hesperia yy (2008) COLONIALISM WITHOUT Pages 1?42 COLONIES? A Bronze Age Case Study from Akrotiri, Thera ABSTRACT on Using ceramic evidence from Bronze Age Akrotiri Thera, the authors a explore the idea that regional cultural interactions of "colonialista character can take without the occurrence of colonization se. assess the place per They types and frequency of Cretan Middle Minoan IILA imports from selected deposits at the site, the nature of local imitations of Cretan pottery, and the a adoption of characteristically Cretan technology, the potter's wheel. By comparing processes of material, stylistic, and technological transfer, the to s authors seek characterize Crete influence off-island and the responses of neighboring island communities, concluding that Cretan material culture is more a cause than an effect of Minoanization. INTRODUCTION The debate over the character of Crete's influence across the southern Aegean in the Neopalatial period received considerable impetus with a series of papers published in the early 1980s.1 Yet, while the evidence has on continued to accumulate since, particularly with work Kythera, Thera, Rhodes, and Kos, as well as on the coast of Asia Minor atMiletos and 1. Dimitris Sakatzis for E.g., Branigan 1981; Davis 1982, pottery drawings; gave freely of their time and knowledge 1984; Schofield 1982; H?gg andMari photography; and Lucy Valassi for help in providing stimulating discussion: natos 1984. with the translation of the 1984; Wiener catalogue Cyprian Broodbank, Fragoula Georma, are to were We grateful the director of and database entries. We fortunate Colin Macdonald, and Nicoletta Mo to have the Akrotiri Excavations, Christos Angeliki Moschou working migliano. We thank too, for their de for to with us as a research Doumas, permission study and assistant, helping tailed and insightful comments, Tracey the for to strew an anon publish material and his overall and record the very large Cullen, Todd Whitelaw, and Institute of from support. The for Aegean quantities pottery the Middle ymous reviewer. levels. Valuable Prehistory funded both this study and Cycladic stratigraphie The following standard abbrevi on information was retrieved from com ations are = work otherMiddle Cycladic phases used below: EC Early at to excavation = Akrotiri. Our thanks go also prehensive reports for pillar Cycladic, MC Middle Cycladic, = = Vassilis Dimitropoulos and Panagiotis pits 66P and 67N compiled by Ange LC Late Cycladic, MM Middle = = Vlachos, who conserved the pottery at liki Moschou and Maria Tsoulakou, Minoan, LM Late Minoan, MBA The Akrotiri; Andreas Kontonis for the respectively. following colleagues Middle Bronze Age. ? The American School of Classical Studies at Athens CARL KNAPPETT AND IRENE N I KOLAKOPOULOU -^"TT Ayia Irini XI 57 V KEA0 -^ ^?r Q ^ Phylakopi <^< MELOS Trianda ^ THERA V\ Kastri KYTHERA RHODES)r^2 '?7 1. of the show Figure Map Aegean can lasos work has failed to The standstill sites mentioned in the text (Fig. 1), interpretive keep pace.2 ing major to perhaps be attributed the polarized debate between those who believe see inMinoan dominance achieved through colonization and those who processes of emulation engaged in strategically by local communities. an new Cyprian Broodbank urges exploration of approaches in both data and that recent advances made in analysis interrogative frameworks, arguing material culture studies concerning the active social role of artifacts enable us anew new to consider the rich Aegean evidence.3 These insights, which on an to postdate the early-1980s work Minoanization, provide opportunity construct more sophisticated models of emulation, acculturation, learning, and cultural transmission in relation to material culture. Chris Gosden, in his particularly germane contribution, has sought new an to tie these approaches from material culture studies to analysis not 2. Broodbank 2004. of regional political dynamics; he only differentiates between distinct center 3. Broodbank 2004, p. 58. Recent forms of colonialism, but places artifacts stage in the political pro advances: Hoskins an Kopytoff 1986; cess.4 Gosden argues that colonialism involves material culture, always 1998; Gosden andMarshall 1999; idea echoed in Broodbank's comment that Minoanization is largely about Chapman 2000; Bonnot 2002; Fowler Material culture is sometimes to have a hold over things.5 powerful enough 2004; Knappe? 2005. we an people's minds and bodies.6 Later in this article will entertain idea 4. Gosden 2004b. was 5. Broodbank 59. given little credence to date: that Minoan Crete itself colonialized, in 2004, p. 6. the is not per some ways, through its off-island activities. Although analogy it is nonetheless worth Not all items of material culture are created but some fect, considering equal, objects was that Britain colonialized through have a to take hold of that could be greater capacity people?a capacity its contact with North America, as considered in some circumstances to be an aesthetic one. W. J.T Mitchell much as the American colonies were takes this idea further, with the suggestion that imperialism and colonialism British creations. COLONIALISM WITHOUT COLONIES? TABLE 1. SIMPLIFIED CHRONOLOGICAL CHART FOR MBA CRETE AND THE CYCLADES Phylakopi Ayia Irini Akrotiri Absolute Crete (Melas) (Kea) (Thera) Chronology EM III ca. 2200-2100 b.c. City I-ii/iii gap MM IA ca. 2100-1950 b.c. Phase A MM IB ca. 1950-1850 b.c. CityII-ii Period IV MM II Phase B ca. 1850-1800 b.c. MM IIB-IIIA Phases C ca. 1800-1750 b.c. Il-iii Period V MM III City andD ca. 1750-1700 b.c. require objects and objecthood.7 Mitchell believes that empire follows art, not the other way around, and extends the question beyond art to object more to hood generally, discuss the various kinds of objects implicated in we not imperialism and colonialism: totems, fetishes, and idols.While do we are explore these categories here, do adopt Mitcheirs idea that they the we can on to products of colonial discourse.8 From there go ask whether new Cretan material culture introduced fields of imagery into the Cycladic were a repertoire that aesthetically enthralling, opening up "colonialist new space" for kinds of practices and values. on recent we can Drawing work, that of Gosden in particular, char acterize Minoanization as a form of colonialism within a shared cultural milieu?in other words, colonialism without colonies.9 This, we think, ac may provide alternatives to the dichotomy between colonization and some as culturation models. One problem in of the Minoan literature, as a a in archaeology whole, has been tendency to conflate the ideas of on colonization and colonialism.10 Gosden's emphasis artifacts?placing at things, practices, and people the forefront?is highly appropriate for the we kind of study think is needed to advance the debate. a we Our methodology in this article entails narrowing of focus. First, one on a consider pottery from site, Akrotiri Thera (Fig. 1), in case-study us nuances approach that allows to capture in the data that might be lost in a we on broader synthesis. Second, focus the early stages of "Minoanization" on through the Middle Bronze Age rather than the mature stages (i.e., are the early Late Bronze Age) with which most Aegean prehistorians more us far familiar. This allows to view Minoanization as an emerging a new process, rather than static phenomenon, and thus to offer insights into its dynamics. comes The pottery in question from two large deposits found in the 7.Mitchell 2005, 145-168. pp. recent excavation of the "pillar pits" ("cppeaxa") for the new roof to cover 8.Mitchell 2005, p. 146. the site (Fig. 2). Excavation of the deep soundings of pillar pits 66P and 9. Gosden 2004b, 41-81. pp. 67N revealed MC destruction that the 10. Van Dommelen 1997. deposits substantially predate LC I volcanic destruction levels and are to C of the MC 11. See also Knappett and Nikola assigned phase to kopoulou 2005; Nikolakopoulou, sequence, considered be contemporary with MM IIIA in the Cretan et forthcoming; Nikolakopoulou al., ceramic sequence (Table l).11While MM IIIA imports have previously forthcoming. at been identified the site,12 their rarity and lack of stratigraphie context 12. 1991. Papagiannopoulou on have severely limited their usefulness. The pillar pit deposits, however, 13.We should note, however, that which we focus here, have numbers of Cretan found the final publication of theMC mate produced large imports is in in secure and the to a new assessment of Crete's rial from the pillar pits currently contexts, they open way on preparation. influence neighboring island communities.13 4 CARL KNAPPETT AND IRENE NIKOLAKOPOULOU ? ?a Pillar pits mentioned in the text Pillar A ?);;iA Sector Alpha House of the Ladies West House _l^ 53A 50 m Figure 2. Site plan of Akrotiri. Akrotiri Excavations Archive COLONIALISM WITHOUT COLONIES? 5 THE CONTEXTS not our to It is purpose describe here in detail the stratigraphie sequence two and the habitation phases attested in the pillar pits. We present only a brief outline of the sequence in order to contextualize the MM imports discussed in subsequent sections. Pillar Pit 66P The trench containing pillar pit 66P (Fig. 2), excavated in 2000-2001 x m under the supervision of Angeliki Moschou, measured 3.00 2.50 and a m reached depth of 12.50 from the modern circulation level down to the ignimbrite bedrock, which was found at +16.76/+16.42 m above sea level (masl). A rock-cut chamber found in the southeast side of the trench had been a a largely backfilled in antiquity with deposit containing large quantity of pottery of the early EC II phase. The remaining void up to the roof of the was a chamber subsequently backfilled with deposit containing pottery dat to ing the earliest MC period (phase A).