‘Mycenaeans’ on Rhodes. A neo culture historical re-evaluation of the archaeological evidence
In this article, the ‘Mycenaean’ occupation in the southwest coast of Anatolia (presentday Turkey) is revisited. The issue at hand is whether the large number of ‘Mycenaean’ artifact types (e.g. pottery, jewelry, seals, weapons and tomb-types), which have been found in the southeast Aegean, is indicative of the presence of ‘Mycenaean’ immigrants or of local ‘peoples’ having adopted traits of ‘Mycenaean’ cultural origin. The approach used in this article, which is referred to as a neoculture historical approach, is based on a contextual analysis of the archaeological record of Late Bronze Age Greece. The particular focus is on the (chamber) tombs. In the final section of the article, some of the results of these analyses are compared with a selection of the finds from the cemetery of Ialysos on the island of Rhodes.
Retracting the divisions? Fresh perspectives on Phoenician settlement in Iberia from Tavira, Portugal
Near Eastern burial customs are attested outside the Levant in territories that fell into the orbit of the socalled Phoenician ‘expansion’ in the Mediterranean, around the ninth to the sixth century BC. Yet, in what is now Portugal, no evidence for Phoenician necropoleis had been attested until recently, leading to the hypothesis that small, marginal communities lived on the verge of indigenous polities, in the periphery of the flourishing Phoenician centres in the south of Spain. The recent discovery of a Phoenician sanctuary and a necropolis in Tavira (ancient Balsa), in what appears to have been a settlement of a predominantly Near Eastern character calls for a reevaluation of this ‘lonetraders’ model. More crucially, the particularities of the burial customs at Tavira highlight once again the still dominant methodological constraints and inconsistencies that have afflicted the interpretation of the Phoenician impact in Iberia since its nascent stages, crudely categorizing it into coastal ‘colonies/trading ports’ and inland ‘indigenous settlements’ – a division that cannot be maintained.
sin(α) = Vision/Object or how to break through the ‘vision barrier’
In the field, an archaeologist is largely reliant on the registration and interpretation of visible physical remains and stratigraphy. Depending on the means available and/or professionalism of the particular project (s)he is involved in, an array of auxiliary scientists and the implementation of certain methods and theories can provide information that would otherwise remain elusive. However, soil micromorphology is still frequently absent from archaeological practice, in spite of its proven value. Given the right circumstances, micromorphological analysis of undisturbed soils can contribute significantly to the understanding of how spaces were constructed and used. Moreover, it can provide details about periodicity and frequency of use, as well as postdepositional processes. This paper advocates the value and advantages offered by soil micromorphological analysis as a discipline for clarifying use of space and to point out to what extent the representativity and validity of the soil record have been affected by turbation processes. Lastly, it recommends the full integration of the discipline as standard practice for archaeological fieldwork.
Hybridization versus Code-Switching
In his book about codeswitching WallaceHadrill writes about the uselessness of hybridization in his study of past cultural interaction and the usefulness of his own model. In this article the uselessness of hybridization is questioned. To understand the difference between both theories, first an explanation of both is given (although codeswitching is only briefly explained). Afterwards tomb paintings in the cemeteries of Poseidonia are considered in order to find out whether hybridization, in opposition to codeswitching, is still useful in interpreting the ancient past.
Communicating Identity in Italic Iron Age Communities
The Aurelian Wall and the Refashioning of Imperial Rome, AD 271-855
Quantifying the Roman Economy. Methods and Problems
State formation in Italy and Greece; questioning the neoevolutionist paradigm
introducties op lopend onderzoek
NWO-project o.l.v. Prof. dr. P.A.J. Attema, uitgevoerd door dr. G. Tol, dr. T. de Haas & dr. K. Armstrong
Promotieproject Kimberley A.M. van den Berg MA
Promotieproject Elisha O. van den Bos MA
Promotieproject Tamara Dijkstra MA
Promotieproject Jorn Seubers MA
The animals from the early and middle neolithic sites of Karatsádhagli and Kamára in Thessaly
The inhabitants of the early and middle neolithic sites of Karatsádhagli and Kamára bred the five classical domestic mammal species: dog, sheep, goat, cattle and pig. Most of the meat and skins consumed and used derived from livestock. Pigs and cattle were kept in high proportions in comparison with inland sites in Thessaly with higher temperatures and lower precipitation. Hunting was of limited importance. Shellfish was collected for food at the coast at 10-15 km distance. Bones, antler and shells were used to make tools. Bone awls, an antler spoon, shell beads and possibly shell pestles were made on the sites.
The use of agricultural animals and wild animals during the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age in South Italy
The exploitation of domesticated and wild animal resources during the Bronze and Iron Ages in Southern Italy is characterized by a prevalence of raising of livestock, especially sheep, goat and cattle, as well as pig. Transhumance involving primarily sheep and goats seems to have been the driving force behind the development of the subsistence strategies and was formalized in the course of the Late Bronze Age and into the Early Iron Age. There is ample evidence for local variations within this general pattern of subsistence, suggesting that environmental and territorial restrictions helped define the local subsistence economies. The wild animal resources that were hunted or collected served to complement the regular meat supply in times of necessity, but also served to stress the privileged position of the local elites, especially in the case of red deer.
Animal Burial in Ancient Mesopotamia
This paper discusses the results of a preliminary study concerning the practice of the intentional burial of complete animals and/or animal parts – separately or in association with human remains – at a number of sites throughout Ancient Mesopotamia, ranging from the Ubaid period to the Neo-Babylonian period (middle 6th –middle 1st millennium BC ). By briefly reviewing the studied archaeological contexts and the available literary evidence, it aims at highlighting some characteristic features of this phenomenon and at reflecting upon the possible interpretations of its occurrence in Mesopotamian culture. The author hopes to contribute to a better understanding of this practice and to provide an insight in the reasons why Mesopotamians buried their animals.
Cattle buried in the desert plain of Dayr al-Barsha (Egypt). A mystery explained thanks to Herodotus?
During excavations in the Dynastic cemetery at Dayr al-Barsha in Middle Egypt, unexpectedly a circular pit filled with cattle bones, dated to around 400 BC was found. Archaeozoological study has shown that it contained the almost complete, but disarticulated skeletons of 15 Egyptian longhorn cattle. In addition, fragmentary remains of at least three other individuals have been collected. Data on the age at death, sex and size of the animals are summarised, as well as the main pathologies and traces observed on the bones. They reveal details on the life and death of the cattle. No parallels are known for the cattle burial at Dayr al-Barsha. However, writings of the Greek historian Herodotus may hold clues to explain the enigmatic find. They describe how the ancient Egyptians buried dead bulls and collected the rotted skeletons at regular intervals to rebury them together in one place. Underneath the cattle burial an older inhumation was found, containing offered cattle bones that fit with practices recorded earlier at Dayr al-Barsha.
The ritual significance of the horse in the graves of four humans in Mikri Doxipara-Zoni.
In 2002 a burial tumulus was excavated at Mikri Doxipara-Zoni (AD 90-120). Research yielded a great spectrum of very interesting finds, including five richly decorated wagons, each buried with two auxiliary horses, two separate horse burials, human cremation burials, altars, hearths, pottery and objects of precious stones and metals. A total of fifteen horses (predominantly mares) in the prime of their lives were killed and buried in this tumulus. Obviously, this indicates that horses were of particular importance to the four people buried with these elaborate finds. This essay explores the ritual significance and symbolism of the horse in the burial of these four humans in this specific tumulus in Greek Thrace.
The chora of Metaponto 2
The Ritual Killing and Burial of Animals
Material Aspects of Etruscan Religion:
Proceedings of the International Colloquium Leiden,
May 29 and 30, 2008
Constantinopel. Een mozaïek van de Byzantijnse metropool
introducties op lopend onderzoek
Canan Çakırlar appointed as the new UD in zooarchaeology
Promotieproject Eleni Panagiotopoulou MSc
Promotieproject Victor Klinkenberg MA (promovendus), Tijm Lanjouw MA (promovendus), Federica Fantone MA (promovenda)
Project Jitte Waagen, Rogier Kalkers, Lennart Kruijer