much that is of value, but there are also many important flaws that will require careful consideration. Before we examine them, we may consider briefly a point that has remained unchallenged too long. The " decipher- ing " of the Linear Script B by Ventris naturally caused a great deal of enthusiasm which perhaps is responsible for the exaggerations apparent in statements made following the discovery. But the stressing of the surprise experienced by some, mainly non-excavators, at the discovery that the language of Linear Script B was Greek or that "Ventris's proof that the masters of Knossos spoke Greek came as an electrifying shock to almost all who had studied the question " or that " the impact" of that fact " was devastating," 2 seem to be out of place now that the first impressionl of the great achievement is passed.
    [Show full text]
  • Middle Helladic Mattpainted Pottery
    MIDDLE HELLADIC MATTPAINTED POTTERY PLATES 39-44 INTRODUCTION Jv/AI ATTPAINTED pottery was first identifiedas a particularvariety in-1879 and was dated to the Middle Helladic period in 1916. A considerable amount of the ware has now been excavated, enough to warrant a close investigation; for it has been the subject of much controversy. Some scholars suggest that it represents a continuation of Early Helladic ceramic tradition, others that it has a Neolithic deri- vation, still others that it is an offshoot from the Cyclades, or even that a wave of migration brought it from Asia Minor. Equally varying opinions are held about the course of its development,the external influences thereon, and its relationship to Late Helladic pottery. It is hoped that this work will shed some light on these problems. First, the distribution w'ill be surveyed province by province and the pottery shapes and decorative motifs classified and catalogued; sites and references will be given for all shapes and motifs. Then, it will be shown on stratigraphic grounds which shapes and motifs are early and which are late, and, by comparing early Mattpainted pottery with earlier Aegean wares,- conclusions will be drawn about its origins. Finally, by comparing later Mattpainted pottery with other ceramics of the Middle Bronze Age, its course of development may be indicated.' In addition to the customary abbreviations I have employed the following: Aberg Xberg, N. F. Brontzezeitliche und Friiheisenzeitliche Chronologie, Teil IV, Griechenland, Stockholm, 1933. A.H. Waldstein, C., ed., The Argive Heraeum, Boston and New York, 1902-1905. Aigina Welter, G., Aigina, Berlin, 1938.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Bradford Ethesis
    University of Bradford eThesis This thesis is hosted in Bradford Scholars – The University of Bradford Open Access repository. Visit the repository for full metadata or to contact the repository team © University of Bradford. This work is licenced for reuse under a Creative Commons Licence. THE PROVENANCE OF BRONZE AGE POTTERY FROM CENTRAL AND EASTERN GREECE The analysis of Bronze Age pottery from Eastern Thessaly, Boeotia and Euboea by optical emission and atomic absorption spectroscopy, and considerations of its place of manufacture. i Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Selina WHITE, B. A., Dip. Arch. Sci. University of Bradford Postgraduate School of Studies in Physics .r September, 1981 Selina White. ABSTRACT The Provenance of Bronze Age Pottery from Central and Eastern Greece. Samples from nearly 800 Bronze Age pottery sherds from Euboea, Eastern Boeotia and Eastern Thessaly were analysed together with 9 raw clays from the same areas. The-analysis was carried out in an attempt to identify areas of pottery manufacture, to discover the origin of spec- ific groups of pottery, to relate pottery to, raw clays and to see how far pottery compositions can be associated with, and predicted by, geo- logy. The work was done on the same lines as earlier studies at the Oxford Laboratory and at the British School at Athens. The main anal- ytical technique used was therefore optical emission spectroscopy. Some 25% of the total number of sherds were also analysed by atomic absorption spectrophotometry so that the results obtained by the two techniques could be compared. The interpretation of the results was facilitated by the use of, computer program packages for cluster and discriminant analysis.
    [Show full text]