University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Supervised Undergraduate Student Research Chancellor’s Honors Program Projects and Creative Work 8-2005 An Assessment of Protogeometric Apsidal Buildings from Greece Sarah Marie Moore University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_chanhonoproj Recommended Citation Moore, Sarah Marie, "An Assessment of Protogeometric Apsidal Buildings from Greece" (2005). Chancellor’s Honors Program Projects. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_chanhonoproj/893 This is brought to you for free and open access by the Supervised Undergraduate Student Research and Creative Work at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chancellor’s Honors Program Projects by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. An Assessment of Protogeometric Period Apsidal Buildings Senior Honors Thesis: Sarah Moore Director: Dr. Aleydis Van de Moortel Contents Introduction Methods and Aims of the Present Study I. Historical Overview: Apsidal Buildings in Prehistoric Greece 1.1 Early Helladic II-Early Helladic III Transition 1.2 Middle Helladic II. Final Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Society 11.1 Introduction: The Late Helladic Decline and the Late Helladic IIIC Period II. 2 Trends in Protogeometric Society 11.3 Architecture III. Catalog of Published Proto geometric Apsidal Buildings 111.1 Tiryns, Curved Wall B ill. 2 Thessaloniki, Toumba 111.3 Thermon, Megaron A III.4 Tarsus, Building U2 111.5 Poseidi, Building I:T III. 6 Asine, Building C (74L, 74N-IM, and 74M ) 111.7 Mitrou, Building A 111.8 Nichoria, Unit 111-1, Unit IV-lb and Curved Wall H ill. 9 Lefkandi, Toumba Building 111.10 Koukounaries, Building A 111.11 Assiros, Toumba III. 12 Antissa, Building III IV. Discussion V. Conclusions Figures References 1 Introduction The period from approximately 1000-900 B.C. in mainland Greece is generally regarded as a time of decline in society and culture. It was thought to have little to offer to our understanding of the development of Greek society. Researchers often believed that this period had little to do with the rise of Archaic society in Greece, mainly because there was little archaeological evidence from the period to suggest otherwise. The outdated name given to the period by previous researchers, the "Greek Dark Age", refers to our lack of knowledge about the period. However, it is becoming increasingly evident through new research that the period following the collapse of the Mycenaean palaces is important in understanding the social and political development of Greece. In ceramic terms, the Greek Dark Age is referred to as the Proto geometric and Geometric periods because of pottery styles, which will be discussed later. The present study will focus on a specific building type, the apsidal building, during the Proto geometric period, which is dated to ca. 1000-900 B.C. In light of new evidence it is clear that Proto geometric societies on the Greek mainland did not live in isolation. This is indicated through the widespread use of Proto geometric pottery styles and the use of iron (Lemos 2002: 1). Uniformities of material culture, such as these, are evidence for communication between groups living on the Greek mainland. Common motifs, styles, and inventions are indications of the sharing of information between groups. There is also some indication, most notably at Lefkandi, of exchange with locations outside the Aegean, such as the Near East. Communities of the Proto geometric period were permanent settlements and not nomadic, which is evidenced by their building construction. Buildings were made of stone foundations with waddle and daub walls or 2 mudbrick walls-nomadic groups would build structures of lighter construction. In addition, several sites give proof for stratified social systems through burial practices and/or architecture (Lemos 2002: 1-2). The most notable case of this occurs at Lefkandi, where a warrior, woman, and four horses are buried in the central room of a monumental apsidal building. Analysis of the Protogeometric period must be based on archaeological material because there are no written records from the period. The only accounts of the period occurring in literature come from Homer and stem from an oral tradition. These tales were put in writing in the 6th century, according to most scholars, but they contain details that relate them to the Bronze Age and Iron Age. The Iliad, attributed to Homer, includes many Mycenaean features found in the archaeological record-for example the boar's tusk helmet-but the Iliad contains many stories and was composed in its present form almost 400 years after the collapse of the Mycenaeans. People living in the Protogeometric period probably recounted the glory of the fallen Mycenaeans, who may have been their ancestors. Oral accounts often evolve, especially over the course of a few hundred years; because of this it is difficult to discern which features of these stories are Mycenaean and which are Protogeometric or Geometric in date!. Currently we do not have much archaeological evidence dating to the Protogeometric period. Most of the evidence currently available comes from burials as opposed to settlements. Classical Archaeology previously focused on more elaborate artifacts and architecture. Complete and painted vessels were prized, while incomplete 1 Lemos, The Protogeometric Aegean, Chapter 6.6 (2002). 3 and undecorated vessels could be thrown away. Methodology for excavating prehistoric settlements was not employed, and Proto geometric sites were often left unexcavated or poorly excavated. However, in general this view has long been discounted and is not the only reason for the scarcity of Proto geometric material. Proto geometric period settlements often lie under later settlements, and many times researchers halted their excavations, due to time or monetary constraints, before reaching the Proto geometric levels. Also, Protogeometric period sites can be difficult to locate. Unless a site was continuously occupied from the Protogeometric period to historical periods, we usually do not have much written evidence for its existence. There are no historical records for many Proto geometric period sites. While monumental architecture does exist from the Protogeometric, most buildings were constructed of waddle and daub or mudbrick on a stone soc1e. These walls would not withstand centuries of weathering, much less human and natural destructions. The only existing portions of these buildings today are the foundations, which are mostly underground and not easily located unless there exists a reason to suspect a settlement, such as Protogeometric material in a surface surveyor written records. Presently new excavations are taking place at sites with Protogeometric material, which will enhance our knowledge of the period. In order to learn more about Proto geometric society research needs to be carried out concerning specific features of the period. As Vincent Desborough said, "The more we know about the [Proto geometric period], the more we will know how and why the preceding society failed and the succeeding arose" (1972: 12). 4 Methods and Aims of the Present Study The purpose of this study is to perform a comprehensive exam of a prominent building type of Proto geometric society-the apsidal building. Currently only a handful of apsidal buildings dating to this time period have been found, but their functions are not clear. Apsidal buildings may have been the homes of rulers, religious buildings, served as community redistribution centers, or served as all of these. The purpose of this study is to provide detailed information regarding this specific building type so that it may be used to assess the function and role of apsidal buildings in Proto geometric society. I employ the method of cognitive archaeology, defined by Renfrew and Bahn as "the study of past ways of thought as inferred through the surviving material remains" (2005: 41). The purpose is to ascertain using only archaeological evidence how these buildings functioned in Proto geometric society and also why the ancient communities built them in certain ways. This is necessary because no historical documents originate during this period in Greece. Contextual analysis, a part of holistic archaeology, is also employed throughout this study. Contextual analysis involves learning from an artifact not only by its location within a building or its frequency at a site, but also by its association with other artifacts. This is a way to understand social organization and/or differences in status (Renfrew and Bahn 2005: 143-144). In order to use contextual analysis as a means to establish the functions and roles of Proto geometric apsidal buildings it is necessary to provide a detailed review of the buildings, their locations, and their artifacts. Section m provides information for the Protogeometric apsidal buildings. They are organized chronologically as far as possible 5 since the dates of some buildings are not precise. The buildings are organized in this way because some of the conclusions in Section V relate to changes over time. Inspiration for this research came from the site of Mitrou, a tidal islet in East Lokris, Greece. The first season of excavation at Mitrou was conducted in summer 2004. The project directors are Dr. Aleydis Van de Moortel of the University of Tennessee and Ms. Eleni Zahou of the Greek Archaeological Service. Surface finds date as early as the Neolithic and continue through the Protogeometric, so there is considerable possibility that Mitrou was continually occupied throughout most of Greek prehistory. Mitrou could shed light on important transitional periods, and one of these periods is the Bronze Age­ Iron Age transition. During excavation pottery of each phase and subphase of this transitional period was discovered, as well as an Early Iron Age settlement and cemetery above the Bronze Age habitation levels. The most impressive discovery was a large apsidal building, Building A.