[Type here] UNIVERSITEIT VAN AMSTERDAM MA Thesis Supervisor Prof. V.V. Stissi KASTRAKI: A POOR PICK OF POTTERY? The Middle Helladic Problem – Reassessing Thessaly’s ‘Dark Age’ Table of Contents List of Figures 2 List of Appendix Material 3 Abstract 5 Introduction 6 (i) Introducing Kastraki- Between the Almiros and Sourpi Plains 9 Chapter One: 9 Excavation and Scholarship on Prehistoric Thessaly: Cultural Context Chapter Two: 15 The Middle Helladic Problem: Ceramics and Chronology Chapter Three: 24 A Thessalian Study: Researching Kastraki Chapter Four: 30 Results of 2016 Study Season: Fabric Groups and Parallels Conclusion 45 Appendix 45 (i) Catalogue 45 (ii) Illustrations 63 (iii) Photographs of Diagnostic Sherds 68 Bibliography 85 1 | P a g e List of Figures Figure 1: Google earth image showing the location of Kastraki, and its surrounding region. 4 Source: Map data 2016 Google Maps 2016 TerraMetrics Figure 2: Hand-drawn map of the Almiros/Sourpi region and surrounding landscape. 9 Source: Wace and Thompson (1912). Figure 1: Computational map of Kastraki (2000/48) and surrounding areas showing elevation. 11 Source: Jitte Waagen (2016). Figure 4: Mycenaean pottery illustrations from Mycenae. 17 Source: Mountjoy (1990), 247. Figure 5: The terrain of Kastraki (2000/48). 29 Source: Jitte Waagen (2016). Figure 6: Finds from the Kastraki excavation. 32 Source: Batziou-Efstathiou (2008), 300. Figure 7: Computational Map of the Kastraki survey area 36 Source: Jitte Waagen (2016). Figure 8: Basic hand-drawn map of survey area. 45 Source: Author (2016). 2 | P a g e List of Appendix Material (i) Catalogue 42 Section A: Photographs of Find-Spot Groupings 43 Section B: Part I 49 Part II 55 (ii) Illustrations 60 Illu. 1 60 Illu. 2 61 Illu. 3 62 Illu. 4 63 Illu. 5 64 (iii) Photographs of Diagnostic Sherds 65 3 | P a g e Kastraki Figure 2: Google earth image showing the location of Kastraki, and its surrounding region. 4 | P a g e Abstract Carol Zerner in the concluding statements of her publication “New Perspectives on Trade in the Middle and Early Late Helladic Periods on the Mainland” highlighted the many enduring questions regarding regional variation, local production and changes in technology (or lack thereof) in Middle Helladic pottery on the mainland. She pointed out the lack of answers for these questions reflects the ‘general characterisation of the Middle Helladic as a culturally backward period in the literature’, whilst simultaneously providing the scope for future study to challenge this concept. The use of the term ‘Dark Ages’ in the title of this paper is controversial- as it is intended to be. The current view of Middle Helladic pottery often circles around the dispersal, consumption and local variations of popular wares such as Minyan, Matt-Painted and Lustrous Decorated ware. The work of Jeremy Rutter in 2007, ‘Reconceptualizing the Middle Helladic Type Site’, addresses the fact that research so far has been dominated by considerations mainly from large, multi-component coastal sites. This means when less significant sites (in terms of production and trade) are discovered, they are often dismissed as ‘poor assemblages’. Rutter states that ‘we need to study small, inland and single component sites’. Only in this way will complications arising from large quantities of imports be removed. Following a discussion on the Middle Helladic problem, this thesis will attempt to address some of the material from the site of Kastraki on the border of the Sourpi and Almiros Plains in Thessaly from this theoretical approach. 5 | P a g e Introduction The Middle Helladic Bronze Age is an under explored and marginally understood phase in Greece’s history1. Thessaly in particular is often considered a peripheral and border area in the Middle Helladic period, and frequently is skimmed over in wider narratives due to a lack of well excavated and clearly stratified sites, and associated diagnostic material. Currently, the evidence which has been gathered from this region has not provided a clear picture of the historical narrative of Thessaly in the Middle Bronze Age. The transitional period from the Early Helladic (EH) into the Middle Helladic (MH) was one which saw significant cultural and economic changes- which have often been considered as a deterioration in cultural progression2. In early publications on the Thessalian region, such as that of Wace and Thompson in 1912, local production was generally characterised as ‘limited’ or ‘bad quality’ in the MH. In fact, the introduction to the principal classes of pottery from Prehistoric Thessaly in Wace and Thompson bluntly stated that “the development or rather degeneration of culture in Thessaly went on gradually without any violent break till the close of the Third Late Minoan period"3. However, modern excavations such as those carried out at Mitrou4 and Pefkakia5 have shown that there is evidence in some areas of Greece, including Thessaly, for a vivid and thriving culture during the MH. With these modern excavations, academic opinion regarding the quality of material culture produced during the Middle Helladic is slowly changing. Nonetheless, Rutter has warned against using evidence only from large centres of habitation like Mitrou and Pefkakia to further develop this opinion, fearing the presence of large quantities of imports at these kinds of sites will obscure the reality of local and regional production6. He suggests that using evidence from these large sites in combination with evidence from small, remote and rural sites will provide a more detailed and complete picture of Middle Helladic Greece. This thesis is an attempt to contribute the material from the site of Kastraki, a small hilltop site which sits on the border between the Almiros and Sourpi plains in Thessaly, to that conversation. Since the early publications of Wace and Thompson, there has been ongoing debate in scholarship regarding the cause of this ‘decline’ of the Middle Bronze Age, considering factors like war, invasion and natural disaster which have been used explained abrupt cultural changes in other periods of history7. However, modern research approaches such as those expressed in the 2004 conference papers “Middle Helladic Pottery and Synchronisms” have begun to recognise that cross cultural and cross period comparison of evidence often yields problematic conclusions for the Middle Helladic period8. This conference and the subsequent publication addressed these abrupt cultural changes, exploring the possibility of more niched explanations for this region. For example, the concept of ‘colonisation’ is often considered as an extreme and all-encompassing cultural phenomenon. Whilst colonisation can often be attributed to large scale cultural developments, Rutter has posited that a small scale occurrence of colonisation may then be harder to detect in the material evidence9. 1 Buck (1966), 193. 2 Buck (1966); Nordquist (1987); Touchais (1989); Zerner (1993), 51-56. 3 Wace and Thompson (1912), 23; NB- the Late Minoan III period roughly corresponds to the Late Helladic III period. 4 Hale (2016). 5 Maran (1992). 6 Rutter (2007), 36. 7 Wace and Thompson (1912); Buck (1966); Dietz (1988); Felten et al. (2007); Zerner (1993); Rutter (2007); Sarri (2010); Choleva (2012); Hale (2016). 8 Felten et al. (2007), 9. 9 Rutter (2007), 43. 6 | P a g e Kastraki is an interesting example through which to examine this concept. Whilst located in Thessaly, which has been recognised since the era of Wace and Thompson as a crossroad of communication in the Bronze Age, Kastraki is situated in the hinterlands of the region, located in a degree of isolation on a steep hilltop10. This may remove, as Rutter expressed, some of the complications that would arrive from significant percentages of imports that would arise in large centres. Additionally, comparison to local material may also illuminate on small scale connections (or perhaps differences) between Kastraki and nearby centres- such as Pefkakia11. The material study of this thesis will therefore address material of local production at the site and comparisons with nearby centres of habitation, whilst the conclusion hopes to delve into this question of regional cultural changes and colonisation. Alongside questioning the cause of cultural changes in the region, modern scholarship (such as Jeremy Rutter’s 2007 ‘Reconceptualizing the Middle Helladic Type-site’) has begun to consider if the impression of technological frugality in MH Thessaly is really an accurate conclusion, or perhaps a biased result of the past research approaches12. Current investigation on the concept of regionalism in the Bronze Age recognises that this area maintains a strongly unique cultural independence during in the late Middle Helladic13. Thessaly becomes a haven for pottery production in the following Mycenaean period with several workshops currently recognised and the potential for other centres to be discovered, considering the range of wares which originate in this period14. The early stages of the Late Helladic period managed to maintain this unique regionalism. The idea that this kind of industry came out of what has historically been considered a technological vacuum during the Middle Helladic is untenable15. There is unfortunately little comparative evidence through which to establish a wide database of ceramics for the Middle Helladic of this region, because much research has been focused on material such as ‘Minyan’, ‘Matt-Painted’ and ‘Lustrous Decorated’ wares, which constitute large percentages of imports during this time in Thessaly. However, if these fine wares are not present in a significant quantity at a site, does this automatically mean limitations in the quality of manufacturing? Or could it more so indicate isolation from large scale trade?16 The general impression from the material17 collected from the area discussed in the following analysis (the coastal Almiros and Sourpi plains), is not indicative of a particularly busy trade and exchange network. These areas do however occupy a strategic position in Thessaly, the thoroughfare between southern and central Greece, and the Northern regions.