Yasur-Lau Assaf. Household Archaeology in Ancient Israel and Beyond
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
202 david ben-shlomo
degree already during the thirteenth century (e.g., Bunimovitz 1998:
108–109; Karageorghis 2000), that is to say, prior to the change in
settlement and burial patterns.
On the background of this crisis, the arrival of the Philistines in the
southern Levant has been described by several scholars as very dramatic.
Stager describes two coordinated waves of attack on the coast in a
“D-Day”-like event (Stager 1991: 35). Barako describes a seaborne
migration (2000), while Yasur-Landau describes a terrestrial migra-
tion of large numbers of civilians, followed by a violent colonization
(Yasur-Landau 2002, 2003a; yet, see Yasur-Landau 2007b, for a more
gradual migration model). In support of a signicant land migration,
Yasur-Landau (2002: 94, 143, 244) argues that contemporary boats
could carry mostly rowers, which were apparently men, and thus could
not be used to transport large numbers of civilian families.
e archaeological evidence presented above concerning the domes-
tic nature of the Philistine cultural elements, as well as certain dier-
ences among the Philistine cities, may support a less dramatic, gradual,
and possibly nonviolent process of Philistine settlement, one that took
several decades and included an inux of immigrants who probably
arrived, to a large extent, from the sea, as this is the easiest route from
the Aegean and the only route from Cyprus to the southern Levant
(see also Yasur-Landau 2007b).
12
Indeed, it is a question whether this
should be dened as a violent colonization strategy (Yasur-Landau
2003a: 50; see Killebrew 2005: 200–201 for other models of coloniza-
tion). ere is a lot of variability in the initial settlement pattern at the
Philistine sites. Some of the sites do show destructions, but there is no
direct proof that the destruction levels at Tel Miqne/Ekron, for example,
and possibly also Gath were caused by Philistine immigrants, although
this possibility cannot be dismissed, and sites like Ashdod display no
evidence for destruction in the Early Iron Age levels. Moreover, if
the immigrants to Philistia were mainly civilians and did not include
12
A time span of 20–25 years could be almost unidentiable in the archaeological
record. e very earliest occupation phase in the Field INE acropolis at Ekron testi-
es to a period of lowkey Philistine presence (Killebrew 1998: 381–383; Gitin et al.
2006: 30–33, Phase 9D), which may reect a gradual occupation process. is gradual
process could, in theory, lower the date of the beginning of the Philistine presence by
a decade or two, but not by 70 years or more as suggested by others (see, e.g., Finkel-
stein 1995). Such a long time span is not evident in the occupational history in the
Philistine cities (see Ben-Shlomo 2006a: 76–78).
early iron age domestic material culture 203
warrior classes, as some have suggested (e.g., Yasur-Landau 2003a), it
is dicult to imagine this population organizing a coordinated mili-
tary attack on the Canaanites living in the area of Philistia.
A large number of immigrants, divided in some way among the ve
major Philistine cities and possibly some of the smaller sites, would
have undoubtedly had a signicant eect on the society and material
culture of Philistia. e dierent cities may have accommodated vary-
ing numbers of immigrants, which were probably dictated by the con-
temporary socioeconomic situation at each location. It is reasonable to
suggest that, according to the changes in site size, Tel Miqne/Ekron,
at least initially, received larger numbers of immigrants. Furthermore,
while the Philistine material culture is oen seen as a relatively homoge-
neous phenomenon, characteristic of all of the Pentapolis sites (Stager
1995: 345; Barako 2000: 522–524; Strange 2000: 133), a comparison
of the Philistine cities shows, especially in regard to settlement size,
a shiing pattern of dominance among them (Yasur-Landau 2003a:
47–49; Ben-Shlomo 2007).
Several scholars draw comparisons with contemporary material cul-
ture changes on Cyprus, but the situation there seems quite dierent.
On Cyprus small groups did arrive by sea; however, it seems that, as
they could not overcome the strong local cities, these immigrants to
Cyprus chose between a number of options. Bunimovitz (1998) and
Yasur-Landau (2003a: 46–47) suggest a strategy of “integration” for
several sites on Cyprus, such as Kition and Enkomi, while for the
secluded site of Maa-Palaeokastro, which was built de novo, they sug-
gest a model of “separation.” At Enkomi these migrants might have
included mercenaries, as the appearance of Naue II swords may indi-
cate (Yasur-Landau 2003a: 50). Maybe the many similarities between
Enkomi, Maa-Palaeokastro, and the Philistine cities during the twelh
century, which are usually ascribed to similar origins (Karageorghis
and Demas 1988: 264–246), indicate instead similar settlement strate-
gies in both Cyprus and Philistia.
e analyses of migration processes and their reection in the
archaeological record have been discussed in several studies (see, e.g.,
McGuire 1982; Anthony 1990, 1992; Burmeister 2000; Yasur-Landau
2002, 2003a, 2003b, 2007; Sherratt 2002, 2008). Households and the
domestic sphere have been shown to be especially important for rec-
ognizing the characteristics and mechanisms of migrations and the
behavior of immigrants in both anthropological (e.g., Boyd 1989;
204 david ben-shlomo
Zimmerer 2004) and archaeological (e.g., Burmeister 2000: 542–547)
examples. e material culture reected in domestic contexts and
households seems to be more sensitive to the arrival of new immi-
grants than the one in public, monumental, and elite structures (e.g.,
Berry 1997: 12; Antony 2000). An analysis of a number of immigrant
societies has shown that migrants usually belong neither to the highest
nor to the lowest socioeconomic stratum of society (see Burmeister
2000 for references); rather, they oen come from various groups of
medium socioeconomic strength in their original society. us, it is
not surprising that the cultural elements of the Aegean elite are not
evident in the Philistine culture. For this reason, examining several ele-
ments of domestic material culture uncovered in households in Iron
Age I Philistia is useful for analyzing what we can know of Philistine
society and its relationship with its hosting society.
A number of modern examples demonstrate how the process of
material culture transfer associated with immigrants can be highly
selective (e.g., Cameron 1995; Chapman 1997; see Burmeister 2000:
541–542 and more references therein). In these studies, the selection
criteria used to determine culture transfer include adaptability to the
new environment, the ethnic, religious, and/or socioeconomic compo-
sition of the immigrant group, and the resistance of inuence coming
from the hosting cultures (e.g., Ostergen 1988). It is clear that immi-
grants create their own hybrid culture (Burmeister 2000: 546), but
dening the process of cultural change that the immigrant society goes
through is highly complex and problematic, particularly when adapted
to archaeological examples (as shown by Burmeister 2000: 548–552, in
an example of German immigration to Britain during the h century
CE). However, although dening this process may be beyond what we
can legitimately retrieve from the archaeological record, the presence
of immigrants can still be seen in items of domestic material culture,
especially if these items occur in signicant quantities and over a sub-
stantial period of time, as is the case in Philistia and probably at several
sites on Cyprus, notably Maa-Palaeokastro and Enkomi.
e evidence presented above of several artifact groups related to
the culture of Philistine households may t these behavioral models
of immigrant groups and their representation in material culture. e
assemblage of domestic artifacts analyzed here, including tableware,
cooking vessels, and diet, spools and various terracotta gurines,
which occurred in signicant quantities at sites in Philistia and also on
early iron age domestic material culture 205
Cyprus and lasted for a substantial period of time, reect the activities
and behavior of immigrant groups. It is suggested that these groups,
and probably also individuals, living in a number of dierent locations
in the eastern Mediterranean, maintained some form of interaction
and exchange of ideas, creating a koiné phenomenon.
e debate concerning the origin of the Philistines and the Sea Peo-
ples is long and unresolved and is beyond the scope of this work (for
reviews, see Singer 1988; Yasur-Landau 2002: 207–211; 2003b). Vari-
ous suggestions have been raised, such as the Argolid, Crete, Cyprus,
western Anatolia, Cilicia, or the Dodecanese; thus far, it seems that
the Philistine material culture demonstrates similarities with many
of these regions (Yasur-Landau 2003b). More parallels seem to stem
from Cyprus than from the other suggested areas. is is not neces-
sarily surprising given the fact that there was a long tradition of strong
connections between Cyprus and the southern Levant, yet this picture
might be biased by the fact that much of the LHIIIC material from the
Aegean is not yet published.
Alternatively, rather than seeking a single origin for these people,
I suggest that a cultural koiné existed in the eastern Mediterranean
during the twelh century bce. During this period, a mutual transfer
of ideas, but not of artifacts, seems to have taken place between the
Levant and other regions in the eastern Mediterranean. is should
not be seen as a unilateral inuence from the west. Multilateral inu-
ences may be reected in the use of certain artifacts, such as closed
cooking vessels, crude zoomorphic gurines, and clay spools, all of
which were produced locally. e transfer of domestic, and possibly
cultic, elements from the east to the Argolid has already been rec-
ognized in the locally made wall brackets of LHIIIB Tiryns (Maran
2004a: 15–16). It can be suggested that this phenomenon of connec-
tions between population groups, which had already started in the
thirteenth century, became stronger in the twelh century, when the
palatial international system of trade in artifacts was replaced by a sys-
tem of trade in ideas, and by the movement of peoples. is is a dier-
ent koiné from that described for the LHIIIC Middle by Desborough
(1964: 228) and by Mountjoy (1999: 49–51), or by Sherratt (1998),
as here it is related to various movements of peoples and groups of
immigrants, and continuous contacts among them during the initial
stages of their settlement in the eastern Mediterranean. Mazar already
suggested a similar relationship between the immigrant populations
206 david ben-shlomo
of the southern Levant and groups on Cyprus (Mazar 1991: 103–104).
is koiné is attested to only by several limited aspects of material cul-
ture, such as the cooking jugs, gurines, and clay spools, items that are
all related to household domestic culture. is should be expected, as
immigrants cannot transfer complete assemblages of material culture
into their hosting cultures (see, e.g., Berry 1997) and are known to be
highly selective in the cultural mannerisms in which they engage (e.g.,
Cameron 1995; Chapman 1997; Burmeister 2000: 541–542).
Many questions remain, such as how and why this process began,
what were the trade connections and other relationships between these
populations, and whether there was a common origin for these people
in the Aegean or elsewhere. As we are dealing with only partial infor-
mation of a very complex process, only further archaeological evidence
can shed more light that may aid to answer these questions.
HOUSEHOLD ARCHAEOLOGY IN LHIIIC TIRYNS
1
Philipp Stockhammer
Although the long-term and large-scale excavations in Tiryns have
produced large quantities of important data, questions regarding the
use of objects in Mycenaean households, and the social practices con-
nected therewith, have not played an important role in research until
now. e series of excavations in the Northwestern Lower Town and
the Lower and Upper Citadel from 1976 to 1985 under the direction
of Klaus Kilian, and the eldwork directed by Joseph Maran in coop-
eration with Alkestis Papadimitriou in 1999–2000 in the Northeastern
Lower Town and the Lower Citadel in 2001–2003, in particular, pro-
duced a large number of meaningful contexts that can shed a new light
on questions of materiality and practice in Tirynthian households in
the thirteenth and twelh centuries bce.
2
My article will mainly focus
on new and important evidence from the Post-Palatial Lower Town
north of the Citadel Hill of Tiryns but will also review evidence from
the Palatial period of the late thirteenth century bce, without which
Post-Palatial household activities in Tiryns cannot be understood.
e main source of information for this article is my doctoral dis-
sertation on the pottery of the Post-Palatial period and its social con-
text (Stockhammer 2008); in the dissertation I concentrated mainly on
elite household activities and the change in their performance from
the Late Palatial period (LHIIIB2) into the early Post-Palatial period
(LHIIIC Early) with regard to feasting activities. I dene “feasting” in
this context simply as performance events where a huge amount of
1
My current research has been inspired and nanced by the Heidelberg Cluster
of Excellence “Asia and Europe in a Global Context.” I would like to thank Joseph
Maran and Tobias Mühlenbruch for intense discussions, Ursula Damm-Meinhardt
for permission to illustrate the plans of horizons 17a1–a3 of the Lower Citadel from
her forthcoming volume on the Palatial stratigraphy of Tiryns (Damm-Meinhardt
forthcoming) and Carol Bell for correcting my English text. e results presented
here are mainly based on my Ph.D. dissertation awarded in Heidelberg (Stockham-
mer 2008). For the abbreviations FS (Furumark Shape) and FM (Furumark Motif) cf.
Furumark 1941.
2
A detailed history of the excavation of the Lower Citadel is given by Mühlenbruch
2005.
208 philipp stockhammer
food is consumed by a certain group of people.
3
Feasts are a means of
social communication; they are the realization of societal discourses in
social practice. e participants at a feast are integrated into the frame-
work of the performance, whereas the nonparticipants are clearly dis-
sociated. In this paper I will demonstrate that architecture and feasting
are directly linked in the Mycenaean Palatial period and constitute
social space.
Elite Household Activities in Palatial Tiryns
e Mycenaean Palatial period until 1200 bce owes its name to the
existence of several palatial centers on the Greek mainland: Mycenae,
Tiryns, and Pylos on the Peloponnese. Within these palaces a king
reigned with profane and sacral power. Mycenaean society was strongly
hierarchical, hieratic, and tight. A complex system of administration,
which controlled much of the economy, was under the control of the
king. For the purpose of administration the so-called Linear B script
was used. Crete had been subjected by the Mycenaean palaces and
forced to pay tribute to the Greek mainland, e.g., in the form of oil,
which was transported in the so-called stirrup jars that were standard-
ized transport vessels. e palaces consisted of a complex sequence of
courtyards, propyla, and rooms, all of which were richly decorated with
wall frescoes. In Tiryns this sequence of rooms has been realized in an
especially impressive manner; it is based on an overall architectural
plan that was implemented at the site aer the earthquake destruction
of Mycenae around 1250 bce. is earthquake destroyed the north-
ern part of the Argolid and especially the old center of the Argolid,
the citadel of Mycenae. Tiryns, however, seems to have suered less
destruction. Instead of concentrating his forces on the rebuilding of
Mycenae, the king of the Argolid—called wanax in the Mycenaean
3
ere are myriad denitions of “feast” (for further discussion, cf. Stockhammer
2008: 295–297). Dietler and Hayden (2001: 3) consider the following the most com-
mon denition: “Feasts are events essentially constituted by the communal consump-
tion of food and/or drink.” Hayden (2001: 28) denes “feast…as any sharing between
two or more people of special foods…in a meal for a special purpose or occasion”;
Dietler (2001: 65) as “a form of public ritual activity centered around the commu-
nal consumption of food and drink” (similar, already, Dietler 1996: 89). For further
denitions—all diering in details—cf. Clarke 2001: 145; Junker 2001: 272; Wiessner
2001: 116–117; Steel 2004: 282; Wright 2004: 133–134.
household archaeology in lhiiic tiryns 209
Linear B writing—decided to make Tiryns his new center of repre-
sentation. e damage at Mycenae was le untouched or only poorly
repaired. On the other hand, the citadel of Tiryns, situated at the bay
of Nafplio and the most important harbor and central distribution
center of Mycenaean Greece, became the new paramount representa-
tive center, something like a Versailles of the kingdom of Mycenae.
erefore, I regard the ourishing of late Mycenaean Tiryns until the
eleventh century bce as the result of the earthquake of 1250 bce.
e citadel of Tiryns is subdivided into the Upper Citadel (Ober-
burg), the Middle Citadel (Mittelburg), and the Lower Citadel (Unter-
burg) (Fig. 1). In the course of the rebuilding of Tiryns aer 1250 bce,
the old palatial buildings on the Upper Citadel were torn down and a
new, richly furnished palace was erected (cf. Kilian 1988b: 132 Fig. 9).
e Middle Citadel was le undeveloped; perhaps some kind of pala-
tial guard was stationed there. At the same time, the Lower Citadel
was fortied with an impressive cyclopean wall and large adminis-
trative buildings, workshops, and cultic areas were constructed there.
To enlarge the Lower Town (Unterstadt) situated around the citadel
rock of Tiryns, it became necessary to reroute the river that ooded
this area regularly. For this purpose, a huge dam-and-channel system
was built that led the rerouted river into the sea. e most impressive
evidence of a royal presence in the context of the rebuilding of Tiryns
aer 1250 bce is the palace on the Upper Citadel, which was already
excavated by Heinrich Schliemann in the late nineteenth century. e
palace consists of a complex sequence of courtyards and propyla with
a megaron at its center that was furnished with a throne and a big cen-
tral round hearth that was surrounded by four columns.
4
Apart from
its symbolic character, the palace architecture was part of the social
space that was constituted by the practices performed within it. e
dierent activities that took place within these courtyards and rooms
at Tiryns are hardly reconstructable as the pottery from Schliemann’s
excavation of the palace has been lost. However, we can get an idea of
these practices by examining the palace of Pylos in Messenia, in the
southwestern Peloponnese.
e palace of Pylos was used at the same time as its Tirynthian
counterpart in the thirteenth century bce. Like the palace of Tiryns, it
4
For the performative character of Mycenaean palatial architecture cf. Küpper
1996: 111–118; Maran 2006b.
210 philipp stockhammer
Figure 1. Tiryns, LHIIIB2: plan of the Citadel Hill and the Lower Town (Maran
and Papadimitriou 2006: 100 Fig. 1; with kind permission by J. Maran).
household archaeology in lhiiic tiryns 211
consisted of a sequence of representational courtyards and rooms with
a megaron at its center that was also furnished with a round hearth
and the king’s throne along the right wall. e palace of Pylos was
destroyed by re around 1200 bce, which led to the excellent preser-
vation of its furnishings. Lisa Bendall (2004: 112–124, 126) was able
to reconstruct the performance of feasts at Pylos by the distribution
of pottery and metal vessels; I adopted and enlarged this reconstruc-
tion in my Ph.D. dissertation (Stockhammer 2008: 297–301). As the
complete ceramic equipment of the palace—about 8540 vessels—was
preserved in situ,
5
Pylos is of special interest for understanding the
connection between architecture and feasting in the Mycenaean Pala-
tial period. e greatest number of vessels, which largely comprises
feasting dishes, was found in only a few so-called pantries. e com-
position and quality of the pottery in the dierent pantries varied,
although the functional spectrum of the vessels in each pantry is very
similar. Remains of metal vessels were concentrated in the megaron
building. e spatial distribution of the ceramic and metal vessels per-
mits the reconstruction of the performative character of feasting events
in Pylos (Fig. 2): each participant had dierent possibilities of admis-
sion into the dierent courtyards and rooms of the palace depending
on his position in the social hierarchy. While the largest number of
people stood in courtyard 58
6
at the front of the palace and were sup-
plied with qualitatively minor pottery out of room 60, another group
of participants had access to the great interior courtyard 63/88, where
they could drink from qualitatively better ceramic dishes that were
brought out of pantries 18–22. A smaller group of participants feasted
in courtyard 3, in front of the megaron, where they were served with
unpainted drinking vessels from room 9 and elaborately painted mix-
ing vessels from room 32. As shown by the spatial distribution of the
metal vessels—bronze and silver dishes, and possibly even gold dishes,
were used inside the megaron itself.
7
e participants that were per-
mitted entrance into the interior-most room of the palace were part
of the ruler’s inner circle. e wall frescoes found in the throne room
5
For more detailed information on the ceramic equipment of Pylos, see Blegen and
Rawson 1966; Whitelaw 2001.
6
For the numbers of rooms and courtyards in Pylos, see Blegen and Rawson 1966:
Key Plan.
7
Bendall 2004: 122–123. Already Blegen and Rawson (1966: 350) assumed that the
elite of Pylos used such vessels (cf. also Knappett 2001: 84).