The Post Mycenaean Dead: ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’

ΑΘΥΡΜΑΤΑ

Critical Essays on the Archaeology of the Eastern

Mediterranean in Honour of E. Susan Sherratt

Edited by

Yannis Galanakis, Toby Wilkinson and John Bennet

Archaeopress Archaeology

ArchaeopressGordon House

276 Banbury RoadOxford OX2 7ED

www.archaeopress.com

ISBN 978 1 78491 018 1ISBN 978 1 78491 019 8 (e-Pdf)

© Archaeopress and the individual authors 2014

The editors wish to express their gratitude to the Sheffield Centre for Aegean Archaeology and Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge for generous financial support that enabled the inclusion of colour images.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise,

without the prior written permission of the copyright owners.

Printed in England by CMP (UK) LtdThis book is available direct from Archaeopress or from our website www.archaeopress.com

i

Contents

Contents

List of Contributors �� iii

Introduction �� 1Yannis Galanakis, Toby Wilkinson and John Bennet

A selected list of publications by Sue Sherratt (as of autumn 2014) �� 6

How and when did Tel Akko get its unusual banana shape? �� 11Michal Artzy and Jamie Quartermaine

The integration of gold resources in the Byzantine economy: an open question �� 23Evanthia Baboula

The ‘Sea Peoples’ as an emergent phenomenon �� 31Alexander A. Bauer

Pottery mobility, landscape survey and maritime activity: a view from Kythera �� 41Cyprian Broodbank and Evangelia Kiriatzi

‘In vino veritas’: raising a toast at Mycenaean funerals �� 51William Cavanagh and Christopher Mee†

Geraki in Laconia in Late Helladic times �� 57Joost Crouwel

How warlike were the Mycenaeans, in reality? �� 67Oliver Dickinson

Desecrating signs: ‘hieroglyphic’ writing systems and secondary script inventions �� 73Silvia Ferrara

Chronologies should carry a ‘use by’ date: the archaeological life history of the ‘Beth Shan Stirrup Jar’ �� 81Elizabeth French

Arthur Evans and the quest for the “origins of Mycenaean culture” �� 85Yannis Galanakis

Man/Woman, Warrior/Maiden: The Lefkandi Toumba female burial reconsidered �� 99Kate Harrell

The Waz-lily and the Priest’s Axe: can relief-beads tell us something? �� 105Helen Hughes-Brock

‘Working with the shadows’: in search of the myriad forms of social complexity �� 117Maria Iacovou

James Saumarez Cameron: a forgotten collector of Cretan seals �� 127Olga Krzyszkowska

ii

The Post-Mycenaean dead: ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’ �� 135Katie Lantzas

The spider’s web: innovation and society in the Early Helladic ‘Period of the Corridor Houses’ �� 141Joseph Maran and Maria Kostoula

‘Metal makes the wheel go round’: the development and diffusion of studded-tread wheels in the Ancient Near East and the Old World �� 159Simone Mühl

“For it is written”: an experimental approach to the materiality and temporality of clay documents inscribed in Linear B �� 177Tom Pape, Paul Halstead, John Bennet and Yannis Stangidis

A ‘wall bracket’ from Kandia in the Argolid: notes on the local character and function of an ‘east Mediterranean’ artefact of the Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age�� 187Lorenz Rahmstorf

Reading post-palatial Mycenaean iconography: some lessons from Lefkandi �� 197Jeremy B. Rutter

Functions and meanings of Aegean-type pottery at Tel Beth-Shean �� 207Philipp W. Stockhammer

Ceramic developments in coastal Western Anatolia at the dawn of the Early Iron Age �� 223Rik Vaessen

Beaker Folk in Thrace: a metrological footnote �� 233Michael Vickers

Rosso antico marble and the façade entablature of the Treasury of Atreus �� 237Peter Warren

Feasts of clay? Ceramics and feasting at Early Minoan Myrtos: Fournou Korifi �� 247Todd Whitelaw

Dressing the house, dressing the pots: textile-inspired decoration in the late 3rd and 2nd millennia BC east Mediterranean �� 261Toby C. Wilkinson

135

16

The Post-Mycenaean dead: ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’1

Katie Lantzas

Problems1

It has been widely argued that the elaboration of mortuary rituals and practices were linked to the growing centralization of the Mycenaean palatial organization during its formative stages. These developments took place from the early second millennium until the 13th century BC. It has also been suggested that centuries after the abandonment of the palatial model, emerging elites manufactured connections to a mythical ancestor or kin-group via manipulation of the extant Late Bronze Age remains (Antonaccio 1995; Button 2007: 77; Voutsaki 1998; Morris 1987; Wright 2008a).

Two ends of a spectrum of socio-political activities utilizing the mortuary landscape have been convincingly argued. We still lack, however, a clear picture of the beginnings of the latter half of the process. How was the mortuary landscape used or ignored by the population living in the area of Mycenae (Figure 16.1) during, and directly subsequent to, the rejection of the palatial system and ideology? What can the mortuary landscape in this area tell us about the socio-economic and ideological developments that took place between 1200 and 900 BC?

Mortuary contexts have been described as the most complete body of evidence on which studies of the Iron Age can rely (Morris 1987: 8). Therefore, it would seem a reasonable assumption that the mortuary record from this era would be well-represented in the literature and subject to critical examination and systematic publication. While this may be the case for the latter half of this period, many of these studies actually present only a cursory examination to the earlier material and focus instead on the perceived resurgence or revival during the 8th century BC (Desborough 1972; Morris 2000; Whitley 1991). This divide is based on two assumptions: 1) that the development from Mycenaean palace to city-state was a linear one consisting of the rise and fall of the palatial

1 As a doctoral student at Sheffield who wanted to study the Iron Age in the Argolid and who believed (with all the conviction of a first-year graduate student) in the importance of continuing research in this period, it was natural that Sue would be my advisor. While pointing out the complexities of working on a body of material that had a problematic record of publication, Sue taught me to approach the evidence with a more critical eye, to explore what was there and what was not and, most importantly, let the data guide my interpretations rather than trying to fit the data into a pre-existing model. This contribution is an exercise in making the most of the post-palatial mortuary evidence from Mycenae.

centres and the re-emergence of social complexity after a period of disorganization; and 2) that the archaeological record from this intervening period is lacking in both quantity and breadth of material.

Due to certain constraints – such as differential preservation, recovery, and publication practices – the mortuary evidence from the Late Helladic (LH) IIIB2 to the Early Geometric period remains fragmentary and is, at times, difficult to interpret. In addition, there is no consistency in the analysis and publication of the mortuary contexts that have been discovered: sex and age data are not always available even at the basic level of classification (e.g., ‘adult’, ‘child’ or ‘infant’). This should not act as a deterrent to research, but inevitably does influence the types of analyses that can be reasonably applied to the material.

With respect to the Late Bronze – Iron Age transition in the Argolid, and at Mycenae in particular, we need to move past comparing instances of wealth and elaboration from previous periods with the body of mortuary data dating to 1200-900 BC. Moving beyond a comparative approach that merely notes the ‘impoverished’ nature of post-palatial mortuary contexts allows for a more nuanced examination of the practical, ideological, and socio-economic aspects that these mortuary practices and contexts can facilitate (Rakita and Buikstra 2005: 1). It may even be possible to use Late Bronze through Iron Age mortuary evidence to examine the cyclical nature of socio-economic collapse and regeneration through the lens of communities’ responses to death (Cannon 1989; Rakita and Buikstra 2005: 5).

Material2

A significant number of mortuary contexts dating to both the LH IIIC and Early Geometric periods have been discovered at Mycenae. Throughout this period, adults of both sexes, as well as children and infants, were inhumed in a variety of mortuary contexts at Mycenae, including chamber tombs, pits and cists and vessel inhumations. These mortuary contexts were located within the ruins of the former palace, in previously established cemeteries, and within the emerging settlement outside the walls of the main palatial centre. In addition to these individual mortuary contexts, there are five chamber tombs with evidence for use in the period under examination located

2 The dataset presented here was compiled for my doctoral dissertation (Lantzas 2012).

Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium

136

ΑΘΥΡΜΑΤΑ: Critical Essays on the Archaeology of the Eastern Mediterranean in Honour of E. Susan Sherratt

in other previously established Mycenaean chamber tomb cemeteries, with evidence of continued use until LH IIIC Middle.

Chamber tomb G-III from Gortsoulia, located north-east of the citadel on the southern slope of Profitis Ilias, contained seven inhumations within the chamber, and two innichesα′andβ′,locatedinthedromos.Theseindividualmortuary contexts were most probably intended for infant inhumations, based on the lack of skeletal material and the presence of grave goods, such as Psi-type figurines and a limited amount of pottery (Shelton 2000: 37). The initial construction of this chamber tomb has been dated to LH IIIA1 and the final inhumation to LH IIIC Middle, which is consistent with the abandonment of chamber tomb constructions and burials throughout the Argolid (Shelton 2000: 36 and 38).

Chamber tomb P-I, located in the cemetery on the Panagia ridge below the church of the same name, was constructed during LH IIIA2 (Shelton 2000: 51). The final inhumation within this mortuary context has been dated to LH IIIC Early. Three children and one adult were definitively identified from the skeletal material, although the existence of additional skeletal material belonging to children was also implied in the publication. The presence of fragmentary and incomplete skeletal material in a cluster along the north side of the chamber indicates that the chamber had been cleared to make room for additional occupants. The type of grave goods, which included a high number of complete and fragmentary figurines, and the

fact that only one adult skeleton was identified, suggest that this mortuary context was used almost exclusively for children. This point is interesting, because it appears that, in general, children were completely segregated from other members of the population in this cemetery. Clearly, children were valued sufficiently by this group to merit burial in this chamber tomb (Shelton 2000: 54).

Chamber tomb 502, located in the Third Kilometre cemetery was constructed during LH III. The earliest inhumations were moved to the north-east side and west corner of the chamber. Eight complete vessels were associated with the final inhumation and, as Wace (1932: 6) describes them, they “…belong to the Granary Class”. The importance of this evidence is that it demonstrates the re-use of a specific chamber tomb prior to, during, and after the demise of the palatial hierarchy at Mycenae. “If a Mycenaean family could continue to use the same tomb down to, and perhaps after, the fall of Mycenae, there could hardly have been a violent change of population” (Wace 1932: 6).

The continued use of chamber tombs during LH IIIC at Prosymna, Asine and Argos, further supports Wace’s original conclusion that there was no dramatic change in population after the collapse of the palatial administration, not just at Mycenae, but at other sites throughout the Argolid as well.

Grave B from Alepotrypa, located on the south-east slope of the Kalkani hill, is one of the rare chamber tombs that was probably constructed and used entirely during LH

Figure 16.1. Map showing location of sites in the Argolid.


137

Katie Lantzas: The Post-Mycenaean dead: ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’

IIIC (Shelton 2003: 36). No age or sex data are available for the occupants of this tomb.

Chamber tomb 532 was located in the Kalkani cemetery. The chamber contained two layers of highly disturbed bones and ceramic material. Wace (1932: 113) determined that fifteen inhumations could be dated to LH III. Despite the highly disturbed nature of this mortuary context, a LH

IIIC Middle stirrup jar was discovered among the remains of the skeletal material that had been dated to LH III (see also Thomatos 2006: 149).

Chronologically overlapping and subsequent to the chamber tombs were various cist, pit and vessel inhumations (Table 16.1). They range in date from LH IIIC late to Early Geometric and have been discovered within

No Name Location Type Dates Finds Occupants1 PG 12; 3

UnnamedPanagia Houses Cist; Pit;

Pit; PitPG; LH IIIB/C; PG;

2 bronze hair-rings; 3 iron pins Adult; Adult; Adult; Child

2 (None) Area of Lion Tomb Pit LH IIIB/C None Child3 Tripod Tomb House of the Tripod

Tomb Cist; Pit LH IIIC 2 bronze tripod cauldrons; 20

bronze double axes; bronze tool7 Adults

4 (None) Under third step of Processional Way

Cist LH IIIC 2 fibulae; amphoriskos Child

5 XXXIX Prehistoric Cemetery Cist LH IIIC Bowl; Jug; Steatite spindle whorl

Infant

6

7

(None)

Pithos Burial

Room S, Cyclopean Terrace Building

Cyclopean Terrace Building, South Chamber

Cist

Vessel

LH IIIC Late

LH IIIC Late

Stirrup jar

2 stirrup jars; jug

1

Adult

8 Larnax Burial Stratum XI of Lion Gate Vessel LH IIIC Deep bowl; jug 19 Γ 31 Room 39 behind South

HouseCist EPG 2 bronze dress pins; 3 bronze

fibulae; bronze finger ring; spindle whorl; cup; jug; stirrup jar; 4 lekythoi

Female Child

10 PG 601 House of Shields Cist EPG Iron pin; belly-handled amphora; askos; spindle whorl

Adult

11 Γ 23 Area of the Temple Cist PG Iron pin; bronze finger-ring; amphora; lekythos

Adult Female

12 Γ 21 South House Annex Cist PG Iron pin Adult Female13 (None) Rise of south slope near

GCBCist; Cist PG None 2

14 PG 606 Room 10 House of Sphinxes

Cist PG 2 bronze finger-rings; Jug; Amphora; Shallow bowl; Possible lamp; 24 pebbles

Child

15 PG 602 House of Shields Pit LPG-EG Pyxis; Jug Young Adult Female; 2 Children

16 G 604 House of the Shields Pit EG 2 bronze pins; 2 bronze rings; iron knife blade; iron pin; 3 Trefoil-lipped oinochoi; pyxis

Adult Male; Adult Female

17 G 603 House of the Shields Cist EG 3 bronze pins; 3 bronze finger-rings; bronze earring; bronze fibula; 3 pyxides; 2 oinochoi; miniature oinochoe; amphora; cup; goblet

1

18 G 607 House of the Sphinxes Cist EG Bronze earring; bronze finger-ring; 2 bronze pins; 4 skyphoi; 2 amphoriskoi; 9 cups; lid; 4 pyxides; aryballos; oinochoe; 2 miniature trefoil-lipped oinochoi

Adult Female

19 (None) North Quarter Pit EG None 6 Children20 (None) Building Kappa Cist EG- G None Child

Table 16.1. Catalogue of mortuary contexts from Mycenae dating between the LH IIIC and the Early Geometric periods.


138


the area of the LH III fortification walls, in association with structures, and also beyond the fortification walls. Areas used for placement of individual mortuary contexts, which contained adults of both sexes and infants and children, include the Citadel House and Citadel House Area, the Temple Complex, the area near the Lion Gate, and the North Quarter (Vlachou 2002 for general discussion; Taylour 1981: 53; Desborough 1973; Lemos 2002 for re-dating). Even buildings outside the citadel walls, which are assumed to have been associated with the palatial administration, such as Panagia House III and the House of the Sphinxes, were re-used as locations for individual mortuary contexts (French 2002: 135 and 141; Iakovidis and French 2003: 35-39; Mylonas Shear 1987: 3, 33 and 70). In addition, excavations in the field south of the Oil Merchant group and east of the Chavos Ravine revealed an Early Geometric cist grave. This individual mortuary context contained an adult inhumation accompanied by four complete pyxides and one broken handmade jar. The skeleton was adorned with a bronze pin located on the right shoulder and a bronze ring. The cist grave inhumation is located against the outside wall of a building, which has not yet been fully explored. Nevertheless, this individual mortuary context is tentative evidence for habitation in the area and mortuary activity outside the walls of the citadel (Lantzas 2012: 57). Substantial burial evidence potentially associated with the population at Mycenae has also been discovered further afield, 2.5 km south-west of Mycenae on the ancient road from Mycenae to Argos. The tumulus at Chania was surrounded by a row of orthostats and contained nine cremation urns, which have been dated to the Late Helladic IIIC Middle period. This type of disposal and the use of cinerary urns during this period is unique and suggests the strong desire on the part of those using this disposal area to set themselves apart (Hägg 1987: 211; Papademetriou 2006: 532; Lemos 2002: 157).

Reading the Evidence

From this brief description of Late Bronze through Iron Age mortuary contexts at Mycenae, several important points can be made. First, as previously argued by Wace (1932: 6), it is clear that there was no dramatic change in population in this area. Second, the community that remained at Mycenae throughout the socio-economic and political changes that took place during this period maintained a claim to both the main palatial centre and the surrounding landscape. Finally, this community made a deliberate choice to reject forms of burial previously associated with the Mycenaean palatial elite.

To interpret these developments, it is useful to refer to James Wright (2008a) who discusses the social and political rationale behind the widespread use of the chamber tomb. Rather than suggesting that the introduction and proliferation of the chamber tomb was due to a change in preferences, he argues that it was indicative of changing socio-economic and political realities (Wright 2008a: 144). I apply this approach to the decline and disappearance of cumulative mortuary contexts. The transition from

cumulative to individual mortuary contexts is one example of a fundamental ideological shift that supported and was supported by the social, political and economic organization of Iron Age communities.

Chamber tombs became relatively widespread throughout the Argolid by LH III and developed into a feature of the palatial ideology in which the corporate group identity was more important than that of individuals (Wright 2008a: 149; Wright 2008b: 238). At Mycenae itself, no chamber tombs are known to have been constructed after LH IIIC and, currently, the final inhumation documented within a cumulative mortuary context has been dated to LH IIIC Middle. Similarly, while some kin-groups at other sites in the Argolid continued to inhume their dead in chamber tombs until the LH IIIC Late (e.g., Argos: Deshayes 1966: 39-69 and Asine: Frödin and Persson 1938: 151-88), only a very few new chamber tombs were constructed in LH IIIC and no new chamber tombs were constructed after LH IIIC. I would argue that this is due, in part, to the association of chamber tombs with palatial ideology – an association which was stronger at ‘palatial’ centres (and hence ceased to be constructed at them more quickly than at places less directly influenced by them).

Concomitant with the decline and eventual abandonment of the chamber tomb, there was an increase in the use of individual inhumation contexts during this period. The placement of mortuary contexts within palatial remains at Mycenae is not seen at other former palatial citadels, at least to the same degree. Only Tiryns boasts a small number of individual mortuary contexts located in the Lower Citadel (Papademetriou 2003: 713-16). The general increase in the number of individual inhumations as opposed to cumulative inhumations has traditionally been viewed from two opposing standpoints. Snodgrass (2000: 145-47 and 153) argued that the increasing use of cist graves was indicative of a new intrusive culture, while Desborough (1972: 266) suggested that the use of cist and pit graves was a revival of Middle Helladic mortuary practices that had been suppressed by the Mycenaean palatial culture. In fact, cist and pit inhumations were in use throughout the Bronze Age (see e.g., Lewartowski 2000). It is therefore reasonable to assume that communities throughout the Late Bronze Age were familiar with this type of individual mortuary context and that a new population was not essential for the spread of individual inhumation in these forms.

The placement of the dead also demonstrates changing socio-economic realities. While the continued use of the mortuary landscape around Mycenae and specific chamber tombs strongly indicates continuity of population and the prolonged claim to the area, the appropriation of the main palatial centre itself as an area of the disposal of the deceased suggests an active rejection of the palatial ideology. Considering the lack of architectural evidence from within the citadel walls, the presence of mortuary activities indicates that the remaining communities changed the meaning of this area by altering its primary


139

Katie Lantzas: The Post-Mycenaean dead: ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’

function from an area of socio-economic activity to one appropriate for the placement of the dead. It is as if the post-palatial communities at Mycenae colonised this area with their dead in order to maintain a connection to it and to prohibit anyone from using the citadel and associated houses for political, administrative or even domestic purposes again. The area within the citadel walls was no longer the seat of authority and a place for the living. The post-palatial communities at Mycenae seem to be deliberately distancing themselves from the palatial administration through the deliberate placement of their dead within the citadel (Morris 2000: 206).

Conclusions

The changes that I have highlighted – the abandonment of the cumulative mortuary context and rise of individual inhumations in a variety of forms – indicate that an ideological shift was taking place in response to the collapse of the Mycenaean palatial administration. Mee (2011: 239) has suggested that this demonstrates a “…sense of insecurity which had undermined confidence in the social order and the traditions that underpinned this”. For the Late Bronze through Iron Age transition, I would argue one step beyond and suggest that while many mortuary practices had precedent in earlier periods, they began to demonstrate an emerging ideology and set of practices that privileged the individual.

The majority of the evidence for post-palatial occupation at Mycenae comes from mortuary contexts and, therefore, should not be ignored. However, these contexts have been excavated, recorded, and published with varying degrees of detail and should also be used with caution. Simply stated, ‘you’re damned if you ignore or overlook this evidence and you’re damned if you don’t make the most of it!’

If we move beyond the preconceived notions and received wisdom related to the Late Bronze through Iron Age transition, then it is possible to use the available archaeological evidence to discuss socio-economic and ideological changes that offer greater insight than previous comparative approaches, which have been focused on the lack of wealth or evidence altogether. It is the analysis of the mortuary evidence within the context of the Late Bronze Age through Iron Age transition that will provide nuanced information about socio-political developments (Pappi and Triantaphyllou: 2011).

References

Antonaccio, C. 1995 An Archaeology of Ancestors: Tomb Cult and

Hero Cult in Early Greece. Lanham: Rowman andLittlefield.

Button, S. 2007 Mortuary studies, memory, and the Mycenaean

polity. In Yoffee, N. (ed.) Negotiating the Past

in the Past: Identity, Memory, and Landscape in Archaeological Research, 76-103. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.

Cannon, A. 1989 The historical dimension in mortuary

expressions of status and sentiment. Current Anthropology 30(4): 437-58.

Desborough, V.R.d’A. 1972 The Greek Dark Ages. London: Ernest Benn. 1973 Late Burials from Mycenae. Annual of the

British School at Athens 68: 87-101.Deshayes, J. 1966 Argos: Les Fouilles De La Deiras. Paris:

Librarie Philosophique J. Vrin.French, E.B. 2002 Mycenae. Agamemnon’s Capital: The Site in its

Setting. Stroud: Tempus.Frödin, O. and A.W. Persson 1938 Asine: The results of the Swedish Excavations

1922-1930. Stockholm: Generalstabens LitografiskaAnstatsFörlag.

Hägg, R. 1987 Submycenaean Cremation Burials in the

Argolid? In R. Laffineur (ed.) Thanatos: les coutumes funéraires en Egée à l’âge du Bronze. Actes du colloque de Liège, 21-23 avril 1986, 207-12. Liège: Université de Liège.

Iakovidis, S. and E.B. French (eds.) 2003 The Archaeological Atlas of Mycenae. Library

of the Athens Archaeological Society 229. Athens: The Archaeological Society at Athens.

Lantzas, K. 2012 Settlement and social trends in the Argolid

and Methana peninsula, 1200-900 BC. British Archaeological Reports International Series 2421. Oxford: Archaeopress.

Lemos, I.S. 2002 The Protogeometric Aegean: The archaeology

of the late eleventh and tenth centuries BC. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lewartowski, K. 2000 Late Helladic Simple Graves: A Study

of Mycenaean Burial Customs. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 878. Oxford: Archaeopress.

Mee, C. 2011 Greek Archaeology: A Thematic Approach.

Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Morris, I. 1987 Burial and Ancient Society: The Rise of the

Greek City-State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

2000 Archaeology as Cultural History. Oxford: Blackwell.

Mylonas Shear, I. 1987 The Panagia Houses at Mycenae. Philadelphia:

University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.

Papademetriou, A. 2003 Οι Υπομυκηναϊκoί και Πρωτογεωμετρικoί


140


Τάφοι της Τίρυνθας. Ανάλυση και Ερμηνεία.In A. Vlachopoulos and K. Birtacha (eds.), Αργοναύτης: τιμητικός τόμος για τον καθηγητή Χρίστο Γ. Ντούμα από τους μαθητές του στο Πανεπιστήμιο Αθηνών (1980-2000), 713-28. Athens: Kathimerini.

2006 The Early Iron Age in the Argolid. In S. Deger- Jalkotzy and I.S. Lemos (eds.) Ancient Greece From the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer. 531-547. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Pappi, E. and S. Triantaphyllou 2011 Mortuary practices and the human remains: a

preliminary study of the Geometric graves in Argos, Argolid. In A. Mazarakis-Ainian (ed.), The Dark Ages Revisited. An International Conference in Memory of William D.E. Coulson, 14-17 June 2007, 673-88. Volos: University of Thessaly Press.

Rakita, G.F.M and J.E. Buikstra 2005 Introduction. In G.F.M Rakita, J.E. Buikstra,

L.A. Beck and S.R. Williams (eds.), Interacting with the Dead: Perspectives on Mortuary Archaeology for the New Millennium, 1-12. Gainesville: University of Florida Press.

Shelton, K. 2000 Four chamber tomb cemeteries at Mycenae.

Archaiologike Ephemeris 139: 17-64. 2003 The cemeteries. In S. Iakovidis and E.B. French

(eds.), The Archaeological Atlas of Mycenae. Library of the Athens Archaeological Society 229: 35-39. Athens: The Archaeological Society at Athens.

Snodgrass, A. 2000 The Dark Age of Greece. An Archaeological

Survey of the Eleventh to the Eighth Centuries BC. New edn. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Taylour, W.D. 1981 Well Built Mycenae: The Helleno-British

Excavations within the citadel at Mycenae 1959-1969. Fascicule 1: The Excavations. Warminster: Aris and Phillips.

Thomatos, M. 2006 The Final Revival of the Aegean Bronze Age:

A Case Study of the Argolid, Corinthia, Attica, Euboea, the Cyclades and the Dodecanese During LH IIIC Middle. British Archaeological Reports International Series 1498. Oxford: Archaeopress.

Vlachou, V. 2002 ΤαφέςκαιταφικάέθιμαΜυκηνώντωνΠρώιμων

ΙστορικώνΧρόνων.Diachronia 5: 35-52.Voutsaki, S. 1998 Mortuary evidence, symbolic meanings and

social change: a comparison between Messenia and the Argolid in the Mycenaean period. In K. Branigan (ed.), Cemetery and Society in the Aegean Bronze Age. Sheffield Studiesin Aegean Archaeology 1: 41-58. Sheffield:SheffieldAcademicPress.

Wace, A.J.B. 1932 Chamber tombs at Mycenae. Archaeologia 82:

1-242.Whitley, J. 1991 Style and Society in Dark Age Greece: The

Changing Face of a Pre-literate Society 1100-700 BC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wright, J. 2008a Chamber tombs, family, and state in Mycenaean

Greece. In C. Gallou, M. Georgiadis, and G.M. Muskett (eds.) Dioskouroi: Studies Presented to W.G. Cavanagh and C.B. Mee on the Anniversary of their 30-Year Joint Contribution to Aegean Archaeology. British Archaeological Reports International Series 1889: 144-53. Oxford: Archaeopress.

2008b Early Mycenaean Greece. In C.W. Shelmerdine (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Aegean Bronze Age, 230-57. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


The Post Mycenaean Dead: ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’

Documents

Transcript of The Post Mycenaean Dead: ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’