Colonialism without Colonies? A Bronze Age Case Study from Akrotiri, Thera

On the challenges and benefits of indoor archaeology: 15 years at the Archeodome (Mitchell Prehistoric Indian Village, South Dakota)

“…Each of these issues causes myriad problems that influence both the nature of the archaeological record, and the manner in which it must be excavated and interpreted. Even in the face of the significant problems highlighted in this article, successful research continues to be conducted at enclosed sites around the world (Agenbroad and Mead 1994;Jeffra and Karr 2013;Karr et al 2010Karr et al , 2011Knappett and Nikolakopoulou 2008;and others). Achieving a balance between maintaining superior scientific excavations and a superior experience for tourists rests on the ability to successfully protect, recover, and interpret archaeological evidence while providing a comfortable, educational environment for tourism.…”

Minoanisation in the Middle Bronze Age: Evaluating the Role of Cycladic Producers and Consumers

“…Most recent studies, however, have emphasised the difficulties in demonstrating political or military control over an area on the basis of archaeological evidence alone and have focused instead on elucidating the exchange networks that linked Crete to the islands and the choices made by Cycladic people in adopting socially significant or economically beneficial objects, technologies and practices from Crete ( e.g. Davis 1979; Schofield 1982; Davis 1984; Davis and Lewis 1985; Davis 1986; Davis and Cherry 1990; Whitelaw 2005; Berg 2007b; Knappett and Nikolakopoulou 2005; 2008; Cutler 2012).…”

“…In a recent critique, Broodbank (2004) raised a number of issues that he argued had impeded the development of complex explanatory frameworks capable of dealing fully with the archaeological evidence for Minoanisation. Among the most significant ongoing problems is a tendency to conflate all periods of Minoanisation (later MBA–mid-LBA), so that the phenomenon is conceived of as a static thing, rather than a fluid process (see also Knappett and Nikolakopoulou 2008). In addition, attempts to address the significance of Minoan and Minoanising objects in the Cyclades regularly overlook how Minoanising objects relate to non-Minoanising ones, or fail to acknowledge the potential economic or social importance of Minoanising imports from places other than Crete.…”

“…Debate over the primary causes underlying the changes in material culture associated with the Minoanisation phenomenon has been ongoing for over 30 years, since the publication of Hägg and Marinatos's edited volume, The Minoan Thalassocracy , in 1984 (recently, see Broodbank 2004; Davis and Gorogianni 2008; Macdonald, Hallager and Niemeier 2009; Wiener 2013). Yet few studies focus specifically on the later MBA phase of the phenomenon, with some notable exceptions (Papagiannopoulou 1991; Davis 1984; 1986; Whitelaw 2005; Knappett and Nikolakopoulou 2005; 2008; Hilditch 2008; Gorogianni 2008; Abell and Hilditch 2016; Gorogianni, Abell and Hilditch 2016). The later MBA is, nevertheless, a crucial period for evaluating the degree to which different Cycladic communities participated in the earliest stages of the phenomenon, as well as for elucidating the initial processes that spurred the massive changes evident in LBA Cycladic material culture and society.…”

Modelling maritime interaction in the Aegean Bronze Age

“…This question is normally answered in terms of its local resources and surplus, but we here consider it in terms of the wider properties of the interaction networks in which it participates. The second phenomenon of interest is "Minoanisation" (see Broodbank 2004 for a recent review; see also Knappett and Nikolakopoulou 2005;2008). In this process a number of sites across the south Aegean, on both islands and mainland, develop increasingly complex exchange links and shared cultural traits.…”