From Pottery to Politics? Analysis of the Neopalatial Ceramic Assemblage from Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos, Crete

Transcription

1

2 From Pottery to Politics? Analysis of the Neopalatial Ceramic Assemblage from Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos, Crete A dissertation submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Ph.D.) in the Department of Classics of the McMicken College of Arts and Sciences 2015 by Emilia Oddo B.A. Università degli Studi di Palermo, 2004 M.A. Katholieke Universiteit von Leuven, 2007 M.A. University of Cincinnati, 2010 Committee Chair: Eleni Hatzaki Jack L. Davis Alan P. Sullivan III Gerald Cadogan

3 ABSTRACT The focus of this dissertation is the analysis of a deposit of Neopalatial ( BC) pottery uncovered within a large cistern (Cistern 2) at the site of Myrtos- Pyrgos, Crete. Excavated by Gerald Cadogan under the aegis of the British School at Athens in the early 1970s on the top of a hill (Pyrgos) near the modern town of Myrtos, Myrtos-Pyrgos is one of the most important and long-lived Bronze Age sites on the southeastern coast of Crete. The study of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 contributes to two interrelated research fields: pottery studies of Minoan (i.e., Bronze Age) Crete and theories of political reconstructions based on pottery analysis. The presentation of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 contributes to the knowledge of ceramics and ceramic production in Crete: this dissertation presents in detail the Neopalatial pottery assemblage from Myrtos-Pyrgos, providing stylistic analysis and contextualization within the broader ceramic production of Neopalatial Crete; thus, it also improves the current knowledge of southeastern Crete, an area whose ceramics remain poorly known. The stylistic and comparative analysis of the pottery from Cistern 2 suggests that the southeast needs to be considered a ceramic region on its own, a micro-region differentiated from but related to the ceramic production typical of east Crete. Aspects of ceramic regionalism and its significance are explored further in relation to the political role of Myrtos-Pyrgos during the Neopalatial period. In the context of earlier hypotheses of Cretan politics and, in particular those at Myrtos-Pyrgos, this dissertation reconsiders the relationship between material culture and the reconstruction of political dynamics, focusing on the role of pottery and pottery style.! i!

4 Based on my analysis of the pottery from Cistern 2, I demonstrate that pottery alone cannot inform or prove political dynamics and I argue that other types of material culture could be considered better indicators of politics.! ii!

5

6 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS! While researching for this dissertation, I benefitted from the support and guidance of a number of individuals and institutions. Their invaluable help made my project both possible and rewarding. My committee members formed a solid team that encouraged me every step of the way and never let me loose sight of my final goal. I thank Gerald Cadogan, the excavator of Myrtos-Pyrgos, for kindly and generously having given me access to unpublished material for the purposes of this dissertation, by suggestion of Eleni Hatzaki. His guidance and knowledge were fundamental for the development of my research. I thank him for his faith in me and for his wonderful hospitality in England, while conducting archival research in the Pyrgos room. I am grateful to Alan Sullivan for his mentorship, his constant encouragement, and his openness to discuss every aspect of my work. By bringing to the table cases from New World archaeology, he has contributed to broaden my perspective on the potentials of ceramic analysis. I owe thanks to Jack Davis, whose availability to discuss dissertation troubles helped me going through various difficulties. His straightforward advises have challenged my thoughts, pushing me to refine my arguments and consider new angles. My deepest gratitude goes to Eleni Hatzaki, my committee chair and my mentor. Her patience, friendship, support of my work, and her love for Crete have inspired me and encouraged me to reach always higher goals. Despite my initial reluctance, her genuine enthusiasm in mastering Minoan sherds introduced me to the wonders of pottery, the world it can hide, and the way to enjoy our time at the strewing table. The faculty of the Department of Classics at the University of Cincinnati has contributed to shape and nurture my academic aspirations, offering me expert guidance! iii!

7 and constant intellectual stimulation, for which I am extremely thankful. In particular, I wish to thank Barbara Burrell, Steven Ellis, Lauren Ginsberg, Kathleen Lynch, Valeria Sergueenkova, Peter van Minnen, and Gisela Walberg. With them, I owe my sincere gratitude to the staff of the Burnam Classics Library at the University of Cincinnati, Jacqueline Riley, Mike Braunlin, Cade Stevens, and the late David Ball, for facilitating significantly my research. I wish to thank the Department of Classics for the generous funding of the Louise Taft Semple fellowship that allowed me to conduct comfortably my research, both in Cincinnati and abroad. Field research in Greece was also funded by: the University Research Council Fellowship (2010) and by the Marion and Dorothy Rawson Fellowship (2011), awarded by the University of Cincinnati; the Emily T. Vermeule Fellowship ( ) and the Homer A. and Dorothy B. Thompson Fellowship ( ), awarded by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens; and by the Richard Seager Fellowship (2014), awarded by the INSTAP Study Center for East Crete. At the British School in Athens, at Knossos, I thank: curators Don Evely, Todd Whitelaw, and Matthew Haysom, and curatorial project assistant Flora Michelaki, for their patience whenever I needed extra time inside the Stratigraphical Museum or yet another box of pottery. I wish to thank Philip Betancourt, Tom Brogan, Matt Buell, Carl Knappett, Charlotte Langohr, Sandy MacGillivray, Jerolyn Morrison, Yiannis Papadatos, Jeff Soles, and Vance Watrous, for kindly granting me access to unpublished pottery, thus providing enriching comparanda for the Myrtos-Pyrgos pottery. I also would like to thank the late Vronwy Hankey, whose early work on the Neopalatial pottery from Myrtos-Pyrgos inspired me in several occasions. For his help with pottery drawing, I! iv!

8 thank Don Evely. For editing of text and pictures, my sincerest thanks go to Carol Hershenson, Amelia Keller, and John Wallrodt. I am thankful for those scholars who lent me their time to read earlier drafts of chapters, shared their own unpublished work, and conversed with me about pottery styles, and in particular to Tom Brogan, Kostas Chalikias, John Cherry, Kostas Christakis, Carl Knappett, Colin Macdonald, Sandy MacGillivray, Eleni Nodarou, and Yiannis Papadatos. Friends and colleagues around the world have been fundamental during these years. Their friendship and critical eye have enriched my life in many different ways. In particular, I wish to thank Natalie Abell, Emilio Bonfiglio, Matt Buell, Doug and Cindy Conley, Andrew Connor, Taylor Coughlan, Emily Egan, Flint Dibble, Sara Frank, Jonida Martini, Ayça Mazman, Amanda Pavlick, Santo Privitera, Efi Tsiolaki, and Bill Weir. Special thanks go to Bea Peruzzi for discussing prehistoric sherds and complicated trains of thoughts at whatever hour of the day, without ever showing tiredness or distress. I offer my deepest thanks also to Heather Graybehl for her priceless help in these past few months, allowing me to continue being as productive as ever. My family has been a constant source of support, encouragement, and affection throughout these years, despite the long distance between us. They have helped me chase my archaeology dream across the ocean without ever complaining or doubting my decisions. I also wish to thank my acquired family, the Kellers, for being always there for me without questions and for having accepted me as one of them since the beginning, making me feel at home far away from home. My deepest gratitude to Evan, my husband, who has followed my research day after day with interest and curiosity. I thank him for! v!

9 his love, his constant support, and his extreme patience, particularly for those troubled days in which dating a sherd was more important than anything else in the world. Last but not least, my sincere thanks to Sophia, who, consciously or not, was there with me at the Stratigraphical Museum and was there while I was finishing writing, thus absorbing the entirety of my work. Her patience with me and my work schedule has been priceless. This dissertation is dedicated to my family and Evan.! vi!

10 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract Acknowledgments Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures Abbreviations i iii vii viii ix xxi Chapter 1. Introduction 1 Chapter 2. Myrtos-Pyrgos: The Discovery of the Site and its Occupational History 8 Chapter 3. Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos: Archaeological Analysis 23 Chapter 4. The Neopalatial Pottery from Cistern 2 37 Chapter 5. Contextualizing the Style of the Neopalatial Pottery from Cistern 2: Outlining and Defining the Cretan Southeast as a Ceramic Region Chapter 6. From Pottery to Politics: Assessing the Political Role of Neopalatial Myrtos-Pyrgos Chapter 7: Conclusions 144 Bibliography 151 Figures 186! vii!

11 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Archaeological phases of Myrtos-Pyrgos Table 2: Chronology and sequence of Minoan Myrtos Pyrgos Table 3: List of the stratified Neopalatial deposits considered in the chapter Table 4: Knossos: shapes from the stratified deposits as established in Hatzaki 2007 Table 5: Knossos: decorative motifs from the stratified deposits as established in Hatzaki 2007 Table 6: Ayia Triada: shapes from the stratified deposits Table 7: Ayia Triada: decorative motifs from the stratified deposits Table 8: Kommos: shapes from the stratified deposits in Building T Table 9: Kommos: decorative motifs from the stratified deposits in Building T Table 10: Mochlos: shapes from the Plateia deposits Table 11: Mochlos: decorative motifs from the Plateia deposits Table 12: Palaikastro: shapes from the stratified deposits Table 13: Palaikastro: decorative motifs from the stratified deposits! viii

12 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1. Map of the Crete showing the location of the sites mentioned in the text. Map by J. Wallrodt Figure 1.2. Map of East Crete showing the location of the sites mentioned in the text. Map by J. Wallrodt Figure 2.1. Plan of the site showing its main archaeological features. Courtesy of G. Cadogan Figure 2.2. The Tomb complex. Courtesy of G. Cadogan Figure 2.3. The Tomb complex, stone by stone. Courtesy of G. Cadogan Figure 2.4. Cistern 1 at the southwest corner of the Pyrgos IV Country House s Courtyard. Courtesy of G. Cadogan Figure 2.5. The Pyrgos IV Country House and surrounding buildings. Courtesy of G. Cadogan Figure 3.3. Cistern 2: view from the northwest. Photo courtesy of G. Cadogan Figure 3.4. Cistern 2: Walls GT and FB from the northeast. Photo courtesy of G. Cadogan Figure 3.5. Cistern 2: Walls GT and FB from the northwest. Photo courtesy of G. Cadogan Figure 3.4. Plan of Cistern 2 and surrounding area, with location of the four trenches. Plan by E. Oddo Figure 3.5. Cistern 2 and wall remains. Plan by E. Oddo Figure 3.6. Merged section of Cistern 2 s southeastern quarter. Redrawn by E. Oddo. Original drawings courtesy of G. Cadogan! ix

13 Figure 3.7. Plan of Cistern 2 s excavation area: the gray area represents the sections merged in Fig Plan by E. Oddo Figure 3.8. Pattern of cross-joins in the Neopalatial assemblage. Redrawn by E. Oddo and J. Wallrodt. Original drawings courtesy of G. Cadogan Figure 3.9. Distribution of Protopalatial and Neopalatial sherds within and above Cistern 2 Figure Chart showing the distribution of Neopalatial sherds within Cistern 2. The northern trenches (F02, G02, plus baulk G01/G02) contained the highest concentration of pottery Figure Cross-join pattern in Cistern 2 trenches. Harris matrices and modifications by E. Oddo Figure Neopalatial cross-joins among the trenches. Harris matrices and modifications by E. Oddo Figure Protopalatial cross-joins among the trenches. Harris matrices and modifications by E. Oddo Figure Neopalatial cross-joins within each trench. Harris matrices and modifications by E. Oddo Figure Protopalatial cross-joins within the trenches. Harris matrices and modifications by E. Oddo Figure 4.1. FB hemispherical cup (MP/73/P304). Drawing by D. Evely Figure 4.2. FB hemispherical cup (N8012). Drawing by D. Evely Figure 4.3. FB, DOL-L hemispherical cup. Inner surface: incised circle on the base (N8013)! x

14 Figure 4.4. FB, DOL-L hemispherical cup with spiral motif (MP/73/P304) Figure 4.5. FB, DOL-L hemispherical cup with crescent motif (N8012) Figure 4.6. FB, DOL-L hemispherical cup with double axes (MP/71/P501) Figure 4.7. FB, DOL-L hemispherical cup with double axes (MP/71/P501). Drawing by D. Evely Figure 4.8. Knossos: FB hemispherical cup (Mountjoy 2003, p. 71, fig. 4.9, no. 111) Figure 4.9. Ayia Triada: FB hemispherical cup (Puglisi 2006, table 4, no. 3.9) Figure Malia: FB, hemispherical cup (Pelon 1970, pl. XV, no. 2) Figure Mochlos: FB, hemispherical cup (Barnard 2001, p. 205, fig. 10.3, no ) Figure Zakros: FB hemispherical cup (Platon 2011, p. 232, fig. 23) Figure Zakros: FB hemispherical cup (Platon 2011, p. 239, fig. 44) Figure FB, DOL-L short rounded cup with spirals (N8021). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L short rounded cup with spirals (N8021) Figure FB, DOL-L rounded cup with zigzag decoration (N8023) Figure FB, DOL-L rounded cup with tripod feet (N8020) Figure FB, DOL-L rounded cup (MP/71/P504). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L rounded cup (MP/71/P504) Figure Malia: FB, DOL-L rounded cup (Pelon 1970, pl. XIV, no. 5) Figure Mochlos: FB, DOL-L rounded cup (Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 447, fig. 19, no. P478) Figure Gournia: FB, DOL-L rounded cups (Hawes et al. 1908, pl. VII, no. 9) Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup (N8010). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup (N8033). Drawing by D. Evely! xi

15 Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup (N8009) Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup (N8033) Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup with foliate scroll frieze (N8007) Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup. Base (N8010) Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup. Ripple motif under base (N8019) Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup (Warren 1991, p. 328, fig. 9, no. H (P1143) Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup, type 2 (Warren 1999, table CCVI, no. P2450) Figure Mochlos: FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup (Barnard 2001, p. 215, fig. 9.3, no. 9.26) Figure FB, DOL-L Vaphio cup (MP/73/P302) Figure FB, DOL-L Vaphio cup (MP/73/P302). Drawing by D. Evely Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-L Vaphio cup (Catling et al. 1979, p 40, fig. 27, no. 186) Figure Ayia Triada: FB, DOL-L Vaphio cup (D Agata 1989, pl. XXI, no. f) Figure FB, DOL-L S-profile cup. Spirals on top (N8024) Figure FB, DOL-L S-profile cup. Spirals and foliate branch (N8025) Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-L bell cup (Warren 1991, p. 328, fig. 9, no. M) Figure Petras: FB, DOL-L bell cup (Tsipopoulou and Alberti 2011, p. 472, fig. 9, no. f, P90/626) Figure FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl (N8004). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl (N8005). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl (N8006). Drawing by D. Evely! xii!

16 Figure FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl with ripples (N8004). Outside Figure FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl (N8004). Monochrome interior Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl (Popham 1984, pl. 128, no. g) Figure Mochlos: FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl (Barnard 2001, p. 221, fig. 8.1, no. 8.10) Figure FB, DOL-L frieze decorated bowl with spirals (N8027) Figure FB, DOL-L frieze decorated bowl with crescents (N8026) Figure FB, DOL-L frieze decorated bowl with crescents (N8026). Drawing by D. Evely Figure Ayia Triada: FB, DOL-L frieze decorated bowl (Puglisi 2006, table 1, no. 1.10) Figure FB, DOL-L banded bowls (left top: 71/P360; left bottom: N4580; right top: N8030; right bottom: N4579) Figure FB, DOL-L banded bowls, interior (left top: 71/P360; left bottom: N4580; right top: N8030; right bottom: N4579) Figure FB, DOL-L banded bowl (N4578). Drawing by D. Evely Figure Mochlos: FB, DOL-L banded bowl (Barnard 2001, p. 238, fig. 6.3, no. 6.26) Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/73/P296). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L banded bowl (N4596). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (N804). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl. Outer surface (N4604) Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl. Inner surface (N4604) Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl. Outer surface (left: N4598; right: N4600)! xiii!

17 Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl. Inner surface (left: N4598; right: N4600) Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/73/P296). Outer surface Figure FB, DOL-L In-and-out bowl (MP/73/P296). Inner surface Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl. Outer surface (N4595) Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl. Inner surface (N4595) Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl. Outer surface (N5001A; spout N8035) Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl. Inner surface (N5001A; spout N8035) Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/73/P296). Interior, base, anemone Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl. Outer (left) and inner surface (right) Figure Gournia: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Betancourt and Silverman 1991, fig. 18, no. 545) Figure Kommos: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Rutter 2006, p. 1131, pl. 3.38, no. 26/3) Figure Mochlos: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 438, fig. 10, no. P6242) Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Warren 1991, p. 326, fig. 7, nos. D- H) Figure Kommos: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Rutter 2006, p. 1126, pl. 3.33, no. 20/2) Figure Kommos: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Rutter 2006, p. 1126, pl. 3.33, no. 17a/3) Figure Malia: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Pelon 1970, pl. XII, nos. 4 and 5)! xiv!

18 Figure FB, DOL-L bridge-spouted jar/jug with spiral motif (N4681). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L bridge-spouted jar/jug with spiral motif (N4681) Figure FB, DOL-L bridge-spouted jar/jug with ivy motif (N4688) Figure FB, DOL-L bridge-spouted jar/jug with ivy motif (N4686) Figure FB, DOL-L bridge-spouted jar/jug. Spouts (left: N4694; right: from vessel N4682) Figure FB, DOL-L bridge-spouted jar/jug. Small size vessel (N8029) Figure FB, DOL-L jug with spiral motif (iv203). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L jug with spiral motif (iv203) Figure FB, DOL-L jug with spiral motif Figure FB, DOL-L. Marine style sherds (MP/71/P363) Figure FB, DOL-L, closed shape with possible argonaut (N4609) Figure FB, DOL-L closed shape with possible argonaut (N4611) Figure FB, DOL-L closed shape with reed motif (MP/73/P314) Figure FB, DOL-L, closed shape with possible argonaut (N4609). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L closed shape with reed motif (MP/73/P314). Drawing by D. Evely Figure Palaikastro: FB, DOL-L, closed shape (Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 132, fig. 17, no. 166) Figure Zakros: FB, DOL-L closed shape (Platon 2011, p. 229, fig. 11) Figure Zakros: FB, DOL-L closed shape (Platon 2011, p. 235, fig. 34)! xv!

19 Figure FB, DOL-L-W straight-sided cup with spiral motif (N8009). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L-W straight-sided cup with spiral motif (N8009) Figure FB, DOL-L-W banded bowl (MP/71/P360) Figure FB, DOL-L-W banded bowl (MP/71/P505) Figure FB, DOL-L-W banded bowls. On left, MP/71/P360; on right, MP/71/P505 Figure FB, DOL-L-W banded bowls, interior. On left, MP/71/P360; on right, MP/71/P505 Figure FB, DOL-L-W oval-mouthed jar (MP/73/P502). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, DOL-L-W oval-mouthed jar (MP/73/P502) Figure Zakros: FB, DOL-L-W closed shape (Hogarth 1902, pl. XII, no. 2) Figure FB, DOL-N-L rounded cup with monochrome interior (MP/71/P510) Figure FB, DOL-N-L rounded cup with trickle decoration (MP/73/P8) Figure FB, DOL-N-L rounded cup with trickle decoration (MP/73/P8). Drawing by D. Evely Figure Palaikastro: FB, DOL-N-L rounded cup with trickle decoration (Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 128, fig. 15, no. 156) Figure Mochlos: FB, DOL-N-L rounded cup with trickle decoration (Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 432, fig. 5, no. P6050) Figure FB, DOL-N-L ledge rim bowl with trickling pattern (N8044) Figure FB, DOL-N-L ledge rim bowl with lug handles (N8045) Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-N-L ledge rim bowl with trickling pattern (Catling et al. 1979, p. 29, fig. 19, no. 109)! xvi!

20 Figure Kommos: FB, DOL-N-L ledge rim bowl with trickling pattern (Betancourt 1990, fig. 41, no. 8.73) Figure Palaikastro: FB, DOL-N-L ledge rim bowl with trickling pattern (Knappett and Collar 2007, p. 168, fig. 14, no. 59) Figure FB, DOL-N-L beaked jug fragment Figure FB, MONO straight-sided cup (MP/71/P508) Figure FB, MONO straight-sided cup Figure Knossos: FB, MONO straight-sided cup (Popham 1984, plate 142, no. 6) Figure Kommos: FB, MONO straight-sided cup (Van de Moortel 2001, p. 48, fig. 32, no. 21) Figure Malia: FB, MONO straight-sided cup (Pelon 1970, plate XIV, no. 4) Figure Palaikastro: FB, MONO straight-sided cup (Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 125, fig. 12, no. 116) Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (N8017). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (N8015). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (MP/71/P512). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (saucer; N8014). Drawing by D. Evely Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (N8017) Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (N8015) Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (MP/71/P512) Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (saucer; N8014) Figure FB, PL conical cup, tall type (s-profile; N8018) Figure FB, PL conical cup, tall type (s-profile; N8018). Drawing by D. Evely! xvii!

21 Figure FB, PL conical cup, tall type (tumbler) Figure Kommos: FB, PL conical cup (Rutter 2006, p. 1126, plate 3.33, no. 17a/7) Figure Palaikastro: FB, PL conical cup (Sackett and Popham 1970, p. 222, fig. 13, no. 12) Figure CB, DOL-L rounded cup with ivy motif (N8028) Figure CB, DOL-L s-profile cup (MP/73/P305) Figure CB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/71/269) Figure CB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/71/269). Outer surface Figure CB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/71/269). Inner surface Figure CB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl. Outer surface (N4582) Figure CB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl. Inner surface (N4582) Figure CB, DOL-L jug/jar with running spirals (N4677) Figure CB, DOL-N-L conical cup (N8003). Drawing by D. Evely Figure CB, DOL-N-L conical cup (N8003) Figure Ayia Triada: CB, DOL-N-L conical cup (Puglisi 2006, plate 19, no. 17.3) Figure Palaikastro: CB, DOL-N-L conical cup (Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 128, fig. 15, nos ) Figure Mochlos: CB, DOL-N-L conical cup (Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 431, fig. 4, no. P4386) Figure CB, DOL-N-L jug (N8046) Figure CB, DOL-N-L jug (N4674). Drawing by D. Evely Figure CB, DOL-N-L jug (N4674)! xviii!

22 Figure Palaikastro: CB, plain jug (Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 155, fig. 35, no. 291) Figure CB, DOL-N-L fenestrated stand with trickle decoration (N4660). Outside Figure CB, DOL-N-L fenestrated stand with trickle decoration (N4660). Inside Figure Gournia: CB, fenestrated stand with plastic decoration (Betancourt and Silverman 1991, fig. 33, nos. 694 and 695) Figure CB, MONO fenestrated stand with plastic decoration (N4667) Figure CB, MONO fenestrated stand (N4659) Figure CB, MONO fenestrated stand (N4658) Figure CB, PL lid. Upper surface (N8039) Figure CB, PL lid. Lower surface (N8039) Figure CB, PL lid (N8040) Figure Pithos fabric, DOL-N-L-W. Handle (N8037) Figure Pithos fabric, DOL-N-L. Base (N8036) Figure Pithos fabric, DOL-N-L. Base (N8036) Figure RB, baking plates. Rims Figure RB, baking plates. Rims Figure RB, cooking tray (N4650). Drawing by D. Evely Figure RB, cooking tray (N4650). Inside Figure RB, cooking tray (N4650). Outside Figure Petras: RB, thick and thin cooking tray (Tsipopoulou and Alberti 2011, p. 493, fig. 42) Figure RB, trefoil-mouthed jug (N8038). Drawing by D. Evely! xix

23 Figure RB, trefoil-mouthed jug (N8038) Figure RB, tripod-cooking jar (N4672) Figure RB, fenestrated stand (right N8042, left N8041). Outside (a) and inside (b) Figure Knossos: RB, tripod cooking jar (Warren 1991, p. 324, fig. 5, no. E) Figure Kommos: RB, tripod cooking jar (Rutter 2006, p. 1124, plate 3.31, no. 9b/9) Figure Mochlos: RB, tripod cooking jar (Barnard 2001, p. 208, fig. 10.6, no ) Figure Poros: RB, tripod cooking jar (Banou 2011, p. 501, fig. 1, no. a) Figure Cycladic jug (MP/71/499) Figure Cycladic jug (MP/71/499). Drawing by D. Evely Figure 4.180: Cistern 2: graph showing the percentage of pottery shapes Figure 4.181: Cistern 2: graph showing the percentage of DOL decorative motifs! xx

24 ABBREVIATIONS BB Banded bowl MM Middle Minoan CB Coarse buff fabric MONO Monochrome ware DOL-N-L-W Dark-on-Light non lustrous ware with added white PL Plain ware EM Early Minoan RB Reddish-brown fabric FB Fine buff fabric RC Rounded cup HC Hemispherical cup S-profC S-profile cup LM Late Minoan SSC Straight-sided cup LRB Ledge-rim bowl VC Vapheio cup! xxi

25 CHAPTER 1 Introduction During their 1962 Travels in Crete, Sinclair Hood, Gerald Cadogan, and Peter Warren explored an archaeological site on the top of a hill (Pyrgos) on the southeastern coast of Crete, nearby the modern village of Myrtos (Figs. 1.1 and 1.2). Cadogan excavated the site, Myrtos-Pyrgos, in the early 1970s and later, unearthing a Bronze Age settlement with impressive architectural features: a large Neopalatial building in the center of the hilltop, named the Country House; a house tomb packed with the skeletal remains of several generations; and a large plastered circular structure on the northern edge of the hilltop, Cistern 2, filled among other things with large quantities of broken pottery (i.e., sherds) dating to the Protopalatial and Neopalatial. This dissertation examines the Neopalatial pottery found in Cistern 2 providing a detailed analysis of the archaeological context of the pottery in question, as well as their relevance for the study of Neopalatial pottery production. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND GOALS The study of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 aims to make a substantial contribution to the current knowledge of ceramic production in southeast Crete. The southeast of the island, until now virtually terra incognita for the Neopalatial period, is the location of a great deal of past and recent archaeological activity; pottery and other types of finds are pivotal in defining this area of Crete as a cultural zone and clarifying its! 1!

26 relationship to other areas. The first contribution of this thesis is the presentation and discussion of one of the largest Neopalatial groups of pottery from Myrtos-Pyrgos. It aims to define the characteristics of the site s pottery production and to contextualize it within the broader Neopalatial ceramic landscape. Broader questions concerning a social understanding of pottery (and in general craft) production, that is whether pottery can be used to reconstruct a site s political organization and dynamics, are then considered through the analysis of the pottery from the cistern. Previous scholarship has included Myrtos-Pyrgos in the debate concerning the Protopalatial and Neopalatial political organization of Crete. Competing and conflcting views of the political organization of the island emphasize its division into independent polities (especially during the Protopalatial period) or its unification under the control of Knossos during the Neopalatial period. Various classes of archaeological evidence have been cited to support or refute each of these interpretations, mainly (but not exclusively) the palaces, administrative documents, and pottery. Little has been said, however, about the comparative validity of these types of evidence for political reconstructions. Stylistic differences, in pottery or other crafts, have been interpreted as expressions of changing cultural and political dynamics. Previous scholarship on Myrtos-Pyrgos has addressed issues of political reconstruction, providing a framework for the addition of this analysis of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2. On the basis of the analysis of Protopalatial pottery, it has been suggested that Myrtos-Pyrgos was under the influence of the palatial site of Malia during that period. Subsequently, in the Neopalatial, the elite architecture at the site follows! 2!

27 styles that are typical of Knossian production; this has been interpreted to indicate a shift in the political dynamics of the site and the island more generally. Both of these scenarios agree with the current debate on Cretan politics, demonstrating the appearance of a Knossian influence during the Neopalatial period, including over the southeast of the island. Through the study of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos, I aim to contribute to this debate, by complementing the current understanding of the Neopalatial political organization of the site, which has been largely based on its architecture. I demonstrate that pottery by itself cannot be used to reconstruct political dynamics and, instead, I will argue that other types of material culture (such as architecture or administration) are likely to be better indicators of political domination. METHODOLOGY AND CHAPTER OVERVIEW To achieve the goals of this dissertation, it is necessary first to define the characteristics of Neopalatial pottery from Myrtos-Pyrgos and then to contextualize it by comparing it with pottery from other contemporary Cretan sites. The definition of Neopalatial ceramic production from Myrtos-Pyrgos is based on the detailed study of the stylistic and technological characteristics of the pottery: that is the study of fabric (or clay paste), shape, and surface treatment, including decoration. The sherds are examined with attention to their archaeological context, the cistern, and its stratigraphical distribution within it, in order to clarify the nature of the deposit. The study of the pottery, as well as the stratigraphy of Cistern 2 was largely conducted in the Stratigraphical Museum at Knossos, where the majority of the Myrtos- Pyrgos excavated material is currently housed, together with copies of the excavation! 3!

28 archive including notebooks, pottery notebooks (by Cadogan and Vronwy Hankey), as well as trench sections and plans. The excavation and post-excavation curation of the pottery has been fundamental to establish the quantities and types of sherds from Cistern 2. As was typical of Cretan archaeology during most of the 20 th century, 1 the pottery was selected during the excavation and post-excavation study, privileging diagnostic sherds (e.g., for dating purposes) and, in particular, finely decorated over coarse pottery. This selection did not alter the original proportions of pottery types, however, and thus maintained a representative sample. 2 The pottery from the cistern was then split into two discrete chronological groups Late Protopalatial (Pyrgos III) and Neopalatial (Pyrgos IV), which were boxed and shelved as such in the Stratigraphical Museum. The pottery is organized in wooden boxes, where it is grouped according to two parameters: first, by context (e.g., Cistern 2 or Country House) and chronological phase (e.g., Pyrgos IV, that is, Neopalatial); then, by shape or style categories (e.g., cups or Marine style). The extant Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 comprises approximately 2000 sherds. After an introduction to the site of Myrtos-Pyrgos, its excavation and finds, principally those from the Protopalatial and Neopalatial phases (Chapter 2), Chapter 3 focuses on Cistern 2, the archaeological context of the Neopalatial pottery. That chapter analyzes in detail the fill within Cistern 2, discussing its formation process and defining the Neopalatial pottery as a coherent assemblage. Chapter 4 presents the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2. Organized by ware (i.e., surface treatment) and shape categories, each type is discussed with attention also to contemporary ceramic comparanda from around Crete. The chapter then discusses the!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1 Momigliano 2007a, pp. 1-8; see also Hatzaki 2011, p G. Cadogan (pers. comm.).! 4!

29 chronology and dating of the pottery from Cistern 2, through a rigorous comparison with selected stratified deposits from representative areas of Crete. The highlighted similarities and differences identified between the pottery from Cistern 2 and other Neopalatial sites suggest the existence of ceramic stylistic regions, which are discussed in Chapter 5. There, it is argued that, stylistically, the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 is part of a southeastern ceramic region, which could be identified geographically with the area around Ierapetra. As a reflection on the significance of ceramic regionalism for the reconstruction of politics in Crete, Chapter 6 reviews the two main scholarly reconstructions of Cretan political organization, together with the archaeological evidence employed for each. It then discusses previous reconstructions of the political role of Myrtos-Pyrgos, integrating this analysis of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 into these scenarios. It is argued that although it is difficult to verify the influence of shifting political dynamics on pottery production, other classes of material culture, such as architecture or administration, could be more reliable indicators. Finally, Chapter 7 summarizes the results of the analysis of the Neopalatial pottery from the cistern, drawing conclusions on the relevance of ceramics and ceramic regionalism for our understanding of Cretan society. The conclusions briefly explore paths of future research suggested by these results. IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY This analysis of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos is important for both pottery studies and for the archaeology of politics, within and beyond the Aegean world.! 5!

30 This study gains significance for pottery studies because it contributes to current knowledge of Neopalatial craft production in Myrtos-Pyrgos, adding to the data coming from the analysis of other Neopalatial assemblages from the site. The pottery from Cistern 2 also represents one of the few assemblages from the southeast of Crete to be discussed; 3 the results of this dissertation thus aim to contribute to our knowledge of the Neopalatial pottery production and contribute to the exploration of the Ierapetra area. Furthermore, the contextualization of the Neopalatial pottery production at Myrtos-Pyrgos, together with the discussion about stylistic regions on Crete and the recognition of the southeast as a region, contributes to an understanding of ceramic (and craft) regionalism. This animates new and old research questions concerning the significance of stylistic regions, their functioning, and their relationship, if any, to sociopolitical dynamics. The results of this dissertation help reframe questions about the archaeology of politics, and in particular the role of different types of archaeological evidence - pottery and pottery style - for political reconstructions by arguing that we cannot demonstrate whether pottery did or did not register political boundaries. Instead, it is suggested in this dissertation that other types of material culture might have been directly affected by politics because they were more visible, such as architecture, or more directly linked to power management, such as administrative documents. Beyond pottery and its inherent significance for the history of craft production in Crete, this dissertation explores the potential of pottery to investigate broader aspects of socio-political human behavior.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3 The other assemblage is the LM IB pottery from Chrysi (Chalikias 2013).! 6!

31 A Note on Chronology The debate on the chronology of Bronze Age Crete is a complex topic. While relative chronologies (based on pottery or architectural phases) have represented a useful research tool, pinpointing absolute dates with precision is still difficult. 4 In this dissertation, I follow the higher chronology published in the Knossos Pottery Handbook. 5 The choice of either a high or low chronology does not affect the development and treatment of the topic of this dissertation and serves the purpose of offering an absolute reference point. Since pottery plays a central role in the dissertation, relative chronology is better suited for discussing stylistic and typological aspects, particularly at an intersite/regional level.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 4 See for example Warren and Hankey 1989; Manning 2009 and 2010; Manning and Bronk Ramsey 2003 and 2009; Cadogan Momigliano 2007a, p. 7, table 0.2.! 7!

32 CHAPTER 2 Myrtos-Pyrgos: The Discovery of the Site and its Occupational History INTRODUCTION This chapter presents the archaeology of Myrtos-Pyrgos, with the aim of providing a background for the study of the pottery from Cistern 2. The chapter is divided into two parts: the first part offers an overview of the site s discovery, excavation, and study seasons; the second part discusses, in general lines, the site s archaeological remains and phases of occupation. Special attention is paid to the Bronze Age and, in particular, to the Protopalatial and the Neopalatial periods, which are the phases of construction, use, and disuse of Cistern 2. FINDING AND EXCAVATING MYRTOS-PYRGOS Myrtos-Pyrgos is situated around the flat top, ca. 55 x 25 m, of a steep conical hill called Pyrgos (which means tower in Greek and refers to a Venetian and Ottoman beacon-tower on the summit, see below) at m above the sea level (Figs. 1.1 and 1.2). 6 The Pyrgos hill is quite steep, especially on its south side towards the sea; yet, it is easily approachable by the inland route from the north, where the slope is less abrupt. Taking the hill as the center, the landscape around Myrtos-Pyrgos appears very!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 6 Hood et al. 1964, p. 94; Cadogan 1992, p. 203.! 8!

33 varied. The Myrtos river, now only a seasonal stream of water, runs along the west flank of the hill, and beyond it is a fertile valley. To the east, gentle ridges separate Pyrgos from the hill of Fournou-Koryphi. Looking north from Pyrgos, the mountains of the Lasithi massif dominate the landscape; to the south, the hill overlooks the Libyan Sea. The proximity of the site to the river valley grants access to arable land and water; in addition, the hilltop commands a clear view of the sea and the coast, as well as ancient routes up into the Lasithi Mountains and between central and eastern Crete. Before any systematic archaeological investigation took place, the schoolmaster of Myrtos village, Giorgos Dimitrianakis, noticed antiquities on the hill and collected various artefacts, many of which from sherds, to a clay potter's wheel, and a small head of soft white limestone dated to the Minoan period. 7 In 1962, Hood, Warren, and Cadogan visited Myrtos during their Travels in Crete and, upon Dimitrianakis recommendation, they visited Pyrgos. When they explored the hill, walls and scatters of finds (such as stone vase fragments and sherds of fine decorated pottery ranging from EM II to LM I) were visible on the ground. 8 While Warren excavated an EM II settlement on the hill of Myrtos-Fournou- Koryfi, 9 the excavation of the Myrtos-Pyrgos was undertaken by Cadogan for the British School at Athens from 1970 over three principal seasons. The first season focused on the west and east slopes, as well as on the hilltop. 10 The second season, in 1971, saw the addition of new trenches into the north and northwest sides of the hill. 11 The third season,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 7 Hood et al. 1964, p Hood et al. 1964, pp , where there is also mention of dressed stones, gypsum blocks, and slabs. 9 Warren Cadogan 1971b, pp Cadogan 1972, pp ! 9!

34 in 1973, finally exposed the whole settlement. 12 Supplementary campaigns were conducted in 1975, 1983, and 1994, for cleaning and wall conservation. 13 Study seasons took place in 1972, and from 1974 to the present. The majority of the finds from the excavation are kept in the Stratigraphical Museum at Knossos. The project had the following aims: first, to establish Myrtos-Pyrgos sequence of habitation; 14 second, to explore the outskirts of the Lasithi region, poorly understood at the time; 15 third, to look for cultural connections between the site and both eastern and central Crete, in order to tie the sequences of the two regions more firmly; 16 fourth, to study the site s history in relation to Fournou-Koryfi, with particular attention to the aftermath of the EM II destruction which marked the end of the inhabitation of Fournou- Koryfi; and last, to check for any LM IB destruction, in light of the traces of burning on Pyrgos architectural remains. 17 OCCUPATION AT MYRTOS-PYRGOS The site of Myrtos-Pyrgos was occupied for a long span of time, from at least the early phases of the Bronze Age (EM II with some evidence of use in Final Neolithic IV- EM I), through LM I, with traces dating to the Hellenistic, the Venetian, and Ottoman periods (Tables 1 and 2; see also Fig. 2.1 for the Bronze Age archaeological phases). 18 The chronology system applied to Pyrgos has also been adopted at other sites on Crete (e.g., Palaikastro) and in the Aegean (e.g., Kea in the Cyclades or Lerna in the Greek!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 12 Cadogan 1974, pp Cadogan 1978; Cadogan 1971b, p. 504; Cadogan 1978, p Cadogan 1971b, p Cadogan 1978, p. 70; see also Cadogan 1971b, p Cadogan 1971b, p Cadogan 1978 and 1992.! 10!

35 mainland). The system provides an internal chronology based on the occupation sequence, identified by Roman numerals (Tables 1 and 2). Each phase, Pyrgos 0, I, II, III, etc., corresponds to the ceramic- and architecture-based chronologies of Bronze Age Crete. Table 1. Archaeological phases of Myrtos-Pyrgos Pyrgos 0/a Pyrgos 0/b Pyrgos I Pyrgos II Pyrgos III Neolithic EM I EM II EM III/MM IA-MM IB (and MM IIA?) MM IIB Pyrgos IV Neopalatial (mainly/wholly LM I) Pyrgos V Pyrgos VI Hellenistic Venetian; Ottoman Pyrgos 0, I, and II Cadogan groups the pre-em II evidence as Pyrgos 0, a phase that is further subdivided into Pyrgos 0a (FN IV) and Pyrgos 0b (EM I) (Tables 1 and 2). Of these early phases, the evidence is limited to three stone axes and a few FN IV and EM I sherds, identified by Peter Day and Peter Tomkins on the basis of stylistic and fabric analyses. 19 Krzysztof Nowicki s research on the inhabitation of the Ierapetra region during the late phases of the Neolithic and early EM corroborate the likelihood of a pre-pyrgos I!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 19 Day et al. 2005, p. 178 and ff.; Cadogan and Knappett forthcoming, chapter 1.! 11!

36 occupation. 20 According to Nowicki, several FN IV to EM I sites developed in the northeastern and southeastern part of Crete, all in defensible areas, often coastal, and all identifiable by clusters of sherds. 21 By the EM II, or Pyrgos I, the hilltop was perennially inhabited. 22 Although no architectural remains could be securely attributed to this phase, probably due to later occupation of the site, finds from across the site include both EM IIA and IIB pottery and some seals. 23 Like other east Cretan sites, such as Myrtos Fournou Koryfi, Pyrgos was destroyed by fire in EM IIB; nevertheless, unlike Fournou Koryfi, Pyrgos was resettled and quickly rebuilt. 24 Pyrgos II, Late Prepalatial (EM III-MM IA) and early Protopalatial (MM IB, probably into MM IIA), is particularly identified by a house tomb (henceforth the Tomb), two ossuaries, a courtyard, and a long paved road (Street VI) (Fig. 2.2). 25 These features are connected to each other, since Street VI leads to a forecourt outside the Tomb; 26 for this reason, Cadogan refers to them as a monumental mortuary complex. 27 Street VI starts north of the Tomb at a stepped way that originally might have been connected to the center of the hilltop. Because of its close connection to the access to the Tomb,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 20 Nowicki 2010; see especially p. 231 where he comments: The origins or the EM II settlements on Fournou Korifi and Pyrgos [ ] had their deep roots in the FN IV-EM I settlement clusters in the Myrtos region. See also Day et al and Chalikias 2013, especially pp Nowicki 2010, pp For the identification of FN IV-EM I sites, see Nowicki 2002; 2008; 2010, pp. 229 and Cadogan 2011a, p See also Driessen and Macdonald Cadogan 1978, p. 71; 1986, particularly p. 157 and ff.; 2011d, pp ; Nowicki 2010, p Cadogan 1978, pp ; 1986, p. 156; 2011d, p. 40; Nowicki 2000, p. 32. Cadogan 2011d, p. 40, comments that a likely corollary of both Pyrgos s resettlement in EM III and its Pyrgos 0 use is that it was probably the local center already in EM II. 25 Cadogan 1978, p. 71; 2011a; 2011d, p. 40 and ff. For the possible significance of the Tomb s location, see Cadogan 2011d, pp Cadogan 1978, p. 71; 2011a, p. 106; 2011d, p Cadogan 2011a, p. 106.! 12!

37 Cadogan refers to Street VI as a processional way. 28 Burials were placed in the Tomb (Room 105), an irregular quadrangular structure (5x3 m) with two stories; architecturally, it is comparable to a house structure (Fig. 2.3). 29 Ossuary 1 is attached to the southern side of the Tomb (Space 106, Fig. 2.2) and Ossuary 2 lies between the courtyard and the northern of the Tomb side (Room 104, Fig. 2.2). 30 The Tomb and the two Ossuaries are Pyrgos enduring features that remained in use through Pyrgos IV. 31 Pyrgos III Late Protopalatial Myrtos-Pyrgos comprises a single phase, Pyrgos III, which corresponds, in ceramic terms, to MM IIB. The settlement suffered a fire destruction at the end of the phase, as indicated by several signs of burning found on architectural (and ceramic) remains. 32 While the Tomb complex continued to be used during Pyrgos III, new buildings were erected on the north slope and on the top of the hill (Fig. 2.1, yellow outlines): on the north side, a substantial terrace wall (wall DW) and, below it, the base of a tower or bastion (Tower 1) and a large cistern (Cistern 2); on the hilltop, a smaller cistern (Cistern 1) and possibly some walls of a predecessor of the later Country House. 33 In the following section, The Tomb during Pyrgos III, is described first, followed by the finds on the north-northwestern slope and the hilltop. The Tomb complex received a new paved forecourt, built 30 cm above the!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 28 Cadogan 2011a, p. 108; 2011d, pp. 40 and 45, where the author states: The approach is public and monumental, ideal for processions to bring ideological sanctification down from a likely place of cosmological authority on the top of the hill. 29 Cadogan 2011d. 30 Cadogan 1978, p. 73; 2011d, p. 49; 2011a, p Hankey 1986, p Cadogan 2011a, p. 108; Hankey 1986; Bignasca 2000, pp Cadogan 1978, p Cadogan 1978; 1997, p. 101; 2010; 2011d, p. 47.! 13!

38 original one. 34 Inside the Tomb chamber (Room 105), about ten male burials were uncovered, lying in semi-extended position. 35 The bodies were found in two different layers separated by a stratum of mud: the lower layer is dated to Pyrgos III and includes six men accompanied by some pottery. 36 The upper layer contains the remaining four burials, over which the upper story of the chamber (perhaps wooden) had collapsed. In the collapse was pottery datable to the Neopalatial period (Pyrgos IV, see below). 37 On the north side of the hill, Wall DW, Tower 1, and Cistern 2 are interpreted by Cadogan as parts of a defense system, protecting Myrtos-Pyrgos most easily approachable and vulnerable side (Fig. 2.1). 38 Wall DW, for Cadogan, served both as defensive and a substructure for dwellings. 39 While the defensive function of Wall DW cannot be ruled out, its interpretation as a substructure for dwellings, i.e., a terracing wall, is an attractive hypothesis: terracing was needed to create a wide flat base over which the foundations of new buildings, higher up on the hill, could be laid. 40 Unfortunately, no corroborating architectural remains of Pyrgos III date were uncovered on the hilltop (with the exception of some possible walls of a central building), perhaps as a result of the fire destruction and subsequent Pyrgos IV reconstructions. Pottery, however, of later floor deposits includes Protopalatial shapes and decoration intermingled with Neopalatial ones, which may hint at a Pyrgos III phase on the hilltop. 41 A rare find in Minoan Crete, Tower 1 is a quadrangular building, with thick stone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 34 Cadogan 2011a, p Musgrave and Evans Cadogan 2011a, p Cadogan 2011a, pp Cadogan 2000, p. 171; 2007, p ; 2011d, 47 and ff. 39 Cadogan 2011d, p This certainly was the case during the following phase, Pyrgos IV, when there is clear evidence for major construction works (see below). 41 Cadogan 1972, p. 630.! 14!

39 walls, lying against Wall DW (Fig. 2.1). Cadogan sees the building as having strategic significance because it commands a view of the Myrtos valley; 42 however, it cannot be excluded that Tower 1 might have served also as storage for foodstuffs. 43 After the Pyrgos III destruction, Tower 1 fell into disuse and was never rebuilt. Cistern 2 is a massive circular construction (3 m deep and 5.30 m in diameter, with a capacity of 66 metric tons), 44 built into the hill slope, not far from Wall DW on its southern side (Fig. 2.1). The inside surface of the entire structure is plastered, providing the capability of storing water. The earliest usage of the cistern, based on ceramic evidence, dates to Pyrgos III. On the hilltop, the only substantial Pyrgos III architectural evidence is Cistern 1, uncovered on the southwestern corner of the courtyard of the Pyrgos IV Country House (Fig. 2.1). This is a circular structure similar to Cistern 2 both in shape and construction, including its interior plaster; it is smaller in size, however, than Cistern 2 (2.48 m deep and about 3.50 m in diameter) and hence with less capacity (22 metric tons of water, which is 1/3 of the capacity of Cistern 2) (Fig. 2.4). 45 According to Cadogan, the function of Cistern 1 was probably to collect storm water, although similarities with the Knossian or Maliote kouloures, circular structures for storing staples, might suggest that it was used as a granary. 46 Based on the existence of Cistern 1 and the surrounding Courtyard- which could!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 42 Cadogan 1978; 2011d, p Cadogan 1978, p. 74; Bignasca 2000, p Cadogan 2007, p Cadogan 1978, p. 74; 2007, p Cadogan 2007, p In the same contribution, Cadogan explains that the kouloura hypothesis seems improbable; since Cistern 1 is located below the top of the hill with its central building, it would have been hard to stop the water running into it when there was a storm which would have spoilt the grain.! 15!

40 have been in place already in Pyrgos II, if not earlier-, 47 one wonders whether there also was a Pyrgos III central building. 48 No architectural remains can be securely associated with a possible central building, other than one or two walls. 49 Yet, the quality and quantity of Pyrgos III pottery found in later dumps on the west and north slopes, in association with stone vases, seals, and figurines, suggests that some activity must have occurred on the hilltop before the Pyrgos IV Country House. 50 Judging from the hieroglyphic inscriptions and seals impressions, however scanty, the inhabitants of Pyrgos III were certainly involved in political, economic, and administrative activities. 51 Consequently, the scarcity of architectural remains may be due simply to later building activity. Pyrgos IV The Pyrgos IV phase covers the Neopalatial period, and in particular the LM I phase, at the end of which (in LM IB) the Country House was burnt down and the site abandoned. Very scanty evidence for a MM III occupation of the site has been found, suggesting that after the fire destruction at the end of MM IIB (Pyrgos III), the site was not immediately re-inhabited. 52 As discussed in the recently published Intermezzo workshop, the lack of substantial archaeological evidence for an MM III occupation at Myrtos-Pyrgos fits well within the general uncertainties concerning the identification and!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 47 G. Cadogan (pers. comm.). 48 See for example Cadogan 1997, 2007, and 2011d. 49 Cadogan 2011d, p. 47, n Cadogan 2011d, p ; Cadogan 1978, p Cadogan 1978, p. 76; 2013b. 52 Cadogan 2011a, p. 112; 2011d, p. 48 (see also n. 44); 2013a, p The only deposit that might contain MM III though Cadogan considers it to be mainly Pyrgos III- comes from the floor of a building below the South-East annex of the Country House (Cadogan 2013a, p. 179).! 16!

41 phasing of MM III as a distinct period at some Minoan sites. 53 During Pyrgos IV, significant building activity took place on the hilltop, including the construction of the Country House. 54 The archaeological evidence attributed to this phase derives from different parts of the site and includes the following: the Country House on the hilltop; Cistern 2; small buildings (Houses) on the upper east, north, and west slopes; the continued use (or reuse) of the Tomb; and the dump on the north slope. The Country House is a freestanding building of at least two stories, occupying the top of the hill. 55 The building faces south, with a view on the Libyan Sea to the front; and the Myrtos valley behind, to the north (Fig. 2.1). In front of the building was a large courtyard, with crazy paving; a raised walk on the façade of the Country House is connected to the street system of the settlement through a stepped path coming from the east slope (Fig. 2.5). 56 By this period, Cistern 1 was in disuse and filled with river pebbles, although its outline remained visible. 57 The Country House seems divided into two parts, western and eastern, with two separate entrances (Fig. 2.5). The west entrance was probably the main entrance to the building, on the southwestern facade, through a verandah with a gypsum floor and a central pillar flanked by two (wooden) columns (Fig. 2.5, the rectangular space between the raised walk and rooms 1, 4, and 5). 58 The ground floor included at least two rooms, a storage space and a light well (no. 3, Fig. 2.5). A staircase (no. 2, Fig. 2.5) led to an upper!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 53 Macdonald and Knappett 2013; Cadogan 2013a. 54 Whitelaw 2001, p. 27. See in particular figs. 2.9 and See Hood 1983, Cadogan 1997 (in particular, pp , concerning the terminological difference between villas and country houses), and Betancourt and Marinatos 1997, for a discussion on nomenclature. 56 Cadogan 1978, p. 77 and plan on p Cadogan 2007, p Cadogan 1978, p. 77.! 17!

42 story, whose spatial organization as well as room functions are not clear but may have included one or possibly two shrines (or shrine treasuries), judging from the material finds (sealings, a Linear A tablet mentioning of wine, a red faience conch shell, Egyptian stone vase fragments, clay tubular stands, and a metal rosette). 59 Cadogan also suggests that the area above the verandah could have supported a balcony. 60 The eastern part of the Country House was accessed through a long, narrow passage running roughly north-south (no. 7 on Fig. 2.5), at right angles to the main street up from the east slope. 61 The ground floor contained two storage rooms, the eastern one having a staircase leading to an upper floor (no. 9, Fig. 2.5). Similar to the interpretation of the western quarter, the objects fallen from the upper story (stone vases and fine clay vessels, mostly imports) suggest to Cadogan that the upper floor had a grander room. 62 The presence of administrative documents, storage spaces, and perhaps ritual areas, suggests that the Country House played a central role in the socio-political organization of the site. 63 The architecture and associated building materials (ashlar, gypsum, dressed poros limestone, and purple limestone) 64 support this interpretation. Cadogan argues that the Country House is in many ways a replica of palatial Knossian architecture, so much so that he hypothesizes Knossian craftsmanship for the construction of the building. 65 Cadogan has suggested that this Knossian influence might represent a!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 59 Cadogan 1978, p. 77; 1981; 1997, p Full discussion of the shrine group can be found in Cadogan Cadogan 1978, p. 77; 1997, p Cadogan 1978, p Cadogan 1978, p. 79. See also Cadogan 1997 and 2008 for the interpretation of the room as a shrine. 63 Cadogan 1997, pp Cadogan 1978, pp ; Cadogan 1992, p Cadogan 1997, pp. 77 and 103. But see also, Cadogan 1971 and Later, during the Hellenistic period, some of this lavish material was robbed.! 18!

43 change of guard from the previous period, from a political and/or cultural perspective: from the Malia-Lasithi state or cultural zone of Pyrgos III to a Knossian culture during Pyrgos IV. 66 The remains of another building, less well preserved, architecturally similar to though smaller than the Country House, was found on the east side of the courtyard of the Country House. Its function, as well as its relation to the Country House, is unclear. 67 Cadogan suggests that it could have been part of the Country House, perhaps connected to the main building through a bridge. 68 On the upper west, north, and east slopes of Myrtos-Pyrgos, small buildings were uncovered and have since been referred to as houses. Those located on the north and west slope rest respectively above the Pyrgos III Wall DW and on a terrace wall built over Pyrgos II remains. 69 The Houses yielded a considerable quantity of objects and local pottery. On the northwestern slope, the Tomb was in use during Pyrgos IV. The four burials of the upper layer in Room 105, some or all of which may have been secondary burials, can be dated to the Neopalatial period. 70 The dating is based on the large quantity (ca. 1,050) of Neopalatial vessels (LM IA) that collapsed, presumably from the second story, above the burials. 71 The pottery includes eating, drinking, and pouring vessels, and!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 66 Cadogan 1990 and 1995, though in nuce even in earlier contributions, such as Cadogan See Chapter 1 above for Knappett s development of Cadogan s model. 67 Cadogan 1978, p. 77, suggests it might have been a Pavilion. 68 Cadogan 2008, p. 12; the idea comes from Popham s suggestion of a bridge connecting the Unexplored Mansion to the Little Palace at Knossos (Popham 1984, pp. 105, 268, n. 14). 69 Cadogan 1978, p See also Hankey 1986, p Cadogan 1972, p. 630; 2011a, pp ! 19!

44 might relate to rites and visitations at the Tomb. 72 Other finds include stone vessels, triton shells, and metal and stone tools. 73 During or before Pyrgos IV, Cistern 2 on the north slope went out of use for collecting water and was rapidly filled with discarded material. 74 The next chapter presents in greater detail the circumstances that preceded the fill as well as its formation process. Pyrgos IV was brought to an end by a violent fire that affected the Country House in LM IB, as the pottery demonstrates. 75 After the destruction of the Country House, Myrtos-Pyrgos was abandoned and perhaps only seldom revisited. A single LM IIIC sherd found on the hill does not provide sufficient evidence for continuous occupation of the site. 76 Nevertheless, in the village of Myrtos, a rescue-excavation uncovered LM IIIA pottery, evidence that the area was used in later times. 77 Pyrgos V and VI As is also common in other sites of the Ierapetra region (e.g., Chrysi), 78 the next phase of human exploitation of Myrtos-Pyrgos is the Hellenistic period (Pyrgos V: late 2 nd and early 1 st century BC), which yielded substantial architectural evidence. 79 The remains of a large circular building (Fig. 2.5, no. 11) found above the northwestern side of the Country House, has been identified as a shrine possibly dedicated to Hermes and!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 72 Cadogan 2011a, p Hankey 1986, p. 135, records the quantities of the main pottery types. 73 Cadogan 2011a, pp ; Hankey 1986, p Oddo-Cadogan forthcoming; Oddo Cadogan 1978, Cadogan 1978, p Cadogan 1978, p. 82; Chalikias 2013, pp Chalikias 2013, p Dating of this phase was based on pottery. See Eiring 2000, p. 59 and ff. Eiring et al. 2002, p. 60.! 20!

45 Aphrodite. 80 No evidence exists on the hilltop for a Roman phase, which is, instead, documented lower in the valley at the western entrance of the modern town of Myrtos. 81 During the Venetian and Ottoman occupation of Crete, human activity is again discernable on the hill (Pyrgos VI). Τhe principal Pyrgos VI structure is the beacon tower or pyrgos, in Greek from which the name of the site is derived. 82 The tower had two building phases, the last of which is dated to around AD 1800 based on numismatic evidence. 83 Venetian accounts document similar towers in the area of the Myrtos Valley. 84 CONCLUSION This chapter presented an overview of the excavation and archaeological finds of Myrtos-Pyrgos, in order to provide a context and a background for the analysis of Cistern 2 and its pottery. In particular, this chronological and archaeological information will be essential in the second part of this dissertation, in which the political role of Myrtos- Pyrgos during the Protopalatial and the Neopalatial periods is examined. As will be discussed, one of the site s main archaeological features, the Country House, has been instrumental for the interpretation of the political role of Myrtos-Pyrgos in Crete.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 80 Cadogan and Chaniotis 2010, p. 294; Eiring 2000, fig. 2. The dedication to Hermes and Aphrodite is based on an inscription and four graffiti found there. The inscription is published in Cadogan and Chaniotis For the graffiti, see Eiring 2000 and Cadogan and Chaniotis Davaras 1973; 1976, p The modern town appears to overlie a Roman settlement. The remains so far include the ruins of a public bath with mosaic floor (Davaras 1976, p. 206). See also Cadogan and Knappett, forthcoming, chapter Cadogan 1978, pp Cadogan and Chaniotis Cadogan 1978, p Cadogan 1978, pp ! 21!

46 Table 2. Chronology and sequence of Minoan Myrtos Pyrgos. Courtesy of G. Cadogan and E. Hatzaki. Dates are based on Momigliano 2007, p. 7 Approx. dates BC Minoan system Myrtos Pyrgos phases PREPALATIAL FN IV Pyrgos 0/a EM I Pyrgos 0/b EM II Pyrgos I EM IIB (/1850?) EM III/MM IA- MM IB (and MM IIA?) Destruction by fire Pyrgos II (a-d) PROTOPALATIAL MM IIB Pyrgos III Destruction by fire NEOPALATIAL (1750/1675?)-1580 (MM III?) LM I (IA and IB) Pyrgos IV LM IB Destruction by fire! 22!

47 CHAPTER 3 Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos: Archaeological Analysis INTRODUCTION The Neopalatial pottery that forms the core of this dissertation was found inside, above, and in the immediate vicinity of Cistern 2, the larger of the two cisterns of Myrtos-Pyrgos located on the north slope of the hill (Fig. 2.1). 85 This chapter focuses on the excavation and stratigraphical assessment of Cistern 2, in order to gain a clear understanding of the archaeological context of the pottery. Although the study of pottery on its own can provide certain types of information (i.e., on chronology, style, and manufacture), the analysis of pottery in association with its context and stratigraphy can clarify the formation process of an assemblage i.e., its sequence of use and final deposition and, in turn, its nature. 86 It is through the study of its archaeological and stratigraphical context that pottery can reveal its story as well as that of the individuals who handled it. CISTERN 2 AND ITS SURROUNDINGS: EXCAVATION AND FINDS Cistern 2 is at the northern edge of the Myrtos-Pyrgos hill. It was constructed about 12 m below the hilltop, about 2.5 m downslope from Wall DW and 10 m east of!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 85 See Chapter 2 for a description of Cistern Schiffer 1987.! 23!

48 Tower Its northern half, on the edge of the hill, was built up, while the southern part was dug into the hill. Cistern 2 is a roughly circular structure, measuring 5.30 m in diameter and slightly above 3 m in depth. This massive structure would have held at least 66 tonnes of water. 88 The walls of the cistern are built of large stones, while the bottom is paved with pebbles. All of the inside surfaces of the structure are coated with a layer of white, shiny lime plaster, whose thickness ranges from 1-2 cm over the walls to 4-5 cm on the bottom (Figs. 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3). Before the start of excavation in 1971, no part of Cistern 2 was visible on the surface. According to the excavation notebooks, the soil over the area of the cistern formed a gentle slope, progressively decreasing towards the north, and abruptly ending at the steep edge of the hill. 89 Cistern 2 was fully excavated in the course of two seasons, 1971 and It was excavated in three 4x4 m trenches (F02, G01, G02), two smaller ones (F01 and F01X, where the X stands for extension), and four 1 m wide baulks in-between (Fig. 3.4). The top courses of Cistern 2 first appeared in 1971, when a small part of its southwestern quarter came to light in trench F01; soon after, trench G02 revealed the whole northeastern quarter, which was then excavated. When digging resumed in 1973, two more trenches (F02 and G01) were opened in order to uncover all of Cistern 2: F02 revealed the northwestern quarter, while the southeastern part was partly in the corner of G01 and the adjacent baulks (G01/G02 and G01/F01, respectively). In addition, the excavation of the southwestern quarter in trench F01, interrupted in 1971 for safety!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 87 Cadogan 2007, p See the section in Chapter 2 on Pyrgos III for a description of these architectural features. 88 Chapter 3. Cadogan 1978, p. 74; 2007, p Hankey s excavation notebooks 1971.! 24!

49 reasons, was completed as F01X. Cistern 2 was fully exposed by the end of the 1973 season. The area above Cistern 2 yielded only a few badly preserved rubble walls, particularly in the trenches G01, G02, and F02: GT (in F02), FB and ET (in G02) (Fig. 3.5). Walls GT and FB were partly built within the material dumped inside the cistern. Wall ET was built outside Cistern 2 proper and rested on the fill that covered the area. Generally, only up to 7 courses of these walls were preserved, and those were made of irregular blocks. Wall ET, however, is an interesting exception: it incorporated blocks originally belonging to the cistern and still displaying the original plaster coating. In order to reach the lower levels and excavate the interior of Cistern 2, the wall remains were recorded and then removed during the excavation. Little can be said about the function of these walls. While they surely belong to the phases during or after the filling of the cistern, it is difficult to reconstruct precisely the way they relate to each other and to the disuse and the filling of Cistern 2. Cadogan suggests that walls GT and FB, built within the fill of Cistern 2, might have served to contain the dump. 90 In addition to the wall remains, shallow pits filled with earth, sherds, and stones were a common feature of the upper levels of the four trenches particularly G01. It is unclear whether the pits pre- or post-date the walls. They are interpreted either as packing, in order to level the terrain, or for rubbish disposal. Alternatively, they may represent hollows in the original accumulation. Pottery, stones, fragments of stone vessels, stone tools, very small amounts of animal bone, metal objects, and fragmentary wall plaster were also found across the four trenches in the levels associated with the!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 90 Oddo and Cadogan, forthcoming.! 25!

50 walls and in the pits. The fill of Cistern 2 consisted of earth, sherds, plaster fragments, and many stones, both rubble and worked. The area above Cistern 2 slopes down towards the north, creating archaeological levels that are thicker at the southern end and get progressively thinner towards the northern end. The soil in the fill was generally compact and hard, which during excavation become muddy in the lower levels towards the bottom of Cistern 2. The predominant find in the fill, both inside and outside the edges of Cistern 2, was pottery, both Protopalatial and Neopalatial. THE STRATIGRAPHY OF CISTERN 2 The stratigraphical study of the fill within Cistern 2 is crucial in order to reconstruct the circumstances and chronology of the deposit, i.e., the formation process of the fill. This, in turn, enables an investigation of the nature of the deposit, as well as an exploration of the human activity behind it. One important question concerns the circumstances and the chronology of the filling of the cistern so as to determine whether the fill is the result of one or of multiple dumping episodes. The analysis of the pottery in association with excavation notebooks, trench plans, and sections provided the necessary information to examine the stratigraphy of Cistern 2. For this study, I received permission also to analyze the Protopalatial pottery from the cistern, currently being studied by Cadogan and Knappett, in order to understand the stratigraphy of Cistern 2. The possibility to look at both the Protopalatial and the Neopalatial pottery was important for two reasons: first, it allowed me to obtain a clearer understanding of the distribution of the pottery from the fill; second, it refined my understanding of the nature(s) of the fill. Three characteristics of the pottery were! 26!

51 particularly valuable for reconstructing the formation process: the number of cross-joins within the different soil levels; the degree of completeness of the pots; and traces of wear on the pottery surfaces and breakage points. Last, in order to reveal the distribution of the sherds, both Protopalatial and Neopalatial, they were plotted onto sections of Cistern 2 (Fig. 3.8). 91 The quantities of Protopalatial and Neopalatial sherds from Cistern 2 are similar, amounting to about 2000 sherds each. Both groups can be found distributed throughout Cistern 2 and above it, although at the bottom levels Neopalatial is nearly absent in contrast to a high presence of Protopalatial (Fig. 3.9). While the Protopalatial sherds are rather homogeneously distributed within Cistern 2, the Neopalatial ones are strongly concentrated in the northernmost trenches, G02 and F02. The sloping ground of the cistern area might be the reason for such an odd spread of the ceramic material. 92 An early assessment of the pottery and the stratigraphy suggested to Cadogan a tripartite sequence of use and disuse for Cistern 2: 1. Phase 1 corresponds to the construction of Cistern 2 and its use to hold water. Although open to the possibility of an earlier date, Cadogan dates the construction and use of Cistern 2 to the Protopalatial period (MM IIB), as suggested by the pottery found in the cistern s bottom. 93 This date is consistent with the overall building activity at Protopalatial Myrtos-Pyrgos, when Tower 1, Wall DW, and Cistern 1 were constructed; Phase 2 corresponds to the disuse of Cistern 2 as a water reservoir and the!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 91 Oddo 2015; Oddo and Cadogan, forthcoming. 92 Oddo and Cadogan, forthcoming. 93 Cadogan Cadogan 1978; Oddo and Cadogan, forthcoming. See Chapter 2 for an account of the Protopalatial building activity in Myrtos-Pyrgos.! 27!

52 progressive accumulation of material in Cistern 2. Cadogan suggests that the collapse of the northernmost wall of Cistern 2 made the structure unusable and that the area consequently became a dumping ground, culminating in the large Neopalatial (LM I) pottery dump. 95 Even Cistern 1, on the hilltop, was filled (with river pebbles) in LM I. 3. Phase 3, corresponds to the construction of the walls, within and above the fill of Cistern 2. As the function and date of the walls are unclear, even the chronological attribution of Phase 3 is uncertain and could be associated with the period during or after the filling of Cistern 2. The combination of the analysis of the stratigraphy and the pottery allowed further refining of the phases of the fill. Interestingly, the Protopalatial and the Neopalatial sherds present different wear pattern. Most of the Protopalatial sherds do not mend up and they show high degrees of wear on both the surface and the breaks. The only exception is the Protopalatial pottery from the bottom of Cistern 2, which includes several oval-mouthed amphorae, and from certain areas of trench G01, which is outside Cistern 2 (Fig. 3.4). By contrast, about 70% of the preserved Neopalatial sherds can be mended into 40-60% complete vessels and, in a few cases, they join into almost complete pots (80-90%). Very few traces of wear are present on the Neopalatial pottery: breaks have sharp edges and surfaces preserve their glossy and almost pristine finish. These wear patterns appear to be quite uniform throughout the assemblage. The only exception is a handful of late Neopalatial (LM IB) sherds, which are not mendable and appear worn, with dulled edges, scratched surfaces, and faded decoration. These differences in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 95 Cadogan 2007, p. 105.! 28!

53 wear patterns between the Protopalatial and the Neopalatial pottery suggest different depositional circumstances, as discussed below. Second, a consistent pattern of cross-joins can be detected across the four trenches. The pattern involves both the Protopalatial and Neopalatial pottery. With the help of both the archaeological sections and the Harris matrices from the four trenches, it was possible to plot the cross-joins onto the sections. In particular, the archaeological section in Fig. 3.6 was created by merging and re-drawing two original archaeological sections from the excavation. Fig. 3.6 shows the stratigraphy of the southeastern quarter of Cistern 2, as seen in the south face of trench G02 and the east face of trenches F01 and F01X (Fig. 3.7). By offering a reconstruction of the stratigraphy of Cistern 2, it allows the visualization of the distribution pattern of the sherds as well as any possible crossjoins (Figs. 3.8 and 3.10). Fig shows the Harris matrices of the trenches and baulks in the cistern, where both Protopalatial and Neopalatial cross-joins have been plotted. The majority of the Neopalatial cross-joins derive from the upper and middle levels of Cistern 2 and its area (Figs. 3.8, 3.9, 3.12, 3.14). As can be seen, sherds from the area outside of Cistern 2 (whether from the upper levels of the fill or in G01) join with levels found within the cistern itself. A few cross-joins link upper and lower levels of the fill (see below), suggesting that they could have been discarded at the same time. Additionally, the largest cluster of cross-joins concentrated in trenches G02 and F02, likely result from the sloping ground of the fill, with higher levels on the southern side and lower ones on the northern side. This pattern could suggest that the dumping of material happened from the south! 29!

54 and spilled towards the north. In that case, a few Neopalatial sherds could have slid down the sloping ground towards the lower levels of the cistern. A similar pattern of cross-joins can be observed for the Protopalatial material: sherds from the inside of Cistern 2 join to sherds from the outside, both vertically (i.e., from different archaeological levels) and horizontally (i.e., within the same archaeological level) across trenches (Figs and 3.15). Particularly interesting is the case of a few joining fragments found in trench G01 level 2, F02 level 9, and F01X level 9: while both levels in F02 and F01X correspond to the bottom of Cistern 2, the joining fragments from G01 level 2 can be found right below the surface of an area outside Cistern 2. Trench G01 has a high number of Protopalatial cross-joins within its levels, and only one Neopalatial sherd joining with the G01/G02 baulk. Within Cistern 2, clusters of Protopalatial cross-joins (mostly of oval-mouthed jars) concentrate in the lower levels, which do not, however, share joins with the rest of the fill (Fig. 3.13). The distribution of the cross-joins and consideration of the wear pattern of the sherds allow a reconsideration and a refinement of the three phases presented above. Four or five phases can be suggested for the use, disuse, and reuse of Cistern Phase A corresponds to the construction and use of Cistern 2 for water storage. Cistern 2 could have well been built during the Protopalatial period (perhaps around MM IIB). The pottery found at the bottom of Cistern 2 is datable to the Protopalatial period and includes several mendable oval-mouthed amphorae and jugs, perhaps connected to water collection. The lack of cross-joins between the sherds from the bottom levels and the rest of the fill suggests that the lower levels of Cistern 2 could represent a!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 96 An account of the new phasing is presented in Oddo and Cadogan, forthcoming.! 30!

55 depositional episode different from the fill itself, perhaps related to the original use level. This phase is identical to Cadogan s Phase 1. Phase B is the time at which Cistern 2 fell into disuse as a structure for water storage. This phase can be dated to the late Protopalatial period or slightly after and might be connected to the collapse of the northernmost wall of Cistern 2, as Cadogan suggests. This is the initial event in Cadogan s Phase 2. The dumping of material in the middle and upper levels of Cistern 2 can probably be divided into two separate sub-phases, judging from the type of material that accumulated and its stratigraphical position; both of these sub-phases of the dumping were incorporated within the preliminary phase 2. First Phase C was the initial period of disuse before the dumping had started, during which a fairly thick layer of earth and stones accumulated over the bottom of Cistern 2 (i.e., over the use level). Very little pottery comes from these levels. It is difficult to precisely date this first dump, although it likely represents the first deposition following the disuse of Cistern 2 during or soon after the late Protopalatial period. This accumulation is thicker to the middle and southern side of Cistern 2 and thinner on the northern side, a circumstance that would have the effect of allowing material dumped later to fall deeper into the northern part of Cistern 2, thus explaining the pattern of accumulation in trenches G02 and F02. In Phase D, the second sub-phase in the filling of Cistern 2, the large dump of pottery, part of which is the subject of this dissertation, was deposited on top of the earth and stone layer. This material may represent clearance from somewhere higher up on the hill, although the evidence does not permit certainty on this point. Both Protopalatial and Neopalatial pottery is represented in these central and upper levels of the fill of Cistern 2! 31!

56 (Fig. 3.9). However, as discussed above, the wear pattern of Protopalatial and Neopalatial sherds indicates that the Protopalatial material, more worn and rarely mendable, is only residual. The Neopalatial, on the other hand, is much better preserved and dates the dump. The Neopalatial pottery dates predominantly to LM IA but includes a handful of LM IB sherds, as Chapter 4 demonstrates in detail. Finding LM IA and LM IB sherds together suggests two possible depositional scenarios: the choice between them depends principally on whether the LM IB sherds are intrusive or not. 1. The large pottery dump may have occurred in LM IA. In this case, the few LM IB non-joining sherds would be a later intrusion, as they might have fallen in or trickled down into the LM IA dump. They may have come from the LM IB destruction that severely affected the Pyrgos IV settlement (see Chapter 3), or from some earlier clearance from the buildings on the hilltop (e.g., the houses). 2. Alternatively, the LM IB sherds may not represent an intrusion, thus dating the entire Neopalatial dump to LM IB. Unfortunately, the archaeological evidence does not allow us to establish with certainty which one of these two scenarios is the more likely. Both hypotheses appear possible. Finally, Phase E relates to the construction of walls within and above the fill in Cistern 2. Some of them especially walls GT, FB, and ET, built within the fill could be dated to the Neopalatial period, based on the pottery found. This phase is identical to Cadogan s Phase 3.! 32!

57 The Fast and the Slow-Filling Hypotheses The observed pattern of cross-joins and wear traces in the ceramic assemblage from Cistern 2 can further inform the circumstances of the fill. Two hypotheses seem possible, a slow-filling model and a fast-filling model. 97 In the slow-filling model, the material was dumped in Cistern 2 on various occasions during the Neopalatial period; in the fast-filling model, the material was dumped all at once at some point in the Neopalatial period. Each of these models has its pros and cons. The slow-filling model interprets the fill of Cistern 2 as a series of dumps that occurred over a period of time, from the Protopalatial to the Neopalatial period. There are two main arguments that corroborate this model: the wall remains within the fill and the Neopalatial non-joining ceramic fragments. The construction of walls within the dump itself is explained as a deliberate means to contain the growing dump. If the material was deposited in two or more dumpings, the slow-filling model could help account for the non-joining sherds (which account for circa 30% of the entirety of the pottery). However, the intervals of time between one dumping episode and another would probably have exposed the broken pottery to the elements, leaving wear traces on the sherds surfaces; on the contrary, very few sherds from the Neopalatial assemblage have such traces. The fast-filling model hypothesizes that the pottery was disposed in Cistern 2 all at once soon after the pottery s breakage, sometime during the Neopalatial period (whether LM IA or LM IB). This model is corroborated by three observations based on the analysis of the Neopalatial assemblage: first, the pattern of cross-joins distributed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 97 Oddo and Cadogan, forthcoming.! 33!

58 throughout the upper half of Cistern 2; second, the fact that most of the assemblage (70%) can be mended; third, the lack of wear on the sherds seems to indicate very little exposure to the elements, as if the pottery had been covered quickly after it was discarded. 98 The only exceptions are the few LM IB and the Protopalatial sherds. Both of these exceptions deserve attention because they might have important implications for this model. As pointed out above, the LM IB sherds are not mendable, there are rarely more than two from the same pot, and they fairly consistently show a higher degree of surface wear than the LM IA sherds. These LM IB sherds are found in the top levels of the dump, where it spread outside Cistern 2. The LM IB material suggests two possible scenarios: a) The LM IB sherds should generally be attributed to the top levels of the fill of Cistern 2. Because these top levels were not sealed by other levels above, sherds were exposed to the elements, which caused their greater degree of wear in comparison to the LM IA material; b) The LM IB sherds and perhaps the other pottery from their associated levels were not part of the fill of Cistern 2 but rather trickled down into it from somewhere higher up on the hill. The distribution of the Protopalatial cross-joins discussed above might challenge this reconstruction, since Protopalatial cross-joins are found between areas outside and inside Cistern 2 (Fig. 3.13), confirming the pattern observed for the Neopalatial pottery. Although not directly supporting the fast-filling model, the similar pattern of cross-joins favors the argument of a single dump that filled the middle and upper part of Cistern 2, as!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 98 Oddo 2015.! 34!

59 well as the area above it. These data, in combination with the wear patterns of the Neopalatial sherds, suggests that a massive dump was deposited all at once in Cistern 2. In sum, the reconstruction of the formation process of the fill of Cistern 2, by means of stratigraphical analysis and study of cross-joins and wear patterns of the pottery, shows a history of use and disuse divided in four or five phases, spanning from the late Protopalatial (when the cistern was probably built) to the Neopalatial period (when it was filled). The pottery dumped in Cistern 2, and spilling onto the area outside it, appears to have been deposited in at least two moments: the lower levels represent the use levels, with Protopalatial oval-mouthed amphorae and rare Neopalatial sherds trickled down from higher levels; the middle and upper levels, including the area outside the cistern proper, represent, instead, one single (i.e., deposited all at once) Neopalatial (LM IA) dump. This information is the background for the study of the Neopalatial assemblage presented in the following chapter, in that it allows considering it as a unitary group, which is stylistically and chronologically coherent. CONCLUSION This chapter presented the excavation and stratigraphy of Cistern 2, the archaeological context of the Neopalatial pottery that is the subject of this dissertation. It first focused on the excavation of the cistern and its fill, describing the principal finds among the trenches. The chapter then discussed the stratigraphy of the fill and the distribution of the pottery (both Protopalatial and Neopalatial) within it. On the basis of the stratigraphy and the pottery analysis, I argue that the fill (and hence the pottery) of! 35!

60 Cistern 2 was dumped all at once during the Neopalatial period, and not over multiple episodes as previously suggested.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 36!

61 CHAPTER 4 The Neopalatial Pottery from Cistern 2 INTRODUCTION This chapter focuses on the pottery from Cistern 2. The presentation is divided in two parts: a description of the pottery and a discussion of its chronology. In the first part, the pottery is presented according to fabric, ware, and shape groups. 99 The fabrics, defined as the ceramic paste with which the vessel is formed, are organized into four broad types: fine buff, coarse buff, reddish-brown, and pithos. Within each fabric type, the material is then discussed according to ware, i.e., surface treatment. Among the pottery from Cistern 2, common Neopalatial wares are plain, dark-on-light lustrous, dark-on-light lustrous with added white, dark-on-light non-lustrous, and monochrome. Lastly, within each ware type, the pottery is grouped into different shapes, according to the vessel s form. 100 Shapes proceed from open (e.g., cups and bowls) to closed (e.g., jugs and jars) and from small to large. At the end of each shape type, the pottery is discussed in relation to other contemporary assemblages from Crete, in order to contextualize Myrtos-Pyrgos within the broader Neopalatial ceramic production. The second part of the chapter focuses on dating the pottery from Cistern 2, based on its stylistic features, which are compared to five Neopalatial ceramic deposits dated on the basis of stratigraphy.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 99 This presentation of the pottery follows the criteria of the Knossos Pottery Handbook, which classifies pottery by fabric, ware, and shape. See Momigliano 2007a, p Momigliano 2007a, p. 8.! 37!

62 FINE BUFF FABRIC Vessels in this fabric category are all wheelmade. A very fine, clean, clay paste was used for the fine tableware. The clay paste is fired to an orange buff color with pink and red hues, in a few cases with a dark red or grey core (2.5 YR 7/3, pale reddish, or 7/4, orange). Inclusions are generally rare (less than 2%), well sorted, small, and rounded. They can be white, black, brown, or purple. Tableware made of this fabric includes all of cup categories and bowls. Closed shapes show more variability in clay paste recipes and firing colors, ranging from a pink buff to a dark reddish-orange. The general characteristics of inclusions remain the ones described above: rare (less than 2%), well sorted, small, and rounded. However, the inclusions present in the dark reddish-orange paste are slightly more frequent (more than 2% and less than 5%) and are mostly black. The reddishorange paste is also more porous than the others. Dark-On-Light Lustrous Ware! The following shapes occur in dark-on-light lustrous ware: hemispherical cup (Figs ), rounded cup (Figs ), straight-sided cup (Figs ), Vapheio cup (Figs ), s-profile cup (Figs ), ledge-rim bowl (Figs ), frieze-decorated bowl (Figs ), banded bowl (Figs ), inand out bowl (Figs ), bridge-spouted jug/jar (Figs ), and fragments of not clearly identifiable closed vessels (Figs ).! Hemispherical Cup (Figs ) This shape is characterized by thin walls, a globular body, a strongly everted rim, a! 38!

63 flat or raised base, and a strap handle often with a knob on top where the handle meets the rim (Figs. 4.1 and 4.2). The bases have an incised circle around their interior (Fig. 4.3), a feature also found in some bowls, such as ledge-rim bowls. The shape is best represented in its morphological features by MP/73/P304 (Figs. 4.1 and 4.4), whose complete profile is 6.8 cm high. Rim diameters range from 10 to 12 cm, and bases from 4 to 4.8 cm. Hemispherical cups occur in either red or brown/black paint with both variants equally represented. The vessel s surface is uniformly glossy. The dark-on-light decoration includes a rim band, a frieze below the rim and on the body where the main decorative motif is painted, and two or three bands on the lower third of the body. The two recurrent motifs on the body include spirals and crescents (Fig. 4.5). A very limited number of sherds have other types of decoration, such as reeds, spirals with foliate bands, or ivy. A single example has double axes, MP/71/P501 (Figs. 4.6 and 4.7). Bases are either monochrome or have a band around the edge while the center is left plain. The interior of the vessel is universally monochrome. The hemispherical cup with dark-on-light lustrous decoration represents one of the most common Neopalatial shapes across Crete. In north-central Crete, at Knossos, the hemispherical cup can occur with a taller and more conical lower body, throughout the Neopalatial period (Fig. 4.8); 101 in their decoration, particularly during MM III and LM IA, the frieze is dominated by ripples and spirals, with rare floral motifs and crescents. 102 Similar characteristics can be seen in south-central Crete, where this shape can also have!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 101 Mountjoy 2003, p. 71, fig. 4.9, nos (see particularly no. 111); Popham 1984, pl. 143, no. 4; Macdonald 1996, pl. 3.B and C; Warren 1991, p. 329, fig. 10, nos. e-j, and pl. 79, nos. g-j. 102 Knossos: Mountjoy 2003, p. 71, fig. 4.9, nos ; Popham 1984, pl. 128, nos. c and d, pl. 130, nos. a-d, pl. 141, nos. 8-10, pl. 143, nos. 1 and 4; Catling et al. 1979, p. 45, fig. 3.1, no Crescents in Warren 1991, p. 329, fig. 10, nos. e and f.! 39!

64 a less everted rim and a more prominent belly than the Myrtos-Pyrgos counterparts (Fig. 4.9). 103 Although these features are not absent from northeastern and southeastern Crete (Bramiana and Chrysi), 104 in the east, and particularly at Malia, Mochlos, Bramiana, and Chrysi, there seems to be a preference for hemispherical cups with strongly everted rim, more globular body, and flat shorter base, such as the ones in Myrtos-Pyrgos (Figs and 4.11). 105 At these sites, the frieze decoration of hemispherical cups regularly includes not only ripples and spirals, but also frequently crescents, as in Myrtos-Pyrgos. The coexistence of both central and eastern Cretan characteristics can also occur, for example in Zakros (Figs and 4.13). 106 Rounded Cup (Figs ) Typically, the rounded cup has a convex profile, with the rim slightly turning in, a flat or raised tronco-conical base, and a vertical handle rounded or ovoid in section (Fig.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 103 Puglisi 2006: table 4, nos ; table 13, nos , 10.22, and 10.23; table 26, nos ; table 29, no. 44.5; table 36, nos ; D Agata 1989, table XXI, no. e, and table XXII, no. f; La Rosa and Cucuzza 2001, fig. 162 and 164; Betancourt 1990, fig. 70, nos. 2023, 2024, 2028, 2029; Watrous 1992, fig. 12, nos. 11, 30, 31, and plate 2, no. 79; Rutter 2006, p. 1123, pl. 3.30, no. 9a/2; p. 1129, pl. 3.36, nos. 24/8-15; p. 1135, pl. 3.42, no. 37d/1; p. 1140, pl. 3.47, nos. 44b/6-11; Chatzi-Vallianou 2011, p. 350, fig. 6, PIT. VII. P44, PIT.VII. P.62, PIT.VII.P34, PIT.VII.P30, PIT.VII.P85. PIT.VII.P See, for example, for Gournia: Hawes et al. 1908, pl. VIII, nos. 8 and 29. For Palaikastro: Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 129, fig. 16, no. 164, and p. 151, fig. 32, nos. 268 and 271, p. 167, fig. 44, nos. 422 and 424. For Mochlos: Barnard 2001, p. 223, fig. 8.3, nos. 8.27, p. 237, fig. 6.2, no. 6.23; Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 429, fig. 2, no. P6124, and p. 430, fig. 3, no. P15. For Petras: Tsipopoulou and Alberti 2011, p. 472, fig. 9, nos. I and j. As the pottery from both Bramiana and Chrysi is currently under study, I am unable to provide references or photographic reproductions. 105 For Malia, see Pelon 1970, pl. XIII, no. 4, and pl. XV, no. 2. For Mochlos, see Barnard 2001, p. 186, fig. 11.5, no ; p. 205, fig. 10.3, no ; p. 230, fig. 7.2 no. 7.20; p. 238, fig. 6.3 nos and 6.25; p. 247, fig. 4.3, nos ; Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 429, fig. 2, nos. P6092 and P4937, and, with raised base p. 438, fig. 10, no. P Platon 2011, p. 232, fig. 23 (central Crete characteristics) and p. 239, fig. 44 (eastern Crete characteristics).! 40!

65 4.14). The base also occurs with short tripod feet (Fig. 4.17). 107 Its roundness can vary from a more conical shape to a more globular one. It is characteristic of this form that it occurs in both tall and short versions. 108 Heights range from 6.4 to 9.5 cm, rim diameters from 10 to 14 cm, and bases from 4 to 6 cm. The rounded cup seems to be more common in eastern Crete, although in a plain or non-lustrous variant with a dipped rim decoration. 109 At Myrtos-Pyrgos, rounded cups usually have the following decorative scheme: rim band, frieze decoration that extends for two thirds of the body, and either three distinct bands or a solid color below. The underside of the bases can be either plain or monochrome. There seem to be a remarkable variability for the motifs in the frieze, which include principally plants (ivy and foliate bands) and zigzags (Fig. 4.16), although spirals are also possible (Fig. 4.5). The color of the paint ranges from red to brown and black. The interior is always monochrome, carelessly executed. The dark-on-light lustrous rounded cup is not uniformly distributed across Crete. No comparanda exist from central Crete, either north or south. 110 Instead, it seems to be more typical of the eastern production region, where, however, it predominantly occurs in the dark-on-light-non-lustrous ware (see below). The Pyrgian dark-on-light lustrous rounded cups are perfectly paralleled at Malia, Mochlos, Pseira, and Gournia. In particular, MP/71/P504 (Figs and 4.19) has close parallels in Malia (Fig. 4.20), as!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 107 See example from Malia in Pelon 1970, pl. XIII, no. 2. But see also Knappett and Cunningham 2003, for example p. 129, fig. 16, no. 160 (with feet but Light-on-Dark). 108 As also, for example, at Palaikastro. See Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 123 and pp ; p. 128, fig. 15, nos (although dark-on-light non-lustrous); p. 166, fig. 43, no Knappett and Collar 2007, fig Examples can be found across the island, from Knossos and Kommos to Mochlos and Palaikastro. However, the highest concentration seems to be in the east. 110 Knappett-Cunningham 2003, p. 123.! 41!

66 well as in the houses and Artisans Quarter at Mochlos (Fig. 4.21), at Pseira, and at Gournia (Fig. 4.22). 111 Straight-sided Cup (Figs ) The shape of the vessel is distinctive as it generally has a flaring thin-walled profile, which narrows slightly at the middle or lower half of the body, and a splaying base. The handle is universally strap, attached to the rim (often rising slightly above the rim level) and mid-lower body. The banded variant is slightly smaller and shorter than the type with solid color on the lower body (Figs. 4.23, 4.24). The only complete profile has a height of about 7.2 cm, taller than the monochrome counterpart discussed below. Rim diameters range from 9 and 12 cm, bases from 6 and 8 cm. The dark-on-light lustrous ware occurs in red and brown-black paint, the latter being the more common. Dark-on-light lustrous straight-sided cups have a main decorative frieze with spirals, plants (foliate scroll and horizontal reed), or ripples applied on the upper third or half of the vessel (Figs. 4.25, 4.26, and 4.27). The vessel s lower part is either solidly painted (Fig. 4.25) or has two or three thin painted bands (Fig. 4.28). The underside of the base is monochrome, except on the banded type where it has linear motifs or ripples (Fig. 4.29). The inside is monochrome as well and is frequently carelessly painted. The combination of motifs does not seem to be accidental: spirals and ripples are!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 111 For Malia: Pelon 1970, pl. XIV, no. 5; as a tripod vessel, Langohr and Alberti forthcoming, fig. 2b and Pelon 1970, pl. XIII, no. 2. Mochlos: Barnard and Brogan 2003, nos. IB ; Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 429, fig. 2, nos. P6058 and P6051, p. 447, fig. 19, no. P478, and p. 448, fig. 20, no. P450. Pseira: Betancourt 1984, fig. 8, nos. 48 and 50. Gournia: Hawes et al. 1908, pl. VII, nos. 8 and 9.! 42!

67 always associated with a solidly painted lower body, while plant motifs are associated with bands. The straight-sided cup is well diffused in Neopalatial Crete in a number of different variants. It is well represented at Knossos, where it occurs in two types: the first is the closest to the Myrtos-Pyrgos type, and has ripple or spiral decoration (Fig. 4.30); 112 the second has a straighter profile than the other type and, as a result, a base diameter almost as large as the rim (Fig. 4.31). 113 This second type of cup is commonly decorated with reed or spirals and seems to be an exclusively Knossian production. Straight-sided cups are poorly represented in both south-central and eastern Crete, where they usually occur with monochrome decoration (see below). 114 Instead, the Myrtos-Pyrgos dark-onlight lustrous straight-sided cup has several parallels at Mochlos (Fig. 4.32), both in terms of shape and decoration (ripples and spirals, but also floral motifs and banded bases). 115 Nevertheless, both the large quantity and the decorative variety of dark-on-light lustrous straight-sided cups in Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos are rarities among other Neopalatial ceramic assemblages. Vapheio Cup (Figs ) This cup is closely similar to the straight-sided cups, with their flaring rim, thin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 112 Warren 1991, p. 328, fig. 9, letter H (P1143, pictured on table 79, no. C); Mountjoy 2003, p. 55, fig. 4.1, nos. 6 and 7, and p. 60, fig. 4.3, nos (narrow type); Popham 1984, plate 133, letter b. See also Lebessi 1975, plate 197, letter β, for Kato Syme. 113 Warren 1999, table CCVI, no. P2450; Popham 1984, plate 143, no. 2 (pictured on plate 130, no. h). The two types from Kommos are both considered imports: Rutter 2006, p. 1129, plate 3.36, no. 24/16, and p. 1135, plate 3.42, no. 37c/ But see Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 166, fig. 43, no. 410, for a dark-on-light lustrous variant. 115 Barnard 2001, p. 170, fig. 12.7, nos and ; p. 188, fig. 11.7, no ; p. 206, fig. 10.4, nos and 10.37; p. 215, fig. 9.3, nos. 9.22, 9.24, and 9.26; p. 224, fig. 8.4, nos. 8.35, 8.36, and 8.38; p. 242, fig. 5.2, no. 5.20; p. 254, fig. 2.1, no. 2.5.! 43!

68 walls, flat base, and strap handle. The only difference between the two categories is the Vapheio cup s distinctive rib at the middle of the body (Fig. 4.34). The only preserved rim diameter from Cistern 2 measures 11 cm, while the bases range between 7 and 9 cm. Cups of this category universally have ripple decoration, in either red or brown/black. It is commonly organized in two registers, with one group of ripples typically in the upper third or half of the body and more ripples in the lower half. On the largest sherd, with red ripples, solid red paint may have been applied too over the lower part of the body (Fig. 4.33). A painted band runs around the base edge. The underside of the base has ripple decoration as well. The inside of the vessel is monochrome and, in the best examples, the paint is thick and uniform. Vapheio cups are rare in the assemblage and fragmentary. In fact, they are generally scarcely present in assemblages from around Crete, but for a handful of examples or sherds. They are best represented in north-central Crete, at Knossos, where they are typically decorated with ripples (Fig. 4.35). 116 In south-central Crete, very rare examples can be found at Ayia Triada, decorated with spirals on the upper part of the body and bands and dots on the lower part (Fig. 4.36). 117 In the east, Vapheio cups are much more rare: good examples come from Gournia and Zakros. 118 S-profile Cup (Figs ) This form is commonly thin-walled, with a slightly flaring rim (though not sharply offset), a vertical body below the rim, a typical bulge in the lower part of the!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 116 Catling et al. 1979, p. 40, fig. 27, no Popham 1984, plate 128, letter a; plate 142, nos ; plate 143, no. 5; plate 153, letters b and c. Warren 1991, p. 328, fig. 9, nos Warren 1999, plate CCVII, nos. P442, P442a, P443. Mountjoy 2003, p. 55, fig. 4.1, nos. 8-10, and p. 73, fig. 4.10, no D Agata 1989, plate XXI, letter f. Puglisi 2006, table 34, no Gournia: Hawes et al. 1908, plate VI, no. 5. Zakros: Platon 2011, p. 232, fig. 21.! 44!

69 body, a flat base, and a strap handle (Figs and 4.38). Although no complete profile is preserved, these cups must have been rather tall and large. Base diameters range between 4 and 5 cm, and rims between 8 and 10 cm. Dark-on-light lustrous S-profile cups consistently have spirals on the upper half of their body and three or more thin bands on the lower half (Fig. 4.37). In one case, the spirals have a vertical foliate branch between them (Fig. 4.38). The inside of the vessel is universally monochrome. This shape is somewhat comparable to the bell cup, which is ubiquitous in Neopalatial Crete with a rounded handle and in either dark-on-light-non-lustrous (dipped) decoration or plain. 119 The same shape in the dark-on-light lustrous category is less common and only a handful can be found in central and east Crete (Figs and 4.40). 120 Ledge-rim Bowl (Figs ) This shape has a slightly thick profile, everted rim, rounded body, flat base, and no handle. They are invariably shallow vessels, wider than they are tall (Figs. 4.41, 4.42, and 4.43). Rim sizes are quite standardized and range between 14 and 15 cm, while heights do not exceed 5 cm.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 119 See, for example, for Knossos: Popham 1984, pl. 141, nos. 15 and 16; Mountjoy 2003, fig. 4.10, nos For Ayia Triada: Puglisi 2006, table 27, no. 43.2; D Agata 1989, plate XXII, letter i. For Kommos: Betancourt 1990, fig. 68, nos. 1989, ; Van de Moortel 2001, p. 48, fig. 32, no. 24; Rutter 2006, p. 1120, plate 3.27, no. 6/5; p. 1128, plate 3.35, no. 23/5; p. 1130, plate 3.37, no. 26/2; p. 1131, plate 3.38, nos.27a/3. For Gournia: Betancourt and Silverman 1991, fig. 14, no. 496 For Palaikastro: Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 127, fig. 14, nos ; p. 128, fig. 15, nos ; p. 167, fig. 44, no. 420; Knappett and Collar 2007, p. 169, fig. 15, no Knossos: Warren 1991, p. 328, fig. 9, letter M with ripple decoration; Mountjoy 2003, fig. 4.10, nos (dark-on-light lustrous). Kommos: Rutter 2006, p. 1127, plate 3.34, no. 22a/2. Gournia: perhaps Hawes et al. 1908, plate VII, no. 16. Petras: Tsipopoulou and Alberti 2011, p. 472, fig. 9, letters f (P90/626), g (P90/1023), h (P90/357), i (P90/103/1+5), j (P89/189/4).! 45!

70 One complete profile, of very high quality (N8004), has an incised ring on the inside of the base (Figs and 4.45), a feature already noticed in the hemispherical cups. Ledge-rim bowls are decorated outside with ripples in black or red paint. The inside is generally monochrome, although in a few cases it has a plain surface with only a lip band (Fig. 4.43). The quality of the manufacture is variable. There are good comparanda for this shape and style from central Crete. At Knossos, this shape can occur in a slightly taller size but is otherwise comparable to the Myrtos-Pyrgos examples, including the preference for the ripple decoration (Fig. 4.46). 121 Other comparanda come from the east, both north (Mochlos) and south (Bramiana) (Fig. 4.47). 122 Bramiana has the closest parallels in terms of shape characteristics, decorative techniques, and surface treatment. Frieze-Decorated Bowl (Figs ) This type of bowl has a slightly everted rim, convex or globular body, and flat, raised or offset base (Fig. 4.50). It has a rather thick profile and horizontal handles, circular or ovoid in section. No complete profile is preserved, and therefore the heights of these bowls are uncertain. Rim sizes range between 10 and 18 in the convex type and between 12 and 19 in the globular type, suggesting that the bowls were made in various sizes. Frieze-decorated bowls resemble large hemispherical cups, although their rim is not strongly everted. The outside of the vessel is decorated, in red and black paint, in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 121 Warren 1991, p. 329, fig. 10, letter Q. Warren 1999, plate CCVI, no. P2402. Popham 1984, plate 128, letters e and g; plate 144, no. 2. Catling et al. 1979, p. 35, fig. 23, no Mochlos: Barnard 2001, p. 183, fig. 11.2, nos ; p. 221, fig. 8.1, nos and The material from Bramiana is currently under study.! 46!

71 different registers with a decorated frieze in the upper half or third of the body, usually framed by a rim band above and a series of three or more bands below. The most common motifs in the frieze are spirals and crescents, followed by a small number of floral motifs (ivy and foliate bands), and rarely ripples and zigzags (Figs and 4.49). The underside of the base is generally plain, either with or without a ring of paint on the edge, but it may also be painted monochrome or with a thick spiral starting underneath and continuing up on the lower part of the body. The ripple-decorated bowls often have ripples underneath the base as well. A slip that gives the vessel its very lustrous appearance was applied either before or after the paint on the outside surface. The inside of the vessel is always monochrome. It is difficult to pinpoint precise comparanda for this shape, since no full profile is preserved. In the absence of handles to help clarify the shape, it can be easily confused with larger hemispherical cups or simply handleless globular cups. Possible comparanda from both central and east Crete show a preference for spirals, ripples, wavy lines, and more rarely floral motifs (e.g., Ayia Triada and Seli) (Fig. 4.51). 123 Although present elsewhere in other shapes (see below), ripples underneath the base are unique to the examples from Myrtos-Pyrgos. Banded Bowl (Figs ) This category includes sherds of banded bowls that do not show clear evidence of!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 123 Knossos: Warren 1991, p. 326, fig. 7, no. 1; Warren 1999, plate CCVI, no. P2330; Mountjoy 2003, p. 60, fig. 4.3, nos. 37 and 38; Popham 1984, plate 143, no. 7 (pictured on plate 130, letter e). Ayia Triada: Puglisi 2006, table 1, no. 1.10; table 4, nos ; table 6, no. 4.12; table 8, no ; table 15, nos ; table 27, nos and 42.19; table 31, nos and ; table 36, no ; D Agata 1989, pl. XXI, letter g. Seli: La Rosa and Cucuzza 2001, figs. 104, 106, and 107. Kommos: Rutter 2006, p. 1129, plate 3.36, nos. 24/8 and 24/9; p. 1141, plate 3.48, no. 45/3. Palaikastro: Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 167, fig. 44, no. 427.! 47!

72 added white. Since this shape is frequent in dark-on-light-with added white decoration, it may be that this group includes bowls where the original white is no longer visible. Unlike the dark-on-light-with added white variant, in this category only a tall form is attested. The rim is usually round or rolled (Fig. 4.54). The body can be more or less globular in its higher half or third, and in some cases it becomes slightly conical in its lower half or third. Bases could be flat or raised. In manufacture, decoration, and shape, these vessels do not differ from those with added white. A series of bands is outside, usually in black and brown, and less often in red. In all instances, this type has a band at the rim. The bands on the body vary in number and distribution; the most frequent scheme has a group of three bands at the middle of the vessel (Figs and 4.53). Bases are monochrome, with a ring of paint around the edges, or plain. Like banded bowls with added white, the dark-on-light lustrous examples are highly standardized in both shape and decoration. The banded bowls seem to be a peculiarity of the Myrtos-Pyrgos ceramic production. There are virtually no comparanda for this shape and style around Crete. In most cases, outside of Myrtos-Pyrgos, the banded decoration is used on the outside surfaces of in-and-out bowls, particularly when the inside is decorated with wavy lines or another linear motif (see below). 124 Mochlos is the only site that has yielded fragments of what appears to be a banded bowl similar to the Myrtos-Pyrgos ones (Fig. 4.55). 125!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 124 Knossos: Warren 1999, plate CCVI, nos. P2341 and P 2403; Mountjoy 2003, p. 77, fig. 4.1, no Pitisidia: Chatzi-Vallianou 2011, p. 347, fig. 4, no. PIT.XVIII.P12. Kommos: Rutter 2006, p. 1126, plate 3.33, fig. 17a/3. Malia: Pelon 1970, plate XII, no. 4. Mochlos: Barnard 2001, p. 207, fig. 10.5, no , and p. 224, fig. 8.4, no Barnard 2001, p. 238, fig. 6.3, no ! 48!

73 In-and-Out Bowl (Figs ) In-and-out bowls were produced in both fine and coarse fabric. 126 The characteristics of this shape are like any other bowl types. Basket handles and horizontal ones are equally attested, and there are spouts. The profile thickness and sizes of the vessels vary. In the examples from this assemblage, however, while the rim diameters can range between 19 and 31 cm, the height is uniform, at circa 9 cm (Figs. 4.55, 4.56, and 4.57). The fine buff examples are invariably dark-on-light lustrous and are high quality, with elaborate decoration inside and out in a reddish-brown or dark wash. The decorative motifs outside are usually organized in friezes enclosed by one or more bands that demarcate the rim and the mid-body of the vessel. The decorative scheme has a regular pattern: rim band; first frieze (mostly crescents or ripple, more rarely spirals); bands; second frieze (ripple). The decoration often continues under the base, either continuing the ripple of the second frieze or closing it by a painted circle (Figs. 4.58, 4.60, 4.62, 4.64, 4.66). A roughly similar decorative scheme is found inside the bowl, although modified as the second frieze is mostly composed of series of bands. The first frieze becomes broader and is commonly decorated with floral motifs (crocuses, ivies, or foliate bands) (Figs. 4.59, 4.61, 4.63, 4.65, 4.67). Where preserved, the bases have a floral motif as well, usually an anemone or a series of spirals (Figs and 4.61). In a few cases, the frieze is decorated with a thick wavy line or simple bands (Fig. 4.69). The decorative patterns seem to show abstract motifs on the outside, and!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 126 For an overview of this shape in Myrtos-Pyrgos, see also Hatzaki 2015.! 49!

74 vegetal/floral motifs on the inside. This scheme is common at other Cretan sites, such as Gournia, Mochlos, Kommos, and in particular Bramiana (Figs. 4.70, 4.71, 4.72, and 4.73). 127 In addition, at Myrtos-Pyrgos, with the exception only of the ripple, the motifs selected for the outside of the in-and-out bowls are a combination of the motifs typical of hemispherical cups. Although it also occurs elsewhere in Crete, the in-and-out bowl could be considered local in southeastern Crete. In north-central Crete, this shape has its zenith in MM IIIB, after which the quality of its execution decreases (Fig. 4.74). Decorations include a combination of bands, ripples, and wavy lines. 128 In south-central Crete, in-and-out bowls are well represented also in LM IA and LM IB, with decoration that privileges spirals and floral motifs and bands and wavy lines (Fig. 4.75). 129 In the east, in-and-out bowls continue well into LM IB. In decoration, however, the northeast tends to follow the central Cretan fashion (Fig. 4.76). 130 At Pyrgos, this shape occurs in a remarkable variety of fabrics and dark-on-light decorations, making it one of the less standardized in the Neopalatial repertoire. Bramiana, in southeastern Crete, provides the only parallel for Myrtos-Pyrgos, in terms of variability of fabrics and decoration. Sites from both south-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 127 For Gournia, see Betancourt and Silverman 1991, fig. 18, nos ; for Mochlos, Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 438, fig. 10, no. P6242, with photo on p. 440, fig. 11, P6242; for Kommos, Rutter 2006, p. 426 and p. 1131, pl. 3.38, no. 26/3. See Chapter 5 for Bramiana. 128 Knossos: Warren 1991, p. 326, fig. 7, letters D-H; pl. 77, letter I; pl. 78, letters A and B; Mountjoy 2003, p. 60, fig. 4.3, nos ; p. 77, fig. 4.11, nos Kommos: Rutter 2006, p. 1126, pl. 3.33, nos. 17 a/3 and 20/2; p. 1127, pl. 3.34, no. 22 b/1; p. 1131, pl. 3.38, no. 26/3; p. 1132, pl. 3.39, no. 32/2; p. 1139, pl. 3.46, no. 43/4. Ayia Triada: Puglisi 2006, table 26, no. 38.1; table 31, nos and Pitisidia: Chatzi-Vallianou 2011, p. 347, fig. 4, nos. PIT.XXI.P1 and PIT.XVIII.P12; p. 350, fig. 6, no. PIT.VII.P Malia: Pelon 1970, pl. XII, nos. 4 and 5. Mochlos: Barnard 2001, p. 171, fig. 12.8, nos ; p. 189, fig. 11.8, nos ; p. 207, fig. 10.5, nos ; p. 224, fig. 8.4, no. 8.42; p. 232, fig. 7.4, nos ; p. 259, fig. 1.4, no ! 50!

75 central and northeastern Crete have yielded only isolated examples of Pyrgian-looking inand-out bowls, perhaps imported (e.g., Figs and 4.72). 131 Bridge-spouted jug/jar (Figs ) and Other Closed Vessels (Figs ) This group includes several closed vessels without complete profiles. Vessels in this group occur in two shapes, jars and jugs. The first is a bridge-spouted jar/jug: it is whole-mouthed, with a spout, a piriform body (also called convex-concave profile) with a globular upper body and conical lower body, and a stemmed splaying base (Figs. 4.77, 4.78, 4.79, 4.80, 4.81, 4.82). The other, a bridge-spouted jug, has a flattened rim, a short neck with horizontal grooves (sometimes with grooves also in the upper shoulder of the vessel), a bulbous baggy body with a flat undifferentiated base, and one vertical handle with rounded section and often a knob on top (Figs. 4.83, 4.84, 4.85, 4.86). Vessels are mainly of medium size, with a few smaller examples (Fig 4.84). Estimated heights range between circa 14 and 28 cm. Medium size vessels have base diameters between 8 and 11 cm, with flat bases of 6 cm in diameter. In the small size category, base diameters are almost invariably 4 or 5 cm. The surface treatment on these pots is mostly in dark paint, with a few examples in red. Decorative motifs are arranged in different registers along the vessel's body. On a high shoulder and/or neck as well as on the base, ripples are invariantly preferred. However, on the belly of the vessel, a larger frieze is filled with a broader range of motifs. The most frequent one is the running spiral, in a few cases greatly elaborated, followed by vegetal/floral motifs, while a few of sherds have crescents. Besides the!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 131 Kommos: Van de Moortel 2001, p. 63, fig. 38, no. 62. Gournia: Betancourt and Silverman 1991, fig. 18, no Mochlos: Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 438, fig. 10, no. P6242, and p. 440, fig. 11, no. P6242.! 51!

76 ripple, bases may also have horizontal bands or, in one case, a thick wavy line. This category of vessels is quite standardized in both shape and decoration, more than in any other category of shape. This high degree of standardization suggests the production of a single workshop: for example, at least three piriform jars/jugs, of identical size and shape, have the same decoration (ivies in the main central frieze and bands around the base), in a similar discolored yellow-brownish paint, with the same diagonal and discontinuous burnishing marks all around the base (Fig. 4.80). Similarly, the combinations of different motifs and their deployment on specific shapes appear to follow strict patterns. The ivy motif usually accompanies the banded bases in the variant with a piriform shape. On the variant with a baggy body, on the contrary, there never seem to be vegetal/floral motifs, as ripples accompanied by abstract motifs, usually spirals, are always preferred. Comparison between the decorative patterns on closed and open vessels in the dark-on-light lustrous category reveals some interesting choices. The vegetal and floral motifs are a strong presence on the closed shapes, while they are poorly represented on the open shapes. Conversely, the crescents, almost omnipresent on the open shapes, are rarely painted on closed shapes. A very small number of sherds of not clearly identifiable closed vessels need to be added to the main shapes described in this section. The sherds belong to the dark-on-light lustrous category and have Marine Style motifs, including a possible argonaut, as well as a thick version of reeds (Figs. 4.87, 4.88, 4.89, 4.90, 4.91, 4.92). 132!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 132 See Mountjoy 1984, p. 196 for a description and catalogue of the Marine Style sherds from Myrtos-Pyrgos. See also Cadogan 2011c for further discussion on this style at Myrtos-Pyrgos. From my observations, the Marine Style sherds from Cistern 2 have the same motif as the large jug fragment from the Country House (Cadogan 1978). The motif is comparable to other! 52!

77 Although bridge-spouted jugs and jars are quite common in the Neopalatial pottery production across Crete, more meaningful comparisons need to take into account the occurrence of these shapes with the specific decorative schemes described above. The best comparanda can be found in the east and in particular at Palaikastro (Fig. 4.92, 4.93, 4.94). 133 Dark-On-Light Lustrous Ware With Added White The following shapes occur in dark-on-light lustrous ware with added white: straight-sided cup (Figs ), banded bowl (Figs ), bridge-spouted and oval-mouthed jug/jar (Figs ).! Straight-sided Cup (Figs ) In a number of dark-on-light straight-sided cups with spiral frieze decoration, the solidly painted lower part of the vessel is accentuated by the addition of two or three thin white bands. Cups in this category have a particularly lustrous slip and are generally of better quality than other straight-sided cups without added white (Figs and 4.96). There are no distinctions in either morphology or sizes between the dark-on-light lustrous and the dark-on-light lustrous-with added white straight-sided cups from Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos. Only a few of the dark-on-light lustrous straight-sided cups from around Crete have visible white paint added to the dark-on-light decoration, all of which are from Mochlos (Fig. 4.32). 134 Elsewhere, the added white seems to be more typical on Vapheio cups.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! examples from Crete, particularly those from the Knossos area (e.g., Popham 1984, p. 146, letters c and d; Banou 2011, p. 502, fig. 2, letter g; Sakellarakis and Sakellaraki 1980, pl. 220). 133 Palaikastro: Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 132, fig. 17, no. 166; p. 153, fig. 34, no Zakros: Platon 2011, p. 229, fig. 11, and p. 235, fig Barnard 2001, p. 215, fig. 9.3, nos and 9.26.! 53!

78 Banded Bowl (Figs ) This shape occurs in short and tall versions. In both cases, the vessel is characterized by: a round or rolled lip, in some cases slightly flattened and everted; a convex profile, running from below the rim to the base, which can be more or less globular in the upper third of the body and is often slightly more conical on the lower third; and a flat or slightly raised base (Figs and 4.98). The height of the tall version is circa 8 cm, with rims ranging between 11 and 13 cm, and bases between 5 and 6 cm. In the short version, the height is circa 6 cm, the rim 10 cm, and the base between 3 and 4 cm. Banded bowls with added white are of very high quality, very lustrous, and well preserved. They are decorated outside with bands, in black/brown or red. White bands were then applied over the bands at the rim and/or at the base, although in some cases they also are found on the body (Figs and 4.100). The base is generally plain, but in rare cases it is solidly painted. A very lustrous slip is carefully applied on the vessel s surface. The inside is universally monochrome. Banded bowls appear to be highly standardized and must have been a local product at Pyrgos, since this category does not have significant comparanda elsewhere in Crete. Bridge-spouted and Oval-mouthed Jug/Jar (Figs ) Only about 10 fragments of these closed shapes have added white. As they are all body sherds, it is difficult to reconstruct the original shapes of the vessels to which they belonged. However, there is no reason to assume that major differences in shapes would occur.! 54!

79 All are extremely lustrous and of very good quality of manufacture. The decorative patterns of the corresponding vessels in the dark-on-light lustrous category are substantially the same as those for the examples with added white. Spirals are by far the best attested, followed by vegetal/floral (foliate scroll) and crescent motifs. There are no obvious comparanda for added-white decoration on this vessel shape. A large fragment of a hole-mouthed jar (mended from several sherds) deserves particular attention (Fig ). It has a frieze of connected spirals with a closed center, highlighted by white dots on the shoulder, and another frieze with a foliate scroll on the middle of the body, right under its largest diameter. Bands fill the gaps above, between, and below the two friezes. The band at the neck and the one between the friezes are punctuated by white dots. The color of the paint is dark brown with reddish hues. The shape of this vessel, probably a strainer, is unique in this assemblage: rather thick walled profile, neck-ring, globular upper body that tends to become conical in its lower part, and horizontal strap handle (Fig ). In view of its fabric, a very dark pinkish red with some black inclusions and a grey core at the neck, this piece does not appear to be local; it may be an import, perhaps from Zakros (Fig ). 135 Dark-On-Light Non-Lustrous Ware! The following shapes can be found in dark-on-light non-lustrous ware: rounded cup (figs ), ledge-rim bowl (figs ), and beaked jug (fig ).! Rounded Cup (Figs ) Vessels in this category occur in two groups. The first has a plain exterior and a!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 135 Hogarth 1902, plate XII, no. 2.! 55!

80 monochrome interior (Fig ). The other has drip decoration, usually created by dipping the cup s rim in paint, flipping it over on its base, and letting the paint trickle down the sides of the vessel (Fig ). The trickling paint, in the examples from this last group, is only in the interior of the vessel, while the paint outside is limited to a very thin rim band. Like the dark-on-light lustrous rounded cups, these dark-on-light non-lustrous cups have a slightly convex profile, with the rim somewhat in-turned, and a flat base with a ridged interior, at times moderately raised (Fig ). Although not preserved, the handles must have been small and probably rounded or ovoid in section. The height was between 6.8 and 8 cm; rim diameters range between 9 and 14 cm, while bases are consistently 4 cm in diameter. As in the case of their dark-on-light lustrous counterparts, rounded cups are a rare occurrence in the Neopalatial pottery production of Crete. In this style, the only comparanda come from east Crete, particularly from Mochlos and Palaikastro (Fig , 4.109). 136 Ledge-rim Bowl (Figs ) The dark-on-light non-lustrous ledge-rim bowls are characterized by trickle pattern on the buff background, usually in dark paint, obtained by dipping the vessel upside down into a painted slip and then letting the slip trickle along the walls of the vessel. The effect changes according to the thickness of the paint, varying from rather!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 136 For Palaikastro, Knappett and Collar 2007, p. 185, fig. 28, no. 149; Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 128, fig. 15, nos , and p. 129, fig. 16, nos For Mochlos, Barnard 2001, p. 168, fig. 12.5, nos ; p. 186, fig. 11.5, nos ; p. 222, fig. 8.2, no. 8.21; p. 237, fig. 6.2, nos ; p. 245, fig. 4.1, nos ; Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 431, fig. 4, nos. P4386 and P4415, and p. 432, fig. 5, nos. P6050 and P6054.! 56!

81 thin lines of paint coming down from the rim to thicker blobs of paint that cover larger sections of the vessel s body (Fig ). As with their dark-on-light lustrous counterparts, the shape is characterized by a ledge rim (in some cases more pronounced than usual) and a slightly globular body. Bases can be flat or raised, usually the former. Two or three examples have lug handles at the rim (Fig ). This type of vessel is shallow, usually shorter than it is wide. The typical height is ca. 5 cm and the rim diameter ranges between 13 and 15 cm. Comparanda for ledge-rim bowls in this category are found in north-central (Knossos), south-central (Kommos), and east Crete (Gournia and Palaikastro) (Figs , 4.113, 4.114). 137 Beaked Jug (Fig ) A few sherds are from beaked jugs. They have a buff slipped surface and trickle decoration in dark paint (Fig ). This type of vessel has a vertical spout, short neck, piriform body (more ovoid-conical than convex-concave), and an undifferentiated base. Although the shape is quite common in the Neopalatial repertoire around Crete, it never occurs with this decoration anywhere else in Crete and seems to be a peculiarity of the Myrtos-Pyrgos production. Monochrome Ware! Only the straight-sided cup can be found in the monochrome ware (Figs ).!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 137 Knossos: Popham 1984, table 128, letter h; table 129, letter b; table 144, nos. 3 and 4 (tall type); Catling et al. 1979, p. 22, fig. 16, no. 3; p. 29, fig. 19, nos. 107 and 109. Phaistos and Ayia Triada: Girella 2010a, p. 6, fig. 66, row 5. Kommos: Betancourt 1990, fig. 41, nos ; Rutter 2006, p. 1120, plate 3.27, no. 5a/1, p. 1130, plate 3.37, no. 25/1. Gournia: Hawes et al. 1908, plate X, no. 4. Palaikastro: Knappett and Collar 2007, p. 168, fig. 14, no. 59.! 57!

82 Straight-sided cup (Figs ) Straight-sided cups in this ware category have red or black paint and are not lustrous (Figs , 4.117). They generally have a thicker concave profile, straight rims, and a flat base that thickens at its center. However, while cups with red paint tend to have thick, straight walls, those with black paint are somewhat lighter and thinner walled (as in the case of MP/71/P508, Fig ). Bases are generally flat, except for a few examples that have a splaying and beveled base. Heights are around 6.5 cm, which is shorter than the dark-on-light types. Rim diameters range between 9 and 11 cm, and bases between 5 and 7 cm. The monochrome straight-sided cup is very common in Cretan pottery production, particularly in MM III or earlier. This shape and style is well represented in north-central Crete, where it commonly (though not universally) has ribs along the body (Fig ). 138 In south-central Crete, the monochrome straight-sided cup is not uniformly attested: few come from the Phaistos and Ayia Triada area, while a number of examples exist at Kommos (Fig ). 139 In the east, Malia has produced a very close parallel to MP/71/P508 (Fig ); 140 monochrome straight-sided cups appear to have been rare at Mochlos, 141 while this shape and style seem well represented in Palaikastro,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 138 At Knossos, see: Popham 1984, plate 128, letter b, plate 129, letter c, and plate 142, nos. 4 and 6; Warren 1991, p. 328, fig. 9, letter A (P1145, also pictured on plate 79, letter A); Warren 1999, plate CCVI, no. P2326; Catling et al. 1979, p. 22, fig. 16, no. 5, p. 29, fig. 19, nos and , p. 40, fig. 27, no Betancourt 1990, fig. 67, nos ; Van de Moortel 2001, p. 48, fig. 32, no. 21; Rutter 2006, p. 1119, plate 3.26, no. 3b/1, p. 1120, plate 3.27, nos. 5a/2, 5b/1, and 6/4, p. 1125, plate 3.32, no. 13/1, p. 1127, plate 3.34, nos. 21/5 and 21/ Pelon 1970, plate XIV, no Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 438, fig. 10, nos. P6620 and P7230.! 58!

83 in both MM IIIB and LM IA contexts (Fig ). 142 Plain Ware The plain ware category is represented by the conical cup (Figs ) Conical Cup (Figs ) The conical cups can be short or tall. Neither type is well represented (circa 10 examples in total) and both have a high degree of shape variation. Hence, it is difficult to single out coherent typological differences, except for a few recurrent features. The short type is represented by five sherds. They are thick walled and have a visible rilling (i.e., the parallel lines on the body produced by the wheel-throwing) around the body. Nevertheless, their profiles can vary: for example, one type has a flattened rim and a globular body (almost like a ledge-rim bowl, Figs , 4.126); another type has a completely straight rim and body (Figs , 4.127); or this shape can have a straight rim and a large squat body (Figs , 4.128) that can get as low as a saucer (Figs , 4.129). In all cases, the bases are flat. The height of these vessels ranges between 3.4 and about 5 cm, and the rim diameters from 7 to 12 cm. The tall conical cups can be subdivided into an S-profile and a tumbler type. Both types have a straight rim, thin walls, and a flat base. The S-profile type is represented by only two sherds that join into an almost complete pot, with a conical body with a slight S- shaped profile (Figs , 4.131). It is circa 6.2 cm high, with a rim diameter of 9 cm and a base diameter of 5 cm. The tumbler type is represented by five sherds (three of which join together into!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 142 Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 125, fig. 12, nos. 114 and 116; p. 126, fig. 13, nos. 122, ; p. 127, fig. 14, nos. 135, 137, ; p. 129, fig. 16, no. 161; p. 166, fig. 43, nos Knappett and Collar 2007, p. 169, fig. 15, no. 79; p. 179, fig. 23, no. 118; p. 185, fig. 28, nos. 151 and 152.! 59!

84 an almost complete pot: Fig ). It has tall body and narrow base with a flaring profile. The height is, on average, 6 cm with a base diameter of 4 cm. Rim diameters are from 9 to 10 cm. The conical cup is omnipresent in the Cretan ceramic production, particularly during the Neopalatial period. Individually, each of the conical cup types from Cistern 2 has numerous comparanda. For example, the tall type with an S-profile is well represented both in central and eastern Crete, from Knossos to Palaikastro (Figs , 4.134). 143 The coexistence of different conical cup shapes within the same assemblage (and chronological phase) has been observed elsewhere, particularly in the east of Crete. 144 COARSE BUFF FABRIC Fabric of this type occurs in the usual colors, orange-pink or dark orange, with small round or angular white, black, or purple inclusions. All vessels in this fabric category are wheelmade. Dark-On-Light Lustrous Ware! The following shapes can be found in the dark-on-light lustrous ware: rounded cup (Fig ), s-profile cup (Fig ), in-and-out bowl (Figs ), and fragments of jugs/jars (Fig ).!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 143 Knossos: Popham 1984, plate 129, letter a; Catling et al. 1979, p. 33, fig. 21, nos , p. 35, fig. 23, no Kommos: Van de Moortel 2001, p. 48, fig. 32, no. 23; Rutter 2006, p. 1126, plate 3.33, nos. 17a/7 and 17b/2. Palaikastro: Sackett and Popham 1970, p. 222, fig. 13, no. 12 and plate 61 (for example, letter g); Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 117, fig. 6, nos. 3-5, 9, 15, 18, p. 118, fig. 7, nos. 29, 30, 32, 39; Knappett and Collar 2007, p. 184, fig. 27, no. 142, and p. 188, fig. 31, no. 179; MacGillivray 2007, p. 97, fig. 4.2, nos Mochlos: Barnard 2001, pp , figs Palaikastro: Knappett and Cunningham 2003, pp , figs. 6 and 7.! 60!

85 Rounded Cup (Fig ) The only example in this category is a base fragment with dark-on-light lustrous orange-red decoration. It is a short variant of the dark-on-light lustrous rounded cup (see above for full shape description). The base diameter is 5-6 cm. The surface of the sherd is covered with a buff slip that gives it a lighter color than the fabric itself. Decoration includes an ivy leaf motif above a thick band (Fig ). The base is left plain but slipped. The inside of the cup is monochrome with thick red paint. There is no obvious comparanda for this particular style. S-Profile Cup (Fig ) One S-profile cup (MP/73/P305) in this category has very lustrous dark-on-light frieze decoration. The characteristics of this shape are in all ways similar to the corresponding fine buff category. It is 13 cm high, which makes it slightly taller than its dark-on-light lustrous counterparts, and has a 4-5 cm base diameter. The only difference is that the vessel in the coarse buff fabric has considerably thicker walls and a pulled out spout. The decoration is poorly executed. The frieze occupies the upper half of the body, below a carelessly painted rim band. On the lower body, between two thin bands, is a smaller frieze with diluted ripples (Fig ). The underside of the base is monochrome. The inside is unslipped and unpainted except for a thick rim band. Overall, this cup seems an oddity compared to the rest of the assemblage, both for its size and its decoration. There are no comparanda for this shape and style.! 61!

86 In-and-Out Bowl (Figs ) Coarse buff in-and-out bowls have two different decorative patterns. The most frequent one has the same characteristics as those in the fine buff fabric group, both inside and out, and in the same colors: one or two rim bands, frieze (crescents, ripples, some spirals), and bands that may continue under the base. Inside, the decoration is parallel to that in the fine buff group with the same predilection for floral motifs. The only difference between these examples and their counterparts in the fine buff group is the recurrent lack of a second frieze on the outside of the coarser vessels (like MP/71/P269, Figs , 4.138, 4.139). The second type of decorative pattern for in-and-out bowls in this category is poorly represented. It has a series of thick bands in red or dark brown both inside and out (Fig , 4.141). The morphological features of these three bowls are: thick rim, in one case slightly everted, and rounded baggy body. The base, generally flat, in one case might have been raised or given feet. The one preserved handle is horizontal and round in section. For coarse in-and-out bowls, Bramiana offers the best comparanda. Examples from this site show an effort to mask and smooth the coarse fabric by applying a thick coat of paint. Decoration and surface treatment are similar to the examples from Myrtos- Pyrgos. Jug/Jar (Fig ) Three sherds survive with a shiny surface, a diluted brownish wash, and a decoration of thin running spirals in reddish-brown paint (Fig ). The way the sherds mend up suggests that the vessel must have been rather large. Further conclusions about! 62!

87 the shape of this incompletely preserved vessel are not possible. Dark-On-Light Non-Lustrous Ware The following shapes can be found in the dark-on-light non-lustrous ware: conical cup (Figs ), jug (Figs ), and fenestrated stand (Figs ). Conical Cup (Figs ) Three cups, two of which are quite well preserved, represent this category. They are tall conical cups of the tumbler type. They have thin walls and a tall conical body with a flaring rim and a narrower flat base. No handles are preserved, although they cannot be excluded. The heights are about 6.5 to 7 cm; rim diameters are invariantly 9 cm; bases are 5 cm. The cups have trickle decoration in red or brown inside and out, except for one example that has a diluted monochrome wash inside (Figs , 4.144). Conical cups with trickle decoration, in both a short and tall variant, are differently distributed around Crete. The short form is well represented in south-central Crete, while the north seems to prefer the ledge-rim bowls (Fig ). 145 Comparanda for this shape come predominantly from the east; it is well represented in Malia, Mochlos and Palaikastro (Figs , 4.147). 146!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 145 Kommos: Betancourt 1990, fig. 67, no. 1955; Rutter 2006, p. 1130, plate 3.37, nos. 25/1 and 25/2; p. 1131, plate 3.38, no. 27b/1; p. 1132, plate 3.39, nos. 30/1 and 33/3; p. 1139, plate 3.46, nos. 43/1 and 43/2. Ayia Triada: Puglisi 2006, plate 14, no ; plate 19, no. 17.3; plate 21, no. 24.8; plate 30, nos.45.1 and 45.2; plate 32, no Seli: La Rosa and Cucuzza 2001, fig. 244, no. XIII-I. 146 Malia: Langohr and Alberti forthcoming, figs. 4, 7a, and 7b. Mochlos: Barnard 2001, p. 204, fig. 10.2, nos ; p. 205, fig. 10.3, nos ; Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 431, fig. 4, nos. P4386 and P4415; p. 432, fig. 5, no. P6050. Palaikastro: Knappett and Cunningham 2003,! 63!

88 Jug (Figs ) Vessels in this category have trickle or banded decoration in dark paint. The trickle decoration is characterized by paint dripping along the vessel s body (Fig ). The bands are typically placed at the rim, at the attachment between neck and shoulder, on the shoulder, and two or three across the belly. A brush of paint is sometimes run over the handle and around its base. In a few cases, the neck shows horizontal grooves (the tool marks are visible), as already seen in the corresponding shape in the fine buff category. The vessels with trickle decoration, most probably jugs, have a piriform body, ending with a splaying base. The surface is usually smooth (Fig ). No complete profile is preserved. The jugs with banded decoration have something like a trefoil mouth, an undifferentiated rim, short vertical neck, rounded bulbous body, and flat base, often with three short feet (Figs , 4.150). Their main handle is vertical, ovoid or round in section, connecting the rim to the shoulder of the pot. Small lug handles can also be found attached to the rim. Although no complete profiles are preserved even for this second type, it is nevertheless better represented than the type with trickle decoration. Rim diameters can range between 13 and cm, and the only preserved base is 11 cm in diameter. Since no complete profile is preserved, it is difficult to cite precise comparanda for the jug with trickle decoration. At present it seems specific to Myrtos-Pyrgos. The shape of the banded-decorated jugs closely resembles the tripod jug with trefoil mouth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! p. 128, fig. 15, nos ; Knappett and Collar 2007, p. 185, fig. 28, no But see Puglisi 2006, plate 27, nos for some examples from Ayia Triada.! 64!

89 from Palaikastro, which is, however, plain (Fig ). 147 Fenestrated Stand 148 (Figs ) Fenestrated or window stands are typically coated with a red paint. This handleless vessel has a cylindrical body, somewhat tubular, and narrower in the middle or right before the bottom. Across the body are the eponymous window-like openings that are either rectangular or triangular, the latter being more frequent in the monochrome ware (Fig ). The base is open. Rim and base openings generally look alike and can be more or less everted. In the dark-on-light non-lustrous category, fenestrated stands are represented by two full profiles. Their surface is slipped, and both edges show the usual dipped decoration with a trickle of red paint along the body (Figs , 4.153). Rim diameters are around 9 cm, while bases are 8 or 9 cm. Heights are between 7.8 and 9 cm. There are no Neopalatial comparanda for this shape in any ware category, as Varouchakis also pointed out, apart from one from Gournia (Fig ). 149 Monochrome Ware The monochrome ware in the coarse buff fabric is represented only by the fenestrated stand (Figs ).! Fenestrated Stand (Figs ) Many fragments of fenestrated stands in this ware group were found, with the surface invariably painted in red (Figs , 4.156). In one example, a plastic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 147 Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 155, fig. 35, no This type of vessel at Pyrgos was studied by Vassilis Varouchakis (2011). 149 Betancourt et al. 1983, p. 33; Betancourt and Silverman 1991, fig. 33, nos. 694 and 695; Varouchakis 2011, p. 251, fig. 9.! 65!

90 decoration was applied below the rim (and was probably replicated above the base) (Fig ). The shape is as above, although it tends in this ware to be more cylindrical and to have a slightly more accentuated narrowing of the middle of the body. Within this ware category, the stands range from tall to miniature (Fig ). No complete profile is preserved, except one of a miniature stand, whose height is 4.4 cm. Base/rim diameters range from 7 cm to 13 cm. Plain Ware The plain ware is represented by a number of lid fragments (Figs ). Lid (Figs ) A few lid fragments are preserved. The surfaces have a buff slip (Figs , 4.159, 4.160). One fragment has a tall central handle, round in section (Fig ). Rim diameters vary greatly, from 15 to 25 cm. PITHOS FABRIC At Myrtos-Pyrgos, the pithos fabric has a pink-orange paste that can have darker or lighter hues. The inclusions are large and angular and occur in both white and black, and more rarely in purple. Voids are rare but occur in a few cases. Surfaces are never left rough. Vessels in this fabric occur in two ware categories. 150 Dark-On-Light Non-Lustrous Ware with Added White (Fig ) Only one sherd occurs within this category. It is a handle attachment, with traces of dark bands, highlighted by white painted lines (as already seen in banded bowls in the!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 150 See Christakis 2005 for a brief overview of the pithos production at Myrtos-Pyrgos.! 66!

91 fine buff fabric group) (Fig ). Dark-On-Light Non-Lustrous Ware (Figs ) Two joining fragments of a base belong to this category. On the outside is a thick buff slip that is slightly shiny and masks the coarse fabric. The decorative motif has ripples and a linear band along the thick grooves running around the lower body (Figs , 4.163). The base diameter is 21 cm. Contemporary pithos fragments from other parts of the site suggest that the Myrtos-Pyrgos potters attempted to make the pithoi appear as if they were fabricated in fine buff ware: all the fragments have smooth, buff surfaces, and decorative motifs comparable to the fine buff vessels. REDDISH-BROWN FABRIC This fabric group, also known as the cooking pot ware, has a very coarse paste, dark reddish to orange brown, with quite large angular inclusions typically white and black in color, and with some mica present. The surface is not treated and is left rough. This fabric is used for cooking vessels. Several fragments are preserved, belonging to the following shape categories: baking plate (Figs ), cooking tray (Figs ), trefoil-mouthed jug (Figs ), tripod cooking jar (Fig ), and fenestrated stand (Fig a and b). Baking Plate (Figs ) Several fragments, mostly (and as usual) rim sherds, can be attributed to this shape. As usual also, it is difficult to reconstruct the shape, but it seems likely to have been a slightly convex plate of large dimensions, with a low vertical rim (usually! 67!

92 undifferentiated), a circular body that tends to slope down towards its center, and a profile that gets progressively thinner towards the center. The handles are horizontal (Figs , 4.165). The rim diameter ranges from cm to cm. Although always in a fragmentary state, comparanda for baking plates can be found in a number of sites across Crete, particularly in the east. 151 Cooking Tray (Figs ) One large fragment remains of a cooking tray rim and handle (Fig , 4.167, 4.168). The vessel is round, with a low vertical rim (undifferentiated), like a large plate. However, unlike the baking plates whose bodies thin towards the center, the bodies of cooking trays have the same thickness all across (Fig ). 152 The rim diameter measures 28 cm. No evidence of feet remains. Cooking trays are well represented around Crete. 153 Trefoil-Mouthed Jug (Figs ) Several fragments belong to a single trefoil-mouthed jug, although they do not join into a full profile. The shape has a trefoil mouth, short neck, and slightly bulbous body that runs straight until the base (Figs , 4.171). It has a relatively thin profile,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 151 For a few examples: Betancourt 1990, fig. 65, no. 1864; Barnard 2001, p. 176, fig , nos ; p. 196, fig.11.15, nos ; p. 209, fig nos ; p. 226, fig. 8.6, nos ; p. 234, fig. 7.6, no. 7.60; p. 239, fig. 6.4, nos ; p. 243, fig. 5.3, nos ; p. 249, fig. 4.5, nos ; p. 253, fig. 3.3 no. 3.16; p. 261, fig. 0.1, no. 0.5; Tsipopoulou and Alberti 2011, p. 495, fig. 43; Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 136, fig. 21, no Examples from Petras have been subdivided into thin and thick cooking trays. See Tsipopoulou and Alberti 2011, pp See also Brogan et al. 2011, p. 582, fig Some examples include: Banou 2011, p. 501, fig. 1, no. d; Puglisi 2006, table 20, no ; table 32, no , plate 39, no ; La Rosa and Cucuzza 2001, fig. 262, XX-33; Betancourt 1990, fig. 65, no. 1865; Betancourt and Silverman 1991, fig. 17, no. 544; Barnard 2001, p. 173, fig , nos ; p. 209, fig nos ; p. 249, fig. 4.5 no Tsipopoulou and Alberti 2011, p. 493, fig. 42.! 68!

93 which thickens slightly towards the center of the base. The handle is long and vertical, round in section, and connects the rim to the belly. The surface is uniformly rough. The base diameter for this pot is 12 cm. There are no obvious comparanda for this shape. Tripod Cooking Jar (Fig ) Six rather large rim and body fragments belonging to the same vessel can be assigned to this shape. The pot has a simple vertical rim, a large tub that bulges slightly in the middle of the body, and undifferentiated base. Three feet would have been attached to the base of the vessel (not preserved). The handle is horizontal, ovoid in section, and is attached just below the rim. Both the rim and the middle of the body have probably decorative grooves (Fig ). The rim diameter is 23 cm. The profile is not completely preserved. The vertical body of this vessel recalls specific examples from Knossos, Ayia Triada, Kommos, and Mochlos (Figs , 4.175, 4.176). 154 The most common version of the tripod cooking pot has a slightly bulging body (Fig ). 155 Fenestrated Stand (Fig a and b) Two sherds in reddish-brown fabric belong to this shape category. They belong to two different vessels: one has a natural reddish surface that was left rough; the other had a dark surface that was painted in red on the exterior (Fig a and b). Neither the!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 154 Knossos: Warren 1991, p. 324, fig. 5, letter E. Ayia Triada: Puglisi 2006, plate 12, nos and 5.62; plate 24, no Kommos: Rutter 2006, p. 1124, plate 3.31, no. 9b/9; p. 1128, fig. 3.35, no. 22b/3; p. 1138, plate 3.45, nos. 40/32 and 40/33. Mochlos: Barnard 2001, p. 208, fig. 10.6, no , p. 239, fig. 6.4, no See for example: Banou 2011, p. 501, fig. 1, letter a; or Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 156, fig. 36, no. 293.! 69!

94 height nor width of either vessel is preserved. IMPORT (FIGS ) Besides a possible import from Zakros, a hole-mouthed jar (Figs ), discussed above, one jug (Fig ) could be traced back to Melos. 156 The fabric of the vessel is soft, fine, buff clay, chalky to the touch, with small angular red and dark inclusions. The jug consists of 25 joined fragments, plus 12 non-joining sherds. Only the jug s lower body is preserved. Its shape is uncertain, although it is most likely to have been a beaked jug. 157 The rounded lower body ends with a splayed and beveled base. The base has a diameter of 10 cm; the height preserved is 16 cm (Fig ). The vessel is decorated with a dark-on-light motif in black and red paint. 158 Broad black and red bands run around the vessel s body, above a zone of streaky ripple pattern. On the base, two broad dark painted bands are separated by a slanting ripple pattern. The decoration is overall poorly preserved (Fig ). DATING THE NEOPALATIAL POTTERY FROM CISTERN 2 Dating the pottery described in the previous paragraphs presents some challenges, which relate mainly to its archaeological context. As established in the previous chapter, the stratigraphy of Cistern 2 suggests that the ceramic material was discarded on one occasion during the Neopalatial period. Pottery from different phases of the Neopalatial period could have been mixed together. The stylistic analysis of the pottery, however,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 156 Cadogan Barber 1974, pp Barber 1974.! 70!

95 that is, the study of shape, ware, surface treatments, and decorative motifs can help allieviate this problem. 159 Stylistic analysis is the most accurate method to evaluate intra-site synchronisms and relative chronologies at regional, pan-island, and overseas levels. 160 The identification of close comparanda from stratigraphically defined ceramic deposits around Crete is an essential analytical tool for a stylistically based dating of the pottery from Cistern Some ceramic wares and styles are chronologically more meaningful than others: for example, unlike plain ware, the decoration of fine decorated tableware changes often and can vary greatly from one area of Crete to the other. 162 A number of sites have local relative chronologies based on the variation of particular stylistic motifs in the fine tableware. In a few cases, such chronologies have developed into detailed intra-site timelines for ceramic production. 163 As discussed above, the pottery from Cistern 2 is quite standardized and therefore does not present much variability within each shape and decoration category. Consequently, it is difficult to build a detailed stylistic intra-site (or rather intra-assemblage) chronology. At this stage of research the only way to date this pottery is through inter-site comparisons. Selecting the Neopalatial Comparanda The selection of ceramic deposits to compare to the pottery from the cistern!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 159 See Rice 1981, 1984, and Paraphrasing Rice 1987, pp , Wilson and Day 1994, p. 2 remark that [ ] a ware-based system is perhaps the best opportunity to integrate technological information into a pottery classification system. 160 Hatzaki 2011, p Momigliano 2007a, p. 6; Hatzaki 2007, pp See, for example, the use of crescents in the east as opposed to central Crete, as discussed above. 163 For the detailed analysis of decorative motifs and their changes during the Neopalatial period, see Puglisi 2006, p. 414 and ff. For the use of conical cups as chronological markers, see Van de Moortel 1997, pp ; 2001, pp ; Rutter 2006, p. 377.! 71!

96 followed two criteria. First, the comparanda needed to include ceramic deposits whose dating is based on stratigraphy or a combination of a typological study of pottery groups with the synchronization of sequences from one site. 164 Second, in order to gain a broad geographical perspective of the Neopalatial ceramic production, deposits were selected from different parts of Crete. Five sites provided the desired conditions: Knossos, Ayia Triada, Kommos, Mochlos, and Palaikastro. Table 3 shows, in chronological sequence, the deposits chosen here to build the chronology of the assemblage from Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos (Table 3). Table 3. List of the stratified Neopalatial deposits considered in Chapter 4 Site Deposit Chronology Bibliography Knossos Ayia Triada KS 178 group MM IIIB Hatzaki, KPH Gypsades Well LM IA Hatzaki 2007 SEX North House group LM IB Hatzaki 2007 Edificio Ovest, room b, level VII Girella 2010 (Dep. 11) Puglisi 2006 (Dep. 40) Villa, fill below vani 62, 65a, 66a Girella 2010 (Dep. 5) Below room Q/Casa della Soglia Alabastrina, level III, destruction deposit Casa dei Vani Gamma e Delta (S of Casa Est), Room Delta (1978): level IV Fill above destruction level of Casa della Soglia Alabastrina MM IIIB LM IA Initial Girella 2010 (Dep. 12) Puglisi 2006 (MM IIIB/LM IA) D Agata 1989 (MM IIIB/LM IA transitional) Warren 1991 (MM IIIB/LM IA transitional) Van de Moortel 1997 (Advanced LM IA) Puglisi 2006 (Depp. 1 and 3; 56, 58; 66 and 68) Casa dei Vani Gamma e Delta (S of Casa Est), Room Delta (1978): level III North of Vano con Pilastro, destruction level LM IA Final Puglisi 2011 Puglisi 2006 (Depp. 2; 24; 17, 10; 72) Casa dei Fichi, involved in the destruction of the Villa area (and Casa Est) Vano con Pilastro, destruction level LM IB Puglisi 2011 Puglisi 2006 (Dep. 5) T Room 23, group 2a MM III T Room 19, first floor, group 6 T Room 23, group 2b LM IA Early Kommos T Room 42, first floor, group 7 T Room 19, second floor, group 17a T Room 42, second floor, group 17b T Room 22, groups (22a and 22b) 23, 24 LM IA Advanced LM IA Final Rutter 2006 T Room 42, group 27a and b T Room 22, groups 31, 32 LM IB Plateia Deposit Level 12 MM III Plateia Deposit Levels 11-8 MM III/LM IA transitional Mochlos Plateia Deposit Levels 7-6 LM IA Early Barnard 2001 Plateia Deposit Levels 5-3 LM IA Late Plateia Deposit Levels 2-0 LM IB Building 6 Room R1 Knappett-Cunningham 2013 Palaikastro Knappett-Cunningham 2003 Area 6 Trench EP87 MM IIIB (Knappett 2013, 193: Building 6 Room R1 = Room 10a and 11a from Block M, SE Bdg.; Area 6 Trench EP87 = Room 45 from Area 6, Block M, NW Bdg.) Room 2 Building 2 LM IA Knappett-Cunningham 2003 Well 605, deposits 1 and 2 MacGillivray 2007 House N LM IB Sackett and Popham 1970 MacGillivray et al. 2011!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 164 Girella 2010a, p. 386.! 72!

97 Knossos The Knossos Pottery Handbook established three representative ceramic deposits for Neopalatial Knossos: KS 178 for MM IIIB, Upper Gypsades Well for LM IA, and SEX North House for LM IB. 165 KS 178 is a stone-built compartment excavated within a building in the vicinity of the Acropolis Houses in Knossos. The pottery found within the compartment is a secondary deposit and includes several well-preserved vessels. It is stratified below a deposit containing pottery and fresco fragments stylistically datable to LM IA: the Gypsades Well group. 166 The subsequent chronological phase, LM IB, is represented by the Stratigraphical Museum Extension (or SEX) North House group. In the basement of this large building in the proximity of the Stratigraphical Museum of Knossos, Warren excavated a floor deposit and an upper floor collapse stratified below a LM II level. 167 Table 4. Knossos: shapes from the stratified deposits Knossos VC SSC HC LRB In&OutB FruitSt RC S-profC KS 178 X - - X X - - X Gypsades X X X - X X - - Well SEX N House - - X !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 165 Hatzaki 2007, pp (KS 178), (Gypsades Well), and (SEX- North House). 166 For the KS 178, see Macdonald 1996, pl. 3a; 2000, p. 64; 2002, pls. 8d-e and 9; Hatzaki 2007, p. 161 and Warren 1981, pp ; Hatzaki 2007, pp ! 73!

98 Table 5. Knossos: decorative motifs from the stratified deposits Knossos Spirals Crescents Ripples Foliate Scrolls Reed Ivy Wavy Dripping Rim Floral various KS X X X - Gypsades X - X X X - X - X Well SEX N House X - - X X ! Ayia Triada The study of the Neopalatial pottery from Ayia Triada, particularly the MM IIIB and LM IA material, has benefitted from two recent studies, by Girella 168 and Puglisi. 169 Girella identifies a few MM IIIB deposits from Ayia Triada. Unlike the rich MM IIIA and B deposits from Phaistos, in Ayia Triada only a few deposits are primary. 170 The majority of MM III deposits are fills. Of the four identified MM III primary deposits, only one is MM IIIB: the deposit under room B in the Edificio Ovest, unearthed in the excavation of a sequence of four LM IA rooms (A-D). Both Girella and Puglisi consider this a MM IIIB foundation deposit. 171 From the Ayia Triada Villa, the fill below rooms 62, 65 and 66, level VII, is associated with the building of the north wall in room 62. The fill was found under a second level (VI), containing LM IA ceramic debris. 172 In the north sector of the settlement, below room Q/Casa della Soglia Alabastrina, level III is a destruction deposit associated with the use of the structure in MM IIIB. The pottery from this deposit, still only partially published, has been stylistically dated to MM IIIB/LM IA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 168 Girella 2010a. 169 Puglisi 2006 and 2011b. 170 Girella 2010a, p. 141, identifies 4, only one of which is dated to MM IIIB, the foundation deposit in the Edificio Ovest. 171 Girella 2010a, pp. 141 and 156; Puglisi 2006, pp. 208 and Girella 2010a, pp. 141 and See also Girella 2007, p. 238.! 74!

99 Transitional and also Advanced LM IA. 173 Based also on Puglisi study of the later material, Girella s analysis of the stratigraphy and the pottery dates the deposit to MM IIIB. 174 The following period, LM IA, at Ayia Triada is subdivided by Puglisi into two subphases, LM IA Initial and LM IA Final. The distinction is based on the existence of two LM IA levels of occupation in the Casa dei Vani Gamma e Delta. Both levels were superposed above a possible foundation deposit datable to MM IIIB. The pottery from the upper level (level III) appears to be stylistically later than that from both the lower level (level IV) and the fill above the destruction level of the Casa della Soglia Alabastrina (stratified directly above the MM IIIB destruction level). 175 According to Puglisi, the LM IA Final and the LM IB pottery is stylistically different and can be isolated stratigraphically. 176 One deposit that corroborates this distinction is the destruction level north of the Vano con Pilastro, part of a building built and occupied during LM IA and destroyed in LM IB. The destruction level north of the Vano con Pilastro predates the construction of the Vano, as it seems to continue below it, and yielded pottery stylistically datable to LM IA Final, just like level III in Casa dei Vani Gamma e Delta. 177 The pottery of the destruction level of the Vano itself is stylistically similar to that from the Ayia Triada Villa, destroyed in LM IB. 178!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 173 For the dating of the deposit to MM IIIB/LM IA transitional, see D Agata 1989 and Warren For the Advanced LM IA date, see Van de Moortel 1997, pp For Girella s dating to MM IIIB, see Girella 2010a, pp. 143 and See also Girella 2010b, Girella 2011, and Puglisi 2003 (especially pp ) and Puglisi 2006, pp Puglisi 2006, p See also Puglisi 2011a. 177 Puglisi 2006, p Puglisi 2006, p. 25.! 75!

100 Table 6. Ayia Triada: shapes from the stratified deposits Ayia Triada Girella dep. 11 Girella dep. 5 Girella dep. 8 Girella dep. 9 Girella dep. 12 Puglisi dep. 1 Puglisi dep. 3 Puglisi dep. 56 Puglisi dep. 58 Puglisi dep. 66 Puglisi dep. 68 Puglisi dep. 2 Puglisi dep. 24 Puglisi dep. 17 Puglisi dep. 10 Puglisi dep. 72 Puglisi dep. 5! VC SSC HC LRB In&OutB FruitSt RC S-profC X X X - X X X X X - X X X X X X X X X !!!!!!!! 76!

101 Table 7. Ayia Triada: decorative motifs from the stratified deposits Ayia Triada Girella dep. 11 Girella dep. 5 Girella dep. 8 Girella dep. 9 Girella dep. 12 Puglisi dep. 1 Puglisi dep. 3 Puglisi dep. 56 Puglisi dep. 58 Puglisi dep. 66 Puglisi dep. 68 Puglisi dep. 2 Puglisi dep. 24 Puglisi dep. 17 Puglisi dep. 10 Puglisi dep. 72 Puglisi dep. 5! Spirals Crescents Ripples Foliate Scrolls Reed Ivy Wavy Dripping Rim Floral various X X X X - X X X - X X - - X - X X X X X X - X X - X X - - X - X X - - X - X X X X X - X - X X - X X X - - X - - X - X Kommos The ceramic deposits from Kommos come from Building T s, Rooms 19, 22, 23, and 42. In particular, four clusters of pottery deposits (one per room) were selected, each including two deposits in stratigraphic succession. This selection also benefits from the chronological subdivision of the Neopalatial period in Kommos, articulated into five subphases (MM III, LM IA Early, LM IA Advanced, LM IA Final, and LM IB). 179 From Room 23, pottery group 2a represents a floor deposit, dated to MM III; it is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 179 Van De Moortel 1997, pp and ; 2001, pp ; Rutter 2006, pp ! 77!

102 stratified directly below group 2b, a floor deposit, datable to LM IA Early. 180 From Room 19, group 6 is a floor deposit of a possible dining area. 181 Pottery from group 6 is dated to LM IA Early, stratified above an early Neopalatial fill; 182 it is stratified below group 17a, a second floor deposit, dated to LM IA Advanced. 183 From Room 42, group 7 is a floor deposit, dated to LM IA Early, and stratified above a mixed MM III and LM IA Early fill, and directly below group 17b, a second floor deposit, dated to LM IA Advanced; group 17b was in turn found below group 27a, a floor deposit with pottery dated to LM IA Final. 184 Finally, from Room 22, groups 23 and 24 are two LM IA Final floor deposits, stratified above groups 22a and 22b, both dated to LM IA Final; 185 they are stratified below groups 31 and 32, two fills with pottery datable to LM IA Final and LM IB Early. 186 Thus, the main Neopalatial sub-phases are represented as follows: Room 23, group 2a for MM III; Room 19 group 6, Room 23 group 2b, Room 42 group 7, for LM IA Early; Room 19 group 17a, Room 42 group 17b, LM IA Advanced; Room 22, groups 23 and 24 (plus 22a and 22b), and Room 42 group 27a and 27b for LM IA Final; Room 22, groups 31 and 32 for LM IB.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 180 Rutter 2006, pp Shaw 2006, pp ; Shaw 2006, pp Rutter 2006, pp Rutter 2006, pp Rutter 2006, pp , , Rutter 2006, pp Rutter 2006, pp ! 78!

103 Table 8. Kommos: shapes from the stratified deposits in Building T Kommos VC SSC HC LRB In&OutB FruitSt RC S-profC Bdg. T Group X a Groups - - X b Group X Group X Group X - - X 17a Group b Group - - X a Group X b Group - - X X 23 Group X X X Group X 27a Group b Group Group - - X ! Table 9. Kommos: decorative motifs from the stratified deposits in Building T Kommos Bdg. T Spirals Crescents Ripples Foliate Scrolls Reed Ivy Wavy Dripping Rim Floral various Group - - X X - 2a Groups X b Group X X X - Group Group X a Group b Group X a Group X - X X 22b Group X X X 23 Group X - X X X - X - X 24 Group X - 27a Group X - 27b Group Group X X!! 79!

104 Mochlos The Plateia deposit at Mochlos consists of a 1.14 m deep sequence of 13 superimposed Neopalatial ceramic deposits, excavated underneath an open area (a plateia, embedded in the road system) in proximity to a Neopalatial house. 187 The deposits, which vary in thickness and richness of finds, represent fills that were then leveled off in order to build a new paved surface. 188 Based on the stylistic analysis of the pottery from these fills, the following periods are represented in the Plateia sequence: MM III (Level 12), MM III-LM IA transitional (Levels 11-8), LM IA Early (Levels 7-6), LM IA Late (Levels 5-3), and LM IB (Levels 2-0). 189 Table 10. Mochlos: shapes from the Plateia deposits Mochlos VC SSC HC LRB In&OutB FruitSt RC S-profC Plateia Level 12 - X - - X - X - Levels - X X X X - X Levels X X X Levels 5- - X X X X 3 Levels X X - X - - -!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 187 Barnard 2001, pp Barnard 2001, p Barnard 2001, pp and pp ! 80!

105 Table 11. Mochlos: decorative motifs from the Plateia deposits Mochlos Plateia Spirals Crescents Ripples Foliate Scrolls Reed Ivy Wavy Dripping Rim Floral various Level 12 X - X X X - Levels X X X X - - X X X 11-8 Levels X X X - - X - X X 7-6 Levels X - X X - X X X Levels 2-0 X - X X X! Palaikastro Several recently published Neopalatial deposits from Palaikastro aim of establishing a ceramic sequence, based on stratigraphy, and to reappraise earlier publications of ceramic deposits, such as those from House N by Sackett and Popham. 190 For the purpose of dating the pottery from Cistern 2, I followed the deposits discussed by Knappett and Cunningham. 191 Both deposits from Building 6 Room R1 and from Area 6 Trench EP87 are dated to MM IIIB. Building 6 was constructed in MM IIIA and, after a fire destruction, was substantially rebuilt in MM IIIB at the end of which it was destroyed by a massive earthquake. 192 Room R1 was a rectangular storage closet connected to a doorway. 193 Trials below Room R1 yielded MM II pottery. 194 The pottery from Room R1 belongs to a destruction deposit: it collapsed from plaster shelves on which it had been stacked and was found densely packed, intermingled with building debris, destroyed by!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 190 Knappett and Cunningham 2003; Knappett and Collar 2007; MacGillivray See also Sackett and Popham Knappett and Cunningham See also Knappett and Cunningham Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p For an overview of the stratigraphy on section, see Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 113, fig An MM IIB foundation deposit was directly below the floor level. Knappett and Cunningham 2003, pp ! 81!

106 the MM IIIB earthquake. 195 Above this deposit, there is very little evidence of LM IA activity. The deposit from Area 6 Trench EP 87 was found in a narrow rectangular space, a closet similar to Room R The two spaces are indeed similar and so is their pottery, dated to MM IIIB. The material found within EP 87, however, was in secondary deposition, either as a result of cleaning or falling from upper floors. 197 The pottery from Building 2 Room 2 is part of a destruction deposit. This deposit rests on top of bedrock; the level immediately above it was eroded away. For this reason, the pottery from it is dated stylistically. 198 Nevertheless, MacGillivray argues that the style of this deposit represents one step in-between the MM III and LM IB. This last Neopalatial phase is well represented in Well 605, deposits 1 and 2, and in House N. Well 605, built in LM IB, was subsequently filled in. 199 The fill includes 8 deposits, chronologically spanning from LM IB till LM IIIA2. Deposit 1 is a primary deposit relative to the use of the well for collecting water: the pottery in it dates to LM IB. 200 Deposit 2 gradually accumulated above deposit 1: it represents the abandonment of the well as a water reservoir, at the end of LM IB. 201 It is stratified below various deposits of a gradual fill, whose pottery can be dated from final LM IB to LM IIIA1. 202!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 195 Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p Knappett and Cunningham 2003, pp. 142 and 143, fig Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p Hemingway et al. 2011, p. 518, notes how Building 2 was never rebuilt at the end of LM IA. 199 MacGillivray 2007, p. 3, p. 6 fig. 1.6, p MacGillivray 2007, pp. 95 and ff. 201 MacGillivray 2007, pp MacGillivray 2007, pp. 112 and ff.! 82!

107 Table 12. Palaikastro: shapes from the stratified deposits PK VC SSC HC LRB In&OutB FruitSt RC S-profC Rooms - - X X - 10a and 11a Room - - X - X - X - 45 NW Bdg. Room 2 - X X Bdg. 2 Well - - X , depp. 1 and 2 House N - - X ! Table 13. Palaikastro: decorative motifs from the stratified deposits PK Spirals Crescents Ripples Foliate Scrolls Reed Ivy Wavy Dripping Rim Floral various Rooms X X X - - X - X - 10a and 11a Room X - X X X - 45 NW Bdg. Room 2 X - - X - X Bdg. 2 Well X X - 605, depp. 1 and 2 House X X X N! Defining the Terms of Comparison The comparison between the Neopalatial assemblage from Cistern 2 and the pottery from the five (Knossos, Ayia Triada, Kommos, Mochlos, and Palaikastro) stratified sequences presented above is centered on fine buff cups in dark-on-light (darkon-light-lustrous) decoration. These specific categories were chosen for the following reasons; in Cistern 2: 1. Fine buff fabric vessels in dark-on-light decoration account for ca. 95% of the! 83!

108 assemblage; 2. Open shapes, especially cups, account for ca. 66% of the dark-on-light total (including all dark-on-light wares in addition to dark-on-light lustrous); and 3. No light-on-dark ware is included in the Neopalatial assemblage. The final point in the list above, the absence of light-on-dark, is very significant and can already provide a chronological clue to date the assemblage: all of the MM IIIB deposits show a co-presence of light-on-dark and dark-on-light wares. 203 In contrast, the presence of light-on-dark in LM IA is residual, limited to a small number of examples, and progressively disappears. The lack of Neopalatial light-on-dark in the cistern, therefore, could suggest a LM IA date. Figures and show the stylistic features of the assemblage from the cistern, indicating the quantities of the dark-on-light open shapes, both in terms of shape and decoration. This quantitative data ascertain which shapes and which decorations are the most frequent and, therefore, the most useful to compare. For example, while the Vapheio cup is recorded as part of the assemblage, it only occurs in extremely modest quantities (0.2%); consequently, the Vapheio cup has little relevance in the comparison of this assemblage to the others for dating purposes. The fact that the material was selected does not constitute a problem, as mentioned above, since the selection did not affect the proportions of the various wares and shapes in the fill. Comparing Deposits: Shapes The comparison of the pottery shapes from the cistern with those from the five sites not only already suggests a date for the Pyrgian assemblage but also reveals an!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 203 E.g., Girella 2001, 2007, 2010a, and 2010b; Hatzaki 2007 and 2013; Knappett and Cunningham 2003 and 2013.! 84!

109 interesting regional divergence among the deposits with the closest parallels. The comparanda from central Crete point to a LM IA date for the assemblage from the cistern. At Knossos, the Gypsades Well deposit shows very close similarities to the cistern: the best-represented shapes in the dark-on-light category are the Vapheio cup (which, however, is rare in the cistern), the straight-sided cup, the hemispherical cup, and the in-and-out bowl (Table 4). 204 Not all of the shapes from Cistern 2 occur at Ayia Triada. However, Puglisi s Deposits 2, 24, 17, 10, 72, with a strong presence of hemispherical cups and straightsided cups, seem the closest to the cistern. 205 These deposits are all dated by Puglisi to LM IA Final (Table 6). It is true that, as Puglisi explains, most of the LM IA Final shapes are already present in the previous phase, LM IA Early. 206 The shape of the hemispherical cup, however, has more central Cretan features, such as a taller body and a slightly (not strongly, as at Myrtos-Prygos) everted rim, as previously discussed above. 207 The deposits from Kommos confirm the strong presence of hemispherical cups from LM IA Early at that site, and increasing in number during LM IA Advanced and LM IA Final. 208 However, the best comparanda for the pottery from Cistern 2 come from those deposits dated to LM IA Final, such as group 24. These later deposits, mostly LM IA Final, also contain several in-and-out bowls, which are a distinctive feature in the!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 204 Hatzaki 2007, pp Puglisi 2006, tables 1-3 (dep. 2); 21 (dep. 24); (dep. 17); (dep. 10); (dep. 72). 206 Puglisi 2006, p For example, Puglisi 2006, table 4, nos (LM IA Early); table 36, nos and (LM IA Final). See also Puglisi 2011a and 2013 for further discussion. 208 Compare, for example, Rutter 2006, p. 1123, plate 3.30, group 9 (LM IA Early) to p. 1129, plate 3.36, group 24 (LM IA Final).! 85!

110 pottery from Cistern At Kommos, Building T is not the only example: the pottery from the kiln dump presents a comparable situation: both shapes, the hemispherical cup and the in-and-out bowl, are represented in deposits dated to LM IA Advanced. 210 For these reasons, the pottery from Cistern 2 finds the closest similarities at Kommos with the LM IA Final deposits. None of these Neopalatial Kommian deposits, however, have the plethora of straight-sided cups found in the cistern: the straight-sided cup that occur at Kommos seem almost invariably to be imports (group 24; group 37c). 211 The parallels between the assemblage from Cistern 2 and the LM IA Final deposits at Kommos are therefore far from perfect. The comparison of the pottery from Cistern 2 with that from deposits in east Crete presents a slightly different picture. At Mochlos, best represented shapes from the cistern (straight-sided cup, hemispherical cup, in-and-out bowl) all occur in deposits from levels 11-8 in the Plateia, dated by Barnard to the local MM III/LM IA transitional phase (Table 10). 212 While the other shapes continue in later levels, the in-and-out bowl decreases after levels 7-6, dated to LM IA Early. 213 At Palaikastro, the MM IIIB deposits from Building 6 Room R1 and Area 6 Trench EP87 have the best comparanda for the shapes from Cistern 2 (Table 12). 214 Not only do these deposits contain all of the major Cistern 2 shapes, but the shapes also occur with the same details as their counterparts from Cistern!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 209 Rutter 2006, p. 1126, plate 3.33, nos. 17a/3 and 20/2; p. 1127, plate 3.34, no. 22b/1; p. 1131, plate 3.38, no. 26/3; p. 1132, plate 3.39, no. 32/2; p. 1139, plate 3.46, no. 43/ Van de Moortel 2001, p. 63, fig Rutter 2006, pp , plates ; pp , plates For MM III/LM IA Transitional in Mochlos, levels 11-8 of the Plateia deposit, see Barnard 2001, pp , figs Barnard 2001, p For Building 6 Room R1, see Knappett and Cunningham 2003, pp , , and ; for Area 6, Trench EP87, see Knappett and Cunningham 2003, pp. 149 and ! 86!

111 2; there seems to have been a very similar manufacturing tradition for a variety of shapes from the hemispherical cup to the rounded cup and even for the closed shapes. As at Mochlos, however, also at Palaikastro, the in-and-out bowls are poorly if ever represented. At Mochlos and Palaikastro, therefore, the best comparanda for the pottery from Cistern 2 come generally from MM IIIB to LM IA Early deposits. This date is slightly earlier than the LM IA Final dates of the deposits from Ayia Triada and Kommos that most closely match Cistern 2. The shapes of the pottery from the cistern find closer parallels in Mochlos and Palaikastro in east Crete than from any of the sites from central Crete, not only in the details of those shapes but also in the occurrence of vessel types that are little documented anywhere else in Crete. A case in point is the rounded cup, rare in central Crete, but common at Myrtos-Pyrgos and the east of Crete. Comparing Deposits: Decoration Comparing dark-on-light decoration reiterates in many ways the observations about the shapes. The pottery from Cistern 2 is similar in decorative motifs to the Upper Gypsades Well (Table 5) at Knossos, Puglisi s Deposits 2 (LM IA Final: Table 7) at Ayia Triada, and Group 24 (LM IA Final: Table 9) at Kommos. Generally in these deposits spiral motifs predominate together with smaller percentages of other motifs (such as ripples and floral). 215 The pottery from the cistern is similar; the spiral is most common on two of the most frequent shapes, straight-sided cup and hemispherical cup. At Ayia Triada, the proportion of spirals vs. ripples is a criterion for distinguishing between LM IA Initial and Final, as from one phase to the other ripples are progressively supplanted!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 215 Hatzaki 2007, pp ; Rutter 2006, p. 1129; Puglisi 2006, tables 2 and 4.! 87!

112 by spirals. 216 Although decorative similarities exist between LM IA Initial at Ayia Triada and the pottery from Cistern 2, the spiral-ladened LM IA Final seems to suit the data from Myrtos-Pyrgos better. Three important differences between the cistern and central Cretan deposits should be noted: first, the new decorative entry in the Knossian LM IA, the reed pattern, is absent from the assemblage from the cistern; second, the wavy motif, very common at the three sites in central Crete, is rare at Myrtos-Pyrgos (Fig ); third, the pottery from Cistern 2 abounds with crescents, practically absent from the central Cretan assemblages. 217 Ivy and floral motifs seem to behave differently. The ivy is poorly represented at Knossos, Ayia Triada, and Kommos, while foliate scrolls and various floral designs occur at all these sites. 218 This situation corresponds to a broader decorative trend, in which floral motifs are far less standardized and are only attested in specific roles; unlike foliate scrolls that appear to occur in the same locations as spirals - on straight-sided cup, hemispherical cup, or bowls - ivy and floral designs are less predictably applied and seem to function, at times, as fillers. 219 This trend is shared by both the pottery from the cistern and all the deposits from central Crete. Like the shapes, east Cretan decoration is compatible with Cistern 2: various decorative motifs common in Cistern 2 can be seen in east Crete already in MM III. Moreover, the decorative choices in the pottery from the cistern seem to belong to a!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 216 Puglisi 2006, p. 467 and ff. 217 However, good comparanda for Cistern 2 s hemispherical cups with crescent decoration can be seen in SEX Pit 4 Trench D at Knossos (Warren 1991, fig. 10/E and F). 218 Ivy decoration on hemispherical cups, however, is represented in the SEX deposit, again (Warren 1991, fig. 10/H and I). 219 For example, non-standardized floral decorations can be easily found on the inside of In-andout bowl. Myrtos-Pyrgos Cistern 2 is certainly one such case, but there are other deposits, such as Kommos Building T group (Rutter 2006: Group 20, p. 1126; Group 22b, p. 1127; Group 26, p. 1131) and Gournia (Betancourt and Silverman 1991, fig. 18, no. 545).! 88!

113 general eastern ceramic tradition, a concept that will be further explored in the next chapter. The deposit from Building 6 Room R1 at Palaikastro, dated to MM IIIB, already has all the key decorative motifs represented in the pottery from Cistern 2 (Table 13), including crescents and ivy, although the latter was on an import from Mirabello. 220 The rounded cup with dripped rim decoration is very well represented there. The deposit from Building 2 Room 2, dated to LM IA, still has most of the decorative features found in Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos, although the quantities are different: this Palaikastran deposit has more floral motifs, used in the same non-standardized pattern as in central Crete, but crescents and ripples are fewer during this phase. 221 The deposits from the Plateia at Mochlos are similar. In Levels 11-8 and 7-6, dated respectively to MM III-LM IA transitional and LM IA Early (Table 11), the key decorative motifs from the cistern are solidly represented. Levels 7-6, in particular, have crescents and ivy together, so distinctive in the pottery from Cistern 2. After level 4 (LM IA Late), spirals seem to outnumber ripples, which start to disappear. 222 Since the pottery from the cistern still has a considerable quantity of ripple decoration, the deposits from Mochlos between levels 11 and 6 are the best comparanda, with a chronological span from MM III-LM IA transitional to LM IA Early. 223!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 220 Knappett and Cunningham 2003, fig (Mirabello import with ivy: fig. 17 no. 166). 221 See Knappett and Cunningham 2003, fig. 43, no Barnard 2001, p Further corroboration for this date comes from Malia s Quartier E, which provides interesting parallels to the decoration of Cistern 2 s pottery. There, the crescents motif is common, being found on hemispherical cups with strongly everted rim and strap handle, exactly as it does in the cistern. The best examples come from Quartier E s Phase II, dated to either MM III-LM IA Early or MM III, when it is found together with ripples and spirals. See Pelon 1970, pl. XIII, no. 4. For the discussion on these deposits chronology see Van de Moortel and Darque 2001.! 89!

114 Dating the Neopalatial Assemblage from Cistern 2 In terms of both shape and decoration, the closest parallels to the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 come from east Crete (Mochlos and Palaikastro), suggesting a date between MM IIIB and an early phase of LM IA. An argument against a MM IIIB date derives from the lack of light-on-dark ware in the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2. In contrast, all of the MM IIIB deposits discussed above contain a mix of light-on-dark and dark-on-light decoration. The absence of light-on-dark in the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 may therefore suggest that a LM IA date is more plausible. As previously discussed, this date is supported also by the comparanda from central Crete, where the pottery from Cistern 2 has parallels with LM IA at Knossos, LM IA Final at Ayia Triada, and LM IA Final at Kommos. CONCLUSIONS This chapter presented and discussed, both stylistically and chronologically, the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2. The manufacture of the pottery from the cistern particularly the fine buff wares - is standardized. Most of the pottery uses the same type of clay paste; shapes have a metallic look; decorated vessels have the same glossy finishing. The only ceramic category that does not show any degree of standardization is the in-and-out bowl. The majority of the vessels from Cistern 2 are open shapes (e.g., cups and bowls) in fine buff dark-on-light and dark-on-light lustrous wares. Some shapes from the cistern, such as the rounded cup, are typical of the east Crete ceramic production.! 90!

115 The decoration of the pottery from the cistern includes most of the typical Neopalatial decorative motifs of Cretan ceramic production, from spirals to ripple to crescents and ivy. However, the closest parallels to the pottery from the cistern come from sites in the east of the island, such as Mochlos in the north and Bramiana in the south. Chronologically, the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 can be dated to LM IA. This date is based on stylistic comparison between the pottery from the cistern and ceramic deposits from five different sites (Knossos, Ayia Triada, Kommos, Mochlos, and Palaikastro). All of the deposits used as comparanda were chosen because their chronology is tied to stratigraphy. The deposits whose pottery was the closest to that from Cistern 2 were those from east Crete, Mochlos and Palaikastro. In conclusion, the stylistic study of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 points to a similarity with the ceramic production of east Crete. The following chapter will explore further these stylistic connections with the aim of defining the regional characteristics of ceramic production at Myrtos-Pyrgos.! 91!

116 CHAPTER 5 Contextualizing the Style of the Neopalatial Pottery from Cistern 2: Outlining and Defining the Cretan Southeast as a Ceramic Region INTRODUCTION In the previous chapter, the stylistic analysis of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 suggested that production at Myrtos-Pyrgos fits within the Cretan eastern and especially southeastern ceramic tradition. The similarities are visible not only in the typology of pottery shapes and decorations, but also in the details of the vessels manufacture, from the distinctive glossy surface treatment to the metallic look. On these premises, and broadening the scope of the previous chapter, this chapter defines the stylistic characteristics of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2, as a group, and compares them to the ceramic style(s) of other areas of Crete, particularly the northcenter, the south-center, the east, and the southeast. The results of this comparison will be shown to outline the southeast as a discrete ceramic region within east Crete. THE NEOPALATIAL POTTERY FROM CISTERN 2: STYLISTIC CHARACTERISTICS From a stylistic point of view, the pottery from Cistern 2 can be considered a coherent group of vessels, or an assemblage, consisting of high quality vessels, all wheelmade and manufactured with a single clay source for all but one of the fabric groups; except for the reddish brown category, there are no macroscopic differences! 92!

117 among the clay pastes from any of the fabric groups (e.g., fine buff, coarse buff, etc.) except for the addition of temper. The best-represented categories are in the fine buff fabric with dark-on-light lustrous surface treatment (with only a small amount of dark-onlight lustrous with added white). The dark-on-light lustrous treatment is consistent from open to closed shapes and is characterized by a high degree of luster that makes the vessels appear very shiny (Table 5.1). The corpus of open vessels contrasts with the closed shapes on two points: number and variety. The open shapes, in both fine buff and coarse buff wares, are far more prevalent (circa 70% of the total). Both groups appear to be heavily standardized, although open vessels show a higher degree of variability. The closed shapes (30% of the total) are limited to just two or three types (the beaked jug and the bridge-spouted jar/jug, including the baggy type), all of which have a repetitive and predictable decorative pattern (see Chapter 4). Extensive standardization can be detected even among the open shapes, although within a much more varied selection of shapes. In fact, with the exception only of the in-and-out bowls, the categories of the straight-sided cups, hemispherical cups, and banded bowls all present standardization in both shapes and decorative patterns. The lack of standardization in the in-and-out bowls is related to the variety of shape, size, and fabric type in which these vessels occur, as well as the fact that decorations generally present not one but rather a combination of motifs. Among the open shapes the one-handled cup is the most common, particularly the straight-sided cups and the hemispherical cups. Both the straight-sided cups and the hemispherical cups have metallic features, such as a thin profile, strap handles, and very shiny surface, and are light to hold. Other one-handled cups, such as s-profile cups,! 93!

118 rounded cups, and conical cups, are present in more limited numbers. Unlike the s-profile cup, which is among the least frequent shapes, both the rounded cups and the conical cups are characterized by a lesser degree of standardization and they never show metallic features, having thick profiles and rounded (or oval) handles. In decoration, the best-represented motif is the running spiral, both in general throughout the assemblage and within each shape category (straight-sided cups, hemispherical cups, s-profile cups, in-and-out bowls, and closed shapes). Next is ripple pattern; this also occurs on a broad variety of shapes but follows specific decorative rules: on straight-sided cups and Vapheio cups, ripple can be found as the main motif spread over the upper two thirds of the vessel; on in-and-out bowls or closed shapes, in contrast, it occurs as a secondary frieze motif at the base and/or at the neck of the pot. Ivy and other floral motifs decorate various shape types, principally straight-sided cups (with banded base), in-and-out bowls (primarily in the interior decoration), and jugs/jars (as the main central frieze). Within each category, however, these patterns are only present in small quantities (about ¼ of the pottery). Crescents are restricted to hemispherical cups and in-and-out bowls. Within these two categories, however, this motif is so frequent that it is the second best represented after the running spirals. Finally, bands are used as a filler (or perhaps framing) motif, limited to bases, necks, lips, or attachments. Banded bowls are a different matter, since their bands constitute the only decoration on the vessel. The overall stylistic coherence in the fine ware seems to corroborate the fastfilling hypothesis discussed in Chapter 3: Cistern 2 was filled quickly, in one or two dumping episodes. In fact, it can be suggested that the majority of the Neopalatial pottery! 94!

119 from Cistern 2 is part of one or two dining/drinking sets, a coherent group of vessels used by an individual or group. 224 Besides the stylistic correspondences mentioned before, there seems to be a certain connection between shapes. The hemispherical cups and the in-and-out bowls present a case in point; stylistic choices typical of the decorative schemes of one shape appear to be echoed in the other. Thus, on the exterior surface of both shapes, the most typical decorative motifs of the main frieze are spirals and crescents; the ripple, never used on hemispherical cups, like bands, usually fills the lower part of the in-and-out bowls. Broadening the scope to the rest of the assemblage, the same decorative schemes are in use. For example, on the surface of the jugs/jars in dark-onlight lustrous ware, the main frieze is decorated with crescents or spirals, while ripple or bands fill the vessels lower part. The fact that there is decorative (and, more generally, stylistic) correspondence among various vessels categories, however, may not be enough evidence to prove that one or two Neopalatial dining/drinking set(s) were deposited in Cistern 2. One challenge to this hypothesis is the secondary nature of the deposit itself, which affects the interpretation of the assemblage in relation to its original context of use. 225 The fill of the cistern may include pottery and other types of material derived from more than one building in the settlement, and linked to one or more contexts of use (e.g., daily or conspicuous consumption). Nevertheless, the stylistic homogeneity of the Neopalatial pottery still remains a striking circumstance. If, ultimately, we cannot demonstrate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 224 Haggis 2007, p See Haggis 2007, pp , for a similar discussion about the Protopalatial ceramic assemblage from Petras Lakkos. See also Haggis 2012.! 95!

120 whether this pottery is part of one or two sets, 226 we can at least suggest that it relates to similar original contexts or events. The characteristic stylistic coherence of the Cistern 2 ceramic assemblage provides a vantage point to define the style of the LM IA pottery production at Myrtos- Pyrgos. In what follows, these features will be compared to other trends in ceramic manufacture from LM IA Crete. MYRTOS-PYRGOS WITHIN NEOPALATIAL CRETE In this section, the Neopalatial assemblage from Cistern 2 is compared stylistically to the various ceramic traditions, that is, the sum of techniques employed in pottery manufacture, from different parts of Crete. The geographical areas in which the same pottery tradition commonly occurs define ceramic regions. Three main ceramic regions of Minoan Crete have been identified in scholarship: the north-central region centered around Knossos; the south-central in the Mesara; and the eastern, spanning from Malia to Zakros. 227 By examining the style of the assemblage from Cistern 2 at Myrtos- Pyrgos, this section aims to establish to which ceramic tradition and region the site belongs to. In Chapter 6, a discussion about the potential meanings of ceramic regionalism will be discussed.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 226 Haggis 2007, p. 749, comes to a similar conclusion in his assessment of the Petras Lakkos assemblage. 227 For a discussion about the separation of the north- and south-central regions see in particular Van de Moortel 1997, especially pp , 630 and ff., 634 and ff.; and See also Momigliano 2007a, p. 8, and Hatzaki 2007, pp and p. 193, on differences between north-central, south-central, and east Cretan production.! 96!

121 Myrtos-Pyrgos and North-Central Crete A comparison of the fine tableware from north-central Crete, particularly Knossos, and Myrtos-Pyrgos shows that, while most of the vessels in the assemblage from Cistern 2 have parallels with Knossos (from the hemispherical cup to the in-and-out bowl, from the straight-sided and Vapheio cups to the ledge-rim bowls), their details in both shape and decoration show different stylistic choices. Ceramic shapes at Myrtos-Pyrgos generally have a distinctly metallic look, with sharp everted rims, splaying bases, very thin walls, and an extremely purified clay paste. The surface treatment of every dark-on-light lustrous vessel has a shiny gloss. Based on my examination of various assemblages in the Stratigraphical Museum at Knossos from the Minoan Unexplored Mansion and the Acropolis House Knossian cups appear less metallic, both in terms of shape and the almost matt surface treatment, in contrast to the Myrtos-Pyrgos vessels. Cups illustrate the comparisons between the two sites. At Knossos, hemispherical and the straight-sided cups generally have a taller and often larger body than their counterparts from Myrtos-Pyrgos. 228 Decorative patterns are also different: crescents are rare at Knossos, although it is one of the most common decoration at Myrtos-Pyrgos; ripple is used in Knossian hemispherical cups, while at Myrtos-Pyrgos it is never found on this type of vessel. 229 There are also differences in the distribution of cup shapes. The rounded cup is a well-represented vessel at Myrtos-Pyrgos, but has no comparanda at!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 228 For hemispherical cups, see the examples from the MUM (Minoan Unexplored Mansion), in Popham 1984, pl. 143, no. 4, or from the SEX (Stratigraphical Museum Extension) excavation, in Warren 1991, p. 329, fig. 10, letters e-j. For straight-sided cups from the same excavations, see Popham 1984, plate 133, letter b, and Warren 1991, p. 328, fig. 9, letter H (P1143, pictured on table 79, letter C). 229 See Warren 1991, p. 329, fig. 10, letters e and f.! 97!

122 Knossos: instead, this shape seems to be replaced at Knossos by the bell cup, which does not exist at Myrtos-Pyrgos. The straight-sided cup at Knossos includes a variant decorated with reeds or spirals; 230 this variant does not exist in Myrtos-Pyrgos. As previously noted, the large number of straight-sided cups at Myrtos-Pyrgos is unusual in Neopalatial Crete and may be related to the character of the assemblage itself. It is noteworthy, however, that north-central Crete provides the only adequate parallels for this shape. Finally, two shapes deserve further consideration: the Vapheio cup (figs ) and the in-and-out bowl (figs and ). The Vapheio cup seems to be distinctively characteristic of the Knossian production. Remains of Vapheio cups from other sites in Crete, including Myrtos-Pyrgos, are not numerous. Although it shares its metallic lines and shiny surfaces with other vases from Myrtos-Pyrgos, the only Vapheio cup fragment from Cistern 2 recalls Knossian examples stylistically, including even the choice of ripple decoration. 231 Knossian in-and-out bowls lack the rich variety of decoration that characterizes the Myrtos-Pyrgos production. At Knossos, the best-represented motifs are bands, wavy lines, and ripple pattern. 232 At Myrtos-Pyrgos, the decoration of in-and-out bowls is not limited to a particular scheme and employs, instead, a heterogeneous combination of patterns (see the description in Pottery chapter). Moreover, while Knossian in-and-out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 230 Warren 1999, table CCVI, no. P2450; Popham 1984, plate 143, no. 2 (pictured on plate 130, letter h). The two types from Kommos are both considered imports: Rutter 2006, p. 1129, plate 3.36, no. 24/16, and p. 1135, plate 3.42, no. 37c/ See in particular Catling et al. 1979, p. 40, fig. 27, no. 186, and Popham 1984, plate 128, letter a; plate 142, nos ; plate 143, no. 5; plate 153, letters b and c. Once again, as these examples show, the Knossian cups tend to be taller and larger than their counterparts from Myrtos-Pyrgos. 232 See for example Warren 1991, p. 326, fig. 7, letters D-H; pl. 77, letter I; pl. 78, letters A and B.! 98!

123 bowls reach their apogee during the MM IIIB and decrease in number and quality afterwards, at Myrtos-Pyrgos they are well attested throughout the LM IA and, most probably, into the LM IB. Myrtos-Pyrgos and South-Central Crete The style of the Neopalatial fine tableware from south-central Crete is in general compatible with the north-central, Knossian, production, at least for the dark-on-light lustrous shapes examined here. Therefore, a comparison between the assemblage from Myrtos-Pyrgos and those from Ayia Triada or Kommos generally provides the same results as Knossos. For example, vessels typical of the Neopalatial period, such as the hemispherical cup, have the same features in the north and south of central Crete, from Knossos to Kommos. 233 Moreover, just like in the north, crescent motifs are rare and rounded cups are absent in the south. Nevertheless, there are two differences between the north- and the south-central production of the shapes found in the Myrtos-Pyrgos assemblage. First, dark-on-light lustrous straight-sided cups and Vapheio cups are rare in the south (as they are also in the east), while they are well represented in the Knossos area as well as at Myrtos-Pyrgos. 234 Second, the southern in-and-out bowls occur throughout the Neopalatial period (until the late LM IB) and present a much richer decorative variety than the northern counterparts,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 233 Puglisi 2006: table 3, nos ; table 13, nos , 10.22, and 10.23; table 26, nos ; table 29, no. 44.5; table 36, nos ; D Agata 1989, table XXI, letter e, and table XXII, letter f; La Rosa and Cucuzza 2001, fig. 162 and 164; Betancourt 1990, fig. 70, nos. 2023, 2024, 2028, 2029; Watrous 1992, fig. 12, nos. 11, 30, 31, and plate 2, no. 79; Rutter 2006, p. 1123, pl. 3.30, no. 9a/2; p. 1129, pl. 3.36, nos. 24/8-15; p. 1135, pl. 3.42, no. 37d/1; p. 1140, pl. 3.47, nos. 44b/ D Agata 1989, plate XXI, letter f. Puglisi 2006, table 34, no ! 99!

124 going from floral motifs to bands and wavy lines. 235 Although the features, shape and decoration, of the in-and-out bowls from Kommos seem to be at least compatible with the variety found in Myrtos-Prygos, their decorative schemes have different arrangements of motifs. Myrtos-Pyrgos and East Crete The pottery of Myrtos-Pyrgos fits well within the production of eastern Crete, particularly of sites like Malia and Mochlos in the north and Bramiana and Chrysi in the south. The features that the pottery from Cistern 2 shares with the eastern region are both stylistic and technological. In general, all of the Cistern 2 fine tableware shapes have exact counterparts in the east. In particular, hemispherical cups tend to have a short flat base, a short globular body, and strongly everted rims; 236 rounded cups are abundantly represented; 237 the in-and-out bowls occur with a variety of decorative patterns and are produced through the whole Neopalatial period; there is a clear preference for crescent decoration. Moreover, at both Myrtos-Pyrgos and the eastern sites, certain shapes occur with the same decorative patterns: for example, hemispherical cups rarely have the ripple pattern that is, in contrast, well represented among the examples from central Crete, and tend more frequently to have spirals and crescents.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 235 Kommos: Rutter 2006, p. 1126, pl. 3.33, nos. 17 a/3 and 20/2; p. 1127, pl. 3.34, no. 22 b/1; p. 1131, pl. 3.38, no. 26/3; p. 1132, pl. 3.39, no. 32/2; p. 1139, pl. 3.46, no. 43/4. Ayia Triada: Puglisi 2006, table 26, no. 38.1; table 31, nos and For Malia, see Pelon 1970, pl. XIII, no. 4, and pl. XV, no. 2. For Mochlos, see Barnard 2001, p. 186, fig. 11.5, no ; p. 205, fig. 10.3, no ; p. 230, fig. 7.2 no. 7.20; p. 238, fig. 6.3 nos and 6.25; p. 247, fig. 4.3, nos ; Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 429, fig. 2, nos. P6092 and P4937, and, with raised base p. 438, fig. 10, no. P Particularly for the dark-on-light lustrous variant: see examples from Malia (Pelon 1970, pl. XIV, no. 5; as a tripod vessel, Langohr and Alberti forthcoming, fig. 2b, and Pelon 1970, pl. XIII, no. 2), Mochlos (Barnard and Brogan 2003, nos. IB ; Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 429, fig. 2, nos. P6058 and P6051, p. 447, fig. 19, no. P478, and p. 448, fig. 20, no. P450), Pseira (Betancourt 1984, fig. 8, nos. 48 and 50), and Gournia (Hawes et al. 1908, pl. VII, no. 9).! 100!

125 Technologically, the eastern production seems to privilege metallic shapes, often with the same glossy surface treatment as the pottery from Myrtos-Pyrgos. The style of most decorative motifs is also similar, from the omnipresent thick ripples to the running spirals with an open center, and from the crescents type to the assorted floral repertoire. Finally, the combination of these motifs on specific shapes is often comparable: for example, the dark-on-light lustrous rounded cup is most commonly decorated with a floral branch and bands around the base; 238 whenever present, the dark-on-light lustrous straight-sided cups have ripples and spirals with monochrome bases, or floral motifs with banded bases; 239 the dark-on-light lustrous in-and-out bowls, especially in the southeast, have the same arrangement of abstract decorations outside (ripples, spirals, crescents) and floral inside. Within the east, however, discrete areas with similar stylistic patterns can be outlined. Although all of the observations delineated above encompass all of eastern Crete, they are especially applicable to Malia and Mochlos in the north, and Bramiana and Chrysi in the south. The pottery production in the sites of Gournia and Zakros, however, which are widely separated within the eastern ceramic region of Crete, presents slightly different features: it is more compatible with central Cretan ceramic styles; it shows, at least, a coexistence of eastern and central characteristics. Two examples are particularly telling for corroborating the previous statement. First, Vapheio cups, a hallmark of the Knossian production, which are poorly represented elsewhere in the east,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 238 Pelon 1970, pl. XIV, no Barnard 2001, p. 170, fig. 12.7, nos and ; p. 188, fig. 11.7, no ; p. 206, fig. 10.4, nos and 10.37; p. 215, fig. 9.3, nos. 9.22, 9.24, and 9.26; p. 224, fig. 8.4, nos. 8.35, 8.36, and 8.38; p. 242, fig. 5.2, no. 5.20; p. 254, fig. 2.1, no. 2.5.! 101!

126 are better represented at Gournia and Zakros. 240 Second, at Zakros, hemispherical cups are represented in both the tall (central) and the short (eastern) versions, indicating a possible coexistence of different ceramic traditions. 241 Between Gournia and Zakros, two (perhaps more) main eastern Cretan styles could be identified: a northeastern and a southeastern one. Both of them have in common the stylistic features described above. However, while the northeastern pottery production seems routinely to implement some central Cretan trends, these same trends are absent from southeastern sites. A good example of this different pattern is represented by the inand-out bowls: in both the north and the south east, they are well represented throughout the Neopalatial period, with a variety of decoration; in the northeast, however, their most common decoration includes bands and wavy lines, like the central Cretan examples; this combination is never found in southeastern sites. 242 In order to further explore and define this difference, the discussion that follows focus solely on comparisons between the pottery from Myrtos-Pyrgos Cistern 2 and two southeastern sites: Bramiana and Chrysi. Since both sites are currently being studied for publication, photographic material and drawings cannot be reproduced here. The observations reported below are all based on my personal study of the pottery. 243!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 240 Gournia: Hawes et al. 1908, plate VI, no. 5. Zakros: Platon 2011, p. 232, fig Platon 2011, p. 232, fig. 23 (central Crete characteristics) and p. 239, fig. 44 (eastern Crete characteristics). 242 For example, Malia: Pelon 1970, pl. XII, nos. 4 and 5. Mochlos: Barnard 2001, p. 171, fig. 12.8, nos ; p. 189, fig. 11.8, nos ; p. 207, fig. 10.5, nos ; p. 224, fig. 8.4, no. 8.42; p. 232, fig. 7.4, nos ; p. 259, fig. 1.4, no I thank Philip P. Betancourt and Thomas Brogan for permission to study the pottery from Bramiana and Chrysi while a 2014 Seager Fellow, at the INSTAP center in east Crete.! 102!

127 Myrtos-Pyrgos and the Southeast of Crete: Bramiana and Chrysi Bramiana The site of Bramiana, located ca. 5 km northwest of Ierapetra, was uncovered during a rescue excavation on the eastern coast of the homonymous artificial lake and dam. Most of the archaeological finds consist of pottery; the construction of the dam is likely to have damaged or even destroyed any architectural evidence. 244 The fine tableware was chosen from the assemblage of Bramiana for study, because this type of pottery is best represented in the assemblage from Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos. The fine tablewares of Myrtos-Pyrgos and Bramiana have a high degree of stylistic similarity in shapes, decorative motifs, and surface treatments. In addition, the two sites share the same characteristics in pottery manufacture. The most striking features of all the pottery from both sites are the metallic shapes and the application of a uniformly glossy surface treatment. Unlike on the pottery from northeastern Crete, at Bramiana this technological characteristic is visible without exception on every shape and on all dark-on-light lustrous decoration. The shapes from Bramiana are precisely paralleled in the cistern in the characteristics of the ledge-rim bowls, hemispherical cups, and in-and-out bowls, and in the presence of the rounded cup. Spirals and ripples, executed in the same style, dominate the decoration at both sites. Finally, at Bramiana, the in-and-out bowl shows the same variety of decoration as at Myrtos-Pyrgos; wavy lines and bands are also never combined, in contrast to both north-central and northeastern styles. The two sites differ markedly only in ceramic fabric(s). While the assemblage from the cistern, and the fine tableware from Neopalatial Myrtos-Pyrgos (Pyrgos IV) in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 244 T. M. Brogan (pers. comm.).! 103!

128 general, seems principally to have used one specific clay recipe, the contemporary ceramic material from Bramiana displays multiple fabrics, perhaps used for specific vessel categories. Chrysi Located on a small island 8 miles off the coast of Ierapetra, the site of Chrysi was visited by early travellers and documented in historical times. Chrysi was excavated and surveyed between 2008 and The excavation uncovered a large Neopalatial (mostly LM IB) settlement on the north coast of the island. 246 Together with Makrygialos, Chrysi and Myrtos-Pyrgos are currently the only fully excavated Neopalatial settlements in southeastern Crete, in the area around Ierapetra. Pottery from different parts of the Neopalatial settlement was selected for this study. Although dated to LM IB, and thus later than the pottery from Myrtos-Pyrgos Cistern 2, the study of pottery from Chrysi was important for refining the stylistic characteristics of LM I at Myrtos-Pyrgos. Since there is a difference in the ceramic chronology of the assemblages from Myrtos-Pyrgos and Chrysi, some stylistic differences are to be expected. In general, the LM IB pottery from Chrysi does not have the glossy surface treatment typical of the assemblages from the cistern at Myrtos-Pyrgos and from Bramiana. Matt surfaces seem to be preferred instead at Chrysi, sometimes coated with a whitish slip. The LM IA repertoire of decorations of big running spirals, ripples, or crescents has been superseded, and instead small running spirals, stylized foliate scrolls, and floral themes are favored. However, a number of earlier pieces from!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 245 Chalikias 2013, pp A first survey of the island was conducted in the 1970s: Alexiou 1975, p For a study of particular features of the site, see Apostolakou et al and Betancourt et al ! 104!

129 mixed contexts at Chrysi are characterized by glossy surfaces and the particular stylistic fashion of ripples and spirals seen at both Bramiana and Myrtos-Pyrgos. Shapes of interest for this comparison include in-and-out bowls, which in all respects are consistent with the material from Myrtos-Pyrgos and Bramiana. THE CRETAN SOUTHEAST AS A CERAMIC REGION The stylistic contextualization of the assemblage from Cistern 2 within the range Neopalatial ceramic production has revealed interesting patterns suggesting that Myrtos- Pyrgos could be understood within the east Cretan pottery tradition (Fig. 1.2). Within the east, however, the stylistic comparisons with the pottery from the sites of Bramiana and Chrysi indicate the existence of an even more specific ceramic tradition in southeastern Crete around the area of Ierapetra during the Neopalatial period. 247 The southeast, therefore, represents a ceramic region, or rather a micro-region, of its own, within the large macro-region, the east. Nevertheless, it should be clear that this subdivision into macro- and micro- regions is not intended to imply any hierarchy or cultural derivation between the two, but aims to reflect only size differences: the east region is macrobecause it incorporates the southeast. In order to clarify and corroborate further the definition of southeastern Crete as a ceramic region, the broad stylistic comparisons above can be expanded and refined. A closer comparison between the pottery from Cistern 2, Bramiana, and Chrysi includes: 1) Establishing the most characteristic shapes and decorations in the pottery from the cistern;!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 247 The few published vessels from Makrygialos might also be included, at least tentatively, within the same tradition: Davaras 1997.! 105!

130 2) Verifying whether the same shapes and decorations (including technological and manufacturing similarities) occur in Bramiana and Chrysi; 3) Evaluating whether, in Bramiana and Chrysi, these shapes and decorations are as common as in Cistern 2. For the comparison to produce meaningful results, these three criteria must be considered in relationship to each other. Each criterion in isolation would fail to represent sufficient evidence for outlining the southeast as a ceramic region. The first criterion, for example, would observe that the hemispherical cup is one of the numerically bestrepresented shapes in the fine tableware from Cistern 2. However, the hemispherical cup (in the categories of dark-on-light and especially dark-on-light lustrous) is one of the most common vessels in all regions of Neopalatial Crete, from Knossos to Zakros to Phaistos; its occurrence, therefore, does not provide any evidence to support the identification of the southeastern region. As noted in Chapter 4, however, the hemispherical cup occurs in local and regional variants across the island, exhibiting slight differences in shape and decoration: the version preferred in central Crete is a taller and larger than the eastern variant, found at Myrtos-Pyrgos. Thus, details of the shape and surface treatment, which reflect particular manufacturing and technological choices, add important information that help characterize the local style. In Cistern 2, the most characteristic shapes are three: the hemispherical cup, the rounded cup, and the in-and-out bowl. There are a number of reasons for their relevance. The hemispherical cup, because of its wide diffusion across Crete, provides a good tool of investigation: since virtually every site in Crete has this shape, it is easy to examine it and establish local variants. The rounded cup, as explained in Chapter 4, is a rare! 106!

131 presence in central Crete but is common in the east and at Myrtos-Pyrgos. Even within the east, however, it is documented in different styles, more commonly in dark-on-light trickle decoration (e.g., Palaikastro and Mochlos) and rarely in dark-on-light lustrous (e.g., Malia, Mochlos, and Myrtos-Pyrgos). Finally, from the analysis in Chapter 4, the in-and-out bowl seems to be a typical shape of Myrtos-Pyrgos, and was probably even exported from there to other Cretan sites. This shape appears with various types of decoration all around Crete, but it has a broad variety and combination of motifs only at Myrtos-Pyrgos. In sum, therefore, these three ceramic shapes, the hemispherical cup, the rounded cup, and the in-and-out bowl, represent three key vessel types, on one side typical of the Myrtos-Pyrgos production, and on the other present elsewhere with different characteristics. As such, they provide good comparative tools to establish the degree of similarity among the ceramic production at Myrtos-Pyrgos, Bramiana, and Chrysi. Hemispherical Cup (Figs ) As previously discussed (Chapter 4), at Myrtos-Pyrgos hemispherical cups are characterized by thin walls, a globular body, a strongly everted rim, a flat or raised base, and a strap handle, often with a rivet on top where the handle meets the rim (figs. 4.1 and 4.2). These stylistic features, and in particular the strongly everted rim, the characteristically thin walls, and the frequently applied rivet give all hemispherical cups from Cistern 2 a distinctively metallic look. Moreover, these vessels have a remarkably glossy surface, a hallmark of the Myrtos-Pyrgos Neopalatial ceramic production, and always occurs with dark-on-light-lustrous decoration, particularly with running spirals and crescents (figs. 4.4 and 4.5). The version of the hemispherical cup at Myrtos-Pyrgos,! 107!

132 with its metallic shape and dark-on-light lustrous decoration is typical of eastern Crete, both north (for example, Malia and Mochlos) and south (Bramiana). 248 The hemispherical cups from central Crete up to Gournia, again both north and south, seem generally to have a taller body than the shorter east Cretan variant; they have a less everted rim and dark-on-light-lustrous decorations favoring ripples or spirals. 249 Among the preferences in decoration, crescents popular in the east - are rare, if present at all, in central Crete; however, floral decorations, such as ivy, are much more common in central Crete, but rarer in the east. 250 Rounded Cup (Figs ) Although not as numerous as the hemispherical cup, the rounded cup can be considered one of the most characteristic shapes from Cistern 2. In Chapter 4, the rounded cup was defined as a vessel with convex profile, rim slightly turning in, flat or raised tronco-conical base, and vertical handle rounded or ovoid in section (figs and 4.18). This shape is poorly represented across Neopalatial Crete and seems to be best attested in the east (both in the north, Malia and Mochlos, and the south, Bramiana and Chrysi), which gives its occurrence in the cistern assemblage added significance. At Myrtos-Pyrgos, rounded cups occur with both dark-on-light-non-lustrous and dark-on-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 248 For Malia, see Pelon 1970, e.g., pl. XIII, no. 4, or pl. XV, no. 2. For Mochlos, see Barnard 2001, e.g., p. 205, fig , or p. 230, fig. 7.20; Barnard and Brogan 2011, e.g., p. 429, e.g., nos. P6092, P For Knossos, see Popham 1984, pl. 141, nos. 8 and 9, pl. 143, no. 4; Warren 1991, p. 329, fig. 10, letters J and L. For Ayia Triada, Puglisi 2006, e.g., table 4, no For Phaistos, D Agata 1989, pl. XXI, letter e. For Kommos, see Watrous 1992, fig. 12, no. 30; Van de Moortel 2001, fig. 38, nos. 63 and 64; Rutter 2006, e.g., pl. 3.30, no. 9a/2, or pl. 3.36, nos. 24/9-/15. For Gournia, see Hawes et al. 1908, pl. VIII, no. 8, and pl. IX, no An example of hemispherical cups with crescent dark-on-light-lustrous decoration is in Warren 1991, p. 329, fig. 10, letters E and F. Ivy and other floral decorations can be seen in: Mountjoy 2003, p. 71, fig. 4.9, no. 119; Warren 1991, p. 329, fig. 10, letters H and I; Puglisi 2006, e.g., table 8, nos and 5.26; Rutter 2006, e.g., pl. 3.36, no. 24/8.! 108!

133 light-lustrous decoration. Generally, in the east, the most typical version of the rounded cup is the dark-on-light non-lustrous variant, with a plain exterior, rim band, and often dripping paint, attested profusely at Malia and Mochlos, and also Palaikastro. 251 The dark-on-light-lustrous version seems to be not only rare but somewhat special and unexpected: the only other examples, besides those from Myrtos-Pyrgos, come from Malia and Mochlos. 252 In-and-out Bowl (Figs and ) This type of vessel is characterized by elaborate decoration on both the inside and the outside surfaces. Although it also occurs elsewhere in Crete, it could be considered local to the southeastern region of Crete. 253 Across the island, this shape seems to follow particular chronological and decorative patterns. Diachronically in central Crete this shape diminishes in popularity and quality of execution after MM IIIB, while in the east it continues well into the LM IB. In central (Knossos and Phaistos area) and northeast Crete (Mochlos), its decoration consists of a combination of bands, ripples, and wavy lines. The typical in-and-out bowl from Myrtos-Pyrgos has very elaborate flower!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 251 For Palaikastro, see Knappett and Cunningham 2003, e.g., p. 128, fig. 15, nos For Mochlos, see Barnard 2001, p. 168, no ; p. 222, no. 8.21; p. 237, nos ; p. 245, nos ; Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 432, nos. P6050 and P6054; p. 431, P4386 and P For Malia, see Pelon 1970, pl. XIV, no. 5; and, as a tripod vessel, Langohr and Alberti forthcoming, fig. 2b, and Pelon 1970, pl. XIII, no. 2. For Mochlos, see Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 429, nos. P6058 and P6051, p. 447, no. P478, and p. 448, nos. P448 and P For Knossos, see Hatzaki 2007 p. 164, fig. 5.4, nos. 6-8; Warren 1991, p. 326, fig. 7, nos. E-H; pl. 77, letter I; pl. 78, letters A and B; Mountjoy 2003, p. 60, fig. 4.3, nos ; p. 77, fig. 4.11, nos For Kommos, see Rutter 2006, p. 1126, pl. 3.33, nos. 17 a/3 and 20/2; p. 1127, pl. 3.34, no. 22 b/1; p. 1131, pl. 3.38, no. 26/3; p. 1132, pl. 3.39, no. 32/2; p. 1139, pl. 3.46, no. 43/4; Van de Moortel 2001, p. 63, fig. 38, no. 62. For Ayia Triada, see Puglisi 2006, table 26, no. 38.1; table 31, nos and For Gournia, see Betancourt and Silverman 1991, fig. 18, no For Malia, see Pelon 1970, pl. XII, nos. 4 and 5. For Mochlos, see Barnard 2001, p. 171, fig. 12.8, nos ; p. 189, fig. 11.8, nos ; p. 207, fig. 10.5, nos ; p. 224, fig. 8.4, no. 8.42; p. 232, fig. 7.4, nos ; p. 259, fig. 1.4, no. 1.30; Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 438, fig. 10, no. P6242, and p. 440, fig. 11, no. P6242.! 109!

134 decorations, spirals, and crescents. At Myrtos-Pyrgos, this shape occurs in a remarkable variety of fabrics and dark-on-light decorations that makes it one of the least standardized in the Neopalatial repertoire. Bramiana provides the only parallel for the variability in fabrics and decoration of the in-and-out bowls from Myrtos-Pyrgos. Discussion The three key shapes in the ceramic assemblage at Myrtos-Pyrgos - the hemispherical cup (figs ), rounded cup (figs ), and in-and-out bowl (figs and ) - occur at Bramiana and Chrysi with the same typical stylistic features discussed above, in particular metallic skeumorphism and a preference for particular decorative patterns (e.g., crescents). While it is true that these two features are most frequent in the Neopalatial pottery from east Crete, in the southeast, and in particular at Bramiana, the stylistic details are in all cases the closest to the pottery from Cistern 2. The similarity in several cases is so complete that vessels from Bramiana would appear stylistically at home at Myrtos-Pyrgos, and vice versa. As a result, it seems feasible to postulate the occurrence of a common potting tradition in the Ierapetra area during LM IA (and the Neopalatial period more broadly), a stylistic micro-region within the broader macro-region of eastern Crete. In a future project, this perhaps still crude statement would benefit from a closer study of workshop activity in the southeast. Moreover, since new excavations and study seasons are currently uncovering sites in the southeast, new pottery will become available that may better define the stylistic characteristics as well as the geographical limits of the southeastern ceramic region.! 110!

135 CONCLUSION Through the stylistic analysis of ceramic traditions in Neopalatial Crete, this chapter demonstrated that the pottery from Cistern 2 fits within the eastern tradition. Further comparisons with pottery from Bramiana and Chrysi in the southeast, suggested that these three sites in the immediate vicinity of Ierapetra form a ceramic region on their own. The definition of the southeastern ceramic region refines our understanding of stylistic traditions and trends in Neopalatial Crete. The next chapter will focus on the meaning of ceramic regionalism and pottery style to extrapolate social and political information.! 111!

136 CHAPTER 6 From Pottery to Politics: Assessing the Political Significance of Neopalatial Myrtos-Pyrgos INTRODUCTION The stylistic study of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 in the context of contemporary production has revealed that Myrtos-Pyrgos had close ceramic ties with east Crete and was part of a southeastern sub-region. Recognition of this southeastern ceramic region expands our previous knowledge of Neopalatial pottery traditions, illuminating this less-explored area of Crete. It is unclear whether the identification of ceramic production regions also reflects social and political organization, however useful such regions may be as a scholarly tool. It is thus uncertain whether a ceramic region implies the presence of a political region and, consequently, whether ceramic regional subdivisions (regions, sub-regions) represent discrete political entities or polities. The significance to be given to pottery as a method to investigate a society s political organization is still a matter of intense debate in archaeological and anthropological scholarship. This chapter focuses on the place of Myrtos-Pyrgos and its pottery within the Neopalatial political dynamic, by addressing the role and importance of pottery in the reconstruction of politics. The first part of the chapter outlines the main hypotheses concerning Neopalatial political organization, with particular attention to the type of material culture at the base of each argument. In the second part, the impact of ceramic! 112!

137 regions is addressed, in connection with the significance of pottery for political reconstructions in archaeology. Finally, the third part is centered on Myrtos-Pyrgos and politics, discussing previous hypotheses about the political relations of the site and the effect on them of the study of the Neopalatial assemblage from Cistern 2. RECONSTRUCTING THE POLITICAL ORGANIZATION OF NEOPALATIAL CRETE The reconstruction of Neopalatial political organization and dynamics has proven challenging since the archaeological discovery of Minoan Crete in the early 20 th century. The debate has concerned the type(s) of political structure(s) on the island, as well as the best method for investigating it(/them). Two hypotheses about Neopalatial politics have received the most favor: one sees Knossos as the leading power of Crete; and the other conceives that Crete comprised several independent polities, in which local elites actively competed for power and where, as a result, power was very fluid and unstable (see below). Different interpretations of the same classes of material culture, particularly architecture and administration, underpin both views. This section examines in detail the arguments supporting the two reconstructions, as well as the archaeological evidence on which they are based. In the discussion that follows, I summarize the common grounds of the various political models discussed, emphasizing the interpretations on which there is consensus as well as the controversies still affecting this research field. Knossos as the Leading Power of Neopalatial Crete One of the most influential views of Neopalatial Crete emphasizes the role of Knossos and its palace in the political dynamics of the whole island, indeed arguing that! 113!

138 the site wielded supreme political control. According to this view, during the Protopalatial period the three palatial sites of Knossos, Phaistos, and Malia, probably monarchies, 254 shared political control of the island (or most of it). 255 During the early Neopalatial period, however, the situation changed and Knossos rose as the leading power, unifying the island. 256 This hypothesis is a development of Arthur Evans early interpretations of the palace and material culture of Knossos, which were influenced also - but not exclusively - by Greek classical literature and culture including Homer s Catalogue of Ships and Thucydides concept of thalassocracy. 257 Evans seminal reconstruction of Minoan politics has subsequently been modified and enriched by more recent archaeological data through the work of several scholars, especially Alexiou, Warren, and Wiener. The assumption of a Minoan monarchy shapes the discussion on both intra-site (internal) and inter-site (external, island-wide) political dynamics. On an intra-site level, the presence of a monarch implies a hierarchically ranked society, in which the (priest-) king occupied the top tier and the elite occupied the town s grand mansions, such as those excavated in the environs of the palace at Knossos. 258 Pendlebury described Minoan society as a paternal theocracy that consisted of states where the proletariat had few or!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 254 In Evans view the palace at Knossos with its elaborate design, characterized by the use of novel technologies in building techniques and manufacture, exemplified for example in the Domestic Quarter, can be considered the dwelling of a priest-king. Evans 1921, pp ; but also Glotz 1924, Pendlebury 1939, Hutchinson 1962, Platon 1966, Hood 1967 and 1971, Alexiou Whitelaw forthcoming. 256 Younger and Rehak 2001, p Thucydides 1.4. But see also Herodotus 3.122: Polikrates is the first Greek thalassocrat of whom we know, apart from Minos [ ]. Pendlebury 1939, p. 287 states: the thalassocracy of Minos is no myth. See also Platon 1966, for example p. 180; Alexiou 1969, pp A more recent view of thalassocracy can be found in Wiener As for example in Evans 1928, e.g., p. 413, 466, ; Hutchinson 1962, p. 257; Hood 1971, p. 117; Platon 1966, pp ; Higgins 1973, p. 18.! 114!

139 no political rights and was heavily taxed, [ ], where there was probably a rather topheavy upper class of princes, nobles, and priests, and a very small middle class, but no very rigid caste system. 259 The palaces are considered the focal points of economic activity, the headquarters of agriculture and handicrafts, and foreign trade, 260 in particular because of the significant presence of storage facilities. As such the palace served as the political, religious, and economic seat of power. From an inter-site point of view, the presence of other palaces across the island has suggested that Bronze Age Crete was organized into various individual monarchies, as in later Greek myths. 261 Each palace represented the capital of a region, whose boundaries are hard to define. 262 The various kingdoms are thought to have coexisted in peace, in the so-called pax Minoica, since virtually no trace of defensive walls or warfare prevention is archaeologically visible. 263 While the implications of Evans suggestive terminology (palace, villa, king, etc.) have been acknowledged, 264 the assumption of a Knossian domination was (and still is) based on two main arguments: the size and longevity of Knossos and its palace; and the perceived cultural Knossian - homogeneity across and even outside the island during the Neopalatial period, visible for example in the adoption of similar administrative,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 259 Hutchinson 1962, p Alexiou 1969, p E.g., the stories of king Minos of Knossos and his brothers, Rhadamanthus and Sarpedon, suggest the coexistence of various monarchies on the island and their partial submission under Minos (i.e., Knossos). 262 Hood 1967, p. 53, defined Minoan Crete as a loose federation of city-states. 263 The lack of evidence for wall systems, however, does not imply lack of war threats, as already pointed out, among others, by Alexiou (1979). For a comprehensive and up-to-date discussion, see Alusik 2007 and Hood 1971, p. 116: the palaces imply kings and queens.! 115!

140 architectural, and ceramic styles. 265 Both Evans and the scholarship that has followed his hypothesis has measured political influence in terms of a settlement s size and archaeological visibility, spread and/or emulation of material culture, and above all by the presence or absence of a palace. 266 Thus, the large size of Knossos and its palace has put this settlement in an undisputed position of supremacy over the rest of the island. 267 The political dynamics between Knossos and other Minoan settlements are evaluated mostly on the basis of styles of material culture. Thus, for example, similar ceramic styles are believed to represent political allegiances and dependence. 268 The perceived stylistic similarities represent perhaps the most entrenched argument for the Knossian hegemony during the Neopalatial period, with similarity interpreted as evidence of political inclusiveness. Variability in material culture is connected to time and external influences. 269 In this spirit, based on the stylistic similarities or differences between material culture, Hutchinson distinguished several Minoan states (sic), some of which were thought to have been independent (e.g., Phaistos), while others were seen as under Knossian control. 270 A problematic implication of the hypothesis of Knossian domination is its evolutionary concept of cultural development, which describes but does not explain cultural change within a biological framework, from birth to maturity to decline. This is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 265 Such as the discovery of Knossian looking material culture outside of Crete, which could be interpreted in terms of a Knossian control (as in Thucydides thalassocracy, perhaps) over the Aegean. 266 E.g., Rethemiotakis and Christakis See, for example, Wiener 2007, p Wiener 2007, p McNeal 1973, pp For the external influences in the development of Minoan history and material culture, see for example Pendlebury 1939, pp Hutchinson 1962, p. 281 and ! 116!

141 particularly true for the earlier scholarship. 271 Major phenomena such as the emergence of the palaces or of Knossian supremacy have been the foci of scholarly interest. As such, Minoan history has been conceived in terms of the evolution that brought about the palaces (in a teleological sense) and then the supremacy of one among them, Knossos. 272 In this respect, this approach to the political organization of Minoan Crete is strongly Knosso-centric, where Knossos represents the absolute model of the way Minoan palaces and polities worked. Crete s Independent Polities and Factionalism The second prevailing hypothesis of Neopalatial political organization sees Crete as composed of independent polities. Since the late 1970s, several scholars, with different theoretical backgrounds and agendas, have proposed an interpretation of Crete in which the palatial centers represent peer polities and in which political control is constantly changing, as a result of continuous power struggles by local social groups (elites or factions). The conclusions of individual scholars, although they started from different perspectives, form a compatible picture of Cretan politics; therefore, their views are discussed together in this chapter. There are two main components of the hypothesis that Neopalatial Crete comprised independent polities. The first is the belief that, from the Protopalatial into the Neopalatial period, Cretan polities, centered on the palaces, were peers. The second relates to the people who held social and political control: in the struggle for power, the social groups within each polity engaged in active competition, resulting in a dynamic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 271 For Evans intellectual background, see MacEnroe 1995 and McNeal 1973, p. 210 and ff., pp See Soles 1995 for an interpretation of Knossos also as a cosmological center, reinforcing its ideological role in Crete.! 117!

142 and ever changing political scene. The sections that follow examine each of these two components individually, discussing their development through the scholarship. Independent Polities A variety of scholarly contributions have argued that Minoan polities were independent. The earliest outline of this hypothesis was proposed by John Cherry and, separately, by Paul Halstead in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Their seminal work was influenced by Colin Renfrew s The Emergence of Civilisation, which sparked an interest in the economic and social mechanisms involved in the development of particular political structures. While Cherry defined the social mechanisms involved, Halstead focused on the economic ones. For Cherry, the social and political change in Protopalatial Crete can be explained with Renfrew s peer polity interaction model, that is, the study of who impresses whom, and how, and what effect does that have upon the future actions of both. 273 Thus, the peer polity theory focused on the types of exchanges and/or relations between polities. Rather than pan-cretan reconstructions, peer polity focused on the region, defined as the larger community beyond the polity level, comprised of loosely related yet politically independent, interacting groups. 274 According to this model, interactions among regions have a deep impact in a polity s organization and functioning, and can trigger socio-political change. 275 Interactions in this context include not only trade and external conquests, but also warfare, competition, emulation, or peaceful incorporation of more developed systems (the so-called symbolic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 273 Renfrew 1986, p. 18. See also Cherry 2005, p. 196, and Cherry and Davis 2007, p Renfrew 1986, p Renfrew 1986, p. 6.! 118!

143 entrainment). 276 Even the socio-political organization of palatial Crete can be explained with these types of interaction, competition, and emulation. In fact, Cherry argues that the palaces, considered multifunctional regional centers, developed independently as the result of strong mutual interaction, cultural emulation, elite and political competition already during the Prepalatial period. 277 This climate of emulation and competition accompanied the palaces (and the regions in which they were centered) throughout their life, in the Protopalatial and even the Neopalatial periods. The continuous interaction of the independent Cretan regions over a long span of time is for Cherry a plausible explanation for the Neopalatial perceived cultural homogeneity, without the need to imply an overarching power, as in the Knossian hypothesis discussed previously. Independent polities also form the basis of the economic analysis of Minoan Crete, which is described as a redistributive system based, among others, on the later evidence of Linear B tablets. 278 The term redistribution refers to a system in which a central power, e.g., a Late Bronze Age palace, concentrates the staple goods produced in the region under its control, and redistributes them to the population, guaranteeing a constant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 276 Renfrew 1986, pp Renfrew defines the symbolic entrainment as the process through which a more developed system is adopted by a less developed one through contact (Renfrew 1986, p. 8). 277 Cherry 1986, p. 23 and 38. For the definition of regional borders, see Bevan 2010; Cherry 1986, pp ; and Renfrew On elite competition, see Cherry 1986, pp ; see also Cherry 1986, p. 37 and Polanyi 1957a, 1957b, 1960, and Polanyi and Dalton The concept and then by Earle For an up to date critical review of the redistributive approach, see Nakassis et al and Earle 2002 (especially pp. 11 and ff.) and The term and concept of redistribution, introduced by Polanyi, was expanded first by Sahlins (Sahlins 1972, but already present in Sahlins 1958 and 1968), Renfrew (Renfrew 1972), and Service (Service 1975). It was then redefined by Earle in the late 1970s (Earle 1977), Halstead (e.g., Halstead 1981a and 1981b, Halstead and O Shea 1982, Halstead 2011), and more recently, by a colloquium organized by Nakassis, Galaty, and Parkinson (Nakassis et al. 2011, particularly Galaty et al. 2011).! 119!

144 supply of food and products. 279 As such, on a social level, the redistributive system requires the presence of a ranked society, with the elite in control of the concentration and allocation of goods to other social classes. 280 In fact, with redistribution, an elite comes to exert a strict control over the flow of commodities and over any surplus. Access to the surplus allows this elite to fund its activities and institutions and, thus, to promote and legitimize its own role within society. Based on his interpretation of the island as a redistributive system, Halstead describes Minoan Crete as a network of small-scale polities, each one specializing in a specific type of staple production (through diversification). 281 Individual regions (for Cretan polities, Halstead suggests an area of no more than 400 square km) 282 exchange commodities and favors. For Halstead, topographically, Crete s diverse landscape naturally favors diversification in crop production and differentiation among regions. In order to prevent hardship during bad years, each region was forced to produce what Halstead calls a normal surplus that could also be exchanged for tokens (social storage). 283 The uneven!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 279 Renfrew 2010, pp Based on Earle s work, Halstead (Halstead 1981b, 2011, and Halstead and O Shea 1982) sees redistribution as more akin to what Earle defined as mobilization, that is, the recruitment of goods and services for the benefit of a group not coterminous with the contributing members (Earle 1977, p. 215; Cherry 1978 also agrees with this interpretation). 280 Earle 1997, pp. 7-9 and E.g. Halstead 1981b, pp Christakis disagrees with a reconstruction of Neopalatial Crete as redistributive. From his study of storage facilities, he argues that redistribution was typical only of certain periods of Minoan history: while there is evidence of staple storage in the Protopalatial palaces, in the Neopalatial period, the palatial storage potential reaches extremely low numbers, proving that storage was now dedicated to other types of items. Christakis 2008, pp and ; Christakis 2011, p Halstead and O Shea 1982, p Halstead 1989, p. 73 and ff., based on Sahlins 1972, p O Shea defined social storage as a transaction for which food is exchanged for some non-food token (O Shea 1981, p. 169), where tokens represent an indirect and more stable and therefore secure form of storage, such as prestige items, that can be stored if not hoarded and re-exchanged for food in moments of need. Halstead applied the theory of social storage to the redistributive character of the Bronze Age economic organizations (Halstead 1981b, pp ; 1994, pp ).! 120!

145 accumulation of tokens triggers the emergence of an elite that manages the centralization, storing, and usage of economic surplus. In Crete, the emergence and decline of each regional polity is affected by its role within the exchange system and, more specifically, by how much its commodities are needed for exchange. Moreover, the elite groups in power are able to manipulate their economic control to acquire more privileges, and social and political status. Halstead identifies an important shift in the Minoan economic organization: during the Protopalatial period the palatial storage mainly concerned foodstuffs, but in the Neopalatial period this role is played by the villas, while palaces are used to store tokens, items of conspicuous consumption. 284 The managerial elite, therefore, in Halstead s view, switched from a focus on serving the community (Protopalatial) to a focus on empowering itself (Neopalatial). For Halstead, the elite is exploitative and parasitic, in contrast to Service and Sahlin s (but also Renfrew s) benevolent group that helped the disadvantaged. 285 Corroborating Cherry and Halstead scenarios, the study of Minoan administrative practices has also produced a view of the island as subdivided into regions that were politically independent (or semi-independent) and economically self-sufficient, during both the Protopalatial and Neopalatial periods. 286 Ilse Schoep defines Cretan society as heterarchical, without a strict hierarchical ranking or fixed power relations, in which political power was in the hands of factions or oligarchies. 287 Schoep s observation on a!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 284 Linear A documents support this scenario: Christakis 2008, p E.g., Halstead 1981b, p Service 1962, pp ; 1975, chapter 4, particularly p. 75; Sahlins 1972, pp Christakis 2008, p. 123, shares Halstead s view. 286 Schoep 1999, p. 212; 2002b, pp Weingarten 1999, p. 353: in Neopalatial Crete [ ] there is nobody to lay down the law, no single administrative rule, but rather closely connected, but local developments in administration. For a synthetic view on seal administration, see Weingarten See Schoep 2002c, p. 30, for factionalism; and Weingarten 1999, p. 353, for oligarchies.! 121!

146 lack of standardization in Linear A administrative practice, from sign shapes to document types and recorded commodities, supports the idea of local administrations: Linear A documents were meant to circulate within elite groups that had their own recording and managerial strategies and that were not necessarily responding to a centralized administrative system. In her view, the common adoption of Linear A is not evidence for an overarching power, such as Knossos, as it is held by the scholarship supporting the Knossian domination of Crete. Instead, it is an effect of Renfrew s symbolic entrainment. 288 The evidence from Neopalatial seals shows that both the imagery and the manufacture quality of some are consistent and suggest a central palatial workshop, which could well be located at Knossos, without necessarily implying a political domination tout court. 289 Schoep study suggests that palaces were not centers of political, economic, and social supremacy but rather embodied an ideological and ceremonial power with its emphasis on large spaces, seemingly for gatherings. 290 Powers were subdivided among a number of places: while villas functioned as economic centers, other places within the same region could have held control over other aspects of sociopolitical and economic organization, such as craft production, which are poorly represented in both villas and palaces. 291 The Political Power in the Independent Polities The hypothesis that Neopalatial Crete comprised independent polities emphasizes the decisive role of certain social groups in the settlement of local politics. In this view,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 288 Renfrew 1986, p Webb and Weingarten 2012, p For example, Schoep 2002a and 2002c. 291 Schoep 2002c, p. 29.! 122!

147 political power is established through active competition among the local social groups, referred to as elites, oligarchies, or factions. Elites and factions, which can also include non-elite individual, can be understood as oligarchies. Yet, while elite describes the top tier of the social ranking, factions are defined as loose corporate bodies, whose identity is not founded on social status but rather on ideological and cosmological factors. 292 As a result, it is possible that elites and factions work and organize themselves internally in very different ways, likely representing also overlapping groups where non-elite members of the society can partake to factions. Nevertheless, for the purposes of this chapter, the potential internal differences between elites and factions are irrelevant, since in both interpretations the focus is on social groups that hold political control, and that are believed to be able to trigger a change in material culture style; therefore, reconstructions of Neopalatial politics that include either elites or factions are considered together here. The peer polity interaction theory stressed the importance of interaction (intended in the variety of ways discussed above) and emulation as factors that trigger socio-political change in the independent polities. In the reconstruction of the economic organization of Crete, this idea is further articulated: the organization of the redistributive system causes the emergence of local elites, whose interest is to stay in power by accumulating tokens through (economic) interactions and exchanges with other polities. As we have seen, particularly during the Neopalatial period, redistribution is not intended as mere allocation of foodstuff, but also through the organization of ceremonial feasts for the community. 293 Feasting is argued to provide a quick way to distribute some of the agricultural surplus among the people, while at the same time it allows the elite to keep!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 292 Brumfiel and Fox 1994, p. 5 and pp. 8-9; Hamilakis 1998b, pp ; 2002b, p. 195; Schoep 2002a, p Halstead 1997, p. 106.! 123!

148 surplus in the palace for its own purposes. 294 Feasts also offer an occasion for elites to legitimize their power and to engage in conspicuous consumption of large quantities of food and/or with the display of prestige objects. 295 Thus, in this scenario, feasts were the moments and places where group identities and social roles were established and/or negotiated. The work of Yiannis Hamilakis on oil and wine production has contributed to this aspect of the debate on the Neopalatial sociopolitical organization, emphasizing the pivotal role of factions in the political balances of Crete. Hamilakis agrees that political power and relations were determined through feasting, and not by virtue of a fixed sociopolitical hierarchy. 296 He criticizes earlier political reconstructions of Minoan Crete that have taken for granted a European hierarchical society, which, he contends, is not supported by the archaeological evidence. 297 Instead, Minoan politics appear to have been fluid, and open competition for control over material and social resources was customary. 298 Feasting and conspicuous consumption were arenas in which similar competitions took place. 299 In this interpretation, the supremacy of one group or faction is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 294 Christakis 2008, p. 123; 2011, p See also Christakis 2008, p. 124 for corollary discussion. 295 Hamilakis 1996, p. 25; 1998a; 1998b, p. 233; 1999, pp ; Sherratt 1987; Dietler and Hayden See Dabney et al for a case study from mainland Greece. 296 Hamilakis 2002a, pp Hamilakis 1998b, p. 233: Debates on political and social dynamics in Bronze Age Crete are still influenced by the stereotypes which portray Minoan Crete as a high European civilization with strong hierarchical structures, kings and aristocracy. The same concept is expressed in Hamilakis 2002b, pp , and Hamilakis 2002a, Introduction. 298 See for example Schoep 2002a, 2010, and Schoep 2002a, p. 118.! 124!

149 short-lived and only lasts until another faction subverts the temporary order. 300 For Hamilakis, since the faction (and not a region or a palace) is the motor of the Minoan society, the concept of well-defined political territories and regionalism is an impossible scenario. 301 As a consequence, the political dynamic is quite unstable and prone to social unrest. All is malleable; all is unstable in Minoan Crete. Synthesis The sections above outlined the principal scholarly contributions on the hypothesis of independent polities in Neopalatial Crete. Because this chapter considers together different hypotheses that come to compatible conclusions, their relevant points of agreement are summarized. At least three components of the interpretation of Neopalatial Crete as independent polities should be noted. First, it criticizes the hypothesis, discussed previously, that Knossos played a dominant political role, contesting the interpretation of archaeological evidence cited in support of Knossian control of Crete during the Neopalatial period; other explanations have been proposed for both the perceived cultural uniformity and the predominance of Knossian-looking material culture, including a temporary (however strong) victory of the Knossian faction. Second, the scenario of independent polities explicitly or implicitly infers political control in the hands of social groups (elites/factions/oligarchies), whose ascendancy or defeat is established through active competition (for example, during communal feasts).!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 300 For Hamilakis, the palaces could represent one faction s brief success, but not the expression of a fixed or stable political setup (Hamilakis 1998b, p. 234). As such, in his view a Knossian domination of Crete throughout the Neopalatial period is implausible: while Knossian factions might have gained control at some point, it was certainly short-lived and not necessarily over the entire island. 301 Hamilakis 2002b, p. 198; 2002a, pp ! 125!

150 As a result, Minoan politics are seen as an extremely competitive field where selfish elites/factions/oligarchies foster dependent relationships among their subjects. 302 Finally, by emphasizing the role of local social groups, the interpretation of independent polities supports regionalism instead of a pan-cretan perspective. Interactions among different regions are crucial for the understanding of the political organization of Crete in this interpretation. Regionalism is discussed in greater detail below. Problems in the Archaeology of Politics in Crete The interpretations of Knossian dominance and of independent polities both present plausible scenarios that are based on archaeological evidence. In fact, the two scenarios are not necessarily mutually exclusive and, indeed, could have coexisted. As already mentioned, in a situation of strong competition, it is feasible that the Knossian social groups (elites/factions/oligarchies) managed to impose their control at some point, which would explain, for example, the perceived homogeneity in culture (e.g., the diffusion of Knossos architectural style). By the same token, however, the duration of the Knossian control might not have lasted long or, simply, was unstable. Nevertheless, the debate between these two political interpretations may not be capable of resolution, because there is no definitive evidence in support of one type of political organization or the other. The same archaeological evidence mainly the palaces, administration, architecture, and pottery has been cited in support of different reconstructions. Moreover, there is no certainty as to which class(es) of material culture are most likely to reflect political dynamics.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 302 Christakis 2008, p. 123.! 126!

151 Perhaps, the terminological choice and the definition of the term politics, and a clear enunciation of how we expect political dynamics to affect material culture, are at the root of the problem. 303 In the 19 th and first half of the 20 th century, studies of Minoan Crete did not explicitly focus on politics; in fact, the terms politics or political were hardly used or defined. Any discussion of political organization was considered under the umbrella of society or, in a few cases, life. 304 Indeed, reconstruction of society and social structure was thought to be the first building block in addressing broader issues such as economy, politics, and ideology. 305 The term politics was intended as descriptive of all human activities and behaviors relating to control and governance of a social group. Stylistic similarities in material culture whether in architecture, ceramics, or some other medium were interpreted as implying political domination. The Emergence of Civilisation, and the accompanying influence of processual archaeology during the 1970s, introduced an interest in definitions of aspects of sociopolitical organization. 306 The use of broad terms, such as society to cover all aspects of human interaction, started to be abandoned, especially because the investigation of society as a whole had become less popular. Sharper focus on more specific aspects of human social activities and organizations (e.g., economy or the emergence of complex societies) resulted in more pressure to define the concepts and mechanisms involved. For!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 303 Branigan Pendlebury 1939, p. 270 and ff., includes any discussion of the social, economic, and political organization under the title Minoan Life. So does, for example, Hutchinson Driessen The first chapter of Emergence titled Civilisation is a famous manifesto on the definition of this term, its features, and its implications for archaeological studies. For a more recent appraisal of the themes proposed in Emergence, see Barrett and Halstead 2004.! 127!

152 example, Cherry warns about the serious implications for research and interpreting results from the lack of definition of terms like state or expressions like complex society. 307 Subsequently, however, the need for definitions has produced new terms, such as the hybrids political culture or political economy, which ultimately are confusing, especially with regard to the archaeological evidence that can best inform them. 308 In a recent contribution, Knappett has proposed to solve the terminological problem of politics by breaking this single word, politics, into a trinity of smaller, more manageable units: material relations (economy), social relations (politics), and social meanings (ideology/culture). 309 Although a promising step, it has not resolved the classes of archaeological evidence that might register social relations and/or social meanings. The following sections demonstrate that Myrtos-Pyrgos provides a good case to examine the issues related to the study of politics in Minoan Crete, particularly with reference to the information that can be extrapolated from different categories of objects. MYRTOS-PYRGOS AND POLITICS The Protopalatial and Neopalatial political organization of Myrtos-Pyrgos has been the topic of several contributions by Cadogan and Knappett. The reconstructions fit well within the hypotheses discussed in the previous section: while Protopalatial Myrtos- Pyrgos suggests a system of independent polities centered around the palaces, Neopalatial Myrtos-Pyrgos seems under the control of Knossos.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 307 Cherry 1984, pp Knappett 2002, p Knappett 2002, p. 171 and ff.! 128!

153 The style of the Protopalatial pottery from the site has revealed similarities between Myrtos-Pyrgos and Malia. 310 Such similarities, seen also in other crafts, 311 have been interpreted as evidence that close cultural and political connections existed between Myrtos-Pyrgos and the palatial site of Malia and that the two sites were part of a Malia- Lasithi state, a culturally and politically unified region defined by a similar culture that was centered at Malia and extended south to Myrtos-Pyrgos and at least as far east as the Ierapetra isthmus. 312 Both Cadogan and Knappett, aiming to clarify the nature of the relations between Myrtos-Pyrgos and Malia, have further refined this hypothesis. 313 In their study, the fine tableware from Myrtos-Pyrgos, characterized by a very elaborate and detailed surface decoration, is very comparable with the production at Malia and revealed similar modes of production. 314 Other ceramic groups, however, including reddish brown (cooking) and pithos ware, do not show the same degree of similarity to their Maliote counterparts, suggesting instead a more traditional production method. 315 Interpreting pottery as an ideological medium and fine tableware as meant for conspicuous consumption by the elite, Knappett has inferred that the similarities between Myrtos-Pyrgos and Malia suggest a strong link in elite ideology. 316 The differences, however, demonstrate that everyday activities, such as cooking or storing practices, were not affected by Maliote examples and followed local traditions. As such, Knappett has suggested that the Malia-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 310 Poursat 1987 and 1988; Cadogan 1990 and 1995; Knappett Cadogan 2013b, pp Haggis 2007, p See Cadogan 2013b for a recent reevaluation of the issue. 314 Knappett 1999, Cadogan 2013b. 315 Knappett 1999 and 2000, Cadogan 2013b. 316 Knappett 1999, p For further discussion on the Malia-Lasithi connection, see also Betancourt 2007 and 2012.! 129!

154 Lasithi state was decentralized, meaning that its center, Malia, had very little if any impact on the periphery. 317 Nevertheless, because of the links between elites, in his view, Myrtos-Pyrgos can be considered under the ideological, social, cultural, and ultimately political influence of Malia. 318 The political relations of Myrtos-Pyrgos seem to change in the Neopalatial period: from a part of the Malia-Lasithi state, it becomes under the influence (whether political or simply cultural) of Knossos. This hypothesis is based on Cadogan s analysis of the architectural style of the Country House at Myrtos-Pyrgos. The presence of administrative documents, storage spaces, and perhaps ritual areas, suggests that Country House played a central role in the socio-political organization of the site, as one of Crete s Neopalatial villas. 319 The architecture and building materials (ashlar, gypsum, dressed poros limestone, and purple limestone) 320 of the Country House support this interpretation. Cadogan argues that the Country House is in many ways a replica of palatial Knossian architecture, so much so that he hypothesizes Knossian craftsmanship for the construction of the building. 321 For Cadogan, such Knossian influence, especially considered together with the violent destruction at Myrtos-Pyrgos at the close of the Protopalatial period, could represent a change of guard from the previous period: from the Malia-Lasithi state to a Knossian culture. 322!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 317 Knappett 1999, pp Cadogan 1978, 1990, 1995; Knappett Cadogan 1997, pp Cadogan 1978, pp ; Cadogan 1992, p See for example Cadogan 1971c and A similar conclusion was reached by Davaras in his architectural study of the villa at Markygialos (Davaras 1997). 322 Cadogan 2013b, 1990, 1995, though in nuce even in earlier contributions, such as Cadogan 1978.! 130!

155 The analysis of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 adds a critical new element to the discussion about the political organization of Myrtos-Pyrgos; the definition of a distinct southeastern sub-region of Neopalatial pottery, to which the ceramics from Myrtos-Pyrgos belonged, is particularly relevant to this discussion. This conclusion has two important implications for the study of Minoan political organization. On the one hand, it sheds new light on the perceived cultural homogeneity of the Neopalatial period, which does not affect all aspects of a community s life: in Myrtos-Pyrgos, pottery production tends to follow local trends and traditions and does so conservatively. Although some pottery shapes (like the hemispherical cup) can be found in all parts of Crete, not all shapes are represented everywhere on the island (e.g., the rounded cup or the fruitstand). Moreover, as discussed in Chapters 4 and 5, similar shapes are rendered in different ways that apparently better suited the local consumers (e.g., the in-and-out bowl). Thus on closer inspection, the Neopalatial ceramic assemblage at Myrtos-Pyrgos appears far less homogeneous than expected. On the other hand, the results of the stylistic analysis of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 present a cautionary tale against extrapolating a political scenario based on a single class of material culture in isolation. While the architecture of the Country House at Myrtos-Pyrgos displays Knossian influence, the pottery assemblage stayed within the local eastern and southeastern tradition, as it had previously during the Protopalatial period. It is difficult and perhaps methodologically unsound to reconcile such diverse stylistic trajectories into a unitary interpretation of Myrtos-Pyrgos political or even cultural role. Instead, these stylistic observations raise questions about the classes of material culture most likely to register political changes, which could therefore be used! 131!

156 to reconstruct political dynamics. Thus, if Knappett s analysis of the Protopalatial fine tableware is applied to the Neopalatial pottery, the stylistic micro- and macro-regions proposed in this thesis could suggest that, while a common elite ideology generally existed in the east of Crete, local differences or variations co-existed within that common ideology. By projection, it could be argued that an eastern elite ideology, as expressed through a common ceramic stylistic narrative, could have been adapted to local needs or habits as exhibited in stylistic variations on a micro level. While perfectly plausible, this scenario does not take into account the Knossian emulation in the most important building at Myrtos-Pyrgos, the Country House. CERAMIC REGIONS AND POLITICAL SIGNIFICANCE Underpinning the idea of region and regionalism are observable similarities in material culture and/or human behavior (e.g., funerary practices). In material culture, such similarities are based on stylistic analysis that takes into consideration both the visible features of an object and the manufacturing processes. Based on the identification of similar stylistic patterns, material culture can be organized into discrete groups, at times distinctive of a specific geographical area or region. For example, in the study of Neopalatial ceramic style, it is commonly agreed that central and eastern Crete represent two separate regions and that, within central Crete, the north (Knossos) is different from the south (Mesara). 323 Although regional stylistic distinctions are clearly visible on the strewing table, their definition and significance for Minoan society is a much more challenging issue. Differences between what is local production and what is not are bound to emerge in any!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 323 Van de Moortel 2002, Momigliano 2007b, Hatzaki 2007, Knappett and Cunningham 2003.! 132!

157 pottery study and, at times, it is even possible to map the geographical spread of a particular ceramic style. 324 It is, however, hard to determine whether ceramic regions correspond to cultural, political, ideological, and/or symbolic regions. 325 To what degree do local styles reflect sociopolitical or cultural mechanisms, instead of being just craft? In the case of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos, it is tempting to equate the existence of a southeastern ceramic region to a southeastern polity that was both stylistically and politically independent. But is this a legitimate assumption? Pottery as a Means of Political Reconstruction Pottery and pottery production have been connected to a society s political and/or cultural organization through two methods of study: first, through the analysis of style, as a means to disseminate a common message; second, through the analysis of the production process, as a way to study the social interactions involved in the manufacture of ceramic vessels. The first approach privileges the stylistic analysis of the pottery and, thus, the study of its morphological characteristics (shape, decoration, surface finishing, etc.). This method focuses on the pot as a finished product, considering its social history and its contexts of use (i.e., consumption). 326 The role of the consumer is seen as pivotal, in particular, that of the elites who astutely and consciously manipulated the available media in order to disseminate their own political or ideological message. As a result, because of this direct involvement of the elite, pottery style could have been used to spread cultural!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 324 Whitelaw forthcoming. 325 Cadogan 2011b and 2013b (especially pp ) address the difficulty in distinguishing or matching cultural and political regions. 326 Appadurai 1986, p. 34.! 133!

158 and ideological messages, synonyms of cultural and ideological supremacy and, thus, political control. Under the broad umbrella of stylistic analysis are two views of the social role of style in material culture; at the heart of the debate is the issue of whether objects should be considered passive recipients of social and cultural messages or whether they are active agents able to shape the definition of social and cultural identities. 327 In interpretations in which style is seen as a passive result of the social environment, style does not engage with the social environment, nor do the users of pottery conceive of it as source of information exchange. 328 Instead, it is the user that may or may not attach some meaning to a particular style. 329 The alternate interpretation of style, on the contrary, sees it as a cultural phenomenon related to particular behaviors. 330 Stylistic choices are viewed as deliberate: material culture is selected on the basis of its visibility and then imbued with specific stylistic messages. 331 As a result, the style of material culture is never casual and is used to communicate various types of information, from identity (whether group or individual)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 327 Deetz 1965; Hill 1970; Longacre 1968 and 1970; Pollock See Sinopoli 1991, p. 119 and ff. for a summary of these approaches. 328 For example, Sackett argues that style is banal and ubiquitous and that its adoption is somewhat arbitrary: he describes style as isochrestic, the outcome of several possible explanations or reasons for its variability, all of which are the result of a group s own tradition of manufacture (Sackett 1985, pp , countered by Wiessner 1985). See also: Sackett 1977, for a manifesto of his method; Lemonnier 1992, p. 89 and ff., for a discussion of Sackett s interpretation of style; and Schiffer 1999 for a more general overview on the impact of human behavior on style. 329 Sackett 1985, p Kroeber and Richardson 1940; Kroeber 1952 and 1963; Binford 1963 and 1965; Friedrich 1970; Wilmsen 1973; Braun 1977 and Kroeber 1952, p. 402, defines style as a selfconsistent way of behaving or as doing things carefully chosen from alternative ways of doing [ ] And it is selective with references to values [ ]. 331 Wobst 1977 and See also Conkey 1978 and 1980 for a similar understanding of style.! 134!

159 to economic wealth, cultural affiliation, and so forth. 332 In this view, objects and their style are active social agents. 333 A position in between these two arguments does not consider style (in particular pottery style) a sufficient tool by itself to address issues of social and political organization; in fact, grasping the origin of stylistic variability is challenging or even impossible. 334 Instead of trying to decipher stylistic messages from the pottery itself, it is suggested that data be incorporated into the ceramic stylistic study from the analysis of other classes of material culture (such as textiles), written documents, and ethnographic work. 335 Underlying some of the models that offer reconstructions of Minoan politics is the assumption that style is a way of expressing oneself and of communicating. This assumption is fundamental to the hypothesis of the Knossian domination of the island during the Neopalatial period: the identification of what is perceived as a typically Knossian style in pottery has enabled the study of its diffusion and the identification of sites in which the adoption of the Knossian style marks a shift in the local production. 336 It is also an argument for the hypothesis of independent polities where factions (or elites) compete during communal feasting events. Since factions meet and engage in a public negotiation of social roles and political identities, their ceramic vessels, as containers of!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 332 Wobst Wiessner has refined Wobst s definition of style: in her words, style is the formal variation in material culture that transmits information about personal and social identity (emphasis added) (Wiessner 1983, p. 256). 333 For a modern case study on this particular interpretation of style in New World archaeology, see Whalen and Minnis Sinopoli 1999, p Sinopoli 1988; 1991, p. 121 and ff.; 1993; 1999, pp It is important to keep in mind here that the work of both Wobst and Wiessner is strongly based on ethnographic analysis. For an example of this approach on Greek soil, see Morgan and Whitelaw For example, Popham 1984, p. 180 Text; Wiener 1984 and 1987, pp ; 2007, pp ; Platon 2004; Haggis 2007.! 135!

160 food and drink, play a decisive role as conspicuous vehicles of status messages: they could show who is who, who matters, who is in charge, and who is able to purchase the most striking vessels. The second method for connecting pottery to sociopolitical dynamics focuses on the study of the manufacturing process of the pottery. The assumption behind this approach is that craft production is influenced by the social, economic, and political context. 337 The emphasis is not on the pot as artwork a finished product to contemplate in order to evaluate its quality and the way it impacts the consumer; instead, pottery is studied as artifact as well as the product of specific social mechanism. 338 This approach owes many of its theoretical premises to the chaîne opératoire methodology developed in France by André Leroi-Gourhan and explored by Pierre Lemonnier and, more recently, by Olivier Gosselain. 339 Lemonnier, in particular, emphasizes the ways in which a technology is carefully selected or rejected by its users, whether consciously or not, depending on traditions, expectations, technical expertise, and so forth. As a result, in his view, technology is a deliberate choice and, as such, must be regarded as a matter of practice and social behavior. 340 Through the study of clay recipes, procurement of raw material, tools, and manufacturing process, the aim of this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 337 See for example, Knappett 1997, pp , on retrieving information on socio-political settings: I would argue that by examining the processes of material culture we might have a better opportunity to understand the workings of the state, if state indeed it is. What I have in mind by processes is production activity, the technological inputs behind the bringing forth of each ceramic object (italics in original). See also Knappett 2004 and Macdonald and Knappett 2007 (pp ) for an application of this approach. 338 See Knappett 2005 for the distinction between artwork and artifact. 339 Leroi-Gourhan 1943 and Gosselain 2000, 2002, 2008, and For a definition of chaîne opératoire and a history of the related methodology, see Sellet Perlès 1987, p. 23, defines it as the succession of mental operations and technical gestures, in order to satisfy a need (immediate or not), according to a preexisting project. 340 Lemonnier 1992, pp. 2 and 9; Lemonnier 1993, Introduction, in particular pp. 8-9, for the theoretical enquiry on the choice.! 136!

161 approach is to uncover the social and cultural reasons behind Lemonnier s technological choice. 341 In Minoan archaeology, the microscopic analysis of pottery (through petrography or SEM) has had important results for its classification and interpretation. On one hand, it has deepened our understanding of pottery production and consumption as two separate social mechanisms. This in turn has opened new perspectives on the interpretation of pottery distribution. This type of study of ceramic production, for example, has shown the high degree of sophistication required to make Prepalatial pottery, visible even in the selection and handling of the raw materials. 342 As a result, this research method refuted the assumption that the Prepalatial Minoan society was not complex and that craft specialization, including the production of ceramics, only appeared with the palaces. 343 On the other hand, the study of the clay recipes, combined with the stylistic analysis, contributes to the identification of discrete areas with similar ceramic traditions and, hence, to ceramic regionalism. 344 These characteristics, seen as a common language in pottery manufacture, are interpreted as a deliberate choice. As such, they can unveil aspects of social and political organization. 345 In conclusion, whether through the analysis of style or the manufacturing process itself, pottery has been identified as one way to tease out aspects of socio-political organization. In what follows, therefore, I will address the question as to whether to ceramic regions are likely to correspond political or cultural regions.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 341 Lemonnier 1992 and Day and Wilson 1998, Wilson and Day 1994, Day et al. 1997, Day and Kiriatzi Tomkins and Schoep 2010, Schoep and Tomkins 2012, Tomkins 2012, Todaro For example, Whitelaw et al. 1997, Day and Wilson 1998, Day and Kiriatzi 1999, Nodarou Nodarou 2007, pp ! 137!

162 Regionalism in Pottery Studies: Looking for Meanings Ceramic regionalism provides important insights into the organization of craft production. If pottery represents directly political or cultural dynamics, then must specific political or cultural shifts be identified behind changing ceramic trends? For the Neopalatial micro- and macro-regions proposed in this dissertation, such ceramic trends could suggest the presence of a common culture (eastern Crete) with local differences or variations (southeastern Crete). By projection, it could be argued that an eastern elite ideology, as expressed through a common ceramic stylistic narrative, could have been adapted to local needs or habits as shown in stylistic variations on a micro level. However, the relationships between political and cultural dynamics and the ways pottery may or may not register them remain fuzzy and difficult to define; 346 regionalism may provide a handy tool to define them, but it could also lead to important misinterpretations. Before drawing cultural or political conclusions, it is important to keep in mind that other classes of material culture could present a different reconstruction of regionalism than the one provided by pottery analysis. As noted above, at Myrtos- Pyrgos (as well as at Makrygialos, also in the southeast) the architecture shows stylistic and constructional similarities with contemporary Knossian buildings. Architecturally, therefore, Myrtos-Pyrgos cannot be considered as part of a southeastern or eastern region. Thus, ceramic regions do not correspond necessarily to architectural regions (if such a phenomenon can indeed be observed). More importantly, if treated in isolation, pottery and architecture could suggest different political and cultural scenarios for the same site, producing misleading result. While architecture could support the idea of a Knossian!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 346 Cadogan 2013b, pp ! 138!

163 power across the island, pottery could suggest a scenario of peer polities. To which class of material culture, then, should we attribute political and cultural value? What does it mean to identify regions? Perhaps at the root of this issue is our expectation about the type of influence that rulers (and elites) could have on material culture and on our ability to identify it clearly. If the role of the elites and/or the ruling classes is also to address social needs (from the organization and management of food procurement, craft production and specialization), 347 three problems arise: 1) Would they have had an interest and active involvement in all these social activities so as to impact and affect material culture through continuity and change? 2) Would it affect only certain classes of material culture? In our case, would either architecture or pottery production feature as one of those activities which were strictly regulated? Or only one of the two, or even none? 3) Would such cultural choices be easily identifiable beyond the elite within a local context? Or were they meaningful only to certain groups of the local population? None of the problems above can be addressed adequately with the information currently available, nor, therefore can it be explained whether and how political trends and organization were registered in material culture. It is not known, nor is it knowable which classes of material culture would be chosen as more meaningful, resulting in those objects registering and transmitting such information. Specifically for Myrtos-Pyrgos, pottery and architecture can have different social impacts and diffusion. Fine tableware is portable and therefore has the potential of reaching even geographically distant places,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 347 Thomas 2000, pp. 6-9.! 139!

164 and could, therefore, be used to spread a cultural or political message throughout a certain area. 348 Architecture, instead, is confined to a place and cannot be physically moved to different locations: it can be consumed only at a local level and transmits a message of permanence. 349 It can be monumental, however, and therefore more visible. In fact, it has been convincingly argued that it is often through architecture that important political statements are made, especially in moments of significant shifts of power. 350 Thus, pottery and architecture, and by extension other categories of material culture, might reflect different ways in which a given society, or a selective portion of it, operated and represented itself, its culture and, perhaps, its identity. Ceramic regionalism cannot be interpreted more broadly than as evidence for the existence of a similar potting tradition. As a consequence, by considering its pottery, it is difficult or impossible to clarify whether Myrtos-Pyrgos was under a Knossian political power or was a peer polity during the Neopalatial period. There might have existed preferential channels, as it were, (whether in administration, architecture, or other arenas), through which a possible central power like Knossos might have affected even the cultural expression of smaller sites. However, the case study conducted in this thesis demonstrated the inability to verify whether pottery was one of these channels. The expression of power and the modalities through which it registered, if it did so, on material culture should be considered, therefore, in a more nuanced fashion. Although historically remote, an interesting example of the complexity of the ways in which a ruling power affects a society may come from some recent contributions to the issue of!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 348 For example, Wiener But see Hitchcock 2008, where architects, highly mobile and active, are seen as the channel through which particular styles are diffused. 350 Trigger 1990.! 140!

165 Romanization. In a new assessment of this cultural and political phenomenon, Woolf points out how, in Roman provinces, different classes of material culture were affected in different ways by the political rise of Rome. On one hand, a common administrative and political system can be easily discerned through the spread of the same Roman coinage, town planning, and the construction of particular public buildings (such as the basilica, the amphitheater, and so forth). 351 On the other hand, it is possible to identify, in the provinces, clear patterns of cultural diversity in a number of categories of material culture, such as epigraphy, ceramic styles, or stylistic features of coinage itself. 352 In Woolf s discussion of Romanization, the concept of a unilateral absorption of a particular cultural traits is untenable: Roman provinces were not passive recipients of a single Roman culture, but, instead, actively participated in the emergence of a new broader cultural configuration that left space for local expressions. 353 What Woolf observes in the Roman empire might not be impossible to imagine for the much smaller scale of Minoan society. Ceramic style and technology could only inform one of the many types of cultural and ideological relations that can exist within a society; their connection to a ruling political power should not be taken for granted and should be considered on a case-by-case basis. While the Neopalatial architecture of important buildings might suggest particular socio-political influences, corroborated, for example, by the adoption of a common administrative system, pottery at large tended to continue the local tradition and might have had a low impact on the diffusion of a particular ideology. Nevertheless, it would be equally wrong to expand on this last statement and conclude that no pottery had connections to elite strategies: not only has!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 351 Woolf 1997, p Woolf 1997, pp Woolf 1997, p See also Woolf 1992.! 141!

166 Knappett shown convincingly a difference in the production of what he calls domestic and elite pottery, but special distinctions could perhaps be made for high-end types of ceramic production in the Minoan repertoire, such as the Protopalatial Kamares or polychrome ware or the LM IB Marine Style. The manufacturing skills required, the restricted production, and the rarity itself make these classes of pottery inherently different from the most recurrent types of Neopalatial fine tableware. CONCLUSION This chapter has discussed the results of the stylistic analysis of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 within the broader context of the debate on the political organization of Crete. It opened by presenting the two main interpretations of political reconstruction: one that considers Knossos the leading power over the island; and the other that perceives fluidity in the power dynamics, related to the struggles of local social groups (particularly during the Protopalatial period). Within the debate on Minoan politics, the site of Myrtos-Pyrgos has been considered part of a Protopalatial Malia- Lasithi state and then under the Knossian control during the Neopalatial period. These observations have been based on the study of the Protopalatial pottery and the Neopalatial architecture. The Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2, however, suggests a different picture that enriches our perspective of the Neopalatial organization of Myrtos-Pyrgos, by demonstrating that the site belonged to a southeastern ceramic region, related to the eastern region. Thus, the architectural and the ceramic styles of Neopalatial Myrtos- Pyrgos do not align: while the pottery production followed local trends, architectural styles replicated Knossian patterns.! 142!

167 In order to evaluate whether pottery and the newly defined southeastern region could illuminate the political question, the chapter then discussed the role of pottery in political reconstructions, whether through the study of style or manufacturing process. I concluded that, while ceramic regionalism offers a good investigative tool for the study of the organization of pottery traditions and of the diffusion of stylistic trends, it does not constitute evidence for political regionalism. It therefore cannot be determined whether pottery or architecture registered the political dynamics of the Neopalatial organization at Myrtos-Pyrgos.!! 143!

168 CHAPTER 7 Conclusions This dissertation has presented the analysis of the Neopalatial pottery found within the fill of Cistern 2 at Myrtos-Pyrgos (Chapter 1 and 2). The study of this pottery contributes to our knowledge of Neopalatial ceramic production both in Myrtos-Pyrgos and southeastern Crete, an archaeologically under-explored area. In addition, the site of Myrtos-Pyrgos and its pottery have been cited in debates concerning the political organization of Protopalatial Crete. 354 Study of the Neopalatial architecture has suggested that a political shift can be detected in this period, which brought Myrtos-Pyrgos under the influence of Knossos. By examining in detail the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2, this dissertation aimed ultimately to contribute to the reconstruction of the political role of Myrtos-Pyrgos in the Neopalatial period. In addition, it evaluates the role of pottery as a tool to investigate ancient politics. In order to gain an understanding of the relationship between the pottery and the human behavior connected to its deposition in Cistern 2, I conducted a thorough analysis of the pottery s archaeological context and its stratigraphy, and linked these to wear and breakage points on the pottery sherds (Chapter 3). From this study, it emerged that the cistern was filled all at once, perhaps during the late Neopalatial period. As such, the pottery was not deposited inside the cistern during several occasions, as previously thought, but was part of a single dumping episode. The confirmation that the Neopalatial!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 354 Cadogan 1990, 1995, 1999, and 2013b; Knappett 1999, 2000, and 2002.! 144!

169 pottery in Cistern 2 had all been deposited simultaneously justified the stylistic analysis of the pottery as a unitary group with stylistic and chronological coherence. The study of the pottery (Chapter 4) revealed a rather standardized assemblage, in which the majority of the vessels, particularly in the fine ware, were manufactured according to similar criteria and technologies: same clay paste, glossy finishing, and metallic look (both in terms of shape and surface treatment). Shapes and decoration largely fit within typical Neopalatial ceramic production, with hemispherical and straightsided cups, spirals, ivy, and ripple (figs , , and ). In both shapes and decoration, however, the closest parallels to the pottery from Cistern 2 can be found at sites in east Crete, from Mochlos to Bramiana. These similarities were corroborated by the chronological study of the pottery through stylistic comparison with deposits from five other sites from around Crete, namely Knossos, Ayia Triada, Kommos, Mochlos, and Palaikastro, whose chronology is based on stratigraphy. The deposits that showed the closest comparanda with Myrtos-Pyrgos from that selection of five sites were from Mochlos and Palaikastro, in east Crete. This eastern connection of Cistern 2 s pottery was explored further in Chapter 5, where additional comparisons with pottery from Bramiana and Chrysi in the southeast suggested that the area around Ierapetra formed its own ceramic region. Thus, ceramically the southeast can be conceived as a micro-region within a macro-region, east Crete. At least during the Neopalatial era, Bramiana, Chrysi, and Myrtos-Pyrgos shared a common potting tradition, with comparable stylistic choices. The definition of the southeastern ceramic region has a significant impact on the understanding of stylistic traditions and trends in Neopalatial Crete. On one hand, it! 145!

170 refines previous knowledge of ceramic production in Crete. On the other hand, it draws interest to a smaller and more local unit of study, the region, while triggering questions concerning the socio-political meaning of ceramic regionalism. The latter was the subject of Chapter 6, which more broadly focused on the debate about the political reconstruction of Crete and the types of archaeological evidence employed to reconstruct political dynamics. There are two main interpretations of the political organization of Bronze Age Crete: one that considers Knossos the leading power over the island; and the other that emphasizes local competition among social groups, with ever-changing power dynamics. While the former organizational structure is commonly attributed to the Neopalatial period, and the latter to the Protopalatial, some scholarship has hypothesized that local power struggles were a normal feature of Cretan politics during both periods, and that Knossian supremacy was nothing but the (temporary) victory of one social group. These reconstructions are based on the study of a variety of classes of archaeological evidence, mainly palatial architecture, the administrative documents, and pottery. In previous scholarship, evidence from the site of Myrtos-Pyrgos has corroborated the main views on Minoan politics. The study of Protopalatial pottery has suggested that the site was part of a Malia-Lasithi state, since it highlighted strong stylistic and technological similarities between the pottery from Myrtos-Pyrgos and Malia. The analysis of the Neopalatial architecture at Myrtos-Pyrgos, however, has painted a different picture, where a clearly Knossian style hints to a shift of political or cultural influences. The study of the Neopalatial pottery from Cistern 2 complements the reconstruction of the site s organization, by showing that architectural and ceramic styles! 146!

171 followed different trends: Knossos vs. the southeast. Reconciling these differences and choosing whether to attribute political value to either architecture or pottery is challenging. Indeed, as discussed in Chapter 6, pottery has been employed to reconstruct politics, in Aegean as well as in New World archaeology. It is tempting, therefore, to attribute a political value to ceramic regions. However, in the present state of our knowledge, it is not possible to demonstrate that political dynamics are reflected in pottery and stylistic variability. Instead, I argued that architecture, and other types of archaeological evidence such as administrative documents, because of their closer connection to the mechanisms of power management and display, could represent better tools to investigate political dynamics. IMPLICATIONS OF THIS STUDY AND NEW RESEARCH TRAJECTORIES The results of this research could be interpreted as negative conclusions, since they challenge and ultimately reject the relevance of pottery as a tool for investigating political organization for Neopalatial Crete. On the contrary, these results suggest that more complex connections might have existed between material culture and political dynamics, and that different types of material culture might have had different meanings for the same society. The topics discussed in this dissertation offer a number of methodological and interpretive implications for Minoan archaeology in particular and, more broadly, for the archaeology of politics. Three areas of research are affected by the results of this study. First, it encourages the development of a more nuanced methodology for the investigation of sociopolitical organization in Minoan Crete. From the results above, two main points have emerged:! 147!

172 1) There is an inherent difficulty in recognizing whether or not material culture registered politics; 2) One class of evidence, in isolation, is not enough to address a complex topic such as politics. The Neopalatial pottery and architecture at Myrtos-Pyrgos, taken individually, produce two different sociopolitical scenarios: local traditions vs. Knossian emulation. While the two together could well represent two parts of the same picture, in isolation each produces a biased reconstruction. Therefore, unless it can be determined which classes of objects are impacted by political changes and dynamics, the study of material culture should be approached considering two possibilities: that, one the one hand, different classes of material culture may reflect different social mechanisms, and therefore no class necessarily has more value than another, but they all contribute to the reconstruction of the same picture; and, on the other, that the possibility should be considered that some classes of objects might not be affected by social mechanisms at all and could, instead, follow completely different trajectories. A second way in which the results of this dissertation affect the study of Minoan Crete concerns regionalism. The identification and preliminary definition of the southeast as a ceramic micro-region has implications for the research on Minoan pottery production and on ceramic regionalism as a whole. It demonstrates and reinforces the existence of local patterns of production. Furthermore, it suggests that, although often in tune with more widespread stylistic choices (i.e., specific decorative motifs or shapes), ceramic production mainly reflected the specific needs of its direct consumers. The evidence from Myrtos-Pyrgos shows that this tendency occurs diachronically, both in the Protopalatial! 148!

173 and in the Neopalatial period, suggesting that pottery production is conservative and tends to follow local traditions. In addition, the existence of macro- and micro-regions sheds new light on ceramic regionalism itself. Broad ceramic macro-regions had previously been loosely identified in the central and eastern part of Crete (Chapter 5); 355 however, more work needs to be done in order to refine the understanding of ceramic regionalism. In particular, it is necessary to try to define these regions in terms of stylistic and/or technical choices, to investigate their possible geographical catchment, and to understand their functioning as well as their relationships. Finally, working on ceramic regionalism can substantially refine the stylistic variability of Minoan pottery, both from an inter-regional and an intra-regional perspective. Inter-regionally, certain styles could be widely shared, beyond regional limits, such as shapes like the hemispherical cup (figs ) or decorative motifs like the spiral (figs ), both ubiquitous in the Neopalatial ceramic production. From an intra-regional point of view, a variety of subdivisions may be uncovered: from micro-regions including a cluster of sites to isolated styles rarely replicated, to even possible buffer zones where different styles could coexist, an aspect previously not explored in the scholarship on Neopalatial pottery. The third and last research direction tying together the themes discussed in this thesis concerns regionalism (not just ceramic) as a source of insights about some aspects of social organization. As demonstrated for southeastern Crete, the use of either ceramic or architectural styles to generate broad conclusions concerning the power structure has revealed varied but overlapping cultural trajectories. This example, combined with the ceramic regionalism discussed above, encourages consideration of the region as a!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 355 Van de Moortel 1997; Momigliano 2007b.! 149!

174 preferred unit of research. 356 This is particularly important for the work on Neopalatial Crete, which has focused more often on the cultural koiné rather than the local, regional phenomena. 357 For the Prepalatial and Protopalatial period, the existence of regionalism is a more accepted situation, with a growing number of scholarly contributions that develop this argument. 358 Neopalatial Crete, however, is still conceived to be a somewhat more unified entity, in view of the perceived cultural homogeneity. While there is no reason to imagine that the cultural koiné corresponds to a lack of regional cultures, it is perhaps time to deepen our understanding of Neopalatial regionalism, a trend that has seen already some scholarly contributions but that, admittedly, is still in its infancy. Focusing on the region as unit of investigation might produce surprising results that would not deny importance to the koiné, but that would ultimately allow us to unfold and explain the complex mechanisms of Neopalatial society.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 356 See also Adams 2004 and 2006 for similar conclusions. 357 With some notable exceptions, such as Tsipopoulou E.g., Legarra Herrero 2009 and 2012 for Prepalatial funerary practices.! 150!

175 BIBLIOGRAPHY Adams, E Power and Ritual in Neopalatial Crete: A Regional Comparison, WorldArch 36, pp Social Strategies and Spatial Dynamics in Neopalatial Crete: An Analysis of the North-Central Area, AJA 110, pp Alexiou, S Minoan Civilization. Herakleion Αρχαιότητες και µνηµεία κεντρικής Κρήτης, ανασκαφές -σωστικές έρευνες, ArchDelt 30, p Alusik, T Defensive Architecture of Prehistoric Crete (BAR-IS 1637), Oxford Enclosure Walls of Minoan Crete, in SOMA 2007: Proceedings of the XI Symposium on Mediterranean Archaeology, Istanbul Technical university April 2007, ed. C. Özkan Aygün, Oxford, pp Apostolakou, V., P. P. Betancourt, and T. M. Brogan The Minoan Settlement on Chryssi and its Murex Dye Industry, in Kosmos: Jewellery, Adornment and Textiles in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 13th International Aegean Conference/13e Rencontre égéenne internationale, University of Copenhagen, Danish National Research Foundation s Centre for Textile Research, April 2010 (Aegaeum 33), eds. M.-L. Nosch and R. Laffineur, Leuven and Liège, pp Appadurai, A The Social Life of Things. Commodities in Cultural Perspective, Cambridge. Barber, R. L. N Phylakopi 1911 and the History of the Later Cycladic Bronze! 151!

176 Age, BSA 69, pp Chapter 6: The Middle Cycladic Pottery, in Excavations at Phylakopi in Melos (BSA Supplementary Volume 42), eds. C. Renfrew, N. Brodie, C. Morris, and C. Scarre, London, pp Banou, E. S An Introduction to the LM IB Pottery from Poros: A Response to Metaxia Tsipopoulou and Emanuela Alberti, in LM IB Pottery: Relative Chronology and Regional Differences. Acts of a Workshop Held at the Danish Institute at Athens in Collaboration with the INSTAP Study Centre for East Crete, June 2007 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 11), eds. T. M. Brogan and E. Hallager, Athens, pp Barnard, K. A Transition, Production and Standardization in Minoan Ceramics: A View from Neopalatial Mochlos (diss. University of Pennsylvania). Barnard, K. A., and T. M. Brogan Mochlos IB: Period III. Neopalatial Settlement on the Coast: The Artisans Quarter and the Farmhouse at Chalinomouri. The Neopalatial Pottery, Philadelphia Pottery of the Late Neopalatial Periods at Mochlos, in LM IB Pottery: Relative Chronology and Regional Differences. Acts of a Workshop Held at the Danish Institute at Athens in Collaboration with the INSTAP Study Centre for East Crete, June 2007 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 11), eds. T. M. Brogan and E. Hallager, Athens, pp Barrett, J. C., and P. Halstead, eds The Emergence of Civilisation Revisited (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 6), Oxford. Betancourt, P. P East Cretan White-on-dark Ware. Studies on a Handmade! 152!

177 Pottery of the Early to Middle Minoan Periods, Philadelphia Kommos II. The Final Neolithic through the Middle Minoan III Pottery, Princeton Lasithi and the Malia-Lasithi State, in Krinoi kai Limenes: Studies in Honor of Joseph and Maria Shaw (Prehistory Monographs 22), Philadelphia, pp Trade and Interconnections in Lasithi between EM II and MM I, the Evidence from the Ayios Charalambos Cave, in Back to the Beginning. Reassessing Social and Political Complexity on Crete During the Early and Middle Bronze Age, eds. I. Schoep, P. Tomkins, and J. Driessen, Oxford and Oakville, pp Betancourt, P. P., V. Apostolakou, and T. M. Brogan The Workshop for Making Dyes at Pefka, Crete, in Kosmos: Jewellery, Adornment and Textiles in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 13th International Aegean Conference/13e Rencontre égéenne internationale, University of Copenhagen, Danish National Research Foundation s Centre for Textile Research, April 2010 (Aegaeum 33), eds. M.-L. Nosch and R. Laffineur, Leuven and Liège, pp Betancourt, P. P., and N. Marinatos The Minoan Villa, in The Function of the Minoan Villa : Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 6-8 June 1992, ed. R. Hägg, Stockholm, pp Betancourt, P. P., and J. S. Silverman The Cretan Collection in the University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, Vol. II: Pottery from Gournia (University! 153!

178 Museum Monograph 72). Betancourt, P. P., M. G. Ciaccio, B. Crowell, J. M. Donohe, and R. C. Green Ceramic Stands. A Group of Domestic and Ritual Objects from Crete and the Near East, Expedition 26, pp Bevan, A Stone Vessels and Values in the Bronze Age Mediterranean, Cambridge Political Geography and Palatial Crete, JMA 23, pp Bignasca, A. M I kernoi circolari in Oriente e in Occidente: strumenti di culto e immagini cosmiche, Freiburg (Switzerland) and Göttingen. Binford, L.R A Proposed Attribute List for the Description and Classification of Projectile Points, in Miscellaneous Studies in Typology and Classification (Anthropological Papers 19), ed. A. M. White and L. R. Binford, Ann Arbor, pp Archaeological Systematics and the Study of Culture Process, AmerAnt 31: pp Branigan, K Some Observations on State Formation in Crete, in Problems in Greek Prehistory, ed. E. French and K. A. Wardle, Bristol, pp Braun, D. P Middle Woodland - Early Late Woodland Social Change in the Prehistoric Central Midwestern U.S, Ann Arbor Pots as Tools, in Archaeological Hammers and Theories, ed. J. A. Moore and A. S. Keene, New York, pp Brogan, T. M., P. P. Betancourt, and V. Apostolakou The Purple Dye Industry of Eastern Crete, in Kosmos: Jewellery, Adornment and Textiles in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 13th International Aegean Conference/13e! 154!

179 Rencontre égéenne internationale, University of Copenhagen, Danish National Research Foundation s Centre for Textile Research, April 2010 (Aegaeum 33), eds. M.-L. Nosch and R. Laffineur, Leuven and Liège, pp Brogan, T. M., and E. Hallager LM IB Pottery: Relative Chronology and Regional Differences. Acts of a Workshop Held at the Danish Institute at Athens in Collaboration with the INSTAP Study Centre for East Crete, June 2007 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 11), Athens. Brogan, T. M., C. Sofianou, and J. E. Morrison The LM IB pottery from Papadiokampos: a response to Leonidas Vokotopoulos, in LM IB Pottery: Relative Chronology and Regional Differences. Acts of a Workshop Held at the Danish Institute at Athens in Collaboration with the INSTAP Study Centre for East Crete, June 2007 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 11), eds. T. M. Brogan and E. Hallager, Athens, pp Brumfiel, E. M., and J. W. Fox Factional Competition and Political Development in the New World, Cambridge. Cadogan, G. 1971a. Excavations at Pirgos, Mirtos, Crete, AJA 75: p b. Excavations at Pyrgos, Myrtos, ArchDelt 26, pp c. Was There a Minoan Landed Gentry? BICS 18, pp Myrtos. Pyrgos Excavations, ArchDelt 27, pp Clay Tubes in Minoan Religion, Proceedings of the Third International Cretological Congress, pp Myrtos: Pyrgos, 1973, ArchDelt 29, pp Pyrgos, Crete, , AR 24, pp ! 155!

180 A Probable Shrine in the Country House at Pyrgos, in Sanctuaries and Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, ed. R. Hägg and N. Marinatos, Stockholm, pp Early Minoan and Middle Minoan Chronology, AJA 87, pp Cycladic Jugs at Pyrgos, in The Prehistoric Cyclades. Contributions to a Workshop on Cycladic Chronology, ed. J. A. MacGillivray and R. L. N. Barber, Edinburgh, pp Why Was Crete Different? in The End of the Early Bronze Age in the Aegean, (Cincinnati Classical Studies 6) ed. G. Cadogan, Leiden, pp Lasithi in the Old Palace Period, BICS 37, pp Myrtos-Pyrgos, in The Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete, eds. J. W. Myers, E. E. Myers, and G. Cadogan, Berkeley, pp Mallia and Lasithi: a Palace State, Proceedings of the Seventh International Cretological Congress, pp The Role of the Pyrgos Country House in Minoan Society, in The Function of the Minoan Villa : Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 6-8 June 1992, ed. R. Hägg, Stockholm, pp Domestic Life at Minoan Myrtos-Pyrgos, Proceedings of the Eighth International Cretological Congress, pp Water Management in Minoan Crete, Greece: the Two Cisterns of One Middle Bronze Age Settlement, Water Science & Technology: Water Supply 7, pp ! 156!

181 A Shrine - or Shrine Treasury - in the Country House at Myrtos-Pyrgos, in Dioskouroi. Studies Presented to W. G. Cavanagh and C. B. Mee on the Anniversary of Their 30-year Joint Contribution to Aegean Archaeology (BAR-IS 1889), eds. C. Gallou, M. Georgiadis, and G. M. Muskett, Oxford, pp Goddess, Nymph or Housewife; and Water Worries at Myrtos? in Cretan Offerings: Studies in Honour of Peter Warren (BSA Studies 18), ed. O. Krzyszkowska, London, pp a. A Power House of the Dead: The Functions and Long Life of the Tomb at Myrtos-Pyrgos, in Prehistoric Crete. Regional and Diachronic Studies on Mortuary Systems, ed. J. M. A. Murphy, Philadelphia, pp b. Behind the Facade: What Social and Political Realities Are Behind the Cultural Regionalities of Middle Minoan Crete? Proceedings of the Tenth International Cretological Congress, pp c. Kythera, the Levant, Myrtos-Pyrgos and Knossos: A Response to Iphigenia Tournavitou, in LM IB Pottery: Relative Chronology and Regional Differences. Acts of a Workshop Held at the Danish Institute at Athens in Collaboration with the INSTAP Study Centre for East Crete, June 2007 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 11), eds. T. M. Brogan and E. Hallager, Athens, pp d. Myrtos: From Phournou Koryphi to Pyrgos, in Stega: The Archaeology of Houses and Households in Ancient Crete (Hesperia Supplement 44), eds. K. T. Glowacki and N. Vogeikoff-Brogan, Princeton, pp a. Where Has Middle Minoan III Gone? A Lack at Myrtos-Pyrgos - and! 157!

182 Elsewhere? What Does It Mean? in Intermezzo: Intermediacy and Regeneration in Middle Minoan III Crete. Villa Ariadne, Knossos 3-5 July 2008 (BSA Studies 21), eds. C. F. MacDonald and C. Knappett, London, pp b. Myrtos and Malia: Middle Minoan Entente Cordiale? Or Unitary State? Creta Antica 14: Cadogan, G., and A. Chaniotis Inscriptions from Crete, BSA 105, pp Cadogan, G., and C. Knappett. Forthcoming. Myrtos-Pyrgos. Vol. 1 Catling, E., H. Catling, D. Smyth, G. Jones, and R.E. Jones Knossos 1975: Middle Minoan III and Late Minoan I Houses by the Acropolis, BSA 74, pp Chalikias, K Living on the Margin. Chryssi Island and the Settlement Patterns of the Ierapetra Area (Crete) (BAR-IS 2549), Oxford. Chatzi-Vallianou, D LM IB Pottery from the Rural Villa of Pitsidia: A Response to Jeremy Rutter, in LM IB Pottery: Relative Chronology and Regional Differences. Acts of a Workshop Held at the Danish Institute at Athens in Collaboration with the INSTAP Study Centre for East Crete, June 2007 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 11), eds. T. M. Brogan and E. Hallager, Athens, pp Cherry, J. F Generalisation and the Archaeology of the State, in Social Organisation and Settlement (BAR International Series 47), eds. D. Green, C. Haselgrove, and M. Spriggs, Oxford, pp The Emergence of the State in the Prehistoric Aegean, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 30, pp ! 158!

183 Polities and Palaces: Some Problems in Minoan State Formation, in Peer Polity Interaction and Socio-Political Change, eds. C. Renfrew and J. F. Cherry, Cambridge, pp Peer Polity Interaction, in Archaeology. The Key Concepts, eds. C. Renfrew and P. G. Bahn, New York, Cherry, J. F. and J. L. Davis An archaeological homily, in Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces II (Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Monograph 60), eds. M. L. Galaty and W. A. Parkinson, Los Angeles, pp Christakis, K.S Cretan Bronze Age Pithoi. Traditions and Trends in the Production and Consumption of Storage Containers in Bronze Age Crete (Prehistory Monographs 18), Philadelphia The Politics of Storage. Storage and Sociopolitical Complexity in Neopalatial Crete (Prehistory Monographs 25), Philadelphia Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies. Redistribution and Political Economies in Bronze Age Crete, AJA 115, pp Conkey, M.W Style and Information in Cultural Evolution: Toward a Predictive Model for the Paleolithic, in Social Archaeology, eds. C. L. Redman, M. J. Berman, E. V. Curtin, W. T. Langhorne, N. M. Versaggi, and J. C. Wanser, New York, pp Context, Structure, and Efficacy in Paleolithic Art and Design, in Symbol as Sense, eds. M. L. Foster and S. Brandes, New York, pp Dabney, M. K., P. Halstead, and P. Thomas Mycenaean Feasting on Tsoungiza at Ancient Nemea, in The Mycenaean Feast (Hesperia 73), ed J. C. Wright,! 159!

184 Princeton, pp D Agata, A. L Some MM IIIB/LM IA Pottery from Haghia Triada, in Transition: le monde égéen du Bronze moyen au Bronze récent: actes de la deuxième Rencontre égéenne internationale de l Université de Liège (18-20 avril 1988) (Aegaeum 3), ed. R. Laffineur, Liège, pp Davaras, C Αναστηλώσεις, ArchDelt 28, pp Guide to Cretan Antiquities, Park Ridge The Cult-Villa at Makrygialos, in The Function of the Minoan Villa : Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 6-8 June 1992, ed. R. Hägg, Stockholm, pp Day, P. M., and E. Kiriatzi Group Therapy in Crete: A Comparison between Analyses by NAA and Thin-Section Petrography or Early Minoan Pottery, JAS 26, pp Day, P. M., and D. E. Wilson Consuming Power: Kamares Ware in Protopalatial Knossos, Antiquity 72, pp Day, P. M., E. Kiriatzi, and M. Relaki Petrographic Analysis of Some Final Neolithic Early Minoan II Pottery from the Kavousi Area, in Kavousi I. The Archaeological Survey of the Kavousi Region (Prehistory Monographs 16), ed. D. C. Haggis, Philadelphia, pp Day, P. M., D. E. Wilson, and E. Kiriatzi Reassessing Specialization in Prepalatial Cretan Ceramic Production, in TEXNH: craftsmen, craftswomen and craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age: proceedings of the 6th International Aegean Conference/ 6e Rencontre égéenne internationale, Philadelphia, Temple! 160!

185 University, April 1996 (Aegaeum 16), eds. R. Laffineur and P. P. Betancourt, Liège, pp Deetz, J. F The Dynamics of Stylistic Change in Arikara Ceramics, Urbana. Dietler, M., and Hayden, B Feasts. Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, Politics, and Power, Washington D.C. Driessen, J Archaeology of Minoan Society (paper, Heidelberg 2011). Driessen, J., and C. F. Macdonald Myrtos-Pyrgos, in The Troubled Island. Minoan Crete Before and After the Santorini Eruption (Aegaeum 17), eds. J. Driessen, and C. F. Macdonald, Liège and Austin, pp Earle, T. K A Reappraisal of Redistribution: Complex Hawaiian Chiefdoms, in Exchange Systems in Prehistory, eds. T. K. Earle and J.E. Ericson, New York, pp How Chiefs Come to Power. The Political Economy in Prehistory, Stanford Bronze Age Economics: The Beginnings of Political Economies, Boulder Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies. Redistribution and the Political Economy: The Evolution of an Idea, AJA 115, pp Eiring, L. J Hellenistic Pottery from Pyrgos at Myrtos, in Ε Επιστηµονική Συνάντηση για την ελληνιστική κεραµική. Χρονολογικά προβλήµατα κλειστά σύνολα εργαστήρια, Athens, pp Eiring, L. J., M.-C. Boileau, and I. K. Whitbread Local and Imported Transport Amphorae from a Hellenistic Kiln Site at Knossos: The Results of Petrographic Analysis, in Céramiques hellénistiques et romaines. Production et diffusion en! 161!

186 Méditerranée orientale (Chypre, Égypte et côte syro-palestinienne), eds. F. Blondé, P. Ballet, and J.-F. Salles, Lyon, pp Evans, A. J The Palace of Minos. A Comparative Account of the Successive Stages of the Early Cretan Civilization as Illustrated by the Discoveries at Knossos 1, London The Palace of Minos. A Comparative Account of the Successive Stages of the Early Cretan Civilization as Illustrated by the Discoveries at Knossos 2.2, London. Friedrich, M. H Design Structure and Social Interaction: Archaeological Implications of an Ethnographic Analysis, AmerAnt 35, pp Galaty, M. L., D. Nakassis, and W. A. Parkinson Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies. Introduction: Why Redistribution? AJA 115, pp Girella, L Alcune considerazioni in margine al MM III: Archanes e Festòs, CretAnt 2, pp Toward a Definition of the MM III Ceramic Sequence in South-Central Crete: Returning to the Traditional MM IIIA and IIIB Division? in Middle Helladic Pottery and Synchronisms. Proceedings of the International Workshop Held at Salzburg, October 31st November 2nd, 2004 (DenkschrWien 42), eds. F. Felton, W. Gauss, and R. Smetana, Wien, pp a. Depositi ceramici del Medio Minoico III da Festòs e Haghia Triada, Padova b. The Gold of Rhadamanthus: Ceramic Deposits and Wares Distribution at Phaistos and Ayia Triada during MM III, in Analysing Pottery. Processing! 162!

187 Classification Publication, eds. B. Horejs, R. Jung, and P. Pavúk, pp A New MM III Deposit from Ayia Triada and the Problem of MM IIIB in South-Central Crete, Proceedings of the Tenth International Cretological Congress, pp Glotz, G La civilisation égéenne, Paris. Gosselain, O. P Materializing Identities: An African Perspective, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 7, pp Poteries du Cameroun méridional: styles techniques et rapports à l identité, Paris Mother Bella was not a Bella: Inherited and Transformed Traditions in Southwestern Niger, in Cultural Transmission and Material Culture: Breaking Down Boundaries, eds. M. T. Stark, B. J. Bowser, and L. Horne, Tucson, pp Ethnographie comparée des trousses à outils de potiers au sud du Niger, Bulletin de la société préhistorique française 107, pp Haggis, D. C Stylistic Diversity and Diacritical Feasting at Protopalatial Petras: A Preliminary Analysis of the Lakkos Deposit, AJA 111, pp The Lakkos Pottery and Middle Minoan IB Petras, in Petras, Siteia: 25 Years of Excavations and Studies. Acts of a Two-day Conference Held at the Danish Institute at Athens, 9-10 October 2010, ed. M. Tsipopoulou, pp Athens. Halstead, P. 1981a. Counting Sheep in Neolithic and Bronze Age Greece, in Pattern of the Past: Studies in Honour of David Clarke, eds. I. Hodder, G. Isaac, and N.! 163!

188 Hammond, Cambridge, pp b. From Determinism to Uncertainty: Social Storage and the Rise of the Minoan Palace, in Economic Archaeology: Towards an Integration of Ecological and Social Approaches (BAR Supplement 96), eds. A. Sheridan and G. Bailey, Oxford, pp The Economy Has a Normal Surplus: Economic Stability and Social Change Among Early Farming Communities of Thessaly, Greece, in Bad Year Economics: Cultural Responses to Risk and Uncertainty, eds. P. Halstead and J. O Shea, Cambridge, pp The North-South Divide: Regional Paths to Complexity in Prehistoric Greece, in Development and Decline in the Mediterranean Bronze Age (Sheffield Archaeological Monographs 8), eds. C. Mathers and S. Stoddart, Sheffield, pp Storage and States on Prehistoric Crete: A Reply to Strasser (JMA 10 [1997], ), JMA 10, pp Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies. Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies: Terminology, Scale, and Significance, AJA 115, pp Halstead, P., and J. O Shea A Friend in Need is a Friend Indeed: Social Storage and the Origins of Social Ranking, in Ranking, Resource and Exchange, eds. C. Renfrew and S. Shennan, Cambridge, pp Hamilakis, Y Wine, Oil and the Dialectics of Power in Bronze Age Crete: A Review of the Evidence, OJA 15, pp a. Eating the Dead: Mortuary Feasting and the Politics of Memory in the! 164!

189 Aegean Bronze Age Societies, in Cemetery and Society in the Aegean Bronze Age (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 1), ed. K. Branigan, Sheffield, pp b. Consumption Patterns, Factional Competition and Political Development in Bronze Age Crete, BICS 42, pp Food Technologies/Technologies of the Body: The Social Context of Wine and Oil Production and Consumption in Bronze Age Crete, WorldArch 31, pp , ed. 2002a. Labyrinth Revisited. Rethinking Minoan Archaeology, Oxford b. Too Many Chiefs? Factional Competition in Neopalatial Crete, in Monuments of Minos: Rethinking the Minoan Palaces. Proceedings of the International Workshop Crete of the Hundred Palaces? Held at the Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, December 2001 (Aegaeum 23), eds. J. Driessen, I. Schoep, and R. Laffineur, Liège and Austin, pp Hankey, V Pyrgos: The Communal Tomb in Pyrgos IV (Late Minoan I), BICS 33, pp Hatzaki, E Chapter 5: Neopalatial (MM IIIB - LM IB): KS 178, Gypsades Well (Upper Deposit) and SEX North House Groups, in Knossos Pottery Handbook: Neolithic and Bronze Age (Minoan) (BSA Studies 14), ed. N. Momigliano, London, pp From LM IB Marine Style to LM II Marine Motifs. Stratigraphy, Chronology and the Social Context of a Ceramic Transformation: A Response to Maria Andreadaki-Vlazaki, in LM IB Pottery: Relative Chronology and Regional! 165!

190 Differences. Acts of a Workshop Held at the Danish Institute at Athens in Collaboration with the INSTAP Study Centre for East Crete, June 2007 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 11), eds. T. M. Brogan and E. Hallager, Athens, pp Ceramic Production and Consumption at the Neopalatial Settlement of Myrtos-Pyrgos: The Case of In-and-Out Bowls, in The Great Islands. Studies of Crete and Cyprus presented to Gerald Cadogan, eds. C. F. Macdonald, E. Hatzaki, and S. Andreou, Athens, pp Hawes, H. B., B. E. Williams, R. B. Seager, and E. H. Hall Gournia, Vasiliki and Other Prehistoric Sites on the Isthmus of Hierapetra, Crete. Excavations of the Wells-Houston-Cramp Expeditions 1901, 1903, 1904, Philadelphia. Hemingway, S., J. A. MacGillivray, and L. H. Sackett The LM IB Renaissance at Postdiluvian Pre-Mycenaean Palaikastro, in LM IB Pottery: Relative Chronology and Regional Differences. Acts of a Workshop Held at the Danish Institute at Athens in Collaboration with the INSTAP Study Centre for East Crete, June 2007 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 11), eds. T. M. Brogan and E. Hallager, Athens, pp Higgins, R. A The Archaeology of Minoan Crete, London. Hill, J. N Prehistoric Social Organization in the American Southwest: Theory and Method, in Reconstructing Prehistoric Pueblo Social Organization, ed. W. A. Longacre, Albuquerque, pp Hitchcock, L Do you see a man skillful in his work? He will stand before kings: Interpreting the Spread of Architectural Influences in the Bronze Age East! 166!

191 Mediterranean, Ancient West and East 7, pp Hogarth, D. G The Zakro Sealings, JHS 22, pp Hood, S The Home of the Heroes: The Aegean Before the Greeks, New York The Minoans: Crete in the Bronze Age, London The Country House and Minoan Society, in Minoan Society. Proceedings of the Cambridge Colloquium, 1981, eds. O. Krzyszkowska and L. Nixon, Bristol, pp Hood, S., P. Warren, and G. Cadogan Travels in Crete, 1962, BSA 59, pp Hutchinson, R. W Prehistoric Crete, Baltimore. Knappett, C Ceramic Production in the Protopalatial Mallia State : Evidence from Quartier Mu and Myrtos Pyrgos, in TEXNH: craftsmen, craftswomen and craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age: proceedings of the 6th International Aegean Conference/ 6e Rencontre égéenne internationale, Philadelphia, Temple University, April 1996 (Aegaeum 16), eds. R. Laffineur and P. P. Betancourt, Liège, pp Assessing a Polity in Protopalatial Crete: The Malia-Lasithi State, AJA 103, pp The production of domestic pottery from Middle Minoan II Myrtos Pyrgos, Proceedings of the Eighth International Cretological Congress, pp Mind the Gap: Between Pots and Politics in Minoan Studies, in Labyrinth Revisited. Rethinking Minoan Archaeology, ed. Y. Hamilakis,! 167!

192 Oxford, pp Technological Innovation and Social Diversity at Middle Minoan Knossos, in Knossos: Palace, City, State. Proceedings of the Conference in Herakleion organized by the British School at Athens and the 23rd Ephoreia of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities of Herakleion, in November 2000, for the Centenary of Sir Arthur Evans s Excavations at Knossos (BSA Studies 12), eds. G. Cadogan, E. Hatzaki, and A. Vasilakis, London, pp Artworks and Artefacts: The Pottery from Quartier Mu, Malia, in Kris Technitis. L Artisan Crétois: Recueil d articles en l honneur de Jean-Claude Poursat, publié à l occasion des 40 ans de la découverte du Quartier Mu (Aegaeum 26), eds. I. Bradfer-Burdet, B. Detournay, R. Laffineur, and T. G. Palaima, Liège and Austin, pp Knappett, C., and A. Collar Unpublished Middle Minoan and Late Minoan I Material from the Excavations at Palaikastro, Crete (PK VIII), BSA 102, pp Knappett, C., and T. Cunningham Three Neopalatial Deposits from Palaikastro, East Crete, BSA 98, pp Defining Middle Minoan IIIA and IIIB at Palaikastro, in Intermezzo: Intermediacy and Regeneration in Middle Minoan III Crete. Villa Ariadne, Knossos 3-5 July 2008 (BSA Studies 21), eds. C. F. MacDonald and C. Knappett, London, pp Kroeber, A. L The Nature of Culture, Chicago Anthropology: Culture Patterns & Processes, New York.! 168!

193 Kroeber, A. L., and J. Richardson Three Centuries of Women s Dress Fashions: A Quantitative Analysis, University of California Anthropological Records 5, pp La Rosa, V., and N. Cucuzza L insediamento di Selí di Kamilari nel territorio di Festós (Studi di Archeologia Cretese 1), Padova. Langohr, C. and M.-E. Alberti. Forthcoming. The Neopalatial Pottery from the Pi Area at Malia: A Preliminary Examination. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Cretological Congress. Lebessi, A Ιερὸν Ἑρµοῦ και Ἀφροδίτης εἰς Σύµνην Βιάννου, Praktika tin en Athinais Archaiologikis Etaireias, pp Legarra Herrero, B The Minoan Fallacy: Cultural Diversity and Mortuary Behaviour on Crete at the Beginning of the Bronze Age, OJA 28, pp The Construction, Deconstruction and Non-construction of Hierarchies in the Funerary Record of Prepalatial Crete, in Back to the Beginning: Reassessing Social and Political Complexity on Crete during the Early and Middle Bronze Age, eds. I. Schoep, P. Tomkins, and J. Driessen, Oxford, pp Lemonnier, P Elements for an Anthropology of Technology (Anthropological Papers 88), Ann Arbor Introduction, in Technological Choices. Transformation in Material Cultures since the Neolithic, ed. P. Lemonnier, London and New York, pp Leroi-Gourhan, A L homme et la matière, Paris Milieu et techniques, Paris. Longacre, W. A Some Aspects of Prehistoric Society in East-Central Arizona, in! 169!

194 New Perspectives in Archaeology, eds. L. R. Binford and S. Binford, Chicago, pp Archaeology as Anthropology: A Case Study (Anthropological Papers 17), Tucson. Macdonald, C. F Notes on Some Late Minoan IA Contexts from the Palace of Minos and its Immediate Vicinity, in Minotaur and Centaur: Studies in the Archaeology of Crete and Euboea Presented to Mervyn Popham (BAR-IS 638), eds. D. Evely, I. S. Lemos, and S. Sherratt, Oxford, pp The Neopalatial Palaces of Knossos, in Monuments of Minos: Rethinking the Minoan Palaces. Proceedings of the International Workshop Crete of the Hundred Palaces? Held at the Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, December 2001 (Aegaeum 23), eds. J. Driessen, I. Schoep, and R. Laffineur, Liège and Austin, pp Macdonald, C. F., and C. Knappett Knossos: Protopalatial Deposits in Early Magazine A and the South-West Houses (BSA Supplementary Volume 40), London., eds Defining Middle Minoan IIIA and IIIB at Palaikastro (BSA Studies 21), London. MacEnroe, J Sir Arthur Evans and Edwardian Archaeology, Classical Bulletin 71, pp MacGillivray, J. A Well 605: Stratigraphy and Catalogue, in Palaikastro: Two Late Minoan Wells (BSA Supplementary Volume 43), eds. J. A. MacGillivray, L. H. Sackett, and J. Driessen, London, pp ! 170!

195 Manning, S. W Beyond the Santorini Eruption: Some Notes on Dating the Late Minoan IB Period on Crete, and Implications for Cretan-Egyptian Relations in the 15th Century BC (and Especially LM II), in Time s Up! Dating the Minoan Eruption of Santorini: Acts of the Minoan Eruption Chronology Workshop, Sandbjerg, November 2007, initiated by Jan Heinemeier and Walter L. Friedrich (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 10), ed. D. A. Warburton, Athens, pp Chronology and Terminology, in The Oxford Handbook of the Bronze Age Aegean (ca BC), ed. E. Cline, Oxford, pp Manning, S. W., and C. Bronk Ramsey A Late Minoan I-II Absolute Chronology for the Aegean - Combining Archaeology with Radiocarbon, in The Synchronisation of Civilisations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Second Millennium B.C. II. Proceedings of the SCIEM EuroConference, Haindorf, 2nd of May - 7th of May 2001 (Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie XXIX. Contributions to the Chronology of the Eastern Mediterranean IV), ed. M. Bietak, Wien, pp The Dating of the Earlier Late Minoan IA Period: A Brief Note, in Time s Up! Dating the Minoan Eruption of Santorini: Acts of the Minoan Eruption Chronology Workshop, Sandbjerg, November 2007, initiated by Jan Heinemeier and Walter L. Friedrich (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 10), ed. D. A. Warburton, Athens, pp McNeal, R. A The Legacy of Arthur Evans, California Studies in Classical Antiquity 6, pp ! 171!

196 Momigliano, N. 2007a. Introduction, in Knossos Pottery Handbook: Neolithic and Bronze Age (Minoan) (BSA Studies 14), ed. N. Momigliano, London, pp b. Knossos Pottery Handbook. Neolithic and Bronze Age (Minoan) (BSA Studies 14), London. Morgan, C., and T. Whitlelaw Pots and Politics: Ceramic Evidence for the Rise of the Argive State, AJA 95, pp Mountjoy, P. A The Marine Style Pottery of LM IB/LH IIA: Towards a Corpus, BSA 79, pp Knossos: The South House (BSA Supplementary Volume 34), London. Musgrave, J. H., and S. P. Evans By Strangers Honor d: A Statistical Study of Ancient Crania from Crete, Mainland Greece, Cyprus, Israel and Egypt, Journal of Medical Archaeology and Anthropology 1, pp Myers, J. W., E. E. Myers, and G. Cadogan The Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete, Berkeley. Nakassis, D., W. A. Parkinson, and M. L. Galaty Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies. Redistributive Economies from a Theoretical and Cross- Cultural Perspective, AJA 115, pp Nodarou, E Exploring Patterns of Intra Regional Pottery Distribution in Late Minoan IIIA-B East Crete: The Evidence from the Petrographic Analysis of Three Ceramic Assemblages, in Archaeometric and Archaeological Approaches to Ceramics: Papers presented at EMAC 05, 8th European Meeting on Ancient Ceramics, Lyon 2005 (BAR-Supplement 1691), Oxford, pp Nowicki, K Defensible Sites in Crete, c B.C.: LM IIIB/IIIC through! 172!

197 Early Geometric (Aegaeum 21), Liège and Austin The End of the Neolithic in Crete, Aegean Archaeology 6, pp The Final Neolithic (Late Chalcolithic) to Early Bronze Age Transition in Crete and the Southeast Aegean Islands: Changes in Settlement Patterns and Pottery, in Escaping the Labyrinth: The Cretan Neolithic in Context (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 8), eds. V. Isaakidou and P. Tomkins, Oxford, pp Myrtos Fournou Korifi: Before and After, in Cretan Offerings: Studies in Honour of Peter Warren (BSA Studies 18), ed. O. Krzyszkowska, London, pp O Shea, J Coping with Scarcity: Exchange and Social Storage, in Economic Archaeology (BAR IS 96), eds. A. Sheridan and G. N. Bailey, Oxford, pp Oddo, E Cross-joins and Archaeological Sections. The Myrtos-Pyrgos Cistern: Reconstructing a Neopalatial Stratigraphy, in The Great Islands. Studies of Crete and Cyprus presented to Gerald Cadogan, eds. C. F. Macdonald, E. Hatzaki, and S. Andreou, Athens, pp Oddo, E. and G. Cadogan. Forthcoming. Sherd Cross-Joins, Ceramic Use-Wear, and Depositional History: Rethinking the Aftermath of a Collapsed Mid-Second Millennium BC Cistern at Myrtos-Pyrgos, Crete, in Archaeological Variability and Interpretation in Global Perspective, eds. A. P. Sullivan III and D. I. Olszewski, Boulder. Pelon, O Fouilles exécutées à Mallia. Exploration des maisons et quartiers! 173!

198 d habitation ( ), III (Le Quartier E) (Etudes Crétoises 16), Paris. Pendlebury, J. D. S The Archaeology of Crete. An Introduction, London. Perlès, C Les industries litiques taillées de Franchthi, Argolide: Présentation Générale et Industries Paléolithiques, Terre Haute. Platon, L Το Υστεροµινωικό Ι ανάκτορο της Ζάκρου: µία Κνωσός έξω από την Κνωσό, in Knossos: Palace, City, State. Proceedings of the Conference in Herakleion organized by the British School at Athens and the 23rd Ephoreia of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities of Herakleion, in November 2000, for the Centenary of Sir Arthur Evans s Excavations at Knossos (BSA Studies 12), eds. G. Cadogan, E. Hatzaki, and A. Vasilakis, London, pp Zakros: One or Two Destructions Around the End of the LM IB Period, in LM IB Pottery: Relative Chronology and Regional Differences. Acts of a Workshop Held at the Danish Institute at Athens in Collaboration with the INSTAP Study Centre for East Crete, June 2007 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 11), eds. T. M. Brogan and E. Hallager, Athens, pp Platon, N Crete, London. Polanyi, K. 1957a. Marketless Trading in Hammurabi s Time, in Trade and Market in the Early Empires: Economies in History and Theory, eds. K. Polanyi, C. M. Arensberg, and H. W. Pearson, New York, pp b. The Economy as Instituted Process, in Trade and Market in the Early Empires: Economies in History and Theory, eds. K. Polanyi, C. M. Arensberg, and H. W. Pearson, New York, pp ! 174!

199 On the Comparative Treatment of Economic Institutions in Antiquity with Illustrations from Athens, Mycenae and Alalakh, in City Invincible: A Symposium on Urbanization and Cultural Development in the Ancient Near East, eds. C. H. Kraeling and R. M. Adams, Chicago, pp Polanyi, K., and G. Dalton Primitive, Archaic and Modern Economies: Essays of Karl Polanyi, Garden City, New York. Pollock, S Style and Information: An Analysis of Susiana Ceramics, JAnthArch 2, pp Popham, M The Minoan Unexplored Mansion at Knossos (BSA Supplementary Volume 17), Oxford. Poursat, J.-C Town and Palace at Malia in the Protopalatial Period, in The Function of the Minoan Palaces. Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, June, 1984 (ActaAth 4, 35), eds. R. Hägg and N. Marinatos, Stockholm, pp La ville minoenne de Malia: Recherches et publications récentes, Revue Archéologique 1, pp Puglisi, D Haghia Triada nel periodo Tardo Minoico I, CretAnt 4, pp Produzioni ceramiche Tardo Minoico I ad Haghia Triada nel contesto della Creta centro-meridionale (diss. Università di Udine) Dal vassoio tripodato al kernos. Un set di ceramiche TM IA da Haghia Triada e il suo contributo alla conoscenza del rituale minoico, CretAnt 11, pp a. From the End of LM IA to the End of LM IB: the Pottery Evidence! 175!

200 from Hagia Triada, in LM IB Pottery: Relative Chronology and Regional Differences. Acts of a Workshop Held at the Danish Institute at Athens in Collaboration with the INSTAP Study Centre for East Crete, June 2007 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 11), eds. T. M. Brogan and E. Hallager, Athens, pp b. Nuovi depositi ceramici TM I da Haghia Triada, Proceedings of the Tenth International Cretological Congress, pp Ceramiche Tardo Minoico I da Haghia Triada (Creta): contesti, produzioni, funzioni. I.1 Materiali dai primi scavi ( ), Rome. Renfrew, C. [1972] The Emergence of Civilisation. The Cyclades and the Aegean in the Third Millennium B.C., Oxford & Oakville Trade as Action at a Distance: Questions of Integration and Communication, in Ancient Civilization and Trade, eds. J. A. Sabloff and C. C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, Albuquerque, pp Introduction: Peer Polity Interaction and Socio-Political Change, in Peer Polity Interaction and Socio-Political Change, eds. C. Renfrew and J. F. Cherry, Cambridge, pp Rethemiotakis, G., and K. S. Christakis Cultural Interaction Between Knossos and Pediada: The Evidence from the Middle Minoan IB Pottery, in Knossos: Palace, City, State. Proceedings of the Conference in Herakleion organized by the British School at Athens and the 23rd Ephoreia of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities of Herakleion, in November 2000, for the Centenary of Sir Arthur Evans s Excavations at Knossos (BSA Studies 12), eds. G. Cadogan, E. Hatzaki,! 176!

201 and A. Vasilakis, London, pp Rice, P. M Evolution of Specialized Pottery Production: A Trial Model, CurrAnthr 22, pp Pots and Potters: Current Approaches in Ceramic Archaeology, Los Angeles Pottery Analysis. A Sourcebook, Chicago Specialization, Standardisation and Diversity: A Retrospective, in The Ceramic Legacy of Anna O. Shepard, eds. R. L. Bishop and F. W. Lange, Niwot, Colorado. Rutter, J. B Neopalatial and Later Minoan Pottery, in Kommos V. The Monumental Minoan Buildings at Kommos, eds. J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw, Princeton, pp Sackett, J. R Meaning of Style in Archaeology: A General Model, AmerAnt 42, pp Style and Ethnicity in the Kalahari: A Reply to Wiessner, AmerAnt 50, pp Sackett, L. H., and M. Popham Excavations at Palaikastro VII, BSA 65, pp Sahlins, M. D Social Stratification in Polynesia, Seattle Tribesmen, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey Stone Age Economics, Chicago. Sakellarakis, Y., and E. Sapouna-Sakellaraki Ανασκαφὴ Αρχανών. Praktika tin en Athinais Archaiologikis Etaireias, pp ! 177!

202 Schiffer, M. B Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record, Albuquerque A Behavioral Theory of Meaning, in Pottery and People: A Dynamic Interaction, eds. J. M. Skibo and G. M. Feinman, Salt Lake City, pp Schoep, I Tablets and Territories? Reconstructing Late Minoan IB Political Geography through Undeciphered Documents, AJA 103, pp a. Social and Political Organization on Crete in the Proto-Palatial Period: The Case of Middle Minoan II Malia, JMA 15, pp b. The Administration of Neopalatial Crete: A Critical Assessment of the Linear A Tablets and Their Role in the Administrative Process (Suplementos a Minos 17), Salamanca c. The State of the Minoan Palaces or the Minoan Palace-State? in Monuments of Minos: Rethinking the Minoan Palaces. Proceedings of the International Workshop Crete of the Hundred Palaces? Held at the Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, December 2001 (Aegaeum 23), eds. J. Driessen, I. Schoep, and R. Laffineur, Liège and Austin, pp Making Elites: Political Economy and Elite Culture(s) in Middle Minoan Crete, in Political Economies of the Aegean Bronze Age. Papers from Langford Conference, Florida State University, Tallahassee, February 2007, ed. D. J. Pullen, Oxford and Oakville, pp Bridging the divide between the Prepalatial and the Protopalatial periods?, in Back to the Beginning: Reassessing Social and Political Complexity on Crete during the Early and Middle Bronze Age, eds. I. Schoep, P. Tomkins, and J. Driessen, Oxford, pp ! 178!

203 Schoep, I., and P. Tomkins Back to the Beginning for the Early and Middle Bronze Age on Crete, in Back to the Beginning: Reassessing Social and Political Complexity on Crete during the Early and Middle Bronze Age eds. I. Schoep, P. Tomkins, and J. Driessen, Oxford, pp Sellet, F Chaîne opératoire: The Concept and Its Applications, Lithic Technology 1/2, pp Service, E. R. [1962] Primitive Social Organization. An Evolutionary Perspective, New York Origins of the State and Civilization: The Process of Cultural Evolution, New York. Shaw, J. W The Architecture and Stratigraphy of the Civic Buildings, in Kommos V. The Monumental Minoan Buildings at Kommos, eds. J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw, Princeton, pp Shaw, M. C Plasters from the Monumental Minoan Buildings: Evidence for Painted Decoration, Architectural Appearance, and Archaeological Event, in Kommos V. The Monumental Minoan Buildings at Kommos, eds. J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw, Princeton, pp Sherratt, A Cups That Cheered, in Bell Beakers of the Western Mediterranean. Definition, Interpretation, Theory and New Site Data. The Oxford International Conference 1986 (BAR-S 331), eds. W. H. Waldren and R. C. Kennard, Oxford, pp Sinopoli, C. M The Organization of Craft Production at Vijayanagara, South India, American Anthropologist 90, pp ! 179!

204 Approaches to Archaeological Ceramics, New York Pots and Palaces. The Earthenware Ceramics of the Noblemen s Quarter of Vijayanagara, New Delhi Levels of Complexity: Ceramic Variability at Vijayanagara, in Pottery and People: A Dynamic Interaction, eds. J. M. Skibo and G. M. Feinman, Salt Lake City, pp Soles, J. S The Functions of a Cosmological Center: Knossos in Palatial Crete, in Politeia. Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegeum 12), vol. II, eds. R. Laffineur and W.-D. Niemeier, Liège, pp Thomas, G An Introduction to Political Philosophy. London. Todaro, S Craft Production and Social Practices at Prepalatial Phaistos: the Background to the First Palace, in Back to the Beginning: Reassessing Social and Political Complexity on Crete during the Early and Middle Bronze Age, eds. I. Schoep, P. Tomkins, and J. Driessen, Oxford, pp Tomkins, P Behind the Horizon: Reconsidering the Genesis and Function of the First Palace at Knossos (Final Neolithic IV-Middle Minoan IB), in Back to the Beginning: Reassessing Social and Political Complexity on Crete during the Early and Middle Bronze Age, eds. I. Schoep, P. Tomkins, and J. Driessen, Oxford, pp Tomkins, P., and I. Schoep Early Bronze Age: Crete, in The Oxford Handbook of the Bronze Age Aegean (ca BC), ed. E. H. Cline, Oxford, pp Trigger, B. G Monumental Architecture: A Thermodynamic Explanation of! 180!

205 Symbolic Behaviour, WorldArch 22, pp Tsipopoulou, M Papdiokampos and the Siteia Bay in the Second Milennium BC: Exploring Patterns of Regional Hierarchy and Exchange in Eastern Crete, in Petras, Siteia: 25 Years of Excavations and Studies. Acts of a Two-day Conference Held at the Danish Institute at Athens, 9-10 October 2010 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 16), ed. M. Tsipopoulou, Athens, pp Tsipopoulou, M., and M. E. Alberti LM IB Petras: The Pottery from Room E in House II.1, in LM IB Pottery: Relative Chronology and Regional Differences. Acts of a Workshop Held at the Danish Institute at Athens in Collaboration with the INSTAP Study Centre for East Crete, June 2007 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 11), eds. T. M. Brogan and E. Hallager, Athens, pp Van de Moortel, A The Transition from the Protopalatial to the Neopalatial Society in South-Central Crete: A Ceramic Perspective (diss. Bryn Mawr College) The Area around the Kiln, and the Pottery from the Kiln and the Kiln Dump, in A LM IA Ceramic Kiln in South-Central Crete. Function and Pottery Production (Hesperia Supplement 30), eds. J. W. Shaw, A. Van de Moortel, P. M. Day, and V. Kilikoglou, Princeton, pp Pottery as a Barometer of Economic Change, in Labyrinth Revisited. Rethinking Minoan Archaeology, ed. Y. Hamilakis, Oxford, pp Van de Moortel, A., and P. Darcque Late Minoan I architectural phases and! 181!

206 ceramic chronology at Malia, Proceedings of the Ninth International Cretological Congress, pp Varouchakis, V Myrtos-Pyrgos Window Stands, Proceedings of the Tenth International Cretological Congress, pp Warren, P Myrtos: An Early Bronze Age Settlement in Crete, London Knossos: Stratigraphical Museum Excavations, Part I, AR 29, pp A New Deposit From Knossos, c BC, and Its Wider Relations, BSA 86, pp LM IA: Knossos, Thera, Gournia, in Meletemata: Studies in Aegean Archaeology Presented to Malcolm H. Wiener as He Enters His 65th Year. Vol. III (Aegaeum 20), eds. P. P. Betancourt, V. Karageorghis, R. Laffineur, and W.-D. Niemeier, Liège and Austin, pp Warren, P., and V. Hankey Aegean Bronze Age Chronology, Bristol. Watrous, L. V Kommos 3. An Excavation on the South Coast of Crete. The Late Bronze Age Pottery, eds. J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw, Princeton. Webb, J. M., and J. Weingarten Seals and Seal Use: Markers of Social, Political and Economic Transformations on Two Islands, in Parallel Lives: Ancient Island Societies in Crete and Cyprus. Papers Arising from the Conference in Nicosia Organised by the British School at Athens, the University of Crete and the University of Cyprus, in November-December 2006 (BSA Studies 20), eds. G. Cadogan, M. Iacovou, K. Kopaka, and J. Whitley, London, pp Weingarten, J War Scenes and Ruler Iconography in a Golden Age: Some! 182!

207 Lessons on Missing Minoan Themes From the United Provinces (17th c A.D.), in Polemos. Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l åge du bronze. Actes de la 7e Rencontre égéenne internationale. Université de Liège, avril 1998 (Aegaeum 19), ed. R. Laffineur, Liège and Austin, pp Chapter 24: Minoan Seals and Sealings, in The Oxford Handbook of the Bronze Age Aegean (ca BC), ed. E. Cline, Oxford, pp Whalen, M. E., and P. E. Minnis Ceramics and Polity in the Casas Grandes Area, Chihuahua, Mexico, AmerAnt 77, pp Whitelaw, T From Sites to Communities: Defining the Human Dimensions of Minoan Urbanism, in Urbanism in the Aegean Bronze Age (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 4), ed. K. Branigan, London and New York, pp Forthcoming. Recognising Polities in Prehistoric Crete, in From the Foundation to the Legacy of Minoan Society (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology), eds. M. Relaki and Y. Papadatos, Oxford. Whitelaw, T., P. M. Day, E. Kiriatzi, V. Kilikoglou, and D. E. Wilson Ceramic traditions at EM IIB Myrtos Fournou Korifi, in Techni. Craftsmen, Craftswomen and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegeum 16), eds. R Laffineur and P. P. Betancourt, Liège, pp Wiener, M. H Crete and the Cyclades in LM I: The Tale of the Conical Cups, in The Minoan Thalassocracy: Myth and Reality. Proceedings of the Third International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 31 May - 5 June, 1982 (ActaAth 4, 32), eds. R. Hägg and N. Marinatos, Göteborg, pp Trade and Rule in Palatial Crete, in The Function of the Minoan! 183!

208 Palaces. Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, June, 1984 (ActaAth 4, 35), eds. R. Hägg and N. Marinatos, Stockholm, pp The Isles of Crete? The Minoan Thalassocracy Revisited, in Thera and the Aegean World III. Proceedings of the Third International Congress, Santorini, Greece, 3-9 September Vol. 1: Archaeology, eds. D. A. Hardy, C. G. Doumas, J. A. Sakellarakis, and P. M. Warren, London, pp Pots and Polities, in Pottery and Society, The Impact of Rescent Studies in Minoan Pottery, Gold Medal Colloquium in Honor of Philip P. Betancourt, 104th Annual Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America, New Orleans, Louisiana (5 January 2003), eds. M. H. Wiener, J. L. Warner, J. Polonsky, and E. E. Hayes, Boston, pp Neopalatial Knossos: Rule and Role, in Krinoi kai limenes: Studies in Honor of Joseph and Maria Shaw (Prehistory Monographs 22), eds. P. P. Betancourt, M. C. Nelson, and H. Williams, Philadelphia, pp Wiessner, P Style and Social Information in Kalahari San Projectile Points, AmerAnt 48, pp Style or Isochrestic Variation? A Reply to Sackett, AmerAnt 50, pp Wilmsen, E. N Interaction, Spacing Behavior, and the Organization of Hunting Bands, Journal of Anthropological Research 29, pp Wilson, D. E., and P. M. Day Ceramic Regionalism in Prepalatial Central Crete: The Mesara Imports at EM I to EM II A Knossos, BSA 89, pp ! 184!

209 Wobst, M. H Stylistic Behavior and Information Exchange, in Papers for the Director: Research Essays in Honor of J. B. Griffin (Anthropological Papers 61), Ann Arbor, pp Style in Archaeology, or Archaeologists in Style, in Material Meanings: Critical Approaches to the Interpretation of Material Culture, ed. E. S. Chilton, Salt Lake City, pp Woolf, G. D The Unity and Diversity of Romanisation, JRA 5, pp Beyond Romans and Natives, WorldArch 28: Culture Contact and Colonialism, pp Younger, J. G., and P. Rehak Review of Aegean Prehistory VII: Neopalatial, Final Palatial, and Postpalatial Crete, in Aegean Prehistory: A Review (AJA Supplement 1), ed. Tracey Cullen, Boston, pp ! 185!

210 FIGURES! 186!

211 FIGURES For the pottery: all photographs by E. Oddo, unless specified; all drawings by D. Evely, except figs. 4.56, 4.57, 4.58, 4.98, 4.99, by Jeff Clarke and Doug Faulmann. Figure 1.1. Map of Crete showing the location of the Protopalatial and Neopalatial sites mentioned in the text. Map by J. Wallrodt Figure 1.2. Map of East Crete showing the location of the Protopalatial and Neopalatial sites mentioned in the text. Map by J. Wallrodt 187

212 Figure 2.1. Plan of the site showing its main archaeological features. The colors distinguish the construction phases: red for Pyrgos II; yellow for Pyrgos III; green for Pyrgos IV. Drawing P. Hacigüzeller 188

213 Figure 2.2: The Tomb complex. Cadogan 2011d, p. 42, fig

214 -f PYRGOS METRES I i I I_ I MM Figure 2.3. The Tomb complex, stone by stone. Cadogan 1978, 72, fig

215 Figure 2.4. Cistern 1 at the southwest corner of the Pyrgos IV Country House s Courtyard. Plan courtesy of G. Cadogan 191

216 0, o I o 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~; CL I& Up c ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I- ~~~~~~~~m ~~~~~~ 1W o a~~~~ 0 C!, O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L~ ~ ~ ~~. >m T- K i~~~~~~~~~~~i Ilp C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~` X9 o Figure 2.5. The Pyrgos IV Country House and surrounding buildings. Cadogan 1978, p

217 Figure 3.1. Cistern 2: view from the northwest. Photo courtesy of G. Cadogan 193

218 Figure 3.2. Cistern 2 from the NE: walls GT (across the Cistern s N side, right of the picture) and FB (almost perpendicular to GT). Photo courtesy of G. Cadogan 194

219 Figure 3.3. Cistern 2 from the northwest: walls GT (left of the picture) and FB. Photo courtesy of G. Cadogan 195

220 Figure 3.4. Plan of Cistern 2 and surrounding area, with location of the four trenches. Plan by E. Oddo 196

221 Figure 3.5. Cistern 2 and wall remains. Plan by E. Oddo 197

222 Figure 3.6. Merged section of Cistern 2 s SE quarter. Redrawn by E. Oddo. Original drawings courtesy of G. Cadogan 198

223 Figure 3.7. Plan of Cistern 2 s excavation area: gray area represents the sections merged in Fig Plan by E. Oddo Figure 3.8. Pattern of cross-joins in the Neopalatial assemblage. Redrawn by E. Oddo and J. Wallrodt. Original drawings courtesy of G. Cadogan 199

224 Figure 3.9. Distribution of Protopalatial and Neopalatial sherds within and above Cistern 2 Figure Chart showing the distribution of Neopalatial sherds within Cistern 2. The northern trenches (F02, G02, plus baulk G01/G02) contained the highest concentration of pottery 200

225 Figure Cross-join pattern in Cistern 2 trenches. Harris matrices and modifications by E. Oddo 201

226 Figure Neopalatial cross-joins among the trenches. Harris matrices and modifications by E. Oddo 202

227 Figure Protopalatial cross-joins among the trenches. Harris matrices and modifications by E. Oddo 203

228 Figure Neopalatial cross-joins within each trench. Harris matrices and modifications by E. Oddo 204

229 Figure Protopalatial cross-joins within the trenches. Harris matrices and modifications by E. Oddo 205

230 ! Figure 4.1. FB hemispherical cup (MP/73/P304) Figure 4.2. FB hemispherical cup (N8012)! Figure 4.3. FB, DOL-L hemispherical cup, inner surface. incised circle on the base (N8013) Figure 4.4. FB, DOL-L hemispherical cup with spiral motif (MP/73/P304) 206

231 Figure 4.5. FB, DOL-L hemispherical cup with crescent motif (N8012)!! Figure 4.6. FB, DOL-L hemispherical cup with double axes (MP/71/P501) Figure 4.7. FB, DOL-L hemispherical cup with double axes (MP/71/P501) 207

232 Figure 4.8. Knossos: FB hemispherical cup (Mountjoy 2003, p. 71, fig. 4.9, no. 111) Figure 4.9. Ayia Triada: FB hemispherical cup (Puglisi 2006, table 4, no. 3.9) Figure Malia: FB, hemispherical cup (Pelon 1970, pl. XV, no. 2) Figure Mochlos: FB, hemispherical cup (Barnard 2001, p. 205, fig. 10.3, no ) 208

233 Figure Zakros: FB hemispherical cup (Platon 2011, p. 232, fig. 23) Figure Zakros: FB hemispherical cup (Platon 2011, p. 239, fig. 44) 209

234 ! Figure FB, DOL-L short rounded cup with spirals (N8021)! Figure FB, DOL-L short rounded cup with spirals (N8021) 210

235 Figure FB, DOL-L rounded cup with zigzag decoration (N8023) Figure FB, DOL-L rounded cup with tripod feet (N8020) 211

236 ! Figure FB, DOL-L rounded cup (MP/71/P504) Figure FB, DOL-L rounded cup (MP/71/P504) 212

237 Figure Malia: FB, DOL-L rounded cup (Pelon 1970, pl. XIV, no. 5)) Figure Mochlos: FB, DOL-L rounded cup (Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 447, fig. 19, no. P478) Figure Gournia: FB, DOL-L rounded cups (Hawes et al. 1908, pl. VII, no. 9) 213

238 Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup (N8010) Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup (N8033) 214

239 ! Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup (N8009) Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup (N8033) Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup with foliate scroll frieze (N8007) Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup: base (N8010) 215

240 Figure FB, DOL-L straight-sided cup, ripple motif under base (N8019) Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-L straightsided cup (Warren 1991, p. 328, fig. 9, no. H (P1143) Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-L straightsided cup, type 2 (Warren 1999, table CCVI, no. P2450) Figure Mochlos: FB, DOL-L straightsided cup (Barnard 2001, p. 215, fig. 9.3, no. 9.26) 216

241 ! Figure FB, DOL-L Vaphio cup (MP/73/P302) Figure FB, DOL-L Vaphio cup (MP/73/P302) Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-L Vaphio cup (Catling et al. 1979, p 40, fig. 27, no. 186) Figure Ayia Triada: FB, DOL-L Vaphio cup (D Agata 1989, pl. XXI, no. f) 217

242 ! Figure FB, DOL-L S-profile cup, spirals on top (N8024) Figure FB, DOL-L S-profile cup, spirals and foliate branch (N8025) Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-L bell cup (Warren 1991, p. 328, fig. 9, no. M) Figure Petras: FB, DOL-L bell cup (Tsipopoulou and Alberti 2011, p. 472, fig. 9, no. f, P90/626) 218

243 Figure FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl (N8004) Figure FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl (N8005) Figure FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl (N8006) 219

244 Figure FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl with ripples (N8004). Outside Figure FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl (N8004). Monochrome interior Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl (Popham 1984, pl. 128, no. g) Figure Mochlos: FB, DOL-L ledge rim bowl (Barnard 2001, p. 221, fig. 8.1, no. 8.10) 220

245 Figure FB, DOL-L frieze decorated bowl with spirals (N8027) Figure FB, DOL-L frieze decorated bowl with crescents (N8026) Figure FB, DOL-L frieze decorated bowl with crescents (N8026) Figure Ayia Triada: FB, DOL-L frieze decorated bowl (Puglisi 2006, table 1, no. 1.10) 221

246 Figure FB, DOL-L banded bowls (left top. 71/P360; left bottom. N4580; right top. N8030; right bottom. N4579) Figure FB, DOL-L banded bowls, interior (left top. 71/P360; left bottom. N4580; right top. N8030; right bottom. N4579) Figure FB, DOL-L banded bowl (N4578). Scale 1:4 Figure Mochlos: FB, DOL-L banded bowl (Barnard 2001, p. 238, fig. 6.3, no. 6.26) 222

247 Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/73/P296). Scale 1:4 Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (N4596). Scale 1:4 Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (N804). Scale 1:4 223

248 Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl, outer surface (N4604) Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl, inner surface (N4604) Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl, outer surface (left. N4598; right. N4600) Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl, inner surface (left. N4598; right. N4600) 224

249 Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/73/P296): outer surface. Photo courtesy of E. Hatzaki Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/73/P296): inner surface. Photo courtesy of E. Hatzaki 225

250 Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl: outer surface (N4595). Photo courtesy of E. Hatzaki Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl: inner surface (N4595). Photo courtesy of E. Hatzaki 226

251 Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl: outer surface (N5001A; spout N8035). Photo courtesy of E. Hatzaki Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl: inner surface (N5001A; spout N8035). Photo courtesy of E. Hatzaki 227

252 Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/73/P296): anemone, interior, base. Photo courtesy of E. Hatzaki Figure FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl: outer (left) and inner surface (right). Photo courtesy of E. Hatzaki 228

253 Figure Gournia: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Betancourt and Silverman 1991, fig. 18, no. 545) Figure Kommos: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Rutter 2006, p. 1131, pl. 3.38, no. 26/3) Figure Mochlos: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 438, fig. 10, no. P6242) 229

254 Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Warren 1991, p. 326, fig. 7, nos. D-H) 230

255 Figure Kommos: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Rutter 2006, p. 1126, pl. 3.33, no. 20/2) Figure Kommos: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Rutter 2006, p. 1126, pl. 3.33, no. 17a/3) Figure Malia: FB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (Pelon 1970, pl. XII, nos. 4 and 5) 231

256 Figure FB, DOL-L bridge-spouted jar/jug with spiral motif (N4681) Figure FB, DOL-L bridge-spouted jar/jug with spiral motif (N4681) 232

257 Figure FB, DOL-L bridge-spouted jar/jug with ivy motif (N4688) Figure FB, DOL-L bridge-spouted jar/jug with ivy motif (N4686) 233

258 Figure FB, DOL-L bridge-spouted jar/jug. spouts (left. N4694; right. from vessel N4682) Figure FB, DOL-L bridge-spouted jar/jug. small size vessel (N8029) 234

259 Figure DOL-L jug with spiral motif (iv203) Figure FB, DOL-L jug with spiral motif (iv203) Figure FB, DOL-L jug with spiral motif 235

260 ! Figure FB, DOL-L. Marine style sherds (MP/71/P363) Figure FB, DOL-L, closed shape with possible argonaut (N4609) Figure FB, DOL-L closed shape with possible argonaut (N4611) Figure FB, DOL-L closed shape with reed motif (MP/73/P314) 236

261 Figure FB, DOL-L, closed shape with possible argonaut (N4609) Figure FB, DOL-L closed shape with reed motif (MP/73/P314) 237

262 Figure Palaikastro: FB, DOL-L, closed shape (Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 132, fig. 17, no. 166) Figure Zakros: FB, DOL-L closed shape (Platon 2011, p. 229, fig. 11) Figure Zakros: FB, DOL-L closed shape (Platon 2011, p. 235, fig. 34) 238

263 Figure FB, DOL-L-W straight-sided cup with spiral motif (N8009) Figure FB, DOL-L-W straight-sided cup with spiral motif (N8009) 239

264 Figure FB, DOL-L-W banded bowl (MP/71/P360) Figure FB, DOL-L-W banded bowl (MP/71/P505)! 240

265 Figure FB, DOL-L-W banded bowls. on left, MP/71/P360; on right, MP/71/P505 Figure FB, DOL-L-W banded bowls, interior. on left, MP/71/ P360; on right, MP/71/P

266 Figure FB, DOL-L-W oval-mouthed jar (MP/73/P502) Figure FB, DOL-L-W oval-mouthed jar (MP/73/P502) Figure Zakros: FB, DOL-L-W closed shape (Hogarth 1902, pl. XII, no. 2) 242

267 Figure FB, DOL-N-L rounded cup with monochrome interior (MP/71/P510)! Figure FB, DOL-N-L rounded cup with trickle decoration (MP/73/P8) 243

268 Figure FB, DOL-N-L rounded cup with trickle decoration (MP/73/P8) Figure Palaikastro: FB, DOL-N-L rounded cup with trickle decoration (Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 128, fig. 15, no. 156) Figure Mochlos: FB, DOL-N-L rounded cup with trickle decoration (Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 432, fig. 5, no. P6050) 244

269 Figure FB, DOL-N-L ledge rim bowl with thick blobs of paint (N8044)! Figure FB, DOL-N-L ledge rim bowl with lug handles (N8045) 245

270 Figure Knossos: FB, DOL-N-L ledge rim bowl with trickling pattern (Catling et al. 1979, p. 29, fig. 19, no. 109) Figure Kommos: FB, DOL-N-L ledge rim bowl with trickling pattern (Betancourt 1990, fig. 41, no. 8.73) Figure Palaikastro: FB, DOL-N-L ledge rim bowl with trickling pattern (Knappett and Collar 2007, p. 168, fig. 14, no. 59) 246

271 Figure FB, DOL-N-L beaked jug fragment Figure FB, MONO straight-sided cup (MP/71/P508) Figure FB, MONO straight-sided cup 247

272 Figure Knossos: FB, MONO straightsided cup (Popham 1984, plate 142, no. 6) Figure Kommos: FB, MONO straightsided cup (Van de Moortel 2001, p. 48, fig. 32, no. 21) Figure Malia: FB, MONO straight-sided cup (Pelon 1970, plate XIV, no. 4) Figure Palaikastro: FB, MONO straightsided cup (Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 125, fig. 12, no. 116) 248

273 Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (N8017) Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (N8015) Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (MP/71/P512) Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (saucer; N8014) 249

274 Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (N8017) Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (N8015) Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (MP/71/P512) Figure FB, PL conical cup, short type (saucer; N8014) 250

275 Figure FB, PL conical cup, tall type (S-profile; N8018) Figure FB, PL conical cup, tall type (s-profile; N8018) Figure FB, PL conical cup, tall type (tumbler) Figure Kommos: FB, PL conical cup (Rutter 2006, p. 1126, plate 3.33, no. 17a/7) 251

276 Figure Palaikastro: FB, PL conical cup (Sackett and Popham 1970, p. 222, fig. 13, no. 12) Figure CB, DOL-L rounded cup with ivy motif (N8028) 252

277 Figure CB, DOL-L s-profile cup (MP/73/P305) Figure CB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/71/269) 253

278 Figure CB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/71/269): outer surface Figure CB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl (MP/71/269): inner surface 254

279 Figure CB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl: outer surface (N4582) Figure CB, DOL-L in-and-out bowl: inner surface (N4582) 255

280 Figure CB, DOL-L jug/jar with running spirals (N4677) Figure CB, DOL-N-L conical cup (N8003) Figure CB, DOL-N-L conical cup (N8003) Figure Ayia Triada: CB, DOL-N-L conical cup (Puglisi 2006, plate 19, no. 17.3) 256

281 Figure Palaikastro: CB, DOL-N-L conical cup (Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 128, fig. 15, nos ) Figure Mochlos: CB, DOL-N-L conical cup (Barnard and Brogan 2011, p. 431, fig. 4, no. P4386) Figure CB, DOL-N-L jug (N8046) 257

282 Figure CB, DOL-N-L jug (N4674) Figure CB, DOL-N-L jug (N4674) Figure Palaikastro: CB, plain jug (Knappett and Cunningham 2003, p. 155, fig. 35, no. 291) 258

283 Figure CB, DOL-N-L fenestrated stand with trickle decoration (N4660). Outside Figure CB, DOL-N-L fenestrated stand with trickle decoration (N4660). Inside Figure Gournia: CB, fenestrated stand with plastic decoration (Betancourt and Silverman 1991, fig. 33, nos. 694 and 695) 259

284 Figure CB, MONO fenestrated stand with plastic decoration (N4667) Figure CB, MONO fenestrated stand (N4659) 260

285 Figure CB, MONO fenestrated stand (N4658) Figure CB, PL lid. upper surface (N8039) Figure CB, PL lid. lower surface (N8039) Figure CB, PL lid (N8040) 261

286 Figure Pithos fabric, DOL-N-L-W. Handle (N8037) Figure Pithos fabric, DOL-N-L. Base (N8036) Figure Pithos fabric, DOL-N-L, base (N8036) 262

287 Figure RB, baking plates rims Figure RB, baking plates rims 263

288 Figure RB, cooking tray (N4650) Figure RB, cooking tray (N4650). Inside Figure RB, cooking tray (N4650). Outside 264

289 Figure Petras: RB, thick and thin cooking tray (Tsipopoulou and Alberti 2011, p. 493, fig. 42) 265

290 Figure RB, trefoil-mouthed jug (N8038) Figure RB, trefoil-mouthed jug (N8038) 266

291 a. b. Figure RB, tripod-cooking jar (N4672) Figure RB, fenestrated stand (right N8042, left N8041). Outside (a) and inside (b) 267

292 Figure Knossos: RB, tripod cooking jar (Warren 1991, p. 324, fig. 5, no. E) Figure Kommos: RB, tripod cooking jar (Rutter 2006, p. 1124, plate 3.31, no. 9b/9) Figure Mochlos: RB, tripod cooking jar (Barnard 2001, p. 208, fig. 10.6, no ) Figure Poros: RB, tripod cooking jar (Banou 2011, p. 501, fig. 1, no. a) 268

293 Figure Cycladic jug (MP/71/499) 269

294 Figure Cycladic jug (MP/71/499) 270

295 Figure Cistern 2: graph showing the quantities (in percentage) of pottery shapes! Figure Cistern 2: graph showing the quantities (in percentage) of dark-on-light decoration 271