Acta Archaeologica vol. 75, 2004, pp. 27–94 Copyright C 2004 Printed in Denmark ¡ All rights reserved ACTA ARCHAEOLOGICA ISSN 0065-001X SEDENTARY VERSUS NOMADIC LIFE-STYLES The ‘Middle Helladic People’ in southern Balkan (late 3rd & first Half of the 2nd Millennium BC) by M H INTRODUCTION (1) lieve that the uneven exploration of the mainland, Judging from the archaeological literature, one can with the strong emphasis on the Peloponnese and in easily get the impression that the Greek mainland, particular the Argolis, has created a skewed and in- including the Peloponnese, was inhabited by a sparse complete picture. The fact that the Turks still occu- and poor population during the Middle Bronze Age. pied a considerable part of central and northern Such assumptions have been based on the scarcity of Greece into the 20th century, implied that early in- settlements. vestigations were concentrated in southernmost Gree- In this paper, I intend to challenge that view by ce, and especially on the Peloponnese. These areas suggesting that archaeological research on the main- are still, by tradition, given a disproportionate land may have been based on preconceived ideas de- amount of attention. However, this unfortunate situ- rived from the type of research conducted in more ation may be rectified by drawing on work by Greek pre-urban centres on Crete and eastwards. I am not archaeologists conducted in central and northern convinced that everybody lived a sedentary life. In Greece during the last few decades. this study, I will bring forward the question if also A first step towards a more complete picture is populations with more nomadic life-styles could have therefore to reassess the available material from the existed throughout prehistory, more or less invisible whole Greek mainland. Also, this area can only be in the archaeological records. Groups living along a meaningfully considered and understood with an ac- continuum from stationary farming to nomadism companying awareness of the situation in the rest of could, in fact, have characterized life. Further, I be- the Balkans and around the Adriatic and the Aegean Sea. This requires us to ignore the present day politi- 1. This paper would have been impossible without the collegial cal climate in discussing the archaeology of geo- support of Christopher Prescott at the Archaeological Depart- graphical areas made sensitive by the concerns of re- ment at the University of Oslo and the overall support and patience of my husband Nils Damm Christophersen. I also cent history (Karakasidou 2000), and to allow our- thank Robin Hägg for having taught me the inside world of the selves to be ‘‘archaeologists without borders’’. Greek Bronze Age (but he has no responsibility for the hypo- A hallmark of the Middle Helladic culture (the theses around a more nomadic life-style), and Hele´ne Whittaker Middle Bronze Age on the Greek mainland, see Table von Hofsten for discussions and for comments on early drafts. A 1) is the tumuli. The high expenditure in the construc- special thank goes to Malcolm Wiener for his useful suggestions regarding the manuscript. I also profited by having the oppor- tion of these graves and their visibility in the land- tunity to give an early version of this paper at the Nordic TAG scape suggest that they were important as symbols of VI conference at Oslo University in March 2001. identification and social differentiation. The tumuli 28 Acta Archaeologica are clearly a key to the understanding of many as- tures of the MH culture, the question of nomadiz- pects, both material and spiritual, of the MH culture. ation is discussed. I also include a catalogue with sum- Müller’s study has suggested that the tumuli in Greece mary data of selected sites relevant to this study. represent a Balkanic element (Müller 1989, 35). How- ever, no comprehensive assessment has yet been car- ried out regarding their connection to the Balkans CHRONOLOGY with their thousands of tumuli. The Bronze Age on the Greek mainland, in central and southern One big question is the change in the material cul- Greece including Peloponnese and Euboea, is usually called the Helladic culture to distinguish it from the Minoan culture on Crete ture and burial customs that took place in the last and the Cycladic culture in the central Aegean. centuries of the 3rd millennium BC. These novelties The Early Bronze Age culture of Thessaly is also often called may be explained by internal adaptations to new en- Early Thessalian and that of Macedonia, Early Macedonian (Col- vironmental circumstances, such as severe climate eman 2000). change or earth erosion, by indigenous groups/tribes Ceramic studies have shown that the Middle Helladic period, the approximate four hundred years from about 2050 to 1680 BC, rebelling against an increasing exploitation from the is a period without sudden changes in the material culture. The Early Helladic II agricultural centres; or the EH III/ last hundred years, the MH III period, has been fairly well sur- MH tumuli builders may have been new immigrants. veyed and subject to interpretation. The first part, MH I–MH II, In the first case, those native groups/tribes must have the approximate three hundred years from the beginning and down had some connections with people to the north to to ca 1750 BC, has until now been regarded as a Dark Age. Since there do not seem to have been any interruption between explain the new tumuli fashion. MH I and the preceding period, the last part of the Early Bronze This paper first presents a brief chronology for the Age – the EH III, I will treat the time from ca. 2200/2150 BC years around the MH period, and gives a resume´ of until the end of LH I/beginning of LH II (mature Mycenaean) ca. the history of research. After a short archaeological 1600 BC, as one uninterrupted chronological period. background, I then outline the Middle Bronze Age In this article I follow the suggested, but still disputed, new chronology, revised due to the eruptions of the volcano on Thera, in mainland Greece, including the Peloponnese, with which probably took place around 1640 BC (Manning 1999. For some general characteristics and what we know of the a critical review of Manning’s A Test of Time see Bietak 2004). social organization and economy, exchange and con- tacts, religion and burial customs. A short summary of material from Western Macedonia from the late HISTORY OF RESEARCH 3rd to the first half of the 2nd millennium is included. Owing to the lack of other remains, pottery has dominated any investigation of the MH culture. In the excavations at Troy in Next, a short odysse´, visiting neighbouring regions 1871, Schliemann came across a ‘‘dull black’’ ware which he be- and people to the north is undertaken, before reach- lieved belonged to the historical period, so he called it ‘‘Lydian ing the general discussion. After assessing main fea- ware’’ (Howell 1973). He found the same dull black ware at My- Table 1. The approximate chronology used in this is based on Rutter (1993, 756). One generation is estimated to 20–25 years. The three Aegean Bronze Age cultures are about contemporary in their divisions and are also abbreviated in a to MH similar manner: EM, MM, LM for the Minoan and EC, MC, LC for the Cycladic culture. Early Helladic I (Abbrev.: EH I) approx. 3150–2650 BC Ω500 years or ca. 20–25 generations Early Helladic II: early (Abbrev.: EH II:e) approx. 2650–2450/2350 BC Ω250 years or ca. 10–12 generations Early Helladic II: late (Abbrev.: EH II:l) approx. 2450/2350–2200/2150 BCΩ200 years or ca. 8–10 generations (At this time there was an intensification of major changes in the material culture; changes already present earlier, but vague) Early Helladic III (Abbrev.: EH III) approx. 2200/2150–2050/2000 BCΩ150 years or ca. 6–7 generations Middle Helladic I (Abbrev.: MH I) approx. 2050/2000–1950/1900 BCΩ100 years or ca. 4–5 generations Middle Helladic II (Abbrev.: MH II) approx. 1950/1900–1750/1720 BCΩ200 years or ca. 8–10 generations Middle Helladic III (Abbrev.: MH III) approx. 1750/1720–1680 BC Ω50–60 years or ca. 2–3 generations Late HelladicI–Early Mycenaean (Abbrev.: LH I) approx. 1680–1600/1580 BC Ω80–100 years or ca. 3–4 generations The MH III period together with LH I is also called the Shaft Grave period, referring to the graves at Mycenae (B3) where the graves in Grave Circle B have approximately been dated to MH III and those in Grave Circle A to LH I. Sedentary versus Nomadic Life-Styles 29 cenae (B3, on Map 1), where he excavated in the years 1874–1876, the MH culture, so much that the ceramic study seems to have and when he again in 1881 found large quantities at the Bronze become an end in itself with Argolis as the center of gravity. Age centre of Orchomenos (E4), Schliemann renamed it ‘‘Minyan Although we know much about the pottery, only few attempts Ware’’, after Orchomenos’ mythical king Minyas. have been made to analyze the nature of the MH society and the way In 1894 Wide found what he called ‘‘frühmykenische keramik’’ of life. On a local basis, Nordquist has made a description of how life in the graves of a tumulus at Aphidna (C3) in Attika (Wide 1896). might have been at Asine (B5), a poor fishing village at the seashore A re-publication of that excavation is under way by the current of south-west Peloponnese (Nordquist 1987). But archaeological evi- author, in cooperation with Dr.