Journal of Greek Archaeology Volume 6: Editorial

Our latest volume maintains our goal to cover the broad chronological spread of Greek Archaeology, ranging from a new review of the Mesolithic occupation at Theopetra, one of the most important hunter-gatherer sites in Greece, to a detailed analysis of how the distribution of Middle Byzantine churches in the Peloponnese enlightens us into the evolution of human settlement and land use. Prehistory is richly represented in further articles, as we learn about Middle Bronze Age society on Lefkas, the dispute over exotic primates portrayed on the frescoes of Santorini, a new Minoan-style peak sanctuary on Naxos, and Post-Palatial settlement structure on Crete. Bridging prehistory to historical times, a detailed study rethinks the burial and settlement evidence for Early Iron Age Athens, then entering the Archaic period, an original article links textual analysis and material culture to investigate dedicatory behaviour in Ionian sanctuaries. As a special treat, that doyen of Greek plastic arts Andrew Stewart, asks us to look again at the evidence for the birth of the Classical Style in Greek sculpture. Greek theatres in Sicily are next contextualised into contemporary politics, while the sacred Classical landscape of the island of Salamis is explored with innovative GIS-techniques. For the seven-hundred years or so of Roman rule we are given an indepth presentation of regional economics from Central Greece, and a thorough review of harbours and maritime navigation for Late Roman Crete. Finally we must mention a methodological article, deploying the rich data from the Nemea landscape survey, to tackle issues of changing land use and the sometimes controversial topic of ancient manuring.

Middle Helladic Tombs at Nydri Plain, Lefkas Island. An Archaeological and Paleoanthropological Study

The prehistoric record of Lefkas and the smaller neighboring islands is fairly extensive. The oldest archaeological material dates back to the Middle Palaeolithic period. The Neolithic period is also attested by archaeological finds in five caves. Even though Early (EH) and Middle Helladic (MH) periods have been known since the 1920s due to Dőrpfeld’s excavations, the archaeological data from the Late Bronze Age are scarce. A small Mycenaean tholos tomb has been excavated at Agios Nikitas, while several LH tumuli have been unearthed at the neighboring Meganissi Island.

Sicilian Theatres with Paraskenia Scene Buildings: An Updated Framework for their Chronological Integration

Hellenistic theatre in Magna Graecia and Sicily differs in morphology from its contemporaries in Greece and Asia Minor. Since the beginning of the previous century, scholars have developed a discussion on a variety of issues in their attempt to better understand the architectural evolution of the Sicilian stone theatres, and in particular of their scene building. The most apparent and persistent problems lie in the uncertainty of dating and the morphology of each of the scene buildings. That is due to various difficulties that will be discussed further into this article. Over the last 100 years, this broad discussion has led to very different conclusions and interpretive proposals, especially regarding the dating of the original construction, the identification of the various building phases of these theatres, and the reconstruction proposals for their scene buildings. The issue of dating is related to the issue of the Romanization of Sicily and so far, it has been one of the most problematic chapters in the history of the island.1 Researchers evaluate differently both archaeological finds and historical sources, thus resulting in divergent interpretations of the significance of this period in the history of Sicily. With the results of the archaeological research of the last 30 years, the debate has been rekindled, causing a true polemic. At the epicenter of the enduring controversy are the four theatres with paraskenia scene buildings, namely the theatres of Tyndaris, Segesta, Solous and Iaitas. In this brief survey of the status quaestionis of the dating of these theatres, which makes no claims to comprehensive coverage, it is my intention to suggest that with the progress of archaeological research and the increase of scholarship on Hellenistic Sicily, we are offered arguments that can help us form a fresh interpretative framework for the chronological integration of these theatres and their architectural evolution.

Public vs Private: The Four Categories of Open-Air Spaces at the Late Minoan IIIC Middle Settlement at Monastiraki–Halasmenos (­Ierapetra, Crete)

On the eastern side of the Isthmus of Ierapetra (Crete), just to the north of the village of Monastiraki, and immediately to the south of the mouth of the Ha Gorge, is situated the Late Minoan IIIC (LM IIIC) settlement of Monastiraki – Halasmenos (Tsipopoulou 2011a, 323). It is one of six sites excavated in the northern part of the Isthmus (Figure 1) which were occupied at some point during the 12th century BC (Kavousi – Kastro, Kavousi – Vronda, Kavousi – Azoria, Monastiraki – Katalimata and Vasiliki – Kephala).1 The excavations of Halasmenos by Metaxia Tsipopoulou and the late William D.E. Coulson, beginning in 1992,2 have revealed an apparently short-lived occupation at a location on a steep hill that projects from the face of the adjacent, steep escarpment, the Lamia (Figure 2).

Farming on the Fringe: Diachronic Changes in Land-Use Patterns and Agricultural Strategies in Ancient Nemea

Between 1984 and 1990, the Nemea Valley Archaeological Project (hereafter NVAP), systematically surveyed the Nemea, Asopos, and Longopotamos Valleys, around Nemea, Phlious, and Kleonai in the northeastern Peloponnesos (Figure 1).1 This survey, covering an area of roughly 80 square kilometers, was for its time cutting-edge, both in its intensive approach to surveying the totality of the walkable landscape, and its use of computers for recording and mapping finds.2 The fieldwalking and record-keeping methods employed, which treated individual artifacts as the basic units of analysis, have produced a robust dataset for evaluating settlement patterns, agricultural land-use, and other past human activities within their ecological, economic, social, and historical contexts. This chapter examines the NVAP survey territory and considers the contributions of intensive pedestrian survey to the crafting of a medium- to long-term history of the Greek countryside from the Archaic to Late Roman periods. Through detailed analyses of survey finds’ physical properties and spatial distribution, I assess past settlement patterns and agricultural methods, consider the dynamics of regional production and consumption of ceramics and other goods, and elucidate a range of activities carried out at rural sites.

The Thessalian Mesolithic: Evidence from Theopetra Cave

The Mesolithic from Theopetra Cave was initially presented at the 1st Prehistoric Conference held in Kastoria in 1998,2 and later in 2000 in Documenta Praehistorica and the volume edited by Galanidou and Perlès (2003). Since then, new evidence was produced during the technical works carried out for the development and promotion of the cave (2005–2008), which provided the opportunity to carry out further excavation. Almost two decades later, this paper sets out to, if not provide definite answers regarding the period in Thessaly and Greece generally, at least to contribute to the discussion by presenting new evidence from Theopetra Cave. During these years, apart from our additional excavations, more Mesolithic sites were investigated, mainly on the Aegean islands, including Cyclope Cave on Youra, Maroulas on Kynthos, Kerame on Ikaria, as well as those on the island of Astypalaia8 more recently. Additional sites from mainland Greece include Boila Rockshelter in Epirus, those in the Kopais Basin, and others in the Peloponnese, including Klissoura Cave I and in the Kandia area of the Argolid. The presence of Mesolithic sites on the islands refutes models of the period that had been presented in the literature during previous decades. At this point, it is worth reiterating the following comment made by Demetrios Theocharis in 1967. There are not enough reasons to explain the disappearance of Palaeolithic populations at the end of the Pleistocene and it seems irrational to assume that adaptation here was more difficult than anywhere else. He concludes by saying that if there is any hope of finding the period that connects the Palaeolithic with the Neolithic, we need to undertake more research in caves.

Reinterpreting the Diachronic Variations in the Numbers of Burials Known from Early Iron Age Athens

The number of burials per year known from Athens decreases significantly in the Protogeometric period and then increases rapidly again in the Late Geometric period. The explanation offered for this development by Morris in 1987 is the most popular one so far. This paper will first quickly discuss this and other previous ideas and their wider implications, but then focus on providing a new one. The starting point of this new interpretation is that various types of burial sites may have different recovery rates. I will thus first sketch the different possibilities for the location of graves in Athens in the Early Iron Age and the Archaic period. The subsequent diachronic analysis of these different types of burial sites and their respective popularity forms the core of this contribution. A case study of the Kerameikos and the area of the later Agora as well as an overview of all Athenian sites is provided. These developments and their correspondences in the grave count allow for an interpretation which does account for the variations in the known numbers of graves as well as the changing spatial patterns. This is finally set into the wider field of socio-cultural changes in Early Athens.

Continuity or Rupture? Further Thoughts on the ‘Classical Revolution’ (2500+ Years after Salamis)

In the last half-dozen years, the early fifth-century BC ‘Classical Revolution’ in Greek sculpture and painting has become ‘hot’ again.1 Did it develop gradually, incrementally, and logically out of the Archaic, or emerge quite suddenly (if so, when?), or involve some combination of both? Since chronology drives the debate, as usual in the study of ancient material culture, to restate some basic principles seems appropriate. I. Absolute chronologies, independently derived, should always underpin and guide relative ones. II. In a relative/gradualist chronology, the ‘latest’ feature of an artifact determines its stylistic terminus post quem, and thus its place in the series.2 Nevertheless: III. Such relative dates cannot be turned simply or unproblematically into history.3 IV. Nothing new comes out of nothing (even Athena came from the head of Zeus). Yet: V. Supposed ‘predecessors’ to a revolution on a gradualist chronology often turn out to be hesitant reactions to it when more data emerge.4 In the present case, unfortunately, the Sicyonian, Argive, Aeginetan, and Athenian bronzes celebrated in the texts are all lost, together with all contemporary wall and panel painting; no absolute chronology exists for early fifth-century East Greek sculpture;5 and West Greek sculpture clearly trails that of the mainland. So by default, our spotlight must fall largely on the marble sculpture of Athens, Aegina, and the Cyclades, and on red-figure vase-painting.

Church Construction as a Proxy for Economic Development: the Medieval Settlement Expansion Phase in the Peloponnese

The Peloponnese, with its diverse and varied landscapes, positioned at the crossroads of land and sea connections between West and East, and having a rich archaeological and historical heritage, is one of the most significant regions of the Mediterranean world. Yet, while the special qualities of the region’s landscape are well known to geologists and environmentalists, the evolution of its historical sites and landscapes is much less understood. There has been a prioritization of certain periods, sites, and types of data – with a tendency to focus on the Classical and earlier periods – which has resulted in a disparity in the evidence collected for the various periods of its past. The importance of the medieval landscape is fundamental, as during this period the structure of the modern natural and cultural landscape took shape, such as the patterns of agricultural exploitation and settlement distribution. The medieval landscape formed a dynamic backdrop to people’s daily lives, providing the basis for their sense of place and identity.

Echoes of the Tragic in the Sacred Landscape of Ancient Salamis: A Geospatial Analysis of Hero Cult

What follows is a geospatial analysis of the sacred landscape of Ancient Salamis, an island polity located in the Saronic Gulf, which has been traditionally identified as the seat of the House of Telamon, from where Ajax the Greater (Αἴας ὁ Τελαμώνιος) reputedly launched his expedition to support the campaign against Troy (Iliad. 2.557). In particular, this analysis focuses on the relationship between two sanctuaries purported to be dedicated to Ajax and possibly coexisting during the late Classical and early Hellenistic periods (Figure 1): the first, the principal Temple of Ajax (ναὸς Αἴαντος) reported by Pausanias (Hell. Per. 1.35.3) to have been located at the Classicalperiod town at the Bay of Ampelakia; and the second, situated at a rural location some 12km away amidst the remains of a Mycenaean citadel at Kanakia and neighboring cult precinct at Pyrgiakoni at the far western side of the island excavated and identified by Yannos Lolos in 2005 (Lolos 2012: 47ff).1 Strong archaeological evidence suggests that this rural location (Figure 2) was the site of chthonic votive practice (ibid.: 49) often associated with hero or ancestor cult during the later Classical and Hellenistic periods and during a time when Athenian affiliation with the island and the figure of Ajax was officially sanctioned as a consequence of the political re-engineering of the Athenian polis under Kleisthenes.