1
Helladic Period 2
Heinrich Schliemann 3
Dendra Panoply 4
Early Bronze Age 5
Middle Bronze Age 6
Pelasgians 7
Dorian "Invasion" 8
Mycenaean Language 9
Early Thebes 10 Mycenae 11 Mycenae
Grave Circle A 12 Mycenae
Grave Circle B 13 Mycenae
Shafr Grave 14 Mycenae
Religion 15 Treasury
of Atreus 16 Mycenae
Megaron 17 Helladic
Bronze Age Pottery 18 Mycenaean
Frescoes 19 Mycenaean
Weapons Manufacture 20 Lefkandi 21 Illiad -
Greek Bronze Age
22 Some External Internet Links
Helladic is a modern
archaeological term meant to identify a sequence of
periods characterizing the culture of mainland
ancient Greece during the Bronze
Age. The term is
commonly used in archaeology and art
history. It was intended
to complement two parallel terms, "Cycladic", identifying
approximately the same sequence with reference to
the Aegean Bronze Age, and "Minoan", with reference
to the civilization of Crete.
The
scheme applies primarily to pottery and is a
relative dating system. The pottery at any given
site typically can be ordered into "Early", "Middle"
and "Late" on the basis of style and technique. The
total time window allowed for the site is then
divided into these periods proportionately. As it
turns out, there is a correspondence between "Early"
over all Greece, etc. Also, some "absolute dates",
or dates obtained by non-comparative methods, can be
used to date the periods and are preferable whenever
they can be obtained. However, the relative
structure was devised before the age of
carbon-dating (most of the excavations were
performed then as well). Typically, only relative
dates are obtainable and form a structure for the
characterization of Greek prehistory. Objects are
generally dated by the pottery of the site found in
associative contexts. Other objects can be arranged
into early, middle and late as well, but pottery is
used as a marker.
Helladic
society
and culture have antecedents in the Neolithic period
in Greece with many innovations being developed and
manifesting during the second and third phases of
the Early Helladic period (2650–2050/2000 BC) such
as bronze metallurgy, monumental architecture and
fortifications, a hierarchical social
organization, and vigorous contacts with other areas
of the Aegean. These innovations would undergo
further changes during the Middle Helladic period
(2000/1900–1550 BC), marked by the spread of Minyan
ware, and the Late Helladic period (1550–1050 BC),
which was the time when Mycenaean
Greece
flourished.
Contents
1
Etymology
2 Periodization
3 Settlements of
the Helladic period
4 Early Helladic
(EH)
4.1 Early Helladic
I (EHI)
4.2 Early Helladic
II (EHII)
4.3 Early Helladic
III (EHIII)
5 Middle Helladic
(MH)
6 Late Helladic
(LH)
6.1 Late Helladic I
(LHI)
6.2 Late Helladic
II (LHII)
6.3 Late Helladic
III (LHIII)
7 Fortified
settlements
8 Population
9 See also
10 References
10.1 Citations
10.2 Sources
11 Further reading
12 External links
Etymology
The
three terms "Helladic", "Cycladic", and "Minoan" refer to location
of origin. Thus "Middle Minoan" objects might be
found in the Cyclades, but they are not on that
account Middle Cycladic. The scheme tends to be less
applicable in areas on the periphery of the Aegean,
such as the Levant. Pottery there might imitate
Helladic or Minoan cultural models and yet be
locally manufactured.
Periodization
The
"Early",
"Middle" and "Late" scheme can be applied at
different levels. Rather than use such cumbersome
terms as "Early Early", archaeologists by convention
use I, II, III for the second level, A, B, C for the
third level, 1, 2, 3 for the fourth level and A, B,
C for the fifth. Not all levels are present at every
site. If additional levels are required, another
"Early", "Middle" or "Late" can be appended. The
Helladic period is subdivided as:
Period
Approximate Date
Early
Helladic I
3200/3100–2650
BC[1]
Early
Helladic II
2650–2200/2150
BC[2]
Early
Helladic III
2200/2150–2050/2000
BC[3]
Middle
Helladic
2000/1900–1550
BC[3][4]
Late
Helladic I
1550–1500
BC
Late
Helladic II
1500–1400
BC
Late
Helladic III
1400–1050
BC
Settlements
of the Helladic period
These
are the estimated populations of hamlets, villages, and towns
of the Helladic period over time. Note that there
are several problems with estimating the sizes of
individual settlements, and the highest estimates
for a given settlements, in a given period, may be
several times the lowest.
The
Early
Helladic period (or EH) of Bronze
Age Greece is generally
characterized by the Neolithic agricultural
population importing bronze and copper, as well as
using rudimentary bronze-working techniques first
developed in Anatolia with which they had cultural
contacts.[7] The EH period
corresponds in time to the Old
Kingdom in Egypt.
Important EH sites are clustered on the Aegean
shores of the mainland in Boeotia and Argolid (Manika, Lerna,
Pefkakia, Thebes, Tiryns) or coastal
islands such as Aegina (Kolonna) and Euboea (Lefkandi) and are marked by
pottery showing influences from western Anatolia and
the introduction of the fast-spinning version of the
potter's
wheel. The large
"longhouse" called a megaron is introduced in
EH II. The infiltration of Anatolian cultural models
(i.e. "Lefkandi I") was not accompanied by
widespread site destruction.
Early Helladic I (EHI)
The
Early
Helladic I period (or EHI), also known as
the "Eutresis culture", is characterized by the
presence of unslipped and burnished or red slipped
and burnished pottery at Korakou and other sites
(metal objects, however, were extremely rare during
this period).[8]
In terms of ceramics and settlement patterns, there
is considerable continuity between the EHI period
and the preceding Final Neolithic period (or FN);
changes in settlement location during the EHI period
are attributed to alterations in economic practices.[8]
Early Helladic II (EHII)
The
transition
from Early Helladic I to the Early Helladic
II period (or EHII) occurred rapidly and
without disruption where multiple socio-cultural
innovations were developed such as metallurgy (i.e.
bronze-working), a hierarchical social organization,
and monumental architecture and fortifications.[9] Changes in
settlement during the EHII period were accompanied
with alterations in agricultural practices (i.e.
oxen-driven plow).[10]
Early Helladic III (EHIII)
The
Early Helladic II period came to an end at Lerna
with the destruction of the "House
of Tiles", a corridor house.[11]
The nature of the destruction of EHII sites was at
first attributed to an invasion of Greeks and/or
Indo-Europeans during the Early Helladic
III period (or EHIII);[12]
however, this is no longer maintained given the lack
of uniformity in the destruction of EHII sites and
the presence of EHII–EHIII/MH continuity in
settlements such as Lithares, Phlius, Manika, etc.[13]
Furthermore, the presence of "new/intrusive"
cultural elements such as apsidal houses, terracotta
anchors, shaft-hole hammer-axes, ritual tumuli, and
intramural burials precede the EHIII period in
Greece and are in actuality attributed to indigenous
developments (i.e. terracotta anchors from Boeotia;
ritual tumuli from Ayia Sophia in Neolithic
Thessaly), as well as continuous contacts during the
EHII–MH period between mainland Greece and various
areas such as western Asia Minor, the Cyclades,
Albania, and Dalmatia.[14]
Changes in climate also appear to have contributed
to the significant cultural transformations that
occurred in Greece between the EHII period and the
EHIII period (ca. 2200 BCE).[15]
In
Greece, the Middle
Helladic period (or MH) was a period of
cultural retrogression, which first manifested in
the preceding EHIII period.[3][4] The MH period is
characterized by the wide-scale emergence of Minyan
ware, which may be
directly related to the people whom ancient Greek
historians called Minyans; a group of
monochrome burnished pottery from Middle Helladic
sites was conventionally dubbed "Minyan" ware by
Troy's discoverer Heinrich
Schliemann.
Gray
Minyan ware was first identified as the pottery
introduced by a Middle
Bronze
Age migration;[16]
the theory, however, is outdated as excavations at
Lerna in the 1950s revealed the development of
pottery styles to have been continuous (i.e. the
fine gray burnished pottery of the EHIII Tiryns
culture was the direct progenitor of Minyan ware).[17] In general,
painted pottery decors are rectilinear and abstract
until Middle Helladic III, when Cycladic and Minoan influences
inspired a variety of curvilinear and even
representational motifs.
The
Middle Helladic period corresponds in time to the Middle
Kingdom
of Egypt.
Settlements draw more closely together and tend to
be sited on hilltops. Middle Helladic sites are
located throughout the Peloponnese and central
Greece (including sites in the interior of Aetolia
such as Thermon) as far north as the Spercheios
River valley. Malthi in
Messenia and Lerna V are
the only Middle Helladic sites to have been
thoroughly excavated.
The
Late
Helladic period (or LH) is the time when Mycenaean
Greece
flourished, under new influences from Minoan Crete
and the Cyclades. Those who made LH pottery
sometimes inscribed their work with a syllabic
script, Linear B, which has been
deciphered as Greek. LH is divided
into LHI, LHII, and LHIII; of which LHI and LHII
overlap Late
Minoan ware and LHIII
overtakes it. LHIII is further subdivided into
LHIIIA, LHIIIB, and LHIIIC. The table below provides
the approximate dates of the Late
Helladic phases (LH) on the
Greek mainland.
Period
Approximate Date
LHI
1550–1500
BC
LHIIA
1500–1450
BC
LHIIB
1450–1400
BC
LHIIIA1
1400–1350
BC
LHIIIA2
1350–1300
BC
LHIIIB1
1300–1230
BC
LHIIIB2
1230–1190
BC
LHIIIC
(Early)
1190–1130
BC
LHIIIC
(Middle)
1130–1090
BC
LHIIIC
(Late)
1090–1060
BC
Sub-Mycenean
1060–1000
BC
Proto-Geometric
1000
BC
Late Helladic I (LHI)
The
LHI pottery is known from the fill of the Shaft
Graves of Lerna
and the settlements of Voroulia and Nichoria (Messenia), Ayios Stephanos,
(Laconia) and Korakou.
Furumark divided the LH in phases A and B, but
Furumark's LHIB has been reassigned to LHIIA by
Oliver Dickinson. Some recent C-14 dates from the
Tsoungiza site north of Mycenae indicate LHI there
was dated to between 1675/1650 and 1600/1550 BCE,
which is earlier than the assigned pottery dates by
about 100 years. The Thera
eruption also occurred
during LHI (and LCI and LMIA), variously dated
within the 1650–1625 BCE span.
Not
found at Thera, but extant in late LHI from
Messenia, and therefore likely commencing after the
eruption, is a material culture known as
"Peloponnesian LHI".[18] This is
characterised by "tall funnel-like Keftiu cups of
Type III"; "small closed shapes such as squat jugs
decorated with hatched loops ('rackets') or
simplified spirals"; "dark-on-light lustrous-painted
motifs", which "include small neat types of simple
linked spiral such as varieties of hook-spiral or
wave-spiral (with or without small dots in the
field), forms of the hatched loop and double-axe,
and accessorial rows of small dots and single or
double wavy lines"; also, the "ripple pattern" on
"Keftiu" cups. These local innovations continued
into the LHIIA styles throughout the mainland.
Late Helladic II (LHII)
The
description
of the LHIIA
is mainly based on the material from Kourakou East
Alley. Domestic and Palatial shapes are
distinguished. There are strong links between LHIIA
and LMIB. LHIIB
began before the end of LMIB, and sees a lessening
of Cretan influences. Pure LHIIB assemblages are
rare and originate from Tiryns, Asine and Korakou.
C-14 dates from Tsoungiza indicate LHII was dated to
between 1600/1550 and 1435/1405 BCE, the start of
which is earlier than the assigned pottery date by
about 100 years, but the end of which nearly
corresponds to the pottery phase. In Egypt, both
periods of LHII correspond with the beginning of its
"Imperial" period, from Hatshepsut to Tuthmosis
III (r. 1479–1425
BCE).
Late Helladic III (LHIII)
LHIII
and LMIII are contemporary. Toward LMIIIB,
non-Helladic ware from the Aegean ceases to be
homogeneous; insofar as LMIIIB differs from
Helladic, it should at most be considered a
"sub-Minoan" variant of LHIIIB.
The
uniform and widely spread LHIIIA:1
pottery was originally defined by the material from
the Ramp house at Mycenae, the palace at Thebes (now dated to
LHIIIA:2 or LHIIIB by most researchers) and Triada
at Rhodes. There is material
from Asine, Athens (wells), Sparta (Menelaion), Nichoria and the 'Atreus
Bothros', rubbish sealed under the Dromos of the Treasury of
Atreus at Mycenae as well. C-14
dates from Tsoungiza indicate LHIIIA:1 should be
more nearly 1435/1406 to 1390/1370 BCE, slightly
earlier than the pottery phase, but by less than 50
years. LHIIIA:1 ware has also been found in Maşat
Höyük
in Hittite Anatolia.[19]
The
LHIIIA:2
pottery marks a Mycenaean expansion covering most of
the Eastern Mediterranean. There are many new
shapes. The motifs of the painted pottery continue
from LHIIIA:1 but show a great deal of
standardization. In Egypt, the Amarna site contains
LHIIIA:1 ware during the reign of Amenhotep
III
and LHIIIA:2 ware during that of his son Akhenaten; it also has the
barest beginnings of LHIIIB. LHIIIA:2 ware is in the
Uluburun
shipwreck, which sank in the
14th century BCE. Again, Tsoungiza dates are
earlier, 1390/1370 to 1360/1325 BCE; but LHIIIA:2
ware also exists in a burn layer of Miletus which likely
occurred early in the reign of Mursili
II and therefore some
years prior to Mursili's
eclipse in 1312 BCE. The
transition period between IIIA and IIIB begins after
1320 BCE, but not long after (Cemal Pulak thinks
before 1295 BCE).
The
definition
of the LHIIIB
by Furumark was mainly based on grave finds and the
settlement material from Zygouries. It has been
divided into two sub-phases by Elizabeth
B. French, based on the
finds from Mycenae and the West wall at Tiryns. LHIIIB:2
assemblages are sparse, as painted pottery is rare
in tombs and many settlements of this period ended
by destruction, leaving few complete pots behind.
LHIIIB
pottery
is associated in the Greek mainland palaces with the
Linear B archives. (Linear B had been in use in
Crete since Late
Minoan II.) Pulak's
proposed LHIIIA/B boundary would make LHIIIB
contemporary in Anatolia with the resurgent Hittites following
Mursili's eclipse; in Egypt with the 19th Dynasty,
also known as the Ramessides; and in northern
Mesopotamia with Assyria's ascendancy over
Mitanni. The end of LHIIIB
is associated with the destruction of Ugarit, whose ruins
contain the last of that pottery. The Tsoungiza date
for the end of LHIIIB is 1200/1190 BCE. The
beginning of LHIIIC, therefore, is now commonly set
into the reign of Queen Twosret. The LHIIIC
has been divided into LHIIIC:1 and LHIIIC:2 by
Furumark, based on materials from tombs in Mycenae,
Asine, Kephalonia, and Rhodes. In
the 1960s, the excavations of the citadel at Mycenae
and of Lefkandi in Euboea yielded stratified
material revealing significant regional variation in
LHIIIC, especially in the later phases. Late LHIIIC
pottery is found in Troy
VIIa and a few pieces in Tarsus. It was also made
locally in the Philistine settlements of
Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza.
Fortified
settlements
During
the Helladic period, a number of major advances were
developed including fortified urban settlements with
monumental buildings such as corridor houses, which
may prove the existence of complex societies
organized by an elite or at least achieving
corporate, proto-city state form.[20][21]
One of these settlements was Manika, located in Euboea, dated to the
Early Helladic period II (2800–2200 BC). The
settlement covered an area of 70-80 hectares, was
inhabited by 6,000–13,500 people, and was one of the
largest settlements of the Bronze
Age in Greece.[20][5]
Another
settlement was Lerna in the Argolid region, which was
perhaps the most important and wealthiest of Early
Helladic sites.[22]
The settlement has a monumental building known as
the House of
the Tiles, a "corridor
house",[23]
notable for several architectural features that were
advanced for its time, such as its roof being
covered by baked tiles,
which gave the building its name.[24]
The structure dates to the Early Helladic II period
(2500–2300 BC) and is sometimes interpreted as the
dwelling of an elite member of the community, a
proto-palace, or an administrative center.
Alternatively, it has also been considered to be a
communal structure or the common property of the
townspeople.[25] The exact
functions of the building remain unknown due to a
lack of small finds indicating the specific uses of
the building.[25] The house had a
stairway leading to a second story, and was
protected by a tiled roof.[26]
Debris found at the site contained thousands of
terracotta tiles having fallen from the roof.[27] Although such
roofs were also found in the Early Helladic site of
Akovitika,[28]
and later in the Mycenaean towns of Gla and Midea,[29]
they only became common in Greek
architecture
in the 7th century BC.[30] The walls of the House
of the Tiles were constructed with sun-dried
bricks on stone socles.[24]
Other
fortified
settlements include Tiryns, which covered an
area of 5.9 hectares sustaining 1,180–1,770 people,[5] and had an large
tiled two-storeyed "round house" (or Rundbau)
with a diameter of 28 m on the upper citadel. It may have
served as a palace or temple or perhaps it was a communalgranary.[31][32]
Other sites include Ayia Irini, which covered an
area of 1 hectare and had a population of perhaps up
to 1,250,[33]Eutresis covering 8
hectares with an estimated population of
1,600–2,400, Thebes covering 20
hectares with a population of 4,000–6,000,[5]Lefkandi (unknown in size
and population), and Kolonna (or Aegina), a densely
populated settlement with impressive fortifications,
monumental stone buildings and sophisticated town
planning.
Already
before
2500–2400 BC, Kolonna experienced remarkable
economic growth and had its own administrative "Corridor House",
the so-called "Haus am Felsrand".[34] During the phase
Aegina III 2400–2300 BC, which corresponds to the
transition phase Lefkandi I-Kastri, the evidence of
the economic structure and administrative and social
organization of the community become more clear.[34] The "White House"
(Weisses Haus; 165 square metres) constitutes
the monumental community building that succeeds the
"Haus am Felsrand", which had the same function.[34]
Kolonna may constitute the Aegean's first state as it appears to
be the earliest ranked society in the area outside MinoanCrete
and perhaps a political center in the Middle
Helladic period where it achieved state-level after
the Minoans but before the Mycenaeans.[35]
Population
Multivariate
analyses
of craniometric data derived from Helladic skeletal
material indicate a strong morphological homogeneity
in the Bronze Age osteological record, disproving
the influx of foreign populations between the Early
Helladic and Middle Helladic periods; ultimately,
the Bronze Age inhabitants of mainland Greece
(including the Mycenaeans) represent a single and
homogeneous population of Mediterranean provenance.[36]
5.^
abcdefghijkMacSweeney
2004, Table 1.
Population estimates for Aegean sites in EB II, p.
57; MacSweeney dates the Early Bronze II period (or
EB II) to circa 2800–2200 BC (see p. 53).
6. ^Sampson 1987, p. 19.
7. ^Pullen 2008, p. 20; van
Andels
& Runnels 1988,
"The transition to the Early Bronze Age", pp.
238–240; French 1973,
p. 53.
8.^
abPullen
2008,
pp. 21–22.
9. ^Pullen 2008, pp. 24–26; Whittaker 2014,
p. 49: "The second half of the Early Helladic period
is characterized by monumental architecture and
fortifications, a hierarchical social organization,
widespread metallurgy and lively contacts with other
parts of the Aegean."
10. ^Pullen 2008, pp. 27–28.
11. ^Pullen 2008, pp. 36, 43
(Endnote #22): "A corridor house is a large,
two-story building consisting of two or more large
rooms flanked by narrow corridors on the sides. Some
of those corridors held staircases; others were used
for storage."
12. ^Caskey 1960, pp. 285–303.
13. ^Pullen 2008, p. 36; Forsén
1992,
pp. 251–253.
14. ^Pullen 2008, p. 36; Forsén
1992,
pp. 253–257.
15. ^Pullen 2008, p. 36.
16. ^Mellaart
1958, pp. 9–33.
17. ^Pullen 2008, p. 40; French
1973,
pp. 51–57; Caskey 1960,
pp. 285–303.
18. ^Lolos 1990, pp. 51–56.
19. ^Kuniholm
1998, pp. 3–4.
20.^
abSampson
1987,
p. 19.
21. ^Bintliff
2012, p. 107: "Taken
together, the Mainland Early Helladic Corridor
Houses, Anatolian Troy, the Northeast Aegean
fortified villages, and perhaps also Manika, may
well evidence complex societies, either organized by
an elite, or at least achieving corporate,
proto-city state form."
22. ^Bryce 2006, p. 47: "Lerna in
the Argolid region was probably the most important
and the wealthiest of all Early Helladic II sites.
Founded originally in the Neolithic period
(represented by Levels I and II on the site), it was
abandoned at the end of this period and was
subsequently reoccupied at the beginning of Early
Helldaic II (Level III)."
23. ^Shaw 1987, pp. 59–79.
24.^
abOverbeck
1963, p. 5.
25.^
abOverbeck
1963, p. 6.
26. ^Overbeck
1963, p. 5; Shaw
1987,
p. 59.
27. ^Caskey 1968, p. 314.
28. ^Shaw 1987, p. 72.
29. ^Shear 2000, pp. 133–134.
30. ^Wikander
1990, p. 285.
31. ^Chapman 2005, p. 92; Hornblower,
Spawforth
& Eidinow 2012,
"Tiryns", p. 1486.
·French,
D.M. (1973). "Migrations and 'Minyan' pottery in
western Anatolia and the Aegean". In Crossland,
R.A.; Birchall, Ann. Bronze Age Migrations in
the Aegean. Park Ridge, NJ: Noyes Press.
pp. 51–57.
·Lolos,
Y.G. (1990). "On the Late Helladic I of Akrotiri,
Thera". In Hardy, D.A.; Renfrew, A.C. Thera and
the Aegean World III. Volume Three: Chronology –
Proceedings of the Third International Congress,
Santorini, Greece, 3–9 September 1989. London:
Thera Foundation. pp. 51–56.
·Musgrave,
Jonathan
H.; Evans, Suzanne P. (1981). "By Strangers Honor’d:
A Statistical Study of Ancient Crania from Crete,
Mainland Crete, Cyprus, Israel, and Egypt". Journal
of Mediterranean Anthropology and Archaeology1:
50–107.
·Shear,
Ione Mylonas (January 2000). "Excavations on the
Acropolis of Midea: Results of the Greek–Swedish
Excavations under the Direction of Katie
Demakopoulou and Paul Åström". American
Journal
of Archaeology104
(1): 133–134.
·Xirotiris,
Nicholas
I. (Spring–Summer 1980). "The Indo-Europeans in
Greece: An Anthropological Approach to the
Population of Bronze Age Greece". Journal of
Indo-European Studies8 (1–2):
201–210.
Heinrich Schliemann
(German: [ˈʃliːman]; 6 January 1822 –
26 December 1890) was a German businessman and a
pioneer of field archaeology. He was an advocate of the historical
reality of places mentioned in the works of Homer. Schliemann was an
archaeological excavator of Hissarlik, now presumed to
be the site of Troy,
along with the Mycenaean sites Mycenae and Tiryns. His work lent
weight to the idea that Homer's
Iliad and Virgil's Aeneid reflect actual
historical
events.
Schliemann's excavation of nine levels of
archaeological remains with dynamite has been
criticized as destructive of significant historical
artifacts, including the level that is believed to
be the historical Troy.[1]
Along
with Arthur
Evans, Schliemann was a
pioneer in the study of Aegean
civilization in the Bronze
Age. The two men knew
of each other, Evans having visited Schliemann's
sites. Schliemann had planned to excavate at
Knossos, but died before fulfilling that dream.
Evans bought the site and stepped in to take charge
of the project, which was then still in its infancy.
Contents
1
Childhood and youth
2
Career and family
3
Life as an archaeologist
3.1 Priam's Treasure
4
Death
5
Criticisms
6
Bibliography
7
In popular culture
8
See also
9
References
10
External
links
Childhood
and youth
Schliemann
was
born in Neubukow, Mecklenburg-Schwerin in 1822. His
father, Ernst Schliemann, was a Protestantminister. The family moved
to Ankershagen in 1823 (today in
their house is the museum of Heinrich Schliemann).[2] Heinrich's mother,
Luise
Therese Sophie, died in 1831,
when Heinrich was nine years old. After his mother's
death, his father sent Heinrich to live with his
uncle. When he was eleven years old, his father paid
for him to enroll in the Gymnasium (grammar school)
at Neustrelitz. Heinrich's later
interest in history was initially encouraged by his
father, who had schooled him in the tales of the Iliad
and the Odyssey and had given him
a copy of Ludwig Jerrer's Illustrated History of
the World for Christmas in 1829. Schliemann
later claimed that at the age of 8, he had declared
he would one day excavate the city of Troy.
However,
Heinrich
had to transfer to the Realschule (vocational
school) after his father was accused of embezzling
church funds[3]
and had to leave that institution in 1836 when his
father was no longer able to pay for it. His
family's poverty made a university education
impossible, so it was Schliemann's early academic
experiences that influenced the course of his
education as an adult. In his archaeological career,
however, there was often a division between
Schliemann and the educated professionals.
At
age 14, after leaving Realschule, Heinrich became an
apprentice at Herr Holtz's grocery in Fürstenberg. He later told
that his passion for Homer was born when he heard a
drunkard reciting it at the grocer's.[4]
He laboured for five years, until he was forced to
leave because he burst a blood vessel lifting a
heavy barrel.[5]
In 1841, Schliemann moved to Hamburg and became a cabin
boy on the Dorothea, a steamer bound for Venezuela. After twelve days
at sea, the ship foundered in a gale. The survivors
washed up on the shores of the Netherlands.[6]
Schliemann became a messenger, office attendant, and
later, a bookkeeper in Amsterdam.
Career
and family
On
March 1, 1844, 22-year old Schliemann took a
position with B. H. Schröder & Co., an
import/export firm. In 1846, the firm sent him as a
General
Agent to St.
Petersburg. In time,
Schliemann represented a number of companies. He
learned Russian and Greek, employing a system that
he used his entire life to learn
languages—Schliemann claimed that it took him six
weeks to learn a language[7] and wrote his
diary in the language of whatever country he
happened to be in. By the end of his life, he could
converse in English, French, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese, Swedish, Polish, Italian, Greek, Latin,
Russian, Arabic, and Turkish as well as German.
Schliemann's
ability
with languages was an important part of his career
as a businessman in the importing trade. In 1850,
Heinrich learned of the death of his brother,
Ludwig, who had become wealthy as a speculator in
the California gold fields. Schliemann went to
California in early 1851 and started a bank in Sacramento buying and
reselling over a million dollars' worth of gold dust
in just six months. When the local Rothschild agent
complained about short-weight consignments he left
California, pretending it was because of illness.[8] While he was
there, California became the 31st state in September
1850 and Schliemann acquired United States
citizenship.
According
to his memoirs, before arriving in California he
dined in Washington with President Millard
Fillmore
and his family,[9] but Eric
Cline says that he
didn't attend but simply read about it in the
papers. He also published what he said was an
eyewitness account of the San Francisco fire of 1851
which he said was in June although it took place in
May. At the time he was actually in Sacramento and
used the report of the fire in the Sacramento Daily
Journal to write his report.
On
April 7, 1852, he sold his business and returned to
Russia. There he attempted to live the life of a
gentleman, which brought him into contact with
Ekaterina Lyschin, the niece of one of his wealthy
friends. Schliemann had previously learned that his
childhood sweetheart, Minna, had married.
Heinrich
and Ekaterina married on October 12, 1852. The
marriage was troubled from the start. Schliemann
next cornered
the market in indigo
dye and then went into
the indigo business itself, turning a good profit.
Ekaterina and Heinrich had a son, Sergey, and two
daughters, Natalya and Nadezhda, born in 1855, 1858
and 1861 respectively.[10]
Schliemann made yet another quick fortune as a
military contractor in the Crimean
War, 1854-1856. He
cornered the market in saltpeter, sulfur, and lead,
constituents of ammunition, which he resold to the
Russian government.
By
1858, Schliemann was wealthy enough to retire. In
his memoirs, he claimed that he wished to dedicate
himself to the pursuit of Troy.
As
a consequence of his many travels, Schliemann was
often separated from his wife and small children. He
spent a month studying at the Sorbonne in 1866, while
moving his assets from St. Petersburg to Paris to
invest in real estate. He asked his wife to join
him, but she refused.[10] Schliemann
threatened to divorce Ekaterina twice before
actually doing so. In 1869, he bought property and
settled in Indianapolis for about three
months to take advantage of the liberal divorce laws
of Indiana, although he
obtained the divorce by lying about his residency in
the U.S. and his intention to remain in the state.[11]
He moved to Athens as soon as an Indiana court
granted him the divorce and married again three
months later.
Life
as an archaeologist
Schliemann's
first
interest of a classical nature seems to have been
the location of Troy.
At
the time Schliemann began excavating in Turkey, the
site commonly believed to be Troy was at Pınarbaşı, a hilltop at the
south end of the Trojan Plain.[12] The site had been
previously excavated by archaeologist and local
expert, Frank
Calvert. Schliemann
performed soundings at Pınarbaşı, but was
disappointed by his findings.[12]
It was Calvert who identified Hissarlik as Troy and
suggested Schliemann dig there on land owned by
Calvert's family.[13] In 1868,
Schliemann visited sites in the Greek world,
published Ithaka, der Peloponnesus und Troja
in which he asserted that Hissarlik was the site of
Troy, and submitted a dissertation in Ancient Greek
proposing the same thesis to the University
of Rostock. In 1869, he was
awarded a PhD in absentia[14]
from the university of Rostock for that submission.[10]
David Traill wrote that the examiners gave him his
PhD on the basis of his topographical analysis of
Ithaca, which were in part simply translations of
another author's work or drawn from poetic
descriptions by the same author.[15]
Schliemann
was
at first skeptical about the identification of
Hissarlik with Troy but was persuaded by Calvert[16] and took over
Calvert's excavations on the eastern half of the
Hissarlik site. The Turkish government owned the
western half. Calvert became Schliemann's
collaborator and partner.
Schliemann
needed
an assistant who was knowledgeable in matters
pertaining to Greek culture. As he had divorced
Ekaterina in 1869, he advertised for a wife in a
newspaper in Athens. A friend, the Archbishop of
Athens, suggested a relative of his,
seventeen-year-old Sophia
Engastromenos
(1852–1932). Schliemann, age 47, married her in
October 1869, despite the 30 year difference in age.
They later had two children, Andromache and Agamemnon
Schliemann; he reluctantly
allowed them to be baptized, but solemnized the
ceremony in his own way by placing a copy of the Iliad
on the children's heads and reciting one hundred
hexameters.
Schliemann
began
work on Troy in 1871. His excavations began before
archaeology had developed as a professional field.
Thinking that Homeric Troy must be in the lowest
level, Schliemann and his workers dug hastily
through the upper levels, reaching fortifications
that he took to be his target. In 1872, he and
Calvert fell out over this method. Schliemann was
angry when Calvert published an article stating that
the Trojan War period was missing from the site's
archaeological record.
Priam's Treasure
A
cache of gold and other objects appeared on or
around May 27, 1873; Schliemann named it "Priam's
Treasure".
He later wrote that he had seen the gold glinting in
the dirt and dismissed the workmen so that he and
Sophia could excavate it themselves, removing it in
her shawl. However, Schliemann's oft-repeated story
of the treasure being carried by Sophia in her shawl
was untrue. Schliemann later admitted fabricating
it; at the time of the discovery Sophia was in fact
with her family in Athens, following the death of
her father.[17] Sophia later wore
"the Jewels of Helen" for the public. Those jewels,
taken from the Pergamon
Museum in Berlin by the
Soviet Army (Red Army) in 1945, are now in the Pushkin
Museum in Moscow.
Schliemann
published
his findings in 1874, in Trojanische Altertümer
("Trojan Antiquities").
This
publicity backfired when the Turkish government
revoked Schliemann's permission to dig and sued him
for a share of the gold. Collaborating with Calvert,
Schliemann smuggled the treasure out of Turkey. He
defended his "smuggling" in Turkey as an attempt to
protect the items from corrupt local officials. Priam's
Treasure today remains a
subject of international dispute.
Schliemann
published
Troja und seine Ruinen (Troy and Its Ruins)
in 1875 and excavated the Treasury
of
Minyas
at Orchomenus. In 1876, he began
digging at Mycenae. Upon discovering
the Shaft
Graves,
with their skeletons and more regal gold (including
the so-called Mask of
Agamemnon), Schliemann
cabled the king of Greece. The results were
published in Mykenai in 1878.
Although
he had received permission in 1876 to continue
excavation, Schliemann did not reopen the dig site
at Troy until 1878–1879, after another excavation in
Ithaca designed to locate an actual site mentioned
in the Odyssey. This was his
second excavation at Troy. Emile
Burnouf and Rudolf
Virchow joined him there
in 1879. Schliemann made a third excavation at Troy
in 1882–1883, an excavation of Tiryns with Wilhelm
Dörpfeld in 1884, a fourth
excavation at Troy, also with Dörpfeld (who
emphasized the importance of strata), in 1888–1890.
Death
On
August 1, 1890, Schliemann returned reluctantly to Athens, and in November
travelled to Halle, where his chronic
ear infection was operated upon, on November 13. The
doctors deemed the operation a success, but his
inner ear became painfully inflamed. Ignoring his
doctors' advice, he left the hospital and travelled
to Leipzig, Berlin, and Paris.
From the latter, he planned to return to Athens in time for Christmas, but his ear
condition became even worse. Too sick to make the
boat ride from Naples to Greece, Schliemann
remained in Naples, but managed to make a journey to
the ruins of Pompeii. On Christmas
Day he collapsed into
a coma and died in a Naples hotel room on December
26, 1890. The cause of death was cholesteatoma. His corpse was
then transported by friends to the First
Cemetery
in Athens. It was interred in a mausoleum shaped like a
temple erected in ancient Greek style designed by Ernst
Ziller in the form of a pedimental sculpture. The
frieze circling the outside of the mausoleum shows
Schliemann conducting the excavations at Mycenae and
other sites. His magnificent residence in the city
centre of Athens, the Iliou Melathron (Ιλίου
Μέλαθρον, "Palace of Ilium")
houses
today the Numismatic
Museum
of Athens.
Criticisms
Further
excavation
of the Troy site by others
indicated that the level he named the Troy of the Iliad was inaccurate,
although they retain the names given by Schliemann.
In an article for The
Classical
World,
D. F. Easton writes that Schliemann "was not very
good at separating fact from interpretation." [18] He goes on to
claim that "Even in 1872 Frank Calvert could see
from the pottery that Troy II had to be hundreds of
years too early to be the Troy of the Trojan War, a
point finally proved by the discovery of Mycenaean
pottery in Troy VI in 1890." [18]
"King Priam's Treasure" was found in the Troy II
level, that of the Early Bronze Age, long before
Priam's city of Troy VI or Troy VIIa in the
prosperous and elaborate Mycenaean Age. Moreover,
the finds were unique. The elaborate gold artifacts
do not appear to belong to the Early Bronze Age.
His
excavations
were condemned by later archaeologists as having
destroyed the main layers of the real Troy. Kenneth
W. Harl in the Teaching
Company's Great Ancient Civilizations of Asia
Minor lecture series sarcastically claims that
Schliemann's excavations were carried out with such
rough methods that he did to Troy what the Greeks
couldn't do in their times, destroying and levelling
down the entire city walls to the ground.[19]
In
1972, Professor William Calder of the University of
Colorado, speaking at a commemoration of
Schliemann's birthday, claimed that he had uncovered
several possible problems in Schliemann's work.
Other investigators followed, such as Professor
David Traill of the University of California.
An
article published by the National
Geographic
Society
called into question Schliemann's qualifications,
his motives, and his methods:
In
northwestern
Turkey, Heinrich Schliemann excavated the site
believed to be Troy in 1870. Schliemann was a
German adventurer and con man who took sole credit
for the discovery, even though he was digging at
the site, called Hisarlik, at the behest of
British archaeologist Frank Calvert. ... Eager to
find the legendary treasures of Troy, Schliemann
blasted his way down to the second city, where he
found what he believed were the jewels that once
belonged to Helen. As it turns out, the jewels
were a thousand years older than the time
described in Homer's epic.[1]
Another
article
presented similar criticisms when reporting on a
speech by University of Pennsylvania scholar C.
Brian Rose:
German
archaeologist
Heinrich Schliemann was the first to explore the
Mound of Troy in the 1870s. Unfortunately, he had
had no formal education in archaeology, and dug an
enormous trench “which we still call the
Schliemann Trench,” according to Rose, because in
the process Schliemann “destroyed a phenomenal
amount of material.” ... Only much later in his
career would he accept the fact that the treasure
had been found at a layer one thousand years
removed from the battle between the Greeks and
Trojans, and thus that it could not have been the
treasure of King Priam. Schliemann may not have
discovered the truth, but the publicity stunt
worked, making Schliemann and the site famous and
igniting the field of Homeric studies in the late
19th century.[20]
Schliemann's
methods
have been described as "savage and brutal. He plowed
through layers of soil and everything in them
without proper record keeping—no mapping of finds,
few descriptions of discoveries." Carl
Blegen forgave his
recklessness, saying "Although there were some
regrettable blunders, those criticisms are largely
colored by a comparison with modern techniques of
digging; but it is only fair to remember that before
1876 very few persons, if anyone, yet really knew
how excavations should properly be conducted. There
was no science of archaeological investigation, and
there was probably no other digger who was better
than Schliemann in actual field work."[21]
·Tiryns:
Der prähistorische Palast der Könige von Tiryns
(1885) (reissued by Cambridge
University
Press,
2010. ISBN
978-1-108-01720-6).
Translated into English Tiryns: The Prehistoric
Palace of the Kings of Tiryns (1885)
3. ^
Robert Payne, The Gold of Troy: The Story of
Heinrich Schliemann and the Buried Cities of
Ancient Greece, 1959, repr. New York: Dorset,
1990, p.
15.
9. ^
Leo Deuel, Memoirs of Heinrich Schliemann: A
Documentary Portrait Drawn from his
Autobiographical Writings, Letters, and Excavation
Reports, New York: Harper, 1977, ISBN
0-06-011106-2,
p.
67; he also mentions
meeting President Andrew
Johnson, p. 126.
12.^
ab Easton, D.F.
(May–June 1998). "Heinrich Schliemann: Hero or
Fraud?". The Classical World91 (5):
339. doi:10.2307/4352102.
13. ^
Allen, Susan Heuck (1999). Finding the walls of
Troy: Frank Calvert and Heinrich Schliemann at
Hisarlík. University of California Press.
p. 3. ISBN978-0-520-20868-1.
·Durant,
Will (1939). The Life of Greece: Being a history
of Greek civilization from the beginnings, and of
civilization in the Near East from the death of
Alexander, to the Roman conquest. Simon
& Schuster. OCLC355696346.
·Easton,
D.F. (May–June 1998). "Heinrich Schliemann: Hero or
Fraud?". The Classical World91 (5):
335. doi:10.2307/4352102.
·Poole,
Lynn; Poole, Gray (1966). One Passion, Two Loves.
Crowell. OCLC284890..
·Silberman,
Neil
Asher (1990). Between Past and Present:
Archaeology, Ideology, and Nationalism in the
Modern Middle East. New York: Doubleday. ISBN0-385-41610-5.
·Tolstikov,
Vladimir;
Treister, Mikhail (1996). The Gold of Troy.
Searching for Homer's Fabled City. Harry
N.
Abrams.
ISBN0-8109-3394-2.
The
Dendra
panoply or Dendra armour
is an example of Mycenean-era full-body armour
("panoply") made of bronze plates uncovered in the
village of Dendra in the Argolid, Greece.
Description
Several
elements
of body
armour
(body cuirass, shoulder guards, breast plates and
lower protection plates) from the late Mycenaean
period
have been found at Thebes, some bronze bands
have been also found at Mycenae and Phaistos.[1]
Bronze scales were found at Mycenae and Troy;
scale armour, the oldest form of metal body armour,
was used widely throughout the eastern Mediterranean
and the Near East. In May 1960[2]
Swedish archaeologists discovered the earliest
example of a beaten bronze cuirass at Dendra, dated to the end
of the fifteenth century BC.[3] It forms part of
the Late
Helladic (LHIIIa) Dendra
Panoply, which consists of fifteen separate pieces
of bronze sheet, held together with leather thongs,
that encased the wearer from neck to knees.[4]
The panoply includes both greaves and lower
arm-guards. The arm-guard is unique but greaves,
probably made of linen, are often depicted in late
Mycenaean art. The few bronze examples that have
been found only covered the shins and may have been
worn over linen ones, as much for show of status
Diane Fortenberry has suggested,[5] as for protection.
Although we have only this one complete panoply to
date, armor of similar type appears as an ideogram
on Linear B tablets from Knossos (Sc series), Pylos
(Sh series) and Tiryns (Si series).[6]
The
panoply’s cuirass consists of two pieces, for the
chest and back. These are joined on the left side by
a hinge. There is a bronze loop on the right side of
the front-plate and a similar loop on each shoulder.
Large shoulder-guards fit over the cuirass. Two
triangular plates are attached to the
shoulder-guards and gave protection to the wearer’s
armpits when his arms were in the raised position.
There is also a deep neck-guard. The Linear B
ideogram depicting armour of this type makes the
neck-guard clearly discernible, and protection by a
high bronze collar was a typical feature of Near
Eastern body armour. Three pairs of curved plates
hang from the waist to protect the groin and the
thighs. All these pieces are made of beaten bronze
sheet and are backed with leather and loosely
fastened by ox-hide thongs to allow some degree of
movement. The complete panoply thus forms a
cumbersome tubular suit of armour, which fully
protects the neck and torso, and extends down to the
knees. It appears that lower arm-guards and a set of
greaves further protected the warrior, all made of
bronze, as fragments of these were also found in the
grave at Dendra. Slivers of boars’ tusks were also
discovered, which once made up a boars’-tusk
helmet.
The
figures on the Warrior
Vase
(Mycenae, ca 1200 BC, National
Archaeological
Museum, Athens)[7]
are wearing body armour. However, this armour is
different. It may be either an embossed waist-length
leather corslet with a fringed
leather apron that reaches to mid-thigh and possible
shoulder-guards, very much like that worn by the Peoples
of the Sea depicted on the
mortuary temple of Ramesses
III (died c. 1155 BC)
at Medinet
Habu, Lower Egypt, or,
alternatively, the body armour may be a ‘bell’
corselet of beaten bronze sheet, a type also found
in central Europe at that time.
· ^ Cynthia King, "The
Homeric Corslet" American Journal of Archaeology74.3
1970:294-96
· ^ Isolated bronze
shoulder pieces and apron plates are known from
Dendra, Thebes and Phaistos in Crete: they
"extend the chronological range of the Dendra type
back to 1450 and forward to 1350", according to King
1970.
· ^ Fortenberry,
"Single Greaves in the Late Helladic Period" American
Journal of Archaeology95.4
(October 1991:623-627).
· ^ M. Snodgrass, "The
Linear B Arms and Armour Tablets— Again,
Kadmos 4
(1965:97-98).
References
·Paul
Åstrom, The Cuirass Tomb and Other Finds at
Dendra Part I: The Chamber Tombs
(Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology, iv)
(Göteborg) 1977. The official publication.
·Nicolas
Grguric,
The Mycenaeans: c 1650-1100 BC, "the Dendra
armour" (Osprey)
·Anthony
Snodgrass, Early Greek
Armour and Weapons: From the End of the Bronze Age
to 600 B.C. (Edinburgh/Chicago) 1964: 71-73,
76f.
The
Early Bronze Age in the Helladic region covers
roughly the period 3200-2100 BC. The main
characteristic of this period is the intensification
of the use of metals and particularly the extension
of metalworking by the mixing of copper and tin for
the manufacture of tools and weapons of durable
brass (bronze). This brought about the improvement
of the Neolithic agricultural and animal husbandry
economy, the increase of production, the creation of
surplus of goods and the development of productive
activities. The quest for metals and other raw
materials as well as the necessity of promoting
exchangeable goods led to the intensification of
commercial contacts, the development of navigation
and the exchange of technological and cultural
experience.
The
beginning of the use of metals (gold, silver,
copper) for the manufacture of jewellery and tools
dates to the Final Neolithic Age which is named
Chalcolithic (4500-3200 BC) for this reason. The
transition from the Neolithic agrarian economy to
the Bronze Age is not abrupt and does not occur at
the same time in the various geographic areas of the
Aegean. In addition every area is ruled by different
geomorphological factors and forms its own cultural
character.
On
mainland Greece, three large cultural groups are
distinguished during the Early Bronze Age. These are
developed in Thrace and Macedonia, in Thessaly and
in the central and southern mainland. The 3rd
millenium in central and southern Greece which is
known as the Early Helladic period is of particular
importance for the Aegean Prehistory. The Early
Helladic period is distinguished in the following
chronological-cultural phases: Early Helladic I (EH
I), Early Helladic II (EH II), the transition phase
Lefkandi I-Kastri and the Early Helladic III (EH
III) period.
The
traits of this period are: the increase of
population which is proportional to the increase of
settlements in coastal areas or in the inland, the
remarkable town planning, the increase of production
and surplus of produce, specialization, the
technological development (metallurgy, pottery) and
industrial production, the control of the goods'
distribution (use of seals), the intensification of
commercial exchange and the increase of privilege
goods.
During
the EH II period a particular economic prosperity is
observed with direct effect on the social and
political organization of the settlements. In
Thebes, Manika, Aegina, Tiryns, Lerna and other
places, densely populated settlements of an urban
character are developed. This trait is apparent in
the town planning, the community buildings
("Corridor Houses"), the constructions of public
interest (fortifications), the technological
specialization, and the particular
economic-administrative importance in their greater
region (regional hierarchy).
Early Helladic I
The
Early Helladic I (EH I) (3200-3100-2650 BC)
succeeds the Final Neolithic (4500-3200 BC)
and presents a close cultural relation with
it. This is apparent in the settlement of
Neolithic sites during this period as well
(e.g. Eutresis), in agriculture and in the
still limited use of metals.
The
EH I archaeological remains are very few and
are found in few archaeological sites of
eastern Central Greece (Eutresis, Lithares,
Perachora, Palaia Kokkinia, Zagani) and the
Peloponnese (Korakou, Tsoungiza, Talioti,
Lerna, Tiryns). The EH I signs were first
indicated in 1915-1916 in the Korakou
settlement in Corinthia. The correct stratigraphic
integration of Eutresis of Boeotia was
defined after the Final Neolithic period and
before the EH II. This is the reason for
which this period is known as the "Eutresis
culture". During this period regional
variations in pottery,
took place. These were first observed in the
ceramic production of the Argolid, which is
defined as "Talioti phase".
The
settlement architecture of this period is
slightly known since intense building
activity took place during the subsequent
phases of the EH period in the same sites.
The hill Zagani constituted the most
significant monument of the EH I period. But
it was completely levelled for the
construction of the new airport of Spata in
Attica. In the brief research which preceded
its construction, remains of houses, EH I
pottery and a stone wall
which enclosed the settlement were
recovered. This wall is the earliest to have
been unearthed to date in any EH settlement
and it precedes those of Raphina and Lerna.
Until
today, there is no evidence on the burial
customs of this period. The handmade pottery
with the intense red burnished
surface is a diagnostic element of the
period. Finally, it is worth mentioning the
limited practice of metalworking, in comparison with the
remarkable development it experiences from
the beginning of the 3rd millenium in
settlements of the northeastern Aegean
(Troy, Poliochni, Thermi).
Early Heladic II
The
EH II period (2650-2200/2150 BC) is the best
substantiated phase of the EH period as far
as excavations are concerned. The rich
settlement and burial remains, pottery,
artifacts made of clay, stone and metal from
the Spercheios valley upto the south
Peloponnese indicate that it is the first
phase of cultural flourishing of south
Greece before the glorious Mycenaean period
(1550-1050 BC).
During
the EH II period the increase of population
is followed by the development of densely
populated settlements and the very
significant economic thriving which brings
about innovations in the administrative
organization and social composition of the
EH communities. During this period
settlements of an urban character are
developed. They are distinguished for their
town
planning community works (e.g.
fortifications, community buildings), the
technological specialization and further
manufacturing development (metalworking),
and the intense practice of trade.
In settlements of Boeotia, the Peloponnese
and on Aegina buildings of the same type
dominate. These are known as the "Corridor
Houses" and are considered
community-administrative and economic
centres of the communities. Certain
settlements, such as Lerna, seem to have
particular economic and administrative
importance in the greater region and lead to
the development of regional hierarchies.
Similar phenomena are not observed in
settlements of the Early Bronze Age in
Thessaly, Macedonia and Thrace.
The
exhaustive study of stratigraphy
(Korakou, Eutresis, Lerna, Tiryns) and in
general of the EH II archaeological remains
(architecture, pottery) render the
distinction in two cultural sub-phases
clear. The earliest is known as the "Korakou
culture" (2650-2450 BC) and corresponds to
the ( Lerna
ΙΙΙA-B architectural phases. The late one
(2450/2350-2200/2150 π.Χ.) corresponds to
the Lerna IIIC-D architectural phases and is
characterized of the strong presence of
elements of the Lefkandi I-Kastri phase.
During
the EH II period as well as the EH III some
settlements present marks of partial or
total destruction by fire. These traces in
combination with the appearance of new
elements in architecture (apsidal
buildings), the burial customs (tumuli),
pottery (Lefkandi I, Gray wheelmade,
incised/impressed), tool manufacture (stone
and bronze axes with a hole for fixing a
handle) and the use of clay anchor shaped
objects, led the researchers to the
observation of many opposing theories about
the time of penetration of new populations
of Indo-European origin in the Greek
mainland. The overall consideration of the
evidence renders clear that at the end of
the EH II and the beginning of the EH III
the south Helladic region is influenced by
two different cultural regions: western Asia
Minor and the islands of the northeastern
Aegean, and the south Balkans (Adriatic
coast). These influences are indicated on
the eastern coast of Central and south
Greece (Lefkandi I-Kastri phase), and on the
Ionian islands and the northwestern
Peloponnese respectively.
Transitional
Phase Lefkandi I - Kastri
Toward
the end of the EH II (2450/2350-2200/2150
BC) certain elements in the architecture,
pottery and metalworking of the central and
southern mainland appear for the first time
and present similarities with settlements of
the north and eastern Aegean (late phase of
Troy II, Red-Yellow Poliochni) and the
Cyclades (Kastri on Syros, Skarkos on Ios).
A group of researchers associate these
similarities with population movement from
the north Aegean and western Asia Minor
toward the Cyclades and the coastal
mainland. Nevertheless, according to the
prevalent opinion these similarities result
from the intensive commercial contacts which began
much earlier than the 3rd millenium BC and
led to the formation of a common culture in
the Aegean, described by the term
"international spirit".
Evidence
of this phase exist on the coast of Thessaly
(Pefkakia), Boeotia (Lithares), in coastal
settlements and cemeteries of eastern Attica
(Agios Kosmas), western Euboea (Lefkandi,
Manika) and the Argolid (Lerna, Tiryns), and
on Aegina. In the west and south Peloponnese
these signs do not occur. Conversely, there
is evidence verifying the contacts of these
regions with the Adriatic and the south
Balkans.
Typical
examples of the "easternlike" phase are the
handmade red and black burnished ceramics
and the use of the potter's wheel for the
first time. The first ceramic category
includes cups with one or two handles, depata
amphikypella, beak spouted and wide-mouthed
jugs with round bodies. The potter's wheel
is used in the manufacture of open bowls.
Finally, archaeometric
study on the bronze
objects from sites of the islands and the
Greek mainland verifies the use of alloys of
brass with tin of the same origin.
Early Helladic III
The
EH III (2200/2150-2050/2000 BC) succeeds the
glorious EH II period and is characterized
of the decrease of the number and size
of settlements and of the decrease of
population. The abandonment of EH II
settlements due to various destructions is
not a general phenomenon. Powerful
settlements such as Tiryns and Lerna in the
Argolid are still occupied. The widespread
use of apsidal
and pottery,
which were initially considered sparse, are
discerned in their remains. The exhaustive
study of the evidence shows respectively
that these were either already known or that
they constitute new expressions of elements
known from the EH II period. In addition,
the preservation in Lerna
IV ruins of the administrative centre, the
"House of the Tiles" and its forming into a
tumulus of a symbolic-ritual character
indicates the continuous use of the area
from the same population.
The
use of tumuli
on Lefkas and in Olympia/Pelopeio is notable
but it does not occur for the first time.
The cemetery of the tumuli R of Lefkas was
organized already from the end of the EH II
period and included grave types which
occurred on the rest Greek mainland as well.
The form of the tumulus is a result of trade
contacts or even of population penetrations
that took place at the end of the EH II
period.
Recent
studies prove that apart from the apsidal
buildings and the burial or ritual tumuli,
elements such as the clay anchor-shaped
objects, the eastern-Balkan type stone and bronze
axes or the use of storage
pits which were considered in the past as
traits of the EH III period and were
associated with the penetration of
Indo-European races, existed from the EH II
and were simply established during the EH
III period.
The
architecture, the burial customs and pottery
show that during the EH III various regional
cultural variations occur. For example,
although the form of the settlements changes
in the Argolid with the apsidal buildings, Aegina
maintains the fortified settlements with the
organized EH II town planning. The pottery
of this period is the painted style in two
variations: light-on-dark (Agia Marina
style) and the dark-on-light (Tiryns style).
The wheelmade fine gray burnished
ware is a new ware deriving from Asia Minor
which reaches the eastern mainland country.
It is the precursor of the typical MH
ceramics, the Minyan pottery. Finally, a
basic trait of the ceramic production of the
Ionian islands and the northwestern
Peloponnese is the handmade pottery with
fine incised or impressed decoration which
comes from the Adriatic.
The
cultural retrogression which begins at the
end of the EH III and characterizes the MH
period (2000/1900-1550 BC) is interrupted by
the beginning of the glorious Mycenaean
period (1550-1050 BC).
Social
stratification
Indicative
elements for the composition of the society
of the Early Bronze Age on the mainland are
drawn from the settlement and funerary
architecture and from mobile finds,
particularly from their distribution in the
settlements and cemeteries. According the
the archaeological remains, during the EH II
period particular economic prosperity was
achieved. This prosperity is characterized
of the increase of the surplus of
agricultural produce, specialization in
handicraft production (pottery,
metalworking, stone carving) and the
expansion of commercial exchange and
cultural contacts. These changes have a
direct impact on the social composition of
the communities of south Greece.
The
existence of "Corridor
Houses", such as the " House of
the Tiles" in Lerna III and the "White
House" at Kolonna of Aegina make clear the
presence of a powerful family which has
political-administrative power and partly
controls production. This family coordinates
the construction of community works
(fortifications, the Tirynthian "Rundbau",
roads, etc.) and the trading of goods (use of
seals) and possesses part of
the wealth of the community.
The
craftsmen,
such as the metal workers and stone carvers
have a particular economic and therefore
social position in the community. In the
framework of ensuring the necessary raw
materials they are also involved in trading
activities. The discovery, for example, of
objects imported from the Cyclades in the
specialized workshops of Aegina and Manika
verifies the existence of a class of
craftsmen-tradesmen in the EH communities.
The imported objects are prestige goods and
prove the economic and social status of
their possessors. The Balkan type single or
double axes with a hole for fixing a handle
from Sitagroi and Lerna respectively as well
as the so-called "treasures" of bronze
implements and weapons found in Thebes and
Petralona of Chalkidike are also considered
as prestige goods.
Finally,
the coexistence of simple graves with poor
grave goods and rich, simple or family ones
in the cemeteries of Attica (Agios Kosmas,
Tsepi), in Manika, Thebes, Lithares and in
the cemetery of the tumuli R of Lefkas
reflects the unequal distribution of wealth
and by extension the social multiformity of
the members of the EH communities.
Society
Information
on the organization and social composition
of the communities of the Early Bronze Age
on mainland Greece is drawn from the
settlement and burial architecture, from the
kind of mobile finds and especially from the
way these are distributed in the settlements
and cemeteries.
The
communities are organized in small and large
settlements which number 300 to 1000 people
on average. The settlements of south Greece
present town planning, economic and social
features that conform to their definition as
"early
urban settlements".
The
archaeological remains of the EH II-III
provide clear indications on the social
composition and structure. The EH II society
and that of the transition phases Lefkandi
II-III include a political-
administrative-economic authority of a
coordinating role which is attributed to a
family. The families of specialized workers-merchants which
concentrate the most "privilege goods" have
a special position in the society of this
period. The degree of distribution of the
community wealth to those occupied
exclusively in agriculture cannot be
diagnosed with certainty. The above
mentioned social categories are not so
discernible in the archaeological remains of
the EH III which is characterized of
economic decline.
The
burial customs include child burials in the
settlement and adult and children burials in
cemeteries outside the settlement. The
cemeteries, known mainly from the EH II
period, include simple or built pits, cist
graves or chamber tombs hewn into rock and
pithos burials. Graves are made for one
person or families. During the EH III period
tumuli inhumations occur. The examination of
the anthropological material from cemeteries
and isolated graves provides information on
the anthropological type, the nutrition and
diseases of the people of that time.
Finally,
the elements that reveal the religious
beliefs and the practice of some kind of
cult are few and partially unreliable. The
burial customs ascertain the respect to
human life and the belief of life after
death.
Demography
The
evidence from the excavations of a
restricted scale in settlements and
cemeteries of the Early Bronze Age, as well
as the observations from surface surveys,
mainly in the Peloponnese (Nemea, Argolid,
Messenia, Laconia) and Central Greece
(Oropos, Perachora, Phocis) allow a first
indicative, but not global, approach of the
demographic evidence of that period.
According to the evidence that results from
the study of the settlements we can say that
the EH communities are organized in small settlements, (0,64 hectares-Aegina)
or larger ones (45 hectares-Manika,
3,5-Lithares, 2,5-Lerna) which number an
average of 300 to 1000 persons.
The
density of the settlements differs from one
region to another and from time to time
while it depends on the geomorphology of the
area and the climatic conditions.
Geoarchaeological studies in the Argos plain
showed that the area between Argos and Lerna
was a large lake of about 5 kilometres
diametre during the EH I period. This
justifies the small number of settlements of
that period in the region. In the EH II the
alluvium deposits transformed the lake into
a fertile plain. As a result, the number of
settlements increased and powerful
settlements were developed (Lerna, Tiryns).
Moreover, regional hierarchies were created.
Sudden floods of streams and rivers at the
end of the EH II in the Argolid (Tiryns) and
in other regions (Strephi of Elis, Akovitika
of Messenia, Rouph of Attica) made these
populations abandon the neighbouring
settlements.
From
the end of this period and during the EH III
the number of the settlements decreased thus
leading to the decrease of population. This
decrease, which is observed during the EH
III in south Greece in general is opposed to
the theories about penetration of new
populations, and to the burial evidence. The
comparative study of skulls from graves of
the EH II (Agios Kosmas) and MH period
(Lerna and Mycenae) verify the homogeneity
of the populations of Attica and the Argolid
during these periods and disproves the
opinion of the penetration of new
populations. In addition, none of the
excavated cemeteries to date presents sudden
increase of dead bodies. Moreover, possible
diseases which could have caused unexpected
or mass deaths toward the end of the EH II
period were not detected by the examination
of the palaeoanthropolical
material.
The
examination of the anthropological material
from cemeteries and isolated graves provides
information on the anthropological
characteristics, nutrition and the diseases
of the people of the EH period. For example,
the inhabitants of Agios Kosmas in Attica
were of medium height, suffered from
osteoporosis and had a short life of 30-40
years. The inhabitants of Manika were also
of medium height and had strong teeth, a
sign indicating that they followed a
balanced diet!
Economy
The
main feature of the Early Helladic economy
is the intensification of the use of metals
via the expansion of metalworking by the
mixing of copper and tin for the manufacture
of tools and weapons from durable bronze.
The economy of the 3rd millenium BC is based
on three factors: agrarian economy
(agriculture and animal husbandry), trade
and artisanship.
Agrarian
economy includes the cultivation of the
cereals and legumes that were known from the
Neolithic period (6880-3200 BC). At the same
time, the cultivation of the olive tree and
vine begin. The climatic conditions and the
improved tools (bronze tools, use of the
plough) contribute to the increase of the
production and agricultural surplus
particularly during the EH II period. Animal
husbandry includes the breeding of sheep and
goat and cattle, the products of which are
neccessary for nutrition and the textile
manufacture (wool).
The
quest of metals and other raw materials (obsidian)
and the necessity of promotion of commercial
agricultural and handicraft products brings
about the intensification of the trade
contacts and the exchange of technological
and cultural experience in general, thus
creating small exchange networks (in the
Argosaronikos gulf) or large ones
(Argolis-Cyclades-northern Aegean). The need
of control of the production and movement of
the goods leads to the use of the seals.
The
main specialized production activities of
the EH settlements are pottery, stone
carving, bone carving, textile manufacture
and metalworking. These activities may
occupy one person, a small group, or one or
more families of a community.
The
new economic conditions bring changes in the
social and political organization of the
settlements especially during the EH II
period.
Burial
Customs
The
burial customs of the Early Bronze Age do
not differ considerably from the ones of the
last phases of the Neolithic Age (4800-3200
BC). These include burials of infants and
children within the limits of the settlement
and in cemeteries while it was mainly the
adults that were buried outside the
settlement.
Infants
and children were buried in their homes, in
vessels or simple pits dug under the floor
for this purpose (e.g. Asine, Lerna). The
cemeteries, known mainly from the EH II
period, were situated far from the
settlement and include simple or built pits,
cist graves (e.g. Agios Kosmas) or chamber
tombs, hewn into rock (e.g. Manika). There
were graves for one or more than one person,
for both men and women (family graves). Some
were used as ossuaries. They contained the
bones - mainly the skulls and the long bones
- from other graves which were emptied for
new burials. During the EH III period, in
western Greece the dead are buried in tumuli
(e.g. Nidhri on Lefkas, Olympia/Pelopeio).
The
dead were placed on the ground or in pithoi,
in an intense contracted
position. In order to achieve this position,
the stiff muscles of the dead were probably
cut with obsidian knives. Specific bones
from the cemetery of Manika of Euboea bear
such traces. As the traces of material on a
bone from Manika reveal the dead were buried
with their clothes or wrapped in a piece of
cloth. Finally, tumuli in Nidhri and Olympia
as well as pithos burials found in Macedonia
at the mouth of the Strymon river present
evidence on incineration of the dead.
Ordinary burials in pithoi are also known
from the cemetery of the Early Bronze Age in
Agios Mamas/Nea Olynthos of Chalkidike.
The
grave goods depend on the gender and social
status of the dead. These include pottery,
marble statuettes, obsidian or bronze tools,
cosmetic articles and jewellery of clay,
stone, bone, bronze and precious metals.
Religion
The
archaeological evidence that indicates the
religious beliefs and the practice of some
kind of cult of the inhabitants of the
Helladic region during the Early Bronze Age
is inadequate and unreliable. It is
restricted to architectural constructions
(hearths, benches,
pits), to anthropomorph or zoomorph
figurines and rhyta
and to the burial customs.
Cult
function is attributed to a room of 17
square metres which is accessible from the
main road of Lithares of Boeotia. Seventeen
small bull figurines were found around burnt
earth which was most likely a hearth. The
mass presence of these figurines led to the
definition of this place as the "Sanctuary
of the Bulls". Nevertheless, it is
noteworthy that the presence of zoomorph
figurines in a farming community is normal.
However, we must refer ti the theory that
claims that this area was the workshop of
the maker of these figurines.
In
House L of Eutresis (room III), which dates
to the EH II period, a stone bench, two bothroi,
a zoomorph rhyton, a figurine and a
perforated vase were found close to a
hearth. The co-existence of these elements,
in combination with the practice of a
chthonic cult in the area of this settlement
(Chasma) during the Mycenaean period, led
the excavators to the dating of this cult to
the EH period.
A
clay hearth with impressed rim and a double
axe carving in the centre, found in the
"Building BG" of Lerna III, was probably
related to rituals that may have taken place
in this building. The existence of central
clay hearths with cylinder seal decoration
in these "Corridor
Houses" led to the attribution
of another function to these buildings, the
religious function.
The
particular importance of the "Corridor
Houses" becomes clear in the settlement of Lerna
IV, when, after the destrution of the "House
of the Tiles" caused by fire, its ruins are
maintained and defined by a stone circle
composing an imposing tumulus (21 diametre)
of a symbolic importance. The tumulus in
Altis of Olympia seems to be of the same
character.
The
burial customs provide clear indications on
the religious beliefs of the inhabitants of
south Greece during the EH period.
Inhumations inside the houses, the existence
of family graves, the collection
of relics, skulls and long bones, to
ossuaries, the offering of grave goods, the
fires in the tumuli of Lefkas, verify the
respect to the value and the miracle of the
human life, and the belief in life after
death.
The
Middle Bronze Age on Mainland Greece is also
known as the Middle Helladic period. The
chronological framework of this period extends
from the beginnings of the second millenium -
roughly 1900 - until 1550 BC, that is until the
beginnings of the Mycenaean period. The Middle
Helladic period is considered as the dark period
of the cultural decline. The remains of the
material culture reveal a clear retrogression
while the information available on the social
stratification and economy are so few and
problematic in interpretation that this period
is considered as the "Middle Age of Greek
Prehistory".
About
1900 BC, the period during which the first
palaces of Crete were being built, Mainland
Greece was entering a long period of decline
during which economic features changed
radically. The amount of metals and imported
products became particularly rare while
composite forms of economic administration, e.g.
the administrative buildings and the the sealing
of products, were abandoned. The economic
decline of the Middle Bronze Age effected the
social stratification as well. The changes in
social stratification appear in a series of
completely new burial customs which show the
prevalence of social equality. Conversely, as
far as Middle Helladic art is concerned,
although it did not reach the high artistic
standard of its contemporary Minoan art, it is
characterized of significant technological
innovations and of the appearance of new
serviceable articles. The number of these
objects increased and their quality was improved
considerably toward the end of this period.
The
profound cultural innovations of the Middle
Helladic period were initially interpreted as a
result of violent population movement and
troubles provoked by the coming of the first Indo-European races. However, this matter
does no more constitute one of the main
objectives of this study since the
archaeological evidence does not support the
massive transfer of foreign cultural elements.
During
the last period of the Middle Bronze Age
(1650-1550 BC), despite the fact that the traits
of the Middle Helladic culture were maintained,
more intense contacts are observed with the
Cyclades and Crete, an unexpected concentration
of wealth and the creation of a prominent social
class. Through these new phenomena, a harmonical
and gradual evolution from the Middle Helladic
toward the Mycenaean civilization is discerned.
Thus, although the Middle Helladic period is
considered as a period of economic and social
decline it was the time during which the
mainland features merged with the insular
influence, that is all the Aegean elements which
led to the creation of the Mycenaean
civilization were mixed in a creative way.
Middle
Helladic Society
The
image that results from the social evidence of the
Middle Helladic period is that destitution and
social insecurity prevailed. This was due to
economic factors or social changes.The
inhabitants of Mainland Greece made great efforts
to survive. Via these efforts they managed to
create remarkable technological achievements or
forms of high art. Apart from certain burial
practices which can be considered as examples of
cult there are no indications on the religious
beliefs of the Middle Helladic society.
Of
all the aspects of the Middle Helladic culture the
burial customs which are well known from the
innumerable burials of that period provide a
clearer picture of the Middle Helladic society and
reflect the survival conditions of the population.
The demographic information which results from the
graves as well as the settlement density imply a
considerable increase of population comparison to
the Early Bronze Age and a slight increase of life
expectancy despite the fact that mortality,
particularly child mortality, was rather high.
In
the Middle Helladic settlements there are no buildings
distinguished from the rest because they appear
more important while the cemeteries do not provide
signs of an apparent social stratification. These
elements indicate that the Middle Helladic society
was characterized of a relative equality of its
members. Nevertheless, the image of this equality
changes in the second fourth of the 16th
century that is during the transition to the early
Mycenaean period. Now all cemeteries of the
mainland reveal examples of intense social
stratification. The sumptuous grave goods and the
grades of luxury according to the social status of
the dead reveal an unexpected concentration of
wealth and its unequal distribution.
Coming
of the Indo-Europeans
The
search of evidence on the first Indo-European
inhabitants of the European region is centred on
the study of Hellenic Prehistory. This is
attributed to the fact that the Greek races of the
Bronze Age are the only Indo-European races for
which adequate and important evidence exists,
namely from the traditions which are preserved by
Homer and the Greek myths.
From
the moment that the Mycenaean language was
identified as Greek, the study gained another
element which associates the Helladic
civilizations of the Bronze Age with the
Indo-European question.
The
Greek language which belongs to the Indo-European
family is considered to have been spoken by races
of Indo-European origin which established their
language when they entered Mainland Greece,
gradually supplanting the prehellenic dialects
that were spoken in the region until that time.
From the beginning of our century research was
considerably concerned with this question, that is
the dating of the entrance of the Indo-European
races on the Greek peninsula.
The
"coming of the Indo-Europeans" is considered to
have provoked great disturbance to the autochtone
population and must not have been completely
pacific. Thus, the period during which violent
population movements had to be discovered. Many
researchers associate this historic moment with
the period around 2000 BC, that is the Middle
Helladic period because the subsequent phase
presents intense evidence of social reforms. The
poor examples of the material culture, the
retrogression of social organization and
technology and the need for fortification works
were considered as phenomena caused by the violent
invasion of new races.
Considering
this general evidence of the Middle Helladic
culture as a starting-point, a series of theories
that sought evidence of the coming of the
Indo-Europeans in the archaeological remains were
created. Some newly imported elements and customs
that were considered to have been brought to
Mainland Greece by the first Greeks such as the horse,
the use of the tumuli or even the appearance of
the wheelmade Minyan
pottery, are indications that suggest the
Indo-European invadors.
However,
these theories present many substantiation
problems. The place of origin of the
Proto-Indo-Europeans has not yet been determined
with accuracy. Moreover, it is uncertain whether
the people that spoke the Proto-Indo-European
language all belonged to a specific race. In
addition, the destructions in Mainland Greece took
place presumably in different periods and the most
significant ones before the last period of the
Early Helladic period (about 2300 BC). It is often
verified that the elements that had been
considered as newly imported constitute in reality
the continuation of the domestic Aegean tradition.
The
association of the social evidence of the Middle
Helladic period with the coming of the first
Indo-European races is now considered as an
overrating of certain archaeological elements and
to their hasty connection to the linguistic and
historic elements. Thus, during the last decades
the trend that has dominated suggests that the
results of the archaeological research must be
studied irrespectively to the question of the
"coming of the first Greeks".
The
demographic and anthropological evidence on the
Middle Helladic period result from the rich
material of the cemeteries and from the indications of
the surface
surveys. The population of the Middle Helladic
settlements rarely exceeded 500 inhabitants. The
density of the population in Messenia is estimated
to have been approximately 130 persons per
hectare.
Most
demographic evidence derives from the cemeteries
of two Middle Helladic sites in the Argolid, Lerna
and Asine.
The statistic surveys of the osteological material
of Lerna reveal that child mortality was very
high. More than half of the inhabitants of Lerna
died under the age of 15. 36% of the children died
at infantile age while 21% under the age of five.
The average life expectancy was 30 for women and
35 for men. Women gave birth to usually three
children - their first at the age of approximately
19 - and they usually died around 30 years old.
The anthropological evidence from the cemetery of
Asine indicate that most men died around 30 to 40
years old. Nonetheless, in spite of the high
mortality that results from the anthropological
surveys, the average life expectancy of the Middle
Bronze Age seems to be higher than the one of the
Early Bronze Age.
The
osteological analyses from these cemeteries reveal
the types of diseases from which the inhabitants
suffered. Thus, we know that during their
childhood the inhabitants of Asine had a low
caloric intake and their nutrition was inadequate
in meat protein. Pathological disfigurements of
the shoulders and hands of adults were observed,
suggesting a kind of osteoarthritis caused by
heavy work. The inhabitants often suffered from
different epidemic diseases. Anemia, dysentery,
infantile diarrhoea and child diseases were very
common while both men and women suffered from
tooth diseases. The inhabitants of Lerna often
suffered from Mediterranean anemia and malaria
which was favoured by the climatic conditions in
this swampy area of the valley of Argos.
Apart
form the traces of chronic ailments, injuries
which may have been caused by accidents during
work or violent conflicts were also observed on
the skeletons. The trepining of
the skulls observed on skeletons from Lerna
reveals that the inhabitants possessed technical
knowledge of surgical operations.
Religion
Archaeological
evidence suggesting religious beliefs of the Middle
Helladic society is virtually inexistent since this period
of Prehistory includes no sign of material culture which
usually imply worship. In contradiction to Minoan Crete
and the Mycenaean period, the Middle Helladic settlements do
not have buildings with the characteristic arrangement and
special installations which could be considered as
temples. Moreover, there are no cult vessels such as those
used during the entire Bronze Age in Minoan Crete and the
Mycenaean Greece. The anthropomorphic cult figurines,
which were made in Mainland Greece and the Cyclades during
the Early Bronze Age disappear in the Middle Bronze Age
and do not re-appear until the mature phases of the
Mycenaean period.
The
absence of all these elements shows that during the Middle
Helladic period profound changes in the social and
religious customs take place. Despite the various
interpretations, the burial customs remain the only
aspects of human activities which reveal the radical
changes in the beliefs of the society.
The
way the dead were deposited in the grave, the orientation
of the graves and the offering of the few grave goods may
reflect specific practices that may resulted from the
principles of a common religious faith.
Burrial Customs
In
contradiction to other periods of Prehistory which do not
provide sufficient information on the burial customs, the
Middle Helladic period presents a great number of burial
monuments which are the best witnesses of the burial
practices but also of the social and economic conditions
of that time. The Middle Helladic burial customs reflect
in a most live way the image of social reforms and the
economic decline of the Middle Helladic period as well as
the gradual concentration of wealth and formation of
privileged classes during the transition from the Middle
to the Late Bronze Age.
The
distinction in two basic burial practices which must have
been employed at the same time is easy thanks to the great
number of Middle Helladic graves. There were the intramural
burials and the burials in cemeteries. A special category
of cemeteries are the tumuli which
were widespread from the south Peloponnese to Epirus and
Thessaly. The most common burials were
the those in simple pits, in cist graves and the pithos
burials where the dead were always placed on their side contracted position. The
graves of the adults were generally given greater care and
include offerings more frequently than child graves.
The
frequent absence of grave goods or the
very few finds in the Middle Helladic graves render the
chronological classification of the graves and the study
of the evolution of the burial customs much more
difficult. The earlier burials of this period indicate
that the Middle Helladic burial customs were fully
developed already from the beginning of the second
millenium BC. Sometimes regional different trends and
preferences in the types of graves and burial customs are
observed. But this variety seems to depend on accidental
circumstances since the burial customs sometimes differ in
their details even with those of adjacent settlements.
When
comparing the Middle Helladic burial customs with other
cultures, it is observed that there are completely
different influences coming from the Cyclades, Asia Minor
or even south Europe. However, the similarities with the
burial customs of these regions seem indirect since they
have the character of distant influences. Therefore it
appears that during the Middle Bronze Age the previous
burial traditions were influenced by the customs of
different cultures and that their final form crystallized
in Mainland Greece. During the end of the Middle Helladic
period the use of the tholos tombs was adopted as well.
This custom was imported from Crete, completing the
picture of the burial customs of the Helladic region
during the Mycenaean period.
Positions of
the dead
During
the Middle Helladic period the dead were deposited in the
graves on their side, in a contracted position. The body
was leaned on one side, the legs were bent and the hands
were brought close to the face. The legs were either
slightly bent or completely bent with the knees brought to
the chin which presupposes presumably that dead body was
placed in a sack or tied with a rope before inhumation.
All elements to date indicate that there was no particular
orientation of the head.
Many
opinions have been stated on the specific deposition of
the dead and some of them relate it to social or religious
beliefs and practices for the dead. According to one
opinion the apparent similarity of the position of the
dead with the position of the foetus includes the
symbolism of the return of the dead to mother earth.
Another more practical opinion suggests that the
contracted position indicates merely the effort to fit the
dead in the smallest possible graves to gain space and
time from digging other graves. This simplicity of the
deposition of the dead along with the often absence of grave goods is
considered to fit with the general image of lack of the
necessary means which characterizes the largest part of
the Middle Helladic period.
According
to another intermediate version of the contracted and
supine position, the dead were placed with the legs bent
to the side and the hands crossed on the belly. The
explanation of this position is that the dead had been
initially placed in a supine position with legs bent, but
the legs fell to the side during decomposition. This way
of deposition is also identified in the skeletons found
with legs bent and open. The dated grave goods that
accompanied burials of such kind reveal that the custom of
the supine inhumation became generalized during the early
Mycenaean period and this is the reason for which this
type of deposition now constitutes a criterion for
chronological classification of the graves.
Grave goods
Most
of the Middle Helladic graves included no grave goods or
had very few. The most common offerings to the dead were
ceramics while jewellery and tools made of bone occurred
more infrequently. The ceramic offerings were usually
tableware drinking vessels, such as flasks and kantharoi,
and libation vessels, such as jugs and amphoras. The great
frequency of spouted and drinking vessels leads to the
conclusion that ritual dinners presumably took place
during the burial procedure. Some types of vessels as the
amphoriskoi which were virtually found only in graves may
have been made especially for burial use.
The
finds around the graves which were mainly shells, animal
bones and broken vessels infer that libations were made
occasionally in the area surrounding the graves to honour
the dead. The discovery of whole animal skeletons in
certain cemeteries indicates that sometimes animals which
must have belonged to the dead person, horses, goat and
dogs, were buried near by.
The
number of the grave goods and their quality increases
greatly toward the end of the Middle Helladic period. At
the same time, the number of metal offerings - often
including jewellery and vases made of gold - as well as
the objects made of imported precious materials raises.
The graves of the warriors buried with their armament and
the so-called shaft graves date to the same period. In
addition, the most sumptuous of these shaft graves were
found in the Grave Circles at Mycenae.
Grave Types
The
graves of the Middle Helladic period present a wide range
of types. The different grave types which were employed at
the same time, the simple shaft graves, the cist graves
and the pithos burials were imposed by the various
traditions and custom practices.
The
factors that effected the selection of the type of grave
were the features of the area, e.g. the hardness of the
soil and the availability of the building materials as
well as the facts of each case such as the height of the
dead and the degree of luxury imposed by the person's
social prestige. In addition, the need for regular access
to the grave was also taken into account.
The
frequency of the grave types differs slightly from one
region to another. Thus, the cist grave was common in
Central Greece and Thessaly while in the Peloponnese
people were buried in simple pits.
Middle Helladic
Economy
The
economy of the Middle Helladic period was pre-monetary,
which means that all the commercial transactions were made
by exchanging agricultural and manufactured products.
Compared with the evidence on the Early Bronze Age
economy, Middle Helladic economy appears considerably
undeveloped. The advanced forms of economic
administration, such as the storage system and the sealing
of product which were widespread in Minoan Crete and
Mainland Greece in the Early Bronze Age are completely
absent in Middle Helladic settlements. Economy seems to
have reacquired its Neolithic agrarian character. The
inhabitants of Mainland Greece with the simple
exploitation of natural resources, fishing, hunting and
timber lived on animal and agricultural products they
produced.
Many
everyday household objects such as textiles and
simple household ware must have been made by
domestic industries. But the manufacture of large
quantities of certain objects such as the fine
ceramics, proves that these were examples of mass
handicraft production. Specifically, the ceramics
production presents strong regional features which
means that the geographically restricted regions
had their own workshops and traded their products
in a confined region.
The
appearance of certain wares of Middle Helladic pottery
of high quality in distant regions reveals that
some ceramics were popular commercial articles and
that they may have had great commercial value.
These products were probably exchanged along with
metals which were also undoubtedly available
despite the fact that they have not left abundant
archaeological remains due to the economic decline
of that time.
The
relatively confined diffusion of regional pottery
indicates the small scale trading activities which
were probably performed by the coastal
settlements, as the diffusion of the commercial
products is more dense in the coastal settlements
than in the inland. We do not know whether trade
was carried out via a central authority which also
possessed political power or whether there was a
separate mercantile class. In any case, the needs
of marine trade presupposed the specialization of
at least one specific group of seamen. The
relatively restricted commercial activities of the
Middle Helladic period show that a great part of
the Middle Bronze Age marine trade was in the
hands of the inhabitants of the Cyclades or Minoan
Crete.
Agrarian
Economy
The
development of the towns and the thriving
of artisanship production which are
observed in this period are not
accompanied by the development of
agricultural cultivations. The stone
tools of this period are
similar to the Early Helladic ones,
indicating that no remarkable
technological progress in the evolution or
the type of cultivations took place. But
during this period a new type of
agricultural tool appears: the saw-toothed
blades of sickles mainly made of chert.
This innovation may reflect a greater
degree of specialization of the
agricultural activities.
Certain
elements, such as earthworks in swampy
areas for more land fit for cultivation,
such as that of the Kopais lake, reveal a
remarkable technological specialization in
land reclamation works which led to the
admirable irrigation works of the
Mycenaean period. The technological
developments in agricultural economy are
considered to have resulted from the
communication with more advanced regions
or countries.
The
more general economic changes during the
transition to the Late Bronze Age indicate
the gradual commercial exploitation of
agricultural products, which led to the
systematic storage of agricultural surplus
ascertained in the perfectly organized
storerooms of the Mycenaean citadels.
Trade
and Communications
The
commercial activities and movement are
verified mainly from the diffusion of the
Middle Helladic pottery
in the Aegean area. The regional ceramic
workshops are easily discerned from their
typical style of their ceramic production
This permits the observation of commercial
exchange.
The
poor presence of Middle Helladic pottery
in distant regions, far from their place
of production reveals that the exchange
network and the movement of people were
geographically restricted whereas there is
no indication concerning international
contacts similar to those of Minoan Crete.
The imported ceramic products are more
common in coastal areas which means that
the sea routes were an easier way of
access to other regions in order to
accomplish commercial exchange or even
other kinds or movement.
Arts
and Crafts
The
technological remains provide information
on the agrarian economy and the simple
social organization of the Middle Helladic
period. The development of the arts is
characterized by a considerable
retrogression in comparison with the Early
Helladic period, by the rareness of the
raw materials and the lack of high
artistic creation such as the artistic
expression of Minoan Crete. This general
image of retrogression is due to
presumably important but still unknown
economic and social factors which led the
populations of Mainland Greece to
incapacity of social and economic
administration. Thus, they were unable to
ensure the necessary raw materials and to
promote the development of the arts at a
great extent.
The
use of metals appears rather restricted.
Metal finds are sparsely unearthed in
Middle Helladic settlements and graves.
The metal grave goods
are rare because metal objects were very
few to be offered as grave gifts to the
dead. The rareness of metals is the reason
metal finds are rarely found in
settlements. This shows that the metal
tools were not thrown away to no purpose
but were almost all recycled to be reused.
During the largest part of the Middle
Helladic period there is also total
absence of rare materials such as
semiprecious stones and ivory.
Most
information on the artistic creation and
technology of the Middle Helladic period
derive from the study of pottery, the
production of which implies important
technological and artistic innovations
despite its uniformity and conservatism.
The great diffusion of certain Middle
Helladic pottery wares in different
regions of the Aegean indicates the
considerable commercial competitiveness of
certain regional workshops.
During
the last phase of the Middle Helladic
period, particularly during the Shaft Grave
period, a larger number of
vases of improved quality, bronze tools
and weapons,as well as a great number of
jewellery made of precious metals and
other rare materials are found in the
graves. This rich artistic production, the
advanced technology and the richness of
the grave goods show that apart from
articles of everyday usage a constantly
increasing reserve of economic resources
could now be offered as grave gifts. In
addition, a great number of imported
articles shows the relation of the
Mainlanders with the Minoan culture of
Crete as well as the more intense contacts
with the Cycladic culture. The
technologies of pottery, metalworking and
other arts of the Middle Helladic period
reached the fine artistic creation of the
Mycenaean period through these fruitful
interconnections.
Metalurgy
Despite
the fact that there is no specific
evidence from the the Middle Bronze Age on
the function of mines it is certain that
the mines of Laurion and Siphnos, from
which silver and lead were extracted
during the Early Helladic period, were
still in use.
It
is very hard to detect the metallurgical
activities in the archaeological remains
because the metal works were situated far
from inhabited areas to prevent fires.
However, kilns, special tools and slag
have been found in certain settlements,
providing clear indications on
metallurgical works.
At
Lerna
and Pefkakia metallurgical crucibles,
were found. At Sesklo stone dies for the
manufacture of metal objects as well as a
crucible with traces of brass were
unearthed while at Nichoria and Midea
brass slag has been indicated. At
Thorikos, an important Middle Helladic
settlement in Acarnania, lead monoxide
slag has been detected, a find which
suggests silver smithing activities.
Metal
Working
There
is very little information on the Middle
Helladic metallurgical activities and
metalworking. The general impression
resulting from the metal finds of that
time is that a small number of the
inhabitants of the Greek Mainland were
occupied with the extraction, trade and processing
of metals. Metals were rare while most of
the metal objects seem to have been
recycled to be reused as unprocessed
materials. The main types of metals from
which mainly jewellery, tools and weapons
were made were copper and bronze. Lead was
used for making sheets to mend broken
vases.
The
most common metal objects discovered in
the Middle Helladic settlements are copper
and bronze wires and metal sheets. The
most technologically advanced metal
objects were jewellery and copper weapons
found in graves. Jewellery were usually
made of wire and metal sheets which were
given the appropriate shape by bending.
This technique was employed in the
manufacture of rings, bracelets, earrings,
and hair-coils,
while pins and beads were made by metal
casting. Toward the end of the Middle
Helladic period jewellery made of precious
metals such as gold, silver and electrum.
appear.
The
use of the same metal tools which were
already known from the Early Bronze Age,
such as knives, awls, chisels and tweezers
indicates that the typology of the Early
Helladic tool manufacture was also
preserved during the Middle Bronze Age.
Among the Middle Helladic copper tools is
a typical type of dagger, the spears and
the arrowheads. The daggers are an
evolution of Early Helladic daggers and
are also related with Minoan dagger types.
But the manufacture of the long bronze
swords which is confirmed in Middle Minoan
Crete and Aegina
has not been indicated on the Greek
Mainland before the Shaft Grave period.
During the Middle Helladic period a new
type of bronze spear defined as "Sesklo
type" spear appears.
No
metal vessels dating from the largest part
of the Middle Helladic period have been
found. Nevertheless, during Middle
Helladic III (1700-1600 BC) a number of
silver, gold and electrum metal vessels
appear, revealing strong influence from
Minoan art. From this period onward,
mainland metalworking developed rapidly.
In fact, in the early Mycenaean period it
reached the point of competing with Minoan
metalworking.
Stone
working
Although
the use of metal tools had begun already
from the Early Bronze Age, stone tools
made of obsidian and chert had still an
important role in the households,
agricultural activities and artisanship.
Stone tools are distinguished in two basic
categories according to the raw material
they were made of and the manufacture
procedure. Thus, there are tools of chipped
stone and tools of polished stone.
Bone
working
Very
often, objects and mainly tools made of
bones are discovered in Middle Helladic
settlements. The basic raw material were
the bones of domestic animals and fish.
Articles made of horns, teeth of wild
animals and sea shells are also examined
as bone objects.
The
manufacture technique of bone articles was
simple. Their surface was carved with
stone or metal tools. That is why their
processing was presumably made in
settlements. In Lerna, Eutresis and Asine
areas of bone processing were indicated.
Many tools and bone remains were
concentrated in these areas.
The
most common bone tools were the long pins
and awls, which were tools for sewing and
hide processing, and the bone polishers
which were probably used in pottery
burnishing. Bone was also used for making
spindle whorls for the spinning of thin
fibres because of its lightness. Another
rather widespread type of bone tool was a
kind of tubular tool which is believed to
have been used in weaving, as it bears
clear traces of use in its inside.
Pickaxes were made of antlers while
perforated plates of boar's tusks covered
the helmets which became one of the most
characteristic elements of Mycenaean
military equipment.
The
bone pins which often had decorated heads
present a great variety of shapes and
materials. Their large number reveals a
specific dressing tradition. Most pins are
found in settlements and only a few come
from graves, which means that the dead
were not buried with their clothes but
were most likely wrapped in materials. Simple jewellery made
of bone, beads, rings and sea shells which
hung on thread were also found in graves.
Ivory
is a rare material of this period on
Mainland Greece and its possession must
have been considered as a symbol of social
prestige. The first examples of ivory
objects, which were hilts of luxury
weapons and tools, derive from the last
phase of the Middle Helladic period. Ivory
was also used for the manufacture of
plaques with incised decoration of circles
or spiral jewellery, which were engraved
with compasses. These objects were used as
inlaid decorative plaques in metal or
wooden articles.
Weaving
The earliest
examples of Aegean textiles which
were preserved because of
favourable environmental
conditions belong to the last
period of the Middle Bronze Age.
The probably most early one was
found in a grave of the Grave
Circle B at Mycenae. All the
textile finds of this period have
been woven with the simple weaving
technique. Flax is considered to
have remained the main raw
material for weaving while the
wool of sheep and goat was used on
a smaller scale.
The weaving devices
found in Middle Helladic
settlements give an image of the
processing steps of weaving
materials and methods. The most
usual weaving devices are the
spindle whorls for the spinning
and the loomweights which indicate
the use of the vertical loom. The
spindle whorls of this period are
of a conical, biconical or flat
shape and were often decorated
with incisions filled with white
colour. The loomweights rarely
occur in Middle Helladic
settlements. These were made of
clay or burnished rocks and their
spherical or tubular shape
represents the mainland loomweight
type. At Lerna Minoan loomweights
were found; these are easily
distinguished by their typical
discoid shape.
Very often these
weaving devices were supplanted by
bases of broken vases which were
previously detached from the rest
of the vase and perforated in the
centre so that the thread could
pass through. The perforated or
solid spools, which were probably
used for the winding of the yarn
and for joining different yarns
for the extension of the woof are
also considered as loom devices.
Some of the solid spools may have
been used as small pestles for the
crushing of fine materials.
There is virtually
no information on the use of the
woven products and the kinds of
dressing except for very few
dressing accessories such as
buttons and pins. The pins found
in some graves indicate that some
clothes were not sewn but fixed on
the body with different
attachments. The Middle Helladic
clothes were probably similar to a
certain type of Mycenaean clothes
which differed greatly from the
common Minoan-like costumes of the
Mycenaean period. The type of this
costume which is a long and large
garment with short sleeves is
considered representative of a
previous dressing tradition of
Mainland Greece which was
presumably formed during the
Middle Helladic period.
The
name Pelasgians
(/pəˈlæzdʒiənz,
-dʒənz, -ɡiənz/; Greek: Πελασγοί, Pelasgoí;
singular: Πελασγός, Pelasgós) was used by
some ancient
Greek writers to refer
to populations that either were the ancestors of the
Greeks or preceded the
Greeks in Greece, "a hold-all term
for any ancient, primitive and presumably indigenous
people in the Greek world".[1]
In general, "Pelasgian" has come to mean more
broadly all the indigenous inhabitants of the Aegean
Sea region and their cultures before the advent of
the Greek language.[2]
During
the classical
period, enclaves under
that name survived in several locations of mainland
Greece, Crete,
and other regions of the Aegean. Populations
identified as "Pelasgian" spoke a language or
languages that at the time Greeks identified as "barbaric", even though some
ancient writers described the Pelasgians as Greeks. A tradition also
survived that large parts of Greece had once been
Pelasgian before being Hellenized. These parts
generally fell within the ethnic domain that by the
5th century BC was attributed to those speakers of ancient
Greek who were
identified as Ionians.
Etymology
Much
like all other aspects of the "Pelasgians", their
ethnonym (Pelasgoi) is of extremely uncertain
provenance and etymology. Michel
Sakellariou collects fifteen different etymologies
proposed for it by philologists and linguists during
the last 200 years, though he admits that
"most...are fanciful".[3]
An
ancient etymology based on mere similarity of sounds
linked pelasgos to pelargos ("stork") and postulates
that the Pelasgians were migrants like storks,
possibly from Egypt,
where they nest.[4]Aristophanes deals effectively
with this etymology in his comedy The
Birds.
One of the laws of "the storks" in the satirical cloud-cuckoo-land, playing upon the
Athenian belief that they were originally
Pelasgians, is that grown-up storks must support
their parents by migrating elsewhere and conducting
warfare.[5]
Gilbert
Murray
summarizes the derivation from pelas gē,
("neighboring land"):[6]
"If
Pelasgoi
is connected with πέλας, 'near', the word would mean
'neighbor' and would denote the nearest strange
people to the invading Greeks ..."
Julius
Pokorny
derives Pelasgoi from *pelag-skoi
("flatland-inhabitants"); specifically "Inhabitants
of the Thessalian plain".[7]
He details a previous derivation, which appears in
English at least as early as William
Gladstone's
Studies on Homer and the Homeric Age.[8]
If the Pelasgians were not Indo-Europeans, the name
in this derivation must have been assigned by the
Hellenes.
The
ancient Greek word for "sea", pelagos, comes
from the same root, *plāk-, as the Doric word plagos,
"side" (which is flat), appearing in *pelag-skoi.
Ernest
Klein therefore simply
interprets the same reconstructed form as "the sea
men", where the sea is the flat.[9]
Klein's
interpretation
does not require the Indo-Europeans to have had a
word for "sea", which living on the inland plains
(if they did) they are likely to have lacked. On
encountering the sea they simply used the word for
plain, "the flat". The flatlanders also could
acquire what must have been to the Hellenes a homonym, "the sea men".
Best of all, if the Egyptians of the Late Bronze Age
encountered maritime marauders under this name they
would have translated as Sea
People.
Ancient
literary evidence
Literary
analysis
has been going on since classical
Greece, when the writers
of those times read previous works on the subject.
No definitive answers were ever forthcoming by this
method; rather, it served to define the problems
better. The method perhaps reached a peak in the Victorian
era when new methods
of systematic comparison began to be applied in philology. Typical of the
era is the long and detailed study of William
Ewart
Gladstone,
who among his many talents was a trained classicist.[10]
Until further ancient texts come to light, advances
on the subject cannot be made. The most likely
source of progress regarding the Pelasgians
continues to be archaeology and related sciences.
Poets
Homer
The
Pelasgians
first appear in the poems of Homer:
those who are stated to be Pelasgians in the Iliad
are among the allies of Troy. In the section
known as the Catalogue
of Trojans, they are
mentioned between mentions of the Hellespontine cities and the Thracians of south-eastern
Europe (i.e., on the Hellespontine border of Thrace).[11]
Homer calls their town or district "Larisa"[12]
and characterises it as fertile, and its inhabitants
as celebrated for their spearsmanship. He records
their chiefs as Hippothous and Pylaeus, sons
of Lethus son of Teutamus, thus giving all of them
names that were Greek or so thoroughly Hellenized that any foreign
element has been effaced.
In
the Odyssey, Odysseus,
affecting to be Cretan himself, instances Pelasgians
among the tribes in the ninety cities of Crete,
"language mixing with language side by side".[13]
Last on his list, Homer distinguishes them from
other ethnicities on the island: "Cretans proper,"
Achaeans, Cydonians (of the city of Cydonia/modern Chania), Dorians, and
"noble Pelasgians."[14]
The
Iliad also refers to "Pelasgic Argos",[15]
which is most likely to be the plain of Thessaly,[16]
and to "Pelasgic Zeus", living in and
ruling over Dodona,[17]
which must be the oracular one in Epirus. However, neither
passage mentions actual Pelasgians; Myrmidons, Hellenes, and
Achaeans specifically inhabit Thessaly and the
Selloi are around Dodona. They all fought on the
Greek side.
Hesiod
Later
Greek writers offered little unanimity over which
sites and regions were "Pelasgian". One of the first
was Hesiod; he calls the
oracular Dodona, identified by
reference to "the oak", the "seat of Pelasgians",[18]
clarifying Homer's Pelasgic Zeus. He mentions also
that Pelasgus (Greek: Πελασγός,
the eponymous ancestor of the
Pelasgians) was the father of King
Lycaon
of Arcadia.[19]
In
Aeschylus's play, The
Suppliants,
the Danaids fleeing from Egypt
seek asylum from King Pelasgus of Argos, which he
says is on the Strymon including Perrhaebia in the
north, the Thessalian Dodona and the slopes of the
Pindus mountains on the west and the shores of the
sea on the east;[21]
that is, a territory including but somewhat larger
than classical Pelasgiotis. The southern boundary is
not mentioned; however, Apis is said to have come to
Argos from Naupactus "across" (peras),[22]
implying that Argos includes all of east Greece from
the north of Thessaly to the Peloponnesian Argos,
where the Danaids are probably to be conceived as
having landed. He claims to rule the Pelasgians and
to be the "child of Palaichthon (or 'ancient earth')
whom the earth brought forth".
The
Danaids call the country the "Apian hills" and claim
that it understands the karbana audan[23] (accusative
case, and in the Dorian
dialect), which many translate as "barbarian speech"
but Karba (where the Karbanoi live) is in
fact a non-Greek word. They claim to descend from
ancestors in ancient Argos even though they are of a
"dark race" (melanthes ... genos).[24] Pelasgus admits
that the land was once called Apia but compares them
to the women of Libya
and Egypt and wants to know
how they can be from Argos on which they cite
descent from Io.[25]
In
a lost play by Aeschylus, Danaan Women, he
defines the original homeland of the Pelasgians as
the region around Mycenae.[26]
Sophocles
Sophocles presents Inachus,
in a fragment of a missing play entitled Inachus,[27] as the elder in
the lands of Argos, the Heran
hills and among the Tyrsenoi Pelasgoi, an unusual
hyphenated noun construction,
"Tyrsenians-Pelasgians". Interpretation is open,
even though translators typically make a decision,
but Tyrsenians may well be the ethnonym Tyrrhenoi.
Euripides
Euripides calls the inhabitants of Argos
"Pelasgians" in his play entitled Orestes.[28] In a lost play entitled Archelaus,
he says that Danaus, on coming to reside in the
city of Inachus (Argos), formulated a law whereby the
Pelasgians were now to be called Danaans.[26]
Ovid
The
Roman poet Ovid
describes the Greeks of the Trojan War as Pelasgians
in his Metamorphoses:[29]
"Sadly
his
father, Priam, mourned for him, not knowing that
young Aesacus had assumed wings on his shoulders,
and was yet alive. Then also Hector with his
brothers made complete but unavailing sacrifice,
upon a tomb which bore his carved name. Paris was
absent. But soon afterwards, he brought into that
land a ravished wife, Helen, the cause of a
disastrous war, together with a thousand ships, and
all the great Pelasgian nation."
"Here,
when
a sacrifice had been prepared to Jove, according to the
custom of their land, and when the ancient altar
glowed with fire, the Greeks observed an azure
colored snake crawling up in a plane tree near the
place where they had just begun their sacrifice.
Among the highest branches was a nest, with twice
four birds--and those the serpent seized together
with the mother-bird as she was fluttering round her
loss. And every bird the serpent buried in his
greedy maw. All stood amazed: but Calchas, who
perceived the truth, exclaimed, "Rejoice Pelasgian
men, for we shall conquer; Troy will fall; although
the toil of war must long continue--so the nine
birds equal nine long years of war." And while he
prophesied, the serpent, coiled about the tree, was
transformed to a stone, curled crooked as a snake."
Historians
Hecataeus of Miletus
Hecataeus
of Miletus in a fragment from
Genealogiai states that the genos
("clan") descending from Deucalion ruled Thessaly and that it was
called "Pelasgia" from king Pelasgus.[30] A second fragment
says that Pelasgus was the son of Zeus and Niobe
and that his son Lycaon founded a dynasty
of kings of Arcadia.[31]
Acusilaus
A
fragment from the writings of Acusilaus asserts that the Peloponnesians were called
"Pelasgians" after Pelasgus, a son of Zeus and Niobe.[32]
Hellanicus
Hellanicus
of
Mytilene,
in Fragment 7 of the Argolica, concerns
himself with one word in one line of the Iliad,
"pasture-land of horses", applied to Argos
in the Peloponnesus.[33]
What is said about it is reported by different
authors and all accounts differ. The explanation is
trivial and mythical, but all accounts agree
Hellanicus said the term Argeia (gē) or Argolis once applied to
all Peloponnesus and that Pelasgus and his two
brothers received it as an inheritance from their
father, named either Triopas, Arestōr or Phorōneus. Pelasgus built
the citadel Larissa of Argos on the Erasinus river, whence the
name Pelasgic Argos (of the Peloponnesus), but later
resettled inland, built Parrhasia and named the
region or caused it to be named Pelasgia, to be
renamed Arcadia with the coming of
the Greeks.[34]
According
to Fragment 76 of Hellanicus's Phoronis,
from Pelasgus and his wife Menippe came a line of
kings: Phrastōr, Amyntōr, Teutamides and
Nasas (kings of Pelasgiotis in Thessaly).[35] The Pelasgians
under Nasas "rose up" (anestēsan) against the
Hellenes (who presumably had acquired Thessaly) and
departed for Italy
where they first took Cortona and then founded Tyrrhenia. The conclusion is
that Hellanicus believed the Pelasgians of Thessaly
(and indirectly of Peloponnesus) to have been the
ancestors of the Etruscans.
Herodotus
In
the Histories, the Greek historian Herodotus of Halicarnassus wrote, with
uncertainty, about the language of the Pelasgians:[36]
"I
am unable to state with certainty what language the
Pelasgians spoke, but we could consider the speech
of the Pelasgians who still exist in settlements
above Tyrrhenia in the city of Kreston, formerly
neighbors to the Dorians who at that time lived in
the land now called Thessaliotis; also the
Pelasgians who once lived with the Athenians and
then settled Plakia and Skylake in the Hellespont;
and along with those who lived with all the other
communities and were once Pelasgian but changed
their names. If one can judge by this evidence, the
Pelasgians spoke a barbarian language. And so, if
the Pelasgian language was spoken in all these
places, the people of Attica being originally
Pelasgian, must have learned a new language when
they became Hellenes. As a matter of fact, the
people of Krestonia and Plakia no longer speak the
same language, which shows that they continue to use
the dialect they brought with them when they
migrated to those lands."
Herodotus
alludes
to other districts where Pelasgian peoples lived on
under changed names; Samothrace[37]
and "the Pelasgian city of Antandrus"[38]
in the Troad
probably provide instances of this. He mentions that
there were Pelasgian populations on the islands of Lemnos and Imbros.[39]
Those of Lemnos he represents as being of
Hellespontine Pelasgians who had been living in
Athens but whom the Athenians resettled on
Lemnos and then found it necessary to reconquer.[40] This expulsion of
(non-Athenian) Pelasgians from Athens may reflect,
according to the historian Robert Buck, "a dim
memory of forwarding of refugees, closely akin to
the Athenians in speech and custom, to the Ionian
colonies".[41]
Herodotus also mentions the Cabeiri, the gods of the
Pelasgians, whose worship gives an idea of where the
Pelasgians once were.[42]
Another
claim made by Herodotus entails the Hellenes
(associated with the Dorians[43])
having separated from the Pelasgians with the former
surpassing the latter numerically:[44]
"As
for the Hellenes, it seems obvious to me that ever
since they came into existence they have always used
the same language. They were weak at first, when
they were separated from the Pelasgians, but they
grew from a small group into a multitude, especially
when many peoples, including other barbarians in
great numbers, had joined them. Moreover, I do not
think the Pelasgian, who remained barbarians, ever
grew appreciably in number or power."
He
states that the Pelasgians of Athens were called
"Cranai"[45]
and that the Pelasgian population among the Ionians of the Peloponnesus were the
"Aegialian Pelasgians".[46]
Moreover, Herodotus mentions that the Aeolians, according to the
Hellenes, were known anciently as "Pelasgians".[47]
"Before
the
time of Hellen, son of Deucalion...the country went
by the names of the different tribes, in particular
of the Pelasgian. It was not till Hellen and his
sons grew strong in Phthiotis, and were invited
as allies into the other cities, that one by one
they gradually acquired from the connection the name
of Hellenes; though a long
time elapsed before that name could fasten itself
upon all."
He
regards the Athenians as having lived in scattered
independent settlements in Attica but at some time
after Theseus they changed
residence to Athens, which was already
populated. A plot of land below the Acropolis was
called "Pelasgian" and was regarded as cursed, but
the Athenians settled there anyway.[49]
In
connection with the campaign against Amphipolis, Thucydides
mentions that several settlements on the promontory
of Actē were home to:[50]"...mixed barbarian
races speaking the two languages. There is also a
small Chalcidian element; but the
greater number are Tyrrheno-Pelasgians once settled
in Lemnos and Athens, and
Bisaltians, Crestonians and Eonians; the towns all
being small ones."
Ephorus
The
historian Ephorus, building on a fragment from
Hesiod that attests to a tradition of an aboriginal
Pelasgian people in Arcadia, developed a theory of
the Pelasgians as a people living a "military way of
life" (stratiōtikon bion) "and that, in
converting many peoples to the same mode of life,
they imparted their name to all," meaning "all of
Hellas". They colonized Crete and extended their
rule over Epirus, Thessaly and by implication over
wherever else the ancient authors said they were,
beginning with Homer. The Peloponnese was called
"Pelasgia".[51]
Dionysius of Halicarnassus
In
the Roman Antiquities, Dionysius
of
Halicarnassus
in several pages gives a synoptic interpretation of
the Pelasgians based on the sources available to him
then, concluding that Pelasgians were Greek:[52]
"Afterwards
some
of the Pelasgians who inhabited Thessaly, as it is
now called, being obliged to leave their country,
settled among the Aborigines and jointly with them
made war upon the Sicels. It is possible that the
Aborigines received them partly in the hope of
gaining their assistance, but I believe it was
chiefly on account of their kinship; for the
Pelasgians, too, were a Greek nation originally from
the Peloponnesus..."
He
goes on to add that the nation wandered a great
deal. They were originally natives of "Achaean
Argos" descended from Pelasgus, the son of Zeus and
Niobe. They migrated from there to Haemonia (later
called Thessaly), where they "drove out the
barbarian inhabitants" and divided the country into
Phthiotis, Achaia, and Pelasgiotis, named after
Achaeus, Phthius and Pelasgus, "the sons of Larissa
and Poseidon." Subsequently, "...about the sixth
generation they were driven out by the Curetes and Leleges, who are now
called Aetolians and Locrians..."
From
there, the Pelasgians dispersed to Crete,
the Cyclades, Histaeotis, Boeotia, Phocis, Euboea, the coast along
the Hellespont and the islands,
especially Lesbos, which had been
colonized by Macar
son of Crinacus. Most went to Dodona and eventually
being driven from there to Italy
then called Saturnia. They landed at Spina
at the mouth of the Po
River.
Still others crossed the Apennine
Mountains to Umbria and being driven
from there went to the country of the Aborigines.
These consented to a treaty and settled them at Velia.
They and the Aborigenes took over Umbria but were
dispossessed by the Tyrrhenians. The author
continues to detail the tribulations of the
Pelasgians and then goes on to the Tyrrhenians, whom
he is careful to distinguish from the Pelasgians.
Upon
becoming king, Pelasgus was responsible for
inventing huts,
sheep-skin coats, and a diet consisting of acorns. Moreover, the
land he ruled was named "Pelasgia".[54] When Arcas
became king, Pelasgia was renamed "Arcadia" and its
inhabitants (the Pelasgians) were renamed
"Arcadians".[55]
Pausanias also mentions the Pelasgians as
responsible for creating a wooden image of Orpheus in a sanctuary of
Demeter at Therae,[56]
as well as expelling the Minyans and Lacedaemonians from Lemnos.[57]
Strabo
Strabo dedicates a
section of his Geography to the Pelasgians,
relating both his own opinions and those of prior
writers. Of his own opinions he says:[26]
"As
for the Pelasgi, almost all agree, in the first
place, that some ancient tribe of that name spread
throughout the whole of Greece, and particularly
among the Aeolians of Thessaly."
He
defines Pelasgian Argos as being "between the
outlets of the Peneus River and Thermopylae as far as the
mountainous country of Pindus" and states that
it took its name from Pelasgian rule. He includes
also the tribes of Epirus as Pelasgians
(based on the opinions of "many"). Lesbos is named
Pelasgian. Caere
was settled by Pelasgians from Thessaly, who called
it by its former name, "Agylla". Pelasgians also
settled around the mouth of the Tiber
River in Italy
at Pyrgi and a few other
settlements under a king, Maleos.[58]
Mythology
In
1955, Robert
Graves in his mythography
The Greek Myths claims that the Pelasgian
creation
myth
involves a singular creatrix goddess who dominates
man and predates other deities. The goddess gives
birth to all things, fertilised not by any male
opposite but by symbolic seeds in the form of the
wind, beans, or insects.[59]
In
the absence of certain knowledge about the identity
(or identities) of the Pelasgians, various theories
have been proposed. Some of the more prevalent
theories supported by scholarship are presented
below. Since Greek is classified as an Indo-European
language,
the major question of concern is whether Pelasgian
was an Indo-European language.
One
major theory utilizes the name "Pelasgian" to
describe the inhabitants of the lands around the Aegean
Sea before the arrival
of proto-Greek speakers, as well
as traditionally identified enclaves of descendants
that still existed in classical Greece. The theory
derives from the original concepts of the philologistPaul
Kretschmer, whose views
prevailed throughout the first half of the 20th
century and are still given some credibility today.
Though
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff wrote them off as
mythical, the results of archaeological excavations
at Çatalhöyük by James
Mellaart and Fritz
Schachermeyr led them to conclude that the
Pelasgians had migrated from Asia Minor to the
Aegean basin in the 4th
millennium BC.[60]
In this theory, a number of possible
non-Indo-European linguistic and cultural features
are attributed to the Pelasgians:
•Groups
of apparently non-Indo-European loan words in the Greek
language, borrowed in its
prehistoric development.
•Non-Greek
and possibly non-Indo-European roots for many Greek
toponyms in the region, containing the consonantal
strings "-nth-"
(e.g., Corinth, Probalinthos, Zakynthos, Amarynthos), or its
equivalent "-ns-" (e.g., Tiryns); "-tt-",
e.g., in the peninsula of Attica, Mounts Hymettus and Brilettus/Brilessus, Lycabettus Hill, the deme
of Gargettus, etc.; or its equivalent "-ss-": Larissa, Mount Parnassus, the river names Kephissos and Ilissos, the Cretan cities
of Amnis(s)os and Tylissos etc. These strings
also appear in other non-Greek, presumably
substratally inherited nouns such as asáminthos
(bathtub), ápsinthos (absinth), terébinthos
(terebinth), etc. Other
placenames with no apparent Indo-European etymology
include Athēnai (Athens), Mykēnai
(Mycene), Messēnē, Kyllēnē (Cyllene), Cyrene, Mytilene, etc. (note the
common -ēnai/ēnē
ending); also Thebes, Delphi, Lindos, Rhamnus, and others.
•Non-Greek
inscriptions
throughout the Mediterranean, such as the Lemnos
stele.
The
historian George
Grote
summarizes the theory as follows:[61]
"There
are,
indeed, various names affirmed to designate the
ante-Hellenic inhabitants of many parts of
Greece — the Pelasgi, the Leleges, the Curetes, the Kaukones, the Aones,
the Temmikes, the Hyantes, the Telchines, the Boeotian Thracians, the Teleboae, the
Ephyri, the Phlegyae, &c. These are
names belonging to legendary, not to historical
Greece — extracted out of a variety of
conflicting legends by the logographers and subsequent
historians, who strung together out of them a
supposed history of the past, at a time when the
conditions of historical evidence were very little
understood. That these names designated real nations
may be true but here our knowledge ends."
The
poet and mythologist Robert
Graves
asserts that certain elements of that mythology
originate with the native Pelasgian people (namely
the parts related to his concept of the White
Goddess, an archetypicalEarth
Goddess) drawing
additional support for his conclusion from his
interpretations of other ancient literature: Irish, Welsh, Greek, Biblical,
Gnostic, and medieval writings.[62]
Ibero-Caucasian
Some
Georgian scholars
(including R. V. Gordeziani and M. G.
Abdushelishvili) connect the Pelasgians with the Ibero-Caucasian peoples of the
prehistoric Caucasus, known to the
Greeks as Colchians and Iberians.[63]
Pelasgian as Indo-European
Anatolian
In
western Anatolia, many toponyms with the "-ss-"
infix derive from the adjectival suffix also seen in
cuneiform Luwian and some Palaic; the classic
example is Bronze
AgeTarhuntassa (loosely, "City of
the Storm God Tarhunta"), and later Parnassus may be related to
the Hittite word parna- or "house". These
elements have led to a second theory, that Pelasgian
was to some degree an Anatolian
language.
Thracian[
Vladimir
I. Georgiev asserted that the
Pelasgians were Indo-Europeans, with an
Indo-European etymology of pelasgoi from pelagos,
"sea" as the Sea
People, the PRŚT of
Egyptian inscriptions, and related them to the
neighbouring Thracians. He proposed a
soundshift model from Indo-European to Pelasgian.[64]
Following
Vladimir
I. Georgiev,[66] who placed
Pelasgian as an Indo-European language "between
Albanian and Armenian",[67]
Albert Joris Van Windekens (1915—1989) offered rules
for an unattested hypothetical Indo-European
Pelasgian language, selecting vocabulary for which
there was no Greek etymology among the names of
places, heroes, animals, plants, garments,
artifacts, social organization.[68]
His 1952 essay Le Pélasgique was critically
received.[69]
Archaeology
Attica
During
the early 20th century, archaeological excavations
conducted by the Italian
Archaeological
School
and by the American
Classical
School
on the Athenian Acropolis and on other sites
within Attica revealed Neolithic dwellings, tools,
pottery and skeletons from domesticated animals
(i.e., sheep, fish). All of these discoveries
showed significant resemblances to the Neolithic
discoveries made on the Thessalian acropolises of Sesklo and Dimini. These discoveries
help provide physical confirmation of the literary
tradition that describes the Athenians as the
descendants of the Pelasgians, who appear to descend
continuously from the Neolithic inhabitants in
Thessaly. Overall, the archaeological evidence
indicates that the site of the Acropolis was
inhabited by farmers as early as the 6th millennium
BCE.[70][Note
1]
It
should be noted, however, that contrary to what
Prokopiou suggests about the results of the American
excavations near the Clepsydra, Sara Imerwahr in her
definitive publication of the prehistoric material
unequivocally states that no Dimini-type pottery was
unearthed.[71]
Lemnos
In
August and September 1926, members of the Italian
School of Archaeology conducted trial excavations on
the island of Lemnos. A short account of their
excavations appeared in the Messager d'Athénes
for 3 January 1927. The overall purpose of the
excavations was to shed light on the island's
"Etrusco-Pelasgian" civilization. The excavations
were conducted on the site of the city of
Hephaisteia (i.e., Palaiopolis) where the
Pelasgians, according to Herodotus, surrendered to Miltiades of Athens. There,
a Tyrrhenian necropolis (c. 9th-8th centuries
BC) was discovered revealing bronze objects, pots,
and more than 130 ossuaries. The ossuaries
contained distinctly male and female funeral
ornaments. Male ossuaries contained knives and axes
whereas female ossuaries contained earrings, bronze
pins, necklaces, gold diadems, and bracelets.
The decorations on some of the gold objects
contained spirals of Mycenean origin, but had no
Geometric forms. According to their ornamentation,
the pots discovered at the site were from the
Geometric period. However, the pots also preserved
spirals indicative of Mycenean art. The results of
the excavations indicate that the Tyrrhenians or
Pelasgians of Lemnos were a remnant of a Mycenean
population.[72][Note 2]
Boeotia
During
the 1980s, the Skourta Plain Project identified
Middle Helladic and Late Helladic sites on mountain
summits near the plains of Skourta in Boeotia. These fortified
mountain settlements were, according to tradition,
inhabited by Pelasgians up until the end of the Bronze
Age. Moreover, the
location of the sites is an indication that the
Pelasgian inhabitants sought to distinguish
themselves "ethnically" (a fluid term[73])
and economically from the Mycenaean
Greeks who controlled the
Skourta Plain.[74][Note 3]
According
to Prokopiou: "Some forty years ago excavations on
the Athenian Acropolis and on other sites in Attica
brought to light many indications of neolithic life
- dwellings, vases, tools, skeletons of sheep -
which confirmed the traditions recorded by Herodotus
that the Athenians were descended from the
Pelasgians, the neolithic inhabitants of Thessaly.
Indeed the neolithic vases of Attica date from the
earliest neolithic age (5520–4900) like the ceramics
from the Thessalian acropolis of Sesclos, as well as
from the later neolithic age (4900–3200) like those
from the other Thessalian acropolis of Dimini...The
search for traces of the neolithic age on the
Acropolis began in 1922 with the excavations of the
Italian Archaeological School near the Aesclepium.
Another settlement was discovered in the vicinity of
the Odeion of Pericles where many sherds of pottery
and a stone axe, both of Sesklo type, were
unearthed. Excavations carried out by the American
Classical School near the Clepshydra uncovered
twenty-one wells and countless pieces of handmade
pottery, sherds of Dimini type, implements
of later Stone Age and bones of domestic animals and
fish. The discoveries reinforced the theory that
permanent settlement by farmers with their flocks,
their stone and bone tools and ceramic utensils had
taken place on the rock of the Acropolis as early as
the sixth millennium."
Professor
Della Seta reports: "The lack of weapons of bronze,
the abundance of weapons of iron, and the type of
the pots and the pins gives the impression that the
necropolis belongs to the ninth or eighth century
BC. That it did not belong to a Greek population,
but to a population which, in the eyes of the
Hellenes, appeared barbarous, is shown by the
weapons. The Greek weapon, dagger or spear, is
lacking: the weapons of the barbarians, the axe and
the knife, are common. Since, however, this
population...preserves so many elements of Mycenaean
art, the Tyrrhenians or Pelasgians of Lemnos may be
recognized as a remnant of a Mycenaean population."
French
reports: "The fourth and final season of the survey
of the Skourta plain was conducted in 1989 by M. and
M.L.Z. Munn (ASCS). Explorations
begun in 1985 and 1987 were extended into new parts
of the plain and surrounding valleys, so that by now
a representative portion (approximately 25%) of most
of the inhabitable areas of the three koinotites of
Pyli, Skourta, and Stefani have been examined
intensively. 66 sites were discovered or studied for
the first time in the course of this highly
productive season, yielding a total of 120 premodern
sites studied by our survey since 1985. The survey
should have identified all major settlement sites
(over 5 ha)
and a representative sample of smaller sites in the
study area. A summary of the chief conclusions to be
drawn from the four seasons can be made...MH
settlement is established on two summits overlooking
the plain...one of which, Panakton...becomes the
most substantial LH site in the area. A fortified MH
settlement is also established on a peak in rugged
country beyond the NE edge of the plain...between
the Mazareika and Vountima valleys, in which other
settlements are established in the LH era...The
remoteness of this NE sector, and the great natural
strength of the MH site and a nearby LH IIIC
citadel...suggest that the inhabitants of these
glens and crags sought to protect and separate
themselves from peoples beyond the peaks that
surrounded them, perhaps because they were
ethnically distinct and economically more or less
independent of the Myc Greeks who dominated the
plains. Traditions of Pelasgians in these mountains
at the end of the BA
raise the possibility that these may have been
Pelasgian sites. Once abandoned, in the LH IIIC or PG
eras, most of these sites in the NE sector are not
again inhabited for well over a millennium.
Elsewhere, within the more accessible expanse of the
Skourta plain itself, LH settlements are established
on many sites which are later again important in the
C era..."
References
Citations
1.Rhodios
& Green 2007, p. 223
(Commentary on I.987)
2."Pelasgian". The American
Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:
Fourth Edition. 2000. Retrieved 15 January
2008. "A member of a people living in the region of
the Aegean Sea before the coming of the Greeks."
14. Homer.
Odyssey, Book 19 (T.E. Lawrence's
translation).
15. Homer.
Iliad, 2.681–2.684.
16.
The location is never explicitly given. Gladstone
shows, by process of elimination, that it must be in
the north of Thessaly. (Gladstone 1858,
pp. 100–105.)
60.Schachermeyr
1976; Mellaart
1965–1966;
Mellaart 1975,
"Southeastern Europe: The Aegean and the Southern
Balkans".
61.Grote 1862, pp. 43–44.
62.Graves 1990, Volume 1.
63.Gordeziani
1985; Kaigi
1969, M. G.
Abdushelishvili, "The Genesis of the Aboriginal
Population of the Caucasus in the Light of
Anthropological Data".
64.Georgiev
1961; Georgiev
1977.
65.
Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers and Bernd
Jürgen
Fischer,
editors of Albanian Identities: Myth and History
(Bloomington: Indiana University Press 2002),
present papers resulting from the London Conference
held in 1999 entitled "The Role of Myth in the
History and Development of Albania". The "Pelasgian"
myth of Albanians as the most ancient community in
southeastern Europe is among those explored in Noel
Malcolm's essay, "Myths of Albanian National
Identity: Some Key Elements, As Expressed in the
Works of Albanian Writers in America in the Early
Twentieth Century". The introductory essay by
Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers establishes the context
of the "Pelasgian Albanian" mythos, applicable to
Eastern Europe generally, in terms of the longing
for a stable identity in a rapidly opening society.
66.Georgiev
1937; Georgiev
1941.
67.Georgiev
1941, p. 63,
quoted in H. M. Hoenigswald's review in Language19.3
(July–September 1943) p. 270.
68.Van
Windekens 1952; Van
Windekens
1960.
69.
As, for example, in Gordon Messing's extended
review, criticizing point-by-point, in Language30.1
(January–March 1954), pp. 104–108.
70.Prokopiou
& Smith 1964, pp. 21–22.
71.Immerwahr
1971, p. 19: "It
is the Late Neolithic period that provides most of
our parallels, yet, curiously, the striking
Dimini-type painted wares of Thessaly are completely
lacking, and there is only one small recognisable
sherd of the related Mattpainted ware of Central and
Southern Greece."
72.Heffner 1927, pp. 123–124.
73.The American
Forum for Global Education 2000.
74.French
1989–1990, "Skourta Plain
project", p. 35.
Sources
•Rhodios,
Apollonios;
Green, Peter (2007). The
Argonautika. Berkeley and Los
Angeles, California: University of California Press.
ISBN0-520-25393-0.
•Heffner,
Edward
H. (January 1927). "Archaeological News: Notes on
Recent Archaeological Excavations and Discoveries;
Other News (July–December 1926)". American
Journal of Archaeology31 (1):
99–127.
•Prichard,
James Cowles (1841). Researches
Into the Physical History of Mankind: Containing
Researches into the History of the European
NationsIII (3rd
ed.). London, United Kingdom: Sherwood, Gilbert and
Piper.
•Prokopiou,
Angelos;
Smith, Edwin (1964). Athens: City of the Gods
from Prehistory to 338 B.C. New York, New
York: Stein and Day. OCLC1016679.
•Schachermeyr,
Fritz
(1976). Die Ägäische Frühzeit: Forschungsbericht
über die Ausgrabungen im letzten Jahrzehnt und
über ihre Ergebnisse für unser Geschichtsbild. Bd.
I. Die Vormykenischen Perioden des Griechischen
Festlandes und der Kykladen (in German).
Vienna, Austria: Verlag der Österreichischen
Akademie der Wissenschaften.
•Sophocles;
Dindorf,
Wilhelm (1849). ΣΟΦΟΚΛΗΣ: Sophoclis Tragoediae
Superstites et Deperditarum Fragmenta: Editio
Secunda Emendatior. Oxford, United Kingdom:
Oxford University Press.
•Van
Windekens,
Albert Joris (1952). Le Pélasgique: Essai sur
une Langue Indo-Européenne Préhéllenique (in
French). Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium: Université de
Louvain, Institut Orientalistique.
•Van
Windekens,
Albert Joris (1960). Études
Pélasgiques (in French).
Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium: Université de Louvain,
Institut Orientalistique.
The Dorian invasion[1]
is a concept devised by historians of Ancient Greece to explain the
replacement of pre-classical dialects and traditions in
southern Greece by the ones that
prevailed in Classical
Greece. The latter were named
Dorian by the ancient Greek writers after the historical
population that owned them, the Dorians.
Greek
legend asserted that the Dorians took possession of the Peloponnesus in an event called the Return of the
Heracleidae (Ancient Greek: Ἐπιστροφὴ τῶν
Ἡρακλειδῶν). Classical scholars saw in the legend a
hypothetically real event they termed the Dorian
invasion. The meaning of the concept has changed
several times, as historians, philologists and archaeologists used it in attempts to
explain the cultural discontinuities expressed in the data
of their fields. The pattern of arrival of Dorian culture
on certain islands in the Mediterranean, such as Crete,
is also not well understood. The Dorians colonised a
number of sites on Crete such as Lato.[2]
Despite
nearly 200 years of investigation, the actuality of the
Dorian invasion has never been established.
The meaning of the concept has become to some degree
amorphous. The work done on it has mainly served to rule
out various speculations. The possibility of a real Dorian
invasion remains open. Likewise, there have been attempts
to link them or their victims with the emergence of the
equally mysterious Sea Peoples.
Contents
1
Return of the Heracleidae
2 The term "invasion"
3 Kretschmer's external
Greeks
4 Greek origin in Greece
5 Destruction at the end
of Mycenaean IIIB
6 Invasion or migration
7 Closing the gap
8 See also
9 Notes
10 Bibliography
11 External links
Return
of the Heracleidae
The
ancient traditiontells that the descendants
of Heracles (the Heracleidae), exiled after his
death, returned after some generations in order to reclaim
dominion their ancestor Heracles had held in the Peloponnesus. The Greece to which the
traditions refer is the mythic one, now considered to be Mycenaean
Greece. The theme of the
"return of the Heracleidae" is considered
legendary. The exact descent differs from one ancient
author to another, the salient point being that in each
case a traditional ruling clan traced its origin, thus its
legitimacy, to Heracles.
The
translation of "return" is strictly English; the Greek
connotations are quite different. The Greek words are katienai[3]
and katerchesthai, literally "to descend", "come
down" or "go down" or less commonly "be brought down." It
means a descent from uplands to lowlands, or from the
earth to the grave, or a rushing down upon as a flood, or
sweeping down upon as a wind or a ship, or those returning
from exile (which typically would have to be by ship). It
is never used as a simple return home, which is a nostos[4]
(as in nostalgia or the "returns from
Troy"). The Heracleidae are
not returning to a former home for which they are
homesick, they are sweeping down upon the Peloponnesus in
war, thus inviting the English translation of invasion.
There
is, however, a distinction between Heracleidae and
Dorians. George Grote summarizes the
relationship as follows:[5]
"Herakles himself had rendered
inestimable aid to the Dorian king Aegimius, when the latter was
hard pressed in a contest with the Lapithae .... Herakles defeated
the Lapithae and slew their king Koronus; in return for which
Aegimius assigned to his deliverers one third part of his
whole territory and adopted Hyllus as his son."
Hyllus,
a Perseid, was driven from the
state of Mycenae into exile after the
death of Heracles by a dynastic rival, Eurystheus, another Perseid:[6]
"After
the
death ... of Herakles, his son Hyllos and his other
children were expelled and persecuted by Eurystheus ...
Eurystheus invaded Attica, but perished in the
attempt .... All the sons of Eurystheus lost their lives
... with him, so that the Perseid family was now
represented only by the Herakleids ...."
The Pelopid family now assumed
power. The Heraclids "endeavored to recover the
possessions from which they had been expelled" but were
defeated by the Ionians at the Isthmus of
Corinth. Hyllus staked peace for
three generations against immediate reoccupation on a
single combat and was killed by Echemus of Arcadia.
The
Heracleidae now found it prudent to claim the Dorian land
granted to Heracles:[5]
"and from this moment the Herakleids and Dorians became
intimately united together into one social communion."
Three generations later the Heracleidae with Dorian
collusion occupied the Peloponnesus, an event Grote terms
a "victorious invasion."[6]
The
term "invasion
The
first widespread use of the term "Dorian invasion" appears
to date to the 1830s. A popular alternative was the
"Dorian migration". For example, in 1831 Thomas Keightly
was using "Dorian migration" in Outline of History;
by 1838 in The Mythology of Ancient Greece and Italy
he was using "Dorian invasion".
Neither
of those two words exactly fits the events, as they imply
an incursion from outside a society to within; but the
Dorians were not outside of either Greece or Greek
society. William
Mitford's History of Greece
(1784–1810)[7]
described a "Dorian conquest" followed by "a revolution in
Peloponnesus so complete that, except in the rugged
province of Arcadia, nothing remained unaltered."[8]
In
1824 Karl
Otfried
Müller's
Die Dorier was published in German and was
translated into English by Tufnel and Lewis for
publication in 1830. They use such terms as "the Doric
invasion"[9] and "the invasian of the
Dorians"[10]
to translate Müller's "Die Einwanderung von den Doriern"
(literally: "the migration of the Dorians"),[11]
which was quite a different concept.
On one
level the Einwanderung meant no more than the Heraklidenzug,
the return of the Heracleidae. However, Müller was also
applying the sense of Völkerwanderung to it, which was
being used of the Germanic migrations. Müller's approach
was philological. In trying to explain
the distribution of tribes and dialects he hypothesized
that the aboriginal or Pelasgian population was Hellenic.
His first paragraph of the Introduction asserts:[12]
"The
Dorians
derived their origin [der Ursprung des dorischen
Stammes] from those districts in which the Grecian
nation bordered toward the north upon numerous and
dissimilar races of barbarians. As to the tribes which
dwelt beyond these borders we are indeed wholly destitute
of information; nor is there the slightest trace of any
memorial or tradition that the Greeks originally came from
those quarters."
Müller
goes on to propose that the original Pelasgian language
was the commo
n
ancestor of Greek and Latin,[13] that it evolved into
Proto-Greek and was corrupted in Macedon and Thessaly by
invasions of Illyrians. This same pressure of Illyrians
drove forth Greeks speaking Achaean (including Aeolian),
Ionian, and finally Dorian in three diachronic waves,
explaining the dialect distribution of Greek in classical
times.[14]
Following
this
traditional view, Thumb noticed that in the Peloponnesus
and in the islands, where the Dorians established
themselves, their dialect showed elements of the Arcadian dialect. This can be
explained if the Dorians conquered a Pre-Doric population,
which was pushed into the Arcadian mountains. Where the
Dorians were a minority, there is a mixed dialect, as in Boeotia, or the Dorians adopted
the existing dialect, as in Thessaly.[15]
To the Achaeans described by Homer belongs the
Aeolic-Arcadian dialect in the whole of eastern Greece,
with the exception of Attica, where the Ionians were confined. The
Ionians must be considered the oldest first wave of the
Greek migration.[16]
In
1902, K. Paparigopoulos, calling the event the "Descent of
the Heraclidae", stated that the Heraclidae came from
Thessaly after being expelled by the Thessalians living in
Epirus.[17]
Kretschmer's
external Greeks
Toward
the end of the 19th century the philologistPaul
Kretschmer made a strong case that
Pelasgian was a pre-Greek
substrate, perhaps Anatolian,[18]
taking up a classical theme of remnant populations
existing in pockets among the Greek speakers, in
mountainous and rural Arcadia and in inaccessible
coasts of the far south. This view left Müller's
proto-Greeks without a homeland, but Kretschmer did not
substitute the Heracleidae or their Dorian allies from
Macedon and Thessaly. Instead he removed the earliest
Greeks to the trail leading from the plains of Asia, where
he viewed the Proto-Indo-European
language
as having broken up about 2500 BC. Kretschmer suggested
that somewhere between that Asian homeland and Greece a
new cradle of the Greek tribes developed, from which
Proto-Ionians at about 2000 BC, Proto-Achaeans at about
1600 BC and Dorians at about 1200 BC came to swoop down on
an increasingly less aboriginal Greece as three waves of
external Greeks.[19]
Kretschmer
was
confident that if the unknown homeland of the Greeks was
not then known, archaeology would find it. The handbooks
of Greek history from then on spoke of Greeks entering
Greece. As late as 1956 J.B. Bury's History of Greece
(3rd edition) wrote of an "invasion which brought the
Greek language into Greece". Over that half-century Greek
and Balkan archaeology united in an effort to locate the
Dorians further north than Greece. The idea was combined
with a view that the Sea
Peoples
were part of the same north-south migration about 1200 BC.
The
weakness in this theory[20] is that it requires both
an invaded Greece and an external area where Greek evolved
and continued to evolve into dialects contemporaneously
with the invaded Greece. However, although the invaded
Greece was amply represented by evidence of all sorts,
there was no evidence at all of the external homeland.
Similarly, a clear Greek homeland for the Sea Peoples
failed to materialize. Retaining Müller's three waves and
Kretschmer's Pelasgian pockets the scholars continued to
search for the Dorians in other quarters. Müller's common
ancestor of Greek and Latin had vanished by 1950; and by
1960, although still given lip service, the concept of
Greek developing outside of Greece was in decline.[21]
Greek
origin in Greece
Additional
progress
in the search for the Dorian invasion resulted from the
decipherment of Linear
B inscriptions. The
language of the Linear B texts is an early form of Greek
now known as Mycenaean
Greek. Comparing it with the
later Greek
dialects
scholars could trace the development of the dialects from
the earlier Mycenaean. For example, classical Greek anak-s (ἄναξ), "king", was
postulated to be derived from a reconstructed form *wanak-
(Fάναξ). In the Linear B texts appears the form wa-na-ka,
sometimes accompanied by the wa-na-sa (Fάνασσα,
"queen").
Ernst
Risch lost no time in proposing that there was never more
than one migration, which brought proto-Greek into Greece. Proto-Greek
is the assumed last common ancestor of all known varieties
of Greek and then dissimilated
into dialects within Greece.[22] Meanwhile the linguists
closest to the decipherment were having doubts about the
classification of proto-Greek. John Chadwick summarizing in 1976
wrote:[23]
"Let
us therefore explore the alternative view. This hypothesis
is that the Greek language did not exist before the
twentieth century B.C., but was formed in Greece by the
mixture of an indigenous population with invaders who
spoke another language .... What this language was is a
difficult question ... the exact stage reached in
development at the time of the arrival is difficult to
predict."
"The
Proto-Greek
region included Epirus, approximately up to Αυλών in the
north including Paravaia, Tymphaia, Athamania, Dolopia,
Amphilochia, and Acarnania, west and north Thessaly
(Hestiaiotis,, Perrhaibia, Tripolis, and Pieria), i.e.
more or less the territory of contemporary northwestern
Greece"
In
another ten years the "alternative view" was becoming the
standard one. JP Mallory wrote in 1989 concerning
the various hypotheses of proto-Greek that had been put
forward since the decipherment:[25]
"Reconciliation
of
all these different theories seems out of the question ...
the current state of our knowledge of the Greek dialects
can accommodate Indo-Europeans entering Greece at any time
between 2200 and 1600 BC to emerge later as Greek
speakers."
By the
end of the 20th century the concept of an invasion by
external Greek speakers had ceased to be the mainstream
view, (although still asserted by a minority); thus
Geoffrey Horrocks writes:[26]
"Greek
is
now widely believed to be the product of contact between
Indo-European immigrants and the speakers of the
indigenous languages of the Balkan
peninsula beginning c. 2,000 B.C."
If the
different dialects had developed within Greece no
subsequent invasions were required to explain their
presence.
Destruction
at the end of Mycenaean IIIB
Meanwhile
the archaeologists were encountering what appeared to be a
wave of destruction of Mycenaean
palaces. Indeed, the Pylos tablets recorded the dispatch of
"coast-watchers", to be followed not long after by the
burning of the palace, presumably by invaders from the
sea. Carl Blegen wrote:[27]
"the
telltale
track of the Dorians must be recognized in the
fire-scarred ruins of all the great palaces and the more
important towns which ... were blotted out at the end of
Mycenaean IIIB."
Blegen
follows Furumark[28] in dating Mycenaean IIIB to 1300–1230 BC. Blegen
himself dated the Dorian invasion to 1200 BC.
A
destruction by Dorians has its own problems (as discussed
in the next section) and is not the only possible
explanation. At approximately this time Hittite power in Anatolia
collapsed with the destruction of their capital Hattusa, and the late 19th and the 20th dynasties of Egypt
suffered invasions of the Sea Peoples. A theory, reported for
instance by Thomas and Conant, attributes the ruin of the
Peloponnesus to the Sea Peoples:[29]
"Evidence
on
the Linear B tablets from the Mycenaean kingdom of Pylos
describing the dispatch of rowers and watchers to the
coast, for instance, may well date to the time that the
Egyptian pharaoh was expecting the arrival of foes."
The
identity of the foes remained a question. The evidence
suggests that some of the Sea Peoples may have been Greek.
However, most of the destroyed Mycenaean sites are far
from the sea, and the expedition against Troy
at the end of this period shows that the sea was safe.
Desborough believes that the sea was safe in central and
south Aegean in this period.[30]
"[L]et
us
not forget the legends, at least as models for what might
have happened. They tell us of constant rivalries with the
royal clans of the Heroic Age – Atreus and Thyestes, Agamemnon and Aigisthes, and so on ...."
In
summary, it is possible that the Mycenaean world
disintegrated through "feuding clans of the great royal
families".[31]
The possibility of some sort of internal struggle had long
been under consideration. Chadwick, after following and
critiquing the development of different views, in 1976
settled on a theory of his own:[32]
there was no Dorian invasion. The palaces were destroyed
by Dorians who had been in the Peloponnesus all along as a
subservient lower class (Linear B: do-e-ro, "male
slave"; latter Greek form: δοῦλος),[33]
and now were staging a revolution. Chadwick espoused the
view that northern Greek was the more conservative
language, and proposed that southern Greek had developed
under Minoan influence as a palace language.
Mylonas
joins two of the previous possibilities. He believes that
some developments in Argolis and attempts for recovery
after 1200 BC, can be explained by an internal fighting,
and by an enemy pressure, by the Dorians. Even if the Dorians,
were one of the causes of the Bronze
age
collapse,
there is evidence that they brought with them some new
elements of culture. It seems that the Doric clans moved
southward gradually over a number of years, and they
devastated the territory, until they managed to establish
themselves in the Mycenaean centres.[34]
Invasion
or migration
After
the Greek Dark
Ages, much of the population
of the Peloponnesus spoke Dorian, while the evidence of Linear B and literary traditions,
such as the works of Homer, suggests that the
population spoke Achaean – Mycenaean
Greek – before. In addition,
society in the Peloponnesus had undergone a total change
from states ruled by kings presiding over a Palace
economy
to a caste
system ruled by a Dorian master ethnos at Sparta.
According
to the scholar H. Michell:[35] "If we assume that the
Dorian invasion took place some time in the twelfth
century, we certainly know nothing of them for the next
hundred years." Blegen admitted that in the sub-Mycenaean
period following 1200:[27]
"the whole area seems to have been sparsely populated or
almost deserted."
The
problem is that there are no traces of any Dorians
anywhere until the start of the Geometric
period about 950 BC. This
simple pottery decoration appears to be correlated with
other changes in material
culture, such as the
introduction of iron weapons and alterations in burial
practices from Mycenaean group burials in tholos tombs to individual burials
and cremation. These can certainly be associated with the
historical Dorian settlers, such as those of Sparta in the
10th century BC.[35]
However, they appear to have been general over all of
Greece; moreover, the new weapons would not have been used
in 1200.
The
scholars were now faced with the conundrum of an invasion at 1200
but a resettlement at 950. One explanation is that the
destruction of 1200 was not caused by them, and that the
quasi-mythical return of the Heracleidae is to be
associated with settlement at Sparta c. 950. It is
possible that the destruction of the Mycenaean centres,
was caused by the wandering of northern people (Illyrian
migration). They destroyed the palace of Iolcos (LH III C-1), the palace
of Thebes ( late LH III B), then
they crossed Isthmus of
Corinth (end of LH III B) they
destroyed Mycenae, Tiryns and Pylos,
and finally they returned northward. However Pylos was
destroyed by a sea-attack, the invaders didn't leave
behind traces of weapons or graves, and it cannot be
proved that all the sites were destroyed about the same
time.[36]
It is also possible that the Doric clans moved southward
gradually over a number of years, and they devastated the
territory, until they managed to establish themselves in
the Mycenaean centres.[34]
Closing
the gap
The
quest for the Dorian invasion had begun as an attempt to
explain the differences between Peloponnesian society
depicted by Homer
and the historical Dorians of classical Greece. The first
scholars to work on the problem were historians
researching the only resources available to them: the
Greek legends. The philologists (later linguists)
subsequently took up the challenge but in the end only
brought the problem into sharper definition. Finally the
archaeologists have inherited the issue. Perhaps some
distinctively Dorian archaeological evidence will turn up
or has turned up giving precise insight as to how and when
Peloponnesian society changed so radically.
The
historians had defined the Greek Dark
Ages, a period of general
decline, in this case the disappearance of the palace economy and with it law and
order, loss of writing, diminishment of trade, decrease in
population and abandonment of settlements (destroyed or
undestroyed), metals starvation and loss of the fine arts
or at least the diminution of their quality, evidenced
especially in pottery. By its broadest definition the dark
age lasted between 1200 and 750, the start of the archaic or orientalizing period,
when influence from the Middle East via the overseas
colonies stimulated a recovery.
A dark
age of poverty, low population and metals starvation is
not compatible with the idea of great population movements
of successful warriors wielding the latest military
equipment sweeping into the Peloponnesus and taking it
over to rebuild civilization their way. This dark age
consists of three periods of art and
archaeology: sub-Mycenaean, Proto-geometric and Geometric. The most successful,
the Geometric, seems to fit the Dorians better, but there
is a gap, and this period is not localized to and did not
begin in Dorian territory. It is more to be associated
with Athens, an Ionian state.
Still,
the Dorians did share in the Geometric period and
therefore to find its origin might be perhaps to find the
origin of the Dorians. The Geometric originated by clear
transition from the Proto-geometric. The logical break in
material culture is the start of the Proto-geometric at
about 1050 BC, which leaves a gap of 150 years. The year
1050 offers nothing distinctively Dorian either, but if
the Dorians were present in the Geometric, and they were
not always in place as an unrecorded lower class, 1050 is
most likely time of entry. Cartledge says humorously:[37]
"It
has of late become an acknowledged scandal that the
Dorians, archaeologically speaking, do not exist. That is,
there is no cultural trait surviving in the material
record for the two centuries or so after 1200 which can be
regarded as a peculiarly Dorian hallmark. Robbed of their
patents for Geometric pottery, cremation burial,
iron-working and, the unkindest prick of all, the humble
straight pin, the hapless Dorians stand naked before their
creator – or, some would say, inventor."
C.Mossè
suggests
that there is not any archaeological evidence that a
"Doric civilization" substituted the "Achaean
civilization, and that the Dorian methods of a
war-society, was a myth created by the scientists who were
based on the "Spartan delusion". The Dorians who spoke a
different dialect were mixed with the local population,
when they migrated to the new lands [38]
The
question remains open to further investigation.
1. ^
About the so-called "Dorians' Issue" cf. Francesco Perono
Cacciafoco, Sulle piste dei Dori. Ipotesi a confronto
tra Linguistica, Archeologia e Storia [On the
Traces of the Dorians. Compared Hypotheses According to
Linguistics, Archaeology, and History], Pisa
University Press (Edizioni PLUS), Pisa 2009, link book.
2. ^
Hogan, C. Michael (10 January 2008). "Lato
Hillfort".
The Modern Antiquarian. Julian Cope.
3. ^
Liddell, Henry George; Scott, Robert (2007) [1940]. "κατεῖναι". Greek-English
Lexicon. Medford: Perseus Digital Library, Tufts
University.
5.^
ab George Grote, Greece
Part I, Chapter XVIII, Section I: "Return of the
Herakleids into Peloponnesus."
6.^
ab George Grote, Greece
Chapter IV: "Heroic Legends : Exile of the
Herakleids."
7. ^
Mitford's single-volume first edition came out in 1784 to
be followed by a second edition containing Volumes I and
II in 1789. The remainder of the initial 8-volume set was
published by 1810. The third edition of 1821 had more
volumes. Some 29 editions more followed. Mitford's work
features marginal notes stating the ancient sources.
8. ^
Mitford, William. The
History
of Greece.
Volume I. Boston: Timothy Bedlington and Charles Ewer,
Cornhill. p. 197.
9. ^Müller 1830, p. 107.
10. ^Müller 1830, p. 97.
11. ^Müller 1844, p. 85.
12. ^Müller 1830, p. 1.
13. ^Müller 1830, pp. 6–7.
14. ^Müller 1830, pp. 11–19.
15. ^
A.Thumb: Handbuch der griechischen Dialekte 1932 :
Martin Nilsson Die Geschichte der Griechische Religion
C.F.Beck Verlag, Munchen, p. 330
16. ^
J.L.Myres, Who were the Greeks? 1930 : Martin
Nilsson Die Geschichte der Griechische Religion
C.F.Beck Verlag, Munchen, p. 330
17. ^
Paparigopoulos, K., 1902, History of the Greek Nation,
(re-edited in demotic Greek, 1995), v. 1, p. 189
18. ^
Hall, Jonathan M. (2002). Between Ethnicity and
Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
p. 40. ISBN0-226-31329-8. “Paul Kretschmer ...
had pointed to elements in Greek vocabulary ... that
appeared to be non-Hellenic, and therefore pre-Hellenic
... for example, the -nth- suffix in Tirynthos ... which
Kretschmer believed had been transmitted to Greece from
Anatolia.”
19. ^Drews 1988, p. 8. "Paul
Kretschmer concluded that there had been three Greek
invasions of Greece during the Bronze Age. The last of
these, ca. 1200 B.C., was surely the Dorian Invasion."
20. ^
A survey of the problems connected with the historicity of
the "Dorian invasion" may be found Hall, J.M. (2007). A
History of the Archaic Greek World ca. 1200–479 BCE.
Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Chapter 3. A number of
ISBN's, including 0631226672.
21. ^Drews 1993, p. 63. "The old
view — that the Dorian invasion proceeded from the central
Balkans and that it occurred ca. 1200 — is now maintained
by only a few archaeologists and against increasing
evidence to the contrary."
22. ^
Risch, Ernst (1955). "Die Gliederung der griechischen
Dialekte in neuer Sicht". Museum Helveticum12: 61–75. The
argument is summarized, and Risch is cited, in Drews 1988,
p. 39.
25. ^Mallory,
J.P.
(1991). In Search of the Indo-Europeans:Language,
Archaeology and Myth. New York: Thames and Hudson.
p. 71. ISBN0-500-27616-1.
26. ^
Horrocks, Geoffrey (1997). "Homer's Dialect". In Morris,
Ian; Powell, Barry B. A New Companion to Homer.
Leiden, Boston: Brill. pp. 193–217. ISBN90-04-09989-1.
27.^
abBlegen, Carl (1967), "The Mycenaean
Age: The Trojan War, the Dorian Invasion and Other
Problems", Lectures in Memory of Louise Taft Semple:
First Series, 1961–1965, Princeton: Princeton
University Press, p. 30, LC 67-14407.
28. ^
Furumark, Arne (1972). Mycenaean Pottery. Svenska
institutet i Athen. ISBN91-85086-03-7. This book, a pottery
lookup reference, arranges pottery by stylistic groups,
assigning relative dates correlated when possible to
calendar dates, along with the evidence. It is the standard
pottery reference for Mycenaean times.
29. ^
Thomas, Carol G.; Craig Conant (2005). The Trojan War.
Westport, Connecticut: The Greenwood press. p. 18. ISBN0-313-32526-X.
30. ^
G.Mylonas (1966) "Mycenae and the Mycenaean age",
Princeton University Press pp. 230,231
31.^
ab Wood, Michael (1987). In
Search of the Trojan War. New York: New American
Library. pp. 251–252. ISBN0-452-25960-6.
32. ^Chadwick,
John
(1976). "Who were the Dorians?". Parola del Passato31:
103–117. Chadwick's point of view is summarized and
critiqued in Drews
1988, Appendix One: The End
of the Bronze Age in Greece
34.^
ab G. Mylonas, "Mycenae and
the Mycenaean age", pp. 231, 232
35.^
ab Michell, H. (1964). Sparta.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 7.
36. ^
G. Mylonas "Mycenae and the Mycenaean age", pp. 227, 228
37. ^
Cartledge, Paul (2002). Sparta and Lakonia: A Regional
History, 1300–362. Routledge. p. 68. ISBN0-415-26276-3.
38. ^
C.Mossè (1984). La Grèce archaique, d' Homére à
Eschyle. Editions du Seuil, p.p 34,35
Bibliography
·Francesco
Perono
Cacciafoco, Sulle piste dei Dori. Ipotesi a confronto
tra Linguistica, Archeologia e Storia [On the
Traces of the Dorians. Compared Hypotheses According to
Linguistics, Archaeology, and History], Pisa
University Press (Edizioni PLUS), Pisa 2009, link book.
·Drews, Robert (1988). The Coming
of the Greeks: Indo-European Conquests in the Aegean and
the Near East. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University
Press. ISBN0-691-02951-2.
·Drews, Robert (1993). The End of
the Bronze Age: Changes in Warfare and the Catastrophe
CA. 1200 B.C. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton
University Press.
·Hall,
Jonathan
M. (2000). "Dorians and Heraklidai". Ethnic Identity
in Greek Antiquity. Cambridge University Press.
pp. 56–65. ISBN0-521-78999-0.
·Hall,
Jonathan
M. (2006). "Dorians: Ancient Ethnic Group". In Wilson,
Nigel. Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece. New York:
Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. pp. 240–242. ISBN0-415-97334-1.
·Pomeroy,
Sarah
B.; Stanley M. Burstein; Walter Donlan; Jennifer Tolbert
Roberts (1999). Ancient Greece: A Political, Social,
and Cultural History. Oxford University Press. ISBN0-19-509742-4.
The
discovery of inscribed tablets in the excavation site
of Knossos verified the organized
use
of an advanced writing system which was initially
considered to have expressed, as the previous ones, a
pre-Hellenic dialect. The decipherment of the
Mycenaean Linear B in 1953 by M. Ventris and J.
Chadwick revealed - to the great surprise of the Greek
scholars of that time - that the syllabic signs of
Linear B composed words of the Greek language.
The
gradual decipherment of many Linear B texts revealed
that the Mycenaean world is undoubtedly associated
with the language and culture of Greek Antiquity.
Hellenic names of personalities and deities, which
later composed the most important figures of the Greek
twelve-god system, were identified in the Mycenaean
texts. The placenames
referred to on the tablets facilitated the
identification of many Mycenaean settlements with
sites known from historical topography. The
professions, the institutions and the hierarchy of the
Mycenaean society of mainly the 13th century BC shed
light on the aspects of political and social
organization which would have been impossible to
approach only through archaeological evidence.
The
Mycenaean language is the earliest known dialect and
it also includes many pre-Hellenic elements. It does
not fully correspond to any of the later dialects but
it is most similar to the Arcado-Cypriot. Moreover,
its vocabulary includes words of Greek origin which do
not appear in the ancient Greek language. It is
considered that these words disappeared in the course
of the Geometric and Archaic period.
The
syntax of the Mycenaean texts is very difficult to
study since the texts of the tablets are mainly simple
lists. Elements of structure occur only on one tablet
from Pylos, on which a temporal clause begins with o-te
(when), while in another part the accusative case of
reference, known from ancient Greek, is employed. The
singular, plural and dual numbers coexist but are
often used in the same way because in all cases they
function as titles. Furthermore, structural
incoherence due to the epigrammatic nature of the
texts or to careless mistakes frequently occur.
The
first writing systems in the Aegean occur in Minoan
Crete during the second millenium BC. The first form
of writing is preserved on the Phaistos disk. The
Hieroglyphic and Linear A succede. Linear B is the
offering of the Mycenaeans to the intellectual
achievements of the Prehistoric Aegean.
This
writing, an evolution of Linear A, was created
probably because of the need for systematizing at a
greater degree the commercial exchange and for
organizing more efficiently storage and archive
keeping of the goods traded in the palaces.
The Linear B texts come mainly from tablets of the
archives of Pylos, Knossos and Thebes. More than 1.000
tablets come from Pylos and more than 3.000 from
Knossos. The palaces of Mycenae and Tiryns have a
smaller deposit of archives.
The
texts were incised on unfired clay tablets with a pen
made probably of bone. These tablets are discerned
according to their shape in rectangular "page" tablets
and in "palm-leaf" tablets. The fact that they have
been preserved until today is due to the fire which
destroyed the palaces around 1200 BC and solidified
the mass of the tablets rendering them more resistant
to wear and tear. The tablets are often concentrated
in the antechambers of the palace storerooms but also
in areas which had no connection with the official
archives of the state, such as the homes of merchants.
Moreover,
the Mycenaean writing occurs also on inscribed seals,
many of which have been found in the Mycenaean Kadmeia and the
inscribed amphoras. The inscriptions on these vases
had been written with colour before the firing of the
vases and functioned as labels that bore inscription
on the content of the vases or the place of origin of
the products. In total, approximately 140 of this type
have been found all over the Aegean, in sites of
mainland Greece such as Thebes, Eleusis, Tiryns and in
Cretan sites, Knossos and Chania. The period of their
use dates to the 14th and 13th centuries BC.
Linear
B, as Linear A, was written from left to right. The
rectangular "page" tablets which provided plenty of
space for long texts were divided by horizontal lines.
In some cases paragraphs are separated from one
another by blank lines. The more detailed study of the
tablets led to the identification of specific scribes.
Thirty-two different writing styles have been
discerned on the tablets of Pylos while those of the
palace at Knossos number one hundred.
The
Mycenaean Linear B writing was given this name by the
excavator of Knossos Arthur Evans as opposed to the
first kind of Minoan Linear A. The similarities of the
two writings lead to the assumption that Linear B
resulted from Linear A. But they also present clear
differences which are indicated in the internal
structure and external form of their signs. Both
writings use the same number of phonetic symbols some
of which are common for both writings while some do
not occur in the other. Today it is believed that the
structure of Linear B derived from Linear A but was
modified in order to better express the Greek
language.
Linear
B is structured by groups of phonetic symbols which
are followed by ideograms.
The
phonetic symbols and the respective ideogram refer to
the same object. The syllabic signs,
as are named the successive phonetic signs, are
represented by vowels and open syllables in
combination with one consonant and one vowel, the last
one always ending in a vowel. Forty-five out of the
eighty-nine signs present parallels with signs of
Linear A and ten more present parallels with elements
of earlier Minoan writings. Apart from the phonetic
symbols there are more than one-hundred ideograms
which represent objects and numbers of the decimal
system as well as weight
and capacity.
measurement units. Many syllabic signs, ideograms or
measurement units have not yet been deciphered. These
unknown elements are gradually completed with the
decipherment of more new texts.
The
archaeological evidence reveals that the last period
of use of Linear B was by the end of the 13th century
BC, that is the final phase before the destruction of
the Mycenaean palaces.
However, we do not know exactly the period of its
creation. The tablets of Knossos date to the period
1425-1385 BC. Therefore, its use is verified already
from the 15th century BC while it may have been
invented even earlier. Its appearance on tablets of
the palace centres of the mainland is estimated around
1350-1300 BC.
The
use of the Linear B writing form ceased upon the
destruction of the Mycenaean palaces. It was
supplanted by another writing not until the adoption
of the Phoenician alphabet in the 8th century BC. This
means that the Mycenaean writing existed only to serve
the administrative functions of the palaces. The later
"dark ages" are characterized of total absence of
written sources. Nevertheless, the Mycenaean
linguistic tradition was preserved in oral speech.
Some of the traits of the Mycenaean dialect were
preserved in the Homeric epics and in the later poetry
which maintained the epic traits.
Metrical
Systems:Weights
and Measures
In
Linear B weights and measures are represented by
specific symbols. We do not know the names of the
units in the Mycenaean language but we know that there
were numbers that followed the decimal system and
units of weight and capacity measurement.
The
symbols of the units were sometimes the same with the
Minoan ones, which means that the Mycenaeans used the
Minoan measurement units. The subdivisions of the
weight and capacity units were also represented by
specific symbols. It is still rather difficult to
estimate the correspondence of these two systems
because of the variability of the agricultural
products' weight.
The
evidence on the measurement units resulting from the
Mycenaean texts are completed by certain
archaeological finds such as the weights and ingots, objects
of a stable weight which were used in commercial
exchange.
Weights
The
weight measurement units were represented in the
Mycenaean texts by specific symbols. The largest unit
was represented by the balance. The ingot of the
Classic period, which was also considered as a balance
corresponds to the Mycenaean balance. The basic unit
was divided in thirty smaller ones. The second largest
subdivision was divided in fourths and each fourth
into twelves. There was also a smaller unit which was
used for weighing the saffron crocus and an even
smaller one for gold.
Apart
from the Linear B symbols, there is also a small group
of archaeological objects, the ingots and the
weights. The ingots are flat bronze fusiform plaques,
which weigh about 29 kilograms. The weight of the
ingots, which was stable in order to serve the trade
of this metal, is considered to correspond to the
basic weight unit. The Mycenaean weights are round
lead plaques of different sizes. Some bore impressed
circles and dots representing their weight. The weight
of the ingots today does not always correspond to
their primary weight since these finds may have been
altered by wear and tear.
The
weight of the weights also presents small differences
in the various regions of the Aegean. Comparing the
weight of the Minoan and Mycenaean weights,
specialists conclude that the Mycenaeans had chosen
one of the existing variations of the Minoan system
maintaining the basic unit identical and slightly
modifying its subdivisions.
The
fine gold balance which had been deposited as a grave
good in a Mycenaean grave is an early Mycenaean find
associated with weight measurement. The two fine
scales could weight materials of just a few grams.
Despite its ritual and perhaps symbolic character,
this find reveals that accuracy in the weighing of
precious materials was very important for the
Mycenaeans.
Measures
The
Mycenaean writing system provided for measurement
units for liquid and dry goods and for products in the
form of grains, such as cereals and spices. These
products were measured in volume and not in weight
because this was changeable depending on the condition
and quality of the product.
The
basic capacity unit of the solid goods was represented
by the cup. A schematic or even verbal parallel with
the "kotyle", the capacity unit of classic times, is
observed. Based on the units of the Classic period we
can assume that the kotyle was equal to roughly 270 to
388 cubic cm [@ 9 - 13 fluid ounces – tkw]. Four
kotyle units formed a larger unit whereas the smallest
subdivision of the basic unit was the one-sixth.
Liquid
measurement was partly the same with dry measurement.
The largest liquid measurement unit corresponded to
30% of the highest unit of dry product measurement.
This difference shows that the capacity units were
adjusted to the highest load that man can bear which
is not the same for liquid and dry products.
The
capacity measures are not known perhaps because they
were made of perishable materials. A specific type of
vase which was found on Thera, may have served this
purpose. But the Theran finds were mostly, adjusted to
the Minoan models. Thus they do not constitute
reliable sources of information for the Mycenaean
measurement systems.
The
purely transport vessels of the Mycenaeans are
considered to be the stirrup
jars. These vessels were of a specific capacity and
occur in two basic sizes. The larger ones contained 12
to 14 litres and the smaller ones 6 to 7 litres of
oil. Comparing the capacity of the large storage
vessels it seems that 0.8 of the litre was of a
specific importance for measuring capacity while it is
estimated that the lowest unit varied from 200 to 500
cubic cm.
The
modern city contains an Archaeological Museum, the
remains of the Cadmea (Bronze Age and
forward citadel), and scattered ancient remains.
Modern Thebes is the largest town of the regional
unit
of Boeotia.
….
Geography
Thebes
is situated in a plain, between Lake
Yliki (ancient Hylica)
to the north, and the Cithaeron mountains, which
divide Boeotia from Attica, to the south. Its
elevation is 215 m above mean sea level. It is
about 50 km (31 mi) northwest of Athens, and 100 km
(62 mi) southeast of Lamia.
The
record of the earliest days of Thebes was preserved
among the Greeks in an abundant mass of legends
which rival the myths of Troy
in their wide ramification and the influence which
they exerted upon the literature of the classical
age. Five main cycles of story may be distinguished:
1The
foundation
of the citadel Cadmeia by Cadmus, and the growth of
the Spartoi or "Sown Men"
(probably an aetiological myth designed to
explain the origin of the Theban nobility which bore
that name in historical times).
2The
building of a "seven-gated" wall by Amphion, and the cognate
stories of Zethus, Antiope and Dirce.
3The
tale of Laius,
whose misdeeds culminated in the tragedy of Oedipus and the wars of
the "Seven
Against Thebes", the Epigoni, and the downfall
of his house; Laius' pederastic
rape
of Chrysippus was held by some
ancients to have been the first instance of
homosexuality among mortals, and may have provided
an etiology for the practice of pedagogic pederasty
for which Thebes was famous. See Theban
pederasty
and Pederasty
in
ancient Greece
for detailed discussion and background.
The
Greeks attributed the foundation of Thebes to Cadmus, a Phoenician king
from Tyre (now in Lebanon)
and the brother of Queen Europa. Cadmus was famous
for teaching the Phoenician alphabet and building
the Acropolis, which was named the Cadmeia in his honor and
was an intellectual, spiritual, and cultural center.
Early history
Archaeological
excavations
in and around Thebes have revealed cist
graves dated to Mycenaean times containing
weapons, ivory, and tablets written in Linear
B. Its
attested name forms and relevant terms on tablets
found locally or elsewhere include te-qa-i,[n 1]
understood to be read as *Tʰēgʷai̮s (Ancient
Greek: Θήβαις, Thēbais,
i.e. "at Thebes", Thebes in the dative-locative case), te-qa-de,[n 2]
for *Tʰēgʷasde (Θήβασδε, Thēbasde,
i.e. "to Thebes"),[2][6]
and te-qa-ja,[n
3] for *Tʰēgʷaja
(Θηβαία, Thēbaia, i.e. "Theban woman").[2]
It
seems safeto infer that *Tʰēgʷai
was one of the first Greek communities to be drawn
together within a fortified city, and that it owed
its importance in prehistoric days — as later — to
its military strength. Deger-Jalkotzy claimed that
the statue base from Kom
el-Hetan
in Amenhotep
III's kingdom (LHIIIA:1) mentions a
name similar to Thebes, spelled out
quasi-syllabically in hieroglyphs as d-q-e-i-s,
and considered to be one of four tj-n3-jj (Danaan?) kingdoms worthy
of note (alongside Knossos and Mycenae). *Tʰēgʷai
in LHIIIB lost contact with Egypt but gained it with
"Miletus" (Hittite: Milawata) and "Cyprus"
(Hittite: Alashija). In the late
LHIIIB, according to Palaima,[7]
*Tʰēgʷai was able to pull resources from
Lamos near Mount
Helicon, and from Karystos and Amarynthos on the Greek side
of the isle of Euboia.
As
a fortified community, it attracted attention from
the invading Dorians, and the fact of
their eventual conquest of Thebes lie behind the
stories of the successive legendary attacks on that
city.
The
central position and military security of the city
naturally tended to raise it to a commanding
position among the Boeotians, and from early days
its inhabitants endeavoured to establish a complete
supremacy over their kinsmen in the outlying towns.
This centralizing policy is as much the cardinal
fact of Theban history as the counteracting effort
of the smaller towns to resist absorption forms the
main chapter of the story of Boeotia. No details of
the earlier history of Thebes have been preserved,
except that it was governed by a land-holding aristocracy who safeguarded
their integrity by rigid statutes about the
ownership of property and its transmission over
time.
The dynastic
history of Thebes in Greek
mythology
is crowded with a bewildering number of kings between
the city's new foundation (by Cadmus) and the Trojan War (see Ogyges). This suggests several
competing traditions, which mythographers were forced
to reconcile.[1]
Contents
1
The rulers
2
List of rulers
3
Royal House of Thebes family tree
4
See also
5
References
The rulers
The
first king of Thebes was Cadmus, after whom the city was
originally called Cadmeia. It only became known as
Thebes during the reign of Amphion and Zethus, after the latter's wife Thebe. The first kings of Boeotia before Cadmus and the flood
of Deucalion were Calydnus and Ogyges (Ogygos).
When
Cadmus died, his son Polydorus was still a minor and
hence Pentheus, a son of Cadmus' daughter Agaue and one of the Spartoi, became king. He met a
tragic end after falling foul of the young god Dionysus.
Polydorus succeeded his nephew but
only reigned for a short while. At his death, the
kingdom was entrusted to his father-in-law, Nycteus,
who acted as guardian for the young Labdacus, the son
of Polydorus and Nycteis. During the regency of
Nycteus, Thebes (Cadmea) made war against Epopeus, the king of Sicyon, who had abducted Nycteus'
daughter, Antiope. (However, an alternate
account says that Antiope fled Thebes to evade her
father's wrath, and sought refuge with King Epopeus
after finding herself pregnant by the god Zeus.)
Nycteus and the Thebans were defeated, and Nycteus
himself died of his battle wounds. He was succeeded as
ruler of Thebes by his brother, Lycus.
Labdacus eventually became king.
Another war erupted, this time over a boundary dispute
between Thebes and Athens; once again, Thebes was
defeated after King Pandion II of Athens received aid from
the Thracian king Tereus. Labdacus himself survived
the war. However, following in the footsteps of
Pentheus, King Labdacus opposed the cult of Dionysus,
and was killed by Dionysus' enraged devotees, the
Maenads. Labdacus left behind a young son, Laius.
Lycus again took control of Thebes, this time as a
usurper, and denied Laius his birthright. This
inaugurated a new dynasty. Lycus is said to have
reigned for twenty years.
Lycus,
as king and ruler of Thebes, waged war against Sicyon
to avenge his brother and niece. This time, the result
went in Thebes' favor, and King Epopeus was slain.
However, Lycus and his wife Dirce proceeded to treat Antiope
cruelly. Antiope was imprisoned, but she later
contrived to escape, and was reunited with her twin
sons, Amphion and Zethus.
Amphion and Zethus were the
sons of Zeus by
Antiope, conceived while Antiope was still in Thebes;
they were born in secret and raised by shepherds in
the vicinity of Mount Cithaeron. After their tearful
reunion with their mother, Amphion and Zethus marched
on Thebes and slew King Lycus and Dirce.
Lycus'
death did not restore Laius to the throne. Amphion and
Zethus seized power, ruling as joint kings of Thebes,
and expelled Laius. Amphion's wife was Niobe, daughter of Tantalus, and they had seven sons and
seven daughters together. Amphion and Zethus expanded
the city (and renamed it Thebes) and built the seven
gates of Thebes, naming them after Amphion's daughters
(Thera, Cleodoxa, Astynome, Astycratia, Chias, Ogygia,
Chloris). Niobe, a boastful woman, attracted the wrath
of the goddess Artemis, who killed all of her
children. Amphion committed suicide after the death of
his beloved children. Zethus' son and only child had
been killed earlier, and Zethus had died of a broken
heart.
Thus,
the throne of Thebes was vacant and the Thebans
invited back Laius, who resided in the
Peloponnesus under the protection of King Pelops, thereby restoring the
original dynasty of Cadmus. When Laius became king, he
married Jocasta, daughter of Menoeceus, son
of Pentheus. Given that the Delphic oracle warned
Laius not to have a son because that son was fated to
kill his own father, Laius exposed his newborn son -
who nevertheless survived, and grew up under the name
of Oedipus. In a tragic tale - in which every
step Oedipus took to avoid the oracle's predictions
brought him closer to his fate - Oedipus killed King
Laius and married Jocasta. Oedipus then became king of
Thebes, as husband of the widowed Jocasta. The couple
had four children, including two sons, Polyneices and Eteocles.
When the
seer Teiresias revealed Oedipus' horrible
crimes - patricide, regicide and incest, no less -
Oedipus was forced to abdicate. Jocasta killed
herself, and Oedipus was shunned by his own children.
Oedipus responded by cursing his sons Polyneices and
Eteocles.
Polyneices and Eteocles made a
pact that each should rule alternately for one year at
a time. But Eteocles reneged on the pact, and
Polyneices was banished from Thebes. Polyneices fled
to the court of King Adrastus of Argos to raise an army, known as
the "Seven
Against Thebes". In
this war, Polyneices and Eteocles were each slain by
the other, thus fulfilling Oedipus' curse.
After
the deaths of Polyneices and Eteocles, Jocasta's
brother Creon, who before had governed Thebes
after the death of Laius and after the exile of
Oedipus, became regent for Eteocles' son Laodamas. It
was during one of Creon's reigns that Heracles was born in Thebes. Creon
served as protector of Heracles, his stepfather Amphitryon, and mother Alcmene. Creon even gave his
daughter Megara in marriage to Heracles. In
return, Heracles defended Thebes in two more wars that
Thebes became entangled in, first against King Erginus of MinyanOrchomenus, then against King
Pyraechmus of Euboea.
After
the death of Eteocles and Polynices, Creon prohibited
a proper burial of Polyneices and his Argive allies.
Theseus, King of Athens, led an army against Thebes
and compelled Creon to give the fallen heroes the
correct rites. When Eteocles' son Laodamas
came of age, Creon resigned the rule to him. Like his
father, King Laodamas was confronted with an attack by
the Epigoni, the sons of the Seven led
by Polyneices' son Thersander. The Epigoni
succeeded, and Thersander was installed as king of
Thebes. King Laodamas was killed during this war.
Thersander
joined the Greek forces in the Trojan War, but he was
killed on the shores of Mysia before ever reaching
Troy (by Telephus, a son of Heracles). His son
Tisamenus was too young at the time to lead the
Theban contingent; but he later came of age while the
war was still going on, and entered the war close to
its conclusion. This is the explanation given for why
no Theban leader is mentioned by Homer in the Iliad.
Jump
up ^
Hard, Robin; Rose, Herbert Jennings (2004). The
mythical history of Thebes. In. The Routledge
handbook of Greek mythology, pp. 294 ff.
Psychology Press, ISBN
978-0-415-18636-0
Mycenae
(/maɪˈsiːni/; Greek: Μυκῆναι Mykēnai
or Μυκήνη Mykēnē) is anarchaeological
site
in Greece,
located about 90 kilometres (56 miles) southwest of Athens,
in the north-eastern Peloponnese.
Argos
is 11 kilometres (7 miles) to the south; Corinth,
48 kilometres (30 miles) to the north. From the hill on
which the palace was located, one can see across the Argolid
to the Saronic Gulf.
In
the second millennium BC, Mycenae was one of the major
centres of Greek civilization, a military stronghold which
dominated much of southern Greece. The period of Greek history
from about 1600 BC to about 1100 BC is called Mycenaean
in reference to Mycenae. At its peak in 1350 BC, the citadel
and lower town had a population of 30,000 and an area of
32 hectares.[1]
Contents
1 Name
2 History
2.1 Neolithic to Middle
Bronze Age
2.2 Late Bronze Age
2.2.1 Late Helladic I
(LHI)
2.2.2 Late Helladic II
(LHII)
2.2.3 Late Helladic III
(LHIII)
2.3 Decline
2.4 Archaic and Classical
Periods
2.5 Revival and
Abandonment
3 Political organization
4 Religion
5 Mycenae in Greek
mythology and legends
5.1 Perseid dynasty
5.2 Atreid dynasty
5.3 Atreids in Asia Minor
6 Excavation
7 See also
8 References
8.1 Citations
8.2 Sources
9 Further reading
10 External links
Name
Although
the citadel was built by Greeks, the name Mukanai
is thought not to be Greek but rather one of the many pre-Greek
place names inherited by the
immigrant Greeks.[2][3]
Legend
has it that the name was connected to the Greek word mycēs
(μύκης, "mushroom"). Thus, Pausanias ascribes the name to the
legendary founder Perseus, who was said to have
named it either after the cap (mycēs) of the sheath
of his sword, or after a mushroom he had plucked on the
site.[4]
The
earliest written form of the name is Mykēnē
(Μυκήνη), which is found in Homer.[5]
The reconstructed Mycenaean
Greek name of the site is Mukānai,
which has the form of a plural like Athānai. The change of ā
to ē in more recent versions of the name is the
result of a well-known sound change in later Attic-Ionic.
History
Neolithic
to Middle Bronze Age
Mycenae,
an acropolis site, was continuously
inhabited from the Early
Neolithic (EN) down through the
Early Helladic (EH) and Middle Helladic (MH) periods; EN
Rainbow Ware constitutes the earliest ceramic evidence
discovered so far.[6] Pottery material
spanning the entire EHI through EHIII period was
discovered in 1877–1878 by Stamatakis at a low depth in
the sixth shaft grave in Grave Circle A; further EH and MH
material was found beneath the walls and floors of the
palace, on the summit of the acropolis, and outside the
Lion Gate in the area of the ancient cemetery.[7]
An EH–MH settlement was discovered near a fresh-water well
on top of the Kalkani hill southwest of the acropolis.[7]
The first burials in pits or cist graves manifest in the
MH period (circa 1800–1700 BC) on the west slope of the
acropolis, which was at least partially enclosed by the
earliest circuit wall.[7]
Late
Bronze Age
During
the Bronze Age, the pattern of settlement at Mycenae was a
fortified hill surrounded by hamlets and estates, in
contrast to the dense urbanity on the coast (cf. Argos). Since Mycenae was the
capital of a state that ruled, or dominated, much of the
eastern Mediterranean world, the rulers must have placed
their stronghold in this less populated and more remote
region for its defensive value. Since there are few
documents on site with datable contents (such as an Egyptian
scarab) and since no dendrochronology has yet been performed
upon the remains here, the events are listed here
according to Helladic
period material culture.
Late
Helladic I (LHI)
Outside
the partial circuit wall, Grave
Circle
B,
named for its enclosing wall, contained ten cist graves in
Middle Helladic style and several shaft graves, sunk more
deeply, with interments resting in cists. Richer grave
goods mark the burials as possibly regal. Mounds over the
top contained broken drinking vessels and bones from a
repast, testifying to a more than ordinary farewell.[8]Stelae
surmounted the mounds.[9]
A
walled enclosure, Grave
Circle
A,
included six more shaft graves, with nine female, eight
male, and two juvenile interments. Grave goods were more
costly than in Circle B. The presence of engraved and
inlaid swords and daggers, with spear points and
arrowheads, leave little doubt that warrior chieftains and their families were
buried here. Some art objects obtained from the graves are
the Silver Siege
Rhyton, the Mask of
Agamemnon, the Cup of Nestor, and weapons both votive and practical.
Late
Helladic II (LHII)
Alan
Wace
divided the nine tholos tombs of Mycenae into
three groups of three, each based on architecture. His
earliest – the Cyclopean Tomb, Epano Phournos, and the
Tomb of Aegisthus – are dated to LHIIA.
Burial
in tholoi is seen as replacing burial in shaft graves. The
care taken to preserve the shaft graves testifies that
they were by then part of the royal heritage, the tombs of
the ancestral heroes. Being more visible, the tholoi all
had been plundered either in antiquity, or in later
historic times.
Late
Helladic III (LHIII)
At a
conventional date of 1350 BC, the fortifications on the
acropolis, and other surrounding hills, were rebuilt in a
style known as cyclopean because the blocks of
stone used were so massive that they were thought in later
ages to be the work of the one-eyed giants known as the
Cyclopes (singular: Cyclops).[10]
Within these walls, much of which can still be seen,
successive monumental palaces were built. The final
palace, remains of which are currently visible on the
acropolis of Mycenae, dates to the start of LHIIIA:2.
Earlier palaces must have existed, but they had been
cleared away or built over.
The
construction of palaces at that time with a similar
architecture was general throughout southern Greece. They
all featured a megaron, or throne room, with a
raised central hearth under an opening in the roof, which
was supported by four columns in a square around the
hearth. A throne was placed against the center of a wall
to the side of the hearth, allowing an unobstructed view
of the ruler from the entrance. Frescos adorned the plaster
walls and floor.
The
room was accessed from a courtyard with a columned
portico. A grand staircase led from a terrace below to the
courtyard on the acropolis.
In the
temple built within the citadel, a scarab of Queen
Tiye
of Egypt, who was married to Amenhotep III, was placed in the Room
of the Idols alongside at least one statue of either
LHIIIA:2 or B:1 type. Amenhotep III's relations with m-w-k-i-n-u,
*Mukana, have corroboration from the inscription at Kom
al-Hetan - but Amenhotep's reign is thought to align with
late LHIIIA:1. It is likely that Amenhotep's herald
presented the scarab to an earlier generation, which then
found the resources to rebuild the citadel as Cyclopean
and then, to move the scarab here.
Wace’s
second group of tholoi are dated between LHIIA and LHIIIB:
Kato Phournos, Panagia Tholos, and the Lion Tomb. The
final group, Group III: the Treasury of
Atreus, the Tomb of
Clytemnestra and the Tomb of the Genii, are dated to
LHIIIB by a sherd under the threshold of the Treasury of
Atreus, the largest of the nine tombs. Like the Treasury
of Minyas at Orchomenus the tomb had been looted
of its contents and its nature as funerary monument had
been forgotten. The structure bore the traditional name of
"Treasury".
The
pottery phases on which the relative dating scheme is
based (EH, MH, LH, etc.) do not allow very precise dating,
even augmented by the few existing C-14 dates due to the
tolerance inherent in these. The sequence of further
construction at Mycenae is approximately as follows. In
the middle of LHIIIB, around 1250 BC or so, the Cyclopean
wall was extended on the west slope to include Grave
Circle A.[12] The main entrance
through the circuit wall was made grand by the best known
feature of Mycenae, the Lion Gate, through which passed a
stepped ramp leading past circle A and up to the palace.
The Lion Gate was constructed in the form of a "Relieving
Triangle" in order to support the weight of the stones. An
undecorated postern gate also was constructed through the
north wall.
One of
the few groups of excavated houses in the city outside the
walls lies beyond Grave Circle B and belongs to the same
period. The House of Shields, the House of the Oil
Merchant, the House of the Sphinxes, and the West House.
These may have been both residences and workshops.
Citadel Facts and Figures
Circuit
length:
1105M
Preserved
height:
up to 12.5M
Width:
7.5-17M
Minimum
stone required: 145,215 Cu.M or 14,420 average stones (10
tons)
Time
to move 1 Block using men: 2.125 days
Time
to move all Blocks using men: 110.52 years
Time
to move 1 Block using oxen: 0.125 days
Time
to move all Blocks using oxen: 9.9 years
Based
on 8-hour work day.
The
largest stones including the lintels and gate jambs
weighed well over 20 tonnes; some may have been close to
100 tonnes.[13]
Somewhat
later,
toward the end of LHIIIB,[when?] another extension to the
citadel was undertaken. The wall was extended again on the
northeast, with a sally port and also a secret passage
through and under the wall, of corbeled construction,
leading downward by some 99 steps to a cistern carved out
of rock 15 m below the surface. It was fed by a tunnel
from a spring on more distant higher ground.
Already
in LHIIIA:1, Egypt knew *Mukana by name as a capital city
on the level of Thebes and Knossos. During LHIIIB,
Mycenae's political, military and economic influence
likely extended as far as Crete,
Pylos in the western
Peloponnese, and to Athens and Thebes. Hellenic settlements
already were being placed on the coast of Anatolia. A
collision with the Hittite Empire over their sometime
dependency at a then strategic location, Troy, was to be
expected. In folklore, the powerful Pelopid family ruled
many Greek states, one branch of which was the Atreid
dynasty at Mycenae.
By
1200 BC, the power of Mycenae was declining; finally,
during the 12th century BC, Mycenaean dominance collapsed
entirely. The eventual destruction of Mycenae formed part
of the general Bronze Age
collapse in the Greek mainland
and beyond. Within a short time around 1200 BC, all the
palace complexes of southern Greece were burned, including
that at Mycenae. This was traditionally attributed by
scholars to a Dorian
invasion
of Greeks from the north, although many historians now
doubt that this invasion caused the destruction of the
Mycenaean centres. Displaced populations escaped to former
colonies of the Mycenaeans in Anatolia and elsewhere,
where they came to speak the Ionic dialect.
Emily
Vermeule
suggests that the disruption of commercial networks at the
end of the 13th century BC, was disastrous for Greece and
this was followed by the coming of the mysterious "Sea
Peoples",
who caused chaos in the Aegean.[14] According to Egyptian
records, the "Sea Peoples" destroyed the Hittite Empire then attacked the 19th
and the 20th dynasties of Egypt, (circa 1300–1164). They
may be related with the destruction of the Mycenaean
centers (the records of Pylos
mention sea-attack). However at the end of LHIIIB period,
the Mycenaeans undertook an expedition against Troy, which
meant that the sea was safe with no indication of
destruction in the Aegean islands.[15]
Another
theory
has drought as the primary cause
behind the Mycenaean decline, but there is no
climatological evidence to support this. Manolis
Andronikos claimed that internal
conflicts involving social revolutions were the sole cause
behind the destruction of Mycenaean sites,[16] but this is contradicted
by the fact that all the Mycenaean centers throughout
Greece were destroyed almost simultaneously.[17]George
E.
Mylonas
noticed that after 1200 BC, some attempt was made for
recovery in Mycenae. He believes that in the Argolid there
was internal fighting, and this was followed by the Dorian
invasion. It seems that the Dorians moved southward
gradually in small clans, until they managed to establish
themselves.[18]
Amos
Nur argues that earthquakes played a major role in the
destruction of Mycenae and many other cities at the end of
the Bronze Age.[19]
However, no conclusive evidence has been brought forward
to confirm any theory of why the Mycenaean citadel and
others throughout Greece fell almost simultaneously at
this time.
Whatever
the cause, by the LHIIIC period (whose latest phase is
also termed "Submycenaean"), Mycenae was no longer a major
power. Pottery and decorative styles were changing rapidly
with craftsmanship and fine art undergoing a decline.
Although settlements were significantly reduced in size,
the citadel remained occupied but never regained its
earlier importance.
Archaic
and Classical Periods
A
temple dedicated to Hera was built on the summit of the
Mycenaean citadel during the Archaic Period. A Mycenaean
contingent fought at Thermopylae and Plataea during the Persian Wars. In 468 BC, however,
troops from Argos
captured Mycenae, expelled the inhabitants and slighted
the fortifications.[20]
Revival
and Abandonment
Mycenae
was briefly reoccupied in the Hellenistic period, when it could
boast a theatre (located over the Tomb of Clytemnestra).
The site was subsequently abandoned, and by the Roman period in Greece its
ruins had become a tourist attraction. The ancient
travel writer Pausanias, for example, visited
the site and briefly described the prominent
fortifications and the Lion Gate, still visible in his
time.[21]
Political
organization
It
appears that the Mycenaean state was ruled by kings
identified by the title wa-na-ka ("wanax') in the
Linear B inscriptions at Knossos and Pylos.
In the Homeric poems, the word form is
anax
(ἄναξ), often translated in English as "lord". Some
inscriptions with a list of offerings indicate that the
king was probably divine, but the term "for the king" is
usually accompanied by another name.[22]
It is doubtful that the wanax was responsible for
religious matters, but probably his title indicates that
his right to rule was given by the god.[23]
The term 𐀣𐀯𐀩𐀄, qa-si-re-u (cf.
βασιλεύς, "basileús"), which was later used
in Greece for "king", was apparently used for the "chief"
of any group of people, or for a provincial official.
(Homer mentions many basilees in Ithaca).[22]
The
land possessed by the king is usually called 𐀳𐀕𐀜, te-me-no
(τέμενος, "témenos"), a word that survived
in classical Greece (the temenos placed by Hephaestus on the shield of
Achilles is called "royal").[23] Other important
landowners were the 𐀨𐀷𐀐𐀲, ra-wa-ke-ta
("lāwāgetas"), the leader of the people, and the 𐀳𐀩𐀲, te-re-ta
("telestai"), the officials. Lawagetas is placed
next to the king and he could be the leader of the army,
but this is not confirmed by the inscriptions.[22]Leonard Robert
Palmer suggests that the
"telestai were the men of telos- the fief holders".[23]
The 𐀁𐀤𐀲, e-qe-ta (equetai, "companions"
or "followers") were a group of nobles (aristocrats), who
followed the king in peace and war. There is also at least
one instance of a person, Enkhelyawon at Pylos, who appears
titleless in the written record but whom modern scholars
regard as being probably a king.[24]
From
the existing evidence, it seems that the kingdom was
further subdivided into sixteen districts. The 𐀒𐀩𐀮, ko-re-te
was the "governor of the district" and the 𐀡𐀫𐀒𐀩𐀮, po-ro-ko-re-te
was the "deputy". It is possible that the real names were
koreter and prokoreter. The 𐀅𐀗𐀒𐀫, da-mo-ko-ro
(damokoros) was an official appointment but his
duties are not very clear. The communal land was held at
the hands of 𐀅𐀗, da-mo (literally, "people", cf.
δῆμος, dễmos), or
"plot holders". It seems that "damo" was a collective body
of men, representing the local district.[22] It is suggested that qa-si-re-u
had a council of elders, a 𐀐𐀫𐀯𐀊, ke-ro-si-ja,
(later "γερουσία", gerousia), but Palmer believes that it
was an organization of "bronze smiths".[23]
Much
of the Mycenaean religion survived into classical
Greece in their pantheon of Greek deities, but it is not known to
what extent Greek religious belief is Mycenaean, nor how
much is a product of the Greek Dark
Ages or later. Moses I.
Finley detected only few
authentic Mycenaean beliefs in the 8th-century Homeric world,[25]
but Nilsson suggested that the
Mycenean religion was the mother of the Greek
religion.[26]
Through oral tradition, Homer transferred the beliefs
during the Dark Ages, but he kept in memory the
confederacy of the Greeks under the powerful king of
Mycenae.[27] when gods walked along
friendly with men, and the "Heroic Age" when great heroes
dominated the scene. The belief in gods as embodiments of
power, the heroic outlook inherited from a distant past
together with the local chthonic cults, were later fitted
into the frame of the city-states.
From
the history traced by Nilsson and Guthrie, the Mycenaean pantheon
consisted of Minoan deities, but also of
gods and goddesses who appear under different names with
similar functions in East and West.[28]
Many of these names appearing in the Linear B inscriptions can be
found later in classical Greece like Zeus, Hera,
Poseidon, Athena, Hermes, Eileithyia and Dionysos,[29]
but the etymology is the only evidence of the cults.
There
are several reasonable guesses that can be made, however.
It seems that originally the Mycenaeans, like many Indo-Europeans, considered divine any
object that inherited an internal power (anima). Certain religious
beliefs were mixed with the beliefs of the local
populations as it appears in the old cults of isolated Arcadia, which survived up to
classical Greece. In these cults, Poseidon appears usually as a
horse, representing the river spirit of the underworld as
it usually happens in northern-European folklore. The precursor
goddesses of Demeter and Persephone are closely related with
the springs and the animals, and especially with Poseidon
and Artemis who was the first nymph.[30]
Mycenaean religion was almost certainly polytheistic, and
the Mycenaeans were actively syncretistic, adding foreign
deities to their pantheon of deities with considerable
ease. The Mycenaeans probably entered Greece with a
pantheon of deities headed by some ruling sky-deity, which
linguists speculate might have been called *Dyeus
in early Indo-European. In Greek, this deity
would become Zeus
(pronounced Zeus or Dias in ancient
Greek).
Among the Hindus, this sky-deity becomes
"Dyaus Pita". In Latin he becomes
"deus pater" or Jupiter; we still encounter this
word in the etymologies of the words "deity" and "divine".
Later
in some cults, Zeus is united with the AegeanGreat Goddess, who is represented by Hera
in a "holy wedding" (hieros gamos). At some point
in their cultural history, the Mycenaeans adopted some Minoan goddesses like Aphaea, Britomartis, Diktynna and associated them with
their sky-god.[28]
Many of them were absorbed by more powerful divinities,
and some like the vegetation
goddessesAriadne and Helen survived in Greek
folklore together with the cult of the "divine child", who
was probably the precursor of Dionysos.[31]Athena and Hera
survived and were tutelary goddesses, the guardians of the
palaces and the cities. In general, later Greek religion
distinguishes between two types of deities: the Olympian, or sky deities
(including Zeus), which are now commonly known in some
form or another; and, the chthonic deities, or deities of
the earth. Walter Burkert warns: "To what extent
one can and must differentiate between Minoan and
Mycenaean religion is a question which has not yet found a
conclusive answer."[32]
He suggests that useful parallels will be found in the
relations between Etruscan and Archaic Greek culture and
religion, or between Roman and Hellenistic culture.
The
pantheon also included deities representing the powers of
nature and wildlife, who appear with similar functions in
the Mediterranean region.[28]
The "Mistress of the Animals" (Potnia
Theron), later called Artemis, may be identified as
the Minoan goddess Britomartis/Dictynna.[33]Poseidon is the lord of the sea,
and therefore of storms and earthquakes, (the "Earth
shaker" in Linear B tablets). He may have
functioned as a pre-Hellenic chthonic Zeus, the lord or
spouse of the Earth goddess.[34]Athena whose task was to
protect the olive-trees is a civic Artemis. The powers of
animal nature fostered a belief in nymphs whose existence was
bound to the trees and the waters, and in gods with human
forms and the heads or tails of animals who stood for
primitive bodily instincts. In Arcadia were depicted
animal-headed gods, indicating than in the remote past the
gods were conceived as animals and birds, in a surrounding
of animal-headed daemons.[30]
Later the gods were revealed in human forms with an animal
as a companion or symbol. Some of the old gods survived in
the cult of Dionysos (Satyrs) and Pan (the goat-god).
The
Mycenaeans adopted probably from the east a priest-king
system and the belief of a ruling deity in the hands of a
theocratic society. At the end of the second millennium
BC, when the Mycenaean palaces collapsed, it seems that
Greek thought was gradually released from the idea that
each man was a servant to the gods, and sought a "moral
purpose". It is possible that this procedure started
before the end of the Mycenaean age, but the idea is
almost absent or vague in the Homeric poems, where the
interference of the gods is not related to the rightness
or wrongness of men's actions.[28]
Later, Hesiod uses a lot of eastern
material in his cosmology and in the genealogical
trees of the gods,[35]
and he introduces the idea of the existence of something
else behind the gods, which was more powerful than they.[36]
This is the powerful Fate (Moira), who in the Homeric poems is acting in
parallel with the gods and predestinates the events.[37] Hesiod complies to the
Greek desire of an order in the universe, and tries to
bring the gods under a rule comparable to the rule which
controls the lives of men. In Greek mythology this power is named Ananke (necessity).[38]
The Olympian
Pantheon is an ordered system.
The Greek divinities live with Zeus at the helm and each
is concerned with a recognizable sphere. However, certain
elements in some Greek cults indicate the survival of some
older cults from a less rationalized world: old cults of
the dead, agrarian magic, exorcism of evil spirits,
peculiar sacrifices, and animal-headed gods. In the
Homeric poems, the avenging Fate was probably originally
a daemon acting in parallel with
the gods.[37]
Later, the cult of DionysosZagreus indicates that
life-blood of animals was needed to renew that of men.[39] A similar belief may be
guessed from the MycenaeanHagia
Triada
sarcophagus
(1400 BC), which combines features of Minoan
civilization and Mycenaean style. It seems that the
blood of a bull was used for the regeneration of the
reappearing dead.[40]
Probably most of these cults existed in the Mycenaean
period and survived by immemorial practice.
A
secondary level of importance was the cult of the heroes,
which seems to have started in the Mycenaean era. These
were great men of the past who were exalted to honor after
death, because of what they had done. According to an old
Minoan belief, beyond the sea
there was an island called Elysion, where the departed
could have a different but happier existence.[41] Later, the Greeks
believed that there could live in human form only heroes
and the beloved of the gods. The souls of the rest would
drift unconsciously in the gloomy space of Hades.
Gods and men had common origins, but there was an enormous
gap between the immortal gods and mortal men. However,
certain elements indicate that the Myceneans probably believed in a
future existence. Two well-preserved bodies were found in
Shaft Grave VI, and Wolfgang
Helbig believed that an
embalming preceded the burial.[42] In the shaft graves
discovered by Heinrich
Schliemann, the corpses were
lightly exposed to fire in order to preserve them.[43]
Mycenaean
religion certainly involved
offerings and sacrifices to the deities, and some have
speculated that their ceremonies involved human sacrifice
based on textual evidence and bones found outside tombs.
In the Homeric poems, there seems to be a lingering
cultural memory of human sacrifice in King Agamemnon's sacrifice of his
daughter, Iphigenia; several of the stories
of Trojan heroes involve tragic human sacrifice. In the
far past, even human beings might be offered to placate
inscrutable gods, especially in times of guilty fear.
Later sacrifice became a feast at which oxen were
slaughtered. Men kept the meat, and gave the gods the
bones wrapped in fat.[44]
Beyond
this speculation we can go no further. Somewhere in the
shades of the centuries between the fall of the Mycenaean civilization and the end
of the Greek Dark Ages, the original Mycenaean religion
persisted and adapted until it finally emerged in the
stories of human devotion, apostasy, and divine
capriciousness that exists in the two great epic poems of
Homer.
It was the beginning of the religion which later the
Greeks considered Hellenic, and embodies a paradox.
Though the world is dominated by a divine power that the
gods bestow in different ways on men, nothing but
"darkness" lay ahead and life was sometimes frail and
unsubstantial.[45]
Mycenae
in Greek mythology and legends
Perseid
dynasty
Classical
Greek
myths assert that Mycenae was founded by Perseus, grandson of king Acrisius of Argos,
son of Acrisius's daughter, Danaë and the god Zeus.
Having killed his grandfather by accident, Perseus could
not, or would not, inherit the throne of Argos. Instead he
arranged an exchange of realms with his cousin, Megapenthes, and became king of Tiryns, Megapenthes taking
Argos. From there, he founded Mycenae and ruled the
kingdoms jointly from Mycenae.
Perseus
married
Andromeda and had many sons, but
in the course of time, went to war with Argos and was
slain by Megapenthes. His son, Electryon, became the second of
the dynasty, but the succession was disputed by the Taphians under Pterelaos, another Perseid, who
assaulted Mycenae, lost, and retreated with the cattle.
The cattle were recovered by Amphitryon, a grandson of Perseus,
but he killed his uncle by accident with a club in an
unruly cattle incident and had to go into exile.
The
throne went to Sthenelus, third in the dynasty, a
son of Perseus. He set the stage for future greatness by
marrying Nicippe, a daughter of King Pelops of Elis,
the most powerful state of the region and the times. With
her he had a son, Eurystheus, the fourth and last of
the Perseid dynasty. When a son of Heracles, Hyllus, killed Sthenelus,
Eurystheus became noted for his enmity to Heracles and for
his ruthless persecution of the Heracleidae, the descendants of
Heracles.
This
is the first we hear in legend of those noted sons, who
became a symbol of the Dorians. Heracles had been a
Perseid. After his death, Eurystheus determined to
annihilate these rivals for the throne of Mycenae, but
they took refuge in Athens, and in the course of war,
Eurystheus and all his sons were killed. The Perseid
dynasty came to an end and the people of Mycenae placed
Eurystheus's maternal uncle, Atreus, a Pelopid, on the
throne.
Atreid
dynasty
The
people of Mycenae had received advice from an oracle that they should choose
a new king from among the Pelopids. The two contenders
were Atreus and his brother, Thyestes. The latter was chosen
at first. At this moment nature intervened and the sun
appeared to reverse direction by setting in the east.
Atreus argued that because the sun had reversed its path,
the election of Thyestes should be reversed. The argument
was heeded, and Atreus became king. His first move was to
pursue Thyestes and all his family - that is, his own kin
- but Thyestes managed to escape from Mycenae
.
In
legend, Atreus had two sons, Agamemnon and Menelaus, the Atreids. Aegisthus, the son of Thyestes,
killed Atreus and restored Thyestes to the throne. With
the help of King Tyndareus of Sparta, the Atreids drove
Thyestes again into exile. Tyndareus had two ill-starred
daughters, Helen and Clytemnestra, whom Menelaus and
Agamemnon married, respectively. Agamemnon inherited
Mycenae and Menelaus became king of Sparta.
Soon,
Helen eloped with Paris of Troy.
Agamemnon conducted a 10-year war against Troy to get her
back for his brother. Because of lack of wind, the
warships could not sail to Troy.
In order to please the gods so that they might make the
winds start to blow, Agamemnon sacrificed his daughter
Iphigenia. According to some
versions of the legend, the hunting goddess Artemis replaced her at the very
last moment with a deer
on the altar, and took Iphigenia to Tauris (see Iphigenia
by Euripides). The deities, having
been satisfied by such a sacrifice, made the winds blow
and the Greek fleet departed.
Legend
tells us that the long and arduous Trojan War, although
nominally a Greek victory, brought anarchy, piracy, and
ruin; already before the Greek fleet set sail for Troy,
the conflict had divided the gods as well, and this
contributed to curses and acts of vengeance following many
of the Greek heroes. After the war, Agamemnon, returning, was greeted
royally with a red carpet rolled out for him and then was
slain in his bathtub by Clytemnestra, who hated him bitterly
for having ordered the sacrifice of their daughter Iphigenia (although the life of
the latter had been saved). Clytemnestra was aided in her
crime by Aegistheus, who reigned subsequently, but Orestes, son of Agamemnon, was
smuggled out to Phocis. He returned as an adult
to slay Clytemnestra and Aegistheus. He then fled to
Athens to evade justice and a matricide, and became insane
for a time. Meanwhile, the throne of Mycenae went to Aletes, son of Aegistheus, but
not for long. Recovering, Orestes returned to Mycenae to
kill him and take the throne.
Orestes
then built a larger state in the Peloponnese, but he died
in Arcadia from a snake
bite. His son, Tisamenus, the last of the Atreid
dynasty, was killed by the Heracleidae on their return to the Peloponnesus. They claimed the right
of the Perseids to inherit the various kingdoms of the
Peloponnese and cast lots for the dominion of them.
Whatever the historical realities reflected in these
stories, the Atreids are firmly set in the epoch near the
end of the Heroic Age, leading up to the arrival of the
Dorians. There are no established stories of a royal house
at Mycenae later than the Atreids, and this could reflect
the fact that not much more than fifty or sixty years seem
to have separated the fall of Troy VIIa (the likely
inspiration of Homeric Troy) and the fall of Mycenae.
Atreids in Asia Minor
On
March 5, 1223 BC, there was a total eclipse of the sun in
the Aegean, which Atreus might have
twisted into a setting of the sun in the east. However,
this date does not solve all unknowns.
A late
date is implied for the Trojan
War,
which would, in that case, have been against Troy
VIIa after all. The Perseids would have been in power
circa 1380 BC, the date of a statue base from Kom
el-Heitan in Egypt recording the itinerary of an Egyptian
embassy to the Aegean in the time of Amenhotep III (r. 1391–1353 BC or
1388–1351 BC). M-w-k-i-n-u (phonetic "Mukanuh"?)
was one of the cities visited, a rare early document of
the name of Mycenae. It was one of the cities of the tj-n3-jj
("Tinay"?),[46] The Homeric Danaans were named, in myth,
after Danaë, which suggests that the
Perseids were in fact in some sort of dominion.
Also
in the 14th century BC, Ahhiya began to be troublesome to
numerous kings of the Hittite Empire. Ahhiyawa or Ahhiya,
which occurs a few dozen times in Hittite tablets over the century, is
probably Achaiwia, reconstructed Mycenaean Greek for Achaea. The Hittites did not
use "Danaja" as did the Egyptians, even though the first
Ahhiya reference in the "Indictment of Madduwatta"[47]
precedes the correspondence between Amenhotep III and one of Madduwatta's subsequent successors
in Arzawa, Tarhunta-Radu. The
external LHIIIA:1-era sources do, however, agree in their
omission of a great king or other unifying structure
behind Ahhiya and the Tinay.
For
example, in the "Indictment of Madduwatta", Attarsiya, the "ruler of Ahhiya",
attacks Madduwatta and drives him from his land. He
obtains refuge and military assistance from the King
Tudhaliya of the Hittites.[47]
After the death of the latter and in the reign of his son,
Arnuwanda, Madduwatta allies with Attarissiya and they,
along with another ruler, raid Alasiya, that is, Cyprus.[48]
This
is the only known occurrence of a man named Attarissiya.
Attempts to link this name to Atreus have not
found wide support, nor is there any evidence of a
powerful Pelopid named Atreus of those times.
During
LHIIIA:2, Ahhiya, now known as Ahhiyawa, extended
its influence over Miletus, settling on the coast
of Anatolia, and competed with the
Hittites for influence and control in western Anatolia. For instance,
Uhha-Ziti's Arzawa and through him Manapa-Tarhunta's Seha River Land. While
establishing the credibility of the Mycenaean Greeks as a
historical power, these documents create as many problems
as they solve.
Similarly,
a Hittite king wrote the so-called Tawagalawa
Letter to the Great King of
Ahhiyawa, concerning the depredations of the Luwiyan
adventurer Piyama-Radu. Neither of the names of
the great kings are stated; the Hittite king could be
either Muwatalli II or his brother Hattusili III, which at least dates
the letter to LHIIIB by Mycenaean standards. But neither
the Atreus nor the Agamemnon of legend have any brothers
named *Etewoclewes (Eteocles); this name, rather, is
associated with Thebes, which during the preceding LHIIIA
period Amenhotep III had viewed as equal to Mycenae.
Excavation
The
first excavations at Mycenae were carried out by Greek
archaeologist Kyriakos
Pittakis in 1841 where he found
and restored the Lion Gate.[49] In 1874, Heinrich
Schliemann excavated deep shafts
all over the acropolis without permission; in August 1876,
a complete excavation of the site by Schliemann commenced
with the permission of the Archaeological Society of
Athens (ASA) and the supervision of one of its members,
Panayiotis Stamatakis.[49]
Schliemann believed in the historical truth of the Homeric
stories and interpreted the site accordingly. He found the
ancient shaft graves with their royal skeletons and spectacular grave
goods. Upon discovering a human skull beneath a golddeath mask in one of the tombs, he
declared: "I have gazed upon the face of
Agamemnon".[50]Christos
Tsountas, another member of the
ASA, cleared a significant portion of the citadel during
his excavations of the site beginning in 1884 and ending
in 1902.[49] Afterwards, Tsountas and
the ASA gave permission to the British School of
Archaeology (BSA) to excavate; the BSA conducted
excavations from 1920 to 1955 under the supervision of Alan John
Bayard Wace.[49]
After Wace died in 1957, excavation work was finished by
Lord William Taylor from 1958 to 1969, especially on the
west slope of the citadel.[49]
The ASA continued excavation work on the site with efforts
led by Ioannis Papadimitriou and Nicolas Verdelis in the
late 1950s and early 1960s, as well as by George Mylonas
from 1957 up until 1985.[49]
In 1985, excavation work was directed by Spyros Iakovidis
who, as of 2009, is still overseeing the ASA's research
mission in both fieldwork and publication preparation.[49]
Since
Schliemann's day, more scientific excavations have taken
place at Mycenae, mainly by Greek archaeologists but also
by the British
School
at Athens.
The acropolis was excavated in 1902, and the surrounding
hills have been methodically investigated by subsequent
excavations. The Athens
Archaeological
Society
is currently excavating the Mycenae Lower Town (as of
2011), with support from Dickinson
College and the Institute for
Aegean Prehistory.[51]
1. ^Chew 2000, p. 220; Chapman
2005, p. 94:
"...Thebes at 50 hectares, Mycenae at 32 hectares..."
2. ^Beekes 2009, p. 29 (s.v.
"Ἀθήνη").
3. ^Chadwick 1976, p. 1. Although
Chadwick states that the name "Mycenae" is derived from a
previously unknown language(s) spoken in Greece, he admits
that his supposition of a Greek language outside of Greece
is "a hypothesis for which there is no evidence."
11. ^
An older view that it represents a goddess, now generally
discounted, is to be found in W.K.C. Guthrie, in The
Cambridge Ancient History (1975) Volume I, Part II,
p. 864: "A frequent design on engraved Cretan gems is of the type made
famous by the Lion Gate at Mycenae, a single upright
pillar, flanked by a pair of guardian animals. Sometimes
the same arrangement is preserved, but the anthropomorphic
figure of a god or goddess takes the place of a pillar"
(illustrations from Nilsson). More recent discussions of
its symbolism can be found in James C. Wright, "The
Spatial Configuration of Belief: The Archaeology of
Mycenaean Religion" in S.E. Alcock and Robin Osborne
(eds.), Placing the Gods, Oxford University Press,
1996, pp. 37–78. Here Wright suggests that the pillar
represents the palace which in turn represents the state.
12. ^Castleden 2005, pp. 95–96; French 2002;
Luce 1975, p. 35: "The Lion Gate
provides further testimony to the power of the Pelopids,
for Mylonas appears to have shown conclusively that it
dates from c. 1250. With the stretch of Cyclopean wall
enclosing Grave Circle A it represents the climax of
military and monumental construction."
13. ^Scarre 1999.
14. ^Vermeule 1960, p. 67.
15. ^Mylonas 1966, pp. 230–231.
16. ^Andronikos 1954, pp. 221–240.
17. ^Desborough 1975, pp. 658–677.
18. ^Mylonas 1966, p. 232.
19. ^Nur 2008,
Chapter 8: Earthquake Storms and the Catastrophic End of
the Bronze Age, pp. 224–245.
20. ^French 2002, p. 142: "The
dedications continue at the Shrine by the Bridge into the
fifth century, probably beyond the disablement of the
walls by the Argives in 468 BC."
27. ^Page 1976, "IV: The Homeric
Description of Mycenaean Greece", pp. 118–177 (see
especially pp. 122–123).
28.^
to: abcdDietrich
1973, pp. 65–66.
29. ^
Paul, Adams John (10 January 2010). "Mycenaean
Divinities". Northridge, CA:
California State University. Retrieved 24 January 2014.
30.^
to: abNilsson
1967, Volume I, pp.
479–480.
31. ^Kerényi 1976, pp. 110–114; Nilsson 1967,
Volume I, pp. 315–319. The child dies every year in order
to be reborn. In the Minoan myth it is abandoned by
his mother, and then brought up by the powers of nature.
Similar myths are found in the cults of Hyakinthos (Amyklai), Erichthonios (Athens), Ploutos (Eleusis), and in the cult of Dionysos.
32. ^Burkert 1987, p. 21.
33. ^Hornblower,
Spawforth & Eidinow 2012, "Artemis", pp.
175–176.
34. ^
Poseidon is pairing with the "Two Goddesses" (Demeter and Persephone) in Linear B tablets.
There is a theory linking his name with elements meaning
"husband" or "lord" (Greek πόσις (posis), from PIE*pótis) and another element meaning "earth" (δᾶ
(da), Doric for γῆ (gē)), producing something like lord or
spouse of Da, i.e. of the earth. His name may also be
interpreted as "lord of the waters" (from PIE*potis and Sanskr. daFon: "water").
35. ^Walcot 1966, p. 85f.; Jeffrey 1976,
p. 38; M.L. West (Early Greek Philosophy and the
Orient, 1971, p. 205) holds that such eastern
material is more likely to be lingering traces from the
Mycenaean tradition than the result of Oriental contacts
in Hesiod's own time.
36. ^Hesiod. Theogony, Lines
216–224:
"Also she bore the Destinies and ruthless avenging Fates,
Clotho and Lachesis and Atropos, who give men at their
birth both evil and good to have, and they pursue the
transgressions of men and of gods: and these goddesses
never cease from their dread anger until they punish the
sinner with a sore penalty."
37.^
to: abNilsson
1967, Volume I, p.
368: "Moira is not a god, because otherwise the will of
the god would be predestinated. Compare Kismet in Muslim religion."
45. ^Pindar. Pythionikos,
VIII.95–7: "Man's life is a day. What is he, what is he
not? A shadow in a dream is man, but when God sheds a
brightness, shining light is on earth and life is sweet as
honey."
·Chew,
Sing C. (2000). "Neglecting Nature: World Accumulation and
Core-Periphery Relations, 2500 BC to AD 1990". In
Denemark, Robert A. World-System
History: The Social Science of Long-Term Change.
London and New York: Routledge. pp. 216–234.
·Desborough,
V.
(1975). "The End of Myceanean Civilization and the Dark
Ages: The Archaeological Background". In Edwards, I.E.S.;
Gadd, C.J.; Hammond, N.G.L. et al. The Cambridge
Ancient History II (2). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. pp. 658–677.
·Schliemann,
Heinrich
(1878). Mykena (in German). Leipzig.
·Shelton,
Kim S. (2010). "Living and Dying in and Around Middle
Helladic Mycenae". In Philippa-Touchais, Anna; Touchais,
Gilles; Voutsaki, Sofia et al. MESOHELLADIKA: The
Greek Mainland in the Middle Bronze Age (Bulletin de
Correspondance Hellénique: Supplément, Volume 52).
Athens: École française d’Athènes. pp. 57–65. ISBN978-2-86958-210-1.
·Velikovsky,
Immanuel
(1999). The
Dark
Age of Greece.
Shulamit V. Kogan & Ruth V. Sharon.
·Vermeule,
Emily Townsend (March 1960). "The Fall of the Mycenaean
Empire". Archaeology (Archaeological Institute of
America) 13
(1): 66–76. doi:10.2307/41663738
(inactive 2015-02-01).
·Palmer,
Leonard
R. (1965) [1961]. Mycenaeans and Minoans: Aegean
Prehistory in the Light of the Linear B Tablets. Part I:
Pylos and the World of the Tablets. Part II: Knossos and
Aegean History (2nd ed.). London: Faber and Faber.
Grave Circle A
in Mycenae is a 16th-century
BC royal cemetery situated to the south of the Lion
Gate,
the main entrance of the Bronze
Age
citadel of Mycenae, southern Greece.[1]
This burial complex was initially constructed
outside the fortification walls of Mycenae, but was
ultimately enclosed in the acropolis when the
fortifications were extended during the 13th century
BC.[1] Grave Circle A and
Grave
Circle
B,
the latter found outside the walls of Mycenae,
represent one of the major characteristics of the
early phase of the Mycenaean
civilization.[2]
The
circle has a diameter of 27.5 m (90 ft)
and contains six shaft
graves, where a total of
nineteen bodies were buried. It has been suggested
that a mound was constructed over each grave, and
funeral stelae were erected.
Among the objects found were a series of gold death
masks,
additionally beside the deceased were full sets of
weapons, ornate staffs as well as gold and silver
cups. The site was excavated by the archaeologist Heinrich
Schliemann in 1876, following
the descriptions of Homer
and Pausanias. One of the gold
masks he unearthed became known as the "The
Death Mask of Agamemnon", ruler of Mycenae
according to Greek
mythology. However, it has
been proved that the burials date circa three
centuries earlier, before Agamemnon is supposed to
have lived.
Contents
1
Background
2 History
3 Findings
4 Excavations
5 Historical
inferences
6 See also
7 References
7.1 Citations
7.2 Sources
8 Further reading
Background
During
the end of the 3rd millennium BC (circa 2200 BC),
the indigenous inhabitants of mainland Greece
underwent a cultural transformation attributed to
climate change, local events and developments (i.e.
destruction of the "House of Tiles"), as well as to
continuous contacts with various areas such as
western Asia
Minor,
the Cyclades, Albania, and Dalmatia.[3]
These Bronze Age people were equipped with horses,
surrounded themselves with luxury goods, and
constructed elaborate shaft
graves.[4]
The acropolis of Mycenae, one of the main centers of
Mycenaean
culture, located in Argolis, northeast Peloponnese, was built on a
defensive hill at an elevation of 128 m
(420 ft) and covers an area of 30,000 m2
(320,000 sq ft).[1] The Shaft Graves
found in Mycenae signified the elevation of a new
Greek-speaking royal dynasty whose economic power
depended on long-distance sea trade.[5]
Grave Circles A and B, the latter found outside the
walls of Mycenae, represent one of the major
characteristics of the early phase of the Mycenaean
civilization.[2]
History
Mycenaean
shaft
graves are essentially an Argive variant of the
rudimentary Middle
Helladic funerary tradition
with features derived from Early Bronze Age
traditions developed locally in mainland Greece.[6]
Grave Circle A, formed circa 1600 BC as a new elite
burial place, was probably first restricted to men
and seems to be a continuation of the earlier Grave
Circle
B
and correlates with the general social trend of
higher burial investment taking place throughout
entire Greece that time.[7]
The Grave Circle A site was part of a larger funeral
place from the Middle Helladic period. At the time
it was built, during the Late
Helladic I (1600 BC),[2]
there was probably a small unfortified palace on
Mycenae,[8]
while the graves of the Mycenaean ruling family
remained outside of the city walls.[9]
There is no evidence of a circular wall around the
site during the period of the burials.[10] The last interment
took place circa 1500 BC.[11]
Immediately
after
the last interment, the local rulers abandoned the
shaft graves in favour of a new and more imposing
form of tomb already developing in Messenia, south Peloponessus, the tholos.[12]
Around 1250 BC, when the fortifications of Mycenae
were extended, the Grave Circle was included inside
the new wall. A double ring peribolos wall was also
built around the area.[13]
It appears that the site became a temenos (sacred precinct),
while a circular construction, possibly an altar was
found above one grave.[14]
The burial site had been replanned as a monument, an
attempt by the 13th century BC Mycenean rulers to
appropriate the possible heroic past of the older
ruling dynasty.[15] Under this
context, the land surface was built up to make a
level precinct for ceremonies, with the stelae over
the graves being re-erected. A new entrance, the Lion
Gate, was constructed
near the site.[11]
Findings
Grave
Circle A, with a diameter of 27.5 m
(90 ft), is situated on the acropolis of
Mycenae southeast of the Lion Gate. The site is
surrounded by two rows of slabs, while the space
between the rows was filled with earth and roofed
with slabs. The Grave Circle contains six shaft
graves, the smallest of
which is measured at 3.0 m by 3.5 m and the largest
measured at 4.50 m by 6.40 m (the depth of each
shaft grave ranges from 1.0 m to 4.0 m). Over each
grave a mound was constructed and stelae
were erected.[16] These stelae had
been probably erected in memory of the Mycenaean
rulers buried there; three of them depict chariot scenes.[2]
A
total of nineteen bodies – eight men, nine women and
two children[10]
– were found in the shafts, which contained two to
five bodies each (with the exception of Grave II,
which was a single burial).[2]
Among the findings, boars' tusks were found in Grave
IV, as well as five golden masks in Graves IV and V.
One of them, the supposed Mask of
Agamemnon, was found in
Grave V. Additionally, gold and silver cups,
including Nestor's
Cup and the Silver
Siege Rhyton, were found by the
side of the deceased. A number of gold rings,
buttons and bracelets were also found.[2]
Most of the graves were equipped with full sets of
weapons, especially swords,[17]
and the figural depictions of the objects show
fighting and hunting scenes.
Many
objects were designed to signify the social rank of
the deceased, for instance, decorated daggers, which
were objects
d'art and cannot be
considered real weapons. Ornate staffs as well as a
scepter from Grave IV
clearly indicate a very significant status of the
deceased.[18]
Items such as bulls' heads with a double
axe display clear Minoan influences.[19]
At the time that the Grave Circle was built, the
Mycenaeans had not yet conquered Minoan Crete.
Although it seems that they recognized the Minoans
as the providers of the finest in design and
craftsmanship, most of the objects decorated in
Minoan style and buried in Grave Circle A are not of
Minoan but of indigenous craftsmanship.[20] On the other hand,
certain motifs such as fighting and hunting scenes
are clearly of Mycenaean style.[21]
Excavations
The
site of Mycenae was the first in Greece to be
subjected to modern archaeological excavation.[22] It was excavated
by the German archaeologist Heinrich
Schliemann in 1876.[11]
Schliemann, inspired by Homer’s descriptions in
the Iliad,
in which Mycenae is termed "abounding in gold",
began digging there.[22]
He was also following the accounts of the ancient
geographer Pausanias who, during the
2nd century AD, described the once prosperous site
and mentioned that according to a local tradition,
the graves of Agamemnon and his followers,
including his charioteer Eurymedon and the two
children of Cassandra, were buried
within the citadel.[23]
What Schliemann discovered in his excavation
satisfied both his opinion of Homer's historical
accuracy and his craving for valuable treasures.
Among the objects he unearthed in Grave Circle A was
a series of gold death masks, including one he
proclaimed "The Death Mask of Agamemnon".[22]
Schliemann cleared five shafts and recognized them
as the graves mentioned by Pausanias. He stopped his
exploration after the fifth grave was explored,
believing that he had finished excavating the Grave
Circle, however a year later Panagiotis
Stamatakis
found a sixth shaft grave.[24]
It
has since been proven that the burials in Grave
Circle A date from 16th century BC, before the traditional
time
of the Trojan War
(13th-12th century BC), in which Agamemnon is
supposed to have participated.[22]
Historical
inferences
The
valuable objects found in the graves suggest that
powerful rulers were buried in this site. Although
Agamemnon was supposed to have lived centuries
later, these graves might have belonged to the
former ruling dynasty of Mycenae – according to
Greek mythology, the Perseides.[8]
In
the 2006 History
Channel
documentary, The
Exodus
Decoded,
it was suggested that some of the objects are
related to the events of the Exodus, the departure of
the Israelites from ancient
Egypt. It was argued
that the Tribe of
Dan is linked with the
Danaans of the Greek
mythology, though this view is not widely supported.[25]
5. ^Dickinson
1977, pp. 53, 107;
Anthony 2007,
p. 48: "The Mycenaean civilization appeared
rather suddenly with the construction of the
spectacular royal Shaft Graves at Mycenae, dated
about 1650 BCE, about the same time as the rise of
the Hittite empire in Anatolia. The Shaft Graves,
with their golden death masks, swords, spears, and
images of men in chariots, signified the elevation
of a new Greek-speaking dynasty of unprecedented
wealth whose economic power depended on
long-distance sea trade."
6. ^Dickinson
1999, pp. 103,
106–107.
7. ^Heitz 2008, p. 21.
8.^
abCastleden
2005,
p. 42.
9. ^Burns 2010, p. 80.
10.^abGates
2003,
p. 133.
11.^
t abcGeldard
2000,
p. 157.
12. ^Castleden
2005, p. 97.
13. ^Morris &
Powell 1997, John Bennet,
"Homer and the Bronze Age", p. 516.
14. ^Antonaccio
1995, p. 49.
15. ^Fields &
Spedaliere 2004, p. 25.
16. ^Komita 1982, pp. 59–60.
17. ^Graziadio
1991, pp. 403–440.
18. ^Graziadio
1991, p. 406.
19. ^Heitz 2008, p. 24.
20. ^Heitz 2008, p. 25.
21. ^Gates 2003, p. 134.
22.^
abcdSansone
2004, "Greece in
the Bronze Age", pp. 7–8.
·Hielte,
Maria (December 2004). "Sedentary versus Nomadic
Life-Styles: The 'Middle Helladic People' in
southern Balkan (late 3rd & first Half of the
2nd Millennium BC)". Acta Archaeologica75 (2):
27–94. doi:10.1111/j.0065-001X.2004.00012.x.
Grave Circle B
in Mycenae is a 17th–16th
century BC royal cemetery situated outside the late
Bronze
Age citadel of
Mycenae, southern Greece. This burial
complex was constructed outside the fortification
walls of Mycenae and together with Grave
Circle
A
represent one of the major characteristics of the
early phase of the Mycenaean
civilization.[2]
Contents
1 Structure
2 History
3 Findings
4 Excavations
5 Further research
6 References
7 Sources
Structure
Grave
Circle B, with a diameter of 28 m (92 ft),
is situated at a distance of 117 m
(384 ft) south of the Lion
Gate, the main entrance of Mycenae.[3]
The burial structure was enclosed by a circular
stone wall, 1.55 m (5 ft) thick and
1.20 m (4 ft) high.[1][4] The Circle hosts a total of 26
graves; 14 of which are shaft
graves and the rest simple cists.
A total of 24 persons were found in the shafts,[1][4] while six of the shaft graves
were family tombs in which several occupants were
found.[1]
Most
shafts were marked by a pile of stones and on four
of them stelae
were erected. The latter were up to 2 m
(7 ft) high.[1] Two of the stelae, on graves
Alpha and Gamma, were engraved with hunting scenes.[5]
History
Mycenaean
shaft
graves are essentially an Argive variant of the
rudimentary Middle
Helladic funerary tradition
with features derived from Early Bronze Age
traditions developed locally in mainland Greece.[6]
During the first phase of use of the Grave Circle,
the interments were typical of the burials of that
period; they were small and shallow with small and
poor goods found next to the deceased.[7]
The graves became gradually larger, richer and more
numerous in goods, while female burials were also
introduced.[7] Moreover, diadems were found in both
sexes and in all the age groups buried. The number
of ornaments was also considerably increased and
especially associated with female burials. An
additional new feature was that half of the graves,
regardless of the sex of the deceased, were equipped
with imports from the nearby Cyclades islands.[7]
The number of imports continues to grow steadily in
the early Late Helladic period (ca. 1600–1550 BCE),
while the first objects of Cretan
origin make also their appearance.[8]
At
its latest phase of use, more women than men are
buried in the Circle, while the male burials appear
to be relatively poor compared to the female ones.[7]
Male burials are associated with sets of tableware,
usually drinking vessels and their military force is
stressed by weapons of various types.[7]
This points to the emergence of an elite warrior
class in Mycenaean society.[7]
Meanwhile,
Grave
Circle
A,
a new elite burial place of similar architecture was
found nearby, which seems to be a continuation
Circle B.[9] Thus, the latest
graves of Circle B (Alpha, Gamma, Delta, Epsilon and
Omikron) were contemporary with the earliest of
Circle A.[10]
Findings
The
graves were not looted in antiquity as happened to
other monuments such as the latter (15th–12th
century BCE) Mycenaean tholoi tombs.[11]
The women in the graves were richly dressed and
decorated with various ornaments,[10]
such as earrings, necklaces, bands of gold and
silver pins. On the other hand, swords, daggers and
arrowheads were found next to the deceased males and
their clothing was trimmed with gold.[7][10] In grave Nu,
traces of a boar's
tusk helmet, typical of
Mycenaean warfare, were recovered.[1][5]
A
death mask of electrum has been also unearthed.
However, it wasn't found on the face of the deceased
male, but in a wooden box next to him.[12]
On the other hand, the burial costumes differed from
those of Grave Circle A. The latter included death
masks of different artistic style and made of gold,
like the Mask
of
Agamemnon.[11]
Excavations
The
burial complex was discovered in 1951 by accident,
when workmen were digging at a nearby 13th century
BCE tholos
tomb, known as the Tomb
of Clytemnestra. Extensive
excavations were conducted by archaeologists Ioannis
Papadimitriou and Georgios
Mylonas in 1952 and lasted
for two years.[3]
Each shaft grave was assigned a letter from the
Greek alphabet, in order to be distinguished from
the graves of Circle A, which bear Latin numbers.[3]
This
group of 26 graves can be dated into the late Middle
Helladic through early Late Helladic period, in ca.
1675/1650-1550 BCE.[13][14]
Their exceptional number, as well as the fact that
they were not looted, enabled the archaeologists to
extract a detailed analysis of the ruling Mycenaean
society of that time.[15]
Further
research
The
remains of the deceased found in the Grave Circle
were generally in a good state of preservation and
have been since extensively examined. Many of the
males have signs of injury, probably received on the
battlefield,[12]
while some of them died in battle.[16]
Researchers
from
the University
of
Manchester
have carried an ancient
DNA
study of 22 skeletons found in the site and obtained
authentic mitochondrial ancient DNA sequences for
four individuals. The results were also compared
with facial reconstructions of the skulls and
archaeological data. They have also concluded that
two bodies from "Gama" shaft, where the electrum
death mask was found, were brother and sister. Based
on this, it has been argued that both female and
male family members, held a position of authority by
right of birth.[13][14]
References
1^
abcdefKershaw
2010, Chapter 2
– Mycenae: 'Rich in Gold' ("Shaft Graves and Tholos
Tombs").
The
shaft grave is the first Mycenaean grave type that appears
during the Late Helladic I period (1550-1500 BC). The most
typical examples of shaft graves are in the two Grave
Circles of Mycenae. Grave Circles A and B which are
considered as burial places of the regional chiefs. Grave
Circle B which is situated in the southwestern side of the
citadel is
the oldest one since its earliest graves date to the end
of the Middle Helladic period. The later Grave Circle A
was initially out of the citadel but later enclosed within
its wall as this was extended for protection.
The
shaft graves constitute probably an evolution of the
Middle Helladic cist grave, a type
which continues in the Late Helladic period as well. These
are deep pits of a parallelogrammic shape and were
destined for more than one burial, in contradiction to the
cist graves. Their roof was made of slabs placed on wooden
beams and was covered with clay while its great distance
from the ground created a small rectangular chamber. The
area above the roof, the latter being usually the surface
of the ground, was covered with earth. On the earth a
stone stele was implanted..
The
dead of the shaft graves were placed in a supine position,
their legs slightly bent, maybe in coffins as the remains
of wood indicate. They were dressed with valuable costumes
and adorned with jewellery and precious metals and rare
stones. Around them were sumptuous grave goods, weapons,
ceramic and metal vases and objects of everyday use which
reveal the high social status of the dead if not their
royalty. Among the grave goods are some of the most
fabulous examples of Mycenaean art as well as imported
objects or domestic ones made of imported materials,
indications of the international contacts of the
Mycenaeans.
The
grave goods of the shaft graves show the refined taste of
the Mycenaean leaders which seem to have been collectors
of the most elegant and masterly articles of that period.
Moreover, the grave goods reflect the personality of the
monarchs, which were no longer attached to the Helladic
customs but had adopted the tastes, customs and beliefs of
other people. Thus, a skeleton, probably of a woman which
has traces of embalmment - despite the isolated example -
brings the burial customs of the Mycenaeans close to the
beliefs of the Egyptians as far as life after death is
concerned.
In
contradiction to the Middle Helladic period
which lacked completely religious signs, during
the following period on mainland Greece religion
dominates over most social activities. The first
evidence of Mycenaean cult come from the shaft grave
period. The beliefs of this period are clearly
influenced by the religion and cultic ritual of
Minoan Crete. The religious parallels of these
two Aegean cultures are revealed by the presence
of the sacred symbols and similar cult objects.
During
the mature phases of the Mycenaean period (Late
Helladic III A-III C) the cult ritual acquires a
stereotype form. The decipherment of these
religious acts and their interpretation are now
supported by a number of iconographic
representations on frescoes,
seals
and gold rings. The interpretation of these
representations which are often codified at a
considerable extent is completed by the more
rich and clear Cretan iconography. But, the
influence of Minoan Crete concern mostly the
ritual of the cult and less the main religious
principals. Along with the cult of the Minoan
female goddess which is distinguished by the
intense eastern elements, the cult of other
female or male deities with names of
Indo-European origin is ascertained mainly by
written sources. The linguistic and
archaeological evidence reveal that in the
course of the Late Bronze Age the pantheon and
the main cult figures of classic Greece had
already been formed.
The
evidence on religious representations is
completed by fragmentary but clear texts
from the tablets of Pylos,
Knossos and Thebes. The relative texts concern
administrative matters of the religion, lists of
offerings to sanctuaries, the possessions and
duties of the priesthood. As in Minoan Crete,
the religious and political power appear
interdependent if not identical on the highest
level of the hierarchy.
The
absence of particular buildings devoted
exclusively to cult shows that the sacred
rituals usually took place in open spaces or in
peak sanctuaries. The sacred buildings which
occur in very few representations had the form
of a shrine of a
tripartite architectural design in the country.
The fact that Mycenaean shrines have been
discovered under temples of Antiquity
constitutes a clear indication that certain
places of cult of the Mycenaean period
maintained their religious property in later
periods as well.
Apart
from architecture, iconography and the written
texts, the Homeric epics are also used as
information sources on the Mycenaean religion
despite the fact that the evidence of Homer
comes mainly from later periods. The religious
traditions of Homer associate the Mycenaean cult
with the cult and burial customs of Classical
Greece and particularly with the cult of heroes.
The
depiction of an imposing female figure which is
often identified as the "Mother Goddess", the
most significant deity of Minoan Crete, occurs
frequently in Mycenaean iconography. The
presence of this deity on mainland Greece as
well as the identical way in which she is
depicted show that the cult of the Minoan
goddess of fertility was greatly approved by the
agricultural populations of Mycenaean Greece.
The various symbols that accompany the religious
representations show that the Mycenaeans, as the
Cretans, attribute many and various properties
to the Mother Goddess. The shields present her
as a war goddess while the animals and the birds
she holds in her hands make her the Potnia, that
is to say the goddess which was responsible for
the birth and death of the animals. One of the
most common emblems of the Mother Goddess was
the snake. However, she is never depicted as a
"snake goddess".
In
contradiction to this supreme female deity, the
Mycenaean art does not include illustrations of
male gods. This differentiates them from the god
of Minoan Crete which is considered husband, son
or attendant of the Mother Goddess and is less
frequently but regularly depicted in Minoan art.
There are also the demonical figures which were
the attendants of the anthropomorph goddess, as
the donkey-like demons which are depicted on a fresco
of Mycenae and on the gold ring of Tiryns. One
of the most common themes of Mycenaean religious
iconography were the sphinxes, mythical figures
of eastern origin with a lion body and female
head which usually bear a feather crown.
The
similarities of the Mycenaean and Minoan
religious iconography made the researchers
believe that the Mycenaean beliefs were
absolutely identical with the Minoan ones, the
former being of eastern origin as well. But, the
decipherment of the texts of Mycenaean writing
revealed a rather different Mycenaean religion.
Texts
of the palace tablets include names of gods of
the Greek twelve-god pantheon as Zeus, Hera,
Poseidon, Artemis, Hermes and Dionysus while
there is frequent reference to the Potnia, an
early regional goddess which is identified with
Athena. Along with these the cult of a number of
unknown until then deities, whose importance
seems to have faded in the later Greek world,
was ascertained. Therefore, the pantheon of the
Mycenaean period is now considered as a mingling
of different elements which expresses the
coexistence of the regional tradition with
imported Minoan elements. The cult of deities of
a different origin at the same time as well as
the different rendering of the cult ritual in
art show that the Mycenaeans adopted from the
Minoan cult only elements that did not oppose to
their own religious traditions.
Some
of the persons of religious scenes are
identified as members of the priesthood. The
priestesses appear in Minoan type dresses which
leave the breasts exposed. This ritual dress
emphasized on the fertility which was an
indispensable element for the benediction of the
cultivations and childbirth.
The
priests wore a typical priestly, long and
sleeved garment.
Seal representations frequently bear the bearded
men motif. They are determined as priests
according to comparisons with the religious
iconography of Minoan Crete and the East.
According to this last iconographic model the
priests are depicted with a long fringed garment
and often hold a Syro-Palestinian axe.
Sometimes
during religious ceremonies the priests, men and
women, wore animal hides which probably
represented the sacrifice. The existence of this
type of priestly garment is verified by the
texts of the tablets, in which references are
made to priests who wear animal hides (di-pte-ra-po-ro),
that is to say leather.
The
members of the priesthood were the leaders of
the religious ceremonies, they accepted the
offerings of the faithful and kings and were in
charge of the possessions of the shrines.
According to the evidence of the tablets, the
priesthood was distinguished in different
degrees of hierarchy and duties. Thus, reference
is made to the key bearers, the hierourgoi
or "sacred workers", the telestai
(religious officials) and to a Priestess of the
Winds (hiereiaanemon). The
religious communities also included persons
devoted to the cult. The number of the slaves
varied in function with the importance of the
shrine.
The
Linear B texts
include clear indications that the relations of
the priesthood were interwoven and
interdependent with political power. The Wanax,
the person in the highest position of the
political leadership may have been the one that
concentrated the religious powers as well.
During
the second millenium BC the religious ceremonies
in imposing buildings reserved exclusively for
cult were rather common in the countries of the
East and in Egypt. These temples were clearly
differentiated from the secular buildings as far
as topography, architectural conception and
decoration are concerned. Conversely, in Minoan
Crete, the dissociation between sacred and
secular buildings was not that clear. However
special places of cult are identified in the
palaces and private residences while the
existence of outdoor cult on peak sanctuaries
and sacred caves is attested.
The
identification of sacred rooms in buildings of
Mycenaean Greece is very difficult. The
archaeological and iconographic evidence lead to
the conclusion that the sacred acts took place
mainly in the countryside. The religious scenes
which are depicted on the seal
rings usually have rocky landscapes, sacred
trees and springs as backgrounds. In the
Mycenaean iconography the "tripartite shrine" is
identified. It is a three-part building
decorated with sacred symbols, which also occurs
in Minoan Crete.
Although
the archaeological evidence on the country
shrines and peak sanctuaries is not yet adequate
the finds indicate that in the places of
Mycenaean cult, temples of the Archaic and
Classical period were founded. The earliest
Mycenaean sanctuary was indicated at Epidauros
under the temple of Apollo Maleatas and dates to
the Late Helladic I period. In a similar way,
that is searching the lower strata of
archaeological and classical temples, remains of
Mycenaean buildings in Eleusis and Delos were
discovered. The existence of organized sacred
places is verified by the texts
of the tablets which register the offerings of
the subjects and kings to the shrines, the lists
of the cult personnel and the number of slaves
that corresponded to each shrine. The
sanctuaries are usually referred to as placenames,
as the cult centre of Pa-ki-ja-ne.
Sacred
places have also been indicated in settlement
complexes. The settlement shrines present no
particular architectural plan. Their
identification is determined by the finding of
sacred vessels and the existence of built
benches on which the figurines
and ritual vessels were placed. Such sacred
places have been found in Mycenae,
Pylos,
Berbati and Kalapodi of Phocis. But, the most
typical and well-preserved sanctuaries have been
discovered off the mainland, in the Mycenaean
town of Phylakopi on Melos and in Agia Irini on
Keos. At the Mycenaean citadel, the so-called
"cult centre" is a building complex on the
southwest side of the Grave Circle A.
Sacred
rooms existed in the Mycenaean palaces
as well. However, their identification is much
more difficult than in the Minoan palaces. In
the large ritual centre of the megaron
libations and sacrifice probably took place
whereas the throne of the king was possibly
occupied by the archbishops or the supreme
religious leader. The sacredness of the palatial
area is also indicated by the iconographic
themes of the frescoes
which decorated the rooms. The totality of the
frescoes of Pylos are religious which means that
sacred acts took place in the palace. Thus,
despite the very few examples of clearly
identifiable sacred rooms it is considered
certain that all the Mycenaean buildings,
citadels or palaces had special areas reserved
for cult.
The
Treasury
of Atreus
or Tomb
of Agamemnon[1]
is an impressive "tholos" tomb on the
Panagitsa Hill at Mycenae, Greece, constructed
during the Bronze
Age around 1250
BC. The lintel
stone above the
doorway weighs 120 tons, with approximate
dimensions 8.3 x 5.2 x 1.2m,[2]
the largest in the world. The tomb was used for
an unknown period. Mentioned by Pausanias, it was still
visible in 1879 when the German archeologist Heinrich
Schliemann discovered the
shaft graves under the 'agora' in the Acropolis
at Mycenae. The tomb has probably no
relationship with either Atreus or Agamemnon, as
archaeologists believe that the sovereign buried
there ruled at an earlier date than the two; it
was named thus by Heinrich Schliemann and the
name has been used ever since.
The
tomb perhaps held the remains of the sovereign
who completed the reconstruction of the fortress
or one of his successors. The grave is in the
style of the other tholoi of the Mycenaean
World, of which
there are nine in total around the citadel of
Mycenae and many more in the Argolid. However,
in its monumental shape and grandeur it is one
of the most impressive monuments surviving from
Mycenaean
Greece.
It
is formed of a semi-subterranean room of
circular plan, with a corbel
arch covering that
is ogival
in section. With an interior height of 13.5m and
a diameter of 14.5m,[3]
it was the tallest and widest dome in the world
for over a thousand years until construction of
the Temple of Hermes in Baiae
and the Pantheon in Rome.
Great care was taken in the positioning of the
enormous stones, to guarantee the vault's
stability over time in bearing the force of
compression from its own weight. This obtained a
perfectly smoothed internal surface, onto which
could be placed gold, silver and bronze
decoration.
The
tholos was entered from an inclined uncovered
hall or dromos, 36 meters
long and with dry-stone walls. A short passage
led from the tholos chamber to the actual burial
chamber, which was dug out in a nearly cubical
shape.
The
entrance portal to the tumulus was richly
decorated: half-columns in green limestone with
zig-zag motifs on the shaft,[3]
a frieze with rosettes
above the architrave of the door,
and spiral decoration in bands of red marble
that closed the triangular aperture above an
architrave. Segments of the columns and
architraves were removed by Lord
Elgin
in the early nineteenth century and are now held
by the British
Museum.[4]
The capitals are influenced
by ancient Egyptian examples, and one is in the
Pergamon
Museum as part of the
Antikensammlung
Berlin.
Other decorative elements were inlaid with red porphyry and green alabaster, a surprising
luxury for the Bronze Age.
The
megaron
(/ˈmɛɡəˌrɒn/; Ancient Greek: μέγαρον),
plural megara/ˈmɛɡərə/, was the
great hall of the Grecian palace complexes.
It was a rectangular hall,
fronted by an open, two-columned porch, and a
more or less central, open hearth vented
though an oculus in the roof
above it and surrounded by four columns. It
was particularly Aegean, due to the open porch
which was usually supported by columns.[1] The entrance
was the feature that helps to distinguish the
megaron, due to its position at the entrance,
which was along the shorter wall so that the
depth was larger than the width.[2]
There were often many rooms around the central
Megaron, such as archive rooms, offices,
oil-press rooms, workshops, potteries,
shrines, corridors, armories, and storerooms
for such goods as wine, oil and wheat.[3]
Structure
The
structure of the Megaron has foreshadowed an
image for the eventual layout of Greek
temples. This includes a columned entrance, a
pronaos, and a central naos or cella.[4] It is the
architectural predecessor of the classical
Greek temple. The design of the megaron
originated in Russia from the earliest dated
examples, and these originals are Neolithic.[2]
An early Megaron has a pitched roof, and there
were other roof types as well such as the flat
roof and barrel roof.[2] These are
always destroyed in the remnants of the early
Megaron, so the definite roof type is not
known. See Ancient
Roofs for
examples. In the theory of architecture, the
Megaron is considered to be the earliest
architectural act.
The
floor was of patterned concrete, covered in
carpet.[5]
On the walls were inlaid paintings called
frescoes, these were often of Phoenician
style.[6]
The Megaron is considered to be the
predecessor of all orders in architectural
theory. Originally it was very colourful, made
with the Minoan architectural order, the
insides made of fired brick and a wooden roof
supported on beams. The rooftop was tiled with
ceramic and terracotta tiles.[7]
There were wood ornamented metal doors often
two leaved, and footbaths were also used in
the megaron.[8] The
proportions of a larger width than length is a
similar structure to early doric temples.[9]
Purpose
The
megaron's functions were many, including
poetry, feasts, meetings, and worship. It was
used for royal functions and court meetings as
well. Its religious functions included the
practice of animal sacrifices, often to Chthonic deities.
Examples
A
famous megaron is in the large reception hall
of the king in the palace of Tiryns, the main
room of which had a raised Throne placed
against the right wall and a central Hearth bordered by
four Minoan-style wooden Columns that served
as supports for the roof. This was from a
Cretan influence,[10] and evolved
into the palace type from MinoanArchitecture. After that
the Myceneans took over this design, making it
characteristically Greek. Frescoes from Pylos
shows figures eating and drinking, which were
important activities in Greek culture.[11]
Bulls were also a trend in many Greek Frescoes.[12]
Other famous central megaron units are at Tiryns, Thebes, Mycenae, and Pylos.
The decoration unifies each Megaron suite
decoratively, This also distinguishes famous
megarons, making them unique. Different Greek
cultures had their own unique megarons; for
example, the people of the Mainland tended to
separate their central megaron from the other
rooms whereas the Cretans didn’t do
this.[13]
References
1. ^"Megaron".
Encyclopædia Britannica Inc. Retrieved April
3, 2013.
Pots
are a wonderful way to learn about the
cultures and societies of antiquity.
Potsherds survive the years by the
thousands and afford archaeologists,
art historians, and social historians
unparalleled insights into the lives
of the people who made, used, and
broke them. The shape of a vase can
suggest its use; its decoration can
tell us about the tastes and lives of
the people who used it. The relative
quantities of sherds, or the findspots
of vases, can let us think about the
ways their users lived, the kinds of
food the people ate and liquids they
drank, how they stored things (and
what they stored), or even the kinds
of things they considered important.
Some vessels are spectacularly
beautiful. And even the most
utilitarian of pots was a thing
touched and used by people in their
day-to-day existence.
This
exhibit has been created by students
in a graduate seminar at the
University of Colorado, CLAS 7109:
Greek Vase Painting. Each student has
been responsible for two or more of
the pots now owned by the University
of Colorado's Art Museum, has done
research into the pot's shape,
decoration, and function, and has
taken on research into additional,
related, aspects of Greek social and
ceramic history. The essay is included
here, and the links provided, are the
result of their work.
The
exhibit has been made possible thanks
to the collaborative and unflagging
efforts of the University of Colorado
Natural History Museum, the Special
Collections Department of the
University of Colorado at Boulder
Libraries, the Classics Department,
and ITS-Graphics. Support was provided
by a grant from the President's Fund
for the Humanities.
Although
pottery was made in Greece during the Stone Age,
the tradition of decorated ceramics in
Greece really started in the Bronze Age, a
period which began in about 3000 BC and
ended with the so-called Dark Ages in about
1100 BC. On mainland Greece, the Bronze Age
is known as the Helladic Period and is
divided into three main phases: Early,
Middle, and Late Helladic (also known as
Mycenaean), abbreviated EH (c. 3000-2000 BC
), MH (c. 2000-1550 BC ), and LH (c.
1550-1100 BC ) (1). For
a chronological chart of Bronze Age periods
and pottery types, click
here.
During the Bronze Age, Greece was divided
into small kingdoms which were probably
often at war with one another (2).
Since we lack written records from this
period in history, we must rely on
archaeological finds such as pottery to
reveal something of the history of Helladic
Bronze Age Greece.
Early
Helladic
(c. 3000-2000 BC)
The
Early Helladic period brought new pottery
shapes in addition to those that had been in
use since the Neolithic period. The easily
recognizable 'sauceboat'
is one of the most common of these new
shapes, plainly decorated with a glossy dark
paint. The sauceboat shape may have been
derived from metal
prototypes or even from the shape
of cut gourds (3).
Most pottery from this period was either
painted in solid colors or decorated with very
simple designs, just as Stone Age
pottery had been. Greeks at this time lived
in small villages or as farmers and hunters,
subsisting mainly on grains, olives, figs,
and game such as deer. Women wove clothing
for the family, as they would do throughout
Greek history (4).
Middle
Helladic
(c. 2000-1550 BC)
Two
major cultural and artistic shifts occurred
in the Middle Helladic period; foreign
invaders known today as the "Minyans"
entered Greece , and the pottery wheel came
into use. The potter's
wheel, which arrived in Greece
in about 2000 BC, had been invented about
2000 years earlier in Mesopotamia (5). As
a result of this new technology (and
possibly due to influence by the foreign
invaders), a new pottery type evolved
from the simple, earlier types, possibly
brought to Greece by the new arrivals
evolved from the simple, earlier types; Minyan
Ware was an undecorated but
highly polished painted ware with a somewhat
sharp-edged profile that seems to have been
based on metal vessels (6).
Made on the fast wheel, Minyan Ware is found
in monochrome grey, black, yellow, and red,
and has a distinctive soapy feel.
Contemporary with Minyan Ware , but very
different in almost every way, is the
dark-on-light, handbuilt Matt-Painted
Ware, decorated with simple
geometric designs and, later, more
naturalistic motifs. This ware may have been
introduced by foreigners as well. In
contrast to the fine fabric of Minyan ware,
Matt-Painted Ware tends toward the course
and chunky. Despite the innovations in
pottery and arrival of the Minyans, life in
Greece did not change much during the Middle
Helladic period; farmers still tended their
fields in the old ways and settlements
remained small (7).
Late
Helladic/Mycenaean
(c. 1550-1100 BC)
The
Late Helladic period, also known as the Mycenaean period, was the time of
the great palaces in Greece , the most
famous at Mycenae.
The well-known Lion Gate
leading into the walled city of Mycenae
anticipates future monumental relief
carvings, and paintings
on palace walls show an interest in the animal
motifsError! Hyperlink
reference not valid.and
depictions of pattern and movement that will
be seen again in vase painting. Other
palaces on the Greek mainland include those
at Pylos and
Tiryns(8).
Along
with the grand palaces, many new pottery
types w ere introduced in the Mycenaean
period (9). On
the opposite end of the design spectrum from
the monochrome and simple designs of Middle
Helladic was the Pictorial
Style, which featured human
and animal figures. These vessels, with
their real and mythological creatures,
marching soldiers, and chariots,
foreshadowed later developments in Greek
vase painting. The Close
Style
was another adventurous experiment,
featuring aquatic birds and delicate
geometric patterns competing for attention.
Despite the innovations, holdovers from the
period of Matt-Painted Ware remained,
especially at the beginning of the Mycenaean
period when simple patterned and banded pots
were common.
Later
Mycenaean pottery painting was influenced by
Minoan
ceramics, which were exported to
mainland Greece (10).
The Mycenaeans simplified
and abstracted the Minoan motifs,
creating a more patterned and decorative
ware than the more naturalistic pottery
found in Crete. Common are variations
on the marine style. Not all pottery was
decorated, though; a plain, glossy type,
known as Acropolis Burnished Ware, is an
orange-tinted descendent of Minyan ware (11).
At
the end of the Late Bronze Age, around 1100
BC, Mycenaean civilization collapsed for a
reason on which archaeologists have yet to
agree. Whatever happened, Greece entered the
so-called Dark Ages , about which little is
known. Depopulation and destruction seem to
have been characteristic of the period, in
which the art of writing was lost along with
much pottery production.
Author:
Summer Trentin
Notes
·(1). On the chronological
divisions of the Greek mainland in the
Bronze Age, see Reynold Higgins, Minoan
and Mycenaean Art (New York: Oxford
University Press 1981): 65-6; John G.
Pedley, Greek Art and Archaeology (Upper
Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall 1993):
29-30.
·(2). William R. Biers, The
Archaeology of Greece (Cornell
University Press 1980): 62-3.
·(3). Pedley, Greek
Art and Archaeology , 40 : see also
Higgins, Minoan and Mycenaean Art ,
67.
·(4). For life in the
Early Helladic period, see Emily Vermeule, Greece
in the Bronze Age (The University of
Chicago Press 1964) 36-42.
·(5). Andrew A Clark, Maya
Elston, and Mary-Louise Hart, Understanding
Greek
Vases: A Guide to Terms, Styles, and
Techniques ( Los Angeles : The J.
Paul Getty Museum 2002): 130-1.
·(7). On the Middle
Helladic period, see Vermeule, Greece in
the Bronze Age , 72-81 ; Higgins, Minoan
and Mycenaean Art , 68-70 .
·(8). On the Mycenaean
palaces, see George E. Mylonas, Mycenae
and the Mycenaean Age (Princeton
University Press 1966): 46-88.
·(9). For the Mycenaean
period and its art, see George E. Mylonas, Mycenae
and the Mycenaean Age ; for further
information with excellent images, see
Spyridon Marinatos, Crete and Mycenae (New
York: Harry N. Abrams, inc. 1960).
·(10). Jack L. Davis,
"Late Helladic I Pottery from Korakou." Hesperia
1979:234-263 ; on Mycenaean pottery and
its influence from Crete , see also Higgins,
Minoan and Mycenaean Art, 106- 22. .
·(11). Penelope A.
Mountjoy, Mycenaean Athens (Jonsered,
Sweden:
Paul Åströms Förlag 1995): 13-4.
The
Mycenaean wall-painting art comes from Minoan
Crete where it had appeared already from 1700
BC in rooms of the palaces and in other
luxurious buildings of Crete. The first
Mycenaean frescoes date to the 15th century
and coincide roughly with the second building
phase of the Minoan palaces. It is very likely
that this art had reached mainland Greece
earlier since the most intense Minoan
influences occurred during the early phases of
the Mycenaean period. Certain archaeological
indications, such as the coloured plasters of
buildings of the Middle Helladic period and
some fresco fragments from the citadel of
Mycenae which were found with ceramics of the
Late Helladic I and II periods verify this
suggestion.
Most
examples of Mycenaean frescoes date to the
14th and 13th centuries BC and are related to
the palatial
apartments of Mycenae, Tiryns and Pylos or
with seats of local chiefs, as Gla,
Argos and the Menelaion. The fresco decoration
constituted an incontestable demonstration of
prestige but its existence in private
buildings shows that they were not an
exclusive privilege of the chiefs. Apart from
their presence in the official architecture,
frescoes have been discovered in graves
of eminent persons and in sacred buildings.
As
the Minoan frescoes, the Mycenaean ones, were
drawing compositions on plaster which were
made with the fresco technique. The drawing
should be completed before the plaster dries.
That is the reason for which it required great
ability and a whole staff of craftsmen which
worked at the same time for the drawing of
large iconographic compositions. The paints
that were employed had an earthen texture and
their colours were blue, red, yellow and
black. As the painted tombstones, various
limestone plastered tiles and clay larnakes
show, the same technique was applied on mobile
objects.
The
themes of the Mycenaean frescoes can be
distinguished in three different categories:
iconographic representations from the religious
life of the population, representations of the
favourite occupations of the ruling class and
abstract decorative themes. The latter
functioned as a frame of the illustrations and
as decorative covers on floors, ceilings and
elsewhere. The decoration procedure of the
frescoes was organized in three levels. The
main drawing representation was placed in the
middle of an outlined jamb which was painted
to resemble veined marble and in a decorative
band. In addition, the representation of
building elements, mainly wooden beams, was
common. The so-called miniature style which is
expressed on long friezes which depict
representations with figures of a very small
size, has a distinguished Mycenaean character.
As
far as the iconographic representations are
concerned, the Cretan influence in the style
and selection of the themes is manifest. As
the Minoan frescoes, the Mycenaean as well
include bull-leaping,
evil creatures and architectural elements. The
purely Mycenaean subject matters were the
hunting and battle scenes and the processions
of women in costumes
offering gifts. The themes of the frescoes
reveal the religious and heroic sprit of the
Mycenaean aristocracy.
The battle scenes are of a narrative character
and depict probably specific moments or
historic events. The themes and fresco styles
seem to have influenced the other iconographic
arts of the Mycenaean period. Thus, similar
classification of the iconographic themes
occurs in ivory carving, pottery and seal
carving.
The
frescoes of the 13th century BC, no longer
based on the Minoan models, acquired an
established Mycenaean character, which
presents strong schematization, rigidity and
inartistic creation. The destruction of the
palaces around 1200 BC marked the end of the
mural painting, which was connected with the
official architecture. The only memory of the
old art are some improvised paintings in the
shrine of the Lower Citadel of Tiryns.
The
manufacture
of defensive and offensive bronze weapons
constituted a substantial sector of Mycenaean
metalworking. The Mycenaean weapons are discerned in
many and continuously evolving types which reveals
that the Mycenaeans constantly improved their
polemical techniques. [ =
war-making skills from Greek
polemikos relating to war, from polemos war–
tkw.] Metal
weapons are found in graves where they had been
placed as funeral gifts and in treasures.
From
the
earliest phases of the Mycenaean period different
types of bronze weapons that will present a rapid
evolution in the later periods, appear. The earlier
spearheads which come from late Middle Helladic
tombs are named "Sesklotype
spearheads" and had a shoe-socket for
greater stability on the wooden stem of the spear.
In the shaft
graves of Mycenae a large number of metal swords and
daggers with elaborate relief decoration and inlaid
with gold, niello,
ivory and precious stones was discovered. This
composite decoration had been achieved with the
impressed technique and the so-called "painting on
metal". This imposing and valuable armament
expressed the virtues of the early Mycenaean aristocracy, the
combative ability and the high social status.
The
swords
of the early Mycenaean period are distinguished in
two main types, type A and type B. Type A, which is
considered as the older one, is discerned by the
very long and narrow blade and the rounded
shoulders, which often end in hornlike lugs. The
initial model of this type is searched in the long
ritual swords of the Old Palace
period. The later type B, which is characterized by
its shorter and broader tang, was appropriate for
both beating and cutting. Its shoulders were squared
and sharp while the stem of the blade which was fit
into the hilt was of the same width of the latter
and was fixed on it with nails.
After
1400
BC new types of offensive weapons appear. Most
swords were now appropriate for beating and cutting.
The most widespread type of sword was a relatively
short tang with a central vein and nails on the
hilt. Later the cross type sword is developed. It
has a broader blade and a strengthened central vein.
At the same time the use of the polemical daggers,
which are distinguished in various and constantly
evolving types, prevails. From the 12th century BC,
a new type of sword, which appears simultaneously in
the Near East, is diffused in the Aegean. This is a
cutting and pricking sword with a sharp, long blade,
rounded shoulders and a forked hilt. Its use
continued into the Iron Age.
The
spearheads
of hammered or cast metal did not evolve remarkably
until the middle of the 13th century BC. During the
Late Helladic III period spearheads became shorter
and sharper and their blade acquired a fin shape.
The spearheads were fixed on the sword hilt with a
hole at one end of the shoe-socket. Parts of
preserved frescoes illustrate armed men carrying the
spears in pairs.
The
tablets
of Pylos refer also to copper arrowheads. The heads
of these arrows are made of molten metal or of metal
sheets and initially followed the simple triangular
shape of the stone ones. But later arrowheads with
stems were manufactured. These were better fixed to
the stem of the arrow and were more efficient. At
the same time with copper arrows, the manufacture of
chert or obsidian
arrowheads continued.
A
typical example of the Mycenaean armament were the
imposing bronze armours which are observed from the
Late Helladic II period. The exact shape of these
metal armours is apparent on a unique find from the
chamber tomb
of Dendra which dates to the end of the 15th century
BC [the so
called Dendra Panoply” – tkw]. This armour is
composed of wide copper bands which are fixed on a
leather internal lining which covered the body from
the knees to the neck. The excessive weight of the
armour made it awkward. That is why it is
conjectured that it was not used in battle but only
to demonstrate prestige. Apart from the armours
there were also other metal parts for the protection
of the warriors. In the late Mycenaean graves metal
helmets, parts of greaves and protective accessories
for the hands were found.
Lefkandi (Modern
Greek: Λευκαντί)
is a coastal village on the island of Euboea, Greece.
Archaeological finds attest to a settlement on the
promontory locally known as Xeropolis, while several
associated cemeteries have been identified nearby. The
settlement site is located on a promontory overlooking the
Euripos, with small bays forming natural harbours east and
west of the site. The cemeteries are located on the
hillslopes northwest of the settlement; the plots
identified so far are known as the East Cemetery,
Skoubris, Palia Perivolia, Toumba, in addition to further
smaller groups of burials. The site is located between the
island's two main cities in antiquity, Chalkis and Eretria. Excavation
here is conducted under the direction of the British School at Athens, and is
ongoing as of 2007 (Previous campaigns in 1964-8, 1981-4).
Occupation at Lefkandi can be traced back
to the Early Bronze Age, and continued throughout the
Bronze and Iron Ages, to end at the beginning of the
Archaic period (early 7th century BCE). The known
cemeteries cover only part of the periods attested in the
settlement, dating to the Submycenaean through Subgeometric periods (c.
1050 – 800 BCE, the "Greek Dark
Ages"). The
abandonment of Lefkandi coincides with a rise in
settlement activity in nearby Eretria, and it has been
argued by the excavators that the site is, in fact, Old
Eretria.
Lefkandi's contribution to archaeology
The site's importance is due to a number of
factors. First, substantial occupation strata of the Late
Helladic IIIC period (c. 1200 – 1100/1075 BCE) excavated
in the 1960s allowed the establishment of a ceramic
sequence for this period, at that time insufficiently
attested. The IIIC settlement furthermore stands in
contrast to sites in the other parts of Greece, such as
the Peloponnese, where many sites were abandoned at the
end of LHIIIB (i.e. the end of the Mycenaean palatial
period). This situation places Lefkandi within a group of
sites in Central Greece with important post-palatial
occupation, such as Mitrou (settlement), Kalapodi
(sanctuary), and Elateia (cemetery).
Heroon
The archaeological significance of the site
was revealed in 1980[1] when a
large mound was discovered to contain the remains of a man
and a woman within a large structure called by some a heroön
(ἡρῷον) or "hero's grave." There is some dispute as to
whether the structure was in fact a heroön built to
commemorate a hero or whether it was instead the grave of
a couple who were locally important for other reasons.
This monumental building, built c 950 BC, 50 meters long
and 13.8 meters wide, with a wooden verandah, foreshadows
the temple architecture that started to appear with
regularity some two centuries later.[2]
One of the bodies in the grave had been cremated, the ashes
being wrapped in a fringed linen cloth then stored in a bronzeamphora from Cyprus. The
amphora was engraved with a hunting scene and placed
within a still larger bronze bowl. A sword and other grave
goods were nearby. It is believed that the ashes were
those of a man.
The woman's body was not cremated. Instead,
she was buried alongside a wall and adorned with jewelry,
including a ring of electrum, a Bronze
braziere, and a gorget believed to have come from Babylonia and already
a thousand years old when it was buried. An iron knife
with an ivory handle was
found near her shoulder. It is unknown whether this woman
was buried contemporaneously with the man's remains, or at
a later date. Scholars have suggested that the woman was
slaughtered to be buried with the man, possibly her
husband, in a practice reminiscent of the Indian custom of
sati. Other
scholars have pointed to the lack of conclusive evidence
for sati in this instance, suggesting instead that this
woman may have been an important person in the community
in her own right, who was interred with the man's ashes
after her own death.
Four horses appear to have been sacrificed
and were included in the grave. Two of them were found
with iron bits still in their mouths.
Xeropolis
Archaeological research has brought to
light a settlement where continuous occupation can be
demonstrated from the Mycenaean period through the Dark
Ages and into historic times.[3][1] It has been
suggested by the excavators that the site can be
identified as the old Eretria which was
forced to up root and move farther from Chalkis as a result
of the Lelantine War.
Notes
1. ^
Preliminary report by Mervyn Popham, E. Touloupa and L.H.
Sackett, "The Hero of Lefkandi", in Antiquity56
(1982:169-74); final publication R. W. V. Catling and I.
S. Lemos, Lefkandi II. 1. The Protogeometric Building at
Toumba. The Pottery, BSA Suppl. vol. 22, Oxford 1991; M.
R. Popham, P. G. Calligas, and L. H. Sackett, (eds.),
Lefkandi II: the Protogeometric Building at Toumba, Part
2. The Excavation, Architecture and Finds, BSA Suppl. vol.
23, Oxford 1993.
The building
is a monumental structure (50 x 13.8 meters) and was
erected in the middle of the tenth century BC
The main
entrance is to the east, while in the west the building
has a curved (or ‘apsidal’) end, a feature typical of the
period. It is divided into three rooms: the East, the
Central and the Apse. The last of these was approached
through a wide corridor flanked by two rooms. A row of
wooden columns run down the central axis of the building
which supported the thatched roof.
A remarkable
feature of this building was the discovery of a row of
post-holes running along the north and south walls and
round the apse which supported a wooden veranda
(peristrasis). This is earliest example in Greek
Architecture and anticipates later uses in Greek temples.
In the
central room two burial shafts were found: one contained
the cremated body of a man buried with his weapons and an
inhumed woman with remarkable jewellery; the other
contained the remains of four horses.
After the
destruction and the deliberate covering of the building
and the burials with a mound, the area in front of the
east entrance was used as a cemetery. Those buried here
were probably members of the same kin group (or oikos) as
those buried inside the building.
They
belonged
to a distinguished elite group which chose to display its
wealth with rich offerings given to their dead. Their
grave offerings include local and imported pottery,
jewellery, iron weapons and luxurious goods most of them
imported from the eastern Mediterranean and others from
northern Greece.
·For
our purposes, the bronze age in Greece can be identified,
roughly, with the second millennium B.C. (i.e., ca.
2000-ca. 1000). In speaking of bronze-age cultures three
terms are used:
·*Minoan
— refers to the culture of bronze-age Crete
·*Cycladic
— refers to the bronze-age cultures of the islands of the
Aegean
·*Helladic
— refers to the culture of mainland Greece in the bronze
age
Introduction. The Homeric poems
date to the late 8th century B.C., but (like Arthurian
legend) they purport to tell of a much earlier age. The
Greece of Homer's time was on the rebound: as we shall see
in a later unit, his day witnessed the rise of the city
state or polis, the flourishing of trade, intense
colonization in southern Italy, Sicily, and the Black Sea
region, the introduction of coinage, of more sophisticated
battle tactics, and of writing — in short, the emergence
of what would become Classical Greece. But these
developments represented a rise out of an extremely bleak
period in Greek history. In the 11th to 9th centuries (the
so-called Dark Ages) mainland Greece had consisted
primarily of meager, relatively isolated agrarian
settlements, dominated by local landed aristocracies, with
a relatively low level of material culture: no urban
centers, relatively little trade or manufacturing, a
population sustained principally by what crops it could
manage to foster in the arid, rocky soil and under
frequent pressure from migrating peoples displaced by the
generally unsettled nature of the times. It is all the
more striking, then, that Homer tells of a time of
powerful Greek kings who rule large kingdoms, engage in
vast military expeditions overseas, and live in grand
palaces filled with precious objects while routinely
dining on meals such as Homer's audience saw only on
special feast days, if at all. Prior to the late 19th
century it was felt that Homer's grand vision of powerful
kings and grand expeditions was merely a poetic fiction
(again, compare the legends about King Arthur), but then
in 1870 a megalomaniacal German banker named *Heinrich Schliemann
journeyed to northwest Turkey and unearthed a grand
bronze-age city (a series of cities, actually) at the very
place tradition identified as the site of Troy. He then
journeyed to Greece and, in digs at Mycenae and Tiryns,
discovered evidence of a rich and powerful bronze-age
civilization very like that described in the poems of
Homer.
[For recent
assessments of Schliemann and his work, see D.F.
Easton, "Heinrich Schliemann, Hero or Fraud?" Classical
World 91.5 (1998) 335-43, S.H. Allen, "A
Personal Sacrifice in the Interest of Science:
Calvert, Schliemann, and the Troy Treasures," Classical
World 91.5 (1998) 345-54, and the debate
between E.F. Bloedow and S.H. Allen in Echos
du monde classique / Classical Views n.s.
17, no. 3 (1998) 579-644.]
At the turn of the
century another amateur archaeologist, *Arthur Evans,
journeyed to Crete and uncovered evidence of a hitherto
unknown bronze-age civilization there. These two men
radically changed the then accepted view of early Greece,
revealing that the eastern Mediterranean in the bronze age
was vastly more sophisticated and complex than formerly
suspected. Schliemann and Evans also gave a valuable
impetus to the development of the modern science of
archeology. Since their day, many other sites have been
discovered and a relatively precise chronology has been
worked out, based on stratigraphic evidence, pottery
styles, and various synchronisms. Michael Wood presents
something of this archaeological background in the first
two episodes of his series, In Search of the Trojan
War; useful accounts can be found in W.A. McDonald's
Progress into the Past and the other works listed
in the course bibliography. In what follows you will find
a general sketch of the Greek Bronze Age, to be developed
further in the class slide lectures.
Minoan
Crete. We
begin
on Crete, where ca. 1900 B.C. there suddenly appears a
culture of a most striking nature. Archaeological remains
in Crete dating to the third millennium B.C. present a
picture of a relatively unimpressive, rather typically
disorganized early bronze-age culture. At the turn of the
millennium, however, a transformation occurs, with a
sudden and quite dramatic change in the material remains
and (one assumes) in the society those remains represent.
The impetus behind this transformation is uncertain, but
it would seem to be associated with the gradual
assimilation of an immigrant population (perhaps from
southwest Turkey) and a concomitant rise in affluence and
social organization. The precise identity of the
immigrants is unknown: even their language is of uncertain
origin, although we have a large number of written records
(dating to the middle of the second millennium) inscribed
on clay tablets in a script known as Linear A. The
archaeological remains, however, attest to one of the most
impressive civilizations ever to appear in the ancient
Mediterranean: a highly centralized and sophisticated
society with a system of writing, a complex and efficient
bureaucracy, beautiful wheel-made pottery, and
(eventually) a naturalistic style of art that at its best
rivals later Classical art. Today, the people of this
society are known as the Minoans. Although this culture
first arose ca. 1900, a massive earthquake ca. 1700 led to
extensive rebuilding and to various artistic and
architectural innovations. Most of the material that you
will see in books and in the course lectures dates to this
second (post-1700) phase of Minoan culture.
The most prominent, and
most instructive, feature of Minoan culture is presented
by the palaces (see, esp., the guide by Cadogan). The
largest and most elaborate is that at *Cnossus, but
others are to be found throughout the island. All are
built according to the same general plan: a north-south
orientation, with a large central court and a smaller
external court to the west; a large number of storerooms
and storage magazines (often, as at Cnossus, on ground
floor of the west wing), royal quarters (at Cnossus, in
the east wing), an industrial area (at Cnossus, in the
north wing), cult places (at Cnossus, on the ground floor
of the west wing, opening on the central court). The
elaborate layout of the palaces reflects a highly
sophisticated artistic and architectural aesthetic. There
seems to be a conscious effort to avoid regularity and
predictability, with numerous twists and turns as one
proceeds along the lengthy corridors through an elaborate
system of doorways. There is an elaborate system of light
wells and windows as well, which must have led to pleasing
alterations of shadow and light (known as a chiaroscuro
effect) as one proceeded through the palaces. [Plan
of
palace at Cnossus]
The design of the
palaces allows us to draw several inferences concerning
Minoan society. First, it suggests a complex and highly
organized political structure, probably under the
leadership of a monarch (since someone presumably
inhabited the grand domestic quarters in the east wing).
The Minoans seem to have had a very tightly controlled and
centralized political/economic system. The palace at
Cnossus clearly was an important political seat, but it
was also an administrative and industrial center, as the
vast storerooms, copious amounts of raw materials, and
numerous workshops indicate. It would seem that produce
from the countryside (grain, wool, oil, wine, etc.) was
brought to the palace, recorded (on the clay tablets
mentioned previously), and subsequently redistributed,
employed in the various workshops, or exported. This high
degree of centralization, along with the general cultural
continuity throughout the island (indicated, e.g., by
similarity in palace design), has suggested to some a
wealthy and powerful central monarch, with his political
seat at Cnossus, who governed the entire island through
various minor kings or nobles, with a peasant population
who toiled, not in their own interest, but the nobility's.
[FN 1]
Unlike the similar
palaces on the Greek mainland (see below on the Mycenaean Palaces),
the Minoan palaces have no fortifications.
[Although fortification
walls have been discovered that predate palaces, these
seem to have been abandoned fairly early in the Palace
Period: see Jeremy
Rutter's
notes on Middle Minoan Crete.]
This could be
attributed, in part, to their isolation and their reliance
on naval power for both trade and defense. The contrast
with mainland Greece also appears, however, in Minoan art:
Helladic art bristles with scenes of soldiers, weapons,
chariots, and military exploits; Minoan art, on the other
hand, focuses on scenes from nature (portrayed with a
liveliness and plasticity that at times anticipates modern
abstract art), religious ritual, and daily life, with
relatively few instances of military motifs. The general
picture that emerges is one of a wealthy, cultured,
unified, peaceful people. Today there is often a tendency
to romanticize the Minoans: some have equated them with
the lost civilization of Atlantis, others (pointing to the
prominence of women in Minoan art) have argued that they
represent evidence of peaceful matriarchal societies in
the bronze age that came to be overthrown by Indo-European
invaders (see below on the Indo-Europeans), who
brought with them their strongly patriarchal and
militaristic traditions. There is little real evidence for
such theories. Above all, it is necessary to remember the
limited and often ambiguous nature of the archaeological
evidence, which is constantly being reevaluated as new
finds come to light. [FN
2]
The bronze-age finds on
Crete were immediately associated by Evans with the
legendary king *Minos
(from whom the term "Minoan" is derived). According to
later Greek myth, Minos ruled a powerful naval empire (or
thalassocracy) from his palace at Cnossus. The most famous
legend concerning Minos told of the adventure of *Theseus and
the *Minotaur.
Theseus, the son of King Aegeus, was a legendary ruler of
Athens (see The World of Athens, H.I. 5). When
King Minos' son Androgeus was killed in Athens (cf. below
on the possible historical significance of the Theseus legend), the
powerful Cretan monarch exacted a terrible toll from the
Athenians: each year seven young men and seven young women
were sent from Athens to Cnossus, where they were fed to
the savage Minotaur.
[The Minotaur (the name
was taken to mean "the bull of Minos") was a monstrous
creature, half human, half bull. He was the offspring of
Minos' wife, *Pasiphae.
Legend had it that Minos had boasted that the sea-god
Poseidon (who was also the god of earthquakes) would grant
him any favor he wished and, as proof of this, had prayed
to Poseidon to send him a bull out of the sea, promising
to sacrifice the animal in the god's honor. The bull
appeared, but was so magnificent that Minos decided not to
sacrifice it but to keep it, sacrificing a normal bull in
its place. Angered by this slight, Poseidon caused
Pasiphae to fall in love with the bull. Pasiphae
approached the artisan *Daedalus, the
most cunning craftsman of all time, and convinced him to
build a cow suit for her. Donning Daedalus' cow suit,
Pasiphae managed to consummate her passion for the bull
and, as a consequence, bore the Minotaur. Horrified by his
new "stepson," Minos ordered Daedalus to construct an
elaborate maze (the *labyrinth) [FN 3] in which to
confine the monster: so cunning was the maze that, once
inside it, no one could trace their way out.]
Upon reaching manhood,
the young Theseus insisted on being included in the seven
young men to be sacrificed that year. He had no fear of
the Minotaur, but was a bit daunted at the difficulty
posed by Daedalus' maze. Fortunately for him, the young
princess *Ariadne
(one of Minos' daughters) fell madly in love with him and
told him how to defeat the maze by unrolling a ball of
yarn as he worked his way into the labyrinth. Theseus
followed her instructions, killed the Minotaur, and
managed to escape from Crete, taking the young princess
with him. (In the time-honored manner of the best Greek
heroes, Theseus quickly deserted Ariadne on the island Dia
[Naxos], where she either committed suicide or was taken
up by the god Dionysus to be his bride: for more on the
amorous adventures of Theseus, see The
Mythological
Background to Euripides' Hippolytus.)
If you study theories of
myth, you will find that one approach suggests that myth
is "faded history" — dimly recalled historical fact,
preserved in a fanciful form in traditional stories handed
down over generations. The tale of Theseus and the
Minotaur, it can be argued, presents precisely such a
myth. What features of the legend tie in with what you
have seen of Minoan culture as represented by the palaces?
(More connections will appear when we look at slides of
Minoan art.)
Minoan culture collapsed
just as quickly as it evolved. All of the palaces except
that at Cnossus were destroyed ca. 1450; Cnossus survived
for another 75 years or so, but the archaeological
evidence suggests that it had been taken over by Greeks
from the mainland. Cnossus itself was destroyed ca. 1375
and Crete remained a cultural and political backwater for
centuries afterward. The cause of this sudden collapse
remains uncertain, but many scholars believe that it is
related to the eruption of the island of *Thera, north
of Crete (see map 4 in The World of Athens) in ca.
1500. The eruption of Thera was a cataclysmic event, some
four to ten times as violent as that of Krakatoa in 1883.
[A good part of this
relatively large island simply blew up (leading many to
recall, once again, the myth of Atlantis). In the past few
years archaeologists have excavated an important
settlement on Thera, preserved intact for centuries in mud
and ash. Thera provides invaluable evidence for Cycladic
culture and is a must-see for any tourist to Greece: it is
actually possible to walk through the town and get a sense
of daily life in a Cycladic setting. The frescoes (in the
National Museum in Athens) are among the most striking
works of art to survive from antiquity.]
It has been thought that
the ash from this eruption, along with a possible tsunami,
may have disrupted the Minoan economy and perhaps ruined
its fleet sufficiently to allow invasion. On this view,
Helladic Greeks seized the island and destroyed all of the
palaces except that at Cnossus, which they took under
their control, only to fall themselves (how, we can only
speculate) some 75 years later.
Helladic
Civilization: The Mycenaean Age.
The arrival in Europe of the "Greeks" (that is, the people
who brought with them the rudiments of the language and
culture that we associate with historical Greece) is
identified by the gradual appearance (ca. 1900-1800) [FN 4] of a new
culture on the mainland, characterized by a distinctive
gray pottery made on a fast wheel (known as Minyan ware),
by the arrival of the horse and chariot, and by a more
martial cast to the archaeological remains (cf. above on
the relatively peaceful cast of Minoan Society). The
new arrivals were invaders from the east and, perhaps, the
north. They were descendants of a people known as the *Indo-Europeans,
originally perhaps located in the steppes of southern
Russia, who, by the third millennium B.C., had began a
gradual series of migrations to the west and south, taking
with them their distinctive language, religion, and
culture.
Our knowledge of
the Indo-Europeans derives mainly from comparative
linguistics and anthropology. Linguists have
demonstrated that the principal languages of
modern Europe and western Asia (Greek and Latin —
along with those languages derived from Latin, the
so-called Romance languages: Italian, French,
Spanish, Portuguese, Rumanian — as well as the
Germanic, Baltic, Celtic, Slavic, Armenian,
Hittite, Tocharian, Iranian, and Indic languages)
are all regional offshoots of an original
Indo-European tongue. As well as a linguistic
heritage, the Indo-Europeans bequeathed to their
descendants, e.g., a strongly patriarchal
tradition and a pantheon headed by a powerful male
weather god: note the similarity between the Greek
Zeus (whose name is etymologically associated with
the shining sky), the Latin Jupiter
(etymologically: "father Zeus"), and the Sanskrit
Dyaus Pitar.
The new arrivals present
little of interest for us until ca. 1550, when Helladic
culture itself undergoes a dramatic alteration. Our
earliest evidence consists of two grave circles (dated to
ca. 1550 and ca. 1500, respectively) at Mycenae. The later
of these was unearthed by Schliemann; the earlier was not
discovered until the 1950s. Within these circles were a
series of shaft graves laden with precious objects, many
of which were imported from (or showed direct influence
from) Egypt, Mesopotamia, and (especially) Crete. At about
the same time, elaborate stone tombs (known as tholos
tombs) began to appear and, within the next century or so,
elaborate palaces that matched those of Crete in size and
magnificence, if not in sophistication. Originally it was
thought that these developments were the result of
colonists or refugees from Egypt or Crete who subdued the
local Greek population and established a modified form of
the society prevalent in Crete, Egypt, and the Near East.
(Review the Theseus
legend (summarized above): what was Androgeus doing
in Athens, and how was Minos able to exact such tribute?)
Today it is generally believed that trade contacts between
mainland Greece and its neighbors to the south and east
led to a sudden flourishing of riches and the local
adaptation of the traditions of the Greeks' more advanced
Mediterranean neighbors.
This flourishing of
Helladic culture in ca. 1600-1100
B.C. is known as *The Mycenaean Age,
after Mycenae, the home of Agamemnon. The principal sites
of importance, in addition to Mycenae, are Tiryns, Pylos,
Thebes, Athens, and Gla, each of which had impressive
citadels. The Mycenaean palaces are much less expansive
and complex, and much more regular in design, than their
Minoan counterparts. They are built around a main
structure known as the *megaron, or royal hall, consisting of a
large rectangular chamber fronted by a colonnaded
antechamber (see The World of Athens, ill. HI 1).
At the center of the megaron was a large hearth surrounded
by four columns (which would have supported a clerestory —
for light and ventilation — and in some cases a balcony).
On the right wall, as one entered, was an elaborate throne
(attested by marks preserved in the flooring). It would
seem that this chamber was where the king performed his
most important political and, perhaps, religious functions
The most striking
feature of the palaces, however, is presented by their
fortifications. In contrast to the Minoan palaces
(discussed above), those of mainland Greece (with the
exception of Pylos) are heavily fortified, with massive
walls constructed of immense, irregularly shaped stones.
[Later ages felt that these stones were too large to have
been put in place by human agency: the story arose that
the walls had been built by the Cyclopes (gigantic
craftsmen in the service of Zeus — the better-behaved
kinsmen of the famous one-eyed monster who tried to eat
Odysseus). Thus the term *cyclopean masonry
is used even today to indicate this style of bronze-age
construction.] Clearly the Mycenaean Greeks, like Homer's
heroes, were familiar with the hazards of war. [See,
further, W. Taylour, The Mycenaeans, J.T. Hooker,
Mycenaean Greece, and the other works in the course
bibliography.]
Like the Minoans, the
Mycenaean Greeks kept elaborate records on clay tablets,
written in a script related to Minoan Linear A but
distinct from it (hence it is known as *Linear B: see
The World of Athens, ill. HI 2). An immense cache
of these tablets was discovered at Pylos, but they also
appear at Thebes, Athens, and (significantly) Cnossus. In
the mid-1950s an architect and amateur linguist by the
name of Michael Ventris demonstrated that the Linear B
tablets were written in a form of Greek — a discovery that
seemed to demonstrate conclusively that the kings of
Pylos, Mycenae, etc. were not foreign overlords (like the
Normans in 11th century England) but Greeks. [See esp. J.
Chadwick, The Decipherment of Linear B, and E.
Doblhofer, Voices in Stone.] The Linear B tablets
provide invaluable evidence regarding the palace economy
and their day-to-day administration, particularly at
Pylos. Like the palace at Cnossus, that at Pylos was as
much storage depot and administrative center as royal
seat, with massive amounts of goods being brought in,
catalogued, and stored or redistributed. The tablets also
tell us something of military and political affairs at
Pylos, and of religious matters. What they do not contain
is literature of any sort: they are purely administrative.
[See in particular the excellent book by J. Chadwick, The
Mycenaean World.]
The Mycenaean Greeks
enjoyed increasing prosperity in the 15th and 14th
centuries, reaching something of a golden age in the early
13th century. But in the middle of the 13th century
problems began to arise: Thebes was sacked; Mycenae was
attacked (the houses outside the walls of the citadel were
destroyed and later rebuilt); Mycenae, Tiryns, and Athens
all extended their fortifications to secure a water supply
and (at Tiryns) to provide for an influx of refugees from
the surrounding countryside. It seems clear that something
of a siege mentality was beginning to develop. Around 1200
the Mycenaean world begins to undergo a general collapse.
This was a disastrous period throughout the eastern
Mediterranean: the Hittite empire (in modern Turkey)
collapsed; various centers in the Near East fell; Egypt
survived, but records there speak of attacks by "the sea
peoples" and this time marks the beginning of a period of
decline in Egyptian affairs. Various theories have been
proposed to account for this wide-spread catastrophe:
climactic change (which might have caused a general
collapse of the ancient economies — fragile under the best
of conditions — and a breakdown of social order) and
foreign invaders remain the two favorite. (The Greeks
themselves spoke of an invasion of Dorian Greeks, said to
be the descendants of the pan-hellenic hero Heracles.) By
ca. 1100-1050 the great centers on the Greek mainland had
all fallen. This collapse ushers in the Dark Ages of the
11th to 9th centuries, mentioned at the beginning of this
account.
Troy. It is now time to
return to Homer. It turns out that there was an age of
great kings and grand palaces. But was there a Trojan War?
(This question is considered at length by Michael Wood.)
Excavations at Troy itself have uncovered nine major
settlements. The most important are:
·Troy
II: the city Schliemann thought was Homer's Troy, but
dating to the latter half of the 3rd millennium
·Troy
VI: ca. 1900 [FN 5]-1300;
a grand city — rich, powerful, with extensive trading
contacts throughout the eastern Mediterranean
(particularly, it turns out, with the Mycenaeans) — but
one that seems to fall to an earthquake rather than
through human agency
·Troy
VIIa: a makeshift affair founded on the rubble of Troy
VI but apparently destroyed by human agency ca.
1275-1200
Interpretation of the
archaeological evidence is difficult. We have a Troy that
is destroyed by fire (Troy VIIa) at almost the very time
ancient tradition claimed Troy fell (1184 B.C. was the
traditional date), but it is not the grand Troy described
by Homer and it falls at a time when the Mycenaean centers
themselves appear to have felt threatened and were making
defensive, rather than offensive, preparations. (It seems
more likely that Troy VIIa fell to the same forces that
destroyed the Mycenaean and Hittite civilizations.) On the
other hand, we have a grand city (Troy VI) that matches
Homer's Troy quite nicely and that falls when the
Mycenaeans are at the peak of their power, but that seems
to have fallen by earthquake (although this interpretation
of the evidence has been questioned: for one thing, if
earthquake were the only cause of Troy VI's fall, why was
it rebuilt on such a reduced scale and in so haphazard a
fashion?). These are not questions that we can solve in
this class, but it is perhaps fair to give Homer the
benefit of the doubt. After all, if there was no historic
basis for Homer's tale, what would be the motivation for
inventing it? On the other hand, we can prove that the
Mycenaeans had extensive trade contacts in Asia Minor, the
Near East, and Egypt: it does not seem improbable that
hostilities of some sort might have broken out between the
Mycenaeans, eager to trade in Asia Minor and the Black Sea
region, and the Trojans, who commanded such a strategic
position overlooking the Dardanelles.
[For a more detailed
(largely negative) assessment of the historicity of the Iliad,
see K.A. Raaflaub, "Homer, the Trojan War, and History," Classical
World 91.5 (1998) 386-403.]
Notes
·[FN
1] Further evidence, of a general sort, is provided by the
Linear A tablets. Confirmation for this view of the Minoan
political and economic structure is found in the very
similar structures attested on the Greek mainland, as we
will see.
·[FN
2] One example: some few years ago archeologists claimed
to find evidence of human sacrifice in one of the smaller
palaces adjoining the grand palace at Cnossus. If proven,
such practices would entail a radical shift in our notions
of the "peaceful" Minoans. See, in particular, C. Eller, The
myth of matriarchal prehistory: why an invented past
won't give women a future (Boston, 2000).
·[FN
3] The English "labyrinth" comes from the Greek labyrinthos.
The ending of this word (-inthos) associates it
with a family of words that predate the Greek language:
that is, it survives from the (unknown) language spoken by
indigenous people of the region prior to the arrival of
the "Greeks" (compare below). It closely resembles another
Greek "loan word," labrys (a type of double ax).
We will see the significance of this in the slide
lectures.
·[FN
4] Note the synchronism with developments on Crete.
·[FN
5] Again, note the synchronism with Minoan Crete and the
arrival of Indo-European peoples in Greece.
