Abstract
AbstractTholos A at Apesokari (south-central Crete, Greece) was constructed on a sloping ledge of bedrock, overlooking the Mesara Plain below. Such an inconvenient topographic setting makes Tholos A an unusual example in the corpus of Minoan circular tombs, which were more commonly built on flatter ground. The builders seem to have cared greatly about placing Tholos A precisely at this location, even at the risk of jeopardizing the stability of its circular chamber. Furthermore, due to limited space availability, the annex rooms of Tholos A had to be built at a higher level on the bedrock, resulting in an architectural configuration unparalleled in other circular tombs. This paper addresses the question of why this particular location was chosen for the construction of Tholos A. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) are used to examine the possibility that concerns related to visibility, intervisibility or invisibility may have played a role in the decision to build Tholos A at this particular spot. Five potential scenarios are formulated and tested to assess whether the tomb may have been placed with the intention of maximizing its visibility and ensuring (or, to the contrary, preventing) intervisibility with specific features in the local landscape.
Highlights
Viewsheds are among the most commonly performed Geographical Information Systems (GIS) analyses in archaeological research (e.g. Wheatley, 1995; Lake & Woodman, 2003; Llobera, 2003; Llobera, Wheatley, Steele, Cox, & Parchment, 2010; Kantner & Hobgood, 2016; Gillings, 2017)
Computer hardware evolves at a rapid pace and recent software developments have contributed to improving the speed and efficiency of viewshed computation
The results of the viewshed analyses suggest that Tholos A at Apesokari was highly visible in its local landscape, but high visibility alone does not suffice to explain the location of the tomb on a sloping ledge of bedrock on the west side of the hill
Summary
Viewsheds are among the most commonly performed GIS analyses in archaeological research (e.g. Wheatley, 1995; Lake & Woodman, 2003; Llobera, 2003; Llobera, Wheatley, Steele, Cox, & Parchment, 2010; Kantner & Hobgood, 2016; Gillings, 2017). A shift of attention has taken place over the last 15 years, and researchers put the emphasis on the active role played by funerary practices in the creation of social identities and relationships (Relaki, 2004; Papadatos, 2007; Legarra Herrero, 2012, 2014; Schoep, 2018) – instead of viewing tombs as passive reflections of static social units In this context, an interest has emerged in the position occupied by circular tombs in the landscape of Prepalatial and Protopalatial Crete. This study of visibility patterns at Apesokari offers an opportunity to touch upon the relationship between the living and the dead, social interactions, and strategies of occupation of the local landscape
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
