:Ausgrabungen in der frühbronzezeitlichen Siedlung im Heraion von Samos 1966

Abstract

Previous articleNext article FreeBook ReviewAusgrabungen in der frühbronzezeitlichen Siedlung im Heraion von Samos 1966 By Hans Peter Isler (Samos 30). Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert 2021. Pp. xiv + 264. ISBN 978-3-95490-535-5 (hardcover) €69.Sergios MenelaouSergios MenelaouFitch Laboratory, British School at Athens. Athens, Greece Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmailQR Code SectionsMoreThe present volume forms the final publication of the excavation carried out in 1966 by H.P. Isler at the Heraion on Samos, eastern Aegean, Greece, in the area of the Hera Temple, north of the North Stoa. Isler’s sole publication since the excavation has been a preliminary report issued in 1973 (“An Early Bronze Age Settlement on Samos,” Archaeology 26.3, 170–75). He notes in the foreword to this volume that for various logistical and technical reasons (expenses of fieldwork, restoration and inventorying of the finds, documentation of contexts and processing of material), the publication had been postponed for nearly six decades despite having had the draft manuscript completed since 1976. The recording and restoration of additional finds, predominantly pottery, were completed in 2004, at which time new photographs and illustrations were incorporated, and the manuscript was finalized in its present form in 2018.Samos 30 sheds light on different aspects of material culture at Heraion, including pottery, small finds, architecture, and chronology, in an attempt to contextualize Samos within the interregional scene of the late third millennium BCE. This well-illustrated volume presents an unknown part of the prehistoric settlement beneath the Sanctuary of Hera, home to one of the most prestigious and renowned religious centers in the ancient Greek world. More importantly, it adds significant comparanda to the preliminary report by H.-J. Weisshaar in 1985 and planned publications of the excavations undertaken by Ourania Kouka (2009–13) in the area of the Sacred Road and Hans Walter (1958–59) in the area of the Hera Temple.In a short introduction (ch. 1), Isler provides information on the location of the excavated area in a 40.5 × 10 m trench that corresponds to squares G/5, H/4, and H/5. This trench was near the area excavated by Vladimir Milojčić in 1953 and 1955 (particularly in F/6), lying to the north and outside of the Archaic-period sanctuary. As Isler outlines in the introduction, it is not surprising that the chronological sequence of layers is comparable to that identified by Milojčić and corresponds to phase IV. Isler mentions that possible older layers were identified in a deep sounding at the southwest corner of the trench (3). According to a reevaluation of the published data by Kouka and Menelaou (“Settlement and society in the Early Bronze Age Heraion: Exploring stratigraphy, architecture and ceramic innovation after mid–3rd millennium BC,” in Pottery Technologies and Sociocultural Connections between the Aegean and Anatolia during the 3rd millennium BC, E. Alram-Stern and B. Horejs, eds., Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften 2018, 119–42, table 1), Heraion IV can be correlated with Early Bronze Age (EBA) IIIA. Only a sketch plan (plan 2) of the excavated area was prepared before backfilling of the trench, but fortunately plan 1 shows its location in a schematic reconstruction. Of the prehistoric remains, only those discovered by Milojčić are shown on this plan, which is better developed in a color-coded format in Kouka’s publications (see “‘Minding the Gap’: Against the Gaps. The Early Bronze Age and the Transition to the Middle Bronze Age in the Northern and Eastern Aegean/Western Anatolia,” AJA 117.4, 2013, 569–80, fig. 1).Chapter 2, on the pottery and small finds, forms the core of this volume. The presentation of the pottery finds begins with a short description of six main clay fabric types as distinguished macroscopically through a naked-eye examination, explaining that no further analysis was conducted due to “bureaucratic and practical reasons” (6 n. 31). Unfortunately, Isler does not take into account the previous and ongoing program of scientific analysis of prehistoric pottery from Milojčić’s (1953 and 1955), Kyrieleis and Weisshaar’s (1981), and Kouka’s (2009–13) excavations at the Heraion (e.g., S. Menelaou, A Diachronic Study of the Early Bronze Age Pottery from Heraion on Samos, Greece: An Integrated Approach, Ph.D. diss., University of Sheffield, 2018; S. Menelaou and O. Kouka, “‘Cooking Up’ Pottery Recipes: A Diachronic Technological and Provenance Analysis of Cooking Ware Ceramics from Prehistoric Heraion on Samos, Greece (ca. 4500–1700 BCE),” JAS Reports 35, 2021, 102716).A well-developed pottery typology (based on the system used in Troy’s publications) follows, divided into six main categories (Typentäfeln) that consist of vessels for eating and drinking, serving and pouring, storing (including cooking pots), and outliers or individual forms. Within each category, Isler identifies different forms (amounting to 49), conveniently discussed in a catalogue format with references to selected, illustrated examples and comparanda from Milojčić’s publication (Die prähistorische Siedlung unter dem Heraion. Grabung 1953 und 1955, Samos I, Bonn 1961), as well as from Troy, and occasionally from Beycesultan. Selected Cycladic and Cretan sites are used for comparisons with specific forms that Isler discusses in the context of cultural influences (e.g., Form 19: Barbotine jugs; Form 22: askoi) and importation (e.g., Form 21). References to possible imports are made here and there and include clay type E (7), 15 pottery vessels (8; pls. 2.8, 4.7, 36.4; Form 18, cut-away spouted jug, is mentioned as an Anatolian import but its type, fabric, and surface treatment point to late EBA II local parallels), and other clay finds. It is noteworthy that the small finds are given consideration almost equal to the pottery. They are presented by material category, starting from the clay finds (predominantly spindle whorls with incised decoration and figurative motifs; perforated sherds with secondary use as loom weights; seals; and others), stone finds (mainly chert and obsidian cores, flakes, and tools; obsidian from Melos Island confirms maritime mobility during EBA III and continuation of connections since the foundation of Heraion in the Middle Chalcolithic), a few metal artifacts perhaps related to a single stone mold (parallels at Troy, Poliochni-Lemnos, and Thermi-Lesbos), and rare bone artifacts.In what follows (ch. 3), Isler presents the contexts with all associated finds, the majority of which were restorable and uncovered in separate groups, listing them by individual number, with concordances to the illustrations and photographs placed at the back of the volume. The stratigraphically simple conditions in the area seem to justify such a separate presentation of the individual finds. This chapter is particularly valuable for understanding the intrasite organization and microscale function of different households, to which every catalogued object is linked. What is missing, though, is a more nuanced discussion on craft organization and mode of production for the different artifact categories. Despite the small size of the excavated area, at least three multiroom structures were uncovered, though not completely exposed. Among these, Building I is the best preserved and comprises four rooms with possibly different functions, according to Isler’s analysis of finds and spaces. Other closed deposits and concentrations of finds, uncovered in the western part of the trench, are also discussed thoroughly. Out of 180 ceramic vessels and 212 small finds included in the volume, 128 vessels and 116 small finds were found in these seven deposits.Chapter 4 deals with the chronology of the site, based mainly on relative ceramic and stratigraphic associations with Milojčić’s excavations, which correspond to the “Burnt House Layer.” More specifically, 26 of the 49 vessel types recognized by Isler were documented by Milojčić, acknowledging that some of the types might be of later date, perhaps corresponding to Heraion V (104). Isler correlates the 1966 pottery finds with established typologies and relative classifications from Troy, Beycesultan, and Tarsus (105–7)—supplemented with a few parallels from Crete (Barbotine ware: table 12.1; possible imports: table 13.4, 13.5)—perhaps the best-documented Anatolian sites at the time of preparing his first manuscript. This, however, resulted in dismissing important literature and publications of sites in the Meander River valley, southwest Anatolia, and the Izmir region, as well as more recent excavations from island sites in the Dodecanese that were published after the 1970s. The next section, called “absolute chronology” constitutes a continuation of the discussion on relative correlations (108–9).In a two-page chapter (ch. 5), Isler explains the decline of the settlement under the lens of destructions reflected in the burnt layer, perhaps caused by the migration of new peoples. Although acknowledging that “further investigation must be carried out” (112) in order to trace any chronological gaps in the Heraion sequence, Isler does not take into account the recent paper by Kouka (2013), which supports the chronological continuity in the transition from the Early to the Middle Bronze Age.In the last chapter (ch. 6), Isler provides a brief contextualization of Heraion within western Anatolian and Aegean EBA developments (mainly with reference to Troy and Beycesultan), starting with a synthesis of the production technology for the main material classes. He places more emphasis on pottery, which comprises the vast majority of finds, and attempts a technological presentation from the manufacturing techniques to the surface treatment modes and decorative styles. Some basic distinction is also achieved between handmade and wheelmade ceramic vessels. However, this chapter could have elaborated further on the relationship between technological features of each stage of the operational sequence (processing of raw materials, firing, and finishing are disproportionally discussed) and the forms, shapes, and functions of the pottery assemblage. In the last two sections of chapter 6, on the position of Heraion and Samos in general in the intra- and interregional networks of interaction and connectivity, Isler rightly recognizes the cultural relationship between Samos and the Meander River valley, but this discussion could have benefited from a more extensive geographical reference scheme.Despite the aforementioned weaknesses, this book demonstrates how much can be accomplished in a meticulously executed traditional, printed volume, following the standards of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut’s publication series. A notable strength of the volume is the presentation of a large body of well-dated artifacts, especially pottery, from closed contexts, and Isler should be praised for compiling the detailed lists and catalogues of the illustrated finds. Equally noteworthy is the restoration work carried out over the years and the visual presentation of the various material classes in photographs (pls. 1–63) and line drawings (suppls. 1–48). While this publication lacks an up-to-date bibliography (no references appear at the end of the volume apart from a list of abbreviations of the main publications cited in the notes) as well as references to the recent work at prehistoric Heraion (other than a few mentions in chapter 1), it is a valuable read for researchers working in the eastern Aegean region and the surrounding area. Prehistoric Heraion, located at a nodal, coastal point on southeast Samos, is now recognized as an important maritime hub having connections with either side of the Aegean and the coastlands of the Helladic and Anatolian worlds. Our hitherto fuzzy knowledge of Samos’ position in interregional networks during late prehistory has markedly improved thanks to recent finds that allow the reconstruction of a stratified diachronic sequence at Heraion (late sixth to mid second millennium BCE) through the use of integrated, novel methodologies, and through an extensive publication program, to which Isler’s work is a greatly appreciated addition.Notes[email protected] Previous articleNext article DetailsFiguresReferencesCited by American Journal of Archaeology Volume 127, Number 2April 2023 The journal of the Archaeological Institute of America Views: 62Total views on this site Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/724673 Views: 62Total views on this site HistoryPublished online March 07, 2023 Copyright © 2023 by the Archaeological Institute of AmericaPDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.