Greek Archaeology Research Articles

Archaeology and the Emergence of Greece by Anthony Snodgrass

BOOK REVIEWS Archaeology andthe Emergence ofGreece. ByANTHONY SNODGRASS. Ithaca and New York:Cornell UniversityPress,2006. Pp. ix + 485. Paper,$39.95.ISBN 978-0-8014-7354-8. This collectionof25 studiesbringstogether AnthonySnodgrass' workoverfourdecades. Butitis morethana collectionofpreviously published essays, forit provides theauthor'sfreshthoughtson the subjectsofthoseessays. Thus itreveals developmentsin thefieldof AncientGreekarchaeologyduringtheperiodofmajornew directions in thesecond halfofthe20th century. Snodgrassspeaks to historians and classicistsas well as to archaeologists,encouragingrapprochementbetweenthevarious groups workingto understandthenature ofancientGreece. FollowingthePreface,theessays are distributed amongsixparts thatidentify theauthor'sspecial interests and contributions to Greek history: * "A Credo"examining thehistory ofarchaeology, itsrelation toother disciplines anda pleafor redirection * "TheEarly IronAgeofGreece" * "TheEarly PolisatHomeandAbroad" * "TheEarly PolisatWar" * "Early Greek Art" * "Archaeological Survey" Each part begins with a shortintroductionpresentingchanges in evidence and/or interpretation, and includes two or more essays. Everyessay in turnreceivesan introduction describingtheintentof theoriginalstudy,pointingto aspects requiringupdating,and providinga bibliographyofimportant recentpublicationson thetopic. S. reportshow new findingshave alteredhis opinion or,in several cases, why his originalargumentis stilljustified.He has, forexample , revisedhis positionon a returnto nomadismfollowingthecollapse oftheMycenaean kingdoms,as well as his view oftherisein populationin the8th century. On theotherhand,withrespectto the transition frombronze to iron,while "sympathetic to correctives yet inthisinstance,I resist"(p. 127). S.'s "Credo" is important foran appreciationofdevelopmentsin thefieldofarchaeologyas well as itsbattlewiththedomains ofhistoriansand classicists.Convergencewithboth disciplineshas long been linkedwithancientwrittensources,a linkthatexcludes much ofhuman history.Yet,ifclassicistsand historiansframetheirquestionsbroadly ,in termsof processes over time,cooperationis both possible and productive."The largeraim ofthispaper is to convince historiansthatarchaeologicalevidence can trulybe broughtto bear 308 BOOK REVIEWS on problemsthatare ofcentralconcerntothem..." (p. 222).Some of theauthor'smoreacerbiccommentsrelateto lack ofempathy:"this paper was addressed to fellowClassicistswho did not,as I had half expected,takeoffence..."(p. 364). Above all,S. givesattention tothematerialevidence forchanges in cultureafterthedifficulties of theLate Bronze Age, thedevelopmentof thepolis, theemergenceofhoplitewarfareand thelessons ofpottery-bothpaintedand plain-and otherart.Readers can follow theprocess ofdeepeningunderstanding throughcomparisonof the original studies and the author's introductory comments.For example,the1974study"Metalworkas EvidenceforImmigration in theLate BronzeAge" is describedin theintroduction as "a journeyman piece" (p. 118).Itemploysclose examinationofparticularmetal itemsand technologyto address themigrationist explanationofthe divide between theBronze and Dark Ages. The 2002 discussion of "The RejectionofMycenaean Cultureand theOrientalConnection" builds on thesefindings toarguea moresweepingconclusion:on the collapse of mostMycenaean centersand theiradministrative structures ,Greecereturned tothepre-Mycenaeanway oflifeoftheMiddle Helladic Age. (We can add theobservationthatthisway oflifehas prevailedinGreecefromtheNeolithicAge intothe21st century CE.) Over time,new subjectsenterthepictureofIronAge Greece.In presenting thecase forsurprising energyin thisearly"Dark" age, S. argues against theview of its deep darknessthatfound wide supportwell intothe 1960s.Particularly importantare the activitiesof the "great discovery of early Greek archaeology since WWII"namelytheEuboeans ,who earlyinthe11th century wereengagingin "paracolonial" efforts in the northern Aegean and the Levant,and two centurieslater in the centralMediterranean.This energy is linkedwithanothermajortopic ofearlyGreekhistoryon whichS. has led theway: theoriginofthepolis notonlyon themainland,but as "exported"throughcolonial activity. Archaeologicaldata allows thepolis tobe seen as morethana theoretical abstraction, byrevealinga way oflifewithinitsphysicalcontext. Developmentsinthediscipline of archaeologyhave added to the new perspective.While excavationdefinedthepolis-center, surveyarchaeologyis now identifying lifein thechora. S.'s presentation also servesas a modeltootherscholars.Thebase ofhis own knowledgeis obvious: fullemploymentofarchaeological data, much of it fromhis own fieldwork, is the foundationforhis arguments, while knowledge ofthescholarshipofothersadds both depthand variety.His use ofthisscholarshipis invariablyrespectful evenwhenhe disagreeswithcertainconclusions.S. embodieshisown plea formulti-and inter-disciplinary cooperation:hisuse ofthetools ofhistoriansand classicistsas well as archaeologistsis exemplary. BOOK REVIEWS 309 S.'s styleis always clear; his discussion of surveyarchaeology, forinstance,could well be a manual forparticipants. He engages the reader'sattention bygoingbeyonddescription and data toraisequestions ,drawinghis audience intotheprocess."Why"he asks (p. 238), "is itthatmodernscholarshiphas come to rejecttheimplicationthat thepoliticalsystemofClassical Greeceessentially goesbacktotheHeroicAge ?" And commonsense oftensuggestsanswers,as in thecase oftheview thatearlypaintingson black-figure potteryare dependentupon Homericepics. Afterdemonstrating thelimitednumberof indisputableparallels,S. suggestsa sourceinparents'story-telling to theirchildren(p. 369) and a generallyheroicambiance (p. 376). The book is handsomelyproduced with numerous illustrations. Would thatitsbindingwereas secureas itsintellectual contents. This briefsummaryofthisbook's coverage and stylecannotdo justiceto a scholarwho by his research, publicationsand instruction ofa cadre ofyoungerscholarshas changed thedirectionofstudyof earlyGreece. In 1983 S. wrotethat"thepotentialforarchaeological evidence may offergrounds of optimism"(p. 27). His own efforts have broughtthistopass. CAROL G. THOMAS University ofWashington Myth,Ritual,and Metallurgy in AncientGreeceand RecentAfrica. By SANDRA BLAKELY. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge UniversityPress , 2006. Pp. xiv + 328. Cloth,$90.00. ISBN 978-0-52185500 -6. Where to begin with a book as unique as Blakely's on ancient Greekdaimones and Africanmetallurgy? AlthoughB. providesa usefulcompendiumofevidenceforthedifferent ancientGreekdaimones (theDaktyloi,Telchines,Kouretes,KorybantesorKabeiroi),herbook...

The ancient cemeteries of Astypalaia, Greece

The small island of Astypalaia in the southern Aegean Sea has produced two first millennium BC cemeteries, one containing remains of individuals of all ages, the other exclusively newborn babies and young children. The sites have been studied by the 22nd Ephorate of the Greek Archaeological Service since 1996. Since 2000 there has been a formal collaboration with the Institute of Archaeology to study the human remains, first described in Archaeology International 2001/2002. Here the leading scholars involved in the project describe the work undertaken over the last eight years.

Harold North Fowler and the Beginnings of American Study Tours in Greece

Site-based study tours have been integral to the teaching of Greek archaeology at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens (ASCSA) since it was founded in 1881, and at other American institutions of higher education as well. The authors present the diary of one such tour taken in 1883 by Harold North Fowler, a member of the first class of students at the ASCSA. Fowler's diary demonstrates the importance of travel in the training of archaeologists and is of further interest because of the immediacy of the personal impressions recorded by a student of Greek archaeology toward the end of the 19th century.

Archaeology and the emergence of Greece

Classical archaeology has changed beyond recognition in the past generation, in its aims, its choice of subject-matter and the methods it uses. This book contains twenty-five chapters, some of them previously published only in rather inaccessible places, which have contributed to this change. The chapters cover four decades of work on pre-classical and classical Greece and some adjacent fields of scholarship, beginning in the 1960s when classical archaeology was not widely seen as a free-standing subject. They chart the progress of a movement for the intellectual independence of Greek archaeology and art, from history and textual studies and for recognition among other branches of archaeology. The key theme of the chapters is the importance of the Iron Age as the formative period in the making of classical Greece and the text varies this with comment on literature, history, anthropology, Aegean and European prehistory and Roman provincial archaeology. This collection represents innovative work in classical archaeology; challenges accepted boundaries and inhibitions; and is wide in scope, covering history, prehistory, art, literary interpretation, and field archaeology.

Next stop: Gender. Women at Roman military forts in Germany

As a Palaeolithic archaeologist I am often surprised by the paucity of research on issues of social relations in more recent time periods. The wealth of archaeological evidence and written texts seems so plentiful from where I stand. Thus when I look into Greek and Roman archaeology for examples of research on gendered being and for a discussion of difference in the past I am reminded that archaeological evidence is the consequence of research questions as much as their starting point. We only see that which we are able to comprehend, and archaeological finds and their interpretations become visible through the questions we ask. Issues of gender in the archaeological record are a very useful reminder of the firm grip that disciplinary traditions have on our imagination. In archaeology material determinism and scientific positivism, coupled with the straw man of subjective distortion of objective reality, continue to drive our imagination at a comfortable speed that does not threaten to overturn the theoretical cart. Furthermore, firmly held disciplinary boundaries, such as those that separate history and the study of texts and representations from the practice of archaeological fieldwork, can result in a limited conversation between the social and material traces of the past. In this sense classical archaeology can appear suddenly familiar to a prehistoric archaeologist, if the refusal of history in one context effectively parallels its absence in another. As someone both used to prehistoric contexts featuring minimal physical evidence, and interested in issues of gender as understood by contemporary feminist scholars, I wonder why this should be so.

Greek Archaeology: A Survey of Recent Work

This survey of work in Greek archaeology since ca. 1990 examines how recent excavation and analysis has related to the questions that seemed most important in Greek archaeology in the 1980s. It focuses in particular on three themes. It argues that archaeological surface survey and the analysis of its findings need to be brought into closer dialogue with the burgeoning work on regionalism in the archeological record. It notes that questions of state formation have been replaced by consideration of the articulation of communities, whatever their political form or status, and draws attention to the need for more work on the way in which individuals and groups selected material for deposition in both sanctuary and cemetery and for the need for closer attention to urban forms. It celebrates the growth of work on the iconography of painted pottery and suggests that there remains scope for further work on objects and images in their chronological context and in the contexts of their use and deposition. In conclusion it draws attention to the absence from recent work of attempts to delineate the "big picture" and of the necessity for such attempts if the full range of the subject is going to be taught effectively to the next generation of students.

Totems, Taboos, and Jews: Salomon Reinach and the Politics of Scholarship in Fin-de-Si�cle France

alomon Reinach (1858-1932) was one of the leading figures of the Franco-Jewish establishment at the end of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. He was the vice president of the most importantJewish organization of the time, the Alliance Israelite Universelle, was one of the cofounders of the Jewish Colonization Association, the institution established to help Jews leaving Russia to settle on the land in various parts of the world, and was very active in the Societe des EtudesJuives, the famous French society of scholarship on Jews and Judaism, founded in 1880. He was also a good friend of Zadoc Kahn, the chief rabbi of France. Together with his brothers, the deputy Joseph Reinach and the scholar and later deputy Theodore Reinach, he was also one of the earliest of the Dreyfusards, working indefatigably for the exoneration of Captain Alfred Dreyfus. This veryJewishly involved personality was at the same time a fixture in the Parisian intellectual scene, penning numerous works on the classics, Greek archaeology, philology, and ancient religions. A member of the prestigious academy the Institut, professor of the history of art and archaeology at the Ecole du Louvre, director of the Museum of National Antiquities at St. Germain-en-Laye, and director of the journal Revue Archeologique, he was to leave his mark as the major contributor to and propagator of the totem and taboo school of British anthropology in France, applying its findings relentlessly in hundreds

Getting history from Greek archaeology – ‘some way to go’

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Buoyant at the crossroads of Aegean and Greek archaeology

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Names and emblems: Greek archaeology, regional identities and national narratives at the turn of the 20th century

IntroductionAs a discipline concerned with the past, and especially the remote past, archaeology is in a unique position to contribute to the growing discussion on nationalism and the formation of collective identities. Although research in these areas is not new, the steadily increasing body of archaeological literature is shaped both by recent theoretical trends within the discipline itself and by widespread concerns over contemporary redefinitions of boundaries and identities (e.g. Atkinsonet al. 1996; Jones 1997; Graves-Brownet al. 1996; Díaz-Andreu & Chanipion 1996; Kohl & Fawcett 1995).

Comment on Ray Laurence, ‘Roman Narratives…’

Greek and Roman archaeology as a whole are often accused of being ‘text-based’ or ‘text-driven’. At a superficial level, this is palpably false: most Classical archaeologists do most of their research without consulting an ancient text for days and sometimes weeks on end, and this is especially true of Romano-British archaeologists. Everyone, except perhaps for a few militant prehistorians, knows this perfectly well. Ray Laurence does not fall into this trap. Instead, he rightly directs us to the deeper level of discourse, narratives and arguments; and hints more briefly at a deeper one still, that of ‘interests and preoccupations’.

Geophysical and Related Techniques Applied to Archaeological Survey in the Mediterranean: A Review

During the last few years geophysical survey has developed considerably in terms of instrumentation and image processing. Together with remote sensing and GIS, it is becoming increasingly, if still slowly, integrated into archaeological investigations in the Mediterranean. This article reviews how, and with what success, geophysical techniques--and, to a lesser extent, geochemical methods, aerial/satellite remote sensing and GIS--have been applied to Mediterranean (especially Greek) archaeology, bearing in mind the environmental constraints of the region, and the significance, diversity and number of its ancient monuments. The application of all the main techniques of geophysical survey and some geochemical methods to a wide range of archaeological targets carried out over the last 40 years is discussed critically. Current developments in instrumentation and data processing are presented, and the next generation of geophysical work, which will have to meet challenges in relation to the protection and management of cultural resources, is also considered. In view of the need to create a common platform for the preservation of cultural heritage, it is argued that geophysical prospection techniques have to become an inseparable component of the archaeological investigative process.

Time, Tradition and Society in Greek Archaeology: Bridging the `Great Divide'

Time, Tradition and Society in Greek Archaeology: Bridging the `Great Divide'

New Work at Kato Phana, Chios: the Kato Phana Archaeological Project: Preliminary report for 1997 and 1998

The first two fieldwork seasons of the Kato Phana Archaeological Project took place in 1997 and 1998 as a collaborative venture between the British School at Athens and the Mytilene Ephorate of the Greek Archaeological Service. The work comprised archaelogical surface survey and mapping of the lower Kato Phana Valley, cleaning and planning of the sanctuary of Apollo Phanaios and geophysical testing of selected areas around the sanctuary site. This article first sets out the aims of the Project and describes earlier work at the cult centre (Geometric to Early Christian periods) by K. Kourouniotes and W. Lamb. This is followed by an account of the survey methodology and of the results gained: these include the location of Bronze Age findspots NE and SW of the cult centre and a dense concentration of sherds, tile and ancient masonry, ranging in date from the Archaic to Early Christion periods, radiating out from the sanctuary, particularly to the S and SE. To the NW, the survey also succeeded in identifying the ancient quarry site from which grey limestone blocks were cut for the sanctuary constructing. The paper concludes with an account of the geophysical testing carried out at Kato Phana, and looks forward to the next projected phase of the Project's fieldwork.

The Art of Rhetoric at the Amphiareion of Oropos

Commentary: My intent in doing this project was to illustrate that an archaeological site as (apparently) obscure as the Amphiareion of Oropos holds a wealth of evidence about the nature and practice of rhetorical contests. Indirectly, I also hoped to illustrate that developing new methods of analysis through “field work” in classical rhetoric complements conventional arm-chair research - characteristic of literary analysis - as a source of primary evidence. The study opportunities and support that I received in 1974 and 1977 from the American School of Classical Studies at Athens and the Greek Ministry of Science and Culture convinced me that the Amphiareion would be appropriate for study. The Amphiareion was small enough for an in-depth examination and large enough to be known by ancient geographers such as Pausanias. From 1977 to 1985 I analyzed the information I had gathered about the site: the inscriptions my wife, Jane Helppie, and I had photographed and drawn on our field trips, the commentary of ancient sources, and the results of archaeological excavations under Basil Petracos and the Greek Archaeological Service. This study reveals that rhetoric was practiced at locations other than prominent centers such as Athens and that these practices were sustained for centuries. In the future I plan to visit other larger and better known sites in order to continue the search for information that provides the basis for a richer understanding of the history of written communication in Greece.

Ancient Greece: Recent developments in Aegean archaeology and regional studies

This review begins by defining the diverse field of “Greek archaeology.” Based on our own expertise, we focus on recent advances in the study of ancient Greece, especially the prehistoric Aegean, and on regional approaches, primarily those associated with archaeological surface survey. General developments in method and theory are addressed as they relate to several major topics: social complexity, Aegean chronology, writing systems, exchange, and regional studies.

Archaeology & Theory - N. Spencer (ed.): Time, Tradition and Society in Greek Archaeology: Bridging the ‘Great Divide’. (Theoretical Archaeology Group (TAG.)) Pp. xx+179, 42 ills. 1 table. London, New York: Routledge, 1995. £35.00.

Archaeology & Theory - N. Spencer (ed.): Time, Tradition and Society in Greek Archaeology: Bridging the ‘Great Divide’. (Theoretical Archaeology Group (TAG.)) Pp. xx+179, 42 ills. 1 table. London, New York: Routledge, 1995. £35.00.

Time, Tradition and Society in Greek Archaeology. Bridging the ‘Great Divide’. Edited by N. Spencer

(1996). Time, Tradition and Society in Greek Archaeology. Bridging the ‘Great Divide’. Edited by N. Spencer. Archaeological Journal: Vol. 153, No. 1, pp. 369-370.

An Interdisciplinary Study of Middle Cycladic White Wares from Akrotiri on Thera

Few archaeological sites have drawn, and held the imagination and attention of the range of scholars as the prehistoric settlement of Akrotiri on Thera in the southern Cyclades, currently excavated by Athens University and the Greek Archaeological Society [1,2]. The archaeological significance of Akrotiri can hardly be overstated from any perspective. With respect to the controversial question of a Minoan hegemony, it lies on a particularly strategic point in Bronze Age trading routes between the mainland, the Cycladic islands and Crete [3\. By the sixteenth century BC the many Minoan features present in Theran material culture (such as fresco iconography, Linear A tablets, ceramic motifs and architectural details) continue to provoke debate concerning the existence, or extent of a Minoan thalassocracy. Thus characterizations of what may be distinguished as truly “local” attributes of Theran crafts in the earlier periods are increasingly important.

Byzantine Thebes: excavations on the Kadmeia, 1980

In May and June 1980 Dr K. Demakopoulou undertook exploratory excavations on behalf of the Greek Archaeological Service in the central square of the city of Thebes. Deposits of the Byzantine and later periods continued down for more than 5 metres. The finds, primarily from domestic habitation, are presented here.