Aegean Trade and Settlement in Anatolia in the Second Millennium B.C.

Mee, Christopher

doi:10.2307/3642747

Cited by 34 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to this distinction, most of the north Levantine sites did not exhibit additional Aegean elements to accompany the local production of Aegean‐derived pottery and were therefore interpreted as unrelated to a large‐scale migration (see Lehmann for an overview of sites and finds). However, a clear break in continuity followed the destruction of some sites such as Tarsus (French ; Mee , 145; Yasur‐Landau , 229–31), Tell Kazel (Badre ; Jung ; 2012; Lehmann , 275), Tell Afis (Venturi , 144–5, 148; Cecchini , 198) and Ras Ibn Hani (Bounni et al , 282; Lehmann , 268). The subsequent appearance of Mycenaean IIIC:1b pottery at these sites may therefore be regarded as a result of some migration.…”

Section: The Second Pillar: Philistine Materials Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

Ramesses III and the ‘Sea‐peoples’: Towards a New Philistine Paradigm

Evian

2017

Oxford J Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The Philistine paradigm attempts to answer fundamental questions in Philistine history, namely the how and when of Philistine settlement in the southern Levant. According to the traditional paradigm, the Philistines, among other ‘Sea‐Peoples’, came from the Aegean islands and were settled in Egyptian strongholds in the south Canaanite Coastal Plain in the eighth year of Ramesses III. Formulated on the basis of Egyptian texts and Philistine archaeological remains, the paradigm has been criticized over the reliability of both source materials. Therefore, it is the aim of the present study to conduct a methodological analysis of the pillars on which the paradigm rests and to offer a new reconstruction of the events that took place in the Levant in the twelfth century BCE.

show abstract

Section: The Second Pillar: Philistine Materials Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

Ramesses III and the ‘Sea‐peoples’: Towards a New Philistine Paradigm

Evian

2017

Oxford J Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Chronology of Mycenaean pottery (after Warren andHankey 1989, 169) 1988;Kuniholm 1996, 332-334).The absolute dates provided in figure 1 represent a traditional view (Warren and Hankey 1989, 169). Late Helladic pottery has been found on some four hundred sites in Anatolia, Cyprus, the Levant, Egypt and the central Mediterranean (Mee 1978;Astrom 1972;Leonard 1994;Hankey 1993;Vagnetti 1993) (figure 2).The majority of the sites in the Mediterranean with such pottery have yielded only a few specimens. In all regions, notable quantities of Mycenaean ceramics, up to hundreds of vessels in some cases, come from a minority of sites.…”

Section: Mycenaean Pottery In the Mediterraneanmentioning

confidence: 99%

An archaeological approach to the concept of value

Wijngaarden¹

1999

Arch. Dial.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Value is one of the concepts which are of importance in the way people structure their material surroundings. According to the philosophy of Georg Simmel, value finds its origins in the tension between the desire for objects and access to them. The dimensions of desirability and accessibility may be investigated archaeologically, in order to approach the concept of value. Such a perspective is taken in this article with reference to three different classes of imported Mycenaean pottery, which have been found in the Late Bronze Age levels of the site of Ugarit at the Mediterranean coast of Syria. It is concluded that various vessel types were appreciated differently at the city. The meanings imposed on these imported objects derived from the roles they played in the local cultural context.

show abstract

“…None of the sherds from Trianda are found in levels earlier than LM IA. Although it has been claimed that some of the pottery from Trianda is MBA (see below), it is commonly accepted that the origins of the settlement lie in LM IA (see Mee 1978: 149 for references). Certainly Furumark (1950: 154) considered the dark ground pottery from Trianda to be of the Late Bronze Age: "The presence of this technique is not surprising, since in provincial Crete it was current still in this period" (i.e.…”

Section: Anatolian Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Earliest Minoans in the South-East Aegean: a Reconsideration of the Evidence

Davis¹

1982

Anatol. Stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the south-east Aegean, among the earliest finds reported to be Minoan were those of Italian excavators in the Dodecanese. A reference in 1928 to “numerosi avanzi di ceramica del tipo di Camares” in the Vathy cave on Kalymnos is typical (Maiuri, p. 114). Yet little imported Middle Minoan pottery has been published from the south-east Aegean. Many sherds described in preliminary reports as Kamares or MM (as were those at Vathy), when illustrated, have turned out not to be imports but local products. It today seems clear that around the time of the Shaft Graves, many pots with dark ground decoration copying Cretan designs were produced and distributed in this part of the Aegean. Largely on the basis of its decoration (believed in imitation of MM pottery), the discovery of such pottery in the south-east Aegean has been taken as evidence of contact with MBA Crete (Mee 1978: 134). I will argue here, however, that if the contexts in which it has been found are carefully examined, there is little evidence that this local dark ground pottery was produced prior to the beginning of the Late Minoan period; nor is there much unassailable stylistic evidence that it indeed was produced in imitation of MM styles. It becomes necessary to reconsider the evidence for contacts between Crete and the south-east Aegean in the MBA, and MBA settlement patterns in this area.

show abstract

Aegean Trade and Settlement in Anatolia in the Second Millennium B.C.

Cited by 34 publications

References 44 publications

Ramesses III and the ‘Sea‐peoples’: Towards a New Philistine Paradigm

Ramesses III and the ‘Sea‐peoples’: Towards a New Philistine Paradigm

An archaeological approach to the concept of value

The Earliest Minoans in the South-East Aegean: a Reconsideration of the Evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About