Charalambidou 2017 Regional Stories

Home , Akanthos (Greece), Amarynthos, Mende (Chalcidice), Nea Palatia, Skala Oropou, Zarakes

VU Research Portal

Charalambidou, X. 2017. “Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites in Northern Greece and South Italy-Sicily”, in A. Mazarakis Ainian, A. Alexandridou & X. Charalambidou (eds.), Regional Stories Towards a New Perception of the Early Greek world, Proceedings of the International Symposium in honour of Professor Jan Bouzek, University of Thessaly, IAKA Department, 18-21/6/2015, Volos, 85-126. Charalambidou, Xenia (Polyxeni)

published in A. Mazarakis Ainian, A. Alexandridou & X. Charalambidou (eds.), Regional Stories Towards a New Perception of the Early Greek world, Proceedings of the International Symposium in honour of Professor Jan Bouzek, University of Thessaly, IAKA Department, 18-21/6/2015, Volos 2017

Link to publication in VU Research Portal

citation for published version (APA) Charalambidou, X. P. (2017). Charalambidou, X. 2017. “Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites in Northern Greece and South Italy-Sicily”, in A. Mazarakis Ainian, A. Alexandridou & X. Charalambidou (eds.), Regional Stories Towards a New Perception of the Early Greek world, Proceedings of the International Symposium in honour of Professor Jan Bouzek, University of Thessaly, IAKA Department, 18-21/6/2015, Volos, 85-126. In A. Mazarakis Ainian, A. Alexandridou & X. Charalambidou (eds.), Regional Stories Towards a New Perception of the Early Greek world, Proceedings of the International Symposium in honour of Professor Jan Bouzek, University of Thessaly, IAKA Department, 18-21/6/2015, Volos Volos University Press.

General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.

• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ?

Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

E-mail address: [email protected]

Download date: 27. Sep. 2021 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites in Northern Greece and Italy*

Xenia Charalambidou

Introduction

The aim of this paper is to discuss old and new discoveries on Euboea in Central Greece that add to our knowledge of EIA and EA settlements, cemeteries and sanctuaries on the island. Information regarding Euboean cultural and socioeconomic developments will further il- luminate activities on the island during these periods. In addition to examining the Euboeans at home, this article will comment on interactions in the Euboean colonies, albeit restricting the scope of the discussion to the Northern Aegean and Italy, where the Euboeans focused their colonizing activity. This presentation deals not only with the ways in which Euboea contributed to the diffusion of material culture and practices in its colonies and beyond, but comments on the cultural exchanges between different peoples who came into contact with each other in these settings. It is consistent with a more widely held tendency in modern scholarship, especially in studies of colonial contact which now focus substantially on indigenous agency and how local consumers actively negotiated the material and social transformations during the period of colonisation (Mullins 2011, 136; cf. Dietler 2005).

Euboea and neighboring regions

After the disintegration of Mycenaean civilisation, Euboea becomes one of the pioneering regions in the emerging EIA Aegean and Mediterranean trade networks. Lefkandi, already an important site in the BA (inhabited from the EH period onwards), continues to be occupied from the end of the BA into the EIA, even during the SM period, as is evidenced by material from the Khaliotis burial ground, the Skoubris cemetery and the Xeropolis settlement (most recently Lemos 2006, 518-519, 525). A notable example indicative of the site’s continuity from the LH III C period to the beginning of the EIA is the “Megaron” build-

* I would like to sincerely thank Prof. A. Mazarakis Ainian (also for the opportunity to participate in the Aristeia project), N. Kourou, J.-P. Crielaard, J. Papadopoulos, S. Verdan, S. Huber, C. Morgan, I. Lemos, A. Kotsonas, E. Kiriatzi, S. Mos- chonissioti and M. D’Acunto for discussions relevant to the topic of this paper; any mistakes in this article are the respon- sibility of the author alone.

85 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites ing at Xeropolis which was constructed in the middle of the LH III C and was occupied during both the LH III C Late and the SM periods; its final phase of use probably occurred in the EPG (Lemos 2011-2012, 22-24; 2014, 171-173; see also Mazarakis Ainian 2012b, 75-76). The PG and SPG periods, both in Xeropolis and the Lefkandi cemeteries, are indicative of the prominent character of the site. Evidence for habitation at Xeropolis extends to the end of the LG period although extensive LG burial sites have not yet been unearthed at Lefkan- di (Lemos 2015). At Toumba, the extraordinary 10th-century apsidal building (fig. 1; henceforth the Toum- ba building: Popham et al. 1993), is often referred to as the “Heroön” (the resting place of a warrior hero: Popham [1994, 14]). Lemos has argued, though, that the Toumba building could not have served as a heroön since there is no evidence for continuous ritual activity (Lem- os 2002, 162-168; 2006, 521; see also Antonaccio 1995, 241-242). The hypothesis that it was constructed as an imitation of a princely residence to serve the deceased is supported by Mazarakis Ainian (2012b, 76).1 From the beginning of the EIA onwards, Lefkandi played a significant role in revitalis- ing sea routes and contacts with the Levant. This is amply illustrated by well-known finds such as the amphora2 belonging to the “hero” buried in the shaft within the Toumba building – identified as Cypriot and dated to the 12th century BC – and the golden pendant from the female inhumation in the adjoining shaft; this latter artefact has close parallels to nd2 -millennium BC Syrian examples (Lemos 2002, 131-132). Whether these artefacts were prized heirlooms/antiques or loot removed at the time from East Mediterranean contexts, probably tombs, as Sherratt 2010, 132-135, 137 has recently posited, remains an open question. Fur- thermore, the “hero” of the Toumba building has recently been identified as a leader (warri- or-basileus) who excelled in warfare and long distance trade (Mazarakis Ainian 2012b, 77- 78). During the floruit of the Lefkandi leader the presence of Euboean pottery at Phoenician Tyre dating to the 10th century BC exemplifies the strong links between Euboeans and Phoe- nicians (e.g. Coldstream 1988; 1998a; D’Agostino 2006, 202; Sherratt 2010, 130). After the Toumba building was enclosed by a tumulus, members of an elite group, with some connection via lineage or kinship to the memorialised deceased within the Toum- ba building, were now buried to the east, forming an elite necropolis, the so-called Toumba cemetery which is probably the wealthiest of all the Lefkandi burial grounds (fig. 1). Concur- rent with this process, from the construction of the Toumba building to the development of the Toumba cemetery, we see the transition from the rule of a powerful “basileus” to that of a dynamic elite group (Lemos 2006, 521). In addition to the Toumba cemetery, the Skoubris, Khaliotis, Palia Perivolia and East cemeteries (none of which have been fully excavated) are all located close to each other and, so far, they cover the periods from the SM to SPG III (Popham et al. 1980; Popham & Lem- os 1996). Initially it had been argued that the corrosive nature of the soil and the possibil-

1. A recent discovery from the UK, at Dorstone Hill in Herefordshire, in the form of two large “halls of the dead”, each buried within a burial mound and dated between 4000 and 3600 BC, offers food for thought about the Toumba building. There are, of course, too many differences (e.g. chronological, cultural, number of deceased) between the two sites to view this new discovery as a parallel for the Toumba building, but a few features present productive comparisons: the form of the buildings which connects them to domestic architecture and possibly the participation of the whole community in their construction, destruction and subsequent covering with a mound, which probably memorialised the deceased buried inside. On the Dorstone hill discovery see: http://www.herit- agedaily.com/2013/07/archaeologists-discover-6000-year-old-halls-of-the-dead-in-uk/97133 2. The shape is identified as a krater according to Sherratt 2010.

86 Xenia Charalambidou ity of a complex secondary rite combining inhumation and cremation could explain why a small number of the tombs furnished definitive evidence for the presence of one or the other type of burial (Popham et al. 1980; 209-216, 429-446; Catling 1985; see also Kourou 1999, 138, 213). Later excavators pointed out that the corrosive effect of the soil had been under- estimated and that many more inhumations may have been made at Lefkandi than initially thought but probably left no skeletal remains (Popham et al. 1989, 118).3 Connections with the East are further evidenced by the significant number of imports found in burials in the Lefkandi cemeteries (mainly from the Toumba cemetery), such as terracotta juglets and jugs, bronze vessels and objects made of faience and glass paste from the Syro-Palestinian region and Cyprus (Popham 1994; 1995; Crielaard & Driessen 1994; Lemos 2001; 2002, 226-227; Nightingale 2007; Sherratt 2010, 130-131; Kourou 2012, 163- 164; Mazarakis Ainian 2012b, 76-78). More recently it has been pointed out by Lemos (2001, 217) that in almost every Lefkan- dian tomb containing imports from the East, there are also imports from the Northern Aegean, indicating that those in Lefkandi who received goods through direct or indirect trade with the East also had a connection to Northern Aegean sites.4 Links with a noble lineage, which disclosed strong Eastern connections, claimed by the descendants of the leader at the Toumba building are well illustrated by the Toumba SPG II Tomb 79, a cremation contained in a Cypriot bronze cauldron (Popham & Lemos 1995; 1996, pls. 26, 74-79; see also Mazarakis Ainian 2012b, 79). This burial has also recently been discussed in Kroll’s (2008) analytical study of the 16 Syro-Palestinian or Cypriot haematite balance weights that were found inside the tomb alongside the remnants of an unidentified bronze item (perhaps a weighing balance?), a sword, a spearhead, iron arrowheads, a North Syrian cylinder seal (an heirloom?) and vases from Euboea, Attica, Cyprus and Phoenicia. In- stead of attempting to decipher the identity and ethnicity of the cremated deceased in the cauldron, as various scholars had done (summarised by Kroll 2008, 37-38), a determination that proves difficult to ascertain, Kroll stressed the importance of the balance weights in understanding the weight systems that early Euboeans used in their eastern (Mediterranean) trade. He argues that the Lefkandi balance weights, few in number and varied in shape and of different standards, were probably brought together from several old, broken sets for funerary use; they had no practical use at the time of the cremation and can hence be per- ceived as symbolic possessions or tokens of the way of life of the deceased. He further argues that the discovery of the Toumba weights confirms that early Euboean traders used Levantine/Cypriot weights including the Mesopotamian/Babylonian ca. 8.4 g shekel, and he wonders whether this could have been the standard that was mostly used by the Euboeans to the weighing and exchange of precious metals (Kroll 2008, 43-44, 46). The sources of metals, gold included, used in Lefkandian craftsmanship remain largely unknown but the technological advances in the metal industry at Lefkandi are attested by the sophisticated metalworking illustrated by the presence of fragments of lost-wax moulds for casting tripod cauldrons (Popham et al. 1980, 93-97) and the manufacture of jewellery at Lefkandi (Lemos 2002, 133-134). The possibility that the majority of gold objects were locally produced – perhaps in some cases by foreign craftsmen whose nationality is unknown – has been suggested by Lemos (2002, 133).

3. Records of all burials from the Lefkandi cemeteries are provided in the Aristeia database. 4. Northern Aegean neck-handled amphorae have also been found in the Xeropolis settlement and are again indicative of the exchange networks between Euboea and the central and northern Aegean (Lemos 2012).

87 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites

Aside from Lefkandi, the number of Euboean sites that have yielded evidence of occupation from the beginning of the EIA is increasing. Chalcis in the central Euboean gulf region and near Lefkandi ranks first in the list. Chalcis was a long-lived and important settlement (now largely buried under the modern city) with a little known BA history, especially during the Mycenaean period (e.g. Hankey 1952; Sampson 1976a, 12; Bakhuizen 1985, 6-8; Ridgway 1992, 15). It rapidly evolved from the PG period onwards, as suggested mainly from tombs and deposits found in modern Chalcis and its periphery.5 From the PG period onward dense archaeological evidence in the area pointed out by Andreiomenou in fig. 2 (such as the deposits of the Agios Ioannis quarter where finds range in date from the PG to the EA periods [Andreiomenou 1972, 170-181], the Piraiki Patraiki PG deposit [Andreiomenou 1984; 1985; 1992] and the PG cemetery at “Εργατικός Συνοικισμός” [Andreiomenou 1966, 248- 255; 1986, 116])6 indicate that a significant part of EIA-EA Chalcis grew here (Andreiome- nou 1966; 1972; 1984; 1985; 1986; 1992; 1998). As will be discussed below, the only potter’s workshop deposit of the late 8th-7th century BC that has thus far been discovered in Chal- cis comes from the Agios Ioannis quarter (fig. 3) (Choremis 1971; 1972, 340; Johnston & Jones 1978, 111-112; Charalambidou 2017b, 127).7 PG, Geometric and Archaic finds (especially pottery) have also been reported in areas as far as Mt Vathrovoúni and Arethusa (Sack- ett et al. 1966, 59-60; Sampson 1976a, 12). In the vicinity of Chalcis an extensive cemetery, dated from the PG to the Roman period, was discovered at Valtos or Makrychorafo (Samp- son 1976a, 52) while PG/SPG burials have also been reported from areas such as Exo Pa- naghitsa and Nea Lampsakos (e.g. in Sampson 1976a). Other Euboean sites yielding evidence of PG to LG and/or Archaic occupation overlook the Aegean emphasizing their role in Aegean trade networks, such as Kerinthos on the north east coast and Oxylithos/Viglatouri (identified with Euboean Kyme) on the central east coast of Euboea. These sites reflect the state of research in Euboea, where some of its important sites have been systematically excavated (Oxylithos/Viglatouri) while others remain largely unknown, despite the fact that they were clearly prominent in their day (Kerinthos). Oxylithos/ Viglatouri, a well-known site that has been systematically excavated from 1984 to 1994, con- sists of an LBA as well as a PG to LG settlement including an area identified as a workshop complex (Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1996-1997; 1998). At Kerinthos (Sackett et al. 1966, 43-44; Sampson 1973-1974; 1976b; Karapaschalidou 2003), Kastri Lichadas (Sackett et al. 1966, 37; Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1993; 1994; 1994- 1995) and Neos Pyrgos near Oreoi (Sapouna-Sakellaraki 2009, 21-61; see also Mazarakis Ainian 2012a, 55-56) in the northern part of Euboea, PG, Geometric and Archaic pottery has been uncovered. At Kerinthos, the size of the site is indicated by the presence of pottery of the abovementioned periods at the summit and on the slopes of the hill. Facing the northern Sporades, Kerinthos could have been a port of call between Euboea and the northern Aegean (Mazarakis Ainian 2012a, 55). Small-scale excavations at Kastri Lichadas have brought to light, among other finds, a mould for casting tripods, which attests to bronze working activities at the site (Mazarakis Ainian 2012a, 56). At Neos Pyrgos near Oreoi architectural remains, and most importantly a “horseshoe-shaped” structure associated with finds from the PG to the Archaic period may be suggestive of a cultic area according to Sapouna-Sakellar-

5. Descriptions and references for the excavated contexts in Chalcis are to be found in the Aristeia database (the same applies to all contexts discussed in this paper). 6. And further in areas such as Vrontou, Vourkos, Alonaki (e.g. Sampson 1972, 12-14). 7. The deposit is under study by Samuel Verdan and the author of this article.

88 Xenia Charalambidou aki (2009, op. cit.). On the other hand, Mazarakis Ainian (2012a, 56) argues that the context could have been of a secular character: the nature of the PG and Geometric finds, the presence of a possible later burial ground, the absence/rarity of finds that can be interpreted as offerings and the lack of evidence of animal sacrifices are among the stronger arguments against a sacral identification of this context. Amarynthos, in the central Euboean gulf, has a long history as is demonstrated by the recent discoveries of BA finds from the EH II, at the latest (Krapf 2011). The site’s EIA history is now beginning to unfold as well. The discoveries from the foot of the hill of Palaioekkli- sies (or Gerani) at Amarynthos-Kato Vathia, yielding finds from the PG to the LG, signal occupation from (the beginning of) the EIA which continued into the 7th century BC, as is attested by pottery fragments, wall remains and burials (Léderrey 2008; Blandin 2008; 2011; Reber et al. 2015, 144-146). The sanctuary of Artemis Amarysia is reported to have been located at the foot of the same hill and, thus far, has yielded a Classical-Hellenistic stoa (Re- ber et al. 2015, 146-149). Individual PG and SPG graves from central and south-central Euboea suggest that there are, as of yet, undiscovered burial grounds and settlements of an early date. The SPG II grave at Agios Theologos (Andreiomenou 1986, 118-120), and two PG hydriae from Aliveri – usually identified with ancient Tamynai – (Kourou 2011) belonged, in all likelihood, to such burial grounds. Further south, at Karystos, recent excavations on Plakari hill have also revealed a long period of EIA occupation and cultic activities from the PG and Geometric to the Archaic and the Classical periods, as seen in contexts from the western part of the hill (Crielaard 2015; this volume; Crielaard et al. 2011-2; 2013; 2014; Crielaard & Songu 2017). Trench 1 at Plakari (fig. 4) is identified with the EIA and Archaic sacrificial refuse area of the first phase of a sanctuary. The repertoire of ceramic material from this refuse area, which dates to the PG, Geometric and Archaic periods, with deposition peaking in the 8th century BC, includes a large percentage of drinking vessels – mainly skyphoi of different sizes, kantharoi and one- handled cups (fig. 5) – as well as mixing vessels, lekanides, large closed vessels, pouring vessels, some pyxides and cooking pots (Charalambidou 2017a). The same context also revealed animal bones, botanical remains and metal, stone and terracotta finds (e.g. pendants, rings, pins/nails, fibulae, knives/blades, figurines and plastic vases), underlining the cultic character of the deposit. It has been suggested that the sanctuary associated with this deposit may have been dedicated to the joint cult of Apollo and Artemis (Crielaard this volume). The material in the refuse area is quite homogeneous since the vast majority of it dates to the EIA and the Archaic period with only a very small number of Classical pottery fragments. Because of this homogeneity, it is possible that the PG fragments discovered within the refuse area are connected to early cultic activities as well. If this is true, it would place Plakari among the earliest cultic places on Euboea during the EIA. Besides the local southern Euboean ceramic material, the ceramic imports designate a wide range of direct or indirect contacts, for example, with Central Euboea, Attica, and eastern Greece. The strong affinities between the EIA ceramic material from Plakari and those from not only central Euboea but also Attica and the northwestern Cyclades (as indicated by affinities in the ceramic tradition of coarse wares from Karystos with this part of the Cyclades) reinforces the notion that southern Euboea demonstrates certain distinct features regarding its cultural interactions when compared to central Euboea (cf. Cullen et al. 2013, 83-84). The range of vessel shapes in combination with the presence of faunal remains and iron

89 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites knives in Trench 1 indicate that animal sacrifices and ritual feasting, probably in the form of communal meals, were among the focal points of the cultic activities on the Plakari hill.8 Understanding the nature of religious feasts as a distinctive kind of ritual practice is extremely important. Feasting was a central component of EIA cultic activities in sanctuaries and the evidence from cultic contexts in the Greek world is increasing rapidly (Char- alambidou 2017a, 261). EIA Euboean contexts from central and southern Euboea now reveal considerable evidence allowing for a more detailed reconstruction of these feasting rites. Feasts, which are symbolically differentiated from everyday activities in terms of action or purpose, are conceived by Dietler (2001) not only as important in establishing ties of friend- ship, kinship, and community solidarity but also as arenas for manipulation and acquisition of prestige and social credit. The dedication of votive items such as jewellery, figurines and fine and coarse vases of small dimensions (see Crielaard et al. 2013, Table I) in Trench 1 clearly shows a wider range of cultic activities in Plakari than feasting. Certain vessel types are comparable to those discovered at the sanctuary of Apollo Daphnephoros at Eretria (e.g. lekanides/bowls, one-handled cups, skyphoi, kantharoi). Jewellery dedications discovered in Trench 1 find some parallels in the Northern Sacrificial area context at Eretria (Huber 2003, vol. II, pls. 43-47) and point to female and male participation in the Plakari cultic activities. A significant portion of the above-mentioned activities may have been associated with maturation rites (Crielaard this volume; Crielaard et al. 2014, 17; Charalambidou 2017a, 261). Many Geometric Euboean sites have earlier PG occupation phases but a very small number of sites develop in the Geometric period with no known PG background, the most indicative example being Eretria (fig. 6). The settlement of Eretria dates back to the 4th millennium BC and the earliest evidence for occupation was limited to the top of the Kastelli hill (the acropolis of the later city-state). During the EH II period, habitation appeared for the first time on the coast. A major break in occupation occurred around 2000 BC when the coastal plain became a lagoon and the settlement there was abandoned. In the MH period habitation resumed, possibly after a gap, on the summit of the Kastelli Hill (Charalambidou et al. 2016, 530). Occupation on the acropolis continued during the Mycenaean period but evidence is scarce. As a result, the Mycenaean history of Eretria is, for the time being, largely unknown. There is a lack of archaeological evidence for the SM and PG periods as well but the 9th century BC is represented by a small number of finds (Blandin 2007 [I], 159). Among these is an SPG II (second quarter of the 9th century BC) warrior burial in the immediate vicinity of the later sanctuary of Apollo at Eretria (Blandin 2007 [II], 91-92, pls. 163-166; Verdan 2013 [II], 8, pl. 58). Mazarakis Ainian (2012b, 79-80) questions whether the possible abandonment of the Toumba cemetery and other burial grounds of Lefkandi (ca. 825 BC?), and the SPG II Ere- trian burial, among the earliest EIA finds at Eretria, are not merely coincidental but can be seen, instead, as being part of a wider spectrum of population movements; he favors the possibility that part of the population of Lefkandi moved and settled in Eretria, which soon began to develop. Evidence for the Eretria settlement – residential buildings and tombs – increases in the MG period while the MG II period witnesses the foundation of the important Eretrian sanctuary, that of Apollo Daphnephoros (Verdan 2013), and the appearance of the earliest burials in the Hygeionomeion Cemetery (Mazarakis 1987, 16; Blandin 2007 [II], 59-72). Further- more, as has been stressed by many scholars (e.g. Mazarakis Ainian 1987; Blandin 2007,

8. On the faunal remains from Plakari see Groot 2014.

90 Xenia Charalambidou

157-170; Verdan 2015), there is a mass body of information mainly from the 8th century BC, from contexts including domestic buildings, cultic sites, burial grounds and clusters of burials that demonstrates the site’s overall growth in this period. In regard to the site’s burial grounds, Blandin (2007) argued that the Eretrians buried their dead in numerous burial zones situated around the area of habitation. She posited that the deceased were buried according to their age and status in the community: infants were buried in vessels and usually without offerings; grown-up children were usually inhumed in pits with or without grave goods; adults were buried in pits or on funerary pyres and their bones were placed in urns. Adults’ burial types depended largely on age and social status: the most notable high-status example from Eretria is the group of tombs of the Heroon (West Gate) necropolis where both men and women were cremated and buried in bronze cauldrons – a type of burial with heroic connotations. Eretrian pottery production has recently been the focus of archaeometric research through the project entitled “The Ceramic Industry of Eretria”. It aims at the diachronic investigation of Eretrian pottery production and supply from the EBA to the Hellenistic period – including the analysis of EIA and Archaic ceramic wares – to characterise, both compo- sitionally and technologically, local products tracing variations and changes in local craftsmanship over time, as well as imported vessels to investigate the site’s changing role in regional and interregional networks.9 Furthermore, EIA Euboean and Euboean-related pottery have also recently been the focus of NAA (Neutron Activation Analysis) research (Kerschner & Lemos 2014). A significant number of samples from Eretria, Lefkandi, Oropos (opposite Eretria) and other sites in the Mediterranean (Troad, Aiolis, Ionia, Al Mina in Northern Syr- ia, Central Italy) which were in contact with Euboea were chemically analysed. Kerschner & Lemos (2014, 191-193) argue that the type of clay used for the main production of Euboean pottery (more specifically central-east Euboean pottery from the Euripos region, including Eretrian pottery) and possibly Oropos can be localised at the clay beds near Phylla, situated in the Lelantine plain 3 km north of Lefkandi. Euboean imports from many Mediterrane- an sites have also been associated with the same type of clay. With regard to metalworking at Eretria, there is now evidence for the use of no less than three metals – bronze, iron and gold – in the area of the Apollo Daphnephoros sanctuary, probably at a short distance from the temple/banqueting hall as the arrangement of the structures associated with metalworking indicates (Verdan 2007; 2013). There is evidence for metalworking in the Apollo Daphnephoros sanctuary throughout the MG II and LG periods but Verdan argues that the structures associated with these activities were most likely part of a multifunctional area as would have been warranted by what might have been only a periodic need for metalworking in the sanctuary. In the northern part of the Eretria settlement, a gold hoard found by P. Themelis, interpreted as belonging to a goldsmith (Themelis 1983), has more recently been revisited by Kroll (2001) and Le Rider & Verdan (2002). They argue that the hoard was monetary in nature (gold and silver could have been used as an exchange medium in routine economic transactions: Kroll 2001, 78), providing yet another important piece of evidence corroborat- ing the Euboeans’ role in metal use and the early formation of monetary exchange.

9. http://www.bsa.ac.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=144:the-ceramic-industry-of-eretr ia&catid=23&Itemid=167. The archaeometric analysis that incorporates macroscopic, petrographic and chemical (WD-XRF) analyses (Charalambidou et al. 2016) is being conducted by V. Kiriatzi, N. Müller, and the author of this article. This project is currently undertaken by the Fitch Laboratory of the British School at Athens in collaboration with the Swiss School of Archaeology.

91 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites

Within the sanctuary’s confines, feasts seem to have played a central role and the presence of drinking vessels (skyphoi and kantharoi) in Building 1, the so-called “Daphnephoreion”, supports the most recent interpretation of the Daphnephoreion as a banqueting hall rather than a temple (Verdan 2015, 186). Similar drinking vessels (skyphoi, kantharoi and kotylai) were found together with other banqueting wares, such as kraters and pouring vessels, in Building 150, also interpreted as an elite dining hall (Verdan 2013, 199-211; Węcowski 2014, 184-185). Even the LG apsidal monumental building (Edifice 2) is now seen to have had a “plurality of functions, sheltering votive offerings as well as large gatherings” (Verdan 2015, 186). The picture appears even less clear-cut when one considers Building 5, which was associated with metalworking, and the pits in front of it which were found to contain the fin- est LG pottery at the cultic site, including a number of large kraters decorated in the Cesno- la Painter’s style (Verdan 2007, 351). There are indications that symposia were held in Eretria as early as the late MG II-LG I period, roughly contemporaneous with the rise of the Attic aristocratic symposium (Węcowski 2014, 263). Evidence comes from a set of grave goods found in a funerary pyre near Ere- tria’s later agora, which was perhaps used to cremate a member of the Eretrian elite. The grave goods include exotica comprising a lekythion and a scarab seal, both from Cyprus, as well as a set of drinking vessels from a banquet service of purely Attic style that comprises an oenochoe, a hydria, skyphoi and four kraters. One of these kraters bears a human-mating and a horse-mating scene, which might have served as good subject matter for banqueting songs (Psalti 2011; see also Simon & Verdan 2014, 4-6). Additional explicit evidence for symposia in Euboean colonies during the last quarter of the 8th – the beginning of the 7th century BC is provided by the well-known Cup of Nestor (ca. 720-710 BC) from the San Mon- tano necropolis at Pithekoussai (Buchner & Ridgway 1993, 219, pls. 72-73, 126-128) and by the roughly contemporary Euboean skyphos known as the Hakesandros cup, from the Hy- pogeio in Methone in Northern Greece (Tzifopoulos et al. 2012, 339-343, no. 2) (see below). As mentioned above, evidence for feasting, commensal consumption and elite display has been clearly attested in two of the sanctuaries thus far discovered on Euboea: the sanctuary of Apollo Daphnephoros and the sanctuary at Plakari in Karystos. Possible evidence of feasting – judging from the presence of table ware, including drinking vessels among other categories of finds – may also be discerned at the sanctuary of Athena at the Acropolis of Eretria, whose first period of use is dated to the late th7 century BC10 (Huber 2007; 2008; Re- ber et al. 2015, 132-136), and the Apollo Delios sanctuary at Zarakes (Chatzidimitriou 2003- 2004a; 2003-2004b; 2004-2009), where the beginning of the cult has been dated to the LG period. The Apollo Daphnephoros sanctuary indicates that sanctuaries could be more than centres of consumption and display; the evidence for metalworking shows that this sanctuary was also an economic centre and meeting place for elites and craftsmen (Verdan 2007, 353). The wide range of imports in various media found at the Apollo Daphnephoros sanctuary and the Northern Sacrificial area – which are complementary contexts – (see Huber 2003; Verdan 2013) from regions such as Attica, Northern Greece, Eastern Mediterranean and Italy indicates the prominent character of this cultic site. Sanctuaries were not the only locations dedicated to cultic activity on Euboea. Cultic buildings and structures/platforms related to ancestor/hero cults (for ancestor/hero cults in

10. Only a few earlier LG sherds have been found in the fill of the Archaic and Hellenistic phases of the sanctuary (S. Huber personal communication).

92 Xenia Charalambidou other parts of the Greek world see Antonaccio 1995) have mostly been found in the vicinity or within the settlement of a handful of Euboean and Euboean-related sites. Three circular structures/platforms of a type generally connected to ancestor/hero cults (regarding such circular structures in other areas of the Aegean see e.g. Hägg 1983; Kourou 2015, 93- 101) have been found in close proximity to the settlement in Region II at Xeropolis/Lefkandi. Used for ritual dining and feasting, they date successively from the LH III to the EPG period (Lemos 2010, 135; 2014, 175; see also Mazarakis Ainian 2012b, 84) and thus represent the earliest known examples of such activities on Euboea. Furthermore, Building A (also known as the Oval Building) of MG II date at Oxylithos/Viglatouri – with a stone platform in its inte- rior and some others in its vicinity – is believed to have been used as a heroon-sanctuary and is reported to have been built (directly?) above a Mycenaean megaron, a PG apsidal building and some empty cist graves (Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1998, 61-63; also Kourou 2012, 169-170; 2015, 96). Whether the so-called Heroon at Eretria, with its associated structures and pits, was the site of an ancestor cult or the cult of an authentic hero cannot be reexamined until it is fully published (see Verdan 2015, 186; bibliography for the Heroon: Verdan 2015, op.cit. and Charalambidou 2003, 1000-1001). Any connection between the Heroon (initiated probably in the early 7th century BC) and the deceased in LG IIb Tomb 6 from the West Gate necropolis also awaits further discussion, particularly in light of the new suggestion that the bronze spear from Tomb 6, which was initially thought to have been a sceptre and a Myce- naean heirloom, may instead be a contemporary weapon from Italy acquired as war loot or as a gift (Bettelli 2000; 2001; Verdan 2015, 186-187). Opposite Eretria, in Oropos, the ‘He- roon’ in the Central Quarter of the OSK plot housed ritual activities which focused around some stone structures/platforms, when part of the settlement was being abandoned and the site was largely changing function (see below). On the occasion of the discussion of Euboean cultic activities, an important parameter is the possible connection of certain Euboean burials with subsequent cultic buildings/places, especially those related to ancestor/hero cults: the West Gate LG elite burials, particularly Tomb 6, at the Heroon necropolis of Eretria and the Heroon itself, the Viglatouri burials and Building A, even the SPG II warrior burial in the immediate vicinity of the later sanctuary of Apollo at Eretria. Outside Euboea itself, a number of sites nearby fell within the Euboean sphere of influence and served as important Euboean “outposts”. Skyros, situated opposite Oxylithos/Vigla- touri, shared many cultural features during the PG/SPG with Euboea, especially Lefkandi; tombs on the island from this period and material from Skyros in private collections indicate that many offerings on the island are similar to those found at Lefkandi and that the inhab- itants of Skyros followed Lefkandian burial practices (about Skyros as part of the Euboean “koine”: Lemos 2002, 168-170, 212-217). Set amidst the north Aegean sea routes, Skyros was an important outpost for ships on their way to the northern Aegean (Popham 1994, 33; Lemos & Hatcher 1986, 336; Lemos 2001, 217). Additional island settlements, such as the recently excavated Kephala on Skiathos (Mazarakis Ainian 2012), probably functioned as in- termediate stations between Euboea and the northern Aegean mainland. The Euboeans fre- quented Kephala, as is made evident by the PG/SPG ceramic material found there. Oropos (fig. 7), opposite Eretria, lay on the border between Attica and Boeotia (Mazara- kis Ainian 2007 with full bibliography) and served as Eretria’s peraia on the mainland from the PG to, at least, Archaic times as is made clear by two habitation loci one at Oropos at Nea Palatia and the other at the western extremity of Skala Oropou (O.S.K. property) (Maza- rakis Ainian 2012; Charalambidou 2008; Vlachou 2010). The ancient Greek geographical term peraia designated a territory beyond the limits of a specific area and usually separated

93 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites from the area by water; the economic importance of the peraia in sustaining the area was crucial (Knappett & Nikolakopoulou 2014). The close relationship between Eretria and Oro- pos resulted in a continuous material and cultural exchange. The metal workshops of Oropos might have “fueled” part of Eretria’s needs in craft products. Microstructural analysis conducted on metalworking debris (fragments of vitrified hearth lining, furnace material, ingot fragments and slag) associated with certain buildings in the Central Quarter of the OSK plot indicates that iron smithing was the predominant craft practiced at Oropos in the 8th century BC, although copper casting/working was also conducted at the same time and in the same location (Doonan & Mazarakis Ainian 2007). In addition to intensive metalworking activities, the discovery of potters’ kilns in the LG-Archaic strata of the OSK plot provides evidence for local ceramic production in Oropos, which supplemented the significant amount of pottery imported, albeit only a short distance, from Euboea.11 After the beginning of the th7 century BC, some Euboean sites either become noticeably smaller or are abandoned (Lefkandi, Viglatouri), a phenomenon frequently linked by scholars with upheavals caused by the so-called Lelantine war (bibliography in Charalambidou 2011). Lefkandi is probably abandoned ca. 700 BC although only a small percentage of the settlement has been excavated. Eretria (and neighboring Oropos in the Attic mainland, see below) has yielded far less 7th-century material from all contexts when compared to the 8th-century (Charalambidou 2003). Chalcis remains largely unknown in the 7th century BC but the important assemblage from the potter’s workshop deposit in the Machairas plot at the southern foot of Agios Io- annis hill (see above), the only such deposit yet known from LG II-EA Chalcis, will shed light on this little understood period and, most importantly, will provide substantial information on Chalcidian ceramic production and technology. The deposit includes a considerable quantity of ceramic material, ranging from transport amphorae, to jugs (including those with cutaway necks) and possibly hydriae, as well as various types of drinking vessels and kraters/ louteria, lekanes etc. (fig. 3). Many of these vessels were misfired; some were deformed during firing. The deposit also presents a rare opportunity to directly compare these Chalcidian vases with contemporary wares from Euboean colonies which were influenced by the traditions of their Euboean motherland (compare, for example, Naxos and Zancle in Sicily: Lentini 1998; Bacci 1998 respectively). In the 7th century BC, evidence from the settlement in the OSK plot in Oropos, Eretria’s peraia, indicates that the settlement there remained in the Eretrian sphere of influence but changed function to some extent (Charalambidou 2008; 2017b, 131; Mazarakis Ainian 2017, 174). In the Central Quarter of the plot, there are far fewer dwellings than in the LG period and certain new structures/platforms (those comprising the ‘Heroon’) can now indicate the presence of cultic activity in the area at least as early as the beginning of the 7th century BC (see above). Other buildings and structures in the West Quarter and in the West Ex- tremity of the West Quarter might have had a public/communal function (Charalambidou 2017b, 131; Mazarakis Ainian 2017, 184). For example, in the West Quarter, the remains of a rectangular building/peribolos of monumental dimensions with a tower-like structure built onto its south wall was unearthed. The building was in use in the 7th and part of the 6th cen-

11. Eleven samples (mainly PG/SPG pendent semicircle skyphoi from the OTE plot) have been chemically analysed, most of them being connected with the clay bed at Phylla near Lefkandi (Mazarakis & Vlachou 2014). In addition, 129 EIA and Archaic coarse and fine ware samples and ancient building material samples are currently being analysed at the Fitch Laboratory of the British School at Athens by the author of this paper, E. Kiriatzi and N. Müller and compared with samples from Eretria.

94 Xenia Charalambidou tury BC and might have been a multi-purpose installation (Charalambidou 2011, 833) – an idea that again runs contrary to the conventional belief that a building should have one distinct function. One of its uses might have been that of an agora, as suggested by E. Greco (2006, 331-332). In the northwestern Cyclades, on Andros, Zagora’s abandonment (ca. 700 BC) has also been linked with the effects of the Lelantine war (e.g. Parker 1997, 91-93). Zagora has been considered by some scholars a Euboean colony or trading station, a view recently revisited by Kotsonas (2015) who convincingly argued against the notion that Zagora was a Euboean colony/trading station. While this war could very well have been an important factor in the fates of Euboean sites, I have argued that the situation in the 7th century BC on Euboea and in the neighboring regions was likely far more complex (Charalambidou 2011). New evidence now indicates that the abandonment of Zagora can be listed among the radical events that occured in certain Cycladic settlements as the result of synoicism. A number of major Cycla- dic sites were abandoned or shrank towards the end of the 8th until the mid-7th century (Za- gora and Ypsili on Andros, Koukounaries on Paros) when we witness the genesis of new centres (in the case of Andros and Paros the development of Palaiopolis and Paroikia respectively) (see e.g. Vlachopoulos & Charalambidou forthcoming).

Beyond Euboean mother-cities

8th-century BC Chalcis and Eretria played important roles far beyond the borders of the island. Euboeans became key players in Greek colonisation, a development that was related to their long-standing involvement in Mediterranean trade from the 10th century BC, as the evidence from Lefkandi indicates. Many scholars have pointed out that one of the major rea- sons the Euboeans established colonies in the northern Aegean and southern Italy-Sicily was to exploit their metal resources (e.g. Soueref 2011, 276; Mazarakis Ainian 2012a, 54; 2012b, 85). A number of sites on Euboea (Lefkandi, Eretria, Kastri Lichadas [see above] and perhaps Archampolis12) and around the Euboean gulf (Oropos) yielded evidence of metalworking activities and/or sophisticated metal craftsmanship. On the basis of literary testimonia, scholars identify a number of sites as Euboean colonies in the Northern Aegean: Methone, Mende, Torone, Aphytis, Dikaia (bibliography listed most recently in Moschonissioti 2012, esp. 58-70). According to Strabo (7 fr. 11 and 10.C447), the Chalcidians founded 30 colonies on the Sithonia peninsula, although Malkin (2013, 378) suggests that modern historians doubt the existence of such large numbers of colonies. Cumae, Naxos and Zancle are usually identified as Euboean colonies in Italy (in their turn Naxos and Zancle founded short-distance colonies: Rhegion, Mylai, Himera, Katane, Le- ontinoi), while the character of the settlement at Pithekoussai is more highly disputed (on overseas Euboean colonisation see e.g. Malkin 1987, 31-43, 175-176, 179-180, 197-200, 256-258, 261; this volume; Boardman 1996; Hammond 1998; Bats & D’Agostino 1998; D’ Agostino 2006; Descœudres 2006-2007; Tiverios 2008; Mele 2014). Recent scholarship has revisited foundation/oikists’ stories and nomima (religious cal- endars, festivals, titles of tribes etc: see Malkin this volume), which colonists modelled after those of their mother-cities, and current research is gradually paving the way for a more systematic identification and description of Euboean colonies. It also stresses how much more

12. Evidence of metalworking has been discovered at the southern tip of Euboea in Archampolis which remains largely unexplored (Keller 1985, 189, 192-193, 263-266; Panagopoulou 1995; Reber 2001, 451-453).

95 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites complex the issues become when people of different origins and identities get involved in the establishment and development of such settlements (most recently Kotsonas 2015, 245- 246 with bibliographical references).

Northern Aegean

Euboean pottery finds from various sites in the Northern Aegean (Tiverios 2008, 6-9) indicate direct or indirect contacts with the Euboeans from the PG period. Such contacts in- tensify in the second half of the 8th century BC when Euboeans founded their colonies. In the Northern Aegean, systematic excavations at Methone in Pieria and Mende in the Chalcidice have revealed that both these Euboean-Eretrian colonies were of major importance in the Aegean networks allowing Euboeans to become among the key players in the wider Thermaic gulf trade. Information pertaining to Methone is supported by rich literary, epigraphic and archaeological evidence, including a detailed foundation story as told by Pl- utarch (Quaest. Graec. 11 [Mor. 293A-B]) (most recently Tzifopoulos et al. 2012; Kotsonas 2015, 253-257). In addition, connections between Euboea and Methone can be discerned in the ceramic record as early as the 9th century BC, before the foundation of the colony (Tzi- fopoulos et al. 2012, 128). Recent archaeological finds at Methone from a rectangular shaft referred to as the Hypogeio date from the last third of the 8th century BC onwards, a date compatible with Methone’s foundation (attributed to ca. 733/2 BC). The function of the Hy- pogeio is difficult to ascertain: Was it intended as an underground storage facility which was never completed? (fig. 8). The quantity and range of imported pottery increases from the foundation date onwards and includes a wide variety of transport amphorae from Attica, Northern Greece, Lesbos, Chios, Samos, the coast of Asia Minor, and even Phoenicia.13 The diverse origins of these imported transport amphorae underline the cosmopolitan character and dynamic role of Methone in Aegean and Mediterranean trade networks. These amphorae have been recently analysed by integrating traditional approaches, including macroscopic examination, typological classification and the study of inscriptions and graffiti, with applications of archaeological science (petrographic, chemical and organic residue analyses) (Kotsonas et al. 2017). The epigraphic evidence includes alphabetic inscriptions, the majority of which are rendered in the Euboean alphabet; all present strong arguments for the identification of the site as a Euboean colony. Excavators have found smaller numbers of Euboean imports at Methone in relation to locally-produced imitations of Euboean pottery, especially skyphoi with concentric circles on the lip, which are more abundant (Tzifopoulos et al. 2012, 128-134; Kotsonas 2015, 254- 255). Evidence for this type of Euboeanising ceramic production in Methone is also attested by the presence of a misfired skyphos from the Hypogeio (Tzifopoulos et al. 2012, 128).14 Kotsonas (2015, 247) has pointed out that Euboean pottery is not common at several sites identified in ancient literature as Euboean colonies and that the literary tradition for the foundation of a colony from a mother-city should not be dismissed merely on the basis of the scarcity of “metropolitan” pottery. Furthermore, early Greek colonies, including those of the Euboeans – as is evident from Methone and other examples (see below) – seem to present a

13. Most recently on Euboean-Phoenician contact: Pappa 2013. 14. The type of skyphos with concentric circles on the lip was also imitated, on a local basis, in other Euboean colonies, as for example in Sicilian Naxos (Kotsonas 2015, 255).

96 Xenia Charalambidou much wider range of imported pottery than their mother-cities in mainland Greece, thus revealing their cosmopolitan character. As discussed above, Northern Aegean sources of metals (including gold), have been considered a major motivation for Euboean colonisation in the wider Thermaic gulf region. A range of metalworking facilities, for both bronze and gold, have been found in Methone and these diverse facilities reflect the various aspects of the metalworking industry, including the production of gold ingots (S. Verdan in his presentation in the Aristeia conference). Accord- ing to J. Papadopoulos (personal communication), it is possible that the gold worked at Me- thone was from the river Echedoros (Gallikos) which flows into the Thermaic gulf near modern Thessaloniki. Archaeological evidence from Mende supports Thucydides’ (IV 123.1) identification of the site as an Eretrian colony (Vokotopoulou & Moschonissioti 1990 and most recently Mo- schonissioti 2004; 2012; 2014; 2017; Moschonissioti et al. 2005). Systematic excavations there have explored the following areas: the settlement sectors (the Acropolis, known as Vigla, and the Proasteion, which occupied the southern coast of the city), the coastal cemetery in the southeastern part of the site, and Mende’s extra-urban sanctuary at the Cape of Poseidi. The majority of the excavated graves (173 of 235 excavated graves) in the coastal cemetery (fig. 9), which was in use from the late 8th to the beginning of the 5th century BC, were enchytrismoi for infants and young children (73.6% of the total number of excavated tombs). 59 (22.5%) were rectangular pits dug in the sand and destined mainly for older children or adults; three cist graves (again of older children or adults) have also been reported.15 The funerary practices at Mende bear certain similarities to those practiced in Eretria. Enchytrismoi, for example, were generally reserved for children in both Eretria and Mende.16 There are similarities in certain types of grave goods as well. Some of the grave goods in the earliest burials consist of cups and feeding bottles decorated with multiple lines like the cups and feeding bottles from Euboean/Eretrian graves. Seven of the pots used for the enchytrismoi burials in Mende are incised coarse-ware pithamphorae that resemble Ere- trian pithamphorae (Moschonissioti 2004, 277-293; 2010; 2012, 154-164, 370-372, 377- 378; 2017, 359-360; Moschonissioti et al. 2005). Cremation, which was common in Eretria, has not yet been attested in Mende (Soueref 2011, 334) but it should be noted that the excavated part of the Mende cemetery lies in the periphery of the necropolis – mainly devoted to enchytrismoi. Macroscopic and petrographic analysis of the ceramic material from Mende’s cemetery shows that the pottery produced locally in the wider area of Mende included “Chalkidic” painted ware and the majority of the incised pithamphorae of “Eretrian” type (Moschonissi- oti et al. 2005). The existence of Euboeanising pottery at both Methone and Mende raises a number of questions; some analogies can be sought in potters’ mobility and pottery production in Euboean colonies and indigenous sites in Italy where Euboean potters settled (see below). The possibility that Euboean potters had settled in both Methone and Mende and used raw materials from the surrounding areas is strong but such hypotheses need to be con- firmed by future research.

15. From the mid 6th-century BC onward Moschonissioti (2012, 33) mentions that the cemetery was probably destined for adult burials mainly. 16. While there are similarities with Eretrian enchytrismoi, it must also be noted that the practice of enchy- trismos has deep roots in Northern Greece as well, going all the way back to the EBA, as can be seen in the Agios Mamas cemetery, and continuing into the Iron Age. Aside from Mende, the practice is evidenced in Akanthos, Aï Yi- annis Nikitis, and Polychrono (Chavela 2012, 318).

97 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites

The corpus of imported pottery found in Mende includes vessels from Euboean, Thes- salian and Northern Greek production centres and transport amphorae from workshops in Attica, Corinth, Chios and the northeast Aegean (Moschonissioti et al. 2005; Moschonissioti 2012). Included in this corpus is an Attic SOS amphora of the late 8th century BC that bears an early 7th-century graffito in a Cypriot alphabet; the inscription is similar to one found on an SOS amphora at Policoro in Italy (Vokotopoulou & Christidis 1995; Moschonissioti 2004, 279). The amounts and dates of all the Euboean imports and locally produced Euboeanising vases found in Mende will be presented in the final publication of the site but so far it seems that Euboean and Euboeanising vases are confined mainly to the years until the beginning or the first half of the th7 century BC. Afterwards, the numbers drop precipitously and Ioni- an imports and influences come to predominate. This change might reflect events that had taken place in Mende’s mother-city. Eretria seems to have lost much of its control over its trade networks after the beginning of the th7 century BC (possibly as a result of the Lelan- tine War), trickling down to affect its colonies’ trade routes. During the same period a similar decrease in the number of Euboean imports is attested throughout the Northern Aegean, Euboean colonies included (Charalambidou 2008, 315-319, 338), which further illustrates changes in Northern Aegean trade networks. At Poseidi, Mende’s extra-urban sanctuary, cultic activities at the site, at the ash altar and in the area of the apsidal building ΣΤ, date as early as the SM or the PG period; sacrificial remains from the large ash altar continue down to the Classical period, but with a hiatus in the 9th century BC (when the sanctuary was probably temporarily abandoned) (Vokoto- poulou 1989, 416-417; 1990; 1991; 1992; 1993; 1994; Moschonissioti 2012, with full bibliography for the site; Moschonissioti, personal communication).17 The large apsidal building ΣΤ, the first cultic building at the sanctuary, dates to the 10th century BC, making it thus the oldest cultic building in the Northern Aegean (Tiverios 2008, 14). It is surprising that so few EIA sanctuaries have been discovered in this region. Even more surprising is the fact that so few scholars have observed or addressed this scarcity (e.g. Andreou, Fotiadis & Kotsakis 1996, 583; Gimatzidis 2012, 297). Most of the Northern Greek EIA-EA sanctuaries currently known are located along the coastline of the Chalkidice.18 Three of the four sanctuaries on the Chalcidice are located on the Pallene peninsula: the Poseidi sanctuary, which is the oldest, the sanctuary at Aphytis (Yiouri 1974) and the sanctuary at Sane (attested as early as the first half of the th7 century BC: Gimatzidis 2012 with bibliography about the site). Inter- estingly, Aphytis is also considered an Eretrian colony by Strabo (about the site: Misailidou- Despotidou 1979; 1999; 2009; 2012). Recent reexamination of the material from the sanctuary by D. Patis indicates that it may have been established in the beginning of the 9th century BC as suggested mainly from a small number of Euboean skyphoi (Moschonissioti 2012, 61). The sanctuary on Mt. Itamos (Parthenonas), attested from the late 7th century BC, is situated on the Sithonia peninsula (Vokotopoulou et al. 1990). Based mainly on the evidence from the Poseidi sanctuary it seems that Euboean impact on religious practices in the North- ern Aegean was crucial (among the first to notice this correlation was Lemos 1998, 56).19

17. Evidence for occupation as early as in the Late Mycenaean or the SM period (?), comes from the Acropolis of Vigla at Mende, while the earliest evidence for occupation in Proasteion, at the seaward foot of the hill, dates to the LPG period (Tiverios 2008, 13-14; Soueref 2011, 245; Moschonissioti 2012, 385). 18. The rest are situated: on the acropolis of ancient Oisyme in Thrace (Yiouri & Koukouli-Chrysanthaki 1987, 369-373; Koukouli-Chrysanthaki & Papanikolaou 1990, 492), at Mantal’ Panagia on Samothrace (Matsas et al. 1993, 648) and on Thasos (Gimatzidis 2012, 297). 19. It would be worthwhile to consider that the only known sanctuary dedicated to Poseidon on Euboea and

98 Xenia Charalambidou

This dearth of early sanctuaries in the Northern Aegean is likely attributed to a number of different factors and it is, of course, possible that additional EIA and EA sanctuaries will be found in the future. Soueref (2011, 238) mentions the possibility that there are more sanctuaries waiting to be identified at coastal sites around the Thermaic gulf citing, for in- stance, the Eretrian colony of Dikaia whose location has been long disputed (most recently identified with Nea Kallikrateia: e.g. Bilouka & Graïkos 2009; Kefalidou 2012) and may have had a cultic site dedicated to Poseidon (Soueref 2011, 241-242). It is also possible that cultic practices in other sites of the Northern Aegean region were conducted in such a way as to leave behind little diagnostic evidence. Examples of such a case could have been cultic activity within domestic contexts. A possible candidate (presented by St. Andreou at the Aris- teia conference) may come from the Thessaloniki Toumba settlement (phase 2a) where a large deposit of fine grey EPG drinking vessels may be related to a large scale drinking cer- emony in the settlement. Like Methone, Mende was an important node in the trade networks of the Thermaic gulf, the Aegean and beyond. Evidence from the Mende settlement and the Poseidi sanctuary indicates that it held this strategic position from an early stage in the EIA. Thucydides (VII.123), in the 5th century BC, mentions that the trade and circulation of metals, wood and wine flourished in Mende (see Soueref 2011, 245, 331); it is not difficult to imagine that these goods were circulated and distributed in earlier years as well. Exploitation of the region’s metal resources would have constituted a significant but not the sole incentive for Euboeans to colonise: their trade could have included other commodities such as timber – important for the construction of ships – and agricultural products (see below). As regards Torone on the Sithonia peninsula, J. Papadopoulos (1996; 2005) rejected the idea that Chalcis colonised this site, arguing that the finds from Torone’s cemetery dating from the end of the SM period until ca. 850 BC indicate the existence of a settlement long before Chalcidian colonisation in the area is assumed to have taken place. The discussion whether Chalcis colonised Torone or not has been kept alive by other scholars: for example, Soueref (2011, 333) who asserts the validity of the literary evidence. Based on its burial practices, the Torone cemetery is identified as belonging to a group of cemeteries on the Si- thonia peninsula (Chavela 2012, 313-314), such as that at Koukos Sykias (Carington-Smith & Vokotopoulou 1988; 1989; 1990) where cremation was the most common form of burial.20 The Koukos Sykias settlement (Carington-Smith & Vokotopoulou 1988; 1989; 1990; 1992) was involved in mining and metalworking. The presence of an apsidal building as well as Euboean imports21 have been understood as an indication of the Euboeans’ presence at the site. Only a full description of the material remains in the final publication will shed light on the settlement’s character. Papadopoulos (2005, 592) argued that “the settlement at Kou- kos which has furnished direct evidence of metalworking, located close to the mines of Sy- kia, could have been the centre where the ore was extracted and worked and Torone, with its prominent harbor, the centre from where the commodity was distributed”. mentioned in the Homeric epics is the sanctuary of Poseidon at Porto Kastri/Geraistos in southern Euboea (Od. 3.177; about this sanctuary see Philippson 1951, 629; Geyer 1962, 121-123; Sackett et al. 1966, 81; Schumacher 1993, 62-87; Arjona Pérez 2007, 84-88). So far excavations in Porto Kastri/Geraistos have brought to light a Ro- man building. Its walls were partially constructed using earlier material from a 4th-century BC building. Part of an inscription ΠΟΣΕ[...] was found there and is often read as ΠΟΣΕ[ΙΔΩΝΟΣ. 20. Cremated bones found mainly in clay urns placed in pits, see Chavela 2012, 314. 21. Connections with Euboea, especially Lefkandi, have also been suggested with respect to the earliest, 10th- century BC, burial from the Koukos cemetery (Moschonissioti 2012, 8).

99 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites

Certain settlements around the Thermaic gulf such as the ancient site near Anchialos and modern Sindos (identified with ancient Sindos) and Karabournaki (identified as ancient Therme) can enrich our knowledge on the complex character of Thermaic gulf coastal sites. The fact that Anchialos/Sindos22 flourished from the MG period onwards is due, according to Tiverios, to the exploitation of the gold that the river Echedoros provided. The identification of Anchialos/Sindos as a Euboean emporion (Tiverios 2008, 21) has recently been chal- lenged by Kotsonas (2015, 249) who, instead, recognises Sindos as a port of call. Kotsonas argues that the community of Anchialos/Sindos, until now considered to be multiethnic, can not be since it was composed mainly of the indigenous population and because Euboean settlement there is questionable. Karabournaki, a coastal settlement on the Thermaic gulf, was cosmopolitan in character and played a dynamic role in Aegean and Mediterranean trade networks.23 The site – which is not connected to Euboeans’ settling there – flourished from the th8 to the 5th century BC, with a peak during the Archaic period (7th and 6th centuries BC). The wide range of archaeological finds from the site attests to the multifaceted character of its economy which was based on trade and crafts. The earliest imports come from Euboea, Attica, the Cyclades, and Corinth. In the 7th century BC they come mainly from Eastern Greece and in the 6th century BC from Attica as well as Corinth. Attic, Corinthian, Lesbian, Asia Minor transport amphorae have been reported while Phoenician and Cypriot pottery has also been discovered at the site (e.g. Tiverios 2008, 28; see also Moschonissioti 2012, 66). Excavators have unearthed industrial remains such as two pits with wasters from ceramic workshop(s) (dating probably to the Ar- chaic period) (section 27-79δ: Tiverios et al. 2003, 192) as well as an area with remains of metallurgical activity (trenches 23-12γ and δ: Tiverios et al. 2007, 264; 2008, 331). Quarters on the top of the tel included beehive-shaped, semi-subterranean rock chambers that may have been dwellings as indicated by some of the pottery (associated with food preparation and dining) and storage spaces (pitheones). The finds from the structure in trench 22-84β, dating mainly to the 7th and 6th centuries BC, testify to a series of activities for the preparation and consumption of food (Tiverios et al. 2009, 323-324; 2013). A range of economic activities is represented at Karabournaki: internal – i.e. commodities produced and consumed within the site – and external economic activities – i.e. trade in products. Euboean colonists played a major role in cultural and economic exchanges in the Ther- maic gulf, as is evident from Methone and Mende. At the same time they would have bene- fited from cultural interaction with other populations, such as those in cosmopolitan Kara- bournaki. Different types of Greek settlements in this wider Thermaic gulf region produced and circulated agricultural products, timber, and ceramic and metal artifacts (see Tiverios 2008, 32).

Italy

Greek colonisation was not a homogeneous phenomenon as Greco points out in this volume. Different types of links and networks were formed during the colonisations of the th8 and 7th centuries BC and opportunities for founding colonies varied as well (Malkin 2013, 376). After the end of the Mycenaean world Euboeans were among the very first to have land-

22. E.g. Tiverios 1998; 2008, 21-24; Gimatzidis 2010, both publications with comprehensive bibliography for the site’s excavations. 23. For full bibliography on the site’s excavations: Tiverios 2009.

100 Xenia Charalambidou ed in Italy and come into contact with indigenous populations, apparent by Euboean pottery finds that date before the colonisation period and during the colonisation movement (most recently D’Agostino 2006; Descœudres 2006-2007; Kourou 2012, 173-177; Naso 2014).24 Literary evidence indicates that Pithekoussai, in the gulf of Naples, was established by Euboeans (Strabo, 5.4.9: Eretrians and Chalcidians) ca. 750-730 BC. Cumae, recognised as a Euboean colony, had two oikists: Megasthenes from Chalcis and Hippokles from Kyme (Strabo 5.4.4) (whether Aeolian or Euboean Kyme is still disputed). Its founding was the out- come of an agreement between Chalcis and Kyme, with the latter giving its name to the foundation and the former considered the founder the colony (on foundation stories about Pithekoussai and Cumae, see D’Acunto 2017). Pithekoussai and Cumae are usually recognised as the oldest Greek colonies in the West (D’Agostino 2006, 204, 221). D’Agostino (2006, 232) stresses the importance of the literary evidence of Livy and Phlegon of Tral- les who cited the relationship between Pithekoussai and Cumae as that of a single foundation occuring in two different time events, presumably close to each other. Naxos, the earliest Greek colony on Sicily (734 BC), was founded by the Chalcidians, with the oikist Thoukles from Chalcis but with colonists from the Cycladic island of Naxos (on the foundation story of Naxos, see, most recently, Pelagatti 2004; Malkin 2013, 377; Lentini 2015, 309). Malkin (2013, 377) noted that Thoukles was the oikist of three (!) colonies on Sicily – Naxos, Leonti- noi and Katane – forcing us to rethink our notions of how oikists functioned, specifically that an oikist could be connected to only one colony. Zancle was founded by the Chalcidians ca. 730 BC, which in turn founded its own short-distance colonies (we know, at least in the case of Rhegion, that Zancle invited people from Chalcis to join them): Rhegion (730 BC), Mylai (717/6 BC) and Himera (648 BC) (Malkin 1987, 31, 176, 179-180; 2013). Himera serves as an excellent example of the mixed character of many colonies: it was settled by many Chal- cidians but was joined by a Dorian-speaking group from Syracuse and, thereafter, Himera’s language became a mixture of “Doric and Chalkidic” (Malkin 2013, 387-388; this volume). Cults of Apollo and Hera predominate among sanctuaries established in Euboean colonial contexts (e.g. Valenza Mele 1977; 1991-1992; Mele 2009, 89-96; Breglia 2009, 238-248, 256-262). The sanctuary of Apollo Archegetes, which was erected by the founders of Sicil- ian Naxos with Thoukles as oikist, stood for centuries (Malkin 2013, 383). Apollo sanctuaries on Euboea (see the sanctuary of Apollo Daphnephoros at Eretria, the sanctuary of Apollo at Zarakes and the probable sanctuary of Apollo at Plakari – in the case of Eretria and probably of Plakari we may have the joint cult of Artemis – [see above]) underscore the importance of this deity in Euboea and its colonial contexts. There have been extensive discussions as to whether Pithekoussai should be considered an apoikia or an emporion (e.g. D’Agostino 1994; 2006, 217-224; Greco 1994; Ridgway 2000, 183-186; Mele 2003; 2014, 1-39). The problem of distinguishing between colonies and trading stations cannot be solved easily and one must also consider analogous problems in Phoenician colonisation when attempting to interpret the evidence (most recently Demetriou 2012, 16-23; Pappa 2013). As Pappa (2013, 12-13) points out, the problems are diverse and as fundamental as the descriptions and meanings of the various names used for commercial establishments: “An example is the use of the terms apoikia and emporion, drawn from the literary sources and traditionally applied to the Greek overseas settlements, the first designat- ing a permanent colony abroad with an interest in the exploitation of the hinterland, the lat-

24. D’Agostino (2006, 202-203) agrees with Ridgway’s older views that Euboeans ships first reached Sardin- ia by following the shipping routes opened by Phoenicians.

101 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites ter a trading colony, set up for the facilitation of trade and thus with no interest in territorial expansion. The word emporion which is recorded first by Herodotos in the th5 century BC, appears to have attained a multitude of meanings, which do not always coincide with the modern definition scholars ascribed to it, that of a strictly commercial establishment. Apart from also being used to describe the area of a town where external trade took place, it was in addition used interchangeably with the word apoikia when the emphasis was on the trading aspects of the settlement…. The discourse generated revolved around the seemingly conflict- ing attitudes concerning the political status of emporia (independent or not) and their function (primarily commercial or not), which nevertheless need not comprise mutually exclusive characteristics”. Kotsonas (2015, 248) notes that many of the criteria used to identify Pithekoussai as a trading station – such as an economy based on craft and trade and the presence of a mixed ethnic population – have no basis. Increasingly, the assumption is being made that many colonies in the Mediterranean had mixed populations and multifaceted economic activities including craft and trade and scholars are stressing, more and more, the “concept of hybrid identities” in colonial contexts (e.g. Dietler 2010; Kelley 2012, esp. 245). It is probably the lack of a precise colonial tradition that still obscures the picture and prevents the unanimous acceptance of Pithekoussai as a Euboean colony (Kotsonas 2015, 248-249). Pithekoussai is now identified, from its outset, as a mixed settlement (see Kelley 2012, 246 for references) and it is now believed that the Italic population at Pithekoussai had a more active role in the creation of the material culture of the settlement than previously thought. The lack of substantial amounts of Euboean pottery at Pithekoussai (Boardman 1996, 156) does not also readily argue in favour of identifying Pithekoussai as either a colony or trading station (cf. Kotsonas 2015, 249). Corinthian pottery is much more common in Pithe- koussai (Coldstream 2004, 41). Both Pithekoussai and Cumae produced Euboeanising and Corinthianising pottery in addition to importing vessels (most recently Mermati 2012), but combined macroscopic and archaeometric analyses need to be conducted at both sites to elucidate details of their pottery production and supply and to identify and characterise po- tential raw materials used for production from the vicinity of the sites (so far the only archaeometric analysis conducted has been the chemical analysis by Deriu et al. 1986). Ac- cording to D’Agostino (2006, 230) Euboean potters at Pithekoussai influenced (or even established?) workshops in other areas in Italy such as Vulci that specialised in the production of large kraters (successful imitations of the Greek models). The quantities of imported ceramics, including transport amphorae from various centres of production (Buchner 1982; Di Sandro 1986; Buchner & Ridway 1993), and the range of trademarks found at Pithekoussai are comparable to those at Methone (Kotsonas 2015), highlighting the importance of both sites as major nodes in EIA commercial and economic networks. Wine and other agricultural products transferred in cargo ships and traded or stored for consumption in transport amphorae of different origins were commonly found in cosmopolitan sites on the coast such as Pithekoussai – the same seems to apply to certain coastal sites in the Thermaic gulf region. Pre-Roman cargoes are often thought to have been carried by small-scale enterprises, i.e. by merchants who would move back and forth in the Mediterranean in relatively small ships (Dietler 2010, 134-135). According to Dietler, such cargoes may have been heterogeneous in terms of their origin but were composed of items from within a limited range of goods targeted toward regional patterns of demand. Reed (2003, 66-68) argues that professional traders, who were already operating in the Greek

102 Xenia Charalambidou world in the 8th century BC, were usually agents of wealthy patrons/aristocrats but could have acted sometimes as independent maritime traders as well. Both the mixed character of the Pithekoussan community, formed by populations of different backgrounds and its cosmopolitan nature have recently been the focus of research revisiting the variation among the site’s tomb types and grave goods (Kelley 2012). Anthro- pological research on the Pithekoussan skeletal material was published back in the 1990s by Becker (1995; 1999; see also A. Papadopoulou this volume), who argued that Euboeans as well as local populations and Phoenicians were interred in the San Montano cemetery (Becker 1995, 275). According to Kelley (2012), the functional similarities between the sets of grave goods found in both the inhumation burials (the largest group of which is thought to have been related to children and adolescents or adults mainly of subordinate classes) and the cremations (considered to have been reserved mainly for adults) at Pithekoussai can indicate that certain inhumation burials which included members of the Italic population belonged to individuals who were active and integrated members of the Pithekoussan community. An analysis of several tombs from Pithekoussai containing tools, such as the woodworking tools from Tomb 678 (known as the Carpenter’s tomb), suggests that the Italic population was more actively involved in the creation of material goods at the site than previously supposed. Depositing iron tools, including woodworking tools, linked the deceased to the economic and symbolic importance of trading and working with timber and timber resources. Judging from the woodworking tools, the fibulae in the Italic tradition, the impasto vases and the Greek and Greek-inspired pottery found in Tomb 678, it becomes clear that “this tomb is indicative of the hybridity and middle ground nature of colonial contexts. The binary construct between Greek and native is not sufficient explanation; rather this burial is evidence for a layered and multifaceted community in which multiple aspects of Greek, Le- vantine and Italic material culture were combined in the creation of a uniquely Pithekoussan identity” (Kelley 2012, 255). Older studies highlight the multiethnic character of Pithekoussai too. According to Cold- stream (1998, 306-307; see also D’Agostino 2006, 222), evidence such as a Semitic graffito on a Red Slip plate in the Scarico Gosetti, the imported Red Slip plates from the Mazzo- la site and the imitations of Phoenician Red Slip plates by potters in Pithekoussai25 had been cited as indications that the Phoenicians were not only trading with the Euboeans at Pithe- koussai but were actually living amongst them as well (see also Becker’s conclusions). These exchanges are among the many that have thus far been cited in bibliography mainly in ref- erence to Euboean-Phoenician relationships in colonial and more generally commercial settlements but recent interpretations indicate wider networks of contemporaneous relationships and affinities between different groups. After some generations “identities” of different groups might have become diluted. Dietler (2010, 77-78) argues that colonists in Massalia: “like settler colonists in many modern contexts […] would have been faced with the ambiva- lent challenge of constructing a new sense of indigeneity or belonging while simultaneously perpetuating a sense of privilege and superiority through cultural ties to a distant homeland […] The local distinction between colonist and native may have been one that was marked in certain contexts, effaced in others, and dissolved in new hybrid identities in yet others”. Much of this argumentation might also be true for Euboean interactions with native and other populations at Pithekoussai.

25. Same imitations of Phoenician Red Slip plates appear also in another Euboean colony, Zancle (Coldstream 2004, 44).

103 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites

Interactions between Euboeans and Phoenicians as a result of their meeting in different Mediterranean contexts contributed greatly to Euboean culture. This is the case with the formation of the Euboean alphabet, the “Euboeic” metrological system and the acquisition by the Euboeans of certain daily customs such as the practice of eating on plates (e.g. Cold- stream 1998, 308; Kroll 2008, esp. 46). Cultural exchanges between Euboeans and the indigenous populations resulted in the diffusion of various aspects of Euboean material culture as can be seen, for example, in drinking/sympotic practices (for examples, see below). What the Euboeans learned from indigenous populations in Italy, however, remains largely unknown (instances in which other Greeks might have been influenced by locals in Italy are seen, e.g. in the mixed indigenous-Greek community at L’Amastuola [Crielaard & Burgers 2012]). Pos- sible influences may be sought in fields where indigenous populations had developed sophisticated ways of craftsmanship such as woodworking and certain aspects of metalworking (for example, Nijboer 1998, 243 points out that with respect to copper alloys, it is not known who influenced whom). Intercultural exchanges allowed for a constant back-and-forth between different groups of people with high living standards. D’Agostino (2006, 206) describes socio-political advances in the Etruscan world: growth of urban centres, social stratification, emergence of dominant political elites towards the end of the 9th century BC, social hierarchy in the course of the 8th century BC, etc. Advances in metalworking in central Italy took place during the 8th and 7th centuries BC with the extraction of iron ores and the processing and distribution of iron.26 During the same centuries, changes also took place in the manufacture of gold and silver objects; a new metallurgical technique, granulation, began to be used (Nijboer 1998, 197-240). Nijboer (1998, 207-208) argues that a stylistic examination of gold and silver artefacts from Italy indicates direct influence from the Near East, not mediated through Greek communities. On the other hand, D’Agostino (2006, 227) supports the idea that Pithekous- san craftsmen could have moved to Etruria introducing techniques such as granulation and filigree both learned from the Phoenicians. Nijboer further comments that during the late 8th and 7th centuries BC gold itself was acquired through Levantine and Greek intermediar- ies since there are no gold deposits in central Italy. Archaeometric analysis becomes essen- tial in investigating the source of this gold. Metals other than gold could have been extracted from mineral resources attested in Italy (a detailed list in Nijboer 1998, 235-240; see also references in D’Agostino 2006, 203) though he does note that the range of metal resources in central Italy needs to be re-examined. Scholars have identified these resources as being one of the main attractions for colonists and traders. D’Agostino (2006, 215) has also asserted that the search for metals would have been an important motivation but however significant this was, the marginal utility which resulted from emporion-type commerce and exchange was equally fundamental. The well-known Mazzola metalworking complex (fig. 10) of the second half of the 8th- early 7th century BC at Pithekoussai (e.g. Klein 1972; Ridgway 1992, 91-95; Nijboer 1998, 240-244; D’Agostino 2006, 222) is thought to be a Greek metalworking “industrial” area with architecture resembling that of its Euboean homeland (as argued by Mazarakis Ainian 1997, 105); its discovery is exceptional. Rectangular building III yielded metallurgical debris (fragments of iron, slag and hammer scale) and was identified as a blacksmiths’ workshop. Building IV, initially oval but, after suffering earthquake damage, transformed into a rectan-

26. Concerning iron technology, Nijboer (1998, 230) believes that knowledge of iron processing probably ex- isted in central Italy prior to the 8th century BC on account of (so far) limited evidence from LBA-EIA contexts.

104 Xenia Charalambidou gular shape ca. 700 BC, is also thought to have been a workshop. Debris from this building has been reported to include iron slag, small pieces of copper alloy, lead, a fragment of a copper alloy ingot, a disc-shaped weight and a fibula discarded during production (Nijboer 1998, 242). Buchner (1981, 271) says the fibula is of Italic type and Nijboer (1998, 242) of a type encountered in both Campania and Greece. The presence of iron slag indicates that iron, as well as copper alloys, were worked at the Mazzola complex (Nijboer 1998, 242). The Greek architecture of the metalworking complex, the Greek-inspired (local?) kraters from the same context and the production of (Italic type?) fibulae (among other metal artefacts?) may again highlight the mixed character of the culture in Pithekoussai but it also makes it clear that the metallurgical evidence and all other finds from the Mazzola complex need to be revisited in light of the new interpretations emerging from the detailed studies of specific artefacts (e.g. Kroll 2001; 2008). One of the metal finds from Structure IV, the disc-shaped weight of 8.79 gr (one-half of the “Euboeic” stater: Kroll 2001, 81, 2008, 45) together with the balance weights from Lefkandi Toumba tomb 79 form our only material evidence, so far, for EIA pre-monetary exchange mechanisms in Euboea and its colonies.27 According to Kroll (2001; 2008), the discovery of the Euboean disk-shaped weight at Pithekoussai leaves no doubt that the influence of the “Euboeic” weight standard stems from Euboea’s pioneering role in the development of 8th-century long-distance trade and colonisation and its interaction with the Phoenicians. He points out that the “Euboeic” weight standard became the most influential weight standard in Archaic and later Greece.28 The development of regional and interregional markets in colonial contexts during the 8th century BC can also be related to increased demands for commodities. Changes in tableware sets, the introduction of new customs related to wine consumption and the enjoyment of wine in Greek or Greek-inspired drinking vessels are considered to have been brought about to a large extent by Euboean influences on the indigenous populations (e.g. Rathje 1990; Cold- stream 1998, 308-310; D’Agostino 2006, 215-216), as is evident in sites such as Pithekous- sai and Pontecagnano (see below). As has been noted, however (Colivvichi 2004, 58-59; Kel- ley 2012, 256), the adoption of Greek-style drinking vessels by the Italic population does not necessarily include the indiscriminate adoption of the symposium ritual and its ideology. At Pithekoussai, in the San Montano necropolis, the inscribed Cup of Nestor is considered to provide early evidence for a distinct sympotic lifestyle. In the context of the necropolis, this cup was a clear manifestation of ceremonial wine drinking, an activity that would have been crucial for the self-identification of the Pithekoussan LG elite (Węcowski 2014, 129-137). Al- phabetic inscriptions on sympotic vessels and the tableware related to wine consumption and symposia from Pithekoussai, Methone and Eretria (see above), attest to practices seen in both Euboean mother-cities and colonies/trading stations during the same period and to a community where symposia had become an important aspect of its life style influenced, in all likelihood, by the mother-city’s practices. In the Mazzola metalworking complex at Pithe- koussai, in apsidal building I (the only non-industrial structure at the site, according to Cold- stream 1998, 309) the renowned LG krater bearing a painted retrograde inscription (the earliest known potter’s signature in Greek, at least in a colonial context) was probably used as a

27. Excavations at the Euboean sanctuary of Apollo Delios at Zarakes have produced a later, 4th-century BC, bronze weight (Chatzidimitriou 2003). The dedicatory inscription on the weight constitutes the main clue to the identity of the deity (Apollo) worshipped at the site. 28. Its importance is evident not only in the 6th-century BC silver coins of Euboean cities and their colonies in Sicily and the Chalcidice, but was also the standard employed by Athens, Corinth and Samos for their coins.

105 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites sympotic vessel. Coldstream (1998) had suggested that a high official, who was responsible for the metallurgical activities performed at the site, might have lived there but, in reality, we know very little about the role and the status of (master) smiths within the community context and their involvement in wine consumption practices.29 According to Nijboer (1998, 205), ancient smiths in central Italy in the 8th and 7th centuries BC could include highly regarded craftsmen of a prominent status: “...it is probable that during the period 800 to 400 BC there was a general transformation of the status of metalworkers which is related to the stratification process itself as well as to the value that is attached to the artefacts they made”. Information from Cumae is more fragmentary than that from Pithekoussai. More recent evidence such as a number of pottery sherds dating to the late MG II period found in a ram- part (related to a 6th-century context) in the Northern fortification walls—originally from the earliest graves in Cumae? – may provide new information concerning its early foundation history (D’Agostino 2006, 232-233; Cuozzo et al. 2006; D’ Acunto 2017; see above D’Agostino 2006, 232 on the roughly contemporary foundation dates of Cumae and Pithe- koussai). According to Mermati (2012) and D’Acunto (2017), evidence from the site is gradually revealing complementary features between the pottery production of Cumae and Pithe- koussae. Apart from common features in ceramic wares, D’Agostino (2009; 2011) argued that Cumae and Pithekoussae exhibit distinct differences indicating that even these neighbouring sites do not fall within the same model of social structure: “Pithecussai is a socially open centre, which integrates traders and artisans, Orientals, Greeks and indigenous. Cumae is an oligarchic polis, dependent on the exploitation of a wide fertile chora” (D’Agostino 2011, 35). Moreover, princely tombs, which have been found at Cumae, are so far absent from Pithekoussai where burial customs are thought to indicate a social framework largely differentiated by age group and wealth/status (D’Agostino 2006, 225-226). A small group of graves of the elites at Cumae is reminiscent of funerary practices from Euboea. More specifically, the funerary ritual includes cremations with the ashes placed in a silver urn inside a bronze lebes, a practice that finds parallels in the graves of the Heroon necropolis at Eretria (D’Agostino 2006, 233; D’Acunto 2017, 309-311). Nevertheless, there seem to have been instances where the mixed collection of grave goods points to a mixed cultural background. A notable example is the late 8th-century BC tomb 104 Fondo Artiaco (e.g. Coldstream 1998, 309; Guzzo 2000; D’Agostino 2011, 46-47; D’Acunto 2017, 311-314), which most likely belonged to a social peer of the people in the Italic princely tombs (Coldstream 1998, 309). This tomb, with its mixed assortment of grave goods from Greece, the Near East and Italy indicates that the cultural background of such a princely tomb would have been as mixed as the artistic strains among its metal vessels (Coldstream 1998, 309). In Sicilian Naxos new evidence can shed light on the precise nature of architectural forms and settlement planning of the first phases of the colony (Lentini 2015). Τhe exact character of this colony is still under discussion, but evidence of cohabitation is also evident there (Lentini 2012). Euboean and Euboeanising ceramic products from the LG and EA levels of Naxos (most recently Lentini 1998; 2004; 2015; see also Malkin 1987, 175-176), such as the one-bird skyphos with horizontal lines (Coldstream 2004, 41-43) or the jug with cutaway neck (Lentini 1990; Coldstream 2004, 44), find parallels with pottery from Lefkandi and

29. Ethnographic examples (Nijboer 1998, 204-205) show that metalsmiths are hierarchically ranked on the basis of the metalwork they produce. Nijboer mentions that the status of smiths may vary from a. highly regarded, often with prominent status, b. equal to other craftsmen with no special position, and c. low status of servile nature.

106 Xenia Charalambidou

Eretria. We now also have concrete evidence that pottery products such as jugs with cutaway neck were produced at Chalcis on Euboea as can be seen in the deposit in the Mach- airas plot (e.g. fig. 3: top right) (for references see above). The jug with cutaway neck is a shape that appears in other Euboean and short-distance (daughter) colonies in Sicily, such as Zancle (Bacci 1998, 388, fig. 2m; Bacci & Tigano 1999, 94 [inv. no. 8832]) and Mylai (Ti- gano 2002, 51, tomb 48). Moreover, figured LG pottery in the Euboean (Cesnola) repertoire appears in Sicilian Naxos and in Leontini (Coldstream 2004, 46). Another type that is common in the Chalcidian colonies and daughter colonies (e.g. Zancle, Rhegion, Metauros, My- lai), as well as in Campania and south Etruria, from the end of the 8th to the early 6th century BC, is the well known “Chalcidian type” jug with horizontal rim (Bacci & Tigano 1999, 92- 93; Stampolidis 2003, 321; Mercuri 2004, 134-138). Significant evidence regarding the nature of the contact between the Euboeans and local populations, however, can also be gleaned from Italic sites such as Veii (Etruria) and Pon- tecagnano (Campania), as well as Timpone della Motta at Francavilla Marittima (Sybaritide). Veii in Etruria is described as an important distribution centre, able to act as an inter- mediary with the Etruscan cities that controlled the metal resources (D’Agostino 2006, 212, 215). The majority of imported vessels found in the EIA necropoleis are reported to have come from Euboea while, at the same time, a small number of Euboeanising imitations were produced locally (Descœudres & Kearsley 1983; Boitani et al. 1985; D’Agostino 2006, 212, 215). Pontecagnano in Campania, not far from Pithekoussai, is a rich source of information (D’Agostino 1977; 1999; 2014). It was exposed to a wide range of influences and developed a mixed cultural physiognomy manifested by the practice of inhumation alongside cremation whereas other areas in the same region of the so-called Fossa Tomb culture practised inhumation exclusively. In the 9th century BC, contacts took place between indigenous communities but in the first half of the 8th century BC changes in pottery styles in the Pontecag- nano necropolis30 reflect changes in cultural contacts. More specifically, in the second quarter of the 8th century BC, cist cremation burials are now seen alongside fossa/pit tombs. This change coincides with the appearance of Greek or Greek-type vases, principally Euboean or of Euboean style and is first seen immediately preceding the first arrival of Euboean settlers at Pithekoussai and Cumae (D’Agostino 2014). Burial practices at Pontecagnano and Pithe- koussai show similarities, according to Kelley (2012, 253), in terms of a basic “vase service” represented by shapes such as an oenochoe, a skyphos/kylix, a small local amphora and a bowl. He argues that this similarity in funerary equipment at Pontecagnano and Pithekous- sai may indicate close connections between the two communities and that the community at Pithekoussai was probably operating within a social and trade-based environment with connections also to mainland Italy (Kelley 2012, op.cit.). In the Sybaritide area recent evidence from the sanctuary on the acropolis of the Tim- pone della Motta at Francavilla Marittima (belonging to a settlement located near the sea and at the crossroads of key land routes) sheds light on the interactions between Euboean, other Greek and indigenous elements in a period that preceded, and subsequently over- lapped for some years, the foundation of Sybaris (ca. 730-720 BC) by settlers from Achaia (Kleibrink et al. 2012, 3). Kleibrink et al. (2012, 18) argued that since no Euboean-style pottery has been discovered along the land route between Pontecagnano and the Sibaritide, nor in the Basilicata sites, Euboean-indigenous contacts at Francavilla Marittima must have tak-

30. The Iron Age settlement of Pontecagnano has not yet been found.

107 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites en place by sea. The Timpone della Motta sanctuary, identified as a religious site central to the sites discussed above would have played an important role in attracting “migrant” craftsmen. They further argue that Euboean influences on local pottery indicate that the main drive for changes in local production came from the local Oenotrian elite. In the course of the 8th century BC, various types of pottery were deposited in the sanctuary on the acropolis of the Timpone della Motta including: local (Oenotrian) matt-painted pottery, matt-painted pottery imported from the Salento area, Greek imports such as Corin- thian, Euboean, Achaian, and East Greek vases, and locally produced, Euboean-inspired pottery (Van der Wielen-van Ommeren & De Lachenal 2007; 2008; Jacobsen et al. 2008-2009; 2009; Jacobsen & Handberg 2010, 11-35).31 The locally manufactured Euboanising vessels (named “Oinotrian-Euboean” by the excavators) were found mainly in contexts related to the sacred buildings Vb and Vc (in use between ca. 800 and 660/650 BC) and at some distance to the east of these buildings, but still within the sanctuary. This evidence, along with the pottery workshop at the foot of Timpone della Motta that produced Euboeanising vessels, implies the presence of Euboean immigrant-potters in this part of the Sibaritide but not itinerant craftsmen since these potters seem to have settled there. It is noteworthy that this workshop, which probably functioned from the second quarter of the 8th century BC until at least the beginning of the EPC period, was close to an already existing indigenous pottery workshop. Jacobsen, Handberg and Mittica (2008-2009, 90-95) distinguish two different potting traditions: that of the Euboean potters, who produced the “Oinotrian-Euboean” pottery using a fast turning potter’s wheel, the multiple brush, a shiny glaze and black and white decoration, reflecting the Greek technological tradition, and that of the indigenous potters who continued to produce handmade matt-painted pottery produced in a coiling technique even after the introduction of the “Oinotrian-Euboean” wares (see also Kleibrink et al. 2012). Ar- chaeometric analysis indicated that the handmade matt-painted and the wheel-turned Oi- notrian-Euboean pottery were produced from similar clay. The repertoire of the Oinotrian- Euboean production mainly comprises Greek-type skyphoi and indigenous-type scodellae but during the second half of the 8th century BC it expanded to include larger kraters, lekanes, kalathiskoi, oenochoai, amphorae and bi-conical jars. Greek-style vases, as well as the production of bi-conical jars and scodellae, may be seen as evidence of a ceramic repertoire ad- justed to the needs of the indigenous population. Jacobsen, Handberg & Mittica (2008-2009, 95) rightfully point out that the concept of “marketing and targeting” was not unfamiliar to Euboean potters who had already produced plates with Geometric decoration for the Phoe- nician market (see Boardman 2004). The Oinotrian-Euboean group from the Timpone della Motta also includes a number of vessels that are stylistically very close to the Euboean LG figure-decorated pottery. The introduction of these Greek and Greek-style drinking cups can be seen as a movement towards the consumption of wine and feasting in the context of the sanctuary. The phenomenon of “expatriated” Greek potters has been discussed for several sites in Italy, including Pithekoussai (see above; for examples and references, see also Jacobsen et al. 2008-2009, 91-92), but the publications of the Timpone della Motta are among the first bal- anced approaches towards an understanding of cultural interactions between Greeks and the indigenous populations of Italy. What has been argued for Veii, Vulci and Campania by D’Agostino (2006, 216) seems to be applicable to a wider area. Social visibility of wine con-

31. Imported pottery of later periods includes pottery from Corinth, East Greece, Attica, Laconia, and Achaia.

108 Xenia Charalambidou sumption and feasting probably gave rise to the development of local centres of production to satisfy this demand which exceeded the imported supply. This demand could also have partly been satisfied by Euboean potters who stayed and operated within the community. Understanding how these potters went about their work may help us better comprehend the various socio-economic processes that were in action in the 8th century BC in the West. Par- allels in the ways Greeks and Phoenicians penetrated local communities have been pointed out by Pappa (2013, 179) who argued that from an early stage Phoenician merchants and artisans remained long enough in Western Mediterranean settlements to set up workshops; it was through these merchants that the transfer of metallurgical technology and ceramic styles came about. Such processes did not always involve direct control and seizing of land. Such a multifaceted range of commercial activities can also be seen among the Euboeans in Italy who managed to create and/or participate in networks between different types of settlements.

Epilogue

Recently discovered evidence on Euboea adds significantly to our knowledge of the settlement map of the island from the beginning of the EIA onward. While there is a clear connection between EIA Lefkandi and its BA counterpart, other sites (e.g. Chalcis, Amarynthos, Karystos) require additional research before a connection can be securely established. Most of the Euboean sites that have produced evidence for occupation at the beginning of the EIA seem to continue through the Iron Age. However, there exist other cases as well: settlements that were reportedly abandoned at the end of the EIA (Lefkandi, Viglatouri?) or present a significant hiatus between the LBA and the beginning of the EIA (Eretria). Furthermore, new evidence reinforces the notion that Euboea was not an undivided geographical and cultural entity but rather an array of distinct regions, each with its own representative features. 8th-century Euboean colonisation was not a sudden development: many advances crucial to the prominent role the Euboeans came to play, such as their key contribution to important Aegean and Mediterranean trade networks, can be seen early on at Lefkandi. The Euboeans managed to create and participate in extensive trade networks from an early stage, extend- ing from neighbouring sites (such as Oropos and Skyros) to distant areas. Euboean colonisation intensified the island’s participation in a wide range of economic activities supported by literate elites who in the 8th century BC adopted a sympotic life style (which also indicates a rise in their standard of living). The abovementioned phenomena did not constitute a Euboean monopoly but Euboeans, as Malkin points out in this volume, were among the first to build the connectivity networks that became critical for the colonisation processes of later years as well. At any rate, it should be pointed out that we are sometimes still confronted with a bias of selectivity in the types of material finds presented or published (a significant point originally made by Papadopoulos 1996; 2011). This becomes more pronounced in some settlements with poorly understood Euboean connections (e.g. Koukos Sykias in the Northern Aegean). Pappa (2013, 37) described a particularly instructive example of the problems that arise from selectivity in the publication of finds, albeit from a different part of the Mediter- ranean: Al Mina in northern Syria. The quantities of Greek ceramics discovered at Al Mina generated discussions regarding the identity of the traders. It was first assumed that the site had been a Euboean emporion but after the non-Greek material was studied and pub-

109 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites lished, the response was a dramatic change of opinion with all trading activity now placed in the hands of the Phoenicians. Returning now to the specifics of Euboean colonisation, there are both common as well as distinct features between Euboean mother-cities and colonies. Most importantly Euboean mother-cities do not exhibit the hybrid character/identities attested to a number of their foundations – especially in Italy. As it becomes obvious, such characteristics can be explained by the fact that Euboeans in colonial contexts came in contact more frequently with people of different cultural backgrounds. As Dietler (2005, 62-63; see also Mullins 2011, 136) has pointed out colonisation is an active process of creative appropriation, manipulation and transformation played out by individuals and social groups with a variety of competing inter- ests and strategies of action embedded in local political relations and cultural perceptions. This paper focused on the Euboeans who acted within a larger world of connections, migra- tions, colonisations, exchanges and influences in which other Greeks, people from the East- ern Mediterranean and various Italic groups intermingled.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andreiomenou, A., 1966. Πρωτογεωμετρικά αγγεία εκ Χαλκίδος, in Χαριστήριον εις Α. Ορλάνδον, Ath- ens, 248-269. Andreiomenou, A., 1972. Έρευναι και τυχαία ευρήματα εν τη πόλει και τη επαρχία Χαλκίδος, ArchDelt 27, 170-184. Andreiomenou, A., 1984. Skyphoi de l’atelier de Chalcis (fin Xe-fin VIIIe s. av. J.C.), BCH 108, 37-69. Andreiomenou, A., 1985. Skyphoi de l’atelier de Chalcis (fin Xe-fin VIIIe s. av. J.C.), II, BCH 109, 49-75. Andreiomenou, A., 1986. Vases protogéométriques et subprotogéométriques I-II de l’atelier de Chal- cis, BCH 110, 89-120. Andreiomenou, A., 1992. Céramique de l’atelier de Chalcis (XIe-VIIIe s. av. J.-C.): les vases ouverts, BCH Suppl. 23, Paris, 87-130. Andreiomenou, A., 1998. Eretria in età geometrica; Calcide e Akraiphia in età sub-geometrica in Bats & D’Agostino 1996, 153-166. Andreou, S., Fotiadis, M. & Kotsakis, K., 1996. Review of Aegean Prehistory V: The Neolithic and Bronze Age of Northern Greece, AJA 100, 537-597. Antonaccio, C.M., 1995. An Archaeology of Ancestors. Tomb Cult and Hero Cult in Early Greece, Lanham. Arjona Pérez, M., 2007. Λατρείες και ιερά των Ευβοέων: Γεωμετρική – Αρχαϊκή Εποχή, University of Thes- saly (unpublished PhD thesis). Bacci, G.M., 1998. Zancle: un aggiornamento, in Bats & D’Agostino 1998, 387-392. Bacci, G.M. & Tigano, G. (eds.), 1999. Da Zancle a Messina. Un percorso archeologico attraverso gli scavi, vol. Ι, Palermo. Bakhuizen, S.C., 1985. Studies in the Topography of Chalcis on Euboea (a Discussion of the Sources), Chal- cidian Studies I, Leiden. Bats, M. & D’Agostino, B. (eds.), 1998. Euboica: L’Eubea e la presenza euboica in Calcidica. Atti del ucon- vegno internazionale di Napoli, 13-16 Novembre 1996, Napoli. Becker, M.J., 1995. Human Skeletal Remains from the Pre-Colonial Greek Emporium of Pithekoussai on Ischia (NA). Culture Contact in Italy from the early VIII to the II Century BC, in N. Christie (ed.), Settlement and Economy in Italy. 1500 BC-AD 1500. Papers of the Fifth Conference of Italian Archae- ology, Oxford, 273-281. Becker, M.J., 1999. Human Skeletons from the Greek Emporium of Pithekoussai on Ischia (NA): Culture, Contact and Biological Change in Italy after the 8th Century BC, in R.H. Tykot, J. Morter & J.E. Robb (eds.), Social Dynamics of the Prehistoric Central Mediterranean, London, 217-225.

110 Xenia Charalambidou

Betelli, M., 2000. La punta di lancia dalla tomba 6 di Eretria: una riconsiderazione, in A. Carandini (ed.), Roma - Romolo, Remo e la fondazione della città (catalogo della mostra), 346-348. Betelli, M., 2001. A Supposed Mycenaean Spearhead from Eretria, SMEA, 189-193. Bilouka, A., Graikos, I. & Klanga, P., 2005. Νέα Καλλικράτεια 2005: Η ανασκαφική έρευνα στο Ανατολικό νεκροταφείο του αρχαίου οικισμού, ΑΕΜΤΗ 19, 239-248. Bilouka, A. & Graïkos, I., 2009. Νέα Καλλικράτεια Χαλκιδικής : Η πρόσφατη σωστική ανασκαφική έρευνα (1999-2005), στην Ερετριακή αποικία των Δικαιοπολιτών στον Θερμαίο Κόλπο, AEMTH, 20 χρόνια, 239-247. Blandin, B., 2007. Les pratiques funéraires d’époque géométrique à Érétrie : espace des vivants, demeures des morts, Érétria : fouilles et recherches XVII, Lausanne. Blandin, B., 2008. Amarynthos au debut de l’age du fer. A la lumière des fouilles récentes, AntK 51, 180-190. Blandin, B., 2011. Amarynthos au debut de l’age du fer: Les travailles de la proprieté M. Patavalis, in Mazarakis Ainian 2011, 857-872. Boardman, J., 1996. Euboeans Overseas: A Question of Identity, in D. Evely, I.S. Lemos & S. Sher- ratt (eds.), Minotaur and Centaur: Studies in the Archaeology of Crete and Euboea Presented to M.R. Popham, Oxford, 155-160. Boardman, J., 2004. Copies of Pottery: By and for Whom?, in K. Lomas (ed.), Greek Identity in the West- ern Mediterranean. Papers in Honour of Brian Shefton, Leiden, 149-162. Boitani, Fr., Ridgway, D. & Deriu, A., 1985. Provenance and Firing Techniques of Geometric Pottery from Veii: A Mössbauer Investigation, BSA 80, 139-150. Breglia, L., 2009. I culti di Cuma Opicia, in Cuma. Atti del XLVIII Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto, 27 settembre – 1 ottobre 2008, Taranto, 231-270. Buchner, G., 1981. Pithekoussai: Alcuni Aspetti Peculiari, ASAtene 59, 263-273. Buchner, G., 1982. Die Beziehungen zwischen der euböischen Kolonie Pithekoussai auf der Insel Ischia und dem nordwestsemitischen Mittelmeerraum in der zweiten Hälfte des 8. Jhs. v. Chr., in H.G. Nie- meyer (ed.), Phönizier im Westen. Die Beiträge des Internationalen Symposiums über “Die phönizische Expansion im westlichen Mittelmeerraum” in Köln vom 24. bis 27. April 1979, Mainz, 279-306. Buchner, G. & Ridway, D., 1993. Pithekoussai I. La necropoli: Tombe 1-723 scavate dal 1952 al 1961, Rome. Carington-Smith, J. & Vokotopoulou, J., 1988. Ανασκαφή στον Κούκο Συκιάς, Ν. Χαλκιδικής, AEMTH 2, 357-370. Carington-Smith, J. & Vokotopoulou, J., 1989. Ανασκαφή στον Κούκο Συκιάς, Ν. Χαλκιδικής, AEMTH 3, 425-438. Carington-Smith, J. & Vokotopoulou, J., 1990. Η ανασκαφή στον Κούκο Συκιάς 1990, AEMTH 4, 439-454. Carington-Smith, J. & Vokotopoulou, J., 1992. Excavation at Koukos, Sykia, AEMTH 6, 495-502. Catling, H.W., 1985. The Arrangement of Some Grave Goods in the Dark Age Cemeteries of Lefkan- di, BSA 80, 19-23. Charalambidou, X., 2003. Συμβολή στην τοπογραφία της Ερέτριας των αρχαϊκών χρόνων, AETHSE 1, 993-1018. Charalambidou, X., 2008. Ωρωπός και Εύβοια κατά την Αρχαϊκή εποχή (700 π.Χ. – αρχές του 5ου αι. π.Χ.). Η μελέτη της τροχήλατης κεραμεικής και των στρωματογραφικών δεδομένων από τον Ωρωπό, University of Athens (unpublished PhD thesis). Charalambidou, X., 2011. Developments on Euboea and at Oropos at the end of the “Dark Ages” (ca. 700 to the mid-7th century BC), in Mazarakis Ainian 2011, 810-831. Charalambidou, X., 2017a. The Pottery from the Sacrificial Refuse Area in Plakari-Karystos: First As- sessment, in Tankosić et al. 2017, 253-274. Charalambidou, X., 2017b. Euboea and the Euboean Gulf region: Pottery in context, in Charalambidou & Morgan 2017, 123-149. Charalambidou, X., Kiriatzi, E., Müller, N., Georgakopoulou, M., Müller Celka, S. & Krapf, T., 2016. Ere- trian Ceramic Products Through Time: Investigating the Early history of a Greek Metropolis, in the

111 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites

Journal of Archaeological Science Reports, NARNIA Special Issue: Interdisciplinary studies of ancient Materials from the Mediterranean, 530-535. Charalambidou, X. & Morgan, C. (eds.), 2017. Interpreting the Seventh Century BC. Tradition and Inno- vation, Oxford. Chavela, K., 2012. Τα Tαφικά Έθιμα ως Δείκτης Διακοινοτικών και Διαπολιτισμικών Επαφών στο Χώρο της Κεντρικής Μακεδονίας κατά την Εποχή του Σιδήρου, in N.Chr. Stampolidis, A. Kanta & A. Gi- annikouri (eds.), Athanasia: the Earthly, the Celestial and the Underworld in the Mediterranean from the Late Bronze and the Early Iron Age. Proceedings of the International Conference held at Rhodes (2009), Herakleion, 307-322. Chatzidimitriou, A., 2003. Χάλκινο ενεπίγραφο σταθμίο από τους Ζάρακες Καρυστίας, AETHSE 1, 1077-1092. Chatzidimitriou, A., 2003-2004a. Ανασκαφικά δεδομένα και Πορίσματα από την Αρχαιολογική Έρευνα στους Ζάρακες Καρυστίας, ArchEubMel 35, 53-68. Chatzidimitriou, A., 2003-2004b. Θραύσμα ανάγλυφου πίθου από τους Ζάρακες Καρυστίας, Archaiog- nosia 12, 181-196. Chatzidimitriou, A., 2004-2009. Ενεπίγραφα όστρακα από τους Ζάρακες Καρυστίας, ΗΟΡΟΣ 17-21, 521- 540. Choremis, Α.Κ., 1971. Αρχαιότητες και Μνημεία Εύβοιας: Χάλκις. Οικόπεδο Αντ. Μαχαίρα, οδός Αμαρυν- θίων 5 (Ο.Τ. 389), ArchDelt 26, Chr., 252. Choremis, Α.Κ., 1972. Αρχαιότητες και Μνημεία Εύβοιας: Χάλκις. Οδός Αμαρυνθίων 5 (Ο.Τ. 389) (οικόπε- δον Αντ. Μαχαίρα), ArchDelt 27, Chr., 340. Crielaard, J.P., 2015. The Iron Age Sanctuary and Settlement at Karystos-Plakari, in Descoeudres & Paspalas 2015, 191-200. Crielaard, J.P. & Burgers, G.-J., 2012. Greek Colonists and Indigenous Populations at L’ Amastuola, Southern Italy-II, BaBesch 87, 69-106. Crielaard, J.P. & Driessen, J., 1994. The Hero’s Home. Some Reflections on the Building at Toumba, Lefkandi, Topoi 4, 251-270. Crielaard, J.P. & Songu, F., 2017. Connectivity and Insularity in 1st-millennium Southern Euboia: the Ev- idence from the Sanctuary of Karystos-Plakari, in Tankosić et al. 2017, 275-290. Crielaard, J.P., Songu, F., Chidiroglou, M. & Kosma, M., 2011-2012. The Plakari Archaeological Project. Project outline and Preliminary Report on the First Field Season (2010), Pharos 18, 83-106. Crielaard, J.P., Barbetsea, L., Charalambidou, X., Chidiroglou, M., Groenhuijzen, M., Kosma, M. & Son- gu, F., 2013. The Plakari Archaeological Project: Preliminary Report on the Second Field Season (2011), Pharos 19, 35-56. Crielaard, J.P., Charalambidou, X., Chidiroglou, M., Kosma, M. & Songu, F., 2014. The Plakari Archaeo- logical Project: Preliminary Report on the Third Field Season (2012), Pharos 20, 1-24. Coldstream, J.N., 1982. Greeks and Phoenicians in the Aegean, in Niemeyer 1982, 261-275. Coldstream, J.N., 1988. Early Greek Pottery in Tyre and Cyprus: Some Preliminary Comparisons, RDAC, 35-44. Coldstream, J.N., 1998a. The First Exchanges between Euboeans and Phoenicians: Who Took the Initi- ative? in S. Gitin, A. Mazar, & E. Stern, (eds.), Mediterranean Peoples in Transition: Thirteenth to Ear- ly Tenth Centuries B.C.E., Studies in Honor of Trude Dothan, Jerusalem, 353-360. Coldstream, J.N., 1998b. Drinking and Eating in Euboean Pithekoussai, in Bats & D’Agostino 1998, 303-310. Coldstream, J.N., 2004. The Various Aegean Affinities of the Early Pottery from Sicilian Naxos, in M.C. Lentini (ed.), Le due città di Naxos. Atti del Seminario di Studi Giardini, Naxos 29-31 ottobre 2000, Milan, 40-50. Colivicchi, F., 2004. L’attro vino. Vino, cultura e identità nella Puglia e Basilicata anelleniche, in Siris. Studi e ricerche della Scuola di Specializzazione in archeologia di Matera 5, 23-68. Cullen, T., Talalay, L.E., Keller, D.R., Karimali, L. & Farrand, W.R., 2013. The Prehistory of the Paximadhi Peninsula, Euboea, Philadelphia. Cuozzo, M., D’Agostino, B. & Del Verme, L., 2006. Cuma. Le fortificazioni 2. I materiali dai terrapieni ar- caici, Naples.

112 Xenia Charalambidou

D’Acunto, M., 2017. Cumae in Campania during the Seventh Century BC, in Morgan & Charalambidou 2017, 293-329. D’Agostino, B., 1977. Tombe “principesche” dell’orientalizzante antico da Pontecagnano, Rome. D’Agostino, B., 1994. Pitecusa: Una apoikìa di tipo particolare, in D’Agostino & Ridgway 1994, 19-27. D’Agostino, B., 1999. La ceramica greca e di tipo greco dalle necropoli della i età del ferro di Pon- tecagnano, in G. Bailo Modesti & P. Gastaldi (eds.), Prima di Pithecusa i pi`u antichi materiali greci del golfo di Salerno. Catalogo della Mostra, 29 Aprile 1999, Pontecagnano Faiano, Museo Nazionale dell’Agro Picentino, Naples, 13-24. D’Agostino, B., 2006. The First Greeks in Italy, in G.R. Tsetskhladze (ed.), Greek Colonisation. An Account of Greek Colonies and other Settlements Overseas, Leiden, 201-237. D’Agostino, B., 2009. Pithecusa e Cuma all’alba della colonizzazione, in Cuma. Atti del XLVIII Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto, 27 settembre – 1 ottobre 2008, Taranto, 169-207. D’Agostino, B., 2011. Pithecusae e Cuma nel quadro della Campania di età arcaica, RM 117, 35-53. D’Agostino, B., 2014. The Archaeological Background of the Analysed Pendent Semicircle Skyphoi from Pontecagnano, in M. Kerschner & I.S. Lemos (eds.), Archaeometric Analyses of Euboean and Euboean Related Pottery: New Results and their Interpretations. Proceedings of the Round Table Conference held at the Austrian Archaeological Institute in Athens, 15 and 16 April 2011, Vienna, 181-190. D’Agostino, B. & Ridgway, D. (eds.), 1994. APOIKIA. I più antichi insediamenti Greci in Occidente: Funzioni e modi dell’organizzazione politica e sociale, Scritti in onore di Giorgio Buchner, Naples. Demetriou, D., 2012. Negotiating Identity in the Ancient Mediterranean. The Archaic and Classical Multi- ethnic Emporia, Cambridge. Deriu, A., Buchner G., & Ridgway, D., 1986. Provenance and Firing Techniques of Geometric Pottery from Pithekoussai: A Mössbauer Investigation, AION 8, 99-116. Descœudres, J.-P., 2006-2007. Euboean Pottery Overseas (10th to 7th centuries BC), in J.-P. Descœudres & S.A. Paspalas (eds.), Proceedings of the 25th Anniversary Symposium of the Australian Archaeolog- ical Institute at Athens, Athens 10-12 October 2005, MeditArch 19/20, 3-24. Descœudres, J.-P. & Kearsley, R., 1983. Greek Pottery at Veii: Another Look, BSA 78, 9-53. Descoeudres, J.-P. & Paspalas, S.A. (eds.), 2015. Zagora in Context. Settlements and Intercommunal Links in the Geometric period (900-700 BC). Proceedings of the Conference held by the Australian Archae- ological Institute at Athens and the Athens Archaeological Society, Athens, 20-22 May 2012, Medi- tArch 25, Sydney. Dietler, M., 2001. Theorizing the Feast: Rituals of Consumption, Commensal Politics and the Power in African contexts, in M. Dietler & B. Hayden (eds.), Feasts: Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspec- tives on Food, Politics and Power, Washington DC, 65-114. Dietler, M., 2010. Archaeologies of Colonialism. Consumption, Entanglement, and Violence in Ancient Mediterranean France, Berkeley. Di Sandro, N., 1986. Le anfore archaiche dallo Scarico Gosetti, Pithecusa, Cahiers des amphores ar- chaïques et classiques, 2, Naples. Doonan, R.C.P. & Mazarakis Ainian, A., 2007. Forging Identity in Early Iron Age Greece: Implications of the Metalworking Evidence from Oropos, in Mazarakis Ainian, 2007 361-378. Geyer, F., 1962. Τοπογραφία και Ιστορία της νήσου Εύβοιας μέχρι του Πελοποννησιακού πολέμου, ArchEubMel 9, 18-124. Gimatzidis, S., 2010. Die Stadt Sindos: Eine Siedlung von der späten Bronze- bis zur Klassischen Zeit am Thermaischen Golf in Makedonien, Rahden. Gimatzidis, S., 2012. Αρχαϊκή κεραμική σε οικισμούς και ιερά της Μακεδονίας: η οικοσκευή των θνητών και των αθανάτων στη Σάνη της Παλλήνης, in M. Tiverios, V. Misailidou-Despotidou, E. Manakidou & A. Arvanitaki, Η κεραμεική της Αρχαϊκής εποχής στο Βόρειο Αιγαίο και την περιφέρειά του (700-480 π.Χ.), Θεσσαλονίκη, 19-22 Μαϊου 2011, Thessaloniki, 297-304. Greco, E., 1994. Pithekoussai: empòrion o apoikìa, in D’Agostino & Ridgway 1994, 13-18. Greco, E., 2006. Agora e Zeus Agoraios, in D. Morandi Bonacossi, E. Rova, F. Veronese & P. Zanovello (eds.), Tra oriente e occidente: studi in onore di E. Di Filippo Balestrazzi, Padua, 327-335.

113 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites

Groot, M., 2014. Burned offerings and sacrificial meals in Geometric and Archaic Karystos. Faunal remains form Plakari (2011-2012), Pharos 20, 25-52. Guzzo, P., 2000. La tomba 104 Artiaco di Cuma o sia dell’ambiguità del segno’, in I. Berlingò, H. Blanck, F. Cordano, P.G. Guzzo & M.C. Lentini (eds.), Damarato. Studi di antichità classica offerti a Paola Pela- gatti, Milan, 135-147. Hägg, R., 1983. Funerary Meals in the Geometric Necropolis at Asine?, in R. Hägg (ed.), The Greek Ren- aissance of the Eighth Century BC. Tradition and Innovation, Proceedings of the Second International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 1-5 June 1981, Stockholm, 189-193. Hammond, N.G.L., 1998. Eretria’s Colonies in the area of the Thermaic Gulf, BSA 93, 393-399. Hankey, V., 1952. Late Helladic Tombs at Khalkis, BSA 47, 49-95. Huber, S., 2003. L’aire sacrificielle au nord du sanctuaire d’Apollon Daphnéphoros. Un rituel des époques géométrique et archaïque, Érétria : fouilles et recherches XIV, Gollion. Huber, S., 2007. Un mystère résolu: Athéna sur l’acropole d’Erétrie, AntK 50, 120-129. Huber, S., 2008. Fouilles dans le sanctuaire d’Athéna sur l’acropole d’Erétrie, AntK 51, 148-153. Jacobsen, J.K., Handberg, S. & Mittica, G.P., 2008-2009. An Early Euboean Pottery Workshop in the Sibaritide, AION 15-16, 89-96. Jacobsen, J.K., Mittica, G.P. & Handberg, S., 2009. Oinotrian-Euboean Pottery in the Sibaritide. A Pre- liminary Report, in Μ. Bettelli, C. De Faveri & M. Osanna (eds.), Prima delle colonie, Organizzazi- one territoriale e produzioni ceramiche specializzate in Basilicata e Calabria settentrionale ionica nella prima età del ferro, Atti delle Giornate di Studio, Matera, 20-21 novembre 2007, Venosa, 203-222. Jacobsen, J.K. & Handberg, S., 2010. Excavation on the Timpone della Motta: Francavilla Marittima (1992–2004). 1. The Greek Pottery, Bari. Johnston, A.W. & Jones, R.E., 1978. The ‘SOS’ Amphora, BSA 73, 103-141. Karapaschalidou, A.A., 2003. Καστρί Κηρίνθου, AAX 5, 139-142. Kefalidou, E., 2012. Κεραμική από τη Νέα Καλλικράτεια στο Αρχαιολογικό Μουσείο Θεσσαλονίκης, in Tiverios et al. 2012, 91-104. Keller, D.R., 1985. Archaeological Survey in Southern Euboea, Greece. A Reconstruction of Human Activi- ty from Neolithic Times Through the Byzantine Period, Indiana University (unpublished PhD thesis). Kelley, O., 2012. Beyond Intermarriage: the Role of the Indigenous Italic Population at Pithekoussai, OJA 31, 245-260. Kerschner, M. & Lemos, I.S. (eds.), 2014. Archaeometric Analyses of Euboean and Euboean Related Pot- tery: New Results and their Interpretations. Proceedings of the Round Table Conference held at the Austrian Archaeological Institute in Athens, 15 and 16 April 2011, Vienna. Klein, J., 1972. A Greek Metalworking Quarter. Eighth-century Excavations in Ischia, Expedition 14, 34-39. Kleibrink, M., Barresi, L. & Fasanella Masci, M., 2012. The “Crosshatched bands style” and the “Undulat- ing bands style”. Two Italic Middle Geometric Matt-painted Pottery Styles from the Timpone della Motta (Francavilla Marittima), AntK 55, 3-24. Knappett, C. & Nikolakopoulou, I., 2014. Inside out? Materiality and Connectivity in the Aegean Archi- pelago, in A.B. Knapp & P. van Dommelen (eds.), The Cambridge Prehistory of the Bronze and Iron Age Mediterranean, Cambridge, 25-39. Kotsonas, A., 2015. What makes a Euboean Colony or Trading Station? Zagora in the Cyclades, Meth- one in the Thermaic Gulf, and Aegean Networks in the 8th century BC, in Descoeudres & Paspal- as 2015, 243-257. Kotsonas, A., Kiriatzi, E., Charalambidou, X., Müller, N.S., Roumbou, M. & Besios, M., 2017. Transport Amphorae from Methone: An Interdisciplinary Study of Production and Trade ca. 700 BC, in J. Strauss Clay, I. Malkin & Y. Tzifopoulos (eds.), Panhellenes at Methone: Graphê in Late Geometric and Protoarchaic Methone, Macedonia (ca 700 BCE), Berlin, 9-19. Koukouli-Chrysanthaki, C. & Papanikolaou, A., 1990. Ανασκαφή στην αρχαία Οισύμη, 1988-1990, AEMTH 4, 487-502. Kourou, N., 1999. Ανασκαφές Νάξου, το Νότιο Νεκροταφείο της Νάξου κατά τη Γεωμετρική Περίοδο. Έρευ- νες ετών 1931-1939, Athens. Kourou, N., 2011. Ταμύναι Ερετρικής και «Χθόνια λουτρά». Με αφορμή δύο πρωτογεωμετρικές υδρίσκες

114 Xenia Charalambidou

από το Αλιβέρι Ευβοίας, in P. Valavanis (ed.), Ταξιδεύοντας στην Κλασική Ελλάδα. Τόμος προς τιμήν του Καθηγητή Πέτρου Θέμελη, Athens, 119-134. Kourou, N., 2012. L’orizzonte euboico nell’Egeo ed i primi rapporti con l’Occidente, in Alle origini della Magna Grecia: mobilità, migrazioni, fondazioni. Atti del cinquantesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto, 1-4 ottobre 2010, Taranto, 161-188. Kourou, N. 2015. Early Iron Age Mortuary Contexts in the Cyclades. Pots, Function and Symbolism, in V. Vlachou (ed.), Pots, Workshops and Early Iron Age Society: Function and Role of Ceramics in Ear- ly Greece. Proceedings of the International Symposium held at the Université libre de Bruxelles, 14-16 November 2013, Brussels, 83-105. Krapf, T., 2011. Amarynthos in der Bronzezeit, AntK 54, 144-159. Kroll, J.H., 2001. Observations on Monetary Instruments in Pre-Coinage Greece, in M.S. Balmuth (ed.), Hacksilber to Coinage: New Insights into the Monetary History of the Near East and Greece. A Collec- tion of eight papers presented at the 99th Annual Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America, Numismatic Studies no. 24, The American Numismatic Society, New York, 77-103. Kroll, J.H., 2008. Early Iron Age Balance Weights at Lefkandi, Euboea, OJA 27, 37-48. Le Rider, G. & Verdan, S., 2002. La trouvaille d’Érétrie: réserve d’un orfèvre ou dépôt monétaire?, AntK 45, 133-152. Lederrey, Cl., 2008. Ein subprotogeometrische Kindergrab, AntK 51, 159-164. Lemos, I.S., 1998. Euboea and its Aegean Koine, in Bats & D’Agostino 1998, 45-58. Lemos, I.S., 2001. The Lefkandi Connection: Networking in the Aegean and the Eastern Mediterrane- an, in L. Bonfante & V. Karageorghis (eds.), Italy and Cyprus in Antiquity: 1500-450 BC. Proceedings of an International Symposium held at the Italian Academy for Advanced Studies in America at Colum- bia University, November 16-18, 2000, Nicosia, 215-226. Lemos, I.S., 2002. The Protogeometric Aegean. The Archaeology of the Late Eleventh and Tenth Centu- ries BC, Oxford. Lemos, I.S., 2006. Athens and Lefkandi: A Tale of Two Sites, in S. Deger-Jalkotzy & I.S. Lemos (eds.), Ancient Greece. From the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer, Edinburgh, 505-530. Lemos, I.S., 2007. ...ἐπεὶ πόρε μύρια ἕδνα...” (Iliad 22,472): Homeric Reflections in Early Iron Age Elite Burials, in E. Alram-Stern & G. Nightingale (eds.), Keimelion. Elitenbildung und elitärer Konsum von der mykenischen Palastzeit bis zur homerischen Epoche, Vienna, 275-284. Lemos, I.S., 2010. The Excavations at Lefkandi – Xeropolis (2003-2008), BICS 53, 134-135. Lemos, I.S., 2011-2012. Euboea and Central Greece in the Post-palatial and Early Greek Periods, AR, 19-27. Lemos, I.S., 2012. A Northern Aegean Amphora from Xeropolis, Lefkandi, in P. Adam-Veleni & K. Tzana- vari (eds.), Δινήεσσα. Τιμητικός τόμος για την Κατερίνα Ρωμιοπούλου, Thessaloniki, 177-182. Lemos, I.S., 2014. Communities in Transformation. An Archaeological Survey from the 12th to the 9th century BC, Pharos 20, 163-194. Lemos, I.S., 2015. The Missing dead: Late Geometric Burials at Lefkandi, in Descœudres & Paspalas 2015. Lemos, I.S. & Hatcher, H., 1986. Protogeometric Euboean and Skyros, OJA 5, 323-337. Lentini, M.C., 1990. Le oinochoai ‘a collo tagliato’. Un contributo alla conoscenza della ceramica di Naxos di VIII e VII secolo a.C., BdA 75, 67-82. Lentini, M.C., 1998. Nuovi rinvenimenti di ceramica euboica a Naxos di Sicilia, in Bats & D’Agostino 1998, 377-386. Lentini, M.C., 2004. L’abitato proto-arcaico di Naxos di Sicilia (scavi 1998-1999), in M.C. Lentini (ed.), Le due città di Naxos. Atti del Seminario di Studi Giardini, Naxos 29-31 ottobre 2000, Milano, 28-39. Lentini, M.C., 2012. Resti di capanne della tarda età del Ferro a Naxos di Sicilia, Aristonothos. Scritti per il Mediterraneo antico 7, 157-174. Lentini, M.C., 2015. Recent Investigation on the Early Settlement Levels at Sicilian Naxos, in Des- cœudres & Paspalas 2015, 309-315. Malkin, I., 1987. Religion and Colonization in Ancient Greece, Leiden. Malkin, I., 2013. Foundations, in K.A. Raaflaub & H. van Wees (eds.), A Companion to Archaic Greece, Oxford.

115 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites

Matsas, D., Karadima, H. & Koutsoumanis, M., 1993. Η ανασκαφή στην Παναγία Τ’ Μαντάλ της Σαμοθράκης το 1993, ΑΕΜΤΗ 7, 647-655. Mazarakis Ainian, Α., 1987. Geometric Eretria, AntK 30, 3-24. Mazarakis Ainian, A., 1997. From Rulers’ Dwellings to Temples. Architecture, Religion and Society in Early Iron Age Greece (1100-700 B.C.), Jonsered. Mazarakis Ainian, A. (ed.), 2007. Oropos and Euboea in the Early Iron Age. Acts of an International Round Table, University of Thessaly, 18-20 June, 2004, Volos. Mazarakis Ainian, A., 2007-2008. Buried among the Living in Early Iron Age Greece: Some Thoughts, in G. Bartoloni & M.G. Benedettini (eds.), Sepolti tra i vivi / Buried among the living. Evidenza ed inter- pretazione di contesti funerari in abitato, Atti del convegno internazionale, Roma, 26-29 Aprile 2006, Scienze dell’Antichità, Storia, Archeologia, Rome, 365-398. Mazarakis Ainian, A. (ed.), 2011. The “Dark Ages” Revisited. Acts of an International Symposium in Mem- ory of William D.E. Coulson, University of Thessaly, Volos, 14-17 June 2007, Volos. Mazarakis Ainian, A., 2012a. Euboean Mobility towards the North: New Evidence from the Sporades, in M. Iacovou (ed.), Cyprus and the Aegean in the Early Iron Age. The Legacy of Nicolas Coldstream, Nicosia, 53-75. Mazarakis Ainian, A., 2012b. The Form and Structure of Euboean Society in the Early Iron Age Based on Some Recent Research, in Alle origini della Magna Grecia. Mobilità, migrazioni, fondazioni, Taran- to, 1-4 ottobre 2010, Atti del 50o Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto, 73-99. Mazarakis Ainian, A., 2017. Conservatism vs Innovation: Architectural Rorms in Early Archaic Greece, in Charalambidou & Morgan 2017, 173-185. Mazarakis Ainian, A. & Vlachou, V., 2014. Archaeometric Analysis of Early Iron Age Pottery Samples from Oropos: Local or Euboean Production?, in Kerschner & Lemos 2014, 95-107. Mele, A., 2003. Le anomalie di Pithecusa. Documentazioni archeologiche e tradizioni letterarie, Inci- denza dell’antico 1, 13-39. Mele, A., 2009. Cuma in Opicia tra Greci e Romani, in Cuma, in Atti del XLVIII Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto, 27 settembre – 1 ottobre 2008, Taranto, 77-167. Mele, A., 2014. Greci in Campania, Roma. Mercuri L., 2004. Eubéens en Calabre à l’époque archaïque: formes de contacts et d’implantation, BÉFAR 321, Rome. Mermati, F., 2012. Cuma: le ceramiche arcaiche. La produzione pithecusano-cumana tra la metà dell’VIII e l’inizio del VI a.C., Naples. Misailidou-Despotidou, V., 1979. Από το νεκροταφείο της αρχαίας Αφύτιος, ArchDelt 34, 70-84. Misailidou-Despotidou, V., 1999. Ανασκαφική έρευνα στην αρχαία Άφυτη, AEMTH 13, 305-313. Misailidou-Despotidou, V., 2009. Άφυτις 1997-2006, in AEMTH, 20 χρόνια, 221-237. Misailidou-Despotidou, V., 2012. Η αρχαϊκή κεραμική από το νεκροταφείο της αρχαίας Άφυτης, in Tive- rios et al. 2012, 371-383. Moschonissioti, S., 1998. Excavation at Ancient Mende, in Bats & D’Agostino 1998, 255-271. Moschonissioti, S., 2004. Εγχώρια διακοσµηµένη κεραµική από το νεκροταφείο της αρχαίας Μένδης, in N.Chr. Stampolidis & A. Giannikouri (eds.), Το Αιγαίο στην Πρώιμη Εποχή του Σιδήρου. Πρακτικά του Διεθνούς Συμποσίου, Ρόδος, 1-4 Νοεμβρίου 2002, Athens, 279-287. Moschonissioti, S., 2010. Child Burials at the Seaside Cemetery of Ancient Mende, in A.-M. Guimier- Sorbets & Y. Morizot (eds.), L’enfant et la mort dans l’Antiquité. Νouvelles recherches dans les né- cropoles grecques. Le singalement des tombes d’enfants, Paris, 207-25. Moschonissioti, S., 2012. Το εργαστήριο γραπτής κεραμικής της Μένδης από τον 8ο έως τον 5ο αι. π.Χ. – Τα ευρήματα του νεκροταφείου, University of Athens (unpublished PhD thesis). Moschonissioti, S., 2017. The City of Mende during the Late 8th and 7th Centuries BC, in Morgan & Charalambidou 2017, 355-363. Moschonissioti, S., Pentedeka, A. Kiriatzi, E. & Mexi, M., 2005. Πετρογραφικές αναλύσεις Γεωμετρικής και Πρώιμης Αρχαϊκής Κεραμικής από το Νεκροταφείο της Αρχαίας Μένδης. Μερικές σκέψεις για την παραγωγή και διακίνηση κεραμικής στην Κεντρική Μακεδονία, AEMTH 19, 249-267. Mullins, P.R., 2011. The Archaeology of Consumption, Annual Review of Anthropology 40, 133-144.

116 Xenia Charalambidou

Naso, A., 2014. Pendent Semicircle Skyphoi from Central Italy in the Light of the Archaeometric Re- sults, in Kerschner & Lemos 2014, 169-179. Nightingale, G., 2007. Lefkandi. An Important Node in the International Exchange Network of Jewel- lery and Personal Adornment, in I. Galanaki, H. Tomas, Y. Galanakis & R. Laffineur (eds.), Between the Aegean and Baltic Seas Prehistory across Borders, Aegaeum 27, Liège, 421-429. Nijboer, A.J., 1998. From Household Production to Workshops: Archaeological Evidence for Economic Trans- formations, Pre-Monetary Exchange and Urbanization in Central Italy from 800 to 400 BC, Groningen. Panagopoulou, M., 1995. Αρχάμπολη Καρυστίας, Αρχαιολογική έρευνα, Athens. Papadopoulos, J.K., 1996. Euboians in Macedonia? A Closer Look, ΟJA 15, 151-181. Papadopoulos, J.K., 1997. Phantom Euboians, JMA 10, 191-219. Papadopoulos, J.K., 2005. The Early Iron Age Cemetery at Torone. Excavations conducted by the Austral- ian Archaeological Institute at Athens in collaboration with the Athens Archaeological Society, Los Angeles. Papadopoulos, J.K., 2011. “Phantom Euboians”. A decade on, in D.W. Rupp & J.E. Tomlinson (eds.), Euboea and Athens. Proceedings of a Colloquium in Memory of Malcolm B. Wallace, Athens, June 2009, Athens, 113-133. Parker, V., 1997. Untersuchungen zum Lelantischen Krieg und verwandten Problemen der frühgriechischen Geschichte, Stuttgart. Pappa, E., 2013. Early Iron Age Exchange in the West: Phoenicians in the Mediterranean and the Atlantic, Ancient Near Eastern Studies Suppl. 43, Leuven. Pelagatti, P., 2004. Le due Naxos: un gemellaggio dalle origini, in M.C. Lentini (ed.), Le due città di Nax- os. Atti del Seminario di Studi Giardini, Naxos 29-31 ottobre 2000, Milan, 22-27. Philippson, A., 1951. Die Griechischen Landschaften: Eine Landeskunde. Der Nordosten der Griechischen Halbinsel I.2. Das österliche Mittelgriechenland und die Insel Euboea, Frankfurt. Popham, M.R., 1994. Precolonisation: Early Greek Contacts with the East, in G.R. Tsetskhladze & F. De Angelis (eds.), The Archaeology of Greek Colonisation. Essays Dedicated to Sir John Boardman, Lon- don, 11-34. Popham, M.R., 1995. An Engraved Near Eastern Bronze Bowl from Lefkandi, OJA 14, 103-107. Popham, M.R., Sackett, L.H. & Themelis, P.G. (eds.), 1980. Lefkandi I. The Iron Age. The Settlement. The Cemeteries, BSA Suppl. 11, London. Popham, M.R., Calligas, P. & Sackett, L.H., 1989. Further excavation of the Toumba cemetery at Lefkan- di, 1984 and 1986. A preliminary report, AR 35, 117-129. Popham, M.R., Calligas, P. & Sackett, L.H. (eds.), 1993. Lefkandi II. 2. The Protogeometric Building at Tou- mba. The Excavation, Architecture and Finds, BSA Suppl. 23, Oxford. Popham, M.R. & Lemos, I.S., 1995. A Euboean Warrior Trader, OJA 14, 151-157. Popham, M.R. & Lemos, I.S., 1996. Lefkandi III. The Toumba Cemetery. The Excavations of 1981, 1984, 1986 and 1992-4: Plates, BSA Suppl. 29, Oxford. Psalti, A., 2011. Νέος εικονιστικός κρατήρας από τη Γεωμετρική Ερέτρια: ο κρατήρας των μελανών ίππων, in Mazarakis Ainian 2011, 873-890. Rathje, A., 1990. The Adoption of the Homeric Banquet in Central Italy in the Orientalizing period, in O. Murray (ed.), Sympotica: A Symposium on the Symposion, Oxford, 279-288. Reber, K., 2001. Unbekanntes Euböa. Auf Griechenlands zweitgrößter Insel warten archäologische Stätten auf ihre Erforschung, AW 32, 449-460. Reber, K. et al., 2015. Aktivitäten der Schweizerischen Archäologischen Schule in Griechenland 2014, AntK 58, 129-151. Reed, C. M., 2003. Maritime Traders in the Ancient Greek World, Cambridge. Ridgway, D., 1992. The First Western Greeks, Cambridge. Ridgway, D., 2000. The first Western Greeeks Revisited, in D. Ridgway (ed.), Ancient Italy in its Mediter- ranean Settings: Studies in Honour of Ellen Macnamara, London, 179-191. Sackett, L.H., Hankey, V., Howell, R.J., Jacobsen, T.W. & Popham, M.R., 1966. Prehistoric Euboea: Contri- butions Toward a Survey, BSA 61, 33-112. Sampson, A., 1973-1974. Κήρινθος, ArchDelt 29, Chr., 484-487.

117 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites

Sampson, A., 1976a. Συμβολή στην Τοπογραφία της Αρχαίας Χαλκίδος. Από τους προϊστορικούς χρόνους μέχρι το τέλος της Ρωμαϊκής περιόδου, Chalcis. Sampson, A., 1976b. Ανασκαφή εις την ακρόπολη της αρχαίας Κηρίνθου, AAA 8, 32-37. Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E., 1993. Καστρί Λιχάδας, ArchDelt 48, Chr., 196-197. Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E., 1994. Λιχάδα. Καστρί, ArchDelt 49, Chr., 297. Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E., 1994-1995. Ανασκαφή στο Καστρί Λιχάδας Εύβοιας, ArchEubMel, 101-137. Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E., 1996-1997. Γεωμετρική Κύμη. Η ανασκαφή στο Βιγλατούρι Οξυλίθου, ArchEub- Mel, 59-64. Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E., 1998. Geometric Kyme. The Εxcavation at Viglatouri, Kyme, on Euboea, in Bats & D’Agostino 1998, 59-88. Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E., 2009. Σύμπλεγμα Ηρακλή με λέοντα από τους Ωρεούς Ιστιαίας. Συμβολή στη με- λέτη της αρχαϊκής πλαστικής της Εύβοιας, Athens. Schumacher, R.W.M., 1993. Three Related Sanctuaries of Poseidon: Geraistos, Kalaureia, Tainaron, in N. Marinatos & R. Hägg (eds.), Greek Sanctuaries: New Approaches, London, 62-87. Sherratt, S., 2010. Greeks and Phoenicians: Perceptions of Trade and Traders in the Early 1st Millen- nium BC, in A. Agbe-Davies & A. Bauer (eds.), Trade as Social Interaction: New Archaeological Ap- proaches, Walnut Creek, 119-142. Simon, P. & Verdan, S., 2014. Hippotrophia: chevaux et élites eubéennes à la période géométrique, AntK 57, 3-24. Stampolidis, N.Chr. (ed.), 2003. Πλόες... Από τη Σιδώνα στη Χουέλβα. Σχέσεις λαών της Μεσογείου, 16ος – 6ος αι. π.Χ., Athens. Soueref, K., 2011. Τοπογραφικά και Αρχαιολογικά Κεντρικής Μακεδονίας, Thessaloniki. Tankosić, Ž., Mavridis F. & Kosma, M. (eds.), 2017. An Island Between Two Worlds: The Archaeology of Euboea from Prehistoric to Byzantine Times. Proceedings of the International Conference held at Ere- tria July 12-14, 2013. Papers and Monographs from the Norwegian Institute at Athens, Vol. 6, Athens. Themelis, P.G., 1983. An 8th Century Goldsmith’s Workshop at Eretria, in R. Hägg (ed.), The Greek Ren- aissance of the Eighth Century B.C.: Tradition and Innovation. Proceedings of the Second Internation- al Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 1-5 June, 1981, 157-165. Tigano, G. (ed.), 2002. Le necropoli di Mylai (VIII-I sec. a.C.), Milano. Tiverios, M.A., 1998. The Ancient Settlement in the Anchialos-Sindos Double Trapeze: Seven Years (1990-1996) of Archaeological Research, in Bats & D’Agostino 1998, 249-250. Tiverios, M., 2008. Greek Colonisation of the Northern Aegean, in G.R. Tsetskhladze (ed.), Greek Coloni- sation. An Account of Greek Colonies and Other Settlements Overseas, Leiden, 1-154. Tiverios, Μ., 2009. Η πανεπιστημιακή ανασκαφή στο Καραμπουρνάκι Θεσσαλονίκης, AEMTH, 20 χρόνια, 385-396. Tiverios, Μ., Manakidou, E. & Tsiafaki, D., 2003. Ανασκαφικές έρευνες στο Καραμπουρνάκι κατά το 2003: ο αρχαίος οικισμός, AEMTH 17, 191-199. Tiverios, Μ., Manakidou, E. & Tsiafaki, D., 2007. Ανασκαφικές έρευνες στο Καραμπουρνάκι κατά το 2007: ο αρχαίος οικισμός, AEMTH 21, 263-268. Tiverios, Μ., Manakidou, E. & Tsiafaki, D., 2008. Ανασκαφικές έρευνες στο Καραμπουρνάκι κατά το 2008: ο αρχαίος οικισμός, AEMTH 22, 329-334. Tiverios, Μ., Manakidou, E. & Tsiafaki, D., 2009. Ανασκαφικές έρευνες στο Καραμπουρνάκι κατά το 2009: ο αρχαίος οικισμός, AEMTH 23, 319-326. Tiverios, Μ., Manakidou, E. & Tsiafaki, D., Valamoti, S.M., Theodoropoulou, T. & Gatzogia, E., 2013. Cooking in an Iron pit at Karabournaki, An interdisciplinary approach, in S. Voutsaki & S.M. Val- amoti (eds.), Diet, Economy and Society in the Ancient Greek World, Towards a Better Integration of Archaeology & Science. Proceedings of the International Conference held at the Netherlands Institute at Athens on 22-24 March 2010, Pharos Suppl. 1, Leuven, 205-214. Tzifopoulos, G.Z., Besios, M. & Kotsonas, A., 2012. ΜΕΘΩΝΗ ΠΙΕΡΙΑΣ Ι. Επιγραφές, χαράγματα και εμπο- ρικά σύμβολα στη Γεωμετρική και Αρχαϊκή κεραμική από το ‘Υπόγειο’ της Μεθώνης Πιερίας στη Μακε- δονία, Thessaloniki. Valenza Mele, N., 1977. Hera e Apollo nella colonizzazione euboica d’Occidente, MÉFRA 89, 493-524.

118 Xenia Charalambidou

Valenza Mele, N., 1991-1992. Hera ed Apollo a Cuma e la mantica sibillina, RivIstArch III, 14-15, 9-20. van der Wielen-van Ommeren, F. & De Lachenal, L. (eds.), 2007. La dea di Sibari e il santuario ritrovato. Studi sui rinvenimenti dal Timpone della Motta di Francavilla Marittima, I. 1 – Ceramiche di importa- zione, di produzione coloniale e indigena, BdA, Volume speciale, Rome. van der Wielen-van Ommeren, F. & De Lachenal, L. (eds.), 2008. La dea di Sibari e il santuario ritrovato. Studi sui rinvenimenti dal Timpone della Motta di Francavilla Marittima, I. 2 – Ceramiche di importa- zione, di produzione coloniale e indigena (tomo II), BdA, Volume speciale, Rome. Verdan, S., 2007. Eretria: Metalworking in the Sanctuary of Apollo Daphnephoros during the Geomet- ric Period (with an Appendix by W. Fasnacht), in Mazarakis Ainian 2007, 345-359. Verdan, S., 2013. Le sanctuaire d’Apollon Daphnéphoros à l’époque géométrique, Érétria: fouilles er recherches XXII, Gollion. Verdan, S., 2015. Geometric Eretria: Some Thoughts on Old Data, in Descœudres & Paspalas 2015, 181-189. Vlachopoulos, A. & Charalambidou, X., forthcoming. Naxos and the Cyclades, in I.S. Lemos & A. Kotso- nas (eds.), A Companion to the Archaeology of Early Greece and the Mediterranean, Oxford. Vlachou, V., 2010. Γεωμετρικός Ωρωπός. Η τροχήλατη κεραμεική και οι φάσεις της εγκατάστασης, University of Athens (unpublished PhD thesis). Vokotopoulou, J., 1989. Ανασκαφή Μένδης 1989, ΑΕΜΤΗ 3, 409-423. Vokotopoulou, J., 1990. Μένδη-Ποσείδι 1990, ΑΕΜΤΗ 4, 399-410. Vokotopoulou, J., 1991. Ποσείδι 1991, ΑΕΜΤΗ 5, 303-318. Vokotopoulou, J., 1992. Ποσείδι 1992, ΑΕΜΤΗ 6, 443-450. Vokotopoulou, J., 1993. Ποσείδι 1993, ΑΕΜΤΗ 7, 401-412. Vokotopoulou, J., 1994. Ποσείδι 1994, ΑΕΜΤΗ 8, 269-274. Vokotopoulou, J., Besios, M. & Trakosopoulou, H., 1990. Παρθενώνας Χαλκιδικής: Ιερό σε κορυφή του Ιτάμου, ΑΕΜΤΗ 4, 425-438. Vokotopoulou, I. & Christidis, A.P., 1995. A Cypriot Graffito on an SOS amphora from Mende, Chalcidice, Kadmos 34, 5-12. Vokotopoulou, I. & Moschonissioti, S., 1990. Το παράλιο νεκροταφείο της Μένδης, AEMTH 4, 411-423. Yiouri, Ε. & Koukouli-Chrysanthaki, Ch., 1987. Ανασκαφή στην αρχαία Οισύμη, AEMTH 1, 363-475. Yiouri, E., 1974. Το εν Αφύτει ιερόν του Διονύσου και το ιερόν του Άμμωνος Διός, in U. Jantzen (ed.), Neue Forschungen in griechischen Heiligtumern, Tübingen, 135-150. Węcowski, M., 2014. The Rise of the Greek Aristocratic Banquet, Oxford.

119 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites

SKOUBRIS

TOUMBA BUILDING TOUMBA CEMETERY AREA OF KHALIOTIS TOMBS

PALIA PERIVOLIA

SOUTH CEMETERY

Fig. 1. Lefkandi: The Toumba building and the cemeteries’ area (Popham & Lemos 1996, pl. 2. Courtesy of the British School at Athens).

Fig. 2. Chalcis (Andreiomenou 1986, 117, fig. 42).

120 Xenia Charalambidou

Fig. 3a-b. Chalcis: Misfired vessels from the deposit at A. Machaira plot (Photos: H. Iliadis).

Fig. 4. Plan of the Plakari hill; Trench 1(a-c) is indicated in the plan (Drawing: J. Fokkema).

121 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites

Fig. 5. Plakari Trench 1(a-c): Fine drinking vessels (skyphoi [a-c], kantharoi [d-e], one-handled cups [f-g]) (Drawings: E. de Vries and B. Konnemann).

122 Xenia Charalambidou

Fig. 6. Eretria in the Geometric period (Verdan 2013 (I), pl. 2) (Courtesy of S. Verdan).

123 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites SOUTH QUARTER CENTRAL QUARTER CENTRAL (Plan: A. Gounaris). WEST QUARTER Oropos: Skala Oropou (O.S.K. property): Central, West and South Quarters Central, West (O.S.K. property): Skala Oropou 7. Oropos: Fig. OF THE WEST QUARTER WEST EXTREMITY

124 Xenia Charalambidou

Fig. 8a-b. The Hypogeio at Methone (Besios et al. 2012, 47, fig. 3 and 49, drawing 4. Courtesy of M. Bessios).

125 Viewing Euboea in relation to its colonies and relevant sites

Fig. 9. Mende: the coastal cemetery (Vokotopoulou & Moschonissioti 1990, 417, fig. 2. Courtesy of S. Moschonissioti).

Fig. 10. Pithekoussai: the Mazzola metalworking complex (AR 1970-1971, 65, fig. 5).

126