Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Aegean Archaeology
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The Prepalatial period in south central Crete is largely known through the rich but generally un-stratified deposits that have been retrieved from the communal tholos tombs, and which have been dated by virtue of stylistic and typological comparisons with ceramic deposits excavated elsewhere in Crete. This dating procedure has been misleading as the lack of criteria through which the EM IIB and the EM III could be distinguished has meant that many ceramic classes or single shapes have been cautiously attributed to a non-specific 'EM I - MM' phase. The discovery of uninterrupted sequences of habitation levels at Phaistos from FN to MM I, has shed an important new light on this crucial period of the history of Crete. The new stratigraphic data has in fact shown that many of the fossil-types that had long been considered to be diagnostic of the MM IA period actually appeared in the Phaistian assemblages in EM IIB, with a specific typology and decorative patterns, and only slowly developed through time. In this paper I will focus on four occupation phases (Phaistos Vlll a, b, c and Phaistos IX), which have all been attributed to the EM III, and will try to highlight the continuity and changes that occurred in terms of typology, surface treatment, fabric, and forming technique of the most frequent coarse and fine wares.
EN
This report is concerned with the excavation of an Early Minoan circular 'tholos' tomb of the Mesara type and the survey of the surrounding area at the site of Mesorrachi, near the modern village of Skopi, in the region of Siteia, East Crete. The excavation and the survey were undertaken during two different seasons, the fall of 2005 and the summer of 2010 by the 24th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities in collaboration with the University of Athens, Department of History and Archaeology. The excavations revealed a circular tomb. Through surface survey it was possible to identify the location of the corresponding settlement, but test trenches did not reveal any other structures in the area. According to the finds, the use of the tholos and the habitation site are contemporary. dated to EM I, probably the beginning of the period. the EM IA phase. The existence of such an early tholos tomb in this remote area of East Crete, very far from south central Crete (Mesara and the Asterousia), which constitutes the core area of this type of tomb, allows a reconsideration of the issue of the origin and the first appearance of the tholos tombs in Crete and contributes with new data to the ongoing discussions about population movements, cultural and/or ethnic diversity and integration in Prepalatial Crete.
EN
The present article is a study of archaeological practice in Greek archaeology, assessed through the methods used by John L. Caskey in excavation and post-excavation procedures, as well as in publication. Archaeological practice is an interpretive exercise rather than mere recovery of artifacts and data. It is influenced by a range of factors including the questions that motivate the primary investigator in their research, the nature of the site, and the general zeitgeist (not to mention unforeseen circumstances). Since archaeological practice influences and conditions archaeological data by favoring certain questions, sites, or datasets more than others, it also conditions the trajectory of archaeological knowledge. Reference to fieldwork techniques and methodologies that Caskey employed mainly during the Ayia Irini excavations on the island of Kea, the last excavation project of his illustrious career, are used to delineate the theoretical underpinnings of his research agenda (and by extension also his generation of Greek archaeologists). It also highlights his dialectical relationship with the intellectual and collegial environment in Greek archaeology, which not only influenced him in designing his research strategy, but also effected changes over time in its implementation and the resulting publication program. The contribution of such a study, especially of a prominent figure in Greek archaeology, constitutes a foray into the history of archaeological thought and knowledge in Classical archaeology, a history so poorly discussed (especially after the 1930s onwards) in otherwise excellent treatises on Anglo-American traditions in the discipline, often positing as histories of world-wide archaeological thought.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.