Download - Nowicki- Dark Age Refuge Centre, Crete

A Dark Age Refuge Centre near Pefki, East CreteAuthor(s): Krzysztof NowickiSource: The Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol. 89 (1994), pp. 235-268Published by: British School at AthensStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30102572Accessed: 22/06/2010 07:49

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bsa.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

British School at Athens is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Annual ofthe British School at Athens.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/stable/30102572?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bsa

A DARK AGE REFUGE CENTRE NEAR PEFKI, EAST CRETE

(PLATES 39-42)

lQog ovg xaToLxoug ov Ine1xov xatL ov aytLO6t[tov QO66bQO TOU XWQLOU

x. Eqtavovulk Kavapdxli

THIS paper presents one component of an on-going study of the topography of dark age sites on Crete.' This exploration of the end of the Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age on the island has sought (I) to clarify the broader regional context of well-known excavated dark age settlements such as Karphi, Kavousi Vronda and Kastro, Palaikastro Kastri, and Vrokastro; (2) to establish the location, function, and chronology of previously discovered but poorly documented sites; (3) to augment this catalogue of known dark age remains with new evidence; (4) to define patterns of settlement and land use for the period in various areas of the island; and (5) to establish chronological and regional patterns that may help us begin to understand this obscure period in Crete.2

The Dark Age on Crete is potentially better represented than in other areas of the Aegean, and explorations in the mountainous hinterland of the island have shown site numbers and a density of habitation only vaguely suggested by the excavated sample of sites. This study of dark age topography has shown the likelihood that a more complete or representative map of Crete might be drawn for the Dark Age than for any other period.

At the beginning of this century three sites representing dark age defensible settlements in Crete were partly excavated: Kavousi Kastro, Vrokastro, and Palaikastro Kastri.3 The list of explored sites was later complemented by a more comprehensive project undertaken by Pendlebury at Karphi.4 In the I96os new excavations at Palaikastro Kastri revealed particularly valuable evidence for the problem of the beginning of the Cretan Dark Age.5

I I am most grateful to the Greek archaeological authorities, in particular Dr K. Davaras, for the permits to carry out my studies and to draw the plans of the sites presented here. The work would not be possible without extremely gracious help and friendship of the inhabitants of Pefki. First and foremost my thanks go to the mayor of this village, Mr Emmanouil Kanavakis, for his interest in my work and for his and his wife's Cretan hospitality. I would also like to thank his brother, Mr Georgios Kanavakis, for all the information he has given about the archaeology and history of the Pefki area, and Mr Nikos Tavladakis for his hospitality. I would like to express my special thanks to Victoria Batten for improving the English of this paper, and to Donald Haggis for many very helpful comments, particularly concerning the pottery.

2 The problem of defensible sites in Crete, and their topography, distribution and evidence as recorded on the surface, will be presented in the forthcoming Defensible Sites in Crete (LM III c-Geometric).

3 H. A. Boyd, 'Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, in I9oo', AJA 5 (1901), 125-57; R. C. Bosanquet, 'Excavations at Palaikastro I', BSA 8 (I901-2), 286; E. Hall, 'Excavations in eastern Crete: Vrokastro', University of Pennsylvania Museum Anthropological Publications, 3. 3 (Philadelphia, 1914).

4 J. D. S. Pendlebury and M. B. Money-Coutts, 'Excavations in the plain of Lasithi, III: Karphi, a city of refuge of the early Iron Age in Crete', BSA 38 (1937-8), 57-145.

5 L. H. Sackett, M. R. Popham, and P. M. Warren, 'Excavations at Palaikastro, VI', BSA 6o (1965), 269-305.

236 KRZYSZTOF NOWICKI

Besides material from stratified contexts in settlements, there were short reports or notes on cemeteries (e.g. Erganos, Panagia Prophitis Ilias, Kourtes, Kamares, Siderokephala, Praisos, Atsipades, Driros, Vronda),6 unexcavated settlements (e.g. Zakros Ellinika, Kandilioro, Oreino Ellinika, Stavrochori Kastri, Monastiraki)7 and unstratified or very disturbed layers of the Dark Age unearthed during the investigations at later sites (e.g. Prinias, Ligortino, Panagia Prophitis Ilias, Elefterna).8 Such was the basis for studies of the Dark Age in Crete beyond Knossos.

Although Pendlebury proposed the reconstruction of events after the collapse of the Minoan-Mycenaean civilization, he still had too little evidence to support his ideas or to resolve some contradictions he found between different areas. Additionally, the chronology of the post-Minoan period was very confusing, and the most important aspect, the definition of LM III c, was not yet established.9 Nevertheless the list of refuge or defensible settlements proposed by Pendlebury remained the most comprehensive one for a long time,'l and was complemented only by a few sites identified in the 196os and 1970s11 Pendlebury's work was never fully explored by later scholars, and many of the sites seem to have never been visited again. Desborough and Snodgrass, when they presented their synthetic books on the Dark Age in Greece, did not include all the identified sites in their discussions.'2

A new chapter of research on the Cretan Dark Age started with two American projects covering the areas around Kavousi and Vrokastro.'3 The material from the re-excavated sites

6 F. Halbherr, 'Cretan expedition, XI: three Cretan necropoleis: report on the researches at Erganos, Panagia and Kourtes', AJA 5 (1901), 259-93; A. Taramelli, 'Cretan expedition, XII: notes on the necropolis of Courtes', AJA 5 (1901), 294-301; L. Mariani, 'Cretan expedition, XIII: the vases of Erganos and Courtes', AJA 5 (1901), 302-14; A. Taramelli, 'Cretan expedition, XX: a visit to the grotto of Camares on Mount Ida', AJA 5 (1901), 439-42; A. Taramelli, 'Ricerche archeologiche cretesi', Mon. Linc. 9 (1899), 403; F Halbherr, 'Cretan expedition, XVI: report on the researches at Praesos', AJA 5 (1901); R. C. Bosanquet, 'Archaeology in Greece, 1900-1901', JHS 21 (1901), 399-400; id. 'Excavations at Praesos, I', BSA 8 (1901-2), 231-70; E. Petroulakis, 'KplLxij 'ATotatdbag dtpoL', Arch. Eph. 1915, 48-50; Boyd (n. 3), 131-6.

7 L. Mariani, 'Antichith cretesi', Mon. Linc. 6 (1895), 293; D. G. Hogarth, 'Excavations in Zakro, Crete', BSA 7 (1900-1), 145; J. D. S. Pendlebury, The Archaeology of Crete (London, 1939), 178, 290, 385; H. A. Boyd, 'Gournia', Transactions of the Department of Archaeology, Free Museum of Science and Art, University ofPennsylvania, i (Philadelphia, 1904), 17-18.

8 Pendlebury (n. 7), 313-16. 9 Pendlebury often mentioned the sites as Subminoan or

PG, but their contemporaneity with Karphi allows them to be redated to LM III c-PG.

0o Pendlebury never published a proper list of refuge sites in dark age Crete, but numerous remarks are scattered in his works.

" N. Platon, PAE 1956, 239-40; P. Faure, 'Nouvelles recherches de spe16ologie et de topographie cr6toises', BCH 84 (1960), 196-219; id., 'Cavernes et sites aux extr6mit6s de la Crfte', BCH 86 (1962), 39-41; M. S. E Hood and P. M.

Warren, 'Ancient sites in the province of Agios Vasilios, Crete', BSA 61 (1966), 178.

12 Pendlebury gave, for example, a much better context for Karphi as a defensible settlement. A. M. Snodgrass writes: 'this site is shown by its pottery to have been curiously aloof from many contemporary developments in the island' (The Dark Age of Greece (Edinburgh, 1971), 249); and further on: 'Karphi was such an isolated site . . . The evidence of Karphi must, as always, be put forward with qualification, not only because of its general cultural isolation .. .' (ibid. 371). He identified the most important links with the outside world as being with Cyprus, in spite of the fact that they were based on a very few items, whereas the connection of Karphi with other Cretan centres is supported by numerous, much better-grounded factors. On the other hand, V. R. Desborough does not want to see Karphi in 'cultural isolation', writing that 'One of the most interesting points is the evidence provided for close contact with other parts of Crete, at least for some periods, and also for overseas contacts' (The Greek Dark Ages (London, 1972), 127-8). Desborough too, however, did not mention other sites, similar to Karphi and already identified by Pendlebury, when discussing this site's political role on the basis of its geographical location.

1' G. C. Gesell, L. P. Day, and W. D. E. Coulson, 'Excavations and survey at Kavousi 1978-1981', Hesp. 52 (1983), 389-420; iid., 'Kavousi, 1982-1983: the kastro', Hesp. 54 (1985), 327-55; iid., 'Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1987', Hesp. 57 (1988), 279-301; iid., 'Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1988', Hesp. 6o (i991), 145-78; B. Hayden, 'New plans of the early iron age settlement of Vrokastro', Hesp. 52 (1983), 367-87.

A DARK AGE REFUGE CENTRE NEAR PEFKI, EAST CRETE 237

of Vronda and Kastro has become vitally important for the chronological development of the pottery, while the surveys around Kavousi and Vrokastro have yielded valuable information on environmental and geographical factors as related to the settlement pattern.'4 Both projects, however, cover restricted areas on Mirabello Bay, and cannot resolve all questions concerning the history and character of the Dark Age in Crete.

More recently, selected Greek Dark Age problems were presented in brief by Coulson.'5 Several questions were posed by this American scholar to illustrate how complex the problem is and how restricted the material available for further studies. Crete is again discussed together with the rest of Greece; the island shows many individual characteristics, however, which should be studied before a new synthesis on this period is presented. New field investigations lead to the conclusion that many of the key questions must be revised and analysed on the basis of a wider range of archaeological evidence. For example, the chronological sequence (particularly the problem of the beginning of the Dark Age in Crete), settlement pattern changes throughout the LM III C-Geometric periods, the problem of immigration and emigration, the development of pottery styles, the partition of Crete into different political and cultural regions, and the interrelations of the main settlement centres within the island and their relations with the outer world, are all important issues which must now be addressed.

The problem of pottery, for example, cannot be restricted to the fine ware. The coarse ware appears at some points to be even more helpful, and should not be treated as non-diagnostic and, as is often the case, excluded from the final publications. The fabric, inclusions, treatment of surface, and decoration are very important indicators of chronological and geographical differences.'16 It is too early to present here more comprehensive conclusions about the variation in this kind of pottery, but some preliminary remarks, which will be illustrated in a more detailed way elsewhere, may be helpful.'7 In general the coarse ware, at least in the mountainous areas, shows characteristics which can be used to show some distinction between LM III B and c. This phenomenon may have been connected with the moving of pottery workshops from lower settlements, with a long tradition of ceramic manufacturing, to the defensible settlements situated in a different geographical zone. In some areas, however, particularly where there was a continuity of settlement, as was the case at Knossos and other central Cretan sites, and perhaps in Chania, the differences between the LM III B and C coarse ware may be less recognizable. In the mountainous sites the coarse ware seems to have changed very little during the LM III c-SM/PG period, and certainly it changed more in shape than in fabric. The next key point in the sequence of the coarse ware appears somewhere between the late Protogeometric and Geometric periods: the fabric became much harder, the clay better-fired, the inclusions finer and more homogeneous, and the range of colour variations more restricted, while new motifs of incised decoration quickly

"4 D. C. Haggis, The Kavousi-Thriphti Survey: An Analysis of Settlement Patterns in an Area of Eastern Crete in the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Minnesota, 1992); id., 'Survey at Kavousi, Crete: the iron age settlements', AJA 95 (Iggi), 291; M. S. Mook and D. Haggis, 'The Kavousi-Thriphti Survey, 1988-1989', AJA 94 (1990), 323; B. J. Hayden, J. A. Moody, and 0. Rackham, 'The Vrokastro

Survey project, 1986-1989', Hesp. 61 (1992), 293-354. 5 W. D. E. Coulson, The Greek Dark Ages: A Review of the

Evidence and Suggestionsfor Future Research (Athens, 1990). 16 D. C. Haggis and M. S. Mook, 'The Kavousi coarse

wares: a bronze age chronology for survey in the Mirabello area, East Crete', AJA 97 (1993), 265-93.

17 Nowicki (n. 2).


replace the old ones. The latter changes seem to coincide with the considerable changes in the settlement pattern of Crete.

Another point worth a brief mention is the problem of the regional partition of the island. The picture appears to be more complicated on the basis of new field investigations than that presented by Desborough and Snodgrass.'8 Crete was probably divided into more than two or three areas, and East Crete was not a political and cultural unit. With the collapse of Minoan-Mycenaean civilization Crete entered the period of partition, and this process deepened throughout the period in question. On the other hand, at some point and in some areas the process was reversed, probably in the Protogeometric, but certainly by the Geometric period. Partition and unification (the latter based on a new political, social, and perhaps ethnic identity) shaped the new map of Crete during the LM III c-Geometric periods, and at the end it reveals large towns, probably expanding their outer territories by force, and old refuge settlements either being abandoned or under pressure from outside. Such a picture brings us, of course, to the question of Dorians, the second major problem pointed by Coulson in the work mentioned.'19 This, however, cannot be resolved before revealing local variation in material culture, and before the archaeological situation of dark age Knossos, in particular, and of central and northern Crete in general, is understood. The subject of dark age Knossos is much more complex, and at present it should be separated from the problem of the defensible sites in the Cretan mountains.20

To understand the actual role of defensible settlements in dark age Crete, one must consider how many have already been identified and how few are usually discussed in connection with the subject. The most comprehensive study of the LM III material was published in the excellent book of Kanta.21 Even here, however, the problem of defensible sites is limited to a few sentences. Other works usually do not mention as many sites as Kanta.22 However, how

's Desborough (n. 12) was able to point out only very general differences between central and E. Crete, and the w part remained for him a blank spot (pp. I13, 115-17, 225, 234-5). Snodgrass (n. 12) proposed a more detailed picture when writing about the border between central and E. Crete: 'the border between the two may be placed at the defile on the road from Mallia through Dreros, close to the modern town of Neapolis' (p. 164). It is a pity that he did not draw the rest of this border or explain how and when it was formed. Material from LM III c sites on both sides of S.'s border is very similar, but not that of the PG or G periods. This phenomenon fits very well into the general changes in the settlement pattern of Crete at the turn of LM III c (or Subminoan) and PG. S. may be right to point to the special role of the Neapolis corridor in the expansion of the central Cretan element towards the E, and to some political borderline at this place. The latter can be drawn around the whole Lasithi range, with the outer settlements quickly developing into large towns (Panagia Prophitis Ilias, Lyttos, Kalo Chorio Maza, Anavlochos, Driros, Lato) and the inner Lasithian settlements (Kera Karphi, Gonies To Phlechtron, Adrianos Fortetsa, Kritsa Kastello, Tapes Kastello, Zenia Kastrokephala, Erganos) experiencing decadence or abandonment and moving to other locations (e.g. Kera Papoura). A similar process can be also noted in other

regions of Crete, e.g. the w Siteia mountains and the Rethymnon isthmus.

19 Coulson (n. i5). 20 The picture revealed by two important excavations

beyond the palace in Knossos is somewhat different. The Unexplored Mansion area shows continuing, but restricted, occupation during the LM III B, LM III c, and SM phases (M. R. Popham, 'The Unexplored Mansion at Knossos: a preliminary report on the excavations from 1967 to 1972', AR 19 (1972-3), 59-61). The Stratigraphical Museum excavations show this area to be abandoned by late LM III B, but clearly reoccupied in LM III c (P. M. Warren, 'Knossos: Stratigraphical Museum excavations, 1978-82, part III', AR 29 (1982-3), 69-83). The problem of DA Knossos was recently summarized by J. N. Coldstream ('Knossos; an urban nucleus in the Dark Age?', in La transizione del miceneo all'alto arcaismo: dalpalazzo alla citth (Roma, 1991), 287-99).

21 A. Kanta, The Late Minoan III Period in Crete: A Survey of Sites, Pottery and their Distribution (SIMA 58; G6teborg, 1980).

22 e.g. Whitley mentions only 5-9 sites (including non-defensible ones) for SM, 8-12 for PG (A. J. M. Whitley, Style, Burial and Society in Dark Age Greece: Social, Stylistic and Mortuary Change in the Two Communities of Athens and Knossos between nioo and 7oo Bc (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Cambridge, 1986), 261).


these sites relate to the more than one hundred defensible settlements so far identified for the LM III c-G periods in Crete needs to be addressed.23 At least seventy can be dated to the early phase of the Dark Age (LM III C-early PG), and this is apparently only a fraction of all sites of this type once scattered throughout the island. For some areas the picture must be completely changed, as in the case of West Crete, where typical defensible or even refuge settlements were identified in both north and south (Rokka and Agios Georgios Kastri).24 We can say, therefore, that the threat which forced most of the Cretans, at some point in late LM III B and at the beginning of III C, to abandon their old settlements and look for safety on the summits of easily defended mountains was similar in the Zakros bay and Kissamos bay, in Mirabello and Sphakia. Local differences, like the continuity of settlement in Knossos, Chania, and some parts of Mesara, may reflect more the strength of particular communities than the different circumstances in different parts of Crete.25

The problem of the Dark Age in Crete cannot be revised until more new archaeological evidence is published. The very limited scope of available information, despite being a starting-point for many ideas arising from the first excavations at early dark age sites, has led to a situation where each criticism of an earlier theory contributes no more than the theory itself.6 The only way to give a new impetus to further research on the period in question seems to be field studies in the Cretan mountains, as a supplementary project to the limited excavations started some years ago.27 The newly identified sites near Pefki (Siteia) are the most recent result of the project which previously concerned the area directly to the west and has already been published.28

GEOGRAPHY

Pefki is situated on the southern outskirts of the Romanati massif, in the SE part of the west Siteia mountains (FIGS. I-3).29 Romanati has a similar geological structure to most of the East Cretan mountains: secondary (Jurassic) limestones overlie an earlier (Permian, Triassic) schist/phyllite core. The shape of the landscape is primarily due to erosion. The main massif is cut by many gullies and small gorges; the outer faces of particular rocky islands form high cliffs. The karstic process can be found in crevices and caves, particularly in the southern part of Romanati. Seismic activity may have been responsible for the most dramatic changes in the local landscape, as in the vicinity of Pefki.

The Romanati massif is not as rich in water as the mountains to the west. Springs are limited to a few areas and appear in a usual geological situation, in the zone between the

23 All these sites will be presented in detail in Nowicki (n. 2). 24 K. Nowicki, 'Report on investigations in Greece, VIII:

studies in g99i', Archeologia (Warsaw), 43 (1992), 118-19. 25 Warren (n. 20), 83. 26 See e.g. V R. Desborough, 'Crete in the first half of the

twelfth century BC: some problems', in Proceedings of the Third Cretological Congress (Rethymnon, 18-23 Sept. 1971), vol. A I (Athens, 1973), 62-9, esp. the author's remark 'This is not a matter of adding to your knowledge of the facts; it is my purpose to bring to your notice certain problems, and even contradictions, that the facts imply.' Recent field

investigations and the new facts yielded by them indicate that there are many fewer contradictions than the facts seemed to imply twenty years ago when D. presented his interesting but controversial paper.

27 This remark concerns two DA sites: Kavousi Vronda and Kavousi Kastro; see reports on the excavations by Gesell et al. (n. 13).

28 K. Nowicki, 'The west Siteia mountains at the turn of the Bronze and Iron Ages', Aegaeum, 6 (I99o), 161-82.

29 On the geography of the w Siteia mountains see Nowicki (n. 28), 16I-6.


FIG. i. Defensible settlements in LM III c-PG Crete (selection). I. Milatos, 2. Vrachasi Anavlochos, 3. Driros, 4. Zenia Kastrokefala, Adrianos Fortetsa, Tapes Kastello, 5. Lato, 6. Kritsa Kastello, 7. Vrokastro, 8. Kalamafka Kastello and

Anatoli Mesokastella, 9. Mythi Kastello, io. Arvi Fortetsa, i i. Kerato and Loutraki Kandilioro, 12. Erganos Kefali, 13. Afrati Profitis Elias, 14. Lyttos, 15. Kera Karfi and Gonies To Flechtron, 16. Kalo Chorio Maza, 17. Profitis Elias/Lykastos, 18. Krousonas Koufo, 19. Prinias Patela, 20. Ligortinos Kefala, 21. Kastelliana Kastello, 22. Rotasi Kefala, 23. Pobia Vigla,

24. Gortys, 25. Kourtes Kefala, 26. Axos, 27. Pandanassa Veni and Thronos Kefala, 28. Spili Vorizi, Frati Kefala, and Atsipades Fonises, 29. Mirthios Kirimianou, 3o. Ag. Georgios Kastri, 31. Vryses Ag. Georgios, 32. Rokka.

500 - 700 m

700 - 100 m

LAND OVER 1000m

FIG. 2. Defensible settlements in E. Crete. I. Palaikastro Kastri, 2. Zakros Gorge Kato Kastello, 3. Zakros Gorge Ellinika, 4. Sfakia Kastri, 5. Praisos, 6. Chandras Voila Kastri, 7. Krya Ag. Georgios, 8. Myrsini Kastello/Ellinika, 9. Tourloti Kastri, IO. Pefki: Stavromenos,

Kastellopoulo, and Mega Chalavro, II. Ag. Stefanos Kastello, 12. Chrisopigi Korakia, 13. Oreino: Kastri, Kato Ellinika, and Pano Ellinika, 14. Ag. Ioannis Psychro, 15. Koutsounari Karfi, 16. Vainia Stavromenos, 17. Kato Chorio Profitis Elias, 18. Monastiraki: Chalasmeno and

Katalimata, 19. Kavousi: Vronda, Aloni, and Kastro, 20. Asari, 21. Palaikastro Plakalonia Kalamafka.


"" KitYA , ."

^ t

".r% .

' i "

.

)".- -"c-".

, .. ..

5 0.0.

12 Jr

8 0

), 5, ro te

71

I o o

" a acheoooca'st

IPF f

; / /

.

'50

" / 1

% %1

routes

seee

1000 arhelogclst

~ ; - \ [ A


limestone and schist layers. Many are seasonal; in some areas the water-table elevation has sunk, and today the springs yield far less water or have even completely dried up. The existence of springs around Romanati was probably the most important factor in the location not only of early settlements, but also of medieval villages. The Venetian (Pefki) or Turkish (Agios Stephanos) fountains are still in use, though today more water is drawn from deep wells. The intensive watering based on the new deep wells is responsible for changes in the vegetation zones of this area. More olive trees are visible around Romanati than several decades ago.

The expansion of olive groves has caused not only deforestation, but also the decline of grain cultivation and even of vineyards. The reduction in grain cultivation is typical of the whole island, and the process has continued especially since the second world war. A large area over the top and higher slopes of Romanati is dominated by pasturage. Several mandras are scattered around the massif, which serves as a main summer herding area for the shepherds from Daphni, Lithines, and Agios Stephanos. The animals are driven down for the winter to lower plains like that around Adromyloi or above Analipsi-Makrygialos. The great number of abandoned and partly destroyed mandras indicates that on Romanati the herding pattern has undergone considerable changes during the last few decades. In general, herds are much bigger but fewer than in the past few generations (this is a characteristic of the whole of Crete). The number of animals is usually higher than can be supported by the physical resources of the area. The last few dry years have revealed this problem most dramatically.

There are three inhabited villages and one deserted village around the Romanati massif (FIG. 3). Agios Stephanos and Pefki are located on the south side at an altitude of c.400 m, Daphni on the north slope at c.6oo m. All three villages were mentioned by Pashley as having the following populations: Ag. Stephanos (Gras) 17 families, Pefki 21 families, Daphni 19 families.30 Between Daphni and Agios Stephanos, at c.6oo m above the sea, is the abandoned and partly destroyed village of Aori. According to the locals, Aori was inhabited, in part at least, by families who had houses in other villages as well, for example in Daphni. The travelling time between the villages range from half an hour (Pefki-Ag. Stephanos) to one hour (Ag. Stephanos-Daphni, Pefki-Daphni), and all were connected with each other by kalderimia which followed the higher slopes of Romanati or ran directly across the massif (FIG. 3). Many eroded and destroyed remains of such kalderimia, or simply pathways, can be still seen at places. Better-constructed kalderimia connected the villages with the 'outer world', for example the routes from Daphni to Siteia and from Agios Stephanos to Makrygialos.

These paths and kalderimia were of very local significance, and were apparently laid out at a distance from the main transit routes. The latter ran around Romanati, following valleys and plains which, with their gentler contours, made travel more comfortable. To the north ran the eastern extension of the Avgo-Roukakka line, which connected the Mirabello area with the Siteia plain via Daphni and Krya. Along the southern coast ran an easy route from lerapetra to the Makrygialos-Goudoura coastal plains; behind Analipsi it branched off, and its northern line entered the Lithines corridor which gives the easiest access to Siteia on the northern coast. Of all the aforementioned villages, only Daphni was located close to, and directly above, the main transit route. It seems, however, that during the Venetian and Turkish

30 R. Pashley, Travels in Crete (London, 1837), i. 322.


periods, if not earlier, the south coastal line played only an insignificant role in lines of communication, and that the main route was moved up because of the high location of Agios Stephanos and Pefki. The coastal area in general was regarded as poor and unprofitable in comparison to the fields around the villages. The process has been reversed during the last twenty or thirty years.

EARLY OCCUPATION

Very little is known of the ancient settlement on the massif of Romanati, and so far this mountain is a blank spot on the archaeological map of Crete. The east Siteia plateau abounds in evidence dating back to the Neolithic period and the Early and Middle Bronze Ages. Several sites from these periods are also known from the areas to the north, south, and west. We can suppose, therefore, that the early Cretan settlers may have penetrated Romanati as well. If we accept the idea that the geographical setting of human habitations in Crete depended not only on environmental factors, but also (and in some periods first and foremost) on the political and social situation, we can suggest some topographical criteria for searching for archaeological sites. All the dark age settlements discussed below may prove that this method works. Can we also use it in looking for earlier sites on the Romanati massif?

Previous archeological investigations mentioned Neolithic in one of two caves situated near Pefki, namely Sto Vreiko (FIG. 3, C I). There is no published material, however, and neither the dating nor the interpretation of the finds can be proven at the moment.3' The second cave, Apaloustres (FIG. 3, C 2; FIG. 4), was not claimed as an archaeological site, but I recorded a scatter of probable EM sherds 30 m from the entrance on a visit in 1992 (FIG. 4. 14).

We have much better evidence for the Early Minoan period. It comes from the site which is situated on the very southern edge of the Romanati massif, between Makrygialos and Agios Stephanos (FIG. 3. 2). A small settlement probably of EM I-II date was located on a steep slope below a rocky knoll which rises beside the approach to the deep valley some 2 km from the seashore. It can be compared to similar sites on the south coast of Crete. A somewhat later site is located on the SE edge of Romanati, c.I km NE of Pefki (FIG. 3. 9).32 Here, on the summit of an isolated rocky knoll, Kastello, which is in fact divided into two separate parts, are the sparse remains of a Middle Minoan I-II site (farmstead or group of houses). The question arises whether Kastello was a proper habitation place, or a kind of defensible stronghold used in case of threat by the people living around it. An extensive Minoan settlement is situated c.5oo m south of Kastello at Akra (FIG. 3. 8). The place is defensible on the w and sw sides (high cliff), but is rather open on the other sides. Sherds visible on the surface seem to represent mostly the Neo-palatial period, but fragments dating to the Proto-palatial period can be also seen.

Another Middle Minoan settlement is situated c.I.5 km SE of Kastello (bearing I 17 deg.) at Kieratia Lagos (FIG. 3. Io). Architectural remains, possibly a number of houses built of large unworked blocks, cover an area c.6o m in diameter on top of a gentle hillock, which is encircled on the west by a natural wall of rocky boulders. Some stones, however, may have

31 N. Papadakis, Siteia, Fatherland of Myson and Korneros: A Historical, Archaeological and Cultural Guide (Siteia, 1983), 73.

32 The sites of Kastello, Akra, and Kieratia Lagos were

shown to me by G. Kanavakis, to whom I also owe all the information concerning the history of the destruction of these sites.


FIG. 4. Pefki area (for the sites see text).


reinforced this natural fortification, making it slightly higher. The site of Kieratia Lagos is

partly destroyed by an electricity pylon. Several sherds visible on the surface belonged to the

Protogeometric-Geometric period, but most of the material dates back to Middle Minoan. Kieratia Lagos seems to have been a border site on the eastern edge of the Romanati massif.

The MM III-LM I period has yet to be identified amongst numerous archaeological sites scattered around the lower slopes of Romanati. One of the most promising areas is that of

Adromyloi, where a very extensive settlement located on the summit and steep eastern slopes of To Marino To Kephali (FIG. 3. 13) suggests the local centre of MM-LM occupation. Another MM-LM I settlement was recorded in the vicinity of Daphni at a place called

Xenotaphia, c.I km E of the village (FIG. 3. 12). Its topographical setting is very typical of sites inhabited during the new phase of the Minoan culture which began in the MM III period. Diagnostic pottery, including sherds representing a fine-ware class, indicates that the settlement flourished during LM I. To the same period may belong some of the sites mentioned by the inhabitants of Pefki in a strip along the slope of Romanati below the village. This information, however, should be checked by proper field investigations. In the area of Pefki we were able to identify at least two LM sites. The first is situated directly south of the

village at Kato Geitonia (FIG. 3. 4; FIG. 4), which is related to the local tradition of a Byzantine and Venetian predecessor of Pefki.33 LM sherds seem to predominate among the prehistoric material, though several fragments may be dated to the Dark Age and quite a lot show the same local variation of fabric as those from the settlement of Mega Chalavro (see below). Because of the long occupation during the medieval period, neither the character nor the extent of the site can be easily reconstructed. The second LM settlement was situated on the aforementioned hill of Akri (FIG. 3. 8). LM I occupation is well attested along the southern

coast, where a Minoan villa was excavated and a probable settlement recorded at

Makrygialos.34 The changes in the settlement pattern between LM I and III have yet to be studied for

particular geographical areas, but it seems that this part of Crete was in general similar to the rest of the island. Coastal sites were occupied throughout LM III A-B. Some settlements or towns connected with maritime trade may have even developed by LM III A and early III B. In this group we should mention Diaskari, which is in a similar geographical position on the southern coast to Palaikastro Roussolakkos on the north coast. In LM III A-B one can observe a striking concentration of graves within well-definied cemeteries, which are often situated inland and are not associated with settlements. Such a group of cemeteries is represented by the sites between Adromyloi and Sykia.35 Its general geographical situation resembles that of the cemeteries near Episkopi on the lerapetra isthmus, or Armenoi in the Rethymnon district. All three are situated inland, one to two hours' walk from the seashore, in an area which has no earlier tradition as a strong settlement centre. To whom did these cemeteries belong?

33 The historical tradition of this village goes back to pre- Saracen times. It was sacked by the Saracens, but reoccupied during the Venetian period and destroyed again by the Turkish corsairs at the end of the I5th cent. After this event the village is said to have been moved to the present-day location of Pefki. Surface archaeological evidence seems to support such a history for this medieval village, whose name is unknown. I am much obliged to E. and G. Kanavakis for

instructive journeys to the area of Kato and Pano Geitonia, and for all the information about it.

34 The existence of a settlement near the excavated villa at Makrygialos was not ruled out by Dr K. Davaras during the 8th International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 6-9 June 1992 (paper on 'The function of the Minoan villa').

35 Kanta (n. 21), 185.


There are most probably two possible answers. The first is that an extensive settlement or settlements are yet unidentified somewhere in the vicinity of these cemeteries. The second

hypothesis is more tentative and is based on the general picture of LM III B settlement, which seems to have been much more scattered than in the earlier (LM I and LM III AI) periods; on this hypothesis the cemeteries may have been common burial grounds used by people who inhabited isolated houses or groups of houses over a wide surrounding area.

At the beginning of LM III C or even at the end of LM III B there was a sudden breakdown of the settlement pattern in Crete. While the picture of settlement in LM III B-c is still far from clear, and while the changes in settlement pattern are probably more complex than

usually presented, in general low-lying settlements and towns seem to have been abandoned and people fled to the summits of neighbouring mountains.36 In the west Siteia mountains the

process is reflected in a series of refuge sites grouped in areas offering safety and the natural conditions necessary for the existence of any place of habitation (FIG. 2).37 Strong centres were identified above Kavousi, Monastiraki, Kato Chorio, Vainia, Koutsounari, and in the Oreino

valley. The same phenomenon took place along the north coast of Mirabello Bay and the Siteia peninsula. The LM III c-Geometric settlements at Tourloti Kastri and Myrsini Kastello are only elements in a more complex system along the northern slopes of the Orno

range. In the Romanati massif, which is the eastern extension of the Siteia mountains, the

only site dating to the Dark Age was Agios Stephanos Kastello.38 The field investigations undertaken in 990o-I near Pefki revealed evidence which sheds new light on the problem of the Dark Age in this part of Crete.

STAVROMENOS

THE SITE

Stavromenos is the mountain which directly towers above the village of Pefki on the NW (PLATE 39 a-b). Its name comes from the chapel which was erected, according to the local tale, to

prevent the Turks from building a fort in this dominating position. Today an easy path leads to the summit, but the rocky massif must have always been considered an ideal natural refuge place.

The summit itself is 8o m long and 20 to 30 m wide, and consists of several terraces. The

highest terrace (FIG. 5. 2, 5), 12 to 20 m wide and 30 m long, is occupied in its s part by the

chapel and is nearly completely eroded in the N part, exposing a bare rocky surface. A thicker accumulation of soil, and perhaps some architectural remains, can be expected on the lower terraces (FIG. 5. 3-4, 6). All the aforementioned terraces are encircled by a high cliff which

gives the only access on the Nw side. Here the cliff forms several natural steps which were

additionally transformed into terraces supporting a 'stairway' leading to the chapel (FIG. 5. 8). Although no walls were observed on the steep w slope, the spot may have accommodated several architectural units.

The main settlement, however, was located on the E slope of Stavromenos (FIG. 4. 2, 5)-

36 For the general characteristic of this process see K. Nowicki, 'Topography of refuge settlement in Crete', Jahrbuch der Riimisch-germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz, 34 (1987), 213-34.

37 For the situation in the w Siteia mountains see Nowicki (n. 28), 16i-8o; id. (n. 24), 116-18.

38 Papadakis (n. 31), 73-


FIG. 5. Plan of Stavromenos.

The remains of buildings are visible on the spur about 40 m below the summit. In two or three cases house plans can easily be drawn. The lower settlement extended onto the slope w and sw of the spur, where the surface is very eroded. We can guess that this area was arranged in a series of narrow terraces which once supported proper buildings. There is, however, nothing but very destroyed terrace walls to support such a reconstruction. Sherds are scattered over an area about 8o m in diameter, indicating an approximate size for the lower settlement.


CATALOGUE OF SHERDS FROM STAVROMENOS (PLATE 42b)

x. Tripod leg. Clay brown, coarse phyllite inclusions, straw-tempered; three shallow finger-impressions (FIG. i6). 2. Tripod leg. Clay brown, v. coarse phyllite inclusions, much white quartzite, straw-tempered; five vertical grooves (FIG. 16). 3. Body fragment. Clay orange, pinkish surface and grey core, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw-tempered; herring-bone incised decoration (FIG. 16). 4. Body fragment. Clay orange-pinkish, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw- tempered; horizontal band with finger-impressions (FIG. 16). 5. Clay light, orange-buff, coarse grey phyllite inclusions; herring-bone incised decoration in a more elaborate fashion (FIG. i6). 6. Rim fragment. Clay pale brown, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw-tempered (FIG. 16). 7. Rim fragment of basin (?). Clay reddish brown with grey core, coarse grey phyllite, white quartzite grits, straw-tempered (FIG. 16). 8. Base fragment. Clay orange-red, coarse purple phyllite inclusions (up to 8 mm) (FIG. 16). 9. Base fragment. Clay orange-pinkish to brownish, large coarse phyllite inclusions, much straw-tempered (FIG. 16). io. Body fragment. Clay red-orange, grey core, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw-

tempered; herring-bone incised decoration in simplified fashion (shallow incisions) (FIG. 16). ix. Body fragment. Clay pale brown with grey core, coarse phyllite inclusions, much straw-tempered; herring-bone incised decoration in simplified fashion (shallow incisions) (FIG. 16). 12. Body fragment. Clay orange-pinkish with grey core, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quarzite grits, straw-tempered; herring-bone incised decoration in simplified fashion (shallow incisions) (FIG. 16). 13. Body fragment. Clay: light buff surface with brown core, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, much straw-tempered; horizontal band of incised spiral circles (FIG. 17, S 13).

x4. Rim fragment of pithos or pithoid jar. Clay: brownish pink surface with grey core, coarse grey and brown phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw- tempered (FIG. 17, S 14). 15. Rim fragment of pithos or pithoid jar. Clay dark brown with grey core, coarse phyllite inclusions, straw-tempered (FIG. 17, S 15). x6. Handle fragment. Clay reddish brown, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, two deep finger-impressions at junction with body (FIG. 13, S 16). 17. Body fragment. Clay light orange-pinkish, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, deeply sealed circles (FIG. 13, S 17). x8. Body fragment. Clay pinkish with grey core, medium to coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, incised hatching (FIG. 13, S 18).

CONCLUSIONS

The pottery on the surface of an archaeological site can usually reflect either intensity of occupation or progressive erosion. In the case of Stavromenos the reconstruction of the original appearance of the ancient settlement is particularly difficult. The pattern of the scatter of sherds on the surface results from several factors of different character, and much of the material was apparently moved from its original position.

Nearly all the fragments recorded on the surface are coarse wares. No clear differences between particular areas were observed. The fabric is in general homogeneous: coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, and straw-tempering are the typical features; very characteristic is a grey core which appears mostly in large vessels like jars and pithoi. Sherds are usually very worn, and no painted decoration has been noted. Relief decoration, however, is very common (PLATE 42 b). The tripod legs belong to the diagnostic LM III c-PG types with multiple finger impressions and vertical grooves; these are very numerous in the LM III c material from Karphi, Palaikastro Kastri, Arvi Fortetsa, Erganos, Kritsa Kastello, Oreino Ellinika, and Kastri.39 Stamped circles, visible on x7, were noted together with LM III c

39 M. Seiradaki, 'Pottery form Karphi', BSA 55 (1960), 9 and fig. 4; Sackett et al. (n. 5), 285 and fig. 17.


evidence at Loutraki Kandilioro, Myrsini Kastello, Chandras Voilia Kastri, but were also observed on a PG-G sherd at Maza and at the PG-G-Archaic site of Stavrochori Skalia.40 Incised spirals (13) are particularly numerous on the top of Kera Papoura in Lasithi, which seems to have been founded during very late LM III C or even at the beginning of PG, and flourished during PG and G.41 The herringbone motif appears in two versions, more elaborate or simplified; this is characteristic for the LM III c-PG periods.42

I could not find any meaningful difference between the material from the upper and lower settlements. Both seem to represent the same period and the same technology of pottery production. This conclusion supports topographical observations and the reconstruction of Stavromenos as a typical dark age site consisting of a lower settlement and a refuge area above it.

KASTELLOPOULO

THE SITE

This site lies about 8oo m N of Stavromenos, below the isolated rock of Kastellopoulo (FIG. 4. 7-8; PLATES 39 d, 41 a). The limit of the ancient settlement is drawn by the scatter of sherds and terraces ascending from the foot of Kastellopoulo to the s and E (FIG. 6). The natural boundaries are formed by a narrow, dry stream bed to the w and a miniature 'kampos' to the E. The scatter of sherds is very dense on the terraced area, and the pottery is particularly abundant at the points where the terrace walls are eroded. Considering the natural relief of the slope, and the height and width of the terraces, one can assume that the ancient houses are fairly well preserved. Some of the terrace walls may follow exactly the lines of ancient supporting walls. The lowest of the latter may have served as a defence.43 The area reconstructed as a settlement itself can be estimated as covering c.5,500 sq m, and the refuge area on the top of Kastellopoulo as not larger than 300 sq m.

The lower settlement at Kastellopoulo, described above, is easily approached but situated in an area abundant with isolated rocks and inaccessible summits. We can only guess that it was no accident that this LM III C site was founded right below the outstanding rock of Kastellopoulo, which is reminiscent of natural citadels typical of many dark age refuge settlements.44

At first sight Kastellopoulo seems to be totally inaccessible. In fact, one can attempt to climb it on its E side, at the place where a natural crack forms an opening in a cliff wall. The oblong, rocky top leaves no suitable surface for any construction; indeed, no architectural remains were observed here. The ridge of Kastellopoulo is divided by the aforementioned

40 These parallels will be published in Nowicki (n. 2). 41 Ibid.; for similar examples from Kavousi Kastro see

Gesell et al. 1985 (n. 13), pls 95-6. 42 Seiradaki (n. 39), 3; Sackett et al. (n. 5), 286. 43 The problem of fortification walls in DA Crete is

discussed by B. J. Hayden, 'Fortifications of postpalatial and early iron age Crete', AA 1988, 1-21, and by K. Nowicki, 'Fortifications in dark age Krete', in S. Van de Maele and J. M. Fossey (eds), Fortificationes antiquae (McGill University Monographs in Classical Archaeology and History, 27;

Amsterdam, 1992), 53-76). It is very probable that many more sites from this period were defended by walls, but because the wall construction was poor only a few can be traced on the surface.

44 We can mention here: Zakros gorge Ellinika, Palaikastro Plakalonia Kalamafka, Adrianos Fortetsa, Gonies Porolios, Mythi Kastello, Arvi Fortetsa, Frati Kephala, and Rokka Kisamou, all with very well-defined lower settlements and inaccessible refuge areas on the rocky knolls above.


FIG. 6. Plan of Kastellopoulo.

crack into two parts with a depression between them, about 2 m deep and 2 m wide, opening to the precipitous western cliff (FIG. 8). Here can be seen numerous sherds, an ash layer, and animal bones in substantial concentration. Unfortunately, the place is badly destroyed by hunters of antiquities.45 A trench dug by them probably explored the whole deposit, and the only remains visible today are on the surface. The sherds are mostly fine wares, and many

15 According to G. Kanavakis this illegal digging took place between 1954 and 1957. Another inhabitant of Pefki

claimed that it took place in the i96os, but the former informant seems to remember the facts better.


S KASTELLOPOULO N

Shrine

S e t tl e m e n

0 30m

FIG. 7. Section (S-N) of Kastellopoulo.

ROCK I~

2 1

ROCK

ash

potsherds bones

0 5m

FIG. 8. Plan of Kastellopoulo shrine.


have painted decoration. The animal bones seem to represent goats and sheep, and are usually burnt. Ash is visible all over, but in some places it appears as a layer in an exposed section. A cobblestone tool with traces of use on both ends was also recorded (below, 59). No remains of walls were visible during my visit, but two natural walls are formed by rock.

The character of the site on the top of Kastellopoulo can be only tentatively reconstructed on the basis of finds and topography. In sharp contrast to the pottery scattered over the lower settlement of Kastellopoulo, which belongs to the coarse-ware group, the material from the knoll represents almost exclusively a fine-ware class. This kind of sherd, together with the abundance of animal bones and ash, suggests a special function for Kastellopoulo. It was mentioned as a beacon or a watchtower.46 Its topographical position, dominating the lower settlement and with a splendid view towards the south, might have justified such an identification, but the finds and new research at other similar sites suggest another, and I think more accurate, reconstruction: the place may have been used as an open shrine where sacrifices were offered. Very important information concerning the character of this site was given to me by Mr Georgios Kanavakis, who visited the place with the police immediately after it was plundered in the 1950s. According to him, two large pithoi had been unearthed. One of them was filled with 'burnt animal bones and two elephant tusks' (!). The second was filled with clay animal and human figurines and with 'round stones the size of apricots [i.e. cobblestones?] of different colours'. What can we now find to check the plausibility of this story, which at first sight sounds incredible?

The position of one pithos and its body fragments were still visible at the site during my visits in i991 and 1992 (FIG. 8, circle no. I; PLATE 40 d). Although no figurines or cobblestones were recorded nearby, this pithos must have contained, at least, smaller pots, fragments of which are still preserved in situ. Many broken pieces of the pithos were noted in the crack directly below to the E. On the basis of the preserved fragments we can reconstruct the pithos as being c.o.8 m in diameter (FIG. 13. 34). The clay is brown close to the surface and grey to black at the core. The outer surface was slightly burnished, the inner surface rough. Although I could not find any fragment of the second pithos, there is no reason to doubt this part of Kanavakis's story. According to him the second pithos was found about I m further w (FIG. 8, circle no. 2; PLATE 40 e). It was said to have been filled with bones, and indeed bones and ash are visible in this part of the trench. More pottery can be seen down the steep rocky slope and cliff to the w.

The material recorded during recent field investigations points without doubt to a special function for the top of Kastellopoulo. A very similar situation was noted on the summits of other LM III c defensible settlements, for example Arvi Fortetsa,47 Gonies To Phlechtron,48 Oreino Kastri,49 and Mirthios Kirimianou. We can conclude, therefore, that the summit of

46 Papadakis (n. 31), 73. M. S. E Hood, P. Warren, and G. Cadogan, 'Travels in

Crete', BSA 59 (1964), 92. On my recent visit to Arvi Fortetsa in May 1992 I saw three holes dug during the winter of 1991-2, probably by illegal excavators. They destroyed much of the area, but revealed more fine ware and many fragments of burnt animal bones, which could be seen on the surface. This supports the original identification of the spot as a

shrine, proposed by the British archaeologists. 48 K. Nowicki, 'To Phlechtron and other dark age sites

near Kera Karphi' (forthcoming). 9 The cult place was probably situated on the top of

Kastri, where the Hilltop Building was reconstructed (Nowicki (n. 28), 17O and pl. 37 b). Many burnt animal bones were seen by the author along the s edge of the highest terrace of Kastri.


Kastellopoulo was used as an open shrine. It was probably located at the most inaccessible spot, which may also have been regarded as a good refuge area in case of a sudden raid. It may have been that the rock of Kastellopoulo was used for refuge, and was only one element of a refuge system covering the inaccessible rocks of Mega Chalavro and the summit of Stavromenos.

CATALOGUE OF SHERDS FROM KASTELLOPOULO (PLATE 42 a)

Nos. I-39 and the stone tool 59 are from the rocky knoll of Kastellopoulo, 40-57 from the lower settlement.

I. Shoulder fragment. Clay dark red-brownish, fine, hard; inner surface all painted with red, outer surface red paint on pinkish slip, octopus motif; LM III c (FIG. 12). 2. Shoulder fragment. Clay light orange-buff, fine, v. hard; orange-buff slip, thick layer of black-brownish paint, black overpainted interior, wide horizontal band with linear decoration below it on outer surface; LM III c (FIG. 12). 3. Body fragment (near base). Clay light buff-orange; outer surface buff slip, black brownish paint, inner surface all painted with black, two vertical strips preserved on outer surface; LM III c (FIG. 12). 4. Body fragment. Clay light buff-orange, fine; inner surface buff, outer surface buff slip and red paint, four narrow wave (?) strips; LM III c (FIG. 12). 5. Body fragment (a lower part). Clay light orange- buff, fine, hard; inner and outer surface black-painted all over (FIG. 12). 6. Kylix stem fragment. Clay light buff-orange, fine; orange-buff slip, red paint, horizontal strip on junction of stem and body with vertical band; LM III B or early III c (FIG. 12). 7. Base fragment. Clay light pinkish buff, fine, hard; inner and outer surface black-painted (FIG. 12). 8. Rim fragment. Clay brown, grey core, fine to coarse phyllite inclusions, sand, white quartzite, straw- tempered (FIG. I2). 9g. Rim fragment. Clay reddish brown, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite, calcite, straw-tempered (FIG. 12). zo. Rim and body fragment of deep bowl. Clay light, pale brown to greyish, fine, hard; inner and outer surface orange brownish slip and black-brownish paint; LM III B or c (FIG. 12). I1. Body fragment. Clay orange, fine; inner surface red overpainted, outer surface orange-buff slip and brownish red vertical strips (FIG. 12). x2. Base fragment. Clay light buff, fine, hard; orange- buff slip and red horizontal band around base; LM III c (FIG. 12). 13. Base fragment. Clay pinkish, fine, hard, v. fine grits and v. fine straw-tempered; pinkish buff slip and wide horizontal band around base, brownish paint; LM III c (FIG. 12).

14. Rim fragment of one-handled (?) cup. Clay pinkish, fine; surface plain, light brownish; LM III c (FIG. 12). 15. Rim and body fragment of deep bowl. Clay light buff-orange, hard, fine; buff slip on surface; LM III B or C (FIG. 12). x6. Rim fragment of deep bowl. Clay orange-buff, fine; inner and outer surface plain; LM III c (FIG. 12).

17. Rim fragment of conical cup. Clay buff, fine; inner and outer surface plain; LM III c (FIG. 12). x8. Rim fragment of closed jug. Clay coarse brownish, coarse phyllite inclusions, white grits, straw- tempered (FIG. 12). xg. Rim fragment. Clay v. coarse, brownish orange, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, much straw temper; surface sl. burnished (FIG. 12). 20o. Base fragment of tube stand (?). Clay red brick, v. hard, coarse and medium phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits; surface brownish red, sl. burnished; LM III (FIG. 12). 2x. Rim fragment. Clay red brick, hard, coarse and medium phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits; surface brownish red, sl. burnished (FIG. 12). 22. Rim fragment of kylix (?). Clay buff, fine, hard; LM III B or C (FIG. 12). 23. Rim fragment of kylix (?). Clay as 22; LM III B or C (FIG. 12). 24. Clay coarse, brown, hard, coarse phyllite inclusions, straw-tempered; surface sl. burnished, herringbone incised decoration in a more elaborate fashion; LM III B or early III c (FIG. 12). 25. Conical cup fragment. Clay orange-red, fine, little sand and white quartzite, v. fine straw temper; LM III c (FIG. 12). 26. Rim fragment of narrow-necked jar. Clay reddish- brown, fine to medium phyllite inclusions, quartzite, calcite, straw-tempered; LM III (FIG. 12). 27. Rim fragment. Clay greenish buff, hard, fine to coarse phyllite inclusions, sand, straw-tempered (FIG. 12). 28. Rim fragment. Clay as 26 (FIG. 12).

29. Shoulder fragment. Clay light orange-buff, fine, hard; light orange slip, black paint; LM III c (FIG. I3).


30. Shoulder fragment. Clay light orange, fine, hard; buff slip, red to dark brown paint, inner surface overpainted with dark brown, LM III C (FIG. 13). 3x. Body or neck fragment. Clay light, fine, hard; buff slip, brown to black paint, inner surface overpainted with dark brown to black (FIG. 13). 32. Shoulder fragment. Clay red-brown with dark grey core, fine, v. hard; pinkish orange slip, red lustrous paint, inner surface overpainted with black; LM III B (FIG. 13). 33. Rim and body fragment of deep bowl. Clay light buff, fine, hard; buffslip, black paint; LM III c (FIG. 13). 34. Rim fragment of pithoid jar. Clay brown with grey-black core; outer surface sl. smoothed, inner rough (FIG. 13). 35. Tripod leg. Clay coarse brownish, surface sl. smoothed, orange to brownish in colour; LM III B or early III C (FIG. 13). 36. Body fragment. Clay orange-red, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits; finger-impressed bands and vertical incised hatching (FIG. I3). 37. Body fragment. Clay light orange, fine, hard; buff slip, dark brown paint (FIG. 13). 38. Body fragment. Clay coarse, orange-brown with brown core, phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw-tempered, surface sl. smoothed (FIG. 13). 39. Rim fragment. Clay light brownish with grey core, fine to medium, and a few coarse, phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw-tempered (FIG. 13). 40. Rim fragment. Clay reddish with brown core, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw- tempered (FIG. 13). 41. Tripod leg. Clay coarse brown, grey core, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw- tempered; three incised vertical grooves; (FIG. 14). 42. Tripod leg. Clay brownish red, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw-tempered; a finger impression (FIG. 14). 43. Tripod leg. Clay like 4x; a finger impression (FIG. 14). 44. Tripod leg. Clay like 42; a finger impression (FIG. 14). 45. Tripod leg. Clay brownish red, coarse phyllite inclusions, white grits, straw-tempered; a finger impression (FIG. 14).

46. Lid knob or false neck of stirrup jar. Clay light, buff, fine, much worn (FIG. 14). 47. Base fragment. Clay v. coarse, brownish red; coarse phyllite inclusions, white grits, much straw temper; basket-like vertical incisions close to base (FIG. 14)- 48. Fragment of human statue (?). Clay pinkish orange, fine, hard, v. fine phyllite inclusions, little straw temper. Probably from the head of a human statue; hair and one eye (?) rendered in applied strips and knob (FIG. 14)- 49. Shoulder fragment. Clay orange to brownish orange, coarse, many coarse phyllite inclusions, v. large quartzite grits; two bands of hatched incisions (FIG. 14). 50. Rim fragment. Clay pink with grey core, coarse, medium size (to 2 mm) grey phyllite inclusions (FIG. 14). 5x. Rim fragment. Clay orange, white quartzite grits, fine to medium phyllite inclusions, straw-tempered (FIG. 14). 52. Base fragment. Clay orange, hard, fine, straw- tempered (FIG. 14). 53. Base fragment. Clay orange-brown with pale brown core, fine, straw-tempered (FIG. 14). 54. Tripod leg. Clay reddish brown with grey core, coarse phyllite inclusions, quartzite, calcite, straw- tempered, a deep (io mm) vertical groove (FIG. 14). 55. Rim fragment of basin. Clay orange-brown surface, grey core, phyllite inclusions, quartzite, calcite, straw-tempered (FIG. 14). 56. Body fragment. Clay brownish buff, coarse phyllite inclusions, straw-tempered (FIG. 15)- 57. Upper part of body fragment. Clay orange-brown, surface orange, v. coarse (to io mm) phyllite inclusions, straw-tempered; two horizontal bands of finger impressions (FIG. I'5) 58. Upper part of body fragment. Clay red-brown with brown core; coarse (5-6 mm) brown phyllite inclusions; outer surface probably washed with pinkish slip, horizontal band with v. shallow finger impressions (FIG. 15)- 59. Stone tool. Serpentine cobblestone with traces of intensive use on both ends. From the rocky knoll of Kastellopoulo. (FIG. 15).

CONCLUSIONS

We have two groups of pottery from Kastellopoulo. The first comes from the very small area on the top of the rocky knoll, and represents mostly the fine ware. It can be dated, therefore, more easily than is usually the case with material from unexcavated sites, and gives us a rare opportunity to find links between the coarse and fine ware on a dark age site.

The majority of the sherds from the first group date back to the LM III C period. Deep bowls, cups, and conical cups all have parallels in the excavated material from Palaikastro Kastri, Kavousi Vronda, Vrokastro, and Kera Karphi, to mention only sites of the defensible


type.50 The Pefki assemblage is very similar to evidence from Arvi Fortetsa pointing to the same tradition and indicating very strong links with the LM III B period and good ceramic workshops.5' Several fragments may be dated LM III B. No. 32 is definitely one of the earliest examples, but the kylix stem 6 and two probable rim fragments of kylikes (22-3) show fabric, slip, and paint of LM III B rather than III C character. The tripod leg with a slightly smoothed orange to brownish surface is similar to the examples noted in Milatos and Mythi together with very early LM III c and late III B pottery, but also in Kalo Chorio Maza where the range of occupation is much wider.52 It seems to represent the LM III B tradition of tripod legs, which already have circular section but are still without vertical grooves or finger impressions; they have a much better texture of clay and are better fired than typical LM III C examples. Such tripod legs can be found on sites which are claimed to have been abandoned in LM III B (e.g. Chondros Kephali, Mallia, Sissi, and Palaikastro).53 Also fragment 24, with incised herringbone decoration, seems to be early LM III c or late III B. No definite cult objects were recorded, but fragment 20 may come from a tube stand, a very common feature of LM III shrines.54

The pottery from the lower settlement represents the typical LM III C-PG repertoire. The tripod legs with vertical grooves and impressed fingers are usual among the most characteristic examples. The finger impressions appear on the definitely LM III C fragments from Kera Karphi, Arvi Fortetsa, Kritsa Kastello, and Palaikastro Kastri, but can also be found among the PG material from Kera Papoura.55 One fragment, 47, is worthy of special attention: it belongs to the group of pottery noted at Erganos Kephali and Gonies To Phlechtron. In both cases only a very few pieces were recorded.56 The fabric is very coarse but relatively hard, the colour orange to red, and the decoration consists of incised or impressed grooves around the base of the pot. The incisions, however, are of an entirely different character from those common for dark age pottery, and were formerly described as 'basketlike'.57 Because there is no published analogy from the excavated sites we can be sure of neither the dating nor the origin of this class of pottery. The three possibilities seem to be (I) that the fragments date back to a much earlier period, probably EM, (2) that they represent a very local production, limited to their place of origin in mountainous areas of Crete, and (3) that they represent a foreign (non-Cretan) product, dating, however, to the Dark Age.

MEGA CHALAVRO

THE SITE

The third site is situated about 400 m w of Stavromenos, on the E edge of the curious labyrinth of a huge heap of rocks (FIG. 4. 4; PLATE 39 b). The physical appearance of this place has led to fantastic theories among the local villagers concerning the ancient history of the

50 Sackett et al. (n. 5), 282-3; Seiradaki (n. 39), 21-2; L. P. Day, W. D. E. Coulson, and G. C. Gesell, 'Kavousi, 1983-1984: the settlement at Vronda', Hesp. 55 (1986), 363.

51 K. Nowicki, 'Arvi Fortetsa and Loutraki Kandilioro: two refuge settlements in Crete' (forthcoming).

52 Nowicki (n. 2). 53 I wish to express my warm thanks toJ Driessen, A. Farnoux,

S. Muller, and J. A. MacGillivray for showing me pottery from recent surveys and excavations in Mallia and Palaikastro.

54 G. Gesell, Town, Palace and House Cult in Minoan Creta

(SIMA 67; Goteborg, 1985), 50. The nearest contemporary shrine was found at Kavousi Vronda, where fragments of snake tubes and goddesses with upraised hands were unearthed in great number: Gesell et al. 1991 (n. 13), 16i f.

55 Seiradaki (n. 39), 7-8; Hood et al. (n. 47), 93; Sackett et al. (n. 5), 285 and fig. 17.

56 B. Rutkowski and K. Nowicki, 'Report on Investigations in Greece, VI: studies in 1988-89', Archeologia (Warsaw), 41 (1990), 120.

57 Ibid.


area above Pefki. People believe that the extensive area between three points-Stavromenos, Mega Chalavro, and Kastellopoulo-was once a level surface and was destroyed in historic times by an earthquake. According to this story the whole area was occupied by a great politeia, the rest of which is represented today by the three sites mentioned. As is common, the inhabitants of Pefki want to believe that huge treasures are still buried under the fallen stones and rocks; Mega Chalavro is the site pointed out as the most promising in this respect. The truth, however, apparently differs from this tale. Mega Chalavro is the result of a geological process which may have had a catastrophic nature, but certainly long before the site was first settled. A large, deep depression, filled with megalithic rubble and cutting the rocky massif into several parts, was formed when the ground below sank down into a huge hollow or cleft. An interesting twist in the local story is that people have accidentally or intentionally explored the rocky labyrinth and have probably found archaeological evidence which seemed to them to support their version of the great catastrophe.

The archaeological site was identified as a dark age settlement in 1990, located on the slope below the characteristic rock rising about 30 m above it (FIGS. 9-II; PLATE 39 c).58 The area where the sherds are visible on the surface is bounded by the rocky massif to the w and 5-1o m high cliffs to the s and E; only the N side is open and not defended by nature. Thus the site measures c.150 m N-S and c.50 m E-W. Part of this area is overgrown with bushes, but in

general the visibility is good. Architectural remains, however, cannot be easily traced. The state of preservation is much worse, and the soil deposit thinner, than in the case of the lower site at Kastellopoulo. Only in some places are scant traces of walls visible among stones and bushes. One better-preserved section of walling can be seen in the N part of the site. Its character and position suggests that it may have had a defensive function and may have closed the only access to the upper refuge area (FIG. 9, wall F). This reconstruction, however, is only tentative.

The part described above is the lower settlement. Far more defensible was the upper, which can be reconstructed as a refuge area rather than a permanently inhabited settlement. There was only one very difficult connection between these two parts. It starts from the Nw corner of the lower settlement, close to the wall described above, and passes beside and above a deep crevice to a natural gate (FIG. 9, G; PLATE 40 a) formed by two fallen rocks, which one must crawl through; immediately behind this gate the path ascends a steep, bare rock. At the end of it one must climb a high, rocky step, reaching the first isolated rocky island (FIG. 9, RA; PLATE

40 b), about 20 m higher than the lower settlement. The top of this rock, which is c.io X 12 m, was occupied by a single building; remains of its walls can still be seen on the surface. Sherds are very numerous, and some come from pithoi or big jars. The area covered by pottery extends s as far as the rock RB (FIG. 9). Another isolated rock (FIG. 9, RC, RD) has a still more defensible character, situated directly w of RA and c.3 m higher. It is cut by a deep crevice, only I m wide, into two parts. All its sides are defended by a precipice and cliffs; the only access climbs to the area RC via a rocky step up from area RA. This rocky 'refuge island', 50 m by 10-15 m in size, shows no architectural traces, but sherds are very numerous, particularly on

top of RC. It seems this area was not built upon, but used for special purposes and under

58 K. Nowicki, 'Report on investigations in Greece, VII: studies in 1990', Archeologia (Warsaw), 42 (I991), 142.


FIG. 9. Plan of Mega Chalavro.


E W

Refuge Area

Rc RA

Set t il m e

0 30 m

FIG. io. Section (E-W) of Mega Chalavro.

i/ !~j e/

II

0e~ rr,

e

FIG. iI. Perspective view of Mega Chalavro from NE.


special circumstances. If any buildings existed here, they may have been built of perishable material.

Sherds are visible on small terraces in the higher part of rock RE, as well as below it along its base to the w (FIG. 9, RE, RF). Both areas were perhaps used as refuge areas as well.

CATALOGUE OF SHERDS FROM MEGA CHALAVRO (PLATE 42 c-d)

i. Tripod leg. Clay pinkish brown, coarse phyllite inclusions (to 8 mm), straw-tempered; deep vertical groove (FIG. 18). 2. Tripod leg. Clay pinkish brown, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, sand grits, straw- tempered, v. shallow vertical groove (FIG. 18). 3. Tripod leg. Clay as 2 (FIG. 18). 4. Handle or tripod leg (?). Clay brown, coarse phyllite inclusions, straw-tempered (FIG. 18). 5. Tripod leg or leg of plate. Clay reddish brown, coarse brown phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, much straw temper; sl. burnished surface (FIG. 18). 6. Base fragment. Clay reddish brown, phyllite inclusions, white quartzite, straw-tempered (FIG. i8). 7. Rim fragment. Clay orange, phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits; band of impressed fingers below rim (FIG. 18). 8. Body fragment. Clay pinkish brown, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw tempered; two bands of impressed fingers made on v. wet and soft clay (FIG. i8). 9. Body fragment. Clay red with grey core, phyllite inclusions, much straw temper; two bands of finger impressions (FIG. 18). io. Rim fragment of closed vessel. Clay as 2 (FIG. 18). ix . Rim fragment. Clay as 2 (FIG. 18). 12. Rim fragment. Clay brownish, v. fine and hard; black paint preserved below collar on outer surface. Geometric (FIG. 18).

13. Rim fragment. Clay as 2 (FIG. i8). 14. Rim fragment. Clay red-brownish with grey core, phyllite inclusions, straw-tempered (FIG. 18). 15. Rim fragment. Clay red-brown with grey core, coarse phyllite inclusions (FIG. 18). 16. Rim fragment. Clay brown, coarse phyllite inclusions, straw-tempered (FIG. 18). 17. Body fragment. Clay v. fine, hard, v. fine sand grits, straw-tempered; buff slip and black paint, two horizontal bands and unidentified motif above them (FIG. 18). 18. Base fragment. Clay brownish, phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw-tempered (FIG. 18). xg. Base fragment. Clay brown fine, hard, phyllite inclusions, straw-tempered (FIG. 18). 20. Base fragment. Clay reddish brown, phyllite inclusions, white quartzite, straw-tempered (FIG. i8). 21. Base fragment. Clay light, buff, somewhat greenish, fine, hard (FIG. 18). 22. Body fragment. Clay brownish, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw-tempered (FIG. 17, m 22). 23. Body fragment. Clay brownish, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite grits, straw-tempered; horizontal band of short hatchings (FIG. 17, m 23). 24. Body fragment. Clay as 23; two horizontal bands of impressed fingers (FIG. 17, m 24). 25. Rim fragment. Clay reddish brown, coarse phyllite inclusions, white quartzite, straw-tempered (FIG. 15, m 25).

CONCLUSIONS

The pottery from Mega Chalavro is not very diagnostic and differs somewhat from most of the pottery from Stavromenos and Kastellopoulo. No typical herringbone motif was found on the sherds-a notable observation at a dark age site. Relief decoration seems to have been limited to finger-impressed bands (very common) and bands with vertical hatchings (relatively rare). Tripod legs present a variety of shapes: 2-3 have a circular section, a characteristic feature of the LM III B-PG periods; 1-2 have vertical grooves. The groove in 2 is very shallow and is executed below the junction of the leg with the body of the pot. I know only one similar

example, from Milatos.59 No. I has a flat section which is very rare, but not extraordinary, in dark age types. Although at first sight the drawing suggests the EM III-MM I type, clay and fabric indicate rather LM III production. Flat tripod legs with vertical grooves were recorded

59 Nowicki (n. 2).


1

2

3

4

5

6

7 7

8

9

10 K

11

12

14 5 15

16

17

18 19 19

13

25

Si28

27

26

24 23 2W 21

20

FIG. 12. Potsherds from Kastellopoulo.

29 30 32

33

34 35

36

38

37

39

40o

S18

S17 S16

FIG. 13. Potsherds from Kastellopoulo and Stavromenos (s x6-x8).


41

42

43

46

44 45 45

47 48

f49

50

51

52

53 54

FIG. 14. Potsherds from Kastellopoulo.

56

58 Cl

57

59

C3

C2 C4 M25

CS

FIG. 15. Finds from Kastellopoulo (56-9), tholos tombs (c x-5), and Mega Chalavro (M 25).


1

3

4

5-

6 7

9

8

11

10 2

12

FIG. 16. Potsherds from Stavromenos.

S14

M 22

M24 M23 S15 S13

FIG. 17. Potsherds from Stavromenos (s 13-15) and Mega Chalavro (M 22-4).


1 L1

4

2

3

5

6

7

8

9

11 10

12

13

16 15 14

17 18

20

21

19

FIG. 18. Potsherds from Mega Chalavro.

in Kritsa Kastello, Gonies Porolios, Arvi Fortetsa, Koutsounari Karphi, and Kera Karphi.60 No. 3 is a typical LM III example. The bases are usually not very diagnostic, but most Mega Chalavro examples belong to the shapes which appear in Erganos, Arvi, and Kera Karphi. Very few rims were observed on the surface of the site. Nos. io-ix and 13 can be generally classified as LM III-PG; I2 is geometric, painted with black. Rim 7 is rather unusual in the dark age repertoire, but can be compared to examples from Arvi Kamini and Chondros

Kephali, both probably LM III B. I can find analogies to the strange rim 25 (from the refuge area RD) only in the Erganos material (where the shape is similar but not identical) and in

Ridopoulia I (R9).61 The only hatching motif recorded at Mega Chalavro was of a simple type, represented by 23; the same decoration was observed on fragments from Arvi Fortetsa and Erganos.62

To sum up the problem of the Mega Chalavro pottery: no certain date can yet be proposed.

60 Ibid. "' Gesell et al. 1983 (n. 13), 419, fig. 13-. a.

62 Nowicki (n. 2).


The site was inhabited or visited during the Dark Age, but the date of its foundation and of the first, and probably most important, phase of occupation is problematic.63

CEMETERIES

Our present knowledge of the turn of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Crete indicates that stone- built tholos tombs were the most common, or even exclusive type during that period, at least in these areas where the Minoans lived in defensible settlements. The graves generally formed extensive cemeteries, within which the individual constructions were irregularly scattered, sometimes very close to each other but sometimes far apart. No single dark age cemetery has been explored in its entirety, and the distribution of tombs, as well as the topographic relationship between the settlement and its cemetery, must be based on a few examples where the links between them are well attested.64

The Dark Age settlements identified in the neighbourhood of Pefki must have left a considerable number of tholos tombs. No find of this type, however, has yet been reported. Of the three sites described above, Kastellopoulo reveals the best-preserved nuclear settlement, with many topographical elements typical of the period. One can expect, therefore, a tholos-

tomb cemetery or cemeteries somewhere in its vicinity.

TOMB 2 TOMB 1

2 .

-a

TOMB 1 SECTION

qbF

0

FIG. 19. Tholos tombs I and 2.

One of the most promising spots is a gentle slope descending from the rocky cliff w of Kastellopoulo and across a small, dry stream-bed (FIG. 4. 15). The area is artificially terraced or levelled in places. A scatter of dark age pottery is visible all over the slope, sometimes in a dense concentration. Although the possibility of a suburban complex cannot be ruled out, it seems that the archaeological evidence here testifies first and foremost to the ancient cemetery, part of which at least may have been linked with the settlement of Kastellopoulo.

Two stone tholos tombs were, indeed, identified on a small lakkos about 300 m sw of Kastellopoulo (FIG. 4. 9; PLATES 40 c, 41 b). Considering the state of their preservation and the lack of any material

63 It was suggested by Donald Haggis that most of the Mega Chalavro pottery may represent MM I-II and LM III B, and I think such a dating reasonable. There are relatively few links with LM III c evidence, a fact which may even suggest earlier or middle LM III B rather than the end. Such an early dating, if supported by other evidence and further research, may shed more light on the sequence of events in LM III B Crete, particularly the late phase between the destruction horizon(s) in III BI/2 and the drastic change in the settlement pattern at the end of III B and the beginning of III c. This was probably a period of wars and migrations, when some coastal areas were abandoned, or at least seriously depopulated, and attempts were made to build

fortified citadels-not only in Crete, but also in the Cyclades and Asia Minor. This probably appears in Egyptian and near eastern written sources as the stormy period of the first invasion of the Sea Peoples during Merneptah's reign and the activities of post-Ahhiyawan troublemakers in the E. Aegean, but still before the main attack of the Sea Peoples on Cyprus, Asia Minor, the Near East, and Egypt.

64 This remark concerns Erganos (Halbherr (n. 6), 262-81), Kera Karphi (Pendlebury and Money-Coutts (n. 4), 100-12), and Kavousi Vronda (Boyd (n. 3), I31-6). The situation in Vrokastro and Kavousi Kastro is not so clear for LM III c, because intensive occupation during PG and G destroyed much of the earlier layout of the cemeteries.


around them, the tombs must have been robbed a long time ago. They were probably built as a pair 3 m apart, close to the projecting rock (FIG. 19).65 Tomb I is in a better state of

preservation, and affords a view of its method of construction which can thus be studied. The chamber was dug in rocky ground, and its walls were of slabs of local schist and limestone. The external plan is square in shape, with sides 3.2 m long. The interior shape of the chamber is only partially visible, as it is filled with earth. We can suppose, however, that its ground plan was also square and measured about 1.8 X 1.8 m; the approximate height of the chamber must have been 1.5 m (at present c.I m). The robbers reached the tomb in the usual way, by removing its top slabs. An original, and still blocked, entrance is visible on the SE side. Tomb 2 is far less exposed on the surface (PLATE 41 b). Either it was completely demolished and then filled up with stones and earth, or the robbers ignored it for unknown reasons. It may also have been looted long before tomb I was found. No sherds are visible in the close vicinity of these tombs, but some 30 m SE were a few fragments, one of which is a tripod leg with the rather uncommon decoration of two grooves incised in a shape of an inverted letter V (FIG. 15, C 1). The fabric points to the LM III C-Protogeometric period.

The third tholos tomb was recorded c.250 m further sw at Glikis Prinos (FIG. 4. io). This identification, however, is based on far less well-preserved evidence. A few stones are all that remain of the tomb construction (FIG. 20 b). One outer corner and the inner circle, or rather the remains of it, indicate that this tomb was bigger than the other two. Its external diameter may have been as much as 4 m or even

4.5 m. A hollow in the centre, a heap of earth and

stones around it, a large amount of sherds, and a few very small fragments of bones would seem to indicate that the tomb was robbed quite recently.66 The coarse-ware fragments show a typical grey core and brownish-red surface; one fine-ware fragment derives from a deep bowl, while another two (FIG. 15, C 3) of deep bowls or cups had their insides overpainted with black. An interesting object is a small piece of iron which may be a fragment of a dagger or sword handle with a rivet (FIG. 15, C 5)- An extensive area around tomb 3, particularly to the E, is covered with sherds. One fragment, part of a deep bowl, was noted about 40 m E of tomb 3 (FIG. 15, C 2). Close by, a piece of molten iron has been seen. The last find may suggest that this outskirt of the valley was designated not only as a cemetery area, but also as a peripheral industrial centre.

Tomb 3 is located between Kastellopoulo and Mega Chalavro, but closer to the latter site. At present it is

TOMB 5

TOMB 4

TOMB 3

0o 3m

FIG. 20. Tholos tombs 3-5.

65 Tholos tombs located in pairs are a very characteristic feature of both the Karphi cemeteries (Ta Mnimata; Astividero); see Ta Mnimata, tombs 1-2, 5-6, 7-8, 17-16; Astividero, tombs 2-3 (Pendlebury and Money-Coutts (n. 4), Ioo-8, pls 12-13).

66 1 was unable to obtain information as to when this tomb was robbed, but the inhabitants of Pefki clearly stated that this digging took place much later than the illegal excavations on Kastellopoulo and in tombs 1-2.


hard to say which tombs belong to which settlement. It seems that the whole area of Glikis Prinos and around was a traditional burial ground used by the inhabitants of the whole district. Other graves or cemeteries may have been located closer to the particular settlements. This was the case with two constructions which were recorded very close to, and NE of, the Mega Chalavro site (FIG. 4. 6). A long, gentle hillock between the Mega Chalavro slopes and the stream bed E of it is covered with sherds, which testify that the area lay within the settlement's activity zone but beyond the limit of its constructions. Two badly destroyed stone constructions are located on the N end of the aforementioned hillock (FIG. 20 a). The character of the stone slabs and the shape of these constructions justify their identification as poor remnants of small tholos tombs (PLATE 41 c). About 15 m further Nw one fragment of a geometric pot has been seen. Stone tumbles to the N and s may indicate the position of other tombs. The cemetery of Mega Chalavro may therefore have been located very close to the settlement and slightly below it, a pattern which is very well represented by the cemeteries of Karphi and Vronda.67

All the constructions identified above as tholos tombs are apparently only a very small part of the dark age cemeteries linked with the settlements of Kastellopoulo, Stavromenos, and Mega Chalavro. According to Georgios Kanavakis from Pefki, larnax burials were unearthed in the small lakkos E of Kastellopoulo (FIG. 4. II), and other graves have been found in rock shelters still further E (FIG. 4. 12). If this secondhand information is true, these larnax and cave burials may point to even older (LM III B?) roots for the settlement of Kastellopoulo. More intensive research, surveys, and excavations should reveal new objects, with (let us hope) their original contents.

SUMMARY

What is the context of the group of Dark Age sites near Pefki? While they do not belong to the greatest and most important settlements of that age, the Pefki sites may point to the character of the changes that governed the general settlement pattern in Crete. Perhaps very local, but topographically significant movements in the area, as observed at Pefki, reflect the same process marked elsewhere by the abandonment of sites such as Kera Karphi, Arvi Fortetsa, Erganos, and Mirthios Kirimianou and the foundation or very dramatic development of towns like Lato, Anavlochos, Panagia Prophitis Ilias, Kerato, Kato Chorio Prophitis Ilias, and many others.

The topographic studies at Pefki, as presented above, were unable to provide answers to several essential questions: first and foremost, the chronological relationship between all the sites. The general field research, however, sheds more light on the Dark Age in East Crete and allows us to present some preliminary conclusions before intensive surveys and excavations add new data to the problem.

The material recorded on the surface at Kastellopoulo points to the LM III C or even the late LM III B period as the beginning of occupation. The best pieces noted on the top of the rocky knoll may date back to the very early phase of LM III C, and show links with very late LM III B. Such an early date for the process of population shift to the mountains, following

67 For the topographical relation between the cemeteries and settlements in Vronda and Karphi, see Gesell et al. 1988

(n. 13), fig. I; K. Nowicki, 'The history and setting of the town at Karphi', SMEA 26 (1987), fig. i.


the collapse of the Minoan-Mycenaean civilization in Crete, is possibly supported by new evidence from Kavousi Kastro68 and fits well with the results of the excavations undertaken at Palaikastro Kastri.69 The refuge settlements of Arvi Fortetsa,70 Vainia Stavromenos, Krya Ag. Georgios, Kavousi Kastro,71 and Praisos, to mention only those close to Pefki, were all founded at the beginning of LM III c if not at the end of LM III B. The settlement at Kastellopoulo, however, is not very defensible and its geographical setting can be compared to that of Kavousi Vronda,72 Monastiraki Chalasmeno,73 and Oreino Ellinika.74 All the aforementioned sites were accompanied by real defensible settlements: Kavousi Kastro, Monastiraki Katalimata, and Oreino Kastri respectively. The topography of early refuge sites suggests that the beginning of the process of change in the settlement pattern of Crete was a particularly hard time, when people's security was seriously threatened.75 Since pottery often overlaps between the more and less defensible sites located close to each other, is hard to say what their relationship was in the functional and chronological sense. The theory of seasonal settlement must be abandoned, for the sites of Oreino Ellinika and Kastri, Monastiraki Chalasmeno and Katalimata, and Pefki Kastellopoulo, Stavromenos, and Mega Chalavro are all located within the same climatic and agricultural zone.

The answer to the problem of the mutual relationship between more and less defensible sites in dark age Crete may be clarified by the results of the Kavousi project. We may propose the following reconstruction. First, at the beginning of the Dark Age, at the turn of the LM III B and III C periods, the very defensible sites like Kavousi Kastro (and subsequently Monastiraki Katalimata and Oreino Kastri) were founded. Soon afterwards, in early or middle LM III c, perhaps even within the same generation or the following one, people tried to go down and built lower-lying settlements. Kavousi Vronda, Monastiraki Chalasmeno, and Oreino Ellinika may have been settled at this time. They coexisted, however, with the true refuge settlements in the vicinity. This security system probably lasted until some point in the Subminoan or the beginning of the Protogeometric period, when new troubles forced the inhabitants of many LM III C settlements to abandon their homes and either to move to more defensible sites or to look for new locations.

In the case of Pefki we are dealing with three sites located within a circle c.8oo m in diameter. All three sites consist of two topographically different parts. Kastellopoulo has a relatively open lower settlement (if we rule out the possibility of a defence wall here) and the inaccessible, but very small, top of the rocky knoll above; and Mega Chalavro has a lower settlement which is, however, well protected on three sides, and a particularly inaccessible refuge area on the rocks above it. The third site was located on the summit and steep slopes of Stavromenos. The part situated on the SE slope was less defensible, but closer to the arable land below. The refuge area, and perhaps the upper settlement, occupied the summit and highest terraces of the mountain. There is still another area which may have been used for

68 W. D. E. Coulson, 'Recent excavations on the Kastro Kavousi, East Crete', paper presented to 7th International Cretological Congress, 25-31 Aug. i99i, Rethymnon; M. S. Mook and W. D. E. Coulson, 'The Late Minoan III c pottery from the Kastro Kavousi, East Crete', AJA 97 (1993), 351.

69 Sackett et al. (n. 5), 269 ff. 70 Hood Warren and Cadogan (n. 47), 93.

71 See n. 68. 72 Boyd (n. 3), 131; Day et al. (n. 50), 355-9. 73 D. C. Haggis and K. Nowicki, 'Khalasmeno and

Katalimata: two early iron age settlements in Monastiraki, East Crete', Hesp. (in press).

74 Nowicki (n. 28), 172 and pl. 33; id. (n. 36), pl. 39- 75 Nowicki (n. 36), 233-4.


protection: the curious rocky labyrinth behind the site of Mega Chalavro (the proper Mega Chalavro location). The differences in location between the particular sites may reflect the changing security situation of Minoan refugees during the Dark Age. The surface material indicates that Kastellopoulo was the most important settlement during LM III c. Its inhabitants may have used the rock of Kastellopoulo itself as a refuge area or, at a slightly greater distance, the summit of Stavromenos and the inaccessible rocks of Mega Chalavro. Stavromenos was apparently inhabited for most of LM III C and until the Protogeometric and Geometric periods. By that time Kastellopoulo was probably abandoned.

We come to the most difficult point when we try to find out the place of Mega Chalavro in the discussed system. A geometric sherd noted close to tombs 4 and 5 suggests that the site was occupied or visited during that period, but in general the material is not very typical either of LM III c or of the Geometric. The fabric is local and differs from that observed at Kastellopoulo. Some sherds may even represent a much earlier period (EM-MM), but they are not very numerous. The Mega Chalavro setting proves that its inhabitants were terrified or even obsessed about the threat of sudden raids. It would be very interesting to know in which phase of the Dark Age (or even earlier) people lived under such conditions.

The dark age sites near Pefki fill the gap in the settlement pattern between the very strong group of LM III c-Protogeometric refugees in the west Siteia mountains and the Praisos area. They show the same process of moving away from the shore which is represented by the Oreino sites, Vainia Stavromenos, and Kato Chorio Prophitis Ilias along the south coast, and by Tourloti Kastri and Asari on the north coast. The abandonment of coastal settlements took place under a very serious threat from the sea, but people did not always flee to the interior of the island. They stayed close to their former locations wherever possible, finding a defensible mountain towering over the coastal plain. Examples are Vrokastro and Myrsini Kastello on the north coast, and Arvi Fortetsa, Kerato, and Koutsounari Karphi on the south coast. Some coastal plains, however, lacked an appropriate location for a refuge settlement, and in such cases people had to move to the nearest defensible mountain in the interior. The Pefki sites represent the second pattern, and their closest analogy can be found in the Oreino valley. The settlements situated about two hours' walk from the sea, and controlling all access from this direction, gave their inhabitants the chance to prepare for fighting by escaping onto the Romanati massif or seeking safety in the refuge areas above.

Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw KRZYSZTOF NOWICKI

(a)

(b)

1

2

1

2

(c)l

(d)

1

m

A

2:

1iiii~ iiiii

,I

KRZYSZTOF

NOWICKI

A DARK

AGE

REFUGE

CENTRE

NEAR

PEFKI,

EAST

CRETE

(a) Stavromenos

from

NW

(I = Stavromenos,

2 = Diaskari).

(b) Stavromenos

(i) and

Mega

Chalavro

(2) from

N. (c) Meg4

Chalavro

from

N (I = refuge

area,

2 = settlement,

3 = cemetery?).

(d) Kastellopoulo

from

N (I = Kastellopoulo,

2 = Stavromenos).

PLATE 40

(a)

(b)1

(d)

(e) (c) I KRZYSZTOF NOWICKI

A DARK AGE REFUGE CENTRE NEAR PEFKI, EAST CRETE (a) Natural gate to the refuge area of Mega Chalavro. (b) Refuge area of Mega Chalavro (RA). (c) Tholos tomb (i) and

Kastellopoulo (2) from sw. (d) Kastellopoulo shrine (i = position of pithos filled with pots and figurines?). (e) Kastellopoulo shrine (2 = position of pithos filled with bones?).

It

(a) (c)

(b) (d)/

1 u

I

PW

KRZYSZTOF

NOWICKI

A DARK

AGE

REFUGE

CENTRE

NEAR

PEFKI,

EAST

CRETE

(a) Kastellopoulo

from

SE (I = shrine,

2 = settlement).

(b) Tholos

tombs

(I and

2) sw of Kastellopoulo.

(c) Tholos

tombs

(?) below

Mega

Chalavro.

(d) Remains

of a tholos

tomb

(?) below

Mega

Chalavro.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

KRZYSZTOF

NOWICKI

A DARK

AGE

REFUGE

CENTRE

NEAR

PEFKI,

EAST

CRETE

Potsherds.

(a) Kastellopoulo

(shrine).

(b) Stavromenos.

(c), (d) Mega

Chalavro.

It

Download - Nowicki- Dark Age Refuge Centre, Crete

Top Related