MYCENAEAN CRETE?
Changes and continuities in Minoan material culture during LM II and LM III
Table of conten
Introduction...3
Chapter 1 Background and chronology...4
1.1 Theory...4
1.2 Chronology...5
Chapter 2 The changes and continuities in material culture during LM II-LM III...6
2.1 Frescoes...6
2.2 Pottery...9
2.3 Burial customs...16
2.4 Script...18
2.4 Settlement – lay out of towns...24
2.5 Synthesis of the different material groups...30
Chapter 3 Human mobility and archaeology...32
3.1 Human mobility and archaeology...32
3.2 Human mobility in the Aegean...35
Chapter 4 Synthesis and analysis...40
Conclusion...47
Bibliography...48
Introduction
The Minoan civilization on Crete lasted from 3400 B.C till 1100 B.C. In the later phases of this long period, in a period referred to as LM II-LM III, or as Final Palatial Period and Postpalatial Period, changes occur on the island, as is evident especially from the material culture. Many scholars have associated these changes with the arrival of the Mycenaeans on Crete.
According to this theory, the Mycenaeans became the new rulers on the island in the LM period.1 As a result, elements of Mycenaean culture such as the Linear B script, were
introduced. Often, the phenomenon of change in Minoan material culture during this period is presented as happening from one day to another. But is this theory correct? For my
research I will look at the changes and continuities in material culture and human mobility during the LM II-LM III period. Next, I will examine whether these changes were indeed related to the arrival of the Mycenaeans.
The main question for my research is ‘‘Can the changes in material culture on Crete during LM II-LM III be attributed by human mobility?’’ I will answer this question with two sub questions: ‘‘What where the changes and continuities during the LM II-LM III?’’ and ‘‘Which indications are there in general for human mobility in the Aegean during the LM II-LM III?’’
Chapter 1 Background and chronology
1.1 TheoryThe human societies that lived on Crete from 3400 B.C till 1100 B.C. are referred to as the Minoan civilization. The remains of this civilization were first discovered by Minos
Kalokairinos in 1878. In the 19th century, various excavations took place on the island
revealing the Minoan civilization bit by bit.2 The Minoan civilization reached its peak from
MM II till LM IB. During this period, the Linear A script was used for administration, the finest art (pottery and frescoes) was produced and architecture of monumental size was built.3 On
the island were various so-called palaces (sites) functioning as administrative centres, such as Knossos, Phaistos, Mallia and Zakros. These palaces were of monumental size and decorated with frescoes depicting human, fauna and flora in an atmosphere of life and movement. Pottery was produced in fine and coarse varieties and decorated with naturalistic depictions of fauna and flora spread over the whole surface.4
By the end of LM IB, the island appears to have suffered from an enormous destruction.5
Destroying almost all major sites, only Knossos survived and retained its function as an administrative centre. During LM II-LM III (the last two periods), Knossos was the only administrative centre and controlled the whole island.However, the palace administration
was no longer written in Linear A, but in Linear B and several other cultural changes can be observed. For example, individual graves with bronze offerings occur; martial scenes appear in Minoan frescoes and pottery loses its decoration of naturalistic representation of fauna and flora. 6
Cultural changes have often been explained by the arrival of new people or external sources for inspiration.7 In this case, the changes are attributed to the arrival of the Mycenaeans from
the Greek mainland. The Mycenaeans arrived at Crete after the great destruction (LM IB), which according to scholars such as Evans, Marinatos, Schoo, Platon and Warren was caused by earthquakes combined with the volcanic eruption at Santorini and its accompanying effects (natural disaster).8 The Mycenaeans settled at Knossos and became the new ruler of
the island from LM II till LM III. The arrival of a new ruling class had as a result material adaptation and the adoption of a new culture on the island.9
Although, scholars agree that Mycenaeans arrived at Crete after LM IB, there are different theories about whether or not the Mycenaeans became the new ruler of Crete. Warren assumes that the Mycenaeans filled a power vacuum, which was caused by natural disaster and social disruptions.10 Hood emphasized the evidence for war such as hoards of bronze
vessels, quantity of charred human bones and the changes in the archaeological record, which according to him was caused by Mycenaeans invading Crete.11 While Evans, Renfrew
and Hutchinson assume an internal disruption and rebellions in LM I against Knossos, and Mycenaeans taking advantage of the situation.12
2 Warren 1989, 19-25; Driessen 2002, 2 3 Idem, 1989 104
4 Dickson 1994, 165, 194, 210; Fitton 2002, 109, 146, 149, 159-161 5 Driessen, J./C.F. MacDonald 1997, 105-106, 117-118; Fitton 2002, 180
6 Patton 1996, 122, 132-132; Haskell 1997, 187-189; Fitton 2002, 180; Hallager 2010, 150-151, 155 7 Warren 1989, 25 8 Driessen, J./C.F. MacDonald 1997, 107 9 Idem, 1997, 117-118; Chapin 2010, 229 10 Driessen, J./C.F. MacDonald 1997, 107 11 Idem, 1997, 108 12 Ibidem, 108
1.2 Chronology
The period of the Minoan civilization at Crete lasted from around 3400 until around 1100 before Christus and can be arranged chronologically in two ways. The first division is based on the development of pottery styles and divides the Minoan civilization into three periods: Early Minoan Period (EM), Middle Minoan Period (MM) and Late Minoan Period (LM). Each period is divided into three periods based on difference in pottery and decoration style. This chronological dating is evolved by Sir Arthur Evans and is based on the division of the Ancient Egypt, Sir Arthur Evans was of the opinion that there was Egyptian influence on the Minoan civilization.13 The second chronological dating is evolved by Nikolaos Platon and is based on
architectural differences of the palaces. This division divides the Minoan civilization into five periods: Prepalatial Period (1), Protopalatial Period (2), Neopalatial Period (3), Final Palatial Period (4) and Postpalatial Period (5).14
I am well aware of the complexities to date the Minoan civilization.15 For my research, I will
refrain from using absolute dates and use the stylistic chronological dating which divided the Minoan civilization into Early Minoan, Middle Minoan and Late Minoan.
Chapter 2 The changes and continuities in material culture
during LM II-LM III
The Minoan civilization reached its peak during the Neopalatial period, or MM III-LM I, which is visible in the art, palaces and settlements from this period. The size of the palaces was monumental and they were decorated with impressive frescoes, while settlements
expanded.16 From LM II onwards, the palace of Knossos and the palace of Khania were the
13 Fitton 2002, 28 14 Patton 1996, 111 15 Manning 2010, 11-28
only remaining palaces keeping their important status.17 More generally, changes in Minoan
culture occur after LM IB.
In this chapter, I will look in detail at the changes and continuities during LM II-LM III, with a focus on frescoes, pottery, burial customs, script and settlement lay – out (town). The aim is to have an overview of the material culture in terms of changes and continuities; the key questions are ‘‘what changed and when?’’ and ‘‘what did not change?’’ For specific
categories of material culture, I will give a short overview of the material culture during MM III-LM IB. Then I will look at changes and continuities in material culture during LM II-LM III. 2.1 Frescoes
Already in the Final Neolithic period, Minoans began to cover the walls and floors of
important buildings with red plaster.18 This practice continued into the following periods. In
the EM period, there was little interest in pictorial painting; it occurred mostly at seal stones. The interest in pictorial paintings grew during the MM period and frescoes appear for the first time during this period when there was a palatial culture at Crete. The earliest frescoes mostly likely date to early MM III.19
MM III-LM I
From the MM III till LM I, Minoan art reached its peak.20 Minoan painters were able to create
an atmosphere of life and movement, and depictions of human, fauna and flora were
painted in a naturalistic way. During MM III-LM I, there were three major classes of frescoes: animals, sea creatures and flowers (1), large-scale figures (2) and miniature figures (3).21
There was a tendency to paint these depictions loose from the ground, in other words not between registers.22 The sea and marine life were an inspiration and interest which is not
only seen in frescoes but also in the art (pottery and sealings) before the frescoes appear.23 It
is clear that the representation of landscape was a preferred subject.24 Minoan frescoes
depicted animals and plants in their habitat without human figures in the scene. Frescoes with nature scenes (animals, plants and landscapes) were often incorporated with religious symbolism.25 Although, the term naturalism is used the representation of flowers was not
really naturalistic in the sense that it was not botanically accurate. However, one can recognize the species and different kind of species of plant or animals were combined.26
Concerning the color used to visualize gender, males were generally painted in dark red and females were painted in white. This color representation was derived from Egyptian art.27
The interest in plants, animals and sea creatures seems to decline in LM IB. Instead, frescoes painted in LM IB were a decorative version of the earlier style.28
17 Dickson 1994, 76; Chapin 2014, 31 18 Chapin 2014, 4
19 Immerwahr 1990, 40; Chapin 2010, 224; Chapin 2014, 11, 20 Warren 1989, 19-25; Driessen 2002, 2, Chapin 2014, 7 21 Immerwarh 1990, 39-40; Chapin 2010, 224
22 Dickson 1994, 165, 194, 210; Fitton 2002, 109, 146, 149, 159-161 23 Immerwahr 1990, 48
24 Chapin 2014, 11
25 Immerwahr 1990, 50; Chapin 2010, 225-226; Chapin 2014, 16; 26 Idem, 1990, 45; Dickson 1994, 165; Chapin 2010, 225; Chapin 2016, 16 27 ibidem, 53-54; Chapin 2010, 225; Chapin 2014, 12
LM II-LM III
The palace of Knossos and the palace of Khania were the only palaces that remained after the destruction of LM IB.29 Evidence of frescoes dated to LM II-LM III comes mostly from
Knossos and Ayia Triadha. Unlike other Cretan sites there is no clear demarcation between before LM IB and after LM IB at the palace of Knossos. The palace of Knossos suffered little from the destruction that occur in LM IB and continued into LM II-LM III. 30 Therefore, it is
difficult to distinguish whether the frescoes were painted in LM I, LM II or LM III. Although, it is hard to tell in which period the frescoes were exactly painted. However, some stylistic differences are notable between MM III-LM I frescoes and LM II-LM III frescoes.
Frescoes painted during LM II-LM III have lost much of their atmosphere of life and
movement, and depictions of human, fauna and flora were no longer naturalistic, compared to frescoes painted in the previous period. The frescoes have become conventional.31 In
addition to the continuation of scenes also new scenes were added to the repertoire such as hunting, warfare, processions and scenes in registers.32 Depictions of human, fauna and flora
not only became conventionalized, they were also was no longer painted loose from the ground but between registers (or borders) which was inspired by Egyptian paintings.33
Paintings between registers was not the only stylistic feature inspired by Egyptian paintings. The frescoes also show other elements which were most likely derived from Egyptian paintings and makes their appearance from LM II onwards: the combination of figures on different scale in the same scene (1), procession (2), registers (3) and neutral grounds (4).34
These elements are features of the frescoes on the Greek mainland. It appears that the Mycenaeans were more attracted to the formal Egyptian system of arrangement than the Minoans.35 Frescoes painted during LM II-LM III show a coarsening of technique such as
heavy outlines (figure 2).36
29 Hood 1978, 65; Dickson 1994, 76; Fitton 2002, 186; Chapin 2014, 31 30 Idem, 1978, 65; Immerwahr 1990, 77-78, 84, 100; Chapin 2014, 31 31 Dickson 1994, 165, 167; Crowley 2010, 272
32 Hood 1978, 80; Immerwahr 1990, 83; Dickson 1994, 167
33 Idem, 1978, 65; Dickson 1994, 165; Preziosi D./L.A. Hitchock, 1999, 176; Fitton 2002, 186; Chapin 2010, 230 34 ibidem, 65, 68-70, 78; Immerwahr 1990, 41, 50-53; Chapin 2010, 230; Chapin 2014, 34, 36
35 Hood 1978, 65, 68-70, 78; Chapin 2014, 36
2.2 Pottery
From the Neolithic onwards, pottery was produced on Crete. Initially, the pottery was handmade and burnished, either plain, or decorated with incisions or plastic decoration. 37
From early MM I onwards, paint and slip were added to the decoration repertoire. At the end of MMI B, incised decoration dies out.38 Pottery made during late EM II/EM III is
characteristic by the light-on-dark style which would continue till LM IA.39 Pottery made
37 Betancourt 1985, 3, 5-9; Dickson 1994, 101; Hallager 2010, 409 38 Idem, 1985, 23; Hallager 2010, 409
39 Ibidem, 55, 103, 117, Hallager 2010, 409-411
during MM is recognizable by the dark-on-light style which would continue into LM.40 The
potters’ wheel was introduced in early MM IB.41
Repertoire of pot shapes
The typical pot shapes during EM were the so-called teapot, askos, jug, kernos, bottle, bowl, tankard, cup, cylindrical pyxis, jar, amphora and globular pyxis (figure 3).42 These kinds of
shapes continued during MM, with the only differences being that the MM vessels were without exaggerated details such as high base and have a more practical shape.43 In addition
to, the existing shapes, new pot shapes occur: the Bull’s head rhyton (figure 4) makes it appearance in MM II, while the stirrup jar (figure 5), pitharaki (figure 6) and a wide variety of rhyton designs make their appearance in MM III.44 The MM pot shapes continued into LM
and new shapes were added. In LM I, the alabastron (figure 7) was added to the repertoire. Krater, squat alabastron and kylix (figure 8) were introduced in LM II. In LM IIIA amphoroid kraters and juglets were added to the shape repertoire and in LM IIIB shallow kylix were introduced. The bell krater makes it appearance in LM IIIC Early. 45
New shapes originating at the Greek mainland were also adopted. Goblet shaped vessels such as stemmed goblets and Ephyraean goblets make their first appearance in LM II (figure 9). The Ephyraean goblet gradually became unpopular during LM IIIA.46
40 Hood 1985, 85, 117; Hallager 2010, 410 41 Betancourt 1985, 77; Hallager 2010, 409 42 Betancourt 1985, 23-24, 35-36, 54-55 43 Idem, 1985, 73-74; Hallager 2010, 409 44 Ibidem, 105-106; Hallager 2010, 410
45 Betancourt 1985, 123, 124, 150, 152, 164; Hatzaki 2007, 249; Hallager 2010, 411
46 Popham 1970, 75; Hood 1978, 42; Betancourt 1985, 150; Dickson 1994, 118; French 1997, 149-152; Haskel 1997, 190; Fitton 2002, 185; Hallager 2010, 411
Figure 3: Typical EM pot shapes
Figure 5: Stirrup jar Figure 4: Bull’s head rhyton
MM III-LM I
Pottery made during MM III-LM I is recognizable by the dark-on-light style. The light-on-dark style has almost disappeared by LM IA.47 Similar to frescoes, the production and quality of
pottery reached its peak during MM III-LM I.48 Decorated pottery had naturalistic depictions
of human, fauna and flora spread over the whole surface.49 LM IB pottery is recognizable by
four typical decoration: floral style (1), abstract and geometric style (2), marine style (3) and alternating style (4). The marine style is inspired by the sea, like a motif of an octopus or dolphin (figure 10). Floral style is inspired by nature, like ivy and crocus (figure 11). The alternating style is a mixture from different styles.50 These four decoration styles spread
through other Aegean island and the Greek mainland.51 Of interest is the close relationship
between the frescoes and decoration on the pottery dated from MM III-LM I. Decoration on pottery was most likely derived from frescoes scenes and the frescoes have most likely an influence on how the decoration on pottery was painted.52
LM II-LM III
Pottery made during LM II-LM III shows signs of mainland influence which is noticeable at the tendency toward the grandiose and elaborate. Vessels of large size occur more frequently and the decoration on the vessels was imposing but compared to the previous period frozen and stiff. There was a tendency to fill as much space as possible.53 Vessels were still
decorated with traditional Cretan motifs, but there were noticeable differences in
47 Betancourt 1958, 85, 117; Dickson 1994, 116, 123; Hallager 2010, 410-411; Chapin 2014, 28-31 48 Warren 1989, 95; Driessen 2002, 2
49 Betancourt 1985, 120, 143; Dickson 1994, 165, 194, 210; Fitton 2002, 109, 146, 149, 159-161 50 Idem, 1985, 108, 140-148; Hallager 2010, 411; Chapin 2014, 28-31
51 Ibidem, 148
52 Betancourt 1985, 144; Hood, 1978, 43; Dickson 1994, 118; Chapin 2014, 28
53 Popham 1970, 71; Hood 1978, 42; Dickson 1994, 118; Preziosi D./L.A. Hitchcock 1999, 167; Hatzaki 2007, 204
Figure 7: Tall alabastron Figure 6: Pitharaki
comparison to the previous period. From LM II onwards, depictions of fauna and flora became more formal and stylized until the point where the species show little to no resemblance to their model in nature (figure 12). Naturalism was no longer the norm.54
Although the decoration on vessels still depicts fauna and flora (traditional Cretan motifs), it was no longer spread out over the whole surface of the vessels, but was regimented into upright and symmetrical forms, and increasingly confined between horizontal bands. 55
Similar to frescoes, the decoration on pottery during LM II-LM III has lost its movement and life compared to the previous period.
Minoan pottery of this period shows a continuation of decoration motifs and at the same time introduction of new motifs and decoration style. LM II sees the introduction into the decoration repertoire of depictions of human and manmade objects, such as helmets, horns of consecration, the figure-of-eight shield and chariots, and of pictorial themes especially with birds. In addition to birds, also bulls, imaginary sphinxes and goats make their appearance on pottery. Pictorial decoration disappeared in the LM IIIA2.56 The Ephyraean
style (figure 13) also makes it appearance during LM II. This kind of decoration originated from the Greek mainland and was often used for drinking vessel. Vessels decorated in this style were on one side decorated and undecorated on the other side. The undecorated side was out of sight and facing the drinker.57 Pottery made during LM III is recognizable by the
loss of pictorial unity. In comparison to the previous period, LM III decoration no longer shows scenes or events. This kind of decoration is probably influenced by the Greek
mainland. Pottery made in LM IIIC is characteristic by two kind of decoration: the plain style (1) and the close style (2). The plain style uses a few linear designs to fill the space. The close style uses elements and patterns to fill as much space as possible.58
54 Hood 1978, 42, Hatzaki 2007, 204; Crowley 2010, 273-274; Chapin 2014, 32 55 Idem, 1978, 42; Hallager 2010, 412
56 Hood 1978, 42-43; Hatzaki 2007, 204, 219; Preston 2010, 315 57 Idem, 1978, 42
Figure 10: Floral Style LM IB
Figure 11: Marine Style LM IB
Conclusion
Frescoes and pottery produced during LM II-LM III have lost the atmosphere of movement and life of the earlier period. Depictions of human, animals and plants on frescoes became conventionalized and were painted between registers (borders). In addition to the continuing scenes (human, fauna and flora) also new scenes were added. From LM II onwards, hunting, warfare, processions and scenes in registers were added to the scene repertoire and figures of different scale were combined in the same scene. Frescoes painted during LM II-LM III show coarsening of techniques such as heavy outlines.
Animals and plants were still painted on pottery during LM II-LM III, but it became stylized and formal and, were confined between horizontal bands and regimented into upright and symmetrical forms. In addition to, the Minoan traditional motifs also new motifs and
decoration style were added to the decoration repertoire. From LM II onwards, depictions of human and manmade objects such as chariot and figure-of-eight shields and Ephyraean style make their appearance. In addition to EM and MM vessel shapes, new vessels shapes were introduced. Krater, squat alabastron, kylix and goblets shapes such as Ephyraean goblets were introduced in LM II. In LM IIIA amphoroid kraters and juglets were added to the shape repertoire and in LM IIIB shallow kylix were introduced. The bell krater makes it appearance in LM IIIC Early.Decoration painted in LM III show no longer a pictorial unity (no scene or event). There is a tendency toward imposing decoration, filling as much space of possible. Pictorial decoration disappeared in LM IIIA2. Pottery LM IIIC is recognizable by two kind of decoration: plain style (1) and close style (2).
2.3 Burial customs
The Minoans buried their deceased as inhumations. In general, the tombs were communal and used for many generations.59 Multiple burials in a tomb were also found at other Aegean
regions, but the scale of the tombs in Crete is unique. This feature distinguished the Cretan society from other Aegean societies, and the long-continued use of tombs reflects the stability of the Cretan society.60 As mentioned before, I will look at the period from MM III
59 Dickson 1994, 210, 215 60 Idem, 1994, 210
Figure 13: High-stemmed kylix with Ephyraean Style decoration
until LM III. In particular, I will look at the type of graves, the use of graves, technique and burials gifts.
MM II-LM IB
During the MM III-LM IB period, most of the cemeteries were located outside the settlement at a distance that was close enough to be visible from the settlement. It seems that the city of the living and the city of the dead should have some connection with each other, but the connection should be visual and should not be too physical. There may be several reasons for this, such as minimizing the chances for the dead to return to the city of the living and hygiene.61 The tombs in the cemeteries were located at some distance from each other.
Tombs dating from MM III-LM IB were communal and consist of multi-chamber tombs, house tombs, circular tombs and tholoi. Sometimes pits, cists and simple interments were used to bury the deceased. The custom of placing skeletal remains in larnakes and pithoi became a common practice, after it was introduced in EM III.62
There are several types of communal graves in Minoan Crete.63 As the name suggests, house
tombs resemble a house with various grouped rectilinear rooms and were built in a similar way as a house.64 The only differences were that house tombs have more evidence for a
wooden door and a more substantial stone foundation for the walls. Tholoi built during this period continued to be used during LM II and LM III. Multi-chamber tombs resemble an artificial cave. Probably they imitate the caves in which people were buried in earlier times.65
The shape is irregular but tends to be radiate from the entrance or antechamber. There was a tendency to build walls in the large rooms of multi-chamber tombs to create interval
divisions and built small spaces such as pits and benches inside multi-chamber tombs and tholoi. These small spaces might be used for primary burials or for burials which were removed from the tomb floor. Such practices often occur at tombs that were used for a long time or reopened after a long time. Circular tombs, or tholoi, were built in stone and have high corbelled inwards walls.66 There was special care for the lower courses and walls of the
tomb to support the weight of the tomb. Inside the circular tomb was an original chamber, an antechamber and in some cases also more groups of rooms were built. The original room and antechamber were built on rock and it was common that an antechamber was built before the entrance. According to Branigan this feature has to do with laying out the deceased before the ritual burial.67
In general, the burial gifts consist mostly of table ware such as different kinds of plates and cups, especially conical cups. In addition to tableware, also jewelry and seals were given as grave gift. Some burial gifts reflect the social status of the deceased, but one must remember that other factors can also affected the choice of burial gifts for example rituals, sentimental motivations or religious.68
61 Alberti 2013, 48, 54
62 Dickson 1994, 212-213, 215; Alberti 2004, 128, 134; Alberti 2013, 48, 54, 63 Dickson 1994, 212, 215
64 Idem, 1994, 217 65 Alberti 2004, 128 66 Dickson 1994, 217
67 Idem, 1994, 217-218, 227, 229; Alberti 2004, 128; Alberti 2013, 48, 53 68 Hatzaki 2012, 312-313; Alberti 2013, 51, 53
LM II-LM III
In general, the tombs of the LM II-LM III consist of other types of tombs and were located at other locations than the tombs dated from MM III-LM IB. For example, in the neighborhood of Knossos new cemeteries were built with pit graves and shaft graves mingled with chamber tombs dated from LM II-LM IIIA.69 The graves in this new necropolis consist of one deposition
and most of them have not more than four depositions of the same date. Single burial became the norm instead of communal burial. However, collective burials do occur during LM II-LM III. Tholoi, rock-cut chamber tombs, shaft-graves and pit graves became the most common from LM II onwards and have in common a low number of depositions instead of a high number of depositions, which was the case in the previous period. These kinds of tombs are mainland types and indicate mainland influence.70
As mentioned before, tholos tombs were also built during MM III-LM I. The majority of the tholoi built in that period were still in use during LM II-LM III. The tholos tombs built during LM II-LM III however were of a different kind, namely of the mainland style. Mainland style tholos tombs were built underground or were vaulted, had a dromos and usually do not have attached chambers.71 The first appearance of a mainland style tholos was at Kephala ridge
near Knossos dated to LM II.72 During the LM III period, tholos tombs were no longer built,
and pit and cist graves became popular again.73 An interesting phenomenon, is that tholos
tombs were effectively no longer used as grave type for the elite during the LM IIIA2/ early LM IIIB-LM IIIC, which was the trend in the previous period. The tholos tombs were smaller and less rich compare to the previous period. It was no longer possible to identify an elite tomb by its really distinctive building or form.74 Chamber tombs remained the dominant form
of grave during LM II-LM III, but the chamber tombs built during LM were less impressive, smaller and single chamber compare to previous period. Single chamber tombs make their first appearance in LM II. The multi-chambered tombs used during LM II-LM III were often re-used or re-opened tombs dating from the previous period. The preference of larnax burial and the appearance of cremation are remarkable features of the LM III period. Circular tombs were reused for larnax burials in LM III.75 In LM IIIA2, in center and east Crete burial in
clay containers was reintroduced. Attention was turned away from the material culture (burial gifts) that might have adorned the deceased and turned to the vessel as a body container for the deceased. Not only clay containers were reintroduced also secondary burials which were common during EM-MM II were reintroduced.76
An interesting phenomenon of the LM II-LM III period are the so called ‘‘warrior graves’’. Graves at Knossos dated to LM II-LM III are known as ‘‘warrior graves’’, because of the weapons found in the graves.77 Although, the definition can be misleading it has become an
accepted term because it highlights the importance of the weapons in the graves. The same can be said about the bronzes items in the ‘‘graves with bronzes’’. Based on the burial
69 Dickson 1994, 214, 230
70 Idem, 1994, 230; Kallitsaki 1997, 213; Alberti 2004, 128, 134; Dickson 2006, 181-183; Preston 2010, 315 71 Dickson 1994, 226-227
72 Idem, 1994, 230 73 Ibidem, 231
74 Dickson 2006, 74, 180
75 Dickson 1994, 231; 180; Fitton 2002, 193-194; Alberti 2004, 128; Dickson 2006, 178, 76 Dickson 2006, 178, 180; Hatzaki 2012, 311
assemblages, the tombs can be divided into two groups: tombs dated from LM II till LM IIIA2 and tombs dated from the end of LM IIIA1 continuing into the subsequent periods (the later necropolis). The earlier tombs (LM II-LM IIIA1) were recognizable by pottery such as piriform jars, alabastra and kylix. Another, characteristic feature was the single-chamber tombs. The later tombs (LM IIIA2-subsequent periods) were recognizable by pottery such as spouted cups, side spouted jars, shallow cups and stirrup jars. In addition to pottery, the tombs also content bronze items such as weapons and jewelry as burials gifts.78
Conclusion
During LM II-LM I, the norm became single burial. However, this does not mean that collective burials do not exist. Collective burials do occur during this period, but contain compare to the previous period a lower number of depositions. In addition to, the burials used during MM II-LM I new types of tombs appear such as single chamber tomb and
mainland style tholos tomb both make their first appearance in LM II. A distinguished feature of LM II-LM III are the ‘‘warrior graves’’ found at Knossos. These graves contain weapons, therefore the name. In LM IIIA2, at the centre and in the east of Crete, burial in clay containers were reintroduced. Not only clay containers were reintroduced also secondary burials which were common during EM-MM II were reintroduced. Distinguished features of LM III were the preference of larnax burial and the appearance of cremation.
Cemeteries built in LM II-LM III were in general located at other locations than the cemeteries built in the previous period and contain other types of tombs. Although, new types of tombs appear during LM II-LM III it does not mean that the old types (MM III-LM I tombs) went out of use. The old types were still used or were reused for example circular tombs were reused for larnax burials in LM III. Also, in general the new types of tombs do occur at Crete but were not much used for burials. This might can be explained by the fact that the deceased was often places in larnakes which limited the space.
2.4 Script
The first form of writing at Crete was the so-called ’’Arkhanes script’’ (figure 14) named after the place where the script was found for the first time dated to EM III-MM IA. During MM IB-MM IIIB, two kinds of script were used Cretan Hieroglyphic (1) and Linear A (2).79 Both scripts
appear on archival documents and sealed documents, but the kind of document and the region of use differ. Cretan Hieroglyphic was used in north and north-east Crete (Knossos, Petras and Mallia) and was written on seal stones, two-and four-sided clay bars and sealed document such as unsealed round clay discs. Linear A was used in central and south Crete (Phaistos) and in general written on page-shape tablets, and sealed documents such as roundels. The differences between Cretan Hieroglyphic and Linear A suggest that, there were two administrative systems operating at the same time.80 In addition, there are also
documents which use both scripts: direct object sealings, noduli and two-hole hanging nodules. The shared use of these documents suggest that these documents were already part of the administration system.81 From MM III till LM IB, Linear A became the script of the
78 Idem, 128-134
79 Schoep 1999, 265-266, 268; Knappett, C/I. Schoep 2000, 366-367; Bennet 2008, 5-6
80 Idem, 1999, 265-266; Knappett, C./I. Schoep 2000, 366; Bennet 2008, 7; Younger, J.G./P. Rehak 2010, 175; Finlayson 2013, 124, 127
island and was followed by Linear B from LM II till LM III.82 Linear B is deciphered by Michael
Ventris in 1952.83 The art of writing disappeared after the collapse of the palaces.84 Linear A
and Linear B were syllabaries consisting of signs. Considering the meaning of the signs, each sign represents either weight, number, open vowel, consonant plus vowel, entire word (logograms/ideograms) and both common and unusual fractions. Logograms/ ideograms were used to represent people, commodities, livestock, materials and objects.85 Writing was
a specialized craft and only a very few people were able to write and to read. Both the earlier and later scripts were written with a sharp instrument on tablets or other shapes of clay damp such as seals and would also be inscribed on a variety of artefacts.86
82 Dickson 1994, 193-194; Preziosi, D./L.A. Hitchock 1999, 158; Finlayson 2013, 138 83 Preziosi D./ L.A. Hitchock 1999, 158-159
84 Dickson 1994, 197
85 Dickson 1994, 193; Bennet 2008, 14-15; Younger, J.G/P. Rehak 2010, 174
86 Ibidem, 193-194; Preziosi, D./L.A. Hitchock 1999, 158; Tomas 2010, 333-334, Palaima 2010, 356; Finlayson 2013, 138
MM III-LM IB (Linear A)
Linear A was already in use during MM IIB. From MM III till LM IB only Linear A was used as script and Cretan Hieroglyphic gradually disappeared.87 During this period, writing reached its
peak and Linear A was used for various practices such as religion and administration,
therefore writing has reached its peak during this period.88 It appears on non-administrative
objects (gold, silver, stone vessels and ceramic vessels) and administrative objects.
Administrative objects can be divided into two groups: tablets (1) and seal-impressed clay pieces in a range of forms (2). The tablets were in page-shaped tablets and small in sizes. Seal-impressed clay pieces were flat-based nodules, single-hole hanging nodules, two-hole hanging nodules, roundels and nodules (figure 15).89 Unfortunately, Linear A has not yet been
deciphered.90
The texts were generally short and the script was used for different practices. It was mostly used for the record of transaction of administrative centres. The inscribed items are
associated with high-status either through the material or by the context in which the objects were found, for example in palaces or rich sanctuary. Linear A was not only used in Crete but also elsewhere in the Aegean such as Akrotiri, Ayia Irini and Ayios Stephanos.91
LM II-LM III (Linear B)
Linear B was developed from Linear A and most likely at Knossos.92 Although, Linear B was
developed from Linear A, one must keep in mind that they are written in different languages. Linear B is an earlier form of the Greek language, while Linear A is still undeciphered.93 The
earliest find of a Linear B document was at Knossos in the ‘‘Room of the Chariot Tablets’’ dated to LM IIIA1. From mid-LM IIIB onwards, Linear B was also used at other places at Crete. So far, only at Khania also Linear B documents were found dated from LM/LH IIIA2-late until IIIB1-late.94 The earliest find of Linear B at Crete was earlier than at the Greek mainland
87 Knappett, C./I. Schoep 2000, 367; Bennet 2008, 8; Finlayson 2013, 127, 88 Dickson 1999, 194, 197; Tomas 2010, 342
89 Driessen 1997, 216; Bennet 2008, 8-13; Tomas 2010, 347-350, Younger J.G./P. Rehak 2010, 175 90 Warren 1989, 97
91 Dickson 1994, 197
92 Dickson 1994, 194; Preziosi D./L.A. Hitchock 1999, 158-159; Bennet 2008, 13; Younger J.G./P. Rehak 2010, 175
93 Idem, 1994, 194; Warren 1989, 158; Preziosi D./L.A. Hitchock 1999, 159; Bennet 2008, 3-4, 13;
94 Hallager, E./M. Vlasakis/B.P. Hallager, 1992, 61; Dickson 1994, 76; Bennet 2008, 8, 13; Palaiama 2010, 356, 366; Finlayson 2013, 217 – 218; Chapin 2014, 31
where finds from Agios Vasilios dated from early LH IIIA2 and Mycenae and Thebes dated from LM/LH IIIA2-Late until IIIB1-late.95
Linear B was used only used for administration, unlike Linear A which was uses for different practices.96 Although, Linear B was developed from Linear A there are notable differences.
Linear B consists of fewer syllabic signs, new logograms (ideograms), has a new way of expressing weight and measurements, and has a better text lay-out.97 There was a difference
between the administration of Linear A and B. Linear B was written on tablets and a range of clay documents which were all stamped by seals. There two kinds of tablets: elongated (palm leaf) and page-shaped. Elongates tablets were used to record singe units of information (single row) and page-shaped tablets were used to record multiple rows of information and sometimes summaries of information from either elongated tablets or string nodules. It seems that there was a hierarchy and progress to record data which was not the case for Linear A. Linear B was also used at sealings, but compared to Linear A there were less sealings. Only flat-based nodules and two-hole hanging nodules were used. Two-hole hanging nodules are divided into two kinds regular nodules (1) and irregular string nodules (2) (figure 16).98 The information on the Linear B tablets confirms that in this period, is
Knossos had control over a great part of the island, which it did not have before. In the previous period, there was no central control of the island in the sense that one site has control over a great part of the island.99
Conclusion
Linear B was developed from Linear A, but has considerable changes compared to Linear A. Linear B was only used for administration and consist of fewer signs. If one looks at the script itself, Linear B has a better lay-out, a wider range of pictorial ideograms, and other signs for measurements and weights. The documents used to write Linear B were page-shaped and elongated tablets. Compare to Linear A, there was a hierarchy and progress to record data (administration). Information was first written on elongated tablets than written on page-shaped tablets. The fact, that there was a progress for administration suggests that there was some kind of uniform and central control, which was not the case with Linear A. Narrowing the number of signs, might have to do with purpose of Linear B, administration. Less signs prevents the chances for alternative reading and makes it easier and handier for the writer and reader.100 Most importantly, Linear B represents another language (also in Knossos):
Greek, whereas Linear A documents a as yet unknown language.
The earliest find of Linear B was at Knossos dated to LM IIIA1.101 This date and place of the
earliest Linear B, is interesting: it seems that there was a gap from LM II until LM IIIA1. If this is really the case it means that there was no continued use of script. And that is was not used during (part of) LM II-LM IIIA1. The finding place and the fact that Linear B might be
developed at Knossos suggests that the administration played a role in the central control of Knossos over a great part of the island.
95 Finlayson 2013, 217-218; Karagianni, 201?. (not consulted by me) 96 Dickson 1994, 194, 197; Bennet 2008, 13; Finlayson 2103, 138 97 idem, 1994, 194; Bennet 2008, 14-16
98 Bennet 2008, 16-19; Palaima 2010, 359; Finlayson 2013, 138 99 Driessen 1997, 216-217; Bennet 2008, 19
100 Dickson 1994, 197
2.4 Settlement – lay out of towns
The Minoan civilization has reached its peak during MM III-LM I, which is shown in the material arts and crafts, but also in the lay-out of palaces and the settlements. The size of the palaces was monumental and decorated with impressive frescoes, and the settlements expanded.102 From LM II onwards, the palace of Knossos and the palace of Khania were the
only remaining palaces.103 But, what about the towns? In this part of the chapter, I will look
at the settlement lay-out of three sites: Knossos (1), Palaiokastro (2) and Gournia (3). I will give a short overview of the development of the town, then I will look at the changes and continuity after the destruction of the palaces, which covers the LM II-LM III.
Knossos
Knossos is located near the north coast in central Crete. 104 The earliest evidence of
occupation at Knossos, was a Neolithic well. The settlement dated to EM I-EM II was built over the Neolithic well and some expansion took place. During EM III-MM IA, the settlement continued to expand but this time the growth was more significantly and significant
structures were built. From MM IB until LM I, the town continued to expand significantly. During MM, Knossos starting to develop as a palatial centre. During MM III-LM I, Knossos had become a palatial centre. The town continued to have this status as a regional centre during LM II-LM IIIA2 (figure 17).105 LM II is a period with extensive destruction and extensive
building. At different parts of the town buildings were rebuilt and re-occupied.106 The elite
buildings built during MM III-LM I were re-occupied in LM IIIA1. After another destruction, these buildings were again reoccupied during LM IIIB.Evidence for occupation during LM IIIA2 was found in the west side of the town. The buildings built in LM I were partially re-occupied and new buildings were built. The new buildings have a rubble construction and were of poor quality. In LM IIIB, high-status buildings built in LM I-II were partially reoccupied and new buildings were built. As mentioned, before these elite buildings were also
re-occupied during LM IIIA1. The new buildings build during this period, were the same as LM IIIA2 of poor quality.107 It became a pattern, that only a small portion of building mostly
located at the ground floor was re-occupied. The rest of the building was left in ruins after destruction.108 It seems that the town was abandoned during Late LM IIIB or early LM IIIC and
a new town was established in the west part of the old town.109
Palaiokastro
Palaiokastro lies in the coastal plain of Roussolakkos, at the northeast end of Crete (figure 18). The first evidence of occupation was in EM IIA.110 During MM IB-MM IIA, the settlement
started to get is form as a proper town and a network of roads with watchtowers was built, connecting Palaiokastro with other Minoan settlements such as Zakros, Karoumes, Petras, Vai
102 Warren 1989, 95; Driessen 2002, 2; Chapin 2014, 7, 9 103 Dickson 1994, 76; Chapin 2014, 31
104 Cadogan 1994, 58
105 Patton 1996, 115-116, 122; Hatzaki 2005, 90; Bennet et all. 2007, 105-106; Whitelaw 2012, 129, 136-139, 144-146; Chapin 2014, 6-8
106 Hatzaki 2004, 121-122
107 Hatzaki 2005, 66-67, 72, 75, 91; Warren 2005, 97 108 Idem, 2005, 75-76; Warren 2005, 97
109 Ibidem, 82-87, 91-92, 98
110Macgillivray J.A./J.M. Driessen 1990, 398; Macgillivray, J.A./L.H. Sacket 2010, 571-572; Christakis 2013, 4999-5000
and Ambelos. The first indications for a large – scale public building are to be dated either in MM IB-MM IIA or MM IIB-MM IIIA. However, no palace or public building was found where a central authority could reside.111 By the end of MM IIIA, the town was destroyed by an
intensive earthquake and rebuilt in MM IIIB-LM IA on roughly the same lay-out as the previous periods. In MM IIIB-LM IA a new town was built according a well-designed plan, which gives a good example of Minoan town planning. The town consists of regular town blocks comprising two or four units facing broad streets. The streets were paved and provided with drainage systems. The streets built during LM IA had a central raised walk which was made of cut sandstone slabs with a spacious gutter. At the end of the LM IA, an earthquake occurred, probably caused by the Thera eruption. Most of the houses were rebuilt after the destruction and new streets with drainage systems were built made of schist slabs. The town was again destroyed at the end of LM IB, by an intense fire (enemy action). After the destruction, some houses were re-occupied with little renovation during LM II-LM IIIA1. The drainage system was again destroyed and in LM IIIA1 a new installation was built this time made of sandstone slabs.112 The town’s lay-out, the urban features and, the
rebuilding and repairing of urban the features show that there was a centrally directed, organized and long-lived civic planning which suggests that there was some kind of central authority and show the continuity of the town.113 During the early part of LM IIIA2, the town
was again destroyed by fire. A period of massive reoccupation of the old houses and extensive building of new houses took place during LM IIIA2-LM IIIB, but was ended in the middle of LM IIIB because of an earthquake. At this point, Palaiokastro was partially occupied and eventually abandoned. The only form of occupation was at a small refuge settlement on the top of the Kastri hill in LM IIIC.114
Gournia
Gournia is located at the north coast of East Crete (figure 19).115 The earliest evidence of
occupation at Gournia was during MM IB-MM II. The town consists of a palace, monumental houses, houses located either in residential blocks or neighborhoods and paved streets. During MM IB-MM II, the town began to get is form. Residential blocks were created when the roughly gridded street system was infilled with houses. Houses located in blocks were contiguous, while houses located at neighborhoods (small areas) allowed the residents to have face-to-face interaction.116 In addition to small changes such as patching streets and
repairing a house, also major reorganizations of the town (transformations) took place. The first evidence for a major reorganization was in Late MM IB. The second major reorganization took place during MM IIIA-MM IIIB. This reorganization has as result new streets system, new monumental buildings, rebuilding and extending of the palace to the south, and paving of the Public Court. In late LM IA, the town was considerably expanded. The northwestern part of the town became an industrial area with ceramic kills and metal foundry. In LM IB, the industrial area was abandoned and became a dumping ground following the pattern of major reorganizations of the town. By the end of LM IB, the town was destroyed and became
111 Idem 1990, 401, 403, 406; Macgillivray, J.A./L.H. Sacket 2010, 571, 574; Christakis 2013, 4999-5000 112 ibidem, 403; Driessen, J./J.A. MacGillivray/A.L.H. Sackett 2006, 379-380, 383; MacGillivray J.A./A.L.H. Sacket 2010, 574; Christakis 2013, 4999-5000
113 Macgillivray J.A./J.M. Driessen 1990, 403; Driessen, J./J.A. MacGillivray/A.L.H. Sackett 2006, 379-380, 383; MacGillivray J.A./A.L.H. Sacket 2010, 574-576; Christakis 2013, 4999-5000
114 Idem, 1990, 406-407; Macgillivray J.A./L.H. Sacket 2010, 574; Christakis 2013, 4999-5000 115 Vavouranaki 2006, 233
mostly abandoned. During LM IIIA-LM IIIB, a few habitants returned to the town occupying three houses in block E located at the southwest and northwest part of the town, and some construction took place, such as a small shrine built over the streets dated to MM III-LM I. In LM IIIB, this new town was also abandoned.117
117 Idem, 2011, 200; Pantou 2015, 137-138; Buell, D.M./J.C. McEnroe 2016, 6, 8
Conclusion
Unfortunately, there is little archaeological research with focusing on settlement lay-out of towns. Therefore, there is a lack of information.
In LM II, in Knossos not only extensively building took place also old buildings were
reoccupied. After a period of extensive destruction (LM II), elite buildings dated from MM III-LM I were reoccupied during III-LM IIIA1. In III-LM IIIA2, buildings built in III-LM I were partially reoccupied and new buildings were built of poor quality. During LM IIIB, the same elite buildings as in LM IIIA1 were partially reoccupied and new buildings were built of poor quality. The town was eventually abandoned in LM IIIB or early LM IIIC and a new town was established in the west part of the old town.
After the destruction in LM IB, at Palaiokastro some houses were re-occupied with little renovation done during LM II-LM IIIA1. LM IIIA2 till the middle of LM IIIB was a period of massive reoccupation of the old houses and extensive building of new houses. At this point, Palaiokastro was partially abandoned and eventually abandoned. In LM IIIC, occupation was in form of a small refuge settlement on the top of the Kastri hill.
Gournia was destroyed by the end of LM IB and was mostly abandoned. A few habitants returned to the town during LM IIIA-LM IIIB occupying three houses located at the southwest and northwest of the town and some construction took place. The new town was eventually abandoned in LM IIIB.
2.5 Synthesis of the different material groups
As mentioned before, the Minoan civilization has reached its peak during MM III-LM I. The size of the palaces was monumental and settlements expanded. From LM II onwards, cultural changes occur which are notable in the frescoes, pottery, burial customs, script and
settlement lay-out (town). In this chapter, my aim was to give an overview of the changes and continuities during LM II-LM III. But how are the different material groups related to each other?
Frescoes, pottery and burials continued from MM III-LM I into LM II-LM III. Nevertheless, there were some changes. Frescoes scenes and pottery decorations painted during MM III-LM I continued into III-LM II-III-LM III but show stylistic changes while new motifs, style and pottery shapes were introduced in LM II. Burials built in MM III – LM I were reused or
reopened during LM II-LM III, while new cemeteries were built and new types of tombs were introduced. At Knossos, Palaiokastro and Gournia changes occur during LM II but the changes were not homogeneous. Each town has its own development. During LM III construction of few buildings took place but also reoccupation of old buildings. It seems that the old houses were partially occupied or occupied with little renovation. Eventually, all the three towns were either abandoned or a new town was established. As time goes by, the towns all reduced in size. Unlike the other material groups, it seems that there was no continuation of the script between LM I and early LM IIIA1. It seems, that the script was the only material group that does not continued into LM II.
The key questions of this chapter are ‘‘what changed and when?’’ and ‘‘what continued?’’ From the overview given here it is clear that changes occur from LM II onwards which are
visible in the material culture in particular frescoes, pottery, burials customs, script and settlement lay-out. However, even though changes do occur, Cretan traditions from MM III-LM I continued into III-LM II-III-LM III.
Chapter 3 Human mobility and archaeology
3.1 Human mobility and archaeologyChanges in material culture and interregional contact are often attributed to human mobility.118 Itself, human mobility is often linked to migration, colonization and conquests.
But are these the only types of human mobility recognizable in the archaeology? What are
the archaeological indicators for human mobility? In other words, how can one study human mobility through archaeology? This question is a significant problem in many archaeological Periods and regions.119 There are evidence in archaeological record for foreign contacts and
external influence on material culture. But how does one connect this with human mobility? In addition to material culture studies, human mobility is also studied by means of scientific analyses on bones.
In this chapter, I will look at two things: the ways in which different types of human mobility have been discussed in archaeology (1) and the ideas about human mobility in the Aegean during LM II-LM III (2). The aim is to have an overview of the archaeology of the human mobility and an idea of human mobility during LM II-LM III in order to answer the main question whether the observed changes during LM II-LM III can be attributed to human mobility.
Interregional contact
Before, archaeologists can talk about cultural changes and what causes these, one must first define the archaeological characteristics of a particular culture. If one knows the
characteristics of a particular culture than one can tell what changed and propose an explanation for those changes.120
As ‘‘characteristics of a culture’’, one can think of pottery, script, architecture and burials; materials. But, also of town plan, consumption, techniques, style and habits, in other words of ‘‘ways of doing things’’.121 Changes in such characteristics may indicate contact between
people. In other words, cultural elements which are characteristic for a particular culture and found in another cultural region can be considered to indicate contact between people from these cultural regions.122 Among all the archaeological evidence, pottery is often considered
as an ideal research tool for research concerning changes in culture and contact between people, because of the durability and ephemerality of pottery in the archaeological record.123
If a specific class of pottery is characteristic of a certain region and it is suddenly also produced in large quantities elsewhere, often the movement of people is assumed.
Types of human mobility
The types of human mobility mostly often discussed in the scholarly literature are
colonization and conquests.124 But are these are not the only types of human mobility known
in the archaeology. What is the link between the different types of human mobility and archaeology? In this part of the chapter, I will look into the different types of human mobility.
119 Knappett, C./Kiriatzi E., 2016, 6 120 Chapman, J./H. Hamerow 1997,
121 Abell 2014, 554; Girella, L./P. Pavúk 2016, 18; Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 102-103; Abell 2016, 73-74
122 Abell 2014, 554; Girella, L./P. Pavúk 2016, 18; Gorogianni 2016, 139, 145-146; Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 102-103; Abell, 2016, 73-74
123 Gorogianni 2016, 139
124 Chapman, J./H. Hamerow 1997, 3; Mokrišová 2016, 47; Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 103
In essence, the term human mobility signifies the ways in which people from different cultures came in contact with each other.125 Human mobility can occur on different scales,
across different distances, in different durations. Moreover, different agents in the mobilities can be identified. As such, the different types of human agents of mobility can be
distinguished, such as traders, travelers, career migrants, colonizers, conquerors and traveling craftspeople, career migration.126
Human mobility is often considered a phenomenon on a large-scale and dealing with great distances.127 But short-term interactions between travelers and traders, and small-scale and
short-distance are just as important for cultural exchange. During the short-term interaction between traders and travelers, for example, contact is made between people of different cultural regions, which can lead to exchange of materials, knowledge or habits which might eventually result in cultural changes due to continuing trade networks.128 Concerning the
migrants, D. Anthony has argued that migrants would keep contact with their social network (interpersonal and kinship) from their previous community and would continue to participate in the economic networks from the community where they came from. This may lead to the introduction of new materials and practices into another cultural region than the cultural region were the migrants came from.129
The terms colonization and conquests are the most discussed types of human mobility in archaeology and are often used to explain changes in material culture. In both cases, the terms can be put in the category warfare. Warfare can be linked to changes in the material culture because warfare often has as results assimilation or acculturation.130
With regards to traveling craftspeople, a craft is learned in a community of practice.
The process of learning a craft is different per community of practice.131 Material indicators of
practices can point to the community of practice a craftsman or craftswoman came from.132
Therefore, traveling craftspeople can be a factor in explaining the changes in material culture.
Career migration considers people who move because of their profession. Examples are skilled Cretan craftspeople who moved to the Mycenaean palaces in order to work in the workshops, or bureaucrats and soldiers who are part of a hierarchy and had to move because of the request of the institution.133
An interesting development concerning the research of material culture and human mobility, is the growing attention for technological mobility, such as the distribution of technological
125 Mokrišová 2016, 46-47; Knappett, C./E. Kiriatzi 2016, 5; Kiriatzi, E./S. Andreou 2016, 129
126 Chapman, J./H. Hamerow 1997, 3; Anthony, 1997, 27; Kristiansen 2013, 6; Abell 2014, 551-552, 554; Lis, B./Š. Rückl/M. Choleva 2015, 64; Mokrišová, 2016, 46-47; Knappet, C./E. Kiriatzi 2016, 5; Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 103; Kiriatzi, E./S. Andreou 2016, 129; Gorogianni 2016, 145-146
127 Abell 2014, 551-552 128 Idem, 2014, 551-552 129 Ibidem, 554
130 Chapman, J./H. Hamerow 1997, 3 131 Nikolapoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 105
132 Abell, 2014, 556; Lis, B./ Š. Rückl/ M. Choleva 2015, 64; Nikolapoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 105 133 Anthony 1997, 27; Kristiansen 2013, 6
knowledge, the adoption and reproduction of technological knowledge and how
technologies can manifest different types of mobilities across spatial scales.134 Although, it is
important to know the movement of people and materials, the movement of techniques is just as important.135 In order to learn a craft, knowledge has to be distributed. There are two
ways of knowledge distribution: vertical or transfer of technological knowledge (apprenticeship) and horizontal or spatial, distribution of technological knowledge (movement of craftspeople).136 In order to make particular material, such as wheel made
pottery and frescoes, specific techniques are required. As mentioned before, a craft is learned in a community of practice. The process of learning a craft is different per
community of practice (vertical).137 Besides, how knowledge and skills were learned it is also
important to understand the mobility of craftspeople because it has impact on the
geographical diffusion of a particular craft knowledge and skills. Craftspeople who moved to other places would bring their knowledge and skills with them, and craftspeople can move to other places in order to learn a particular craft (horizontal).138 It is important to understand
that there are various reasons for craftspeople to leave his or her residence.139 By looking at
the distribution and transfer of technological knowledge one can infer from which place a person came from or to which place a person went in order to learn. The information gain from these researches (technological mobility) can contribute to the study of human mobility, in particular human mobility in wider sense.140
In addition to changes in material culture, human mobility in modern archaeology is increasingly studied by means of the technical analysis of bones and tissues. Through the analysis of mitochondrial DNA general patterns of migration in early prehistory have been identified.141 However, the actual movement of people is difficult to detect by DNA analysis.
More promising in this respect is strontium isotope analysis.142 With this method one can
track the movement of humans and animals based on the variation of strontium isotope composition. Strontium(⁸⁷Sr/⁸⁶Sr) in bedrocks comes into groundwater and soils, and via consuming of food and water it comes into the human skeletal tissues. Based on similarity in the ratio of the strontium (⁸⁷Sr/⁸⁶Sr) taken from an individuals’ tissues and local geological material, one can determine if the individual was local or has spent at least seven or ten years in the area.143 Thus, strontium isotope analysis enables to identify foreigners in the
funeral record, irrespective of the material culture. Unfortunately, it is often difficult to pinpoint exactly where the individuals originated, since the isotope fingerprints of many regions is unknown and, in any case, overlap to a certain degree.
3.2 Human mobility in the Aegean
In the first part of this chapter, I have discussed about how one can recognize contact between people from different cultural region and the different types of human mobility. In
134 Knappett, I./E. Kiriatzi 2016, 8-9
135 Abell, 2014, 552; Knappett, I./E. Kiriatzi 2016, 8-9 136 Lis, B./Š. Rückl/M. Choleva 2015, 63
137 Nikolapoulou, I. C. Knappett 2016, 105
138 Abell 2014 556-557; Lis, B./Š. Rückl/M. Choleva 2015 63; Knappett, I./E. Kiriatzi 2016 8-9 139 Lis, B./Š. Rückl/M. Choleva 2015, 64-65
140Abell 2014, 552, 559-560; Knappett, I./E. Kiriatzi 2016, 8-9; Mokrišová, 2016, 47; Nikolapoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 109-111; Girella, L./P. Pavúk 2016, 17-23
141 Friedlander et al. 2002, 460-469; Cassidy & Bradley 2015, 5-15 142 Nafplioti 2008, 2308-2309; Whelton et al. 2018, 768
second part of the chapter, I will look at the ideas about human mobility in the Aegean during the MM III-LM III. So, what exactly do we know about human mobility in the Aegean during MM III-LM III? It is certain that there was contact between people from different places, based on the material evidence: pottery, frescoes, scripts and seals share common elements throughout the Aegean.144 Which leads to the question how this contact between
the people was made, in other words which type of human mobility took place at the
Aegean? Four types of human mobility have discussed in the scholarly literature: colonization (1), acculturation (2), traders (3) and traveling craftspeople (4).145
Models and theories
Concerning the changes and human mobility during MM III-LM III, two terms have been amply discussed: Minoanisation (1) and Mycenaeanisation (2). Minoanisation is referred to especially for MM III-LM I.146 According to scholars, Minoan culture spread during this period
beyond the borders of Crete and Crete became the leading force for economy (trade). Mycenaeanisation happened during LM II-LM III and saw the spread of the Mycenaean culture in the Aegean and Asia Minor.147 Cultural features that spread to other regions were
pottery, frescoes, burial customs, architecture and script.148
Scholars have proposed models and ideas to explain these phenomena: Minoanisation and Mycenaeanisation. In the 20th century, two models have dominated: colonization model (1)
and acculturation model (2). Places under consideration, were considered either to have been colonialized or acculturated. The colonization model argues that Minoan features found beyond Crete requires an in-depth knowledge of Minoan ways of doing things and that the only explanation for the spread of this knowledge is that it came with Minoans who
emigrated to the places in question. The acculturation model, instead, assumes that Minoan features were not propagated, but adopted by non-Minoan communities willingly or out of necessarily. It might be for prestige or economic reasons. Both models assume that human mobility occurs at macro-scale that one culture has influenced another culture.149 Concerning
Mycenaeanisation specifically, two models have been dominant: acculturation (1) and core-versus-periphery (2). The acculturation model argues that the widespread distribution of Mycenaean material culture was the results of acculturation between high/donor and several lower/recipient cultures.150 The core-versus-periphery approach argues that the
widespread distribution of Mycenaean material culture was the results of interaction between core and periphery.151 Both for Minoanisation and for Mycenaeanisation, this
human mobility is considered to have been a phenomenon that happened large-scale and far-distance, which was commissioned by the elite.152
144 Dickson 1994, 71-73; Mokrišová 2016, 47-51; Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 106-111; Gorogianni 2016, 139; Abell, 2016, 75-77
145 Abell 2014, 551-552, 554; Lis, B./Š. Rückl/M. Choleva 2015, 64; Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 103; Gorogianni 2016, 145-146;
146 Niemeier 2009, 11; Alberti 2013, 35; Abell 2016, 71-72; Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappet 2016 102-103; Mokrišová 2016, 43, 45
147 Alberti 2013, 35; Mokrišová 2016, 43, 45; Gorogianni 2016, 136
148 Niemeier 2009, 11; Alberti 2013, 35; Gorogianni 2016, 136; Mokrišová 2016, 43, 45
149 Papadimitriou, N./D. Kriga 2013, 13; Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 103-104; Abell 2016, 71-72; Mokrišová 2016, 49
150 Kiriatzi, E./S. Andreou, 2016, 130 151 Idem, 2016, 130
Concerning the four types of human mobility that have been proposed for the Aegean, elites have been considered as the leading force for human mobility. Colonization and trades were facilitated by them (elites) and are considered to have been done for prestige and status (power), as well as to create and maintain connections with other elites and making new connection ties with other elites (gift exchange and administrated trade).153 In such
scenario’s, acculturation was done out of willingness or out necessity.154 The term
colonization and acculturation have been understood as the way in which one culture has influences another culture.155 Materials and people have been considered as inseparable
from each other. Therefore, the arrival of new material was considered as the arrival of new people, in other words ‘‘pots equals people’’.
The journeys of traders are also considered to have been commissioned by the elites, with the aim to get prestige goods or raw material for the making of goods, for example metals. Examples are trade between Crete and Anatolia and Cycladic islands.156 The mobility of
craftspeople has been considered as limited and similar to colonization and traders commissioned by elite. If there was mobility of craftspeople, it was the craftsmen who moved to other places.157
Views about human mobility has changed over the course of time. In the 20th century, elites
were thought of as the leading force for human mobility, especially when considering large-scale (large group) and long-distance movements.158 Recent studies have suggested that this
does not necessarily have to be the case.159 Human mobility can occur on small-scales (small
group and individuals) and involve different social levels.160 Also, non-elites (lower class of
the society) and individuals or small groups are able to move other places.161
Concerning the models and theories used to explain the changes and human mobility in the Aegean, the colonization model, acculturation model and core versus periphery are no longer dominant. Instead, of a black and white approach recent studies propose hybrid views.162 Materials were imported and imitated, which eventually, may results in hybrid
forms. Changes in the material culture were the results of combination of new influences, old traditions and innovations.163 Concerning the four types of human mobility in the Aegean,
it is important to realize that movement to other places in the Aegean happened between areas within the same cultural milieu, which has played a role in the willingness and easiness of adopting certain new practices for migrants and vice versa. It can be considered as
152 Papadimitriou, N./D. Kriga 2013, 13; Knappett. C./E. Kiriatzi 2016, 6; Abell 2016, 551-552, 557, 562; Mokrišová 2016, 46, 48
153 Papadimitriou, N./D. Kriga 2013, 13; Knappett. C./E. Kiriatzi 2016, 6; Kiriatzi, E./S. Andreou 2016, 128-129; Abell 2016, 557, 562
154 Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 103 155 Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 104
156 Alberti 2013, 25, 32-33; Abell 2016, 75; Gorogianni 2016, 148 157 Abell 2014, 557, 562; Knappett. C./E. Kiriatzi 2016, 6
158 Idem, 2014, 551-552; Mokrišová 2016, 46-47 159 Abell 2014, 551-552; Mokrišová 2016, 46-47
160 idem 2014, 551-552, 554; Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 104; Kiriatzi, E./S. Andreou 2016, 129; Mokrišová 2016, 46-47
161 ibidem, 551-552, 554; Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 104; Kiriatzi, E./S. Andreou 2016, 129; Mokrišová 2016, 46-47
162 Girella, L./P. Pavúk 2016, 17-23; Nikolakopoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 104; Kiriatzi E./S. Andreou 2016, 131 163 Idem, 2016, 17-23; Nikolapoulou, I./C. Knappett 2016, 109
