DOCSLIB.ORG

An Examination of the Funerary Offerings Placed in Mycenaean Chamber Tombs During the Palatial and Postpalatial Periods in the Aegean

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Examination of the Funerary Offerings Placed in Mycenaean Chamber Tombs During the Palatial and Postpalatial Periods in the Aegean AN EXAMINATION OF THE FUNERARY OFFERINGS PLACED IN MYCENAEAN CHAMBER TOMBS DURING THE PALATIAL AND POSTPALATIAL PERIODS IN THE AEGEAN A Thesis Submitted to the Committee on Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Arts in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences TRENT UNIVERSITY Peterborough, Ontario, Canada © Copyright by Christa Falconer 2014 Anthropology M.A. Graduate Program May 2014 Abstract AN EXAMINATION OF THE FUNERARY OFFERINGS PLACED IN MYCENAEAN CHAMBER TOMBS DURING THE PALATIAL AND POSTPALATIAL PERIODS IN THE AEGEAN Christa Falconer Mortuary remains comprise a large part of the archaeological record for the Late Bronze Age in the Aegean. By the Palatial period, chamber tombs became the most common burial type on the Mycenaean Mainland, with their popularity continuing into the Postpalatial period. In addition, a single chamber tomb could be reused for as many as ten generations, resulting in large collections of burials and offerings. On account of the prolific use and reuse of chamber tombs, they provide an abundance of data for studying the mortuary rituals performed by the Mycenaeans during the Palatial and Postpalatial periods. The purpose of this study is three fold: to test the theory that the Mycenaean palatial systems influenced the types of offerings placed in the chamber tombs; to assess the validity of previously stated claims that the offerings placed in the chamber tombs represent funerary rituals, and if so, what type(s) of rituals?; and to establish whether Mycenaean mortuary archaeology is sufficiently well recorded to support a meaningful analysis of variation in funerary depositional patterning. The results of this study provide insight into the nature of the Mycenaean mortuary rituals for chamber tombs. Keywords: Mycenaean, Ancient Aegean, Mycenaean Mainland, Palatial Systems, Palatial Period, Postpalatial Period, Late Helladic IIIA-C, Late Bronze Age, Chamber Tombs, Mortuary Rituals, Funerary Offerings, Social Structure, Correspondence Analysis. ii Dedication This thesis is dedicated to Cindy Ellen Morgan, Margaret Morgan, and in memory of William “Bill” Morgan (1925-2012). Words cannot express both the love and gratitude that I feel, so this dedication will have to do. “Why did you do all this for me?” he asked. “I don’t deserve it. I’ve never done anything for you.” “You have been my friend,” replied Charlotte. “That in itself is a tremendous thing” ~ E. B. White (1899-1985), Charlotte’s Web “It is not so much our friends' help that helps us, as the confidence of their help.” ~ Epicurus (341-270 B.C.E.) iii Acknowledgements This research brought with it a series of challenges that would not have been overcome without the assistance and support of others. First, I want to thank my supervisor, Dr. Rodney D. Fitzsimons, for his support and patience throughout this process, and for providing valuable feedback on the finished product. In addition, I would like to thank the members of my committee: Dr. James Conolly, for helping me run my statistics, and offering valuable advice and suggestions, Dr. Jocelyn Williams, for her excellent advice and suggestions regarding mortuary archaeology, and Dr. Angus Smith, for acting as my external examiner and providing great feedback. I would also like to thank SSHRC for their generous scholarship and Trent Graduate Studies for the scholarship and bursaries. My research would not have been possible without all of your contributions. I would also like to take this time to thank a few other people who helped me along the way: Cindy Ellen Morgan, for her unwavering support, generosity, and kindness, which allowed me to stay focused and determined, and for rat cuddles; Mike Donison, for helping me with “technological errors” (a.k.a. PIBAK – Problem Is Between the Chair And Keyboard), for his advice and moral support, and for simply putting up with me during this process; Kristen Csenkey, for Publican House growlers, cheap barbeque chips, and Disney movies as a means to de-stress, and playing “Pooh sticks” on the London Street bridge; Baisel Collings, for board game nights, drunken D&D, and letting me vent my frustrations over many pints; Kathy Axcell, for her thoughtfulness and for putting me to work over the summer; Kristine Williams, for her wonderful advice and iv understanding; and finally, my edit minions (Mike Donison, Cindy Ellen Morgan, Robert Makinson, and Jenn Rocque), for giving me valuable feedback on my thesis; Thank you for your continual support. I could not have done this without all of you. v Table of Contents Abstract .............................................................................................................................. ii Dedication ......................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... iv Table of Contents ............................................................................................................. vi List of Figures ................................................................................................................... ix List of Tables .................................................................................................................. xiii List of Maps .................................................................................................................... xiv Chapter One: Introduction ...............................................................................................1 Research Goals.........................................................................................................2 Parameters and Definitions ......................................................................................3 Geographical Parameters .............................................................................4 Chronological Parameters ............................................................................5 Definitions....................................................................................................7 Thesis Outline ........................................................................................................11 Chapter Two: The Nature of the Mycenaean Palaces ..................................................14 The Role of Exchange ............................................................................................14 The Late Helladic IIIA:1 Period ............................................................................17 Building Activity .......................................................................................18 Socio-political Change ...............................................................................19 The Late Helladic IIIA:2-IIIB Period ....................................................................20 Building Activity .......................................................................................21 The Linear B Tablets .................................................................................22 The Palatial Workshops .............................................................................25 The Wanax .................................................................................................27 The Palatial Systems ..................................................................................28 Palatial Economies and Political Power ....................................................30 Collapse of the Mycenaean Palatial Systems.........................................................32 The Late Helladic IIIC Period ................................................................................33 Building Activity………………………………………………………...33 Social Changes ..........................................................................................35 Exchange Networks ..................................................................................36 Summary ................................................................................................................38 Chapter Three: Theoretical Approaches in Mortuary Archaeology and the Interpretation of Mycenaean Mortuary Remains ........................................................39 Theoretical Approaches .........................................................................................39 vi New Archaeology ......................................................................................40 The Late Helladic I-II Periods ...............................................................................45 Burial Types ...............................................................................................45 Multiple Burials .........................................................................................49 Prestige Items .............................................................................................49 Access to Burial Types ..............................................................................50 The Late Helladic IIIA-B Periods ..........................................................................51 Burial Types ...............................................................................................51 Multiple Burials .........................................................................................53 Prestige Items .............................................................................................54
Load more

Recommended publications
  • How to Tell a Cromlech from a Quoit ©
    How to tell a cromlech from a quoit © As you might have guessed from the title, this article looks at different types of Neolithic or early Bronze Age megaliths and burial mounds, with particular reference to some well-known examples in the UK. It’s also a quick overview of some of the terms used when describing certain types of megaliths, standing stones and tombs. The definitions below serve to illustrate that there is little general agreement over what we could classify as burial mounds. Burial mounds, cairns, tumuli and barrows can all refer to man- made hills of earth or stone, are located globally and may include all types of standing stones. A barrow is a mound of earth that covers a burial. Sometimes, burials were dug into the original ground surface, but some are found placed in the mound itself. The term, barrow, can be used for British burial mounds of any period. However, round barrows can be dated to either the Early Bronze Age or the Saxon period before the conversion to Christianity, whereas long barrows are usually Neolithic in origin. So, what is a megalith? A megalith is a large stone structure or a group of standing stones - the term, megalith means great stone, from two Greek words, megas (meaning: great) and lithos (meaning: stone). However, the general meaning of megaliths includes any structure composed of large stones, which include tombs and circular standing structures. Such structures have been found in Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, North and South America and may have had religious significance. Megaliths tend to be put into two general categories, ie dolmens or menhirs.
    [Show full text]
  • Kd Lald`Fr;K¡
    Megalithic Cultures c`gn~ik’kkf.kd laLd`fr;k¡ Dr. Anil Kumar Professor Ancient Indian History and Archaeology University of Lucknow [email protected] [email protected] Introduction According to V. Gordon Childe the term ‘Megalith’ is derived from two Greeks words, megas means large and lithos means stone and originally introduced by antiquaries to describe a fairly easily definable class of monuments in western and northern Europe, consisting of huge, undress stones. In other words, the Megaliths usually refer to the burials made of large stones in graveyard away from the habitation area. Meadows Taylor believed that resemblances of the east and west were not merely accidental and that “the actual monuments of celto-scythian tribes are found in India and being examined are found to agree in all respects with those of Europe.” James Fergusson argued that they were all “erected by partially civilized races after they had come in contact with the Romans.’ He also stated that it was difficult to comprehend “how and when intercourse could have taken place which led to their similarity.” People like Dubreuil argued an Aryan origin for the megaliths. Elliot and Perry saw the south Indian megaliths and monumental stone architecture as one of the elements reflecting a manifestation of the Egyptian archaic civilization as far back as 1923. In 1872, Fergusson brought out his excellent work entitled “Rude Stone Monuments in all Countries: their age and uses. This first attracted the attention of scholars. Types of megaliths The megaliths are, indeed, among the most widespread remains of stone both in time and space.
    [Show full text]
  • Registration and Promotion of Monumental Olive Trees in Greece. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 7(4) 107-121
    Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol.7, No.4 Publication Date: Apr. 25, 2020 DOI:10.14738/assrj.74.7977. Koniditsiotis, S. (2020). Registration and Promotion of Monumental Olive Trees in Greece. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 7(4) 107-121. Registration and Promotion of Monumental Olive Trees in Greece. Koniditsiotis Stavros Msc of Cultural Policy and Development, Open University of Cyprus, Cyprus ABSTRACT The history oF the olive tree, its cultivation and its products is known For centuries. Some olive tree have survived over millennia and their history dates back to antiquity. In many cases, it is related to mythology and religion. The olive tree is associated with Folk tradition, people's everyday liFe, and customs. In Greece, monumental olive trees are found in the Peloponnese, Crete, Euboea, Chios, Pelion and Attica. This paper explores and describes the particular morphological Features such as shape, size, wood, cavities and age, as well as the cultural characteristics such as historical or religious events, myths and traditions that deFine an olive tree and characterize it as monumental. The main aim oF our research is to examine the key position that monumental olive trees and their materialistic and symbolic maniFestations consist a natural and cultural heritage as well. In this framework the study focuses on various key issues related to monumental olives trees and their natural, historical, social and cultural value. Keywords: Monumental Olive Trees, Nature conservation monuments, Natural sites, Greek monumental Olive Trees, Cultural heritage of olive Trees. 1. INTRODUCTION The present study is a part of a wider research on the value of the natural heritage and specially on ancient olives trees as natural monuments and cultural heritage of all Mediterranean regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Artisans in the Service of the Royalty at Dendra and Their Role in the Formation of Fashion Trends
    Artisans in the Service of the Royalty at Dendra and their Role in the Formation of Fashion Trends Eleni Konstantinidi-Syvridi1 Abstract: Through its remarkable finds the necropolis at Dendra, covering the periods LH IIB–IIIB, offers an eloquent picture of the luxury possessed by the aristocracy up to the final phase of the early Mycenaean period. It is a time when art and crafts shift away from the hitherto Minoan influences to create forms and symbols that are purely Mycenaean, in search of a new identity. Metalwork of an advanced workmanship, testifying to the presence of highly skilled craftsmen, furnished the distinguished deceased in the necropolis. Craftsmen in the service of the elite seem to have circulated between various areas of the Aegean and Cyprus, forming through their creations common codes between its members. Being one of the few unplundered tholoi of the period, the Dendra tomb gathers most of those features that became fashionable in art and crafts among the early Mycenaean elite. A re-evaluation of the grave goods can therefore provide the impetus for a discussion on the production, manufacture and trade of luxurious items, especially metalwork, at the threshold of the Mycenaean Palatial period. Keywords: Dendra, warrior burials, metalwork, metal vessels, tholos tombs Within the fragile socio-political landscape of the early Mycenaean period, the elite families fought for the establishment of their political and economic power over the region,2 and at the same time shared a network of common values and symbols of
    [Show full text]
  • Traces of Ritual in Middle Helladic Funeral Contexts Including an Assessment of Geographical Location
    Traces of ritual in Middle Helladic funeral contexts including an assessment of geographical location Maria Hielte-Stavropoulou Introduction RESEARCH IN SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY has helped to understand the structure of ritual as a rigidly performed sequence of activities involving gestures, words, and objects. Rituals and their performance may in many cases seem enigmatic, but studies on the theory of symbolism helps (Turner 1985:32). 1 By exploring the rit­ uals of the African Ndembu, Victor Turner could map a rich structure of symbol­ ism. An actual ritual procedure involves not only one symbolic object, but a series of them in a sequence. 2 Like a piece of music or a sequence of words, it must have a syntax. The combination and arrangement of the symbols form the message. Collectively enacted dramas have private and unconscious meaning (Keesing and Strathen 1998). A religious system may be seen as a 'cluster of sacred symbols' (Geertz 1957:424). Rituals are often sophisticated exercises in the meaning of words and sentences and display a subtle mechanism of elusive symbols ( Gerholm 1988). The obvious aspects of rituals are formal actions (Rappaport 1979), with a compulsory air to them and a definite correct way of performance. To explain the practical reasons for the existence of rituals, I tend to Horton's straightforward definition (1982) as a means of acting on the world, bringing about and control­ ling things. How then can we study ancient rituals of the Bronze Age? Of the hierarchy of sources, suggested by Ian Morris,3 only points 3 and 4 are possible options.
    [Show full text]
  • An Investigation Into the Exchange of Artistic Motifs Between the Aegean, Egypt, and the Near East In
    THE AEGEAN AND THE EAST An Investigation into the Exchange of Artistic Motifs - between the Aegean, Egypt, and the Near East in the Bronze Age by J.L. CROWLEY B.A.(Hons.) Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA HOBART 1977 THE AEGEAN AND THE EAST VOLUME I TEXT VOLUME II PLATES This thesis contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university nor does it include any copy or paraphrase of material previously published or written by another person except when due reference is made in the text. Signed: Date: THE AEGEAN AND THE EAST TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME I TEXT VOLUME II PLATES THE AEGEAN AND THE EAST VOLUME I TEXT Content6 Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (1) LIBRARY ABSTRACT - Summary of the Thesis (ii) ABBREVIATIONS (iv) Intnoduction 1. INTRODUCTION AND CHRONOLOGY 1 Pala I The Moti64 2. MOTIFS COMMON TO THE AEGEAN AND THE EAST Heraldic Poses 15 Antithetical Group 23 Mirror Reverse 27 Contest Scenes, Struggling Hero, and Master of Animals 30 Mistress of Animals 35 Sphinx 41 Griffin 47 Dragons and Crocodiles 55 Thoueris and the Minoan Genius 59 Sacred Tree, Sacred Pillar 65 Palm, Palmette 72 Papyrus, Lotus 76 Rosette 83 Quatrefoil 89 Scale Pattern 92 Guilloche, Linked Circles, Quirk 95 Spiral 100 Flying Gallop 107 Page 3. OTHER MOTIFS IN EASTERN OR AEGEAN ART Smiting Figure, Pharaoh and Weather God 113 Star Disk in Crescent 116 Winged Sun Disk 119 Scale Mountain 120 Duel 121 ' Bull Sports 124 Fish, Dolphin, Octopus, Nautilus 126 Tricurved Arch 128 Rocky Landscape, Glen 129 Marbling, Colour Waves 130 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Honouring the Dead in the Peloponnese
    Honouring the Dead in the Peloponnese Proceedings of the conference held at Sparta 23-25 April 2009 Edited by Helen Cavanagh, William Cavanagh and James Roy CSPS Online Publication 2 prepared by Sam Farnham Table of Contents Abstracts v Preface xxv 1 Emilia Banou and Louise Hitchcock The 'Lord of Vapheio': the social identity of the dead and its implications for Laconia in the 1 Late Helladic II–IIIA period. 2 Diana Burton God and hero: the iconography and cult of Apollo at the Amyklaion. 25 3 Nikolaos Dimakis The display of individual status in the burials οf Classical and Hellenistic Argos. 33 4 Eleni Drakaki Late Bronze Age female burials with hard stone seals from the Peloponnese: a contextual 51 approach. 5 Rachel Fox Vessels and the body in Early Mycenaean funerary contexts. 71 6 Florentia Fragkopoulou Sanctuary dedications and the treatment of the dead in Laconia (800–600 BC): the case of 83 Artemis Orthia. 7 Stamatis Fritzilas Grave stelai and burials in Megalopolis. 99 8 Pepi Gavala The sculpted monuments in Laconian cemeteries (late 19th – early 20th century). 129 9 Oliver Gengler 151 Leonidas and the heroes of Thermopylae: memory of the dead and identity in Roman Sparta. 10 Mercourios Georgiadis 163 Honouring the dead in Mesolithic and Neolithic Peloponnese: a few general observations. 11 Grigoris Grigorakakis 183 New investigations by the 39th Ephoreia of Prehistoric and Classical antiquities at Helleniko, n. Kynouria. The burial of Late Classical date from the western roadside cemetery. 12 Georgia Kakourou-Chroni Nikiforos Vrettakos: “Let us depart ascending ...” 201 13 Konstantinos Kalogeropoulos The social and religious significance of palatial jars as grave offerings.
    [Show full text]
  • Hielte-Stavropoulou, M., 2001
    THE HORSESHOE-SHAPED AND OTHER STRUCTURES AND INSTALLATIONS FOR PERFORMING RITUALS IN FUNERAL CONTEXTS IN MIDDLE HELLADIC AND EARLY MYCENAEAN TIMES* The use of cemeteries for religious ceremonies is well documented on Crete.1 But on the Mainland, interpretations of the archaeological record for Middle Helladic times have led to views holding the cemeteries more as restricted abodes only for the dead with vestiges from some “burial rites” and perhaps also from some “cult” conducted later. My purpose is to explore the idea that some of these cemeteries also had an important social function for performing religious ceremonies. In other words, I will pose the question: can some cemeteries have functioned as religious centers of their time; places to communicate not only with the ancestors but also with the gods? In addition to reviewing the archaeological evidence, I will apply ideas and concepts from comparative archaeology, and also make use of anthropology in pursuing this question. To date, there are only two sites on the Mainland from Middle Helladic times generally accepted as being of religious significance: a) the sanctuary on Kynortion at Epidaurus and b) the altar with animal bones found on the little island of Nisakouli,2 both situated on Peloponnesos. However, Hägg has expressed that “the Middle Helladic population of mainland Greece did practice some kind of religion”3 and that we should “be prepared to admit the possibility that their religious activities could have been of a nature that would not have left any traces in the archaeological record.”4 * I would like to thank the organizers, Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • The Greek Age of Bronze - Armour
    The Greek Age of Bronze - Armour http://www.salimbeti.com/micenei/weapons1.htm Home Armour Weapons Shields Helmets Chariots/Ships Troy / Sea people Art / Links etc. Swords/Daggers In contrast to Anatolia and Near East, the earliest stages in the development of Mediterranean metallurgy appear only after about 5500 BC. During the late Neolithic of Aegean (ca. 5500-4500 BC) pins of copper turn up at Dikili Tash, Paradeissos, and Kitsos Cave, while two small daggers have been recovered from Aya Marina in Phocis. It was only during the following, Final Neolithic period (ca. 4500-3700 BC) however that Aegean metallurgy began to flourish. Copper, Gold, silver and lead artifacts have been recovered at least twelve different sites of this period, including large assemblages of metal finds at sites such as Zas Cave on Naxos and copper daggers from Dimini and Sesklo. The early swords of the Aegean Bronze Age are some of the most striking artefacts from this epoch in terms of craftsmanship and opulence. Their perceived role has at various times ranged from their being ritual objects, to being restricted in terms of modes and environments of use, to their being perfectly serviceable tools of war. The early swords evolving out of the dagger. Before bronze, stone was used as primary material for cutting edged tools and weapons. Stone is however very fragile, and therefore not practical to be used as swords. With the introduction of copper, and eventually bronze the daggers could be made longer, and evolved into swords. The earliest Aegean/Anatolian swords were found at Arslantepe, Turkey, dating to ca.
    [Show full text]
  • Shaft-And-Chambers Toms in the Necropolis of Tierradentro, Colombia
    IJSA International Journal of South American Archaeology - IJSA (ISSN 2011-0626) www.ijsa.syllabapress.com Shaft-and-Chambers Toms in the Necropolis of Tierradentro, Colombia Elías Sevilla Casas Grupo de Investigación ARQUEODIVERSIDAD Facultad de Artes Integradas, Universidad del Valle Cali, Colombia Email address: [email protected] Int. J. S. Am. Archaeol. 6: 36-44 (2010) ID: ijsa00036 This information is current as of February 2010 E-mails Alerts To receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article - sing up in the box at the top right corner of the article, see: http://www.ejournals.syllabapress.com/ealerts.html Rights & Permissions To reproduce this article in part (figures, tables) or in entirety, see: http://www.ejournals.syllabapress.com/rightperm.html Reprints To order reprints, see: http://www.ejournals.syllabapress.com/reprints.html © 2007- 2010 Archaeodiversity Research Group & Syllaba Press. All rights reserved. Int. J. S. Am. Archaeol. 6: 36-44 (2010) Shaft-and-Chambers Toms in the Necropolis of Tierradentro, Colombia Elías Sevilla Casas Grupo de Investigación ARQUEODIVERSIDAD Facultad de Artes Integradas, Universidad del Valle Cali, Colombia Email address: [email protected] Available online in February 2010 Abstract A formal comparative introduction, without any interpretive intent or archaeological analysis, is provided to the shaft and chamber tombs (SCTs) in the necropolis of the Archaeological Park of Tierradentro, Colombia, which was included in the World Heritage List in 1995. The necropolis is unique among the known SCTs for the concentration in four hills of 78 tombs open to the visitor, their architectural complexity (including elaborated staircases), and the existence in some of them of high and low relief sculptures and mural paintings.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeologica Hereditas
    Monographs of the Institute of Archaeology of the Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw 13 ARCHAEOLOGICA HEREDITAS Sacred space: contributions to the archaeology of belief edited by Louis Daniel Nebelsick, Joanna Wawrzeniuk and Katarzyna Zeman-Wiśniewska Warsaw 2018 Archaeologica Hereditas Monographs of the Institute of Archaeology of the Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński in Warsaw Editorial Board: Editor-in-chief: Zbigniew Kobyliński Members of the Board: Tadeusz Gołgowski, Jacek Lech, Przemysław Urbańczyk Secretary of the Board: Magdalena Żurek Editorial Board’s address: 1/2 Wóycickiego St., Building 23, PL 01-938 Warsaw, Poland tel. +48 22 569 68 17, e-mail: [email protected] www.archeologia.uksw.edu.pl Technical editing and proofreading: Zbigniew Kobyliński Layout: Bartłomiej Gruszka Cover design: Katja Niklas and Ula Zalejska-Smoleń Linguistic consultation: Louis Daniel Nebelsick Cover picture: Early Bronze Age stele from tell Chuera, Syria; photo by Nicola Scheyhing Publication recommended for print by Professors Christopher Pare (Mainz) and Bogusław Gediga (Wrocław) © Copyright by Instytut Archeologii Uniwersytetu Kardynała Stefana Wyszyńskiego, Warszawa 2018 ISBN 978-83-946496-8-5 ISSN 2451-0521 Publisher: Institute of Archaeology, Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw, 1/2 Wóycickiego St., Building 23, PL 01-938 Warsaw, Poland CONTENTS 5 Preface 135 Early Iron Age hoards between Louis Daniel Nebelsick, Joanna Wawrzeniuk Brittany and the Carpathian basin – and Katarzyna Zeman-Wiśniewska a preliminary review Imke Westhausen * 149 The largest European area 9 Settlements of the Brześć Kujawski of the sacred Group of the Lengyel Culture – Krzysztof Narloch places of sacrum or profanum? Marta Kaczmarek 153 Sacred space of the Iron Age enclosed sites in the north-eastern 17 Places of ritual activity Poland in pre-Bronze Age Cyprus Zbigniew Kobyliński Christine Winkelmann 165 Towards a sacred topography 29 The space above.
    [Show full text]
  • Neolithic Passage Tomb Art Around the Irish Sea Iconography and Spatial Organisation
    UNIVERSITÉ DE NANTES UFR HISTOIRE, HISTOIRE DE L'ART & ARCHÉOLOGIE Year 2008 Number assigned by the library esis to obtain the degree of DOCTEUR DE L'UNIVERSITÉ DE NANTES Discipline : Archaeology Presented and defended in public by Guillaume Robin on the 4th of November 2008 Title : Neolithic passage tomb art around the Irish Sea Iconography and spatial organisation Volume : text Supervisors: Mr Serge Cassen (Chargé de Recherche, CNRS) Mr Muiris O'Sullivan (Professor, University College Dublin) International PhD cotutelle convention JURY Mr Serge Cassen Chargé de Recherche, CNRS Supervisor Mr Muiris O'Sullivan Professor, University College Dublin Supervisor Mr André D'Anna Directeur de Recherche, CNRS Rapporteur Mr Julian omas Professor, University of Manchester Rapporteur Mrs Elizabeth Shee Twohig Senior Lecturer, University College Cork Examiner Mr Alasdair Whittle Professor, Cardiff University Examiner 2 Acknowledgements We address our most profound thanks to Mr Serge Cassen (CNRS) for having believed, four years ago, in our PhD project and for having given us daily an exceptional supervision. This work, the orientation of its questions of research and its results would have been quite different without the priceless scientiic inluence of the director of the Laboratoire de Recherches Archéologiques (LARA) in Nantes University. Our work owes much to Mr Muiris O'Sullivan (University College Dublin) who accepted to cosupervise it. We thank him for his scientiic investment, the personal documentation he put at our disposal and for allowing our work in the site of Knockroe. We thank the rapporteurs, Messrs André D’Anna (CNRS) and Julian Thomas (University of Manchester), and the examiners, Mrs Elizabeth Shee Twohig (University College Cork) and Mr Alasdair Whittle (Cardiff University), for accepting to evaluate this work.
    [Show full text]