Review of Aegean Prehistory III: Crete from Earliest Prehistory through the Protopalatial Period

Watrous, L. Vance

doi:10.2307/506551

Cited by 60 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The changing social strategies from the end of the Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age and the development of a social complexity have been discussed and explored in various ways and fields (Renfrew 1972;Halstead 1989;1994;Nakou 1995;Broodbank 2000;Tomkins 2004). The relationships that the living created with the dead, but also the differences that were created between the dead (Parker Pearson 1993.227) and the way they were expressed and (re)negotiated by the living, may be indicative of a fundamental realignment and reorganisation of human relations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…What is generally accepted, however, is that this extremely long period witnessed many social and economic changes, such as intensive exploitation of the marginal land of the Greek landscape (Runnels, van Andel 1987;Demoule, Perlès 1993;Watrous 1994;Cavanagh 2004;Tomkins 2008;, the introduction of metals and metallurgy and wide-range exchange links (van Andel, Runnels 1988;Perlès 1992.154-155;Broodbank 2000.163). In terms of pottery, it is characterised by an increase in coarse pottery and vessels fired at very low temperatures, often bearing traces of burning on their surface (Demoule, Perlès 1993.401;Vitelli 1999.65;Cavanagh 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Creating identities in the mortuary arena of the Greek Final Neolithic: a contextual definition of practices in Central and Southern Greece

Psimogiannou¹

2012

Doc. praeh.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: the chronological backgroundFor several decades in Greek prehistory, a division of the Neolithic and Bronze Age in units of three for each particular period has been established 1 . The Neolithic has been divided into Early, Middle and Late and each of them, except for the last, was further divided into three parts, a system mostly utilised in Thessaly and the Peloponnese (Demoule, Perlès 1993.398). Nevertheless, the efforts to group Neolithic cultures according to this tripartite chronological terminology do not seem to depict the reality successfully.In south-eastern Europe, the millennium that starts at the mid 5 th millennium BC forms a period that ABSTRACT -It is generally accepted that the Greek Final Neolithic witnessed many social and economic changes. However, few studies have explored the archaeological material of the period in a systematic and fully contextual manner. After analysing new material from a rescue excavation at Proskynas in east Lokris, central Greece, in combination with previous evidence, it is clear that most of our knowledge has come from the funerary domain, where acts of consumption and display of material culture took place. These included the deposition of artefacts in a mortuary context and in pits dug into the bedrock in the vicinity of the graves. The aim of this paper is to provide a contextual approach of the social and mortuary practices of the period in central and southern Greece and discuss their role to the creation of cultural identities. It is also suggested that these collective acts that occur primarily within the funerary domain may also imply a shift of interest from the domestic to the mortuary arena, which emerges as a new place for social negotiation at the end of the Neolithic period. IZVLE∞EK -

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Creating identities in the mortuary arena of the Greek Final Neolithic: a contextual definition of practices in Central and Southern Greece

Psimogiannou¹

2012

Doc. praeh.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The overall population of the southern Aegean appears to grow, with both a larger number of sites and larger sizes of sites recorded (Watrous 1994: 703-704;Wiencke 1989: 497-499). There are a number of possible explanations for this significant population growth (Renfrew 1972;Sherratt 1981;Watrous 1994;, but the primary concern here is with growth in the populations of individual sites, and although this is linked to changes across the landscape as a whole, a distinction between the two should be made. In explaining the increase in the size of communities, it is significant that sites with larger populations seem to have an evolutionary advantage.…”

Section: Population In Eb IImentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The evidence from these sites is presented in Table 2. Evidence for social complexity at 'large' sites (after Konsola 1986;Pullen 1994;Rutter 1993;Soles 1988;Watrous 1994; Table 3. Evidence for social complexity at 'small' sites (after Broodbank 2000;Konsola 1986;Korfmann and Mansperger 2001;Pullen 1994;Soles 1988;.…”

Section: Social Complexity In Eb IImentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Complexity and Population: A Study in the Early Bronze Age Aegean

2004

Papers From the Institute of Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is suggested that the size of a population to some extent defines the limits of its social complexity. State level societies tend to have relatively large populations, and egalitarian communities tend to be relatively small. Since the 1960s, anthropologists have tried to describe and explain this relationship between population size and social complexity, suggesting a causal link between large populations and social differentiation, based on studies of game theory and human cognitive capacity. Once a population rises above a certain level, change in social organisation is deemed inevitable. Approximate figures for these 'population thresholds' have been proposed, but their accuracy and applicability to archaeological populations and communities remain uncertain. This paper explores the hypothetical population threshold at the point when societies begin to show the first signs of ranking in the context of the Early Bronze Age Aegean, comparing the estimated population sizes of particular sites with the evidence they show for ranking and social hierarchy. While larger communities tend to show more evidence for social differentiation, it is recognised that population size is not the sole factor in determining its development.

show abstract

“…3). EM III is problematic and it is difficult to identify in stratified deposits (for further discussion about the EM III period see Haggis 1999: 57;Manning 1997: 158-160;Momigliano 1991Momigliano , 1999Watrous 1994Watrous : 717-720, 2001: 221-223), but it seems clear for the MM IA period that mortuary contexts contain far fewer copper-based objects, even in cemeteries of large communities such as Gournia (Soles 1992), Mallia (Demargne 1945;Van Effenterre and Van Effenterre 1963) and Archanes (Maggidis 1994;Panagiatopoulos 2002). Copper-based objects found on the island can be arranged into three broad categories: ornaments, tools and weapons/daggers (Fig.…”

Section: Types and Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

About the Distribution of Metal Objects in Prepalatial Crete

2004

Papers From the Institute of Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although metal objects have been used as evidence in different interpretations of the socioeconomic changes identified in Prepalatial Crete (c.3100-1900 BC), they constitute an understudied category of material. This paper argues that metal objects on Crete were subject to complex processes regarding the creation of meaning; a more comprehensive appraisal of metal objects on the island may cast new light on these issues. Copper-based, gold, lead and silver objects are investigated from their ore extraction locations outside Crete to their final deposition, linking the different steps of the process of creating an artefact with different layers of meanings for the metal and, subsequently, for the finished objects. This study evaluates differences in the use of metals, with a particular focus on their intra-island depositional patterns. It seeks to identify differences in the roles of metals within Cretan communities as well as regional fashions in the use of metal objects. It is suggested that metals had different characters since their depositional patterns vary, and that people consciously chose certain metals to make specific objects and also used metal objects in different ways, reflecting the socio-economic context for each region. KeywordsCrete, Early Bronze Age, metallurgy, Prepalatial, regionalism Introduction Studies of Bronze Age metal (copper-based, gold, lead and silver) objects in the Aegean are somewhat paradoxical. On the one hand, metalwork has played an important role in the interpretations of Bronze Age Aegean societies. It has been argued that control over the production, exchange and consumption of metal was an important source of socio-economic control for the emerging elites during this period (Branigan

show abstract

Review of Aegean Prehistory III: Crete from Earliest Prehistory through the Protopalatial Period

Cited by 60 publications

References 2 publications

Creating identities in the mortuary arena of the Greek Final Neolithic: a contextual definition of practices in Central and Southern Greece

Creating identities in the mortuary arena of the Greek Final Neolithic: a contextual definition of practices in Central and Southern Greece

Social Complexity and Population: A Study in the Early Bronze Age Aegean

About the Distribution of Metal Objects in Prepalatial Crete

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About