OIL, WINE, AND THE CULTURAL ECONOMY

OF ANCIENT GREECE

In this book, Catherine E. Pratt explores how oil and wine became increas-
ingly entangled in Greek culture, from the Late Bronze Age to the Archaic
period. Using ceramic, architectural, and archaeobotanical data, she argues
that Bronze Age exchange practices initiated a strong network of dependency
between oil and wine production, and the people who produced, exchanged,
and used them. After the palatial collapse, these prehistoric connections
intensified during the Iron Age and evolved into the large-scale industries
of the Classical period. Pratt argues that oil and wine in pre-Classical Greece
should be considered “cultural commodities,” products that become indis-
pensable for proper social and economic exchanges well beyond economic
advantage. Offering a detailed diachronic account of the changing roles of
surplus oil and wine in the economies of pre-Classical Greek societies, her
book contributes to a broader understanding of the complex interconnections
between agriculture, commerce, and culture in the ancient Mediterranean.

Catherine E. Pratt is Assistant Professor in the Department of Classical

Studies at the University of Western Ontario. Her fieldwork has included
Palaikastro on Crete, the Palace of Nestor at Pylos, Mycenae, and the
Athenian Agora. She is currently codirector of the Bays of East Attica
Regional Survey in Porto Raphti, Greece. Her work has been published
in American Journal of Archaeology and Annual of the British School at Athens.
OIL, WINE, AND THE
CULTURAL ECONOMY
OF ANCIENT GREECE
FROM THE BRONZE AGE
TO THE ARCHAIC ERA

CATHERINE E. PRATT
University of Western Ontario
University Printing House, Cambridge cb2 8bs, United Kingdom
One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor, New York, ny 10006, USA
477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, vic 3207, Australia
314–321, 3rd Floor, Plot 3, Splendor Forum, Jasola District Centre,
New Delhi – 110025, India
79 Anson Road, #06–04/06, Singapore 079906

Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.

It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of
education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence.

www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781108835640
doi: 10.1017/9781108891165
© Cambridge University Press 2021
This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception
and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published 2021
A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
names: Pratt, Catherine E., author.
title: Oil, wine, and the cultural economy of ancient Greece : from the Bronze age to the Archaic era
/ Catherine E. Pratt, University of Western Ontario.
description: New York : Cambridge University Press, 2021. | Includes bibliographical references
and index.
identifiers: lccn 2020047376 (print) | lccn 2020047377 (ebook) | isbn 9781108835640
(hardback) | isbn 9781108812986 (paperback) | isbn 9781108891165 (ebook)
subjects: lcsh: Agriculture, Ancient – Greece. | Olive oil – Greece – History – To 1500. | Wine and
wine making – Greece – History – To 1500. | Greece – Civilization – To 146 B.C. | Greece –
Economic conditions – To 146 B.C.
classification: lcc s429 .p73 2021 (print) | lcc s429 (ebook) | ddc 634/.6309495–dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020047376
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020047377
isbn 978-1-108-83564-0 Hardback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of
URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication
and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain,
accurate or appropriate.
To my mother
CONTENTS

List of Figures page ix

List of Maps xi
List of Tables xii
Acknowledgments xiii

1 INTRODUCTION 1
Oil, Wine, and Cultural History in Pre-Classical Greece 1
Oil–Wine, Olives–Vines 4
Cultural Commodities: Dependency, Value, and the
Longue Durée 9
Considering Climate Change: Vulnerability, Resilience,
and Adaptation 21
The Structure of the Book 38

2 DEVELOPING A RELATIONSHIP OF DEPENDENCY: OIL

AND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALATIAL ERA 46
Production of Oil and Wine 47
Modes of Exchange: Commensal, Gift, and Commercial 64
Commensal Exchange: Increasing Scale and Formalization
of Feasts 64
Gift Exchange: Ritual and Funerary Gifts 74
Commercial Exchange: Regional and Long Distance 77
Chapter Conclusions 88

3 CONTROLLING THE RELATIONSHIP: OIL AND WINE IN

THE MYCENAEAN PALATIAL ERA 96
Production of Oil and Wine 97
Commensal Exchange: State-Sponsored Feasting 116
Oil and Wine in Gift Exchange 124
Oil and Wine in Commercial Exchange 132
Chapter Conclusion 147

vii
viii C O NT E NT S

4 MAINTAINING THE RELATIONSHIP: OIL AND WINE IN

POSTPALATIAL GREECE 155
Production of Oil and Wine 158
Modes of Exchange: Commensal, Gift, and Commercial 164
Commensal Exchange: From Regional to Local 164
Gift Exchange: Funerary and Ritual Offerings 173
Commercial Exchange: Simplification and Local Resourcefulness 178
Chapter Conclusions 193

5 REBUILDING THE RELATIONSHIP: OIL AND WINE IN

EARLY IRON AGE GREECE 197
Production of Oil and Wine 200
Modes of Exchange in the Early Iron Age 206
Commensal Exchange: Local, Regional, and Ritual 206
Gift Exchange: Funerary Offerings 219
Commercial Exchange: Specialized Amphoras and Interregional
Networks 224
Chapter Conclusions 238

6 EXPANDING THE RELATIONSHIP: OIL AND WINE IN

THE EARLY ARCHAIC PERIOD 245
Production of Oil and Wine 248
Exchanging Oil and Wine in the Archaic Period 254
Commensal Exchange: Communal, Private, and Ritual 255
Gift Exchange: Deities, Deceased, and the Living 270
Commercial Exchange: Regional Amphoras and
Mediterranean Networks 275
Chapter Conclusions 290

7 CONCLUSION: CULTURAL COMMODITIES AND THE

FUTURE OF OIL AND WINE 298
Dynamic Stability: Shared Values and the Construction of Eliteness 299
Olive Oil and Wine as Cultural Commodities 304
Learning from the Past: Climate Change and the Future of Greek
Oil and Wine 308

Online Appendix A:Oil and Wine in the Homeric Epics.

See www.cambridge.org/pratt-a
Online Appendix B:Oil and Wine in Hesiod’s Works and Days.
See www.cambridge.org/pratt-b
Notes 315
Bibliography 332
Index 396
FIGURES

1.1 Grid for visualizing variations in entanglements over time through

changes to scale and centralization page 13
1.2 Grid for visualizing changes to entanglements with the time periods
discussed in the book plotted for reference 14
2.1 Wine-making installation from Vathypetro 48
2.2 Stone-pressing bed from Kommos 49
2.3 Bronze Age rock-cut basins at Agarak 52
2.4 Estimated storeroom size (in m2) in Neopalatial palaces, houses, and
villas mentioned in the text 55
2.5 Estimated storage potential (in liters) of Neopalatial houses and villas
mentioned in the text 55
2.6 Linear A ideograms for wine (AB 131a–c), olive oil (A 302), and olives
(AB 122) 57
2.7 The number of pithoi that palatial stores were designed to house 59
2.8 Type 2 oval-mouthed amphora from MM II levels at Quartier Mu,
Malia 77
2.9 Early transport stirrup jars 78
3.1 Clay sealings from the Wine Magazine with variations of the wine
ideogram 109
3.2 The Wine Magazine (Rooms 104 and 105) at Pylos 112
3.3 Pylos Rooms 23 and 24 from northeast 113
3.4 Cretan transport stirrup jar from Mycenae’s House of the Oil
Merchant (no. 9099) with multiple seal impressions on clay spout cap 114
3.5 Pylos feasting equipment, including kylix cups and kraters for mixing
wine 118
3.6 Drinking scene on a pictorial krater found at Tiryns 120
3.7 Gold signet ring from the Tiryns hoard 122
3.8 West Cretan transport stirrup jar from the Kadmeion at Thebes
marked with Linear B 133
3.9 Central Cretan transport stirrup jar 134
3.10 Transport stirrup jar cargo of the Point Iria shipwreck 143
3.11 Mainland Greek transport stirrup jar from Zygouries 144
3.12 Trojan Gray Ware transport stirrup jar 145
3.13 Rhodian transport stirrup jar 146
4.1 Model of Tiryns during LH IIIC 161
4.2 Krater found in the ash layer above Phase II floor at Aigeira, Achaia 167
4.3 Small fine stirrup jar and amphoriskos from Perati cemetery 175

ix
x LIST OF FIGUR ES

4.4 Representation of a ship on pottery from Kynos–Livanates 180

4.5 Cretan Postpalatial transport stirrup jar with octopus wavy lines from
Halasmenos 181
4.6 Postpalatial round-mouthed amphora from Halasmenos 182
4.7 LH IIIC East Mainland–Aegean Koine: examples of typical vessels 184
4.8 Mycenaean rim-handled amphora, A99, recovered from the Point
Iria shipwreck with potmarks on handles 185
4.9 Number of transport stirrup jars and round-mouthed amphoras at LM
IIIC sites on Crete 189
4.10 Postpalatial Cretan transport stirrup jars depicted on the walls of
Ramesses III’s tomb 191
5.1 Plan of Nichoria, Unit IV-1 and Nichoria Unit IV-5 208
5.2 Imported Attic MPG belly-handled amphora from Lefkandi no. 898 214
5.3 Skyphos from Lefkandi, Skoubris tomb 33 214
5.4 Frequency of decorated ceramics per 100 m3 at Toumba Thessaloniki
by phase 216
5.5 MPG Attic lekythos from Grave I-Grotta 1971 221
5.6 Upper half of an early North Aegean amphora found at Lefkandi 224
5.7 Early North Aegean amphora from Troy 228
5.8 Group II/late North Aegean amphora from Sindos 228
6.1 Skyphos depicting a lever press, sixth century BCE 251
6.2 Oropos. Plan of metal working complex with building Theta and Iota 261
6.3 Middle Geometric II Attic krater found in Building 150 (Ed150) at
Eretria 262
6.4 Attic column krater, ca. 580–570 BCE 265
6.5 Percentage of drinking, mixing, serving, pouring, perfume, and
transport vessels within the total assemblage of offerings found in Attic
tombs during the time period 950–480 BCE 269
6.6 Early Corinthian A amphora 276
6.7 Early Athenian SOS amphora 277
6.8 Dionysos on the François Vase 279
MAPS

1.1 Map of the Mediterranean with major sites mentioned in the text page 43
1.2 Map of the Aegean with major sites mentioned in the text 44
5.1 Map with the northwest Aegean Koine highlighted 198
5.2 Possible production locations for early and late North Aegeanamphoras 230
5.3 Distribution of early North Aegean amphoras with number and find
context indicated 233
5.4 Distribution of Group II/late North Aegean amphoras outside of the
north Aegean region 235
5.5 Distribution of Group II/late North Aegean amphoras within the
north Aegean region 236
6.1 Extent of Greek and Phoenician colonization 246
6.2 Distribution map of SOS amphoras within the Mediterranean, with
provenance distinguished 278
6.3 Comparison of quantities of Corinthian A and SOS amphoras in Sicily 281

xi
 TABLES

1.1 Vulnerability variables due to climate change–induced food shortage page 25

1.2 Chronological table for time periods mentioned in this book 40
2.1 Number of attestations of specific Linear A logograms on Neopalatial
tablets and the minimum total amount of the commodity in liters 58
2.2 Number of presses found in Pre-/Protopalatial versus Neopalatial
contexts 63
2.3 Minimum number of oval-mouthed amphoras and transport stirrup
jars found at large Minoan sites 87
3.1 Distribution by type of record of Linear B tablets recording olives 103
3.2 Distribution by type of record of Linear B tablets recording olive oil 105
3.3 Distribution by type of record of Linear B tablets recording wine 106
3.4 Minimum number of individual vessels and low-end estimate of
volume held for contexts at Mycenae and Pylos 111
4.1 Number and percentage of the whole ceramic assemblage of kylikes
and deep bowls/skyphoi from the LH IIIB to LH IIIC periods 169

xii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This book is dedicated to my mother, Susan C. Ferris, who not only read
through the entire manuscript twice in extreme detail but also formatted my
sixty-page bibliography. Only love could possibly provide the patience and
fortitude to do that. Although this might be the apex of her support of my
fondness for archaeology, it has been there from the very first introductory
course I took during my first year as an undergraduate at the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill. This book has also benefited from the guidance,
insights, and critiques of many other people. Central to these personae are
Sarah Morris and John Papadopoulos, who became much more than academic
advisors. I must also mention Cindy Colburn, whose kindness continues to
have no bounds. As I embark on the new role of parent-researcher, I cherish
her insights even more. My comrades-in-archaeology shared moral support,
research interests, and insightful conversations that contributed to the shape of
the manuscript. They include, but are not limited to, Heidi Dodgen, Hillary
Pietricola, Brett Kaufman, Trevor Van Damme, and Bartek Lis. Sarah Murray
has been a close comrade for many years, and her fire has helped keep me
motivated through many summers of long hours in the Blegen Library. I am
thankful for our new adventure as codirectors of the Bays of East Attica
Regional Survey. I would also like to thank Mark Lawall, who became both
an amphora mentor and friend while writing this book. His knowledge of
amphoras and their complexity is truly awe-inspiring. Bernard Knapp and
Stella Demesticha also helped shape the ideas in this book by including me in
their own enterprises related to maritime transport containers. This book also
owes a great debt of gratitude to Carl Knappett, who not only contributed to
my knowledge of the intricate world of archaeological ceramics but also
introduced me to the editors at Cambridge University Press. Finally, I am
very grateful for the support and intellectual stimulation provided by Ian
Hodder. He is always quick to push me beyond the boundaries of conventional
thinking.
Over the years, the research for this book has received various funding and
support. At the University of California, Los Angeles, I received the Harry and
Yvonne Lenart Graduate Travel Fellowship, the Graduate Summer Research
Mentorship Award, the International Institute Graduate Student Fieldwork

xiii
xiv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Fellowship, and a Steinmetz Foundation and Friends of Archaeology Award.

A large section of research was also conducted as a postdoctoral research fellow
with the Hellenic Republic State Scholarships Foundation (IKY) under the
auspices of Professor Panos Valavanis at the University of Athens. There are
also a few institutions and libraries without which I am quite sure I would not
have been able to finish this book. The first is the Blegen Library at the
American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Thank you to the staff for
their help and for providing a little 5×5 foot home among precious books. The
British School of Archaeology at Athens, including the Fitch Laboratory, was
a second home and the Canadian Institute in Greece became a third. In Paris,
this book benefited from the Bibliothèque Gernet-Glotz at Anthropologie et
histoire des mondes antiques (ANHIMA) and from discussions with François
de Polignac, Vincent Azoulay, and Paulin Ismard. Finally, I thank the staff and
directors, especially Greg Nagy, of the Harvard Center for Hellenic Studies in
Washington, DC, for giving me a fellowship and for allowing my return over
many years to use the library.
I would also like to thank the team at Cambridge University Press. This book
was initially accepted for review by Anastasia Graf with Beatrice Rehl soon
taking over. I am still awed by the speed and clarity with which Beatrice returns
emails and inquiries. Her support guided the book across two rounds of
reviews. I would also like to thank the three anonymous reviewers who
provided their constructive critiques and insights. They helped craft this
book into increasingly better versions. Of course, any remaining errors are
my own alone.
Last, but certainly not least, I would like to thank my family. My husband,
Charles Stocking, has been with me since the very beginning of this enterprise.
He has seen this book transform into the 150,000-word behemoth it is today
and has witnessed the vast amount of research poured into it because he was
there for every minute of it. Every late night in the library. Every trip to
archaeological sites or museums. He was there to push me to finish and submit
the manuscript before we welcomed our daughter, Stella, into the world. He
was also there to wake up excessively early or stay up excessively late to take
care of baby Stella as I worked on revisions and edits. As I write this now, I hear
him helping a toddler learn her ABCs. Charles and I made a decision to do
everything together and support each other’s work. I am so thankful for his
presence in my life.
ONE

INTRODUCTION

There are two liquids most pleasing to human bodies: inside – wine, outside – oil.
–Pliny (23–79 CE), Natural History XIV, 29.150
It is evident that the country now called Hellas had in ancient times no settled population . . .
without commerce, without freedom of communication either by land or sea, cultivating no
more of their territory than the exigencies of life required, destitute of capital, never planting
their land . . .
–Thucydides (ca. 460–400 BCE), History of the Peloponnesian War, 1.2.1–2

OIL, WINE, AND CULTURAL HISTORY IN PRE-CLASSICAL GREECE

This book aims to explore the centrality of olive oil and wine in various realms
of ancient Greek life and how this interdependence came to exist and persist.
Indeed, this book argues that oil and wine can be regarded not just as economic
commodities, but cultural commodities that actively shaped the paths of ancient
Greek history. Cultural commodities can be defined as things that have become
deeply entangled with humans through increasing ties of dependency that are
reinforced by a high value constructed within multiple contexts of exchange.
On the one hand, expansions and contractions of dependencies between
people and oil/wine can be seen by tracing shifting emphases in exchange
modes – such as commensal, gift, and commercial exchange – within their
social and environmental contexts over the long term. On the other hand, the

1
2 INTRODUCTION

value attributed to oil and wine, although it generally remained consistently

high, was constructed in different ways as internal and external stimuli, includ-
ing changes in the natural environment, affected the relationships between
people and things over time. Cultural commodities therefore lie at the inter-
section of value, exchange, and dependency, where discontinuation is no
longer an option because of the long history of increasing entanglement.
Ultimately, cultural commodities become signifiers of identity, deeply rooted
in social and ideological practices. For the cultures of pre-Classical Greece, the
history of their entanglement with oil and wine is one that begins in the Bronze
Age and continues throughout the ensuing Early Iron Age despite dramatic
socioeconomic and environmental changes. By the Archaic period, olive oil
and wine were taken as an always present staple of daily life: their status as
cultural commodities had been solidified. Ultimately, the idea of cultural
commodities connects olive oil and wine to their cultural contexts over the
longue durée, making it possible to project their value and cultural significance
into the future. Indeed, the book concludes by suggesting that the history
presented here has meaningful implications for the future of oil and wine in the
Mediterranean.
Scholars, both ancient and modern, have long recognized the fundamental
role of olive oil and wine within Mediterranean cultures.1 In the first century
CE, very few would have contradicted Pliny the Elder when he wrote that,
“There are two liquids most pleasing to human bodies: inside – wine,
outside – oil” (Natural History XIV, 29.150). Indeed, both liquids were so
ubiquitous and essential to daily life that within his Natural History, Pliny
dedicated an entire book to the history and varieties of grapevine and wine
(XIV),2 as well as six chapters to the olive tree and oil (XV.1–6). Even our
first Greek literature in the Archaic period (around the eighth century BCE)
indicates clearly that both olive oil and wine were already intensely inte-
grated into contemporary agricultural, social, and economic spheres.
Hesiod’s Works and Days describes in detail the best practices of wine-
making, one of the fundamental agricultural activities performed during
the yearly cycle. And yet, for ancient Greeks themselves, the history of oil
and wine before the Archaic period was unclear at best and otherwise
nonexistent. For example, Thucydides’ fifth-century view of the ancient
past of Hellas was quite bleak, isolated, and agriculturally destitute. In the
section known as the “Archaeology” quoted in the epigraph, he described
the land of Greece in “ancient times” as one of dispersed populations
producing only the bare minimum of agricultural commodities needed for
survival, without “planting” their land, and without access to commercial
networks by land or sea (Peloponnesian War 1.2.1–2). Moreover, the verb
used for “planting,” φυτεύοντες, specifically expresses the planting of fruit
trees, most notably vines and olives.3
 OI L, WI NE, A ND CULTUR AL HI S TOR Y 3

This book aims to show, through a focus on oil and wine, that Thucydides’
concept of his own past as bleak and barren was far from reality. In fact, despite
a fluctuating climate and dramatic changes to sociopolitical structures, pre-
Hellenes achieved and maintained all of the attributes Thucydides thought they
lacked. This book traces how people did indeed plant their land with vines and
olive trees from almost the outset of settled life on both the archipelago
and Crete. The Minoan palatial era marked the start of extensive production
and exchange of oil and wine that was maintained and even strengthened
throughout the Mycenaean palatial era as communication by land and sea
increased substantially. One could say that Thucydides is merely referring to
his more recent past, that is, what we call the Early Iron Age. While his picture
of a bleak and “dark” Iron Age was indeed once accepted by scholars and
archaeologists, research over the last 30 years has overturned these
misconceptions.4 Not only did people continue to cultivate olives and grapes
after the collapse of the palaces, but they also adopted innovative and adaptive
solutions to the problems faced by climate change and population movements.
Production shifted toward more hospitable regions at the same time that
exchange networks were maintained, even across the Aegean. By the end of
the Early Iron Age and the beginning of the Archaic era, it is increasingly clear
that the regional entanglements surrounding oil and wine were expanding and
interacting at more complex levels. The close of the pre-Classical period marks
the point when Greek oil and wine, as cultural commodities, were deeply
entrenched within group identity, produced in large quantities of surplus, and
exchanged over vast stretches of the Mediterranean. The prehistory of oil and
wine therefore challenges long-held notions of decline, isolation, and darkness.
To date, no scholar has focused on the long-term prehistory of olive oil and
wine in Greece. Their focus has generally been placed on either the introduc-
tion of oil and wine production or the flourishing trade of these two commod-
ities in the Classical, Hellenistic, and Roman periods.5 The intervening Early
Iron Age is commonly overlooked altogether. Scholarly work that has
addressed olive oil or wine tend to do so separately while concentrating on
a narrow time period, geographical region, or amphora type.6 Moreover, few
books have addressed how and to what extent the changes in oil and wine use
affect or reflect the changes in Greek history. These trends in the literature are
not without their reasons. Up to now, there has been a particular dearth of data
related to daily life in the Early Iron Age. This is especially apparent when
addressing archaeobotanical evidence, which itself had been overlooked for
most other time periods as well. Recently, however, there has been a dramatic
shift in focus for both broader historical interests and detailed objective
analyses. The Postpalatial era and Early Iron Age have become subjects of
interest, stemming from and leading to the publication of archaeological data
related to those time periods.7 In addition, a renewed interest in the diet and
4 INTRODUCTION

agricultural practices of ancient people has fueled research and publication of

archaeobotanical data, palaeoenvironmental analyses, and residue analyses con-
ducted on pots used for cooking and eating.8
These recent trends present an opportune time for a synthesis of many
variable data into a coherent treatise on olive oil and wine in the pre-
Classical eras. In contrast to previous works, this book contextualizes olive
oil and wine within longer-term sociopolitical trends, shifting exchange net-
works, and broader environmental histories that are not easily grasped through
short-term perspectives. Adopting a long-term perspective allows an under-
standing of the dynamics of the relationships between humans and their
social and environmental world. On a detailed level, the monograph is
also concerned with the micro-history and material culture of oil and
wine, particularly, their production, exchange, and consumption in
specific social and economic contexts. Furthermore, it considers this
historical phenomenon as an ideal occasion to delve deeper into broader
theoretical issues of dependence, value, agency, and connectivity.
The implications of this historical study have a meaningful impact on issues
of current and future agricultural practice and commerce in the Mediterranean.
By understanding the resiliency of the relationship between people and olive
oil/wine over a long period of time, we can gain some general insight into how
to maintain these connections through political, economic, and environmental
hardship. As the Mediterranean once again enters into dramatic climate change
today, it is important to understand more fully the outcomes of these changes in
the past and how populations adapted to and, eventually, thrived in new
conditions. Indeed, the cultural commodities of olive oil and wine were as
much entangled in Greece’s past as they are in Greece’s future.

OIL–WINE, OLIVES–VINES

The central objects of study in this book, olive oil and grape wine, are
considered here together for very specific and necessary reasons. From
a broader perspective, oil and wine can both be labeled as value-added com-
modities. That is to say, both olive oil and wine are derivatives of products that
could have acted as simple commodities in and of themselves (olives and grapes)
and, through technological skill, they are transformed into different commod-
ities. In most cases, value-added commodities are considered more “valuable”
because of the time, effort, and knowledge needed to produce them. In the case
of both olive oil and especially wine, this transformation also brings about the
additional benefit of an extended shelf life (although we do assume whole olives
were also preserved in a similar way as today; Foxhall 2007, 12). Olive oil and
wine are also useful to consider together since both processes of value-addition
are very similar, both in concept and in the equipment used (and found in the
 OIL–W I NE, OL I VES–V I NES 5

archaeological record). Of course there are some differences (e.g., specific

growing regions, type of maintenance, labor necessary for harvest) but in
general, the production of both oil and wine benefit from domesticated plants,
which need constant and seasonal attention.9 In addition, the equipment
needed for both commodities includes specialized pressing beds, along with
large catchment basins/pots, liquid bulk storage containers, liquid bulk trans-
port containers, and smaller consumption containers. In most cases, it is
impossible to determine definitively whether a container meant for liquids
(based on shape) held either oil or wine. Indeed, many residue analyses
determine that specific pots could have been used for either liquid, or in
some cases both liquids had been inside the same pot at some point. As will
be argued throughout this book, one final reason to consider both oil and wine
together is their compatibility with regards to social contexts and their archae-
ological remains. Both oil and wine were used in the same types of activities
and their respective exchange contexts. For example, in Bronze Age Greece,
based on archaeological and written sources, oil and wine were both used in
ritual activities, which included feasting and gift-giving. Containers for oil and
wine, as well as drinking equipment, are found in almost all contexts of ancient
Greek life including cemeteries, shrines, palaces, urban houses, farmsteads, and
shipwrecks.

Oil and Wine Production: Technologies and the Archaeological Record

The first oil and wine production in Greece came relatively late. The earliest
evidence not only for domestication but also for pressing olives for oil and
grapes for wine comes from the Near East. Although recent studies of patterns
in genetic variation of olives and grapes suggest a longer, more complex
trajectory (Besnard et al. 2001, 2011; Arroyo-Garcia et al. 2006), the domes-
tication of the olive has traditionally been placed in the Jordan Valley, and
perhaps the site of Teleilat Ghassoul more specifically (Zohary and Spiegel-
Roy 1975; Kislev 1987; Neef 1990; Hadjisavvas 2003, 117). This area could be
extended more broadly to Palestine in the Chalcolithic era (sixth millennium
BCE). The first use of wild olives for oil was discovered off the Carmel coast in
Israel, where archaeologists have found hundreds of olive pips resting on stone
grinding surfaces and in pits at the site of Atlit-Yam, suggesting some sort of
processing as early as the Pottery Neolithic period (Galili et al. 1997
Hadjisavvas 2003, 117; Foxhall 2007, 13). Grapes were purposefully cultivated
and wine produced about 3200 BCE in the Near East, although we know wild
grapes were used much earlier (Hansen 2002, 55). Arguably the earliest evi-
dence for wine production comes from the fourth millennium site of Areni
cave in Armenia. There, grapes were crushed in a shallow, slightly slanted, and
grooved ceramic 1m-long basin on the floor. From there, the must flowed
6 INTRODUCTION

directly into a 60cm-deep vat imbedded into the floor where it would have
fermented (Barnard et al. 2011). In Greece, the earliest evidence for wine
production has been dated to sometime in the fifth millennium both on Crete
and in Northern Greece (Valamoti 2004; Sarpaki 2012, 214). Olive cultivation
was introduced in southern Greece and Crete at the end of the Neolithic Era
and evidence for oil production becomes evident during the Bronze Age
(Valamoti et al. 2018, 184; Langgut et al. 2019).10
Once the knowledge of making oil and wine became more widespread,
multiple ways of pressing the fruit developed. The scale of production and
access to resources would have determined whether simple mortars and pestles
or larger, dedicated, and specialized facilities would have been necessary. Since
there would often have been a correlation between the type of pressing facility
and the scale of production, we can use changes in the types of grape or olive
presses and fluctuations in their frequency in the archaeological record as
proxies for changes in scale of oil and wine production. The actual and
probable technologies of oil and wine processing are therefore important topics
to address. Trends in these processing facilities visible over time can tell us
about the production of oil and wine, its relative value, and the entanglements
between people and things.
Pressing technologies for both olive oil and wine have been thoroughly
analyzed in previous publications (for in-depth overviews, see Brun 1993; Brun
2003, 53–58, 146–158; Brun 2004, 7–24; Foxhall 1993, 2007, 131–217; see also
contributions in Amouretti and Brun 1993). Most studies, however, focus on
the Hellenistic and Roman periods when pressing facilities are relatively easily
identified and more prolific. Before this point, invisibility is an inherent
problem. Trends in the location of pressing activities certainly changed over
time and space and any rural production is inherently difficult, if not impos-
sible, to identify with certainty.11 For information on pressing outside of urban
zones, one must turn to survey data. Indeed, Foxhall’s (2007, 172, 173–176,
table 6.2, 182–204) extensive overview of pressing equipment found in surveys
throughout Greece indicates that pressing activities were often undertaken not
only outside of urban spaces, but also outside of the immediate vicinity of
farmsteads (i.e., out in the fields or groves themselves). Postdepositional activities
might also play a part in the invisibility of stone pressing equipment since these
objects were frequently reused both in antiquity and in our modern era (Foxhall
2007, 172). Moreover, it is often impossible to assign a secure date to these items
since stone pressing technology changed very little over time and they are often
found out of context or unassociated with other, datable, material. Out of the
seventy-five entries recorded in Foxhall’s (2007, 173–176, table 6.2) overview of
pressing equipment found in survey, forty-six are identified as Roman-
Late Roman with some labeled as “reused,” fifteen are undatable, and
twelve are identified as Classical or Classical-Hellenistic, with some uncertainty.
 OIL–W I NE, OL I VES–V I NES 7

The remainder are Medieval or modern. From this study alone it is clear that the
vast majority of pressing equipment found in surveys is difficult to identify,
variably interpreted, and nearly impossible to date with any certainty if it is not
clearly a Roman-era trapetum press (Brun 1993; Foxhall 2007, 165–172). The
data are complicated further by the fact that some evidence suggests these presses
had multiple functions. As argued by Foxhall (2007, 132, 138, 184), presses could
be transportable and multipurpose for wine, oil, or other industrial activities.12
The variable and complicated evidence for pressing in the Hellenistic,
Classical, and Archaic periods has been thoroughly addressed by Lin Foxhall
(1993; 2007, 138–165; see also Brun 2004, 84–130). The Archaic era presents
the most complete evidence for large-scale “lever and beam” press installations
at Azoria on Crete and Klazomenai on the coast of Asia Minor. Chapter 6
provides an in-depth overview of these two production facilities, as well as the
complications with their interpretation. As discussed in Chapters 4 and 5, little
evidence is available for pressing technologies in the Postpalatial era and Early
Iron Age, which might suggest a change in scale of production or location of
processing facilities. For these time periods, it is necessary to turn to other
evidence for oil and wine production, including archaeobotanical remains,
storage facilities, and contemporary craft production. It is in fact the Bronze
Age that presents some of our best and most abundant evidence for olive and
grape processing facilities (Brun 2004, 72–76). The thorough study, now over
25 years old, by Platon and Kopaka (1993) argued, based on their analysis of
over forty presses, that there are three types of presses present on Minoan Crete
and that their primary purposes can be understood by examining the charac-
teristics of each type as a whole along with trends in its architectural placement,
associated objects, associated archaeobotanical remains, and by analogy with
ethnographic and historical examples. Their work serves as a foundation upon
which new data from Crete and elsewhere can be integrated.13 Wine produc-
tion has been assigned as the primary purpose for Type I and II pressing
installations, while olive oil production was primarily intended for Type III.
The most basic and prevalent Type I pressing installation includes a ceramic
high-walled crushing bed with a large, wide spout accompanied by a large
catchment pot at a lower level. Type II pressing installations are larger rectan-
gular basins built within a room or carved out of bedrock in an extra-urban
environment where grapes would be crushed by foot. These basins have
a channel or outlet leading to either a catchment pot or another basin placed
at a lower level to catch the must. Type III installations are identified by a large,
usually circular, and shallow cut-stone crushing bed with a narrow spout. Their
stone construction and morphology strongly suggest crushing olives was their
primary purpose. Chapters 2 and 3 provide an in-depth discussion of these
three production technologies and how trends in their typology, context, and
8 INTRODUCTION

frequency can help elucidate changes to scale and control of oil and wine
production in the Minoan and Mycenaean palatial eras.
When addressing the production and exchange of oil and wine, it is also
important to consider the production of a surplus. The idea that groups of
people, from the first sedentary farmers to the nations of today, tend to produce
a surplus of edible goods is a common fact. Most would say that the primary
reason to produce a surplus of food is to withstand fluctuations in growing
seasons and climate, such that if a bad drought hinders the amount of food
produced, then the surplus from the previous year would tide people over. This
simplistic view of surplus, however, has continually come into question (see,
e.g., Bogaard 2017). Are there no other reasons to produce a surplus? Who is in
charge of this surplus production, its storage, and its distribution?
Anthropological studies on feasting have shown that surplus was indeed used
for means other than purely practical and that the control of such surplus (and
the ability to give it away) was a marker of distinction and power. Indeed,
surplus can be envisioned as a culturally constructed “state of mind” dictated by
what is thought to “be enough,” a concept that is influenced by who controls
the surplus (Hastorf and Foxhall 2017, 37). Many recent studies have shown
that pre-Classical Greek societies generally maintained a surplus of foodstuffs
and its control varied according to region and time period. On Late Bronze
Age Crete, surplus was stored in central-court buildings, often called palaces, in
large pithoi within a labyrinth of storerooms and magazines (Christakis 2008).
Similarly, Late Bronze Age palaces on the Mycenaean mainland also main-
tained rooms stocked with large jars, presumably filled with food. In contrast,
perhaps a more communal aspect to surplus storage was adopted in northern
Greece at this same time (Margomenou 2008).
Regarding the surplus of oil and wine specifically, two issues must be
addressed. The first is that oil and wine are not grain and water. This means
that one could argue that there should have been no need for a large surplus
in these two liquids since they were not necessary for human or animal
survival. Of course, olive oil provides essential fatty acids and wine could
have been used to sterilize water given a high enough alcohol content.14 As
added-value commodities, they are the product of additional labor and
expertise applied to otherwise viable commodities (olives and grapes). Yet,
the fact remains that oil and wine are not necessary for human survival. But
could someone from the ancient Mediterranean imagine surviving without
them? This question is especially pertinent if we consider the production of
surplus for reasons other than survival, namely, competitive display (gift-
giving, feasting) and exchange (barter, trade). To consider the importance of
oil and wine within these two realms where surplus is necessary, we must
consider why and how these two liquids acquired such prominence within
ancient Greek culture.
 CULTURAL COMMODITI ES 9

CULTURAL COMMODITIES: DEPENDENCY, VALUE,

AND THE LONGUE DURÉE

What initially motivated this project was the striking extent to which olive oil
and wine are integrated into the daily lives and seasonal rhythms of people living
in modern Greece. Perhaps even more striking was that despite dramatic
political, social, economic, and environmental changes in recent history,
Greek people nevertheless maintained their connections to their ancestral land
and the products elicited from that land (even if they now live in a city; see,
e.g., Forbes 1993). This insight led to the consideration of what are the
underlying motivations, both conscious and subconscious, for the maintenance
of this incredibly long-lasting connection between people, place, oil, and wine –
present and past. Did communities in the pre-Classical period of Greece also
maintain this continuity despite external and internal change? The synthesis of
the archaeological, textual, and contextual evidence for the pre-Classical period
of Greece presented here suggests that people did indeed develop a sort of
inescapable relationship with oil and wine. During this long-term process, oil
and wine became, what I call, cultural commodities and remain as such until today,
a point to which the Conclusion of the book returns.
In this book, I define cultural commodities as products that continue to be
produced because they have become indispensable for the functioning of social
and economic exchanges well beyond economic advantage. Cultural commod-
ities can therefore be considered in opposition to subsistence commodities or
economic commodities, such as a “cash crop” – commodities produced primar-
ily for their economic benefits. The indispensability of cultural commodities is
a result of the intersection of dependency and value. That is, a relationship of
dependency developed between people and the commodity that was reinforced
and held in place over time by a positive network of value. It was both needed
and wanted. In the case presented here, oil and wine take an active role, shaping
ancient Greek culture as they became inextricably bound to humans and humans
to them. Ultimately, the cultural commodities of oil and wine become signifiers
of Greek cultural identity, deeply rooted in social and ideological practices,
rather than mere agricultural products functioning within an economic vacuum.
To delve deeper into this concept of cultural commodities, it is perhaps useful
to explore the ideas of dependency and value as they apply to the ancient past.
More specifically, it is important to address why these two ideas are integral for
understanding the historical trajectory of oil and wine in the pre-Classical period.

Dependency and Entanglement

Dependency is a concept that has recently gained attention as one of the main
ideas behind the theory of “entanglement” (Hodder 2012, 2014).15
10 INTRODUCTION

Entanglement describes the complex relationships generated between people

and things over time. Specifically, the relationships between people and things
can be designated as ones of dependence (pl. dependences) or dependency (pl.
dependencies). Dependence suggests a positive relationship whereby the one
gains something through the presence of the other, whereas dependency
suggests a more negative relationship whereby the one could not survive
without the other. In his seminal work on the subject, Ian Hodder defines
entanglement as the sum of the dependency between humans and things,
things and things, things and humans, and humans and humans (represented
as E=HT+TT+TH+HH).
In this definition the word “thing” can include not only material objects, but
also immaterial concepts such as institutions (which in themselves are bundles
of human–thing interaction), thoughts, and even feelings. In this way,
a “thing” is ultimately a flow of matter, energy, and information (Hodder
2012, 218).16 Entanglement therefore takes the centrality of things espoused by
material culture and materiality studies to the next level by assigning the same
“things” primary agency. This is not to say that things necessarily actively think
about how to act in the world. Rather, things achieve this level of agency
through their temporality and physicality. These attributes of things, that they
have a certain scheduled life that involves decay, serves to draw humans into
their care, thereby creating a certain “stickiness” or “entrapment.” A pot, for
example, does not have active agency in the sense that it thinks about its
surroundings. Yet when it breaks the humans around it have to take action
and make decisions about mending it, reusing it, or discarding it. Agency,
therefore, does not have to be a conscious state, but rather a mode of eliciting
action from or affecting in some way the world around you. The inescapability
of this relationship between humans and things is the hallmark of the concept of
entanglement: humans cannot disavow things (Hodder 2012, 68–70, 79).
As living things, grapevines and olive trees have the potential to influence
humans in a particularly prominent and active way. One way that the agency of
vines and olive trees can be seen is during the process of domestication and
propagation. Plants of all kinds have the “desire” to reproduce (van der
Veen 2014, 800). That is, all plants exist with certain mechanisms that
allow for and encourage reproduction through various means, such as colors,
smells, attractive morphology for bees and birds, and so on. When people started
to domesticate olive trees and grapevines and cultivate those that produced the
most pleasing fruit, the plants immediately became dependent on humans for
their care. Instead of planting from seeds, which takes too long to generate
a fruit-bearing plant, farmers used the technique of vegetative propagation. In
this process, farmers choose the best individual that produces the best fruit and
graft or clone it to keep that particular genetic line going. For the grapevine,
important traits include hermaphroditic, self-pollinating flowers, a thicker stem,
 CULTURAL COMMODITI ES 11

and larger, juicier fruit (Palmer 1994, 13). As plants are manipulated, they
become more dependent on human care. For example, one effect of the thicker-
stemmed free-standing vines is that the plants need constant attention – tren-
ching, fertilizing, pruning and weeding every year or they will be unproductive
(Palmer 1994, 14). One could also say, however, that these plants were in some
way manipulating humans. By creating larger, sweeter or more robust fruit, the
plants enticed humans to continue their reproduction (Jones and Cloke 2008,
84). The primary objective in the life of grapevines and olive trees was therefore
fulfilled by the “domesticating” actions of humans (Pollan 2001). Through the
gradual alteration of its morphology and fruit, the plant actively drew humans
into its care, thereby achieving a level of agency even beyond that of a static
object.
The concept of entanglement is not only useful for viewing the relationships
between people and things through the lens of dependency and agency, but it is
also useful to trace changes to those relationships over time. The complex
interconnections between humans and things are not static, but highly dynamic
and develop a dimension of directionality. That is, the stronger the entrapment
between humans and things – the “tautness” of the entanglement – the more
difficult it is to change course as the dependencies between the various agents
increase. In the case of oil and wine in ancient Greece, once vines and olive
trees had been thoroughly domesticated and their products fully integrated into
the daily, ritual, and political lives of people, they were inextricably bound
together, despite tumultuous eras of political collapse and demographical shifts.
This is not to say, however, that entanglements maintain a linear trajectory of
increasing tautness. On the contrary, the unstable and disruptive nature of
humans and things will inevitably cause “untyings” or “catalysis” as things,
humans, institutions, and so on, break down or fail (Hodder 2012, 167). At
these moments, solutions are sought that will hold fast the integrity of the
entanglement over the long term, even if there is a need for some loosening at
various points. The solutions take the shape of transformations to things that
ultimately increase the “fittingness” of these things within the entanglement
and within that particular context in time. In this sense, fittingness can be
understood as how things work to increase the tautness of the entanglement
(Hodder 2012, 113–135). This inevitably involves some amount of resonance
and reverberation between human conception, body, and the things around
them. Even at moments of severe untying, that is, historical “collapse,” it can
be demonstrated that the entanglement does not disperse, but rather alters. As
will be discussed in Chapter 4, various alterations to the entanglement between
people, oil and wine, can be traced through the archaeological record after the
collapse of the Mycenaean palaces around 1200 BCE. In particular, the for-
merly mass-produced transport container for these commodities in the Late
Bronze Age, the transport stirrup jar, disappears entirely in favor of vessels that
12 INTRODUCTION

are more easily produced and flexible in their uses, such as hydrias and
amphoras.
Because of their dynamic yet resilient nature, entanglements are good tools
for answering questions about long-term problems. Here, entanglements are
a particularly useful framework when tracing the production and exchange of
oil and wine over hundreds of years. How the relationships between people
and oil/wine change over time will provide meaningful information about
long-term changes to important social and economic practices, such as agri-
cultural strategies, land management, ritual acts, and social hierarchy. In order
to successfully describe entanglements as they change over time, it is important
to consider major variables within the entanglement. Alteration of these variables
would cause significant change throughout the many relationships of depen-
dency. In other words, the shape that the entanglement takes is due to the
nature of the things and people within it and each one’s relative influence over
the connections of dependency holding the entanglement together.
Hodder (2012) suggests that increased dependence is a product of things
being unstable and finite, so that change within entanglements is continually
produced. Hence, change within entanglements is the result of discovering
technological, social, and cultural solutions to this instability. “Things” here
can be institutions, social groups, or any other bundle of humans, ideas, and
physical objects. So what about the “central authorities” of the Neopalatial
court-centered buildings? This is a thing whose instability would certainly have
had the potential to produce significant changes within the entanglement. But
what about a pottery kiln? It would certainly have been an integral part of the
entanglement between people, oil, and wine. But would the instability of
the kiln and its technological solution have had the same potential to change
the entanglement? Maybe. In the larger scheme of things, in the broader
picture of the entanglement, the central authorities can be said to have had
the potential to enact a greater change. In this case “change” would mean the
ability to affect the connections of dependency between people and things, that is, the
ability to generate, suppress, encourage, or control connections of dependency.
The greater this ability to affect the connections, the more “central” an element
of the entanglement becomes. One of the variables that can be used to describe
entanglement is therefore centrality.17 A low number of strong agents (people or
things) would constitute a centralized entanglement, whereas a high number of
weaker agents would constitute a decentralized entanglement. The other vari-
able worth including in descriptions of entanglements is scale. Large-scale
entanglements would have a high number of total agents, whereas small-scale
entanglements would have fewer agents.
With these distinctions in mind and with an eye to the longue durée, it is
possible to visualize the variation in centralization and scale of entanglements
by means of an x-y grid (Figure 1.1). Points on this grid would reflect the
 CULTURAL COMMODITI ES 13

Large scale

Decentralized Centralized

Small scale

1.1 Grid for visualizing variations in entanglements over time through changes to scale
and centralization. Image by author

nature of the entanglement at a given moment in time. Since entanglements are

not a static fact, but a continually changing dynamic relationship, it is impos-
sible to categorize them into rigid typologies. Throughout this book, therefore,
it will be important to refer back to this visualization in order to describe the
change in entanglements over time.
This dynamic complexity of entanglements is perhaps best illustrated by an
example. The entanglement encountered between people and oil/wine in the
Mycenaean palatial era was extremely centralized and large-scale. Chapter 3
presents the evidence supporting the notion that the central authorities, seated
in palatial structures, regulated most aspects of surplus production, distribution,
and consumption. That is not to say that they controlled every aspect of the
economy. Rather, the palatial authorities seem to have had an influence,
whether direct or indirect, in the choices made during acts of exchange. This
certainly included an influence on the value of the things exchanged and their
importance within the broader entanglement. Following the Late Bronze Age
collapse, however, the relationships and dependencies between people and oil/
wine changed dramatically, leading to an entanglement that can be described as
centralized, yet small-scale (Figure 1.2). As outlined in Chapter 4, there was
a shift toward an overall decrease in the number of actors (people and things)
within the entanglement’s connections. A small-scale supply of surplus oil and
wine was produced locally, reserved, and carefully controlled by local central
authorities.
Of course there are infinite variations in entanglements and therefore infinite
points on this grid, but it is nevertheless fruitful to be able to describe
14 INTRODUCTION

Large scale

Early Archaic
period
Mycenaean
Palatial era

Minoan
Palatial era

Decentralized Centralized

Early Iron Age

Small scale Postpalatial era

1.2 Grid for visualizing changes to entanglements with the time periods discussed in the book
plotted for reference. Image by author

entanglements as they morph over time, even if the description is only relative
to what came before and after. As an interpretive tool, capturing the nature of the
entanglement at a given point in time is essential for understanding the
historical trajectory of oil and wine over the longue durée. By tracing these
entanglements through time, it is possible to answer “how” oil and wine
became so important within the Greek cultural milieu.

Value and Exchange

To answer “why” oil and wine became so important within Greek culture one
must turn to the idea of “value.” In the framework outlined earlier, value is
the second component of a cultural commodity. The term “value” carries with
it an exhaustive history of scholarship that is beyond the scope of this
introduction.18 It is important to acknowledge, though, that the term
“value” is itself dynamic and consequently does not necessarily refer to only
monetary, personal, or cultural value. Rather, the concept of value spans all of
these loci and more. What is particularly pertinent to the discussion of olive oil
and wine in the ancient world, however, is the relative place that these com-
modities held in relation to all other things within a particular cultural
context.19 How this place is determined is complex and will be returned to
below.
The idea of dependence only represents a step toward understanding the
specifically economic aspects of surplus products (in the most general sense) and
how the economic realities of the ancient Greek world changed over time. It is
 CULTURAL COMMODITI ES 15

also necessary to consider the construction of value, since, as argued in this book,
value is one of the main glues holding dependencies together. Connections of
dependency between people and things represent the presence of need. People
need other people to help with the grape harvest or much of the yield will go bad.
A pot needs a person to fix it or it will remain a broken pile of sherds. But what if
the person does not value that pot worthy of being fixed? What if the value of
grapes diminishes such that the vineyard owner does not need to harvest them all
and therefore does not need the help of his neighbors or a large labor force? What
these small examples bring to the fore is the idea that need and dependence are
not necessarily the sole motivator behind the existence of a particular thing over
time.
The value that is attributed to a person or thing is an important factor in
determining its place within an entanglement and how long it will keep that
place. Like dependencies and their resultant entanglements, value is fickle and
changes over time. Value is therefore another interpretive category that can be
useful when asking questions about problems over the long-term. In other
words, both oil and wine had to be continuously valued within Greek culture
such that their production was deemed unequivocally essential over thousands
of years. As will be discussed in this book, not all products related to oil and
wine are present over time as values change (e.g., stirrup jars disappear, conical
cups disappear, kylikes, etc.). It is therefore necessary to consider how the value
of commodities and related products were constructed in the ancient past and
what determines whether the value of something changes over time or remains
constant.
It is at this point that exchange is of the utmost importance. Exchange is
necessary for understanding value because, within a cultural economy para-
digm, value is created at the moment of exchange, which, in turn, informs produc-
tion and consumption of the particular thing exchanged. The specific value
attributed to that thing at that moment of exchange is determined by calculative
agents of both a human and nonhuman kind within an uncertain economic world
(Gregory 2014; Knight 1921). This paradigm is in opposition to the idea that
value is created by worker-labor or individual rationality within a predictable
system.20 In this way, cultural economy represents a paradigm shift because it is
market-centric, rather than production-centric or consumption-centric
(Gregory 2014).21
Because value is conceived as calculated by both humans and things, the
cultural economy paradigm falls into the category of post-humanist approaches
to the economy, that is, assigning things primary agency. This agency is
accomplished through actor-networks, “calculative agencies,” that configure
ontologies. Actors (both human and nonhuman) are therefore embedded in
a network (or, are the network) of social relations that are constantly renego-
tiating meanings.22 Hence, value is conceived not through individual reasoning
16 INTRODUCTION

or bureaucratic regulation, but rather a blending together of all concepts of and

influences on the construction of a thing’s value, as distributed across both
human and nonhuman entities. The value itself is determined when two
calculative agencies come together at a moment of exchange. In other words,
exchange is the process by which calculative agencies, made up of humans and
things, compete and/or cooperate with one another. This competition takes
place when each agency is able to integrate the framed calculations of other
agencies into its own calculations, thereby producing negotiations (Callon
1998, 32). This competition is the result of agencies having calculating tools
of differing levels of efficiency – the knowledgeable versus naïve buyer/seller.
Of course, this theoretical framework cannot be applied entirely to the ancient
past and our problem of how and why oil and wine became cultural commod-
ities. Rather, it is a useful tool, a heuristic, with which we can think about the
evidence available for the exchange of these two commodities. This book is not
concerned with the direct operationalization of actor-networks, but instead
chooses to consider it as one of the underlying principles governing why the
archaeological record looks the way it does today; as the result of the complex
affective connections between humans and things that generate meaning and
value over time.
By assigning things active agency, the cultural economic approach to the
ancient economy can be effectively combined with entanglement theory, as out-
lined earlier. Hence, the ideas of dependency and value, as expressed here, are
connected by their conceptual framework, which is rooted in the power of
meaningful connections between human and nonhuman agents. By concen-
trating on the dialectal relationship of dependences and dependencies between
things and humans within the context of a cultural economic paradigm, we can
move away from the idea of value as a contained entity, localized in a single
place within the life of an object, and instead move toward value as continually
negotiated throughout the life of an object where its exchange informs its
production and consumption. In other words, we cannot understand the
value of something as a finite attribution. It is constantly generated and
regenerated through the socialness of the object itself, that is, its relational
materiality (what objects are as actors), human desire of objects (Graeber’s
humanist perspective; 2001, 2005, 2011), and the marriage of these two view-
points, one of which being the creation of calculative agencies within an actor-
network. What this suggests is that the web of dependences between humans
and things not only holds the fabric of a society on a forward trajectory, but also
creates value using the same connections, conceptual abstractions, resonances,
and notions of fittingness. This creation of value through calculative agencies
and their dependences within an entanglement provides the necessary ammu-
nition for exchange both within the entanglement and with other people and
their own, different entanglements. Hence, object agency and network “thinking”/
 CULTURAL COMMODITI ES 17

analysis connect how (dependency) and why (value) olive oil and wine became
important in pre-Classical Greek societies by observing the interactions of
entanglements through exchange contexts over long periods of time.

Modes of Exchange
If, within the cultural economy paradigm, the value of things, and humans for
that matter, is constructed at the point of exchange, then it is necessary to
examine prominent modes of exchange (any transaction from one entity to
another) and how those modes change over time. The transformations of
modes of exchange not only affect how the value of something is interpreted,
but these shifts also affect, and are affected by, changes in the broader depen-
dences that make up an entanglement. For example, a shift from an item
existing within exclusive elite gift exchange to being accessible on an open
market will affect the people and associated things involved with its manufac-
ture, shipping, and use. This book will consider the particular roles of surplus
oil and wine within common modes of exchange in pre-Classical Greece and
how these roles and their exchange contexts transformed within shifting socio-
economic boundaries.
Multiple modes of exchange – redistribution, trade, barter, gift-giving, and
so on – can coexist at the same time and are fluid within a society, blurring
distinct boundaries of meaning. Indeed, the cultural economy paradigm strives
to dissolve the distinction between gifts and commodities and the bounded
restrictions of tribe/peasant/capitalism to see a more continual, intertwined,
and perhaps entangled, world of globalization. This idealization works well for
the modern world when it is possible to reference exact transactions, personal
accounts of events, and historical records in order to reconstruct boundary-less
types of exchange. For the ancient past, however, we rely on what is left in the
archaeological record and what little biased documentation has survived. It is
therefore impossible to retain an idealized world of indistinct types of exchange
when desiring to create meaning from what little evidence is presented. In
other words, in order to generate meaningful data about exchange in the
ancient world it is necessary to draw some informed boundaries. In doing so,
one creates categories that can be juxtaposed and traced through time. For the
time periods addressed in this book, and for the types of remains available in the
archaeological and textual records, exchange can be divided into three basic
modes: commensal, gift, and commercial.23

Commensal Exchange. The act of communal dining or feasting is one of

the most prominent and long-lasting forms of surplus exchange in Greek
prehistory. Indeed, it is a common mode of exchange in many, if not most,
cultures around the world.24 In a way, a feast represents a microcosm or
18 INTRODUCTION

a culmination of the broader connections between people and things. In these

events, human and thing interactions bring to light the underlying infrastruc-
ture in place within a society. This infrastructure is composed of hierarchical
and heterarchical nodes within both the human and nonhuman world. For
example, feasts made clear the tensions of human sociality, including distinc-
tion versus cohesion, hoarding versus sharing, and accumulation versus dis-
persal (Gamble 2004). In addition, various configurations of individuality,
corporeality and sociality were played out and challenged, albeit through the
use of large vessels for collective eating and drinking or smaller individual ones,
or through the use of plain and homogenous pottery that signaled, at least
superficially, collective identity (Hamilakis and Sherratt 2012, 194).
Based on the location, equipment, and scale of feasting practices, it is possible to
make some distinctions between types of feasting events and their ultimate purpose
within a society. Such purposes include segregation, communalism, and debt-
reparation, along with many others (see, e.g., Dietler and Hayden 2001; Hayden
2014). Despite an obvious fluidity between types of commensal events, it is
nevertheless possible to distinguish between what Michael Dietler (2001) describes
as entrepreneurial or empowering feasts, patron-role feasts, and diacritical feasts.
Each of these three types is distinguished by scale of attendance and the extent to
which the feast emphasizes or masks the distinctions between participants.
Entrepreneurial or empowering feasts highlight the high-status role of the hosts
and their ability to hold elaborate feasts for the community. In this case, surplus oil
and wine would have been used within the context of reciprocity as a way to take
part in a status competition. Patron-role feasts are provided by high-status hosts to
lower-status guests and are often used to acknowledge labor provided by the guests
in fulfillment of their social obligations. Here, surplus is used within the context of
reciprocity that reinforces existing hierarchies. Finally, diacritical feasts are
not open to all members of the community but are restricted to high-status
individuals. These types of feasts serve to delineate elites from non-elites.
Within the archaeological record, this last type of feast is best seen by the use
of specialized equipment and consumption of special foods and drink.
Dietler’s categories of feasts, along with their variations, will often be
considered for the time periods and cultures addressed in this book as they
signal the existence of specific dependences between people and things, as well
as specific values attributed to the things involved with the commensal acts,
including surplus wine and oil. For example, a shift from diacritical feasts to
empowering feasts would require a significant increase in oil and wine produc-
tion and storage, especially if the frequency of events also increased. Therefore,
the specific transitions, and the specific things transitioning, within feasting
practices over time can be indications of broader transformations within the
entanglement and the network of calculative agents involved with value-
creation.
 CULTURAL COMMODITI ES 19

Gift Exchange. The concept of gift-giving has received much attention since
even before Marcel Mauss’ seminal work, published in 1923.25 Since then, the
topic, particularly within anthropological discourse, has remained popular.26 As
discussed earlier, the lines between various types of exchanges are blurry. This
fluidity becomes especially evident when discussing “giving” and “gifts.” Gift-
giving can take multiple forms and is in no way mutually exclusive from commer-
cial or any other type of exchange within a society, ancient or modern. Because of
the fluidity of the concept of giving, it is necessary to analyze historically the gift in
its broader social and economic context and its relationship to other forms of
exchange in its cultural, political, and religious components (Carlà and Gori 2014,
31). Indeed, most feasts and commensal exchanges can be interpreted as a form of
giving since often participants did not contribute directly to the feast, but instead
contributed indirectly or exchanged at some point particular services or goods.27
There are, however, non-commensal situations where giving is the predo-
minant mode of exchange. By non-commensal gift exchange, I mean the
offering of wine or oil to someone without the expectation of consuming
the commodities oneself or of receiving something immediately in return (as
one would in a commercial context).28 Two of the most prominent locations
where it might be possible to see these types of exchanges are sanctuaries and
cemeteries. Distinguishing between oil and wine containers used for feasting
events at sanctuaries and cemeteries versus those objects given as gifts to deities
or the deceased is a very difficult, and often impossible task. Despite these
overlaps, it is nevertheless possible to distinguish in the archaeological record
some items that had been intended as “gifts” in the sense outlined earlier, such
as ritual offerings left behind and grave goods deposited with the deceased.
Olive oil and wine were frequently used, in various forms, as gifts to gods and
the deceased. The Minoan and Mycenaean palatial administrations were very
concerned with providing perfumed oil and wine to sanctuaries, as indicated in
the surviving documentary evidence. At the same time, sanctuaries and shrines are
often littered with containers designated for perfumed oils and wines, and in some
instances, there is evidence for larger-scale storage of these two commodities in
sacred places. In addition, perfumed oil and wine seem to have been a staple of the
funerary realm throughout all time periods addressed. Indeed, the most abundant
type of vessel found in the Postpalatial era, the small decorated stirrup jar, is found
in massive quantities with the deceased. The changing quantities of oil- and wine-
carrying containers found in sanctuaries and tombs plays an important role in
understanding the value that these two commodities continued to hold as social
and economic conditions dramatically altered. These data also provide meaningful
evidence toward understanding the scale and structure of the oil and wine
industries over time and how the relationships between people and these two
commodities fluctuated as entanglements changed.
20 INTRODUCTION

Commercial Exchange. Commercial exchange, or trade, is the final mode

of exchange that will be included as a means of tracing the trajectory of value
and dependence between people and oil/wine. In contrast to commensal and
gift exchange, commercial exchange can often provide a more direct window
onto the perceived value of something as it comes up against the value of
something else. This juxtaposition creates meaningful, though relative, infor-
mation about how the thing traded fits into a culturally specific regime of value.
Of course, it is difficult to see these trading actions through the archaeological
record. Textual records can be much more explicit about the relative value of
specific things. In the Minoan and Mycenaean palatial eras, written records
concerned primarily with movements of goods into and out of the palaces
provide some clues. As discussed in Chapters 2 and 3, it is possible to recon-
struct the relative values of, for example, olive oil to wine to barley to figs. For
the Postpalatial era and Early Iron Age, the complete lack of written records
leaves a large gap in the dataset. It is therefore necessary to rely on the
archaeological record alone. Fortunately, there are some key objects that
provide proxy information related to the trade of surplus olive oil and wine:
specifically, large ceramic jars intended for the transportation of bulk liquids,
namely, amphoras.29 For amphoras, standardization of production, the scope of
their distribution, and how they and their contents were consumed reflect the
interaction between farmer, potter, and politics on a local scale and also reflect
interaction between different cultures along a broader economic network.
These two scales of interaction fluctuate as historical and environmental events
alter political regimes, population sizes, and interaction with distant lands.
Detailed distributions of amphoras, and especially their specific find contexts,
provide an insight into their relative value within the culturally specific deposi-
tion context. For example, the juxtaposition of find contexts of amphoras from
Crete suggests that they were differentially valued by people around the Eastern
Mediterranean: on Cyprus, they are often found in tombs, yet on the Greek
mainland they are predominantly in basement storerooms.
Identifying specifically commercial exchange through the archaeological
record must be determined through careful study of distribution patterns,
both within a site and within the extent of the object’s geographical spread
(Dillian and White 2010, 7). For example, amphoras imported into a specific
site from a neighboring region and only located within the storerooms of
a central building could be interpreted as a type of tribute or contribution. If,
however, the same amphoras are found throughout many regions and even
across large bodies of water, then the transaction could be interpreted as one of
commercial trade.
This book presents a detailed analysis of the available data for bulk olive oil
and wine trade for each time period addressed. Each chapter focuses on the
 CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHAN GE 21

particular pots used at that time and how their production and distribution
reflect the broader entanglement. Indeed, Knappett (in Bevan 2014, 406–407)
suggests that the amphora as a transport container does not have a “boom-and-
bust” trajectory, but instead has “dynamic stability.” As a ceramic type, it never
quite goes away, it only changes shape. And in this way, the amphora can be
considered a “fluid” technology whereby it can be “invented” in multiple
places at the same time because clay is ubiquitous, amphoras are durable, and
they are portable. This dynamic stability of the amphora in pre-Classical Greece
is something that this book will focus on as a way of seeing the connections
between historical eras. Indeed, it is the continuity and fluidity not only of
amphoras but also of their liquid contents, which present a unique case for
studying past entanglements between things, humans, and their sociocultural
and environmental contexts.

CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHANGE: VULNERABILITY, RESILIENCE,

AND ADAPTATION

It is an incontrovertible fact that the environment actively influences interac-

tions between people and the things around them. Factors like rainfall, season-
ality, aridity, groundwater availability, temperature maximums and minimums,
UV index, CO2 levels, extreme weather events, and more all take part in
providing parameters within which certain plants and animals can thrive, or
not. Moreover, when one or more of these environmental characteristics
change, established relationships, say between people and cultivated plants,
can be altered substantially as the ecosystem adapts to survive and, preferably,
thrive in the new normal conditions. Climatic change is not so much an event,
but rather a continuously active process. The changes only become more
noticeable when conditions negatively affect, or at least disrupt, the status
quo. This is certainly the case today as the world faces impactful climate change,
but it was also the case in the ancient past. Studies of past climate change tend to
focus on glacial/interglacial shifts, with the Holocene only briefly mentioned as
an afterthought at the end. Recently, however, there has been a shift in focus to
understand the more nuanced climate shifts of, especially, the middle and late
Holocene when anthropogenic forces have been at their greatest. Researchers
are now keen to answer questions about the relationship of man to his
environment and the specific connections between climate change and social
change. In what specific ways did climate change impact how people interact
with their natural surroundings and with each other? Indeed, there has been
a call-to-action for archaeologists to not only include considerations of climate
and environment within their interpretations, but to also actively investigate
climate change as one of the many factors that influenced past lives and social
changes (Izdebski et al. 2016, 12).
22 INTRODUCTION

In the following pages, I outline a methodology for including palaeocli-

matic data into a broader discussion of the long-term entanglements between
people and oil/wine. This is followed by a brief overview of the various
methodological issues with using these data, such as the incompatibility of
proxy-based sources, regionality, micro-climate variability, and discrepancies
in interpretation. Then, in order to provide a foundation upon which the
chapter discussions will be based, I present these palaeoclimatic data and
arguments around climate change set out across the whole chronological
framework used in this book. Finally, climatic changes are only relevant if
they affect the two plants in question. The evidence for olive tree and
grapevine responses to different climatic changes will therefore be presented
and analyzed in relation to the previously outlined reconstruction of climate
change from the Bronze Age to the Classical period in Greece.

A Historical Ecology Approach: Methodologies and Implications

To consider the impact of climate change on the entanglements between
people and oil and wine over time, I develop a narrative of coupled social-
ecological change within the frameworks of resilience and adaptation. I do not,
however, assume links between climatic and social changes, but rather aim to
identify possible connections between these changes and consider possible
adaptation responses. These narratives should therefore be considered hypoth-
eses that require further testing (Clarke et al. 2016, 99–100; Weiberg et al.
2016). Looking at general sociopolitical and climate variability trends alongside
each other allows one to look for features of the society that factored into its
level of vulnerability in the face of both short-term climate variability and long-
term climate change and its ability to effectively adapt and thrive, or not,
afterward (Nelson et al. 2016; Weiberg and Finné 2018, 593–594).
I therefore take a historical ecology approach (Armstrong et al. 2017) that has
four main methodological components: (1) a long-term perspective, (2) spatial-
temporal resonance between palaeoclimate and societal data, (3) an assessment
of the relative resiliency of a society within the context of climate variability
and change, and (4) a focus on archaeological evidence indicating climate-
induced responses.
(1) The long-term perspective of historical ecology encompasses not only the past,
but also the future. It is an applied research program that seeks to understand long-
term human–environmental interactions with a focus on avoiding, mitigating, and
reversing adverse ecological effects in the future (Armstrong et al. 2017). The
majority of this book is dedicated to exploring past relationships between humans
and their natural environment over a long-term period of about 1,500 years. In the
Conclusion of the book, the patterns of adaptation and change that are visible during
 CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHAN GE 23

this time period are then analyzed with a view to the future of agriculture in Greece.
The long-term perspective of historical ecology comes with a few caveats and
methodological issues that must be addressed. In order to move beyond focusing
on climate/environmental “events” and instead focus on long-term human-
environmental processes, it is necessary to consider chronological and dating uncer-
tainties and inconsistencies. Both archaeological and climatological chronologies are
uncertain and subject to debate on their own. Trying to correlate the two becomes
even more difficult, making very high-resolution correlations problematic (e.g.,
trying to associate a specific climate anomaly with a social disruption; Finné and
Weiberg 2018). Taking a long-term view of these two processes, social and environ-
mental, allows one to see connections that would not be visible with a short-term
perspective. For example, Chapter 4 will explore how climate change might have
affected the relationships between social structure and agriculture. Specifically, while
an arid climate might not have directly caused negative societal change, beneficial
climate conditions might have been favorable in the relative short term while at the
same time supporting an ultimately unstable economy that proved detrimental in the
long term (Weiberg and Finné 2018).
(2) To effectively discuss long-term social and climatic trajectories, spatial-temporal
resonance between palaeoclimate and societal data is necessary.30 In terms of meth-
odology, it is important to try to use proxy data whose time- and spatial-scales match
the cultural-historical questions one is trying to answer. When focusing on a small
spatial scale or region, say Messenia (southwest Peloponnese), one should use local
proxy data (cave speleothems and lake cores). When asking questions about a larger
region, for example, Peloponnese, one should also integrate other proxy data from
other areas of that region. And, finally, if asking questions about a broader region, for
example, southern or northern Aegean, it is important to find correspondences
among many proxy data and not rely on a single piece of evidence for the character-
istics of the climate at a given time.31

Timescales are becoming increasingly coherent and precise as better palaeo-

climatic proxy data are integrated into climate reconstructions. Cave spe-
leothems from the southern Argolid have been argued convincingly to
represent the climatic patterns of the Peloponnese in general (Finné and
Weiberg 2018; Weiberg and Finné 2018). Moreover, those same speleothems
have generated proxy data that can be measured within a single generation and
with a low margin of error. The same is true for cave speleothem data from
northern Greece. Moreover, when one integrates or compares the high-
resolution speleothem data with other climate proxy data, it is possible to see
even closer resolution and smaller-scale microclimatic differences. Each type of
proxy evidence has its own challenges and advantages, discussed later. The
benefit of an integrated approach is that one can see patterns across multiple
proxy data that might not be apparent otherwise.
24 INTRODUCTION

As palaeoclimatic proxy data generate more precise timescales, it is possible

to produce more accurate resonance between the palaeoclimatic and social/
archaeological data. A temporal arrangement in presenting palaeoclimatic and
archaeological data achieves the highest consensus between archaeologists and
palaeoclimatologists. It is important to consider the scale by which one measures
time. Measurements of time to be used cannot be too coarse (e.g., Early or Late
Holocene) or else they will not reflect cultural changes. Nor can they be too brief
(e.g., Late Helladic IIIA, Late Helladic IIIB) or they will not capture long-term
climatic developments. When discussing the role of environmental and climatic
change on the relationships between people and oil/wine, this book adopts the
suggestion by Weiberg and colleagues (2016) that it is best to discuss both the
archaeological and palaeoenvironmental records according to the cultural periods
of southern Greece and Crete: Protopalatial, Neopalatial, Late Helladic/
Mycenaean, EIA, Archaic, Classical. This timescale provides a level of detail
necessary to see patterns in both datasets, and can also overcome issues related to
specific chronological inconsistencies.32 A discussion of palaeoclimate is therefore
provided in each chapter to accompany those periods of time.
(3) It is becoming increasingly apparent that the relationship between social and
environmental change is not solely dependent on the scale and duration of the
climatic event, but the capability of the society to react and adapt to the change
(Nelson et al. 2016 with bibliography). In a historical ecology approach, therefore, it
is essential to assess the relative resiliency of a society within the context of climate
variability and change. Climate data can then be used as one of many factors in the
overall resiliency of a society. For example, even if climate change did not directly
affect the production of olives and grapes in the ancient Greek world, it would have
affected the networks within which they were produced, especially in surplus. Tracing
a society’s resilience in the face of both short- and long-term climate changes will
provide insights into the resiliency or vulnerability of agricultural strategies and
practices. Nelson and colleagues (2016) developed a methodology for quantifying
the “load” of a society’s vulnerability to climate change-induced food shortage,
specifically, using eight variables that can be archaeologically visible (availability of
food, diversity of available food, resource depression, connections, storage, mobility,
equal access, and barriers to resource areas; Table 1.1). These variables are related to (1)
the availability of food relative to population size and (2) social institutions and
practices (access to food). Among their diverse, historical, case studies, it became
clear that two social domain variables – connections and mobility – contributed
more to the vulnerability load than any other variables. In contrast, lack of an
adequate food supply rarely contributed much to vulnerability. They noted that
after a climate event, some cases had significant social change, but no food shortage,
while very few cases experienced no social change. Factors contributing to social change
without food shortage included emigration after the climate change, which reduced the
 CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHAN GE 25

table 1.1 Variables related to the vulnerability of a society due to climate change-induced food shortage.

Evidence
Variable (archaeological/historical) Value for resilient food systems

Availability of food Insufficient calories or Balance of available resources and population

nutrients in humans/animals size reduces risk of shortfall
Diversity of Inadequate range of resources Diverse portfolio reduces risk, increases
available, responsive to varied options
accessible food conditions
Resource Depleted or degraded Healthy habitats contribute to managing risk
depression/health resources/habitats and change
of food resources
Connections Limited connections with Social networks expand access to food and land
others experiencing and are sources for risk pooling
different conditions
Storage Insufficient, inaccessible Stored foods reduce risk in times of shortage
storage
Mobility Inability to move away from Movement to alternative places, landscapes,
challenging food conditions and social groups offers potential for
addressing resource shortfall through access
to food/land
Equal access Unequal control and Equal access avoids challenges to coping and
distribution of land, water, adaptive capacity in disaster risk
and food resources management
Barriers to resource Physical barriers limiting access Lack of barriers enhances capability of people
areas to key resource areas to provision themselves with food

After Nelson et al. 2016, table 2.

local population to a level that avoided food problems but had dramatic impacts socially.
Other populations shifted their diet by focusing on a more abundant resource. This
tactic, however, was not sustainable in the long run. Overall, they found that those cases
with the highest vulnerability load all had evidence of food shortage. Methodologically,
therefore, this book will take into consideration the variables outlined by Nelson et al.
(2016) to examine the vulnerability of ancient Greek societies in the face of specific
climate changes occurring for each time period addressed in the chapters.

(4) Finally, a historical ecology approach must consider the perception of climate
change in the past. What would people have noticed? Do we have archaeological
evidence that climate change affected agriculture or changed behaviors in the short
term? Methodologically, this means focusing on archaeological evidence indicating
climate-induced responses. Responses, however, should be divided into two cate-
gories: (1) reactions to sudden, short-term climate variability and (2) adaptations to
long-term climate change. It has been argued that short-term weather variability
impacted past peoples’ ways of life, but that long-term climate change did not elicit
actions (Weiberg and Finné 2018, 589). Yet, while people might not have consciously
26 INTRODUCTION

“acted” on long-term climate change, they might have adapted their ways of doing
things over the long-term such that the change had an effect, nevertheless. In some cases,
the short-term reactions might have persisted eventually becoming long-term adapta-
tions. It has been suggested that since premodern agrarian strategies were, for the most
part and in different ways, geared toward resilience in the face of short-term fluctuations,
there might have been a certain amount of built-in resilience to longer-term climatic
changes. However, this resilience over the long-term might have meant that practices
that had been emergency measures or short-term reactions became normalized.33
Certainly, this could have been the case in social situations where agriculturists were
free to practice resilient strategies, such as polyculture and planting environmentally
appropriate species. It has been shown, however, that in times when ancient societies
practiced a top-down system of agriculture (regulated or dictated by social hierarchies),
the effects on the local environment and local populations could be far-reaching and
long-lasting (Marston 2011, 2012, 2015, 2017). This distinction between sustainable and
unsustainable agricultural practices naturally ties into the discussion above of a society’s
vulnerability to climate variability and change.
In an attempt to identify the relationships between people and the perception
of climatic changes, reactions and adaptations that are archaeologically visible will
be discussed in each chapter. Examples of reactions to short-term climate
variation include evidence for water-management changes due to drought or
intensification of bimodal seasonal rain (e.g., check-dams, deeper wells, water
drainage systems). Adaptations to long-term climate change would happen
over a longer timescale and would possibly be imperceptible to single
generations. The changes nevertheless happened. An example would be
a shift in dominant growing regions of grapevines to wetter areas during
long-term periods of dry conditions.
Overall, it is not enough to consider climate changes in parallel with social
changes, trying to find links between the two. Rather, it is necessary to
examine the entanglement as a whole and climate change as one factor
among many that contributed to social and economic changes. Moreover, it
is only possible to attempt this holistic approach using a long-term perspective
because both social and environmental change happen as a result of long-term
processes and factors set in motion long before the change is even visible in the
archaeological or climate proxy records. This book therefore includes climate
and environmental conditions as only one, yet vital, element that affected the
relationships between people and oil/wine.

Methodological Complexities of Palaeoclimate Proxy Data

Reconstructing past climates is a complicated, inaccurate process requiring
interdisciplinary collaboration and model-based extrapolation (Knapp and
 CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHAN GE 27

Manning 2016). The climate of the Mediterranean basin is particularly complex

due to its strategic location between major bodies of water (e.g., Atlantic
Ocean, North Sea) and continental air-masses (e.g., Europe, Africa, Siberia).
The result is a basin that, while having the same basic “Mediterranean” climate,
is made up of regional idiosyncrasies, divided both east-west and north-south.
The highly mountainous terrain of most of the land within and around the
Mediterranean Sea also presents complications in the form of microclimates
that tend to diverge, often dramatically, from the broader trend of the region
and the basin as a whole. It is therefore necessary to pay close attention to not
only the dataset itself, but also the origin of the data and whether they
accurately represent the geographical area in question; here, namely Greece
and the Aegean region.
Past-climate variables cannot be directly measured, so information is derived
through the use of proxies. A proxy can be defined as “any component of
a climate archive whose origin is related to a climate variable or process and
whose relationship holds for a wide variety of oceanographic and sedimentolo-
gical environments and timescales” (Lionello 2012, p. xliii). The most prominent
proxies for Mediterranean Holocene reconstruction are palynological (pollen)
data from sediment cores, stable isotopes from sea-bed cores, and speleothem
growth in caves. Each have their own methodological and interpretive issues.
While pollen cores are currently the most prevalent source of data for Greece,
their interpretation is complicated. When it comes to Holocene environment,
human impact plays a major role and the types and quantities of pollen are often
directly affected by the presence of humans in the landscape. The usefulness and
reliability of pollen data as a proxy for, especially, mid- to late Holocene climate
are significantly reduced due to human land use and their impact on vegetation
(Finné et al. 2011, 3166). When interpreting palynological data, it is unclear
whether the variations over time are due to climate fluctuations or changes in
agricultural strategies, settlement organization, or a combination of these. For
example, multiple cores from the Peloponnese have presented a sharp increase in
olive pollen around 900 BCE that has been associated with the onset of intensive
cultivation of olives (Jahns 1993, 2005; Bottema and Sarpaki 2003; Kontopoulos
and Avramidis 2003; Kouli 2011). Moreover, for the Olea species in particular,
although it produces large quantities of pollen, it is not yet possible to discern
wild from domesticated varieties. In the case of Vitis, wild vines produce large
amounts of pollen, but the domesticated version is self-pollinating, consequently
producing little pollen (Hamilakis 1996, 4). Again, it is not possible to calculate
the ratio of wild to domesticated plants and the existence of wild plants does not
necessitate their use for oil and wine. Pollen data are therefore not as reliable for
Holocene climate reconstruction, but they can provide reasonable evidence for
land-use fluctuations and human–environment interaction.
28 INTRODUCTION

The analysis of speleothems (stalactites and stalagmites) is a more recent

development in past climate change research. Speleothems are secondary
CaCO3 deposits formed in caves that are generally tightly linked to precipita-
tion regimes. Carbon isotope compositions of speleothems vary in accordance
with changes in the soil vegetation and microbial activity, which in turn are
controlled by temperature and precipitation (McDermott 2004). In addition,
their location (in caves) means that postdepositional alteration of stratigraphy
and chemical signals is uncommon (Frisia et al. 2008). They are therefore good
proxy mechanisms for the environment in the immediate vicinity of the
sample. In this respect, speleothems provide good indications of the local
climate variability, but might not reflect more regional-scale fluctuations and
can therefore present results inconsistent with samples from neighboring
regions.
Another common source of proxy information is deep-sea sediment cores.
The relative abundance and assemblage composition of microorganisms (phy-
toplankton and zooplankton) provide important information of past sea-surface
temperature, relative salinity, and nutrient and water-column conditions.
Geochemical proxies such as stable and unstable isotopes, major and minor
sediment components are also important in learning more about the dynamics
of the carbon and nutrient cycles (Lionello 2012, xliv).

Climate Change from the Bronze Age to the Classical Period

Despite the methodological and interpretive issues described earlier, the sheer
amount of data generated over the last 30 years has made it increasingly possible
to reconstruct broad patterns in climatic fluctuations in the eastern
Mediterranean and Aegean more specifically. While it is certainly not the
case that the whole area experienced the same conditions at the same time,
some general trends seem to apply to most subregions, with a few microcli-
mates standing out. In what follows, I attempt to outline these eastern
Mediterranean and Aegean climatic patterns using up-to-date data generated
by multiple, yet correlating, proxy-based sources. What follows is by no means
the full extent of the available data for the past climate of the eastern
Mediterranean (for overviews, see Mayewski et al. 2004; Wanner et al. 2008;
Finné et al. 2011; Psomiadis et al. 2018). Instead, I focus on what is known
about the broad palaeoclimatic trends of the Aegean and Greece from about
3000 to 500 BCE. Sections in individual chapters will address evidence for local
and regional environmental changes that might have affected the production of
surplus oil and wine.
Multiple proxy sources in regions all around the eastern Mediterranean have
generated data suggesting that the period from about 3000 to 2000 BCE was
a generally more humid phase compared to the previous or following
 CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHAN GE 29

fluctuations. Speleothem data from Thasos (Psomiadis et al. 2018), Romania

(Constantin et al. 2007), and Israel (Bar-Matthews et al. 1998; Bar-Matthews
and Ayalon 2011) all support this era as one of increased precipitation with
some give-and-take for the dating of the onset and transition. Similarly,
northern Aegean sediment cores from lakes in the Thessaloniki plain
(Ghilardi et al. 2012) and Lake Shkodra in Albania (Zanchetta et al. 2012;
Mazzini et al. 2015) showed lake expansion until ca. 2200 BCE. This more
humid trend is corroborated in the southern Aegean through deep-sea sediment
cores (Triantaphyllou et al. 2009a).
The end of this phase is often said to be marked by the “4.2-event” when
a proposed climate anomaly, or rapid climate change, ushered in a phase of
rapidly increasing aridity resulting in a multi-century drought (2250–1950
BCE; Weiss 2016). Indeed, the fall of the Akkadian state has been attributed
to the 4.2 event (Weiss et al. 1993). However, this event does not appear to be
so intense throughout the eastern Mediterranean. A rapid climate change is not
corroborated by north Aegean speleothem data or southern Aegean sedimen-
tary cores (Wanner et al. 2008; Finné et al. 2011; Psomiadis et al. 2018). Indeed,
there is an age accuracy discrepancy by plus or minus over a century for this arid
phase depending on the geographic position and proxy-type (see Psomiadis
et al. 2018 for an overview of the data and relevant citations). Despite the
discrepancy in timing and intensity, there does seem to be corroborating
evidence from the north Aegean, Levant, and even Italy for a more arid
phase between the end of the third and beginning of the second millen-
nium BCE.
The general trend from proxies around the eastern Mediterranean is an
alleviation in the drier than average conditions from about 2000 to 1450 BCE
with a generally benign climate (Finné et al. 2011, 3167). Within that broad
trend, however, are variations in subregions. Speleothem evidence from the
northern Aegean and Balkans show a pronounced arid phase around
1650–1550 BCE. Specifically, caves from Thasos (Psomiadis et al. 2018) and
Turkey (Göktürk 2011) suggest a cold, dry period of around 100 years. Similar
signatures have been detected in the southern Aegean (ca. 1600–1550 and ca.
1510–1440 BCE; Weiberg and Finné 2018, 589), but not the Middle East.34
Other researchers have interpreted proxy data from the southern Aegean and
Crete as representing not necessarily an entirely benign climate but rather a shift
to the bimodal climate currently experienced in those regions; namely, warm,
dry summers and cool, wet winters (Moody 1997, 2009; Drake 2012; Flood and
Soles 2014).
There is a general consensus that the time period between 1450 and 850 BCE
was one of drier, and generally harsher, conditions, although there is much
inter-variability superimposed upon this general pattern, for example between
the Aegean region and the Levant. This variability could be explained by strong
30 INTRODUCTION

Siberian highs with cool air flowing in over the Aegean leading to cooler, drier
climatic conditions in this region, while wetter conditions persist in parts of the
Levant and a warming trend is apparent for the Adriatic region (Rohling et al.
2002; Mayewski et al. 2004; Finné et al. 2011, 3167; Brooke 2014, 301).
Climatic fluctuations for the period 1450–850 BCE could also be tentatively
viewed from the perspective of the low solar activity that in northwestern
Europe yielded wetter, cooler climatic conditions centered around 850 BCE
(Chambers et al. 2007, 2010). Mayewski et al. (2004) suggest that this time
period was characterized by rapid climate change.
For the Aegean, regional studies suggest this rapid climate change was
centered around ca. 1050 BCE when a further cooling occurred (Mayewski
et al. 2004; Weninger et al. 2009; Finné et al. 2011, 3163). This broad time
period in particular highlights the influence of microclimates on the magnitude
of change. On Crete, Tsonis et al. (2010) suggest that the long-lasting dom-
inance of El Niño after 1450 BCE until around 1200 BCE affected Crete more
than other places of the Eastern Aegean, as attested by the disappearance of
more water-hungry plant species, such as Tilia.35 For the Peloponnese, spe-
leothem records suggest extremely dry conditions around 1130–1000 BCE
when the stalagmite stopped growing (Weiberg and Finné 2018, 589). In
contrast, proxy data from the north Aegean region suggests that this same era,
1450–750 BCE, was characterized by constant wetter conditions. Speleothem
records from Thasos and Romania suggest a peak in humidity at 1350 and 1250
BCE (Onac et al. 2002; Psomiadis et al. 2018). Interestingly, while humidity
levels remain high, temperature levels drop around 1050 BCE and rapid cool-
ing is inferred not only from the same cave records, but also from marine
records off the Adriatic coast.36
To the east, Turkey, the Middle East, the Near East, and the Arabian
Peninsula shift to more pronounced arid conditions at around 1050 BCE, as
indicated by the falling levels of the Dead Sea, and by pollen data from sites such
as Gibala-Tell Tweini, Diktili Tash, and Troy.37 The gap in settlement at Troy
from 1050 to 980 BCE has been connected to a rapid climate change event that
brought “stochastic outbreak” of cold and fast-flowing air masses into the
Aegean basin, with a source in Siberia. These cold air masses would result in
a series of unusually cold and dry winters and springs. Weninger et al. (2009, 46)
hypothesize that local farming communities in the northern Aegean would
have experienced repeated and devastating crop failures, often in consecutive
years, for at least three decades and perhaps twice as long. They further
speculate the development of “rapid climate change-downwind habitat-
tracking,” in this case from the Black Sea region into the Troad.
Around 850 BCE, there is evidence for further cooling in some regions.
A wetter and cooler climatic situation in northwestern Europe is hypothesized
as being connected with reduced solar activity (Chambers et al. 2007, 2010;
 CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHAN GE 31

Usoskin et al. 2007; Steinhilber et al. 2009). This minimum in solar insolation
was the lowest since 2900 BCE and has been termed the “Homeric Minimum”
(Brooke 2014, 301). A cooling event is also interpreted from proxy sources in
cores from the Ionian Sea (Finné et al. 2011, 3163). Proxy evidence suggests
that after the “Homeric Low” during the eighth century there would have
been a significant recovery from this “Preclassical global crisis” as temperatures
warmed (due to the fading Siberian High around 750 BCE) and precipitation
increased (Manning 2013, 113–114).38

The Effect of Climate Change on Olive Trees and Grapevines: Past and Present
The climatic narrative constructed earlier would only play a major role in the
broader context of this book if the fluctuations described affected the ways in
which people interacted with olive trees and grapevines. In other words, the
recorded changes in aridity and temperature must have had an impact on the
growth and fruit production of these two plants for there to be any meaningful
implications for the cultural history of olive oil and wine from the Bronze Age
to the Archaic period in Greece. In what follows, I outline how olive trees and
grapevines are in fact very sensitive to climate change both today and in the
past. Scientific evidence for the ways in which both plants react and adapt to
various types of climate change (e.g., increase/decrease in temperature and
precipitation) is presented. This is supplemented by a discussion of historical
accounts of these same types of reactions and adaptations, thereby connecting
modern observations to past events (e.g., the Medieval Climate Anomaly and
Little Ice Age). Finally, evidence is presented that suggests it is indeed possible
to apply the data and interpretations described for the modern and premodern
period to the time frame addressed in this book. In other words, modern and
historical evidence for the effects of climate change on olive trees and
grapevines can help reconstruct how these plants coped with the climatic
fluctuations described in the previous section.

Olive Trees and Grapevines as Sensitive Indicators of Climate

Change. Both grapevines and olive trees are often thought to be hardy plants,
surviving in various climatic conditions. On the one hand, olive trees are
perceived as living in xeric conditions and relatively poor soils. Grapevines, on
the other hand, are perceived as capable of surviving in relatively warm or cool
temperatures (e.g., Argentina vs. southern Ontario, Canada, where ice wine is
a delicacy; Shaw 2005). In both cases, these perceptions are in some way
true, but come with many caveats and footnotes. While olive trees are
adaptable to dry spells and drought and can attain acceptable (but not
flourishing) yields under dry farming, they are very sensitive to longer periods
of freezing and, although resistant to water shortage, produce best with high
32 INTRODUCTION

rainfall or with irrigation (Palomo et al. 2002; Tanasijevic 2014). Studies of

old, traditional olive production systems in dry-farmed (rain-fed) areas around
the Mediterranean provide our best analogies for ancient olive cultivation.39
In general, the number of trees per hectare is very low (8–18 m apart; 30–156
trees/h), their yields are very low (0.5–4 trees/h), with a long delay before
full production (15–40 years) and severe alternate bearing. In these condi-
tions, harvesting of trees is inefficient and expensive because it is almost
always done by hand or by beating the fruit off with long poles onto nets
(Civantos 2001; Rallo et al. 2005; Vossen 2013). These characteristics of
traditional olive cultivation would have exacerbated any impacts caused by
climatic changes. Trees remain premature for a long period of time and
would have been more susceptible to deterioration because of water stress or
freezing. Moreover, severe alternate bearing (that the trees produce fruit only
every-other year) would result in a long gap in full production (upward of 10
years or more) if a multiyear drought occurred.
The perception of grapevine flexibility is countered by the fact that wine
production occurs over narrow geographical and climatic ranges with some
varieties having an extremely small climatic niche (pinot noir, e.g., has an
approximate 2°C niche; Jones and Webb 2010). One might want to suggest
that certain varieties of grape are more suited to different climatic conditions.
However, as of right now, there is no evidence that there were different
varieties of grapevine in ancient Greece and Crete: all were Vitis vinifera,
with wild progenitor Vitis silvestris. The varieties we have today have been
developed in much more recent times. Although Classical and Roman litera-
ture recognizes different types of wine in different areas, it is unclear if this refers
to specific grape varieties, that is, different genetic variations of grapevine, or
simply different types of wine and their flavors. Only DNA analysis of seeds that
are well preserved (i.e., fresh remains or water logged) will reveal this (Hansen
2002, 75).
Like traditionally grown olive trees, aspects of traditional grapevine cultiva-
tion can exacerbate any climatic problems. Although they do not take quite as
long to mature as olive trees, grapevines can take as much as 10 years and more
to produce a significant crop (Palmer 1994, 14 note 19; Sarpaki 2012, 214). As
discussed subsequently, each phase in the life cycle of both olive trees and
grapevines is sensitive to climate in one way or another such that even slight
changes could affect how the plant grows, flowers, produces fruit, or lays
dormant. Because of these many sensitivities to climate, both plants have
been selected by scientists as “sensible indicators” or the “best bio-indicators”
of climate change for the Mediterranean basin (Moriondo et al. 2008, 2013;
Schultz and Jones 2010; Hannah et al. 2013, 6907). Consequently, much
research has been undertaken in recent years to understand exactly how both
olive trees and grapevines react to different types of climate change. Although
 CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHAN GE 33

many environmental factors contribute to the survival and thriving of olive

trees and grapevines, most studies focus on temperature and precipitation as
two of the most dominant and more measurable climatic forces.

Increased Temperature: Effects and Adaptations. Because, in general,

the Mediterranean is currently facing increasing temperatures and decreasing
rainfall, most scientific analyses of the effects of climate change on olive trees
and grapevines focus on those variables. In general, olive trees are more
reproductively sensitive than physiologically sensitive to climate change.
That is, they will survive, but not reproduce well or make fruit well. The
quality of fruit is mainly dependent on the tree’s flowering phenology. During
the winter months, olive trees have minimum chilling requirements. If tem-
perature increases too much, those requirements might not be met, thereby
limiting the following growth period. Olive flowering begins when days get
longer and warmer during springtime (Garcia-Mozo et al. 2009). Increased
temperatures force flowering to start earlier for a shorter amount of time,
ultimately affecting the quantity and quality of fruit produced in the following
months (Avolio et al. 2012). Increased heat and UV-B rays have a particularly
strong effect on pollen germination, which decreases by 20–39 percent, and
tube length, which decreases by 11–44 percent. These changes could have
serious implications for olive yields, especially for low fruit-setting cultivars or
in years and environments with additional unfavorable conditions (Koubouris
et al. 2015).
As with olive cultivation, grapevine cultivation can be significantly impacted
by overall increases in temperature. The type of impact is entirely dependent on
regional location. Warming in cool climate regions could lead to more con-
sistent vintage quality, aiding the successful cultivation of grapevines. Other
regions with a warmer growing season, however, might become too warm for
the existing varieties to produce good-quality wine or survive at all. Likewise,
winter changes due to increasing temperatures could affect viticulture. Regions
with hard winter freezes would become less prone to vine damage, whereas
regions that already have mild winters might move beyond the threshold for
necessary cooling that allows latent bud hardening and reduction of pests (Jones
et al. 2005, 339). During the growing season, increased temperatures can affect
grape quality and viability. Prolonged temperatures above 10°C initiate spring
vegetative growth and determine the start of the growing season. During
flowering and the growth of berries, extremes of heat can cause premature
véraison (change of color and start of the accumulation of sugars), high grape
mortality through abscission, enzyme inactivation, and partial or total failure of
flavor ripening. During the maturation stage, a high diurnal temperature range
leads to the beneficial synthesis of grape tannins, sugars, and flavors (Jones et al.
2005, 320–321). Earlier and shorter berry-ripening time would result in an
34 INTRODUCTION

earlier harvest, likely producing desiccated fruit and a reduction in the final
yield (Jones et al. 2005, 339; Moriondo 2010).40
Both olive trees and grapevines react to increased temperature with
adaptive responses. When combined with agricultural strategies employed
by the humans that tend to these plants, the adverse effects can be mitigated.
Left to their own devices, if climate shifts toward increasing temperatures for
a long period of time (decades or centuries, i.e., not an isolated event), both
olive trees and grapevines will shift growing regions toward the north and
higher elevations. For example, current projections for upcoming increases
in temperature by an average of 1°C in the Mediterranean will decrease area
suitable for viticulture by 25–73 percent in major wine producing regions
within 30 years (Hannah et al. 2013). This trend should result in the
establishment of vineyards at higher elevations and higher latitudes. This
adaptation has been shown to have occurred during the Medieval Climate
Anomaly when grape cultivation extended to northern Germany, England,
and Poland, which indicated relatively warm temperatures (Gladstones
1992). At the same time, when mild winters became normal, olives were
cultivated in northern Italy where today they are no longer present (Pfister
et al. 1998). From the tenth to fourteenth centuries AD, olives were
cultivated along the northern limits of the Apennines and the southern
limits of the Alpine region. Humans can further contribute to successful
cultivation by changing management practices like pruning, fruit thinning,
green tipping, leaf removal, and fertilization. Increases in irrigation and
sprinkling or misting the vines help cool the grapes.

Decreased Temperature: Effects and Adaptations. An overall decrease

in temperature would essentially result in the opposite effects and adaptions
described earlier. Olive trees are a warm climate evergreen plant that requires
a relatively high temperature threshold. Zero degrees Celsius is considered the
minimum temperature under which the physiological activities of the tree are
completely blocked. Under negative 5°C, serious problems have been reported
for olive leaves due to freezing (Tjamos et al. 1993). For the growth period, the
base temperature in Mediterranean orchards is around 7°C. This threshold
would be reached later in a cooler climate, resulting in a shorter growth period.
Of course, regional climatic variation plays a major role. Lower temperatures
would mean that some areas that were once too hot for olive trees might
become viable, while other areas that were at the limit of winter freezing
temperatures would no longer support olive tree cultivation. Grapevines are
more tolerant of freezing temperatures than olive trees, but they too have
limits. Currently for continental Eastern Europe, the grapevine has a limit of
negative 1℃ for a January average (Schultz and Jones 2010, 138).
 CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHAN GE 35

In terms of adaptive strategies, decreasing temperatures would require

a gradual shift of growing areas toward the south and lower elevations.
Historical records and palynological data from the “Little Ice Age,” ca. AD
1400–1900, present evidence for such shifts in cultivation of olive trees and
grapevines. During this period, olive groves were affected by severe winter
temperatures throughout the Mediterranean basin resulting in the progressive
shrinking of olive cultivation. Olives ceased being cultivated in the
Mediterranean French Alps, Languedoc (possibly due to eight severe frost
events between AD 1565 and 1624), and the left bank of the river Rhone
where they had been cultivated from the sixteenth century (Moriondo et al.
2013, 825). Other regions in the northern limits of olive cultivation in France
replaced the olive with grapevines or mulberry trees, both of which could
withstand the colder winters. In northern Italy on the central and western sides
of the southern Po Plain olive trees were irreversibly damaged, essentially
eliminating olive cultivation in this area. Likewise, cultivation of the olive in
eastern Spain generally decreased between ca. AD 1500 and 1600 due to the
long-lasting cooler temperatures (Moriondo et al. 2013, 826). The Little Ice
Age also affected the northern limits of vine cultivation. Specifically, large
grape growing areas in Central Europe were abandoned and replaced by an
extension into Southern Europe (Gladstones 1992).

Increased Humidity: Effects and Adaptations. Precipitation fluctuations

associated with climate change can also affect olive trees and grapevines. Like
temperature, precipitation increase can be beneficial or detrimental depend-
ing on the regional climate. Grapevines are generally more tolerant of
increased humidity. Too much rainfall, however, can have a detrimental
effect by rotting the roots or berries. Excessive rainfall during harvest season
is also considered a critical weather-risk factor for viticulture (Jones and
Webb 2010, 105). Olive trees are particularly sensitive to an overabundance
of water since they rely on dry growing season conditions that assure fruit
pollination, fruit set, a minimum of foliar diseases, and the development of
typical fruit characteristics (Vossen 2013). Several studies on mature orchards
have shown that the greatest efficiency of water use is at approximately
40–70 percent of full evapotranspiration demand. When water is applied
beyond this level, growth and production are only slightly improved (Lavee
and Wodner 2004; Grattan et al. 2006; Vossen 2013, 46). During processing,
oil is easier to extract from low-moisture fruit and more difficult to extract
from fruit that has been over-irrigated or has received rain before harvest, or
if the fruit is washed or wet just prior to crushing. In regions that are toward
the dryer end of olive cultivation limits, increased rainfall could dramatically
increase fruit yield and result in greater shoot growth, and trunk diameter
(Vossen 2013, 45).
36 INTRODUCTION

Historically, there is some evidence to support the olive’s sensitivity to

humidity. Climatic proxy data suggests that before 150 BCE, the western
Mediterranean was generally more humid than the eastern (discussed
earlier). This trend resulted in a limited cultivation of olive in southern
Italy where it may have initially been too wet for olive cultivation, as
corroborated by a low diffusion of Olea pollen in Apulia, Campania, and
Basilicata from ca. 500 BCE to 500 CE (Moriondo et al. 2013, 825). In
contrast, Bronze Age signatures suggest olive pollen is well represented
(Di Rita and Magri 2009). During the Little Ice Age, when conditions
generally became cooler and wetter, some regions saw an increase in
olive cultivation. For example, in Andalusia where water is usually the
limiting factor for crop cultivation there is evidence for an increase in
olive production (Moriondo et al. 2013, 826). In contrast, other regions
became too cold and wet to support olive growth. For example, olives
were not cultivated north of Thessaly in Greece, even though they are
today (Moriondo et al. 2013, 827, fig. 4; 828, fig. 6). That grapevines
were less affected by the wetter conditions of the Little Ice Age is
perhaps indicated by the fact that the price for olive oil increased
exponentially in Italy and France, but wine prices remained relatively
low and stable (Moriondo et al. 2013, 826, fig. 3).

Increased Aridity: Effects and Adaptations. Rainfall decrease associated

with climate change has the potential to significantly alter the way olives
and grapes are grown. Increased dryness can be more easily mitigated if one
has access to irrigation, but many farmers today and certainly in the past rely
solely on rain-fed agriculture. Although olive trees are particularly good at
tolerating dry conditions, drought stress can limit shoot growth and next
season’s cropping potential plus fruit size and olive production (Vossen
2013). Specifically, drought stress in the spring growing season, when cell
division and initial mesocarp cells are forming, is regarded as the most
detrimental to fruit size and oil accumulation. Additionally, alternate bear-
ing (producing fruit every 2 years) is worsened when there is an intense
competition for water. Studies have suggested that applying almost any
amount less than 40 percent of full evapotranspiration demand as supple-
mental irrigation can have a significant effect on growth, fruit production,
and total oil yield (Lavee and Wodner 2004; Grattan et al. 2006; Vossen
2013, 46). Irrigation that relieves drought stress can significantly increase
fruit oil content along with overall fruit yield. Drought-stressed trees tend
to mature their fruit earlier than irrigated trees (Vossen 2013). During
shorter-term drought events, rain-fed trees adjust structurally and function-
ally by producing more vessels with lower diameter to prevent cavitation
and limit wood formation during droughts (Rossi et al. 2013).
 CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHAN GE 37

These adaptations, however, would prove futile in situations of long-term

climate change. Eventually, the best response is to shift growing locations toward
wetter regions. Historically, this trend can be illustrated by regions traditionally too
wet for olive trees showing increased cultivation, while regions that are traditionally
dry lost the ability to cultivate olive trees. Southern Italy, an area that was too wet
for olives before 150 BCE, saw more olive cultivation during the following
Medieval Climate Anomaly. A simultaneous increase in evergreens in Campania
and Basilicata suggests a climate-driven process (Moriondo et al. 2013, 825). In
contrast, Andalusia, a typically dry area, saw increased drought episodes, which
resulted in a marked decrease in olive cultivation. In addition, there is evidence that
in typically humid regions, olive groves expanded during the thirteenth century dry
period at the expense of vineyards. That this was related to climatic change and not
anthropogenic decisions is indicated by local decreases in deciduous trees and lower
lake water levels. This trend has been confirmed along both the Catalan coast and
the French Mediterranean coast (Moriondo et al. 2013, 825 with references).
The modern scientific studies and historical cases presented here suggest that
not only are olive trees and grapevines affected by climate change, but it is also
possible to reasonably predict what types of effects and adaptions one could
expect for specific climatic shifts, both in the future and for the past. Although
the precise changes to climate in the time period covered in this book are
unclear, we are nevertheless capable of seeing relative changes through proxy
evidence, as presented earlier. That is, we are not able to reconstruct with any
certainty that around 1200 BCE the temperature decreased by 3°C. But it is
possible to see gradual shifts between warm and cool or wet and dry conditions
happening over decades or centuries. At the same time, it can be argued that
knowing the exact number of degrees increase in temperature or centimeters of
rainfall is not necessary in order to predict the general effects to and adaptation
by olive trees, grapevines, and the people that tend to them. For example, if the
temperature even changed by a single degree Celsius, it is clear, based on data
and models of the recent past, current, and future scenarios, that olive and vine
cultivation would have been affected. If a single degree average increase
(0.8–2.3 range) over the Mediterranean basin (with some regions experiencing
much higher-magnitude changes) could shift growing areas by as much as
25 percent northward and to higher elevations, we should not expect anything
less for the ancient past (Tanasijevic et al. 2014). When commenting on the
potential impact of climate change during the time periods addressed in this
book, I will often refer back to the data and examples presented here to see any
possible correlations with trends visible in the archaeological record. Although
there are significant complications in reconstructing past climate changes and
their effects at specific times in specific places and to specific plants, it is
nevertheless an important effort to undertake in order to gain a holistic view
38 INTRODUCTION

of the connections between people and the active environment with which
they maintained intense relationships.

THE STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK

The historical problem of olive oil’s and wine’s importance to pre-Classical

Greek societies lies at the heart of the present work. The next five chapters trace
the dynamic entanglement between people and oil/wine through the produc-
tion and exchange of those two commodities from the Minoan and Mycenaean
palatial eras to the Early Iron Age and Archaic period. Olive oil and wine were
central aspects of political, religious, and household life. As critical features
within the Greek cultural milieu, oil and wine reflect the broader story of
Greek cultural history as it fluctuated between eras represented by centraliza-
tion and interconnectedness versus decentralization and relative isolation. It is
therefore essential to take a historical approach in order to gain a full outlook
over the changing roles of oil and wine within their specific, yet dynamic,
cultural context. It is the full picture across the entire entanglement at a specific
time, from production strategies to different modes of exchange, that allows
a clearer understanding of the dependencies between people and oil/wine, as
well as the specific construction of their relative values. It is not enough to focus
on the changing roles of oil and wine within a particular exchange mode, such
as commensal events. Rather, it is necessary to see patterns of change as they
unfold across multiple exchange modes and in connection with production
strategies. Moreover, these patterns only make sense if understood within their
historically specific cultural and environmental context. By taking this approach,
readers will gain a holistic view of oil and wine during a given time period in
Greek history at the same time that the long-term story can be appreciated.
Additionally, readers interested in a particular time period, as is often the case
for most specializations, will find this book accommodating. For these reasons
the chapters of this book are organized chronologically.
The central goal of the book is to trace how and why olive oil and wine became
integral components of ancient Greek life. This can be done by examining how the
relationship between people and these two commodities changed from the Bronze
Age to the Archaic period and whether the relative value of oil and wine remained
consistently high. It is the many relationships of dependency that determine the
broad characteristics of the entanglement, as discussed earlier. Therefore, tracing
changes in dependency relationships will provide meaningful correlates for shifts in
the overall entanglement. Alterations to relationships of dependency can be seen
through a holistic view of the patterns produced across all relationships as social and
environmental context shifts over time. These patterns, in turn, can be viewed in
the archaeological record through changes in networks of people and things.
Tracing changes in entanglement between people and oil/wine therefore relies
 THE STR UCTURE OF THE BOOK 39

on the consideration of the changing socioeconomic context of oil and wine

production and exchange, including the alteration of specific groups of actors
involved. For example, the relationships between farmers, potters, and central
authorities changed significantly from the Minoan palatial era to the Mycenaean
palatial era. Changes to these networks of people and things can be traced through
the archaeological record, expressed as, for example, production strategies of
specialized pots (increased volume of production and standardization), records of
land transactions (increase in palatial concern for control of land), and centralized
storage facilities (continued construction of large storage magazines). Taken
together, these patterns in the archaeological material ultimately represent mean-
ingful changes to entanglements that can be traced over time. In this case, the
relationships of dependency governing oil and wine production and exchange
increased in intensity from the Minoan palatial era as Mycenaean central authorities
exercised more control over the cultivation of land, the production of transport
containers, and surplus storage.
Since, within a cultural economy paradigm, value is constructed at the moment
of exchange, tracing the value of olive oil and wine over time requires a holistic
view of their use within prominent modes of exchange. That is, their value at
a given time is expressed as the general trends across different exchange modes;
broad patterns affecting commensal, gift, and commercial exchange. Changes
across different exchange modes can be viewed through changes across different
exchange contexts where oil and wine are prominent features: feasts, funerary gifts,
ritual practices, and commodity distribution. Changes to these exchange contexts
are revealed through patterns in the archaeological record. For example, different
dining wares and architectural settings for commensal events; alterations to number
and type of grave goods and ritual offerings for gifting practices; and amphora
distributions for commodity distributions. The place of oil and wine within
a particular regime of value can also be detected when compared to their place
in a neighboring regime of value. That is, when oil and wine are exchanged
outside of the Greek cultural milieu, or between different regions within the
Aegean, the patterns of shared (or not) practices as expressed through proxy
archaeological data, as outlined previously, will reveal similarities and differences
in the value of these two commodities. For example, the absence of Cretan
transport stirrup jars, once used to haul large quantities of oil or wine in the Late
Bronze Age, in mainland graves stands in stark contrast to their frequent occur-
rence in contemporary Cretan graves. This pattern, when taken into consideration
alongside other contemporary trends in the remnants of exchange modes reveals,
through comparison, how these two regions differentially viewed the value of
these containers, and by proxy, their contents.
Each chapter takes as its topic a particular period in Greek prehistory: the
Minoan palatial era, Mycenaean palatial era, Postpalatial era, Early Iron Age, and
early Archaic period (see Table 1.2).41 In order to present clearly the data on which
40
table 1.2 Chronological table for time periods mentioned in this book

Crete Dates BC Mainland Dates BC

Early Minoan Early Pre-palatial Period 3100–2650 Early Helladic (EH) I 3100+ to 3000
(EM) I

EM IIA 2650–2450/00 EH II 2650–2500

EM IIB 2450/00–2200 Later EH II 2500–2200

EM III Late Pre-palatial Period 2200–2100/2050 EH III 2250–2100/2050

Middle Minoan 2100/2050–1925/00 Middle Helladic (MH) I 2100/2050–1950/

(MM) IA 1900
1950/1900-1800
MM IB Protopalatial Period (Old 1925/00–1875/50 MH II
1800-1700/1675
Palace Period)
MM II 1875/50–1750/00 MH III
MM III Neopalatial Period (New 1750/00–1700/1675
Palace Period)
Late Minoan 1700/1675–1625/00 Late Helladic 1700/1675–1635/
(LM) IA (LH) I 00

LM IB 1625/00–1470/60 LH IIA Mycenaean 1635/00–1480/70

Palatial Period
LM II Monopalatial Period 1470/60–1420/10 LH IIB 1480/70–1420/10

LM IIIA1-2 Final Palatial Period 1420/10–1330/15 LH IIIA1–2 1420/10–1330/15

LM IIIB 1330/15–1200/1190 LH IIIB 1330/15–1200/

1190

(continued)
 LM IIIC (early, Postpalatial Period 1200/1190–1075/50 LH IIIC (early, middle, late) Postpalatial 1200/1190–1075/
middle, late) Period 50

Subminoan Early Iron Age 1075/50–970 Protogeometric (early, middle, late) Early Iron Age 1075/50–900

Protogeometric 970–810 Early Geometric (I and II) 900–850/840

(middle, late)/
Protogeometric B

Early and Middle 810–740 Middle Geometric 850/840–760

Geometric (i and ii)
Late Geometric 740–700 Late Geometric Early Archaic 760–700/670
(ia, ib, iia, iib) Period

Orientalizing Early Archaic Period 700–640/630 Protoattic, Protocorinthian, and other 700/670–600/580
(early, late) regional designations

Late Orientalizing 640/630–600

(later)

Archaic Late Archaic Period 600–480 Late Archaic 600/580–480

Period

Modified following Manning, 2010, table 2.2; Dickinson 2006, 23; Kotsonas 2008, 32, table 1.

41
42 INTRODUCTION

the above argument relies, and to trace the differences and similarities between each
time period, the chapters are structured similarly. Specifically, chapters begin with
a brief overview highlighting prominent cultural and environmental attributes of
the time period, followed by a detailed description of data available for the
production of oil and wine, including land ownership, scale of production, location
of production, control of surplus, scale of surplus storage, and so on.
The chapter then moves through the three modes of exchange highlighted
earlier – commensal, gift, and commercial – outlining the archaeological and
textual data as it provides a broad picture of how olive oil and wine were used
in each exchange context. Feasting deposits are highly visible in the archaeological
record, taking the form of large deposits of drinking, eating, and cooking ceramics,
storage wares, and remnants of the actual meals (bones, plant remains). In addition,
changes in the location, frequency, and scale of feasting deposits can aid in
reconstructing social conditions and their dependences on oil and wine for
commensal activities. As will be explored, the combination of data on feasting
deposits with data from surplus storage practices, written records, and production
installations, creates a relatively full picture of the nature and transitions of surplus
oil and wine use within this particular mode of exchange. This, in turn, can inform
us of the value attributed to these goods and their place within an entanglement.
Archaeological and textual evidence for non-commensal gift exchange relies on
ritual and funerary contexts. There are two categories of evidence for these
instances of the use of oil and wine within the context of non-commensal gift
exchange. The first category involves records of transactions between people and
deities where the provisions are intended as offerings and not as supplies for feasting
or drinking events. This dataset is of course only useful when textual evidence is
available, that is, in the Late Bronze Age and early Archaic period. The second and
more plentiful avenue of inquiry involves objects associated with oil and wine
storage and consumption, such as jars, jugs, cups, and perhaps pyxides (small
containers used for unguents/processed oils), deposited within sanctuaries or within
tombs as grave offerings. Trends over time and region in the number, frequency,
and types of oil and wine containers provide evidence for the relative value of oil
and wine in those contexts as gifts to gods and deceased people. For example, the
continuing value of oil and wine as a funerary gift after the Mycenaean palatial
collapse is exemplified by the presence of hundreds of decorated stirrup jars, used for
perfumed oil and wine, in the graves at the cemetery of Perati in Attica. In fact, the
small stirrup jar remained one of the most popular types of vessel in the Postpalatial
era, supplanted only in the Early Iron Age by amphoriskoi (small amphoras).
The remnants of commercial exchanges are best represented by the distribution
of large amphoras and related shapes. In each chapter, the most prevalent types of
amphoras produced and exchanged in the Aegean are discussed. For the Late
Bronze Age, the production and distribution patterns for both amphoras and
a specialized type of container, the transport stirrup jar, are discussed. Production
 map 1.1 Map of the Mediterranean with major sites mentioned in the text. Image by author

43
44 INTRODUCTION

map 1.2 Map of the Aegean with major sites mentioned in the text. Image by author

techniques, scale, and standardization all provide insights into the intensity of
connections between the people and things that surround that industry. Mass-
produced, standardized, and labelled transport stirrup jars in the Mycenaean palatial
era are in stark contrast to the following Postpalatial era when common, almost
interchangeable, household shapes, such as the neck amphora and hydria, are used
for small-scale, regional exchanges of oil and wine. The differences in amphora
production strategies are consistent with their dramatically divergent cultural
contexts and highlight changing socioeconomic networks. The distribution pat-
terns of Greek amphoras are used to understand the relative value of their contents
in various regions of Greece and the broader Mediterranean. How these patterns
change over time, that is, from chapter-to-chapter, presents a long-term picture of
how networks of commercial exchange never ceased, but altered in scale and shape
to match the needs of the entanglement at a given time.
 THE STR UCTURE OF THE BOOK 45

The conclusion of each chapter takes a holistic view of the production

strategies and relevant patterns across all three exchange modes to describe
and analyze the structure of the entanglement and the value of oil and wine at
that particular point in time. Ultimately, the relationships of dependency made
visible by these data reveal the internal workings and external connections of
the Bronze and Iron Age Greek world. It is through these two cultural
commodities that continuity and change can be understood over the long
term in the social, ideological, and economic underpinnings of Greek culture.
The Conclusion to the book addresses the implications of this historical study on
modern issues of agriculture and commerce in the Mediterranean. As the
Mediterranean is once again impacted by dramatic climate change today, it is
important to understand more fully the outcomes of these changes in the past and
how populations adapted to and, eventually, thrived in new conditions.
Ultimately, the downfall of human populations is not just the climate change itself,
but also the unwillingness to effectively adapt. It is therefore necessary to learn from
the entanglements of the past to pursue the most beneficial paths for people and
their relationships with olive trees and vines. As cultural commodities even today,
olive oil and wine remain a staple of Greek life, without which the future is
inconceivable. At this point of inescapable entanglement, to suggest halting
production of these two commodities, due to the effects of climate change,
would seem impossible. Yet, it is becoming increasingly clear that the environ-
ments of many regions of Greece and Crete are changing, to the point where
maintaining olive trees and producing olive oil are no longer monetarily lucrative.
The cost of water exceeds the price at which the oil is eventually sold. These
cultural commodities could pose a threat to the stability of the region as climate
change worsens in the next 50 years.
 TWO

DEVELOPING A RELATIONSHIP
OF DEPENDENCY
Oil and Wine in the Minoan Palatial Era

A s one of the earliest locations in greece with clear

evidence for surplus production of both olive oil and wine, the island of
Crete occupies an integral place in the history of these two commodities.1 By
the time of the Minoan palaces, roughly 2000–1450 BCE, Cretans had already
been enjoying olive oil and wine for roughly 1,000 years.2 Yet it was only
during this time, when homogenous cultural attributes spread throughout the
island and palatial or central-court buildings became the focus of social and
economic activities, that the scale of oil and wine production and exchange
increased exponentially.3 Before this point, archaeological evidence suggests
that oil and wine were produced in relatively small quantities and were more
socially restricted. As this chapter demonstrates, during the palatial era, and
especially the Neopalatial era (ca. 1600–1450 BCE), olive oil and wine con-
tinued to be highly valued products but became more accessible to a wider
section of the population as exchange contexts, such as feasts and trade,
increased in scale and frequency.4 Evidence from storage strategies, commensal
events, ritual offerings, and commercial exchanges suggests that oil and wine
came to play an integral role in the functioning of central-court buildings and
their complex relationships with the agricultural hinterlands around them. The
details surrounding the production and exchange of oil and wine therefore
provide unique insights into the broader sociopolitical changes of the
Neopalatial era.

46
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 47

Based on a cohesive view of the data presented in this chapter, I suggest that
the Neopalatial era was the tipping point in the entanglement between people
and oil/wine in the prehistoric Aegean. Compared to previous eras on the
island, the Neopalatial era marks a significant change in the way the high value
of oil and wine was perceived and created. New hierarchies and political
configurations made possible upscaled production of oil and wine. The choice
to pursue that upscaled production and exchange the products in large-scale
feasting, ritual, and economic contexts suggests that oil and wine not only
maintained a high value but also became accessible to a larger section of the
population. These people, their institutions, and associated ideas then contrib-
uted to the construction of the high value of oil and wine and the cultural
attributes associated with it. Ultimately, the sociopolitical situation of the
Neopalatial era created the perfect environment for the establishment of
a lasting connection between people, oil, and wine for the next 1,000 years
and beyond.

PRODUCTION OF OIL AND WINE

The mode, scale, and integration of the production of oil and wine at a given
time, and how these attributes change over time, can contribute toward under-
standing how the value of these two commodities was constructed within
a given cultural context and the characteristics of their integration within an
entanglement. The Minoan Neopalatial era marks a point when the archae-
ological evidence available for the production of oil and wine increases sub-
stantially. In fact, the facilities from the Minoan period represent the most
robust corpus of data for the production of oil and wine until the Hellenistic
period. The best evidence for wine and olive oil production are the physical
installations associated with their manufacture. The number of presses, their
location within a site, and their association with other archaeological remains
are important indications for the status and value of the actors and activities
involved in the creation and control of oil and wine. In addition, patterns
produced over time within these variables can indicate changes to the size and
scale of potential production, which can be the result of changes in how
production of these commodities was administered, by whom, and for what
purposes. These changes ultimately reflect how value was constructed for and
attributed to these products.
The general trend observable for the presence of pressing vats in the Minoan
Bronze Age reveals an overwhelming preponderance of wine presses compared
to olive presses, at least within excavated (generally settlement) contexts
(Figures 2.1 and 2.2).5 Platon and Kopaka (1993) recorded forty-one installa-
tions for Bronze Age Crete, thirty-two of which can be identified as ceramic
wine presses, divided between a ceramic version (Type I) and a platform
48 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

2.1 Wine-making installation from Vathypetro. Image by Chelsey Gareau

version (Type II).6 This discrepancy is further emphasized by the fact that most
of the stone olive presses date to the later Mycenaean period on the island. It is
therefore possible that olive pressing was carried out in the location of the olive
groves themselves, which, at the moment, have yet to be identified.

Technologies of Wine and Oil Production

The morphology of Type I press beds, along with their contexts and accom-
panying equipment, points toward their use for wine production. Frequently
found in settlements or in isolated buildings (farmsteads), these spouted ceramic
containers are placed on an artificial platform or bench and in immediate
relation with it a large pot or collector is placed on a lower level to receive
the liquid from the press above (either placed standing above the ground or
inserted into the ground). The press beds are of relatively uniform dimensions
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 49

2.2 Stone-pressing bed from Kommos. After Platon and Kopaka 1993, 41, fig. 4. Image by
Chelsey Gareau

(ca. 0.47–0.69 and 0.55–0.77 cm in diameter for the base and lip, respectively;
heights range from 0.21 to 0.50 cm). When found in isolation, they have been
variously interpreted as for separating oil and water during olive pressing, grape
pressing for wine, washing clothes, and so on (Renfrew 1972, 282, 285; Warren
1972, 138–139). Yet, when all the examples are examined as a whole and the
characteristics of the technology scrutinized, it becomes clear that Type I press
beds could be used for only a limited number of activities. Their ceramic
construction would be insufficient for the amount of pressure needed to
crush olive stones, and their dimensions, along with tall walls, would prevent
using any kind of rolling technique. Instead, the morphology of the vat and its
large spout with tall walls of its own suggest that the activity produced and
managed relatively large amounts of liquid that would be conveyed in its
entirety into a separate storage container (Hamilakis 1996). That the associated
storage container is often embedded in the floor and is immobile should not be
surprising. A submerged container for the fermentation of grape must is
a common trait in the production of wine in various regions of the
Mediterranean (e.g., the earliest wine at Areni cave, Armenia). When finished,
the wine would then be ladled or scooped out into other containers.
Alternatively, the must could be immediately ladled out into nearby fermenta-
tion pots. In either case, it would also be necessary to have the catchment pot at
a low position to allow enough room above to manipulate the pressing of the
fruit in the vat by either standing in it or using a tool to exert force.7 This type of
installation had a long life span and was quite conservative since it has been
identified in sites dating from at least 1650 BCE (Akrotiri) to ca. 1450 BCE
50 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

(Zakros), as described later. Even earlier, the site of Myrtos (Phornou Koryphi;
2900–2200 BCE) has multiple examples of press beds and pithoi with grape pips
and skins, as well as chemical signatures indicating they contained wine
(Warren 1972; Brun 2004, 72–73).
One of the best examples of a Type I press installation comes from the Late
Minoan palatial town of Zakros in east Crete.8 Many houses (at least ten)
situated on the hills near the palace produced these types of installations or press
beds. House Z, a large important building on the southwest hill near the palace,
presents a relatively recently excavated in situ example that is particularly well
preserved. The room in which the installation was found seems to have been
used exclusively for pressing and storage of wine. The equipment was all intact
and almost entirely in situ including a platform on which the Type I ceramic
press bed was placed, along with a large collector container fixed at a lower
level in front of the press. The lower part of the collector was embedded in the
ground. Two steps were constructed on the southern side of the press in the
extension of the platform, most likely used to deposit grapes into the press and
to step into the press bed for crushing the grapes. The person pressing the grapes
could even take a break and sit on a built-in bench at the same level as the press.
The must would then be transferred from the collector container to the two
pithoi placed nearby using the jugs and cups also recovered from the room. An
embedded jar would have even collected any liquid lost during the move, aided
by the slope of the ground. Once fermented, the wine would then be trans-
ferred to the two amphoras and two smaller pithoi in the room. The room also
contained items perhaps tangentially related to wine-making such as a tripod,
a loom weight, and fragments of a circular stuccoed offering or libation table.
Although no organic remains have been published from the room, the
mechanics of the installation combined with the types of associated equipment
make a strong case for the production of wine in this room. Since pieces of this
wine-making kit have been found in many other houses at Zakros, it would not
be unreasonable to assume that where a Type I press bed has been found there
was likely wine-making taking place.9
The site of Mochlos, located on the north coast, is divided between the coast
and a small offshore island. The coastal part of the site was the location of
various artisans’ quarters and workshops. There, Building C.7 contained two
Type I press beds. Both press beds have been subjected to residue analysis, with
interesting results. The first press bed was found in Room 2.2 on a bench with
a funnel along with many different types of containers, stone tools, cooking
pots, and cups on the floor. Almost all of the containers and the press bed
produced chemical compounds related to olive oil, coriander, and other spices.
The room has been interpreted as a perfumed oil workshop with the vat having
signatures of all the different ingredients suggesting it was part of the last phase
of the brewing process (Brogan and Koh 2008, 2). The second press bed was
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 51

found outside the northwest entrance to the second phase of the building in
LM IB. It is slightly different morphologically with a closed spout and the
presence of a hole on the side. Unlike the previous press bed, this one produced
residues of tartaric and syringic acids, used as definitive biomarkers for wine
products (Brogan and Koh 2008, 3). Pithoi in the same building had residues for
both oil and wine, suggesting reuse (Brogan and Koh 2008, 4). The evidence
from Mochlos suggests that when a press bed is found in isolation, one cannot
assume that it was used solely for the production of wine, but rather could
function in different contexts.
One of the most recently discovered in situ Type I pressing installations was
found at the site of Akrotiri on Thera. During excavations for the site’s new
shelter, a press bed was found together with a collection pot (Sarpaki 2012,
215). The press bed is very similar to those on Crete, but with slightly taller
walls and made of local clay. The collection pot is also of local origin and type
with a wider mouth and spout inserted into the thick lip (Sarpaki 2012, 215).
Three others of this type have been noted in preliminary publications (Doumas
2014, 24–25, fig. 20.b, h; 56; 57, fig. 52). Unique to this installation is a basket
full of slaked lime found inside the press bed (Doumas 2014, 56, fig. 51).
Doumas (2014, 56) notes that ethnographic testimonies confirm that lime is
used to purify and filter must. Although the complete context of this installa-
tion is unknown or unpublished, it is supplemented by evidence from the
broader site indicating that wine production was an important sector of the
economy. In addition to the multiple examples of collection basins with lip-
spouts, narrow-bottomed pithoi with a spigot close to the base are also
frequently found (Doumas 2014, 59, fig. 54). Interestingly, they are lined
with bees’ wax, and one of them has a relatively long Linear A inscription (at
least six characters) incised on the rim of the vase that includes the sign for wine
(Doumas 2014, 58, fig. 53). An Early Cycladic II version of this same type of
container has been found at Akrotiri, although of a slightly different, more
amphora-like, shape but with a spigot at the base (Doumas 2014, 17, fig. 13). In
addition, grape pips, both whole and crushed, have been found throughout the
site (Doumas 2014, 23, fig. 19b), and bunches of grapes were a very common
motif. Taken together, it seems that Therans were just as concerned with the
production of wine as their southerly Cretan neighbors.10
The second type of press bed found in Bronze Age contexts on Crete is
composed of a built or carved rectangular area, sometimes plastered, with
a cutting leading to a lower-level platform or other catchment installation,
such as a pithos. These installations are almost certainly used for crushing grapes
and producing must for fermentation; they can be found out in the countryside
near the vineyards and carved out of bedrock or constructed within a building.
Bi-level rock-cut basins were a very common type of grape-pressing installa-
tion throughout the Near East and even used up to today. In Armenia, for
52 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

example, these installations had been used since the Early Bronze Age. Bedrock
cuttings at the site of Agarak in the region of Shirak (from which we get the
wine designation “Shiraz”) might date to the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron
Age, though this site had been in use since the Early Bronze Age II period (ca.
2900–2700 BCE).11 There, large rectangular cuttings in the bedrock included
a circular opening or cutting close to the bottom from which must would have
flowed down to a lower rock-cut deep basin. From there, it would have been
presumably scooped out and stored in jars to ferment (Figure 2.3).
Similar evidence comes from the opposite end of the Mediterranean and
about 3,000 years later. Historical and ethnographic evidence from Spain
provides examples of large, open bi-level pressing basins cut out of the bedrock
in the vineyard itself. For example, a “stomping pit” has been used at a vineyard
in La Rioja, Spain, since the early eighteenth century. The first level of the pit
catches all the stems and seeds from the grapes, while the second level removes
smaller debris such as skin and seeds as the must flows over the rock.12
For the Minoan era, a rock-cut example comes from the island of Gavdos,
just off the southern coast of Crete. Inhabited in the Minoan period, the island
seems to have had at least one prominent settlement that exported goods, such
as pottery and foodstuffs, to the Cretan mainland (e.g., stirrup jars and oval-
mouthed amphoras; Rutter 2006b; Day et al. 2011, 544; Pratt 2016a, 40,
table 6). The installation discovered on Gavdos is composed of two relatively
deep rectangular basins cut into the bedrock, one lower than the other,

2.3 Bronze Age rock-cut basins at Agarak. Photo courtesy of Kristina Olshansky
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 53

connected by a cutting that allowed the liquid from the upper basin to flow to
the lower one (Kopaka et al. 2001; Kopaka 2015). Due to the nature of the
discovery, it is impossible to determine whether wine was produced there
through residue analyses. However, there is some indication in the Linear
A records that wine was transported from Gavdos to other districts under the
administration of Haghia Triada (Tsikritsis 2002, 118).
An example of a constructed version of this type of pressing installation has
been found at the large Minoan settlement of Palaikastro in east Crete, not far
from the palatial site of Zakros. Dating to the beginning of the Neopalatial era
(MM IIIB), Building 6 included a room with a plaster-lined, low-walled tank
measuring 1.90 by 1.53 m with walls 40–45 cm wide and 20–30 cm high. The
plaster was mixed with crushed hexiplex shells and laid over the floor of the
tank, which sloped down from east to west (Knappett and Cunningham 2012,
65, 181, pl. 15). Strangely, a Type I press bed was embedded in the southern
wall and associated with a large sunken pithos at a lower level. Inside the pithos
was found a broken dipper cup, as well as part of a pithoid jar inside the press
bed. There is some indication that this press had a long life, stretching back into
the Protopalatial period. We might therefore be observing two stages in the
use-life of this press. The earlier version used the plastered tank to crush the
grapes while the later version used the Type I press bed, which became
increasingly popular throughout the Neopalatial era. Alternatively, the plas-
tered floor might have also been used for other industrial purposes like purple-
dye production or cloth-dying. Not only were hexiplex shells found within the
plaster, but additional shells also were found to the west of the tank. Two
similar installations were found at Zakros, one of which was also associated with
a Type I press bed (Platon and Kopaka 1993, 60 nos. 34–35). The fewer
numbers of Type II pressing installations are not surprising given the fact that
they take more effort to construct, are not portable, and were more often than
not found outside of the settlements.
Olive oil production was most certainly the primary objective for the third
type of press bed found throughout Minoan Crete and on Thera. These press
beds are constructed out of a single block of stone, either rectangular or circular
in shape with shallow walls or merely a depression. Stone would be the obvious
choice of material for an activity that required large amounts of force to crush
the olives and extract oil. These press beds also included a spout, although
much narrower than those of Type I beds, perhaps reflecting the smaller
amount of liquid emanating from the crushing process. Like the grape-
pressing installations, these too had some sort of catchment mechanism, either
a basin or large ceramic container.
Perhaps the best in situ example of an olive press in the Bronze Age comes
from the Minoan port town of Kommos on the southern coast of Crete
(Figure 2.2). Perhaps as early as LM I, large-scale workstations were
54 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

established at two separate locations within the settlement. Each consisted of

a massive stone-spouted press bed resting on a built stone platform (Blitzer
1993, 167). Although their use might have been concentrated during the
following Mycenaean era, these installations nevertheless present evidence
for large-scale olive oil production in Minoan settlement contexts (see
Chapter 3 for a detailed description). Similar large-scale press beds have been
found in Minoan palatial-era contexts at Knossos (unpublished example in the
area of the unexplored mansion), at the villa of Vathypetro (two from rooms 1
and 3; Brun 2004, 77), and Late Minoan Phaistos (Blitzer 1993, 167). A similar
example has also been found out of context in the quarries on Thera, and large
quantities of crushed olive stones have been found throughout the site at
Akrotiri (Doumas 2014, 31, fig. 27b, 33).13 And, interestingly, one of only
two Linear A tablets found at Akrotiri has the sign for olive oil (Doumas 2014,
31, fig. 27c, 33).
Concerning Minoan palatial interest and control in the production of these
commodities, the perfumed oil workshop identified at Mochlos (dating to LM
IA) is interesting (Brogan and Koh 2008). Its presence within a wealthy port
town, but not associated with a palace, is in stark contrast to later LM/LH III
situations. It is clear that the palaces consumed perfumed oil for various
activities, but they apparently were not as firmly in control of its production.
Oil and wine production was therefore quite decentralized in the Minoan
Neopalatial era.

Chronology and Context of Minoan Wine and Oil Production

The chronological distribution of the wine presses is also significant. Of the
thirty-two wine presses, only six date to the Prepalatial (Myrtos-4, Knossos)
and Protopalatial (Malia) periods. In contrast, twenty-six date to the
Neopalatial period. Between MM IIIB and LM IA, presses are found at
Malia, Palaikastro, Azokeramos, Choiromandres and Kato Zakros,
Vathypetro, Gournia, Petras, and Epano Zakros. In the LM IB period, there
is a significant drop-off in presses datable to that period. Only four sites have
LM IB wine presses (Gournia, Palaikastro, Tourtouloi, Kato Zakros), although
within these sites there is a concentration of presses – two at Palaikastro, three at
Tourtouloi, and three at Kato Zakros. In addition, five presses can be dated to
the entire LM I period (Phourni, Knossos, Palaikastro, and Kato Zakros-2).
This dramatic increase in presses suggests that the beginning of the Neopalatial
period also saw a rise in the concern for producing larger amounts of wine
within settlement contexts.
The exact location of these presses within individual sites is also important
for interpreting the role of oil and wine within Minoan society. Significantly,
only three presses have been found within the court-centered buildings
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 55

themselves, and these contexts are questionable (Platon and Kopaka 1993,
72).14 Instead, most presses are found in large houses in the urban vicinity of
the court-centered buildings (e.g., at Knossos, Malia, Kato Zakros, and
Gournia). These domestic locations perhaps signal the production of wine
for both household consumption and some form of palatial, or communal,
demand (Figure 2.4c). The dual nature of wine production during the
Neopalatial period would fit with what we know of palatial demand for wine
from Linear A records and palatial storage areas, as discussed later.
The other prominent location for wine presses is within the context of rural
villas. Four villas have produced wine presses (Epano Zakros, Tourtouloi,

2.4 Estimated storeroom size (in m2) in Neopalatial palaces, houses, and villas mentioned in the
text. After Christakis 2008, Tables 8 and 10. Image by author

Low estimate High estimate

3,000

4,000
30,000
1,980
16,000 1,600
1,600 9,900 250 6,400
1,350
HAGIA TRIADA ARCHANES MOCHLOS TYLISSOS MYRTOS VATHYPETRO
(VILLA REALE) (CENTRAL (BUILDING B.2) (MANSION A) PYRGOS
BUILDING) (CENTRAL
BUILDING)

2.5 Estimated storage potential (in liters) of Neopalatial houses and villas mentioned in the text.
After Christakis 2008, 44–52, Table 10. Image by author
56 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

Vathypetro, Azokeramos). Many have two or three presses each, perhaps

suggesting that some villas specialized in the production of wine (Figure 2.5).
Blitzer (2014, 242) has suggested that the olive’s prehistoric cultivation may be an
indication of societal changes promoting specialization away from subsistence
living, and this may also be true for the vine. Both plants, especially in their early
stages, require significant attention that would have been in competition with the
maintenance of seed crops necessary for agricultural subsistence. The presence of
robust wine-production areas in rural villas also supports the suggestion that
palaces were not prominent or direct producers despite their concern with
collecting and storing wine. Instead, it seems probable that the wine stored
within the palaces had been brought in as finished products (Platon and
Kopaka 1993, 92). Villas have also produced some evidence of olive oil
production, although these stone implements are generally unconfirmed or
unpublished. At Vathypetro, a crudely formed stone press may be LM I or LM
III in date (Marinatos 1949, 102–103, pl. 3; Blitzer 1993, 167), and numerous
other stone presses found at villas or farmsteads of Middle through Late Minoan
in date, such as Zou in east Crete, have gone “unremarked” (Blitzer 1993, 167).
The presence of some form of independent production apart from the realm
of central-court buildings is also demonstrated by the existence of presses at
harbor towns. Coastal non-palatial towns associated with olive and wine
presses include Palaikastro, Mochlos, and Kommos. In these instances, the
presses are often found alongside amphoras, perhaps suggesting that the oil/
wine produced here was destined to be shipped, via sea routes, to other regions
of the island or farther abroad (e.g., Kea or Thera).

Record-Keeping and Land Management Evidence

Documents Written in Linear A. While the Linear A script is not fully
deciphered, it can nevertheless provide some information about the relation-
ships between palaces, producers, and surplus oil and wine. Relevant data
include volumes of wine and oil with which the palaces were concerned, as
well as some general idea of the activities associated with the use of surplus oil
and wine. For example, it is not yet possible to identify the Linear
A syllabograms with certainty, but many of the ideograms, including those
associated with oil and wine, can be identified. In addition, the counting system
of the Linear A script is known, allowing for some idea of quantities of things
recorded. One significant aspect for our understanding of the nature of the
relationship between palaces and the surrounding hinterland is that, in general,
Linear A archives seem to support the idea that there had been a relative
amount of autonomy regarding the disposition of agricultural production.
This is especially significant in comparison with the later LM III period on
the island when records written in Linear B are particularly concerned with
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 57

land holdings. For example, within the Linear A documents, while there are
categories for “inventory,” “incoming,” “outgoing,” and possibly “assess-
ments” (products expected), there is no category for “cadastral surveys”
(records of land holdings) (Montecchi 2012, 3). Also in support of a more
autonomous system in Neopalatial Crete is the fact that Linear A tablets varied
greatly from site to site and are located at non-court-centered buildings. These
more varied contexts indicate that knowledge of Linear A script and its use
were not exclusively linked to the “palace” economy, as would be the case with
Linear B record-keeping (Montecchi 2012, 5).
Although the nature of record-keeping within Linear A administrative
documents supports a looser connection between central authorities and agri-
cultural production, the documents also make clear that there did exist a close
relationship between the two sectors. Specifically, the central authorities were
concerned with acquiring large amounts of oil and wine for various purposes.
Indeed, within the Linear A archives, oil and wine are commonly present on all
types of documents, including records of contributions (Montecchi 2012, 4).
There is only one ideogram for oil, *302 OLE, but it can have modifying or
ligatured signs, perhaps indicating quality or type, if perfumed (Montecchi
2012, 17). Linear A has three ideograms related to wine: *131 WINE, *131b,
and *131c (Figure 2.6). Like the oil ideogram, these too can receive ligatured
signs. It has been argued that these composite signs might indicate the type of
wine that is being accounted for, representing the flavor, vintage, or quality
(Bennett 2002, 81). For example, tablet 27 from Haghia Triada has two
sections on the reverse listing wine. The wine logograms have ligatures or
adjunct signs and other signs modifying the numerals for the amounts. Two of
the wine adjunct signs are used elsewhere as phonetic signs and so could
represent abbreviations for different types, qualities, or origins. The third
adjunct to wine, listed twice, is the logogram for a grain, probably barley
(Palmer 2002, 100). This too might indicate the type and could potentially
reference the “Greek grog” found in residue samples from Minoan
tableware.15 Interestingly, the ideogram for “press,” which appears in Egypt
from the First Dynasty, is not present in Linear A. This is perhaps related to

2.6 Linear A ideograms for wine (AB 131a–c), olive oil (A 302), and olives (AB 122). Image by
author
58 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

the extra-palatial locations of wine presses, as previously noted, suggesting

that the palace did not control or manage the presses.
In the Linear A archives, wine and oil ideograms appear on a high proportion
of texts at the sites of Haghia Triada, Khania, Zakros, Phaistos, Pyrgos and
Arkhanes. For example, wine is listed with other commodities on three of the
seven tablets found at Arkhanes and is the only commodity recorded on one of
the two tablets from Pyrgos. At Haghia Triada, 21 of 147 tablets mention
wine.16 Significantly, many Linear A tablets have single commodity sections
recording wine. At Haghia Triada, three of nineteen and at Zakros four of six
tablets single out wine, which may suggest that Minoans accorded wine
specialized handling (Table 2.1; Palmer 2002, 102). As detailed earlier, the
ligatured signs indicating quality, flavor, or perhaps vintage on the wine
ideogram might further support this suggestion. That palaces were concerned
with acquiring wines from different regions, at least, is indicated by the various
origins of oval-mouthed amphoras and other containers found in palace store-
rooms (see later). The designated uses of the recorded quantities of wine are, in
general, difficult to discern. However, tablets from Room 9 of Casa del Lebete
at Haghia Triada record mixed groups of commodities, including olive oil and
wine, which seem to be records of religious offerings intended for feasting
(Montecchi 2012, 4).
In addition to Linear A archives, the ideograms for wine have been found
incised on vases where they can be part of inscriptions or isolated signs. This
practice is attested at Knossos where the ideogram was written on large storage

table 2.1 Number of attestations of specific Linear A logograms on Neopalatial tablets and the minimum
total amount of the commodity in liters

Wine: AB 131a–c Oil: A 302 + ligatures Olive: AB 122

Arkhanes 4 (28.8+ liters) 2 (115.2 liters) 1 (192 liters)

Chania 11 (86.4+ liters) 9 (878.4 + liters –
Haghia Triada 28 (10,937+ liters) 96 (11,790+ liters**) 14 (14,880+ liters)
Knossos 1 (no associated numerals) – –
Phaistos 2 (57.6+ liters) – –
Tylissos – 16 (ca. 3,965.5 liters) 1 (384 liters)
Zakro 9 (7,516.8+ liters)* 1 (Quantity: BB) 5 (2,712+ liters)
Kato Symi – – 1 (no associated numerals)
Myrtos-Pyrgos 1 (ca. 2,592 liters) – –

Calculations are based on tablets listed in Schoep 2002b, 100, 103, 119.
*
Schoep 2002, 102 and 184 show conflicting amounts for ZA 4. Page 184 lists the amount of wine
on ZA 4 as 9,984 liters, about 65 pithoi. This seems to be a mistake, using dry instead of liquid
measurements.
**
Figures from Schoep 2002, 182 are incorrect, again using dry instead of liquid measurement.
Dry: 1 unit=96 liters; T=9.6 liters; V=1.6 liters; Z=0.4 liters.
Liquid: 1 unit=28.8 liters; S=9.6 liters; V= 1.6 liters; Z=0.4 liters.
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 59

pithoi (KN Zb 27 followed by the number 17; isolated signs: KN Zb 34, KN

Zb 36, KN Zb 37, KN Zb 38). Wine ideograms were also found at Epano
Zakros where a long inscription was identified on a large pithos. This inscrip-
tion starts with the ideogram for wine, followed by the number 32 (ZA Zb 3).
On the island of Kea, an isolated wine ideogram has been found on a pitcher
(KE Zb 5) (Platon and Kopaka 1993, 85; Hallager 2002, 64). It can be assumed,
based on the presence of oil and wine on Linear A archive documents, as well as
on storage pithoi found within palace contexts, that the palaces had direct
interests in the quantities of both commodities and their subsequent storage at
these locations (Figure 2.7). The recording of olives, vines, oil, and wine in
Linear A tablets verifies that both plants and their products were already
fundamental elements of the agricultural economy on Crete by the Middle
Minoan period (Blitzer 1993, 169).

Land Management Features and the Effects of Climate Change

Even though there is no indication in the Linear A archives that the palaces
were involved with land directly, as in later Linear B documents, there is some
evidence from the Neopalatial era that suggests people were more concerned
with controlling and interacting with the natural world. At the beginning of the
LM I period, an expansion in water management features takes place. The
construction of wells, cisterns, stone and ceramic channels, gutters or water
spouts, ceramic pipelines, multistage irrigation networks, and the development
of new hydraulic technologies, like embankment dams and reservoirs, all point
to a concern for the retention of and access to water (Vokotopoulos, Plath, and
McCoy 2014). These active interactions with the landscape might also indicate
the formation of intensified connections between people, since the construc-
tion and maintenance of water management devices like dams, irrigation

2.7 The number of pithoi that palatial stores were designed to house. After Christakis 2008,
Table 9. Image by author
60 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

channels, and cisterns all require massive labor investment. Although both olive
trees and grapevines can be dry-farmed, fruit production and growth can be
enhanced significantly through additional water and irrigation (Rossi et al.
2013). Grapevines, in particular, are more sensitive to dry conditions and,
depending on the location (e.g., lower altitude in drier East Crete), might
have required more water than was naturally available. Although it is impos-
sible to know whether these features were directed toward olive and grape
cultivation, it is nevertheless possible that these crops benefited from their
existence.
Large agricultural construction projects have been identified at a number of
sites scattered around the island and dating from the end of the Middle Bronze
Age into the Neopalatial era. On the small island of Pseira, agricultural dams
and terraces were constructed in the LM I period to maximize arable land and
supply water to crops (Betancourt 2012, 48, 55). Other dams have been
recognized at Phaistos and Mochlos. Although the construction of dams
began in the later part of the Middle Bronze Age, the Neopalatial era marks
a period of intensification. At the same time, terracing became a relatively
widespread practice and is found at Kavousi (Haggis 2005), Vrokastro,
Kommos (Pope 2004), Mochlos, Chalinomouri (Soles et al. 2003, 123–124),
Itanos, and Gournia. The site of Choiromandres, located near Kato Zakros on
the far east end of the island, has both elaborate terracing and multiple dams all
constructed in the late LM IA or early IB period. In addition, an enclosed plot
of 3.4 hectares was covered by planned parallel terraces above which were built
two successively placed dams and check-dams. In this case, the dams seem to
have been the result of a desire to protect arable land from erosion, as well as
providing the benefits of rainwater collection (Vokotopoulou, Plath, McCoy
2014, 255–257). Similar terracing and water management features near the large
site of Palaikastro, just north of Kato Zakros, have also been dated to around the
same time (Orengo and Knappett 2018; Kulick 2019, 13–14). These agricul-
tural arrangements were adapted for dryland agriculture and reflect concerns
for soil retention that suggest the existence of pressures in land use across
Palaikastro’s territory. The construction of much deeper wells in LM IB at
the site of Palaikastro itself might add to the local narrative of increased
attention to water sources (MacGillivray et al. 2007, 223–224).
There are a number of possible reasons for the Neopalatial increase in
construction of labor-intensive land and water management features. The
first would be connected to the rise of the second palaces and the need for
more cultivated land to support the activities of the palaces, including large
communal events and economic enterprise. Water control might have been
used to grow specific crops that require more water than is naturally available.
The creation of enclosed terraces would also suggest a need to separate these
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 61

desirable crops. Additional terracing features might also suggest the desire to
create more space for cultivated crops to support palatial enterprise.
The other possibility, which by no means excludes the first, is that these land
and water management features are in response to climate change, as indicated
by proxy sources such as pollen records (Jahns 1993, 2005; Bottema and Sarpaki
2003, Kouli 2011). There are two prevailing opinions on Bronze Age climate
change. The first suggests that proxy evidence indicates short-term episodes of
pronounced aridity and erratic drought (MacGillivray, Sackett and Driessen
2007, 223–224). At the same time, there is some evidence for the presence of
a “Little Ice Age” producing cooler, wetter, and less evaporative conditions,
again punctuated by inconsistencies in timing and amount of rainfall (Moody
1997, 2009). The second scenario reconstructs a more gradual intensification of
the summer dry season, which would have developed on Crete during the
Bronze Age. This maturation of the summer dry season, along with contrasting
wet winters, has been dated to the Middle-Late Bronze Age (Moody 1997, 72;
Grove and Rackham 2001, 144–145; see also Drake 2012). The most recent
analyses use palaeoclimatic data, archaeological evidence, and ethnographic
analogy to argue that water management features from LM I Crete, as well as
other evidence suggesting cultural concern for water, point to the second
scenario (Flood 2012; Flood and Soles 2014). Moreover, the specific locations
of Neopalatial water management technologies do not correspond to areas with
the highest settlement density, but rather areas subject to longer dry seasons and
erratic rainfall patterns (Flood and Soles 2014, 80). This bimodal climate and
aridization seems to have developed over an extended period of time, allowing
the gradual adaptation of water management systems to fit the new climatic
scenario. The character of Neopalatial water management features (dams,
reservoirs) suggests a concern for storing water from one season to the next,
from the wet season to the dry (Flood and Soles 2014, 84). Because of these
transitional conditions, the landscape would have been subject to unpredictable
climatic events, such as episodes of flash-flooding, exacerbated by poor surface
moisture retention in soils, rapid infiltration to subsurface groundwater accu-
mulations and intermittently flowing streams (Vokotopoulos, Plath, and
McCoy 2014, 253).
If these water and land management techniques are indeed a response to
changes in climate, we might expect the relationship between people and
their surrounding natural environment to grow more intense. Whether
people attributed the changes they viewed to climate change or, perhaps,
supernatural intervention does not change the fact that certain responses
were needed.17 These responses created connections between farmers and
their crops that would have developed a nature of dependency, whereby the
climate change necessitated one to provide essential life ingredients (e.g.,
water regulation, shade, more nutritious fruit) for the other. Domesticated
62 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

plants, like olive trees and grapevines, are particularly susceptible to increased
reliance on humans for their continued survival when climate change affects
their natural habitat. As discussed in the Introduction, olive trees and grape-
vines are not only good bioindicators of climate change but can also be
profoundly affected by their interactions with humans and the type of
agricultural strategies employed to help them thrive. Climate change toward
a bimodal seasonal system and longer dry periods would have initiating,
albeit gradually, a shift in the agricultural strategies employed by farmers,
perhaps necessitating irrigation or altered growing areas. Microclimates
undoubtedly played a major role in olive and vine cultivation in Bronze
Age Greece and Crete. Areas of western Crete receive significantly higher
water availability, mainly due to the average regional elevation being high,
combined with the mountainous terrain providing winter snowpacks that
sustain agricultural activities throughout the summer. As the Late Bronze
Age climate shifted toward drier, warmer conditions, it is not surprising that
most of the water management features have been found in eastern Crete,
where changes in natural water availability would have been more significant
and perhaps more immediately felt.
Both archaeobotanical data and modern scientific studies give strong indica-
tion that grapevines and olive trees would have been affected by the climate
change occurring during the Late Bronze Age. Pollen cores from northwestern
Crete show that olive pollen decreased around the beginning of the Neopalatial
period and continued to decrease after the Theran eruption (Bottema and
Sarpaki 2003). In the Lake Kournas core, olive pollen values decrease from
19.3 to 2.7 percent after the eruption and in the Delphinos core the values
decrease from 6.1 to 1.3 percent. This relatively dramatic reduction might be
the result of a combination of factors that include general climate change,
settlement pattern change, and cultivation strategy change. Bottema (2003,
747) suggests that the decrease of olive pollen percentages shown in the cores
can be explained by the abandoning of groves, neglect, absence of pruning, or
the cutting of trees. At the same time, grapevine pollen had a very low
percentage before the Theran eruption, but high values after it. While this
might demonstrate an intensification of vine cultivation, it might also be the
result of wild vine increasing in the region (Bottema 2003, 747). Since the
pollen from the wild and domesticated olives and grapevines are nearly impos-
sible to discern distinctly, it is impossible to determine the precise causes of
these fluctuations. In addition, it is necessary to keep in mind that the cores are
derived from northwestern Crete and therefore reflect more precisely the
conditions of the surrounding environment and cannot represent the entire
island. Nevertheless, the apparent changes in olive tree and grapevine pollen do
coincide with climate changes and the settlement shifts that seem to have
followed. In the case of northwestern Crete, decreases in olive pollen in that
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 63

particular region might have been caused more by movements of people rather
than by the inability of olive trees to thrive in that environment. This idea is
supported by the following LM III period when there is much evidence to
suggest that expansive olive tree groves flourished in northwestern Crete,
producing large quantities of surplus olive oil that was then bottled and shipped
to various eastern Mediterranean regions (see Chapter 3).
Based on the evidence discussed earlier, it is relatively clear that the
Neopalatial era was a time of transition and change. Not only were
the second palaces constructed together with their own form of bureaucracy
and subsistence management, but the world around them was changing as
the climate moved toward more erratic conditions. The Neopalatial era
shows a marked increase in agricultural and land management strategies
necessary to keep olive grove and vineyard yields high. This more active
approach to the landscape would have heightened the relationship between
olive trees and grapevines and the people who cultivated them and relied
on their produce. Although the climate changes proposed for the Late
Bronze Age likely took place over a longer period of time, there are
nevertheless some indications that human populations did indeed see these
changes occurring, as perhaps indicated by the increase in shrines incorpor-
ating water features and the introduction of deities associated with water
abundance (Flood and Soles 2014, 83–84).
In addition, the number and concentration of wine presses increased
dramatically from the previous era, suggesting an additional investment of time
and energy in the production of wine (Table 2.2). The location of these wine
presses, in large houses around the palaces or within large villas, suggests
a decentralized nature of production. This pattern of press locations indicates that
the palaces were not directly involved with the manufacture of oil and wine. Yet,
Linear A evidence makes clear the desire of palatial authorities to have access to
a surplus of both commodities. Both oil and wine are included on a large percentage
of all extant tablets. In addition, all central-court buildings devoted a huge amount

table 2.2 Number of presses found in Pre/Protopalatial versus Neopalatial contexts

Wine presses Wine presses Olive (stone)

EM IIB–MM II MM III–LM IB presses NP

Palace 2
Urban (w/palace) 2 20
Settlement (w/o palace) 5 (Myrtos) 6 (PK) 1 (PK)
Villa 8 1 (Valthypetro)
Cemetery 1 (Phourni)

From Platon and Kopaka 1993 and Palmer 1994, 24–25, Table 1.1 with more recent additions (e.g., PK
Block M – NP)
64 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

of space to the storage of surplus commodities. Oil and wine were certainly two of
the most prominent. Indeed, the palaces had a large stake in the production of
surplus oil and wine that could then be used in multiple forms of exchange.

MODES OF EXCHANGE: COMMENSAL, GIFT, AND COMMERCIAL

Within a cultural economy paradigm, the value of an object is ultimately tied to

its exchange and the means by which it is exchanged. Exchange can be under-
stood as the liminal space between production and consumption that affects the
nature of production and consumption (cf., Introduction pg. 22–23; Gregory
2014; Callon and Muniesa 2005, 1229). Thus, we may understand the increased
production of olive oil and wine in the Neopalatial era, discussed previously, as
a direct function of the increasing importance of those liquids and the reliance
on those liquids by people during both daily and special exchanges. The
following section outlines the archaeological and written evidence for three
prominent modes of exchange, in which surplus oil and wine were used. These
modes include commensal, gift, and commercial exchange. Here, it is informa-
tive to compare the evidence for the role of oil and wine in these types of
Neopalatial exchanges to those from previous eras in an attempt to see changes
and patterns, which might indicate the shifting relationship between people and
these two commodities. Overall, it becomes clear that in all modes of exchange,
oil and wine became more prominent throughout the Neopalatial era.

COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: INCREASING SCALE AND FORMALIZATION

OF FEASTS

Some of the main venues for surplus oil and wine exchange, taking place within
multiple aspects of Minoan life, were communal commensal events, or feasts.
Tracing the patterns in the prominent use of oil and wine within these venues
of connectivity provides a window onto the changing political and social
relationships from the Protopalatial to Neopalatial eras. Changes to the overall
availability, accessibility, and performativity related to the consumption of
olive oil and wine, as culturally valued commodities, are proxy indicators of
changes in the way that people managed social and political hierarchies. As will
be discussed later, in the Minoan period, there is evidence for both entrepre-
neurial/empowering feasts, as well as patron-role feasts with a more open
constituency. In other words, the material remains point to strategies of
exclusion by elites alongside rites of aggregation and cohesion through the
manipulation, offering, and consumption of food and drink. To understand the
significance of oil and wine in these contexts, it is useful to compare practices
over a long period of time. In what follows, broad patterns in Protopalatial
commensal events are juxtaposed with those of the ensuing Neopalatial era.
 COMMENSAL EXCHAN GE 65

Protopalatial Era
In the Protopalatial period, feasting seems to have been concentrated within
funerary contexts at locations specifically designated for large-scale communal
feasts, such as platforms and annexes outside large tombs (e.g., Branigan 1993).
These locations often produce huge quantities of feasting debris and are some-
times associated with wine presses, suggesting on-site production of the wine
that would have been necessary for these occasions. For example, a wine press
was found in the Early to Middle Minoan cemetery of Phourni at Archanes, in
addition to more than 300 vessels, mostly conical cups associated with a paved
area near the terrace in front of Building 6 and near tholos B. At Haghia Triada,
conical cups, jugs, and plates were found in recent excavations in the annexes
south of tholos A, dated to Middle Minoan I. Ritualized behavior related to the
dumping of this debris can sometimes be identified. At the cemetery of
Drapinias Kisam, a huge number of conical cups were found in the context
of ritual smashing (AR 2000–2001, 140–141). A final indication that feasting
practices took place outside of tombs during the Protopalatial period is the stark
contrast with assemblages found within the tombs themselves. While small
quantities of bridge-spouted jars, cups, and miniature storage jars are included
with the dead, they are paltry assemblages when compared to the impressive
numbers of pouring vessels, juglets, pitchers, and conical cups found in exterior
spaces. A good example of this juxtaposition can be found at the well-known
Protopalatial cemetery of Kamilari in the Mesara plain (Borgna 2004, 259).
The discovery of wine press models within a number of tombs of the Mesara
might present another indication that wine was directly associated with the
funerary world (Platon and Kopaka 1993). These models might symbolize the
association of the dead with wine production (perhaps they were wine-makers?),
indicating that the identity of this person was intimately connected to his
involvement with wine. In addition, when compared with other deposited
grave goods, the miniature pressing vats demonstrate how the value of wine as
a prestige good is clearly associated with its production and not just its
consumption.
Prepalatial and Protopalatial feasting activities were not restricted to ceme-
teries. Remains of commensal events have been found within other ritual
(sanctuary, cave) and settlement contexts. The Prepalatial site at Myrtos is
perhaps the best example of both a settlement and ritual context with evidence
for feasting and wine consumption. Within the settlement, a group of rooms
has been identified as a sanctuary. Next to the sanctuary was a wine press,
suggesting a close connection between the production of wine and its use in the
adjoining ritual area. Caves with evidence for Protopalatial drinking and
feasting events include Kamares (Tyree 2001, 45), Psychro (Watrous 1996,
31–40), Amnisos (Tyree 2001, 45 n. 47), and Skotino (Faure 1964, 164). At
66 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

these caves, pottery of Protopalatial date consists predominately of drinking

cups and pouring vessels, and the presence of larger jars at Kamares and Psychro
indicate wine was probably the liquid consumed. These jars might have been
used to transport the wine up to the sites (Watrous 1996, 31, 34–35; Tyree
2001, 45). When feasting deposits have been detected in Pre- and Protopalatial
settlements, their deposition suggests sporadic and spontaneous events, located
in open-air, communal spaces not solely designated for the purpose of com-
mensal events (Letesson and Driessen 2008, 208–209).
It is clear, however, that even in this early period, feasting events were
important aspects of social integrity. The evidence from pottery assemblages,
with the introduction of true drinking sets (pouring vessels with matching
cups) in the Protopalatial period, suggests a hierarchical, perhaps entrepreneur-
ial/empowering feast type setting. These drinking sets were “instruments of
limited and exclusive convivial practices” allowing for the identification of
individuals as hosts or guests (MacGillivray 1987, 273–276). This shift to
individualized drinking sets may be viewed in opposition to the previous
Prepalatial habit of using large communal drinking cups (chalices), which
were presumably passed around (Day and Wilson 2004). The adoption of
individual drinking vessels such as cups and goblets in EB II and III seems to
be a move toward a form of “communal individualism” or “collective indivi-
duation” (Simondon 2007; Hamilakis and Sherratt 2012, 191). In the
Prepalatial era (and before), oil and (especially) wine were perhaps convenient
commodities for community bonding. Their consumption solidified group
identity during communal activities. When individual drinking vessels became
fashionable in the Protopalatial era, however, I suggest that the connection
between people, wine, and oil became more definite. That is, social structures
were in part defined by access to particular knowledge about wine drinking and
conviviality. These connections between people, wine, and oil would once
again shift in the Neopalatial era as the scale and characteristics of feasts
changed.

Neopalatial Era
After the destructions and disturbances that mark the end of the
Protopalatial era, clear shifts in the characteristics of commensal events
take place, culminating in “an explosion in ritual commensality” in the
Neopalatial era (Hamilakis and Sherratt 2012, 192). Evidence for this
aggrandizement takes various forms, including a new emphasis on settle-
ment and ritual feasting, larger more frequent events, new formal arrange-
ments of commensal spaces, and changes in the constituency’s drinking
vessel repertoire. These changes began during the initial stage of the
Neopalatial era (MM III), continued into the following LM IA period,
 COMMENSAL EXCHAN GE 67

then seem to develop slightly differently during the final period of the
Neopalatial era, LM IB. After outlining the changing patterns of feasting
remains in the archaeological record, I ultimately suggest that these patterns
are the result of a shift in the nature of commensal events, which resulted in
an intensification of the relationships between people and these two
commodities.

Shift in Feasting Contexts. In the transition from the Protopalatial era to the
Neopalatial, our evidence for feasting presents a shift from funerary contexts to
settlements and sanctuaries. In cemeteries, the designated platforms, large
feasting deposits, and contrasting grave assemblages of the Protopalatial era
changed to smaller, less defined commensal spaces and indistinguishable
ceramic sets in the Neopalatial era. No longer is it possible to identify
collective ceremonies outside tombs. Instead, what we see is a change in
social strategies and a transformation from a communal method of burial to an
individual one (Girella 2007, 153). The number of vessels associated with
funerary assemblages diminishes and the types of vessels used as tomb deposits
are indistinguishable from those used in consumption of funeral meals/drinks.
It is possible that funeral commensal events were now located inside the
tombs, limited to members of family, and were centered around drinking
toasts and libations (Girella 2007, 153). Despite these changes, it is certain that
some form of commensal event was taking place based on the numbers of vessels
found in Neopalatial funerary contexts. In addition, at least some cemeteries
were maintaining in-house production of wine as was common for the previous
period. For example, at the Phourni cemetery at Archanes, Building 4 dates to
the LM IA period and has been interpreted as a workshop for wine production.
There, 250 conical cups have been found (Sakellarakis and Sakellaraki 1972;
Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 227–229, 396 [cf., also for Building
17]; Soles 1992, 145). In addition, larger deposits of conical cups have been found
at the Neopalatial tombs at Poros (Dimopoulou 1999).
The most significant change to feasting contexts in the Neopalatial era is an
emergent emphasis on newly designed and redefined feasting spaces within
ritual and settlement contexts. Spaces dedicated to ritual activities associated
with deities, such as peak sanctuaries and caves, received more attention in the
Neopalatial era. One common activity in these places was the enactment of
frequent commensal events. Evidence for these events comes from both
archaeological remains and written documents recorded in Linear A script.
Specifically, the Linear A tablets contain records of religious offerings intended
for feasting. These records indicate that amounts of olive oil and wine were
almost always needed (Montecchi 2012, 4). Archaeological evidence for com-
mensal events within religious contexts consists of the same types of deposits
found in other contexts, including wares for food preparation, eating and
68 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

drinking, as well as plant and animal remains. At the sanctuary of Kato Syme,
ritual meals at cultic feasts took place in an open-air enclosure rebuilt at the very
beginning of the Neopalatial period (MM IIIB). The remains of these feasts
consist of mostly simple, undecorated vessels for drinking (cups and chalices),
which perhaps emphasized the community, rather than individuality, in con-
trast to the previous period (Borgna 2004, 262). In general, caves seem to have
been used frequently in the Neopalatial era as they had been in the Protopalatial
era (Tyree 2001). Most archaeological evidence suggests that the activities
taking place within and near caves often included large communal banquets
and drinking rituals (e.g., Skoteino Cave; Girella 2007, 150). For example,
Melidoni cave produced a Neopalatial assemblage that consists exclusively of
vessels for cooking, eating, and drinking, found in association with numerous
fire pits (Tzedakis and Gavrilaki 1995, 891; Tyree 2001, 45 n. 50). In contrast to
the beginning of the Neopalatial period, the final period of the Neopalatial era
(LM IB) saw a gradual decrease in the frequency at which both peak sanctuaries
and caves were used for feasting activities. Indeed, Kato Syme, Iouktas, and
Arkalochori were all deserted before LM IB (Girella 2007, 162). The activity
once taking place at these specialized locations seems to be replaced by an
increase in cultic activity within settlements and the establishment of domestic
shrines (Girella 2007, 162). As will be discussed in the following chapter, this
abandonment is the result, in part, of a shift as modes of exchange became more
centralized during the Mycenaean era.
The most prominent changes to feasting can be seen best in the Neopalatial
settlement deposits. Whereas during the Protopalatial era feasts were sporadic
occasions held in communal non-designated open-air spaces, the Neopalatial
era marks a shift toward structures specifically built or designated as spaces for
ceremonial and commensal purposes. These include the west wings of palaces
and large centralized buildings in non-palatial towns. Western wings of palaces
contained cultic installations along with rooms opening onto the western
courts, equipped with cooking and serving utensils (Borgna 2004, 257).
These, or similar architectural features, and associated equipment have been
found at most palatial centers including Phaistos, Khania, Galatas, Petras,
Knossos, and Zakros. At Khania, concentrations of pottery suited for dining
and drinking were found in association with several structures in the West
Court (conical cups) and Great Hall (platform for a lustral basin, restricted
attendance). Also associated with palatial repetitive feasting activities is the
cultic complex at Daskaloyannis Street in Khania, where pits and drains filled
with bones, ash, pots, and hundreds of conical cups have been found
(Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1997, 566–571; 2002, 160–161). Residue analysis con-
ducted on some of this material has produced evidence for olive oil on tripods
and wine within the conical cups (Martlew 2004; Girella 2007, 152; Tzedakis et
al. 2008). At Galatas, indications of ritual consumption have been found in
 COMMENSAL EXCHAN GE 69

several rooms of the palace including Room 22 in the west wing, the east wing
with the “cooking place,” the columnar hall, and the pillar hall.
Non-palatial settlements have also produced evidence for the establishment
of designated commensal buildings. At Mochlos, Building B.2 is six to eight
times larger than other houses and is interpreted as a ceremonial center with an
altar and bronze bowls. The hearth in front of the altar was found containing
remains of the feast, including a cooking dish, tripod cooking pot, several cups
and animal bones. In addition, a large number of conical cups were found
scattered along the path in front of the building (Brogan and Koh 2008, 5–6).
Other indications at Mochlos for a designated feasting location come from the
LM IB House D.5. This large building contained a massive number of cooking
and eating/drinking equipment, but no kitchens, suggesting a communal din-
ing area (Brogan and Koh 2008, 5).
What we can see, therefore, is a shift from the “neutral ground” of the
Protopalatial cemetery, to the hierarchically reinforcing and formalized spaces
of the Neopalatial settlement. At the same time, sanctuaries also seem to have
been locations for formalized feasting. Although the exact nature of these
events is entirely unclear, Linear A documents indicate that the palaces had
some influence over their management, including the provisioning of surplus
oil and wine.

Shift in Feasting Scale and Frequency. The beginning of the Neopalatial

era also marks a significant change in the scale of feasting events. Whereas
Protopalatial era deposits with a few hundred drinking vessels were considered
large, these same deposits would be considered average or even below average
for a feasting deposit dated to the Neopalatial era. To be considered a large-
scale deposit for the Neopalatial period, drinking vessels must range in the
thousands. This increase in scale can be seen not only in the archaeological
record, but also in the written Linear A documents. For example, at Drapinias
in western Crete, datable to MM IIIB–LM IA, a total of 3,562 complete conical
cups and bell cups have been found. This means that the original number of
cups was at least triple that number. These cups were found smashed and
scattered together with utility vessels, tripod cooking pots, pithoi, and
amphorae, all vessels necessary for the transport, storage, and serving of wine
and food (Blackman 2000–2001, 140–1; Girella 2007, 151). In the surviving
Linear A tablets, not only are wine and oil frequently mentioned, but also the
scale of their consumption at commensal events is sometimes made evident
through lists of associated vessels. For example, HT 31 from Haghia Triada lists
3,700 conical cups, an astounding number for a single recorded transaction.
While this provisioning may not have been intended for a single event, the
large number is nevertheless impressive considering that Linear A documents
do not seem to record transactions occurring over long periods of time. Indeed,
70 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

the entire mixed commodity tablet series from Phaistos and Haghia Triada,
dating to LM IB, is interpreted as provisions for banquets prepared by the
central administration (HT 23, 30, 38, 114, 121, PH 31; Montecchi 2012, 6).
Most tablets in this series have various types of oil, most probably perfumed,
and wine.
The large scale of these feasts is even more impressive when taking into
consideration that an increase in the frequency of commensal events also
occurred during the Neopalatial period. There is strong evidence for frequently
repeated commensal activities, replacing the sporadic and spontaneous feasts of
the previous era. At the palatial building at Petras, there is evidence for the
systematic organization of a communal feast, related with banqueting perfor-
mances prepared for receiving people. During the LM IA phase, three deposits
of thousands of conical cups have been recovered from several places in the
palace (Girella 2007, 147). Another example of the repetitive nature of
Neopalatial feasting events comes from an LM IA deposit at Nopigeia. Here,
the number of drinking cups runs in the many thousands, and the nature of the
deposition shows people returning to same spot over and over again (Hamilakis
and Sherratt 2012, 193).
The increase in size and frequency of commensal events has significant
implications for the relationship between people, oil, and wine, as well as the
determination of the value of oil and wine. On the most basic level, events with
thousands of participants that take place regularly require huge quantities of
both oil and wine. Even if each person received only a small amount of each
commodity, say half a liter of wine and a quarter liter of oil, that still adds up to
1,500 liters of wine and 750 liters of olive oil for a 3,000-person event. In all
likelihood these quantities were much larger.
If each settlement carried out its own events on a regular basis, then large
amounts of both commodities would have been needed continually.
Specialization and cooperation amongst the inhabitants of a settlement and its
hinterland would be a necessary component for the production of such a large
amount of surplus product. This type of specialization is even more intricate
when the commodities being produced require expert knowledge and skills.
When combined with the natural world and the agency of the plants them-
selves, these connections acquire a new level of complexity. People relied upon
the output of the plants and the functioning of the equipment to support
a robust production of oil and wine. A closer relationship between people
would also be necessary for the creation of water management systems to
support this increased production, especially during a time of climate change.
In addition, people would rely upon others with specialized knowledge related
to the production of large storage and transport containers, without which such
large-scale commensal events would not function. Moreover, each major
settlement was not always able to support its own need for oil and wine but
 COMMENSAL EXCHAN GE 71

imported these commodities from other areas of the island, a topic to which we
will return shortly.

Shift in the Nature of Feasting: Exclusive and Unrestricted Access. In

addition to changes in the patterns of feasting location, volume, and frequency,
there is also a shift in the nature of commensal equipment. Protopalatial era
feasting equipment seems to have been characterized by high-quality, differ-
entiated drinking sets. The equipment used during the Neopalatial era, how-
ever, seems to have had a slightly binary character that intensified over time.
Feasts could be either exclusive elite celebrations or unrestricted occasions in
which social identity rather than power was most important.18 Using Dietler’s
model, there is evidence for both “entrepreneurial/empowering” and “patron-
role” feasts with a more open constituency. However, large open-constituency
events seem to be more prominent in the MM III–LM IA periods and exclusive
elite events gradually became more common in the final period of the
Neopalatial era.19 In contrast to the previous Protopalatial era, the unrestricted
feasting events of the Neopalatial era are characterized by a simplified, homo-
genous banqueting set used by all constituents. Cups, goblets, conical cups, and
juglets, all undecorated or simple, are common in the palaces, sanctuaries, and
cultic installations, including tomb annexes. As mentioned earlier, deposits
consisting of thousands of plain or simple conical cups have been found at
most palatial and large non-palatial settlements in or near spaces that were
accessible to large numbers of people. It is important to note, however, that
these spaces seem to have been regulated and specialized. Open-air gatherings
more conducive to random parties characterized Prepalatial and Protopalatial
gatherings. In the Neopalatial era other types of spaces for gathering became
more important and heterogenous from the Central Court, to open areas
between houses and interior gathering areas such as banquet halls, Minoan
Halls, and rooms with central column and hearth (Letesson and Driessen 2008,
208). What this heterogeneity and spatial control suggests is a shift toward
a division of space that ultimately segregated individuals and articulated social
distinctions manifested through different feasting activities. In this way, the
“strong program” associated with the spatial configuration of these buildings
controls interactions such that any other possible encounter is rendered impos-
sible (Letesson and Driessen 2008, 212).
At Kommos, for example, cooking facilities were connected with large-scale
feasting and drinking ceremonies that took place either in the central court of
Building T (Palatial building) or in spaces, which opened directly off it (stoas)
and were easily accessible to large numbers of people (Rutter 2004, 72). Here,
the high quality and exotic nature of pouring and drinking vessels suggest that
these festive occasions were attended by elite members of society. At the same
time, far greater frequencies of more utilitarian versions of the same functional
72 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

vessel types indicate the participation of many other people. A similar situation
is present at Mochlos, where a designated communal building containing
massive numbers of cooking and eating/drinking equipment (Brogan and
Koh 2008, 5). Unrestricted communal events relied more heavily on large
surpluses of oil and wine and, consequently, produced increasingly compli-
cated networks of production and exchange that were necessary for their
provision.
Evidence for the existence of exclusive commensal events alongside the
larger, more communal feasts comes from architectural features within both
palatial and elite dwellings. Restricted access to banquets in contexts like
Neopalatial dwellings might be an attempt by emerging elites to manipulate
instruments of social power and political legitimization by favoring exclusion
and selective affiliation (Hamilakis 1999). Plentiful amounts of tableware or
conical cups appear in extra-palatial settlement contexts, such as elite dwellings
at Petras and Galatas (Borgna 2004, 258). In addition, certain small rooms in
Neopalatial villas seem to have been locations for more restricted commensal
events. In the palaces, fine Kamares cups, jugs, and other pouring vessels
characteristic of aristocratic assemblages have been found in the official halls
and residential rooms (Borgna 2004, 258).
These elite, exclusionary forms of feasting, designed for differentiation,
seem to intensify in the LM IB period, contemporary with a drastic decline
of communal banquets in all spheres of life. This change might suggest an
increase in domestic forms of feasting (Girella 2007, 162). Evidence for this
includes a decrease in the use of simple plain ware and an increase in the use
of highly elaborate tableware. This elaborate tableware was generally
restricted to elite contexts and often came in matching sets. This pairing
of vessels is a common feature of Mycenaean feasting practices and fore-
shadows the influence of the mainland on Crete during the following
Monopalatial and Final Palatial periods (see Chapter 3). For example, at
LM IB Phaistos, there is clear evidence for wine consumption in Room 103,
which includes the recovery of complete storage, pouring, and drinking sets
(Girella 2007, 147). In addition, the LM IA final and LM IB levels at
Kommos have produced a more elaborate assemblage of feasting equipment
compared to the previous MM III and LM IA early period. At Kommos,
valued imports from Cyprus, the Greek mainland, and other regions in
Crete are quite common and are restricted to the Civic Center, excluding
the larger surrounding settlement. At the same time, local finewares become
prominent including a homogenous range of patterns in a recurring syntax,
namely the “Floral Paneled Style.” The shapes made with this style do not
include the most popular Neopalatial shapes and are very limited in scope,
including only the semiglobular cup, in-and-out bowl, collar-necked jug,
and oval-mouthed amphora (Rutter 2004, 73). Such evidence supports the
 COMMENSAL EXCHAN GE 73

view that in palatial Crete banqueting practices consisted of an articulated

series of events in terms of location, function and purpose; moreover, it
would seem to imply that in Neopalatial times in particular, elite ideology of
consumption was materialized according to a common and codified
architectonic language. Indeed, Letesson and Driessen (2008, 212) note
that “ . . . during the Neopalatial period, the impact of the architectural
elaboration and heterogeneity of poles of convergence reached such
proportions that it may eventually have transformed their original
essence of communality into an ever increasing tendency toward cate-
gorization and segmentation.”
What the archaeological evidence suggests is that the Neopalatial era marked
a transition to a different kind of feasting, which involved more competition
and social segregation, as well as the transition from spontaneous “parties” to
ritual (repetitive, regulated) events (Letesson and Driessen 2008, 208; Moody
1987). This change is signaled by new architectural features common to both
palaces and large houses (villas, etc.) and by the spatial syntax within these built
environments. Open-air gatherings more conducive to random parties char-
acterized Prepalatial and Protopalatial gatherings. In the Neopalatial period
other types of spaces for gathering became more important and heterogenous
from the Central Court, to open areas between houses and interior gathering
areas such as banquet halls, Minoan Halls, rooms with central column and
hearth (Letesson and Driessen 2008, 208). This heterogeneity and spatial con-
trol suggest a shift toward a division of space that ultimately segregated indivi-
duals and articulated social distinctions manifested through different feasting
activities (Letesson and Driessen 2008, 212).
The scale and frequency of feasting events, as well as their contexts,
changed over time. That is to say, feasting practices changed from sporadic,
hierarchical and specialized events to formal, ritualized and controlled events
that emphasized homogeneity and communality. The calculative agencies,
networks of individuals, institutions, and things, that work to construct the
values attributed to oil and wine would have shifted at the same time that
commensal events acquired new meaning. The new accessibility of oil and
wine to a larger portion of the population through large-scale feasting events
might have changed the way that the value of oil and wine was perceived.
As enticing commodities, their value does seem to have remained high,
overall. These ritualized feasts would have also functioned as a means of
solidifying the status of oil and wine as necessary components of any form
of communal eating. In one way, providing the opportunity for a larger
percentage of the population to experience, desire, and value oil and wine
promotes the power of those “in control” of surplus production. As
discussed in the conclusion to the chapter, the availability of oil and
wine to less elite individuals could have effectively broadened
74 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

dependences and dependencies between people and these two commod-

ities as a wider swath of the population came to expect the presence of oil
and wine at certain kinds of feasts and communal events. As we will see in
the next chapter, Mycenaean political and ideological structures were
adept at exploiting this system.

GIFT EXCHANGE: RITUAL AND FUNERARY GIFTS

As discussed in the Introduction, the lines between various types of

exchanges are blurred. This fluidity becomes especially evident when
discussing “giving” and “gifts.” Indeed, most feasts and commensal
exchanges can be interpreted as a form of giving since often participants
did not contribute directly to the feast, but instead contributed indirectly
or exchanged at some point particular services or goods.20 There are,
however, non-commensal situations where giving is the predominant
mode of exchange. By non-commensal gift exchange, I mean the offering
of wine or oil to someone without the expectation of consuming the
commodities oneself or of receiving something immediately in return (as
one would in a commercial context).21 Distinguishing between oil and
wine containers used for feasting events at sanctuaries and cemeteries
versus those objects given as gifts to deities or the deceased is a very
difficult, and often impossible task. The evidence for commensal events at
these types of locations during the Proto- and Neopalatial eras has been
discussed earlier. Here, relatively meager evidence available for the use of
oil and wine within contexts of non-commensal gift exchange is pre-
sented. There are two categories of evidence for these instances. The first
category involves records of transactions between people and deities
where the provisions are intended as offerings and not as supplies for
feasting or drinking events. The second involves objects associated with
oil and wine storage and consumption, such as jars, jugs, cups, and
perhaps pyxides (small containers used for unguents/processed oils),
deposited within sanctuaries or within tombs as grave offerings.

Oil and Wine as Gifts to Deities?

Some Linear A texts represent the distribution of goods, and some of those
goods are typical items offered to deities recorded in later Linear B, including
oil and wine. Since Linear A is still undeciphered, however, it is impossible to
determine whether the same goods were allocated for offerings or other ritual
activities such as feasting (Tomas 2010, 128). Nevertheless, it is clear that
quantities of oil and wine, sometimes large, sometimes small, are associated
with deities. Some of the Haghia Triada tablets have a layout similar to the
 GIFT EXCHA NGE: RIT UA L A ND FUNER ARY GIF TS 75

Linear B Knossian Fs tablets listing offerings, but the Linear A tablets

have quantities of goods that are much larger (Schoep 2001, 61). It is
possible, therefore, that in the Neopalatial era, larger quantities of oil
and wine were given as gifts to the gods, or that these quantities
represent commodities as commensal gifts to be used during religious
festivals and feasts. The nature of Minoan palatial documentary evidence
limits our ability to interpret these texts. As will be discussed in the next
chapter, the Linear B documents of the Mycenaean era are much more
informative.
Many Protopalatial and Neopalatial sanctuaries have produced evidence for
storage of agricultural surplus. In addition to the many pithoi recovered from
these sites, we find smaller, closed vessels, such as amphoras and jars, some of
which would have likely contained oil or wine. Independent sanctuaries with
these vessels include Anemospelia, Juktas, Kato Syme, Building B at Arkhanes,
Philioremos/Gonies, Karphi/Vigla, Building 4 at Phourni and Kophinas
(Kyriakidis 2001, 126–127 with references). In addition, nonindependent
sanctuaries also seem to have kept storage of consumables, including the
Lower West Court Sanctuary Complex at Phaistos, the Upper West Court
Sanctuary Complex at Phaistos, and Quartier 18 at Malia (Kyriakidis 2001, 128
with references). Kyriakidis (2001, 129) suggests that the storage containers
present at sanctuaries are evidence for “Religious Storage” comprising the
“donation of goods to the supernatural.” If this is the case, then the storage
of wine and oil at sanctuaries and cult places is direct evidence of gifts given to
the gods. Alternatively, these storage practices might relate to the consumption
of these goods during religious feasting events, as discussed earlier. Feasting
events could be held to honor deities and can certainly be conceived as gifts
(like the later Archaic/Classical practice of theoxenia). Yet, these religious
commensal events do not function quite the same way as, for example, libations
or offerings in that they are ultimately consumed by the donators. Of course,
any foodstuff “given” to a deity, even on a small scale, was most likely
consumed by priests and religious officials or stored and later consumed on
a larger communal scale. Ultimately, the exact purpose or motivation for the
presence of oil and wine storage at Minoan sanctuaries is entirely unclear.
Written sources from later eras make clear the importance of surplus oil and
wine for libations and offerings to the gods, a topic to which we will return in
the following chapters.

Funerary Gifts: Deposition of Oil- and Wine-Related Vessels in Graves

Protopalatial-era tombs were often of the tholos type and generally con-
tained more than one interment. The ceramic material deposited within
these tombs included a limited range of ceramic shapes, mainly cups, jugs,
76 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

and jars with the appearance of large deposits of ceramics outside the tombs
(presumably the remains of funerary feasts). The cups and jugs deposited
within the tombs ranged from a few vessels to quite large deposits. This
trend was very wide-spread and can be identified at most of the cemeteries
throughout all the regions of Crete.22 The deposition of cups, jugs, and jars
within tombs seems to indicate that even though the overall assemblage
diminished from previous periods, it was nevertheless important to give
objects associated with, presumably, wine-drinking. Whether the jugs and
jars deposited within tombs contained wine at the time of their deposition is
impossible to determine. An overall disappearance of tombs from the
archaeological record toward the end of the Protopalatial era has been
thoroughly documented and has yet to be sufficiently explained (Legarra
Herrero 2014, 159). Neopalatial mortuary behavior used new types of
tombs, such as the chamber tombs at Knossos, and the cemeteries were
built in new locations and had a very different layout.
The identification of archaeobotanical remains has demonstrated that olives
and grapes were an ordinary component of funerary assemblages. Olive stones
and grape pips have been found in multiple contexts that have been interpreted
as offerings to deities or offerings to ancestors (grave goods). At the palace of
Zakros, olive remains found in a bowl were interpreted as an offering outside of
a funerary context (Platon, 1974; Margaritis 2014, 280). The earliest examples
of the incorporation of olives and grapes within funerary rituals date to the third
millennium. Elite tombs within the Petras house tombs contain charred olive
stones and grape pips (e.g., tomb 5, room 12). The preservation of the seeds
suggest that they were not a result of a primary fire destruction rite, but instead
the result of a secondary episode leading to deposition in parallel with the
human bones (Margaritis 2014, 281). Other evidence comes from a Prepalatial
tholos tomb at Livari where fragments of olive stones were found in almost
every sample taken, but no other plant remains were recovered. As these stones
were not associated with charcoal, they could have been added to the burial rite
at a second stage, perhaps specifically as offerings (Margaritis 2014). Although
none of these examples are evidence for oil or wine, nor are they evidence for
surplus oil or wine, they are nevertheless important for our interpretation of the
ceramic containers found within tombs. If whole olives were offered as gifts,
there is a higher likelihood that the jars and jugs deposited within tombs would
have contained olive oil and wine, rather than another liquid or nothing at all.
Admittedly, the Minoan palatial evidence for surplus oil and wine used within
the mode of gift exchange is exceedingly small. This paucity might indicate that
oil and wine were, in fact, not often given to deities and ancestors as gifts.
Rather, surpluses of these commodities were preferably exchanged during
commensal events enacted to honor such individuals. This propensity seems
to change, however, in later eras when we have much greater archaeological
 COMMERCI A L EX CHAN G E: R EGI ON AL AN D LON G D I STA N CE 77

2.8 Type 2 oval-mouthed amphora from MM II levels at Quartier Mu, Malia (Poursat and
Knappett 2005, pl. 3, no. 29; c. EfA/J.-C. Poursat, neg. L2656-013). Image courtesy of the
École Française d’Athènes

and literary evidence for the offering of oil and wine within sanctuary and
funerary contexts.

COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE: REGIONAL AND LONG DISTANCE

In addition to commensal events, one of the most prominent and archaeologically

visible exchange modes in the Minoan era was relatively large-scale trade in bulk
(surplus) oil and wine. Starting in the Protopalatial era, oval-mouthed amphoras
were used to transport these liquid commodities from one region of Crete to
another (Figure 2.8). Comparing the production, distribution, and use of oval-
mouthed amphoras during their initial appearance in the Middle Minoan
period to patterns in the Neopalatial period bring to the fore significant
changes. These changes include a general increase in production volume,
widespread distribution at sites of varying hierarchical status, and an increase
in their shipment off the island. Combined, I argue that these changes suggest
an increase in the value of surplus oil and wine within the commercial
economy. In addition, I suggest that the creation seemingly ex-nihilo of a new
type of surplus oil and wine container at the beginning of the Neopalatial period,
78 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

(a)

(b)

2.9 Neopalatial transport stirrup jars from Knossos Unexplored Mansion showing (a) loop on
shoulder (Popham et al. 1984, pl. 73a, no. KNO 2535_PhA 7842) and (b) third handle (Popham
et al. 1984, pl. 74b, no. KNO 2465_PhA 6363). Reproduced with permission of the British
School at Athens

the transport stirrup jar, supports the idea that during this period of the Minoan
Bronze Age the relationship between people and oil and wine reached a new
level of integration (Figure 2.9a, b). The characteristics of the initial
 COMMERCI A L EX CHAN G E: R EGI ON AL AN D LON G D I STA N CE 79

production, distribution, and use of transport stirrup jars display their high value.
They were carefully decorated, labeled, controlled, and imitated outside of
Crete, as discussed in more detail later. At the same time, they seem to have
been immediately used for long-distance exchange. This labeling and the pattern
of distribution of transport stirrup jars highlight the influence of the elites as they
attempted to control value through specialization and innovation. Yet by
introducing a complicated and elaborate container for surplus oil and wine,
these same people were creating a more complicated network of interaction that
included the people who produced the extra surplus, the people who produced
the specialized containers, and the people who transported them on ships over
long distances.

Regional Trade Practices from the Proto- to Neopalatial Eras

Increases in the scale and volume of intra-island oil and wine trade from the
Protopalatial era to the Neopalatial era were the result of increased demand to
supply island-wide networks connected to the Neopalatial palaces. These
changes made oil and wine more critical to the functioning of the economy
than in previous eras. It is possible to see these changes in trade practices
through the archaeological record using large ceramic transport containers as
proxies for the liquids they once carried. Specifically, in the Neopalatial era, it is
possible to discern an increase in the scale of transport container production and
an increase in the number of production locations. At the same time, the
characteristics of their production support the notion that control over oval-
mouthed amphoras was decentralized in nature. At the same time, the dis-
tribution of these containers increases in scale during the Neopalatial era,
especially between major centers of the island.

Oval-Mouthed Amphora Production and Regional Distribution. The

most common ceramic container used for interregional bulk commodity ship-
ments during the Protopalatial and Neopalatial eras was the oval-mouthed
amphora.23 Although the Protopalatial era saw the production of oval-
mouthed amphoras at a few locations throughout the island, during the
Neopalatial era there is a significant increase in the number of production
locations and the overall number of vessels found at Cretan sites (see Pratt
2016a). At the same time, the shape itself remained relatively unchanged.
Specifically, the oval-mouthed amphora has an ovoid body that varies from
ovoid-conical to ovoid-piriform and has a flat base (Poursat and Knappett 2005,
39–43). The shoulder is incurving to a narrow neck, and vertical roll handles are
attached at the shoulder and rim. The rim itself is pinched in at the attachment
of the two opposite handles, thereby producing an oval or even bilobate mouth
(Mountjoy 2003, 52). The decoration on oval-mouthed amphoras ranges from
80 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

purely linear ornament (i.e., banding) to simple floral motifs and can be dark-
on-light or light-on-dark, though the former is more common. The majority
of ovoid-conical oval-mouthed amphoras, the most common variety, are
between 30 and 45 cm tall with a capacity of 10–15 liters.24
Production of oval-mouthed amphoras in the Protopalatial era seems to have
been very localized. Petrographic analyses have demonstrated that many
regions of Crete produced their own oval-mouthed amphoras, including the
area around the Mirabello Bay, the Mesara plain, the south coast, the palatial
site of Malia, and perhaps the palatial site of Petras (Day 1991, 1995, 1997;
Poursat and Knappett 2005; Haggis 2007). Despite quite disparate production
locations, Protopalatial oval-mouthed amphoras retained a high level of uni-
formity in decoration, form, and size. That oval-mouthed amphoras in various
ceramic fabrics are found at Protopalatial sites throughout the island suggests
a vigorous exchange of commodities between different regions. These vessels
are found concentrated in administrative centers and prominent settlements,
but are also present in smaller villages (e.g., Haggis and Mook 1993).
Protopalatial era sites have produced a relatively high number of examples,
but their distributions within the sites differ. For example, while the majority of
oval-mouthed amphoras found at Phaistos are concentrated within the court-
centered building itself, at Malia most examples have been found in the storage
rooms of Quartier Mu.25 The extraordinary efforts to identify and quantify the
imports at Malia has led to the conclusion that of the seventy-one oval-
mouthed amphoras recovered from these Quartier Mu rooms, twenty-six
were locally produced, seventeen were made in the Mirabello region, eleven
in the Mesara, and twelve along the south Coast.26 In addition, thirty-six oval-
mouthed amphoras have been found within the Protopalatial settlement at the
port town of Kommos, where the oval-mouthed amphora was the most
common storage vessel (Betancourt 1990, 31). Palaikastro has also produced
some oval-mouthed amphoras in Protopalatial contexts, although in smaller
quantities. Many examples at Palaikastro are handmade in a local fabric with
distinctive bichrome decoration. This site has also produced examples of
imported amphoras, including some in Mirabello fabric (Knappett and
Cunningham 2012, 100, 201). The high volume and wide distribution of oval-
mouthed amphoras originating from multiple regions of the island, as exem-
plified thus far by Malia, highlight their position as the favored regional
transport container in the Protopalatial era. Indeed, a recently discovered
shipwreck off Pseira Island dated to MM IIB corroborates this assertion since
at least forty-seven oval-mouthed amphoras were found at the site (Hadjidaki
and Betancourt 2005–2006; Bonn-Muller 2010). These oval-mouthed
amphoras were made in at least two different east Cretan fabrics, representing
products most likely destined for local east-west “coast-hopping” trade (P.
Betancourt, quoted in Bonn-Muller 2010).
 COMMERCI A L EX CHAN G E: R EGI ON AL AN D LON G D I STA N CE 81

The following Neopalatial era witnessed an increase in localized production

of oval-mouthed amphoras, coinciding with the increased demand for surplus
oil and wine by palatial centers. Although significant differences in pottery
production and circulation existed between the different periods within the
Neopalatial era (MM III, LM IA, and LM IB),27 the typology of oval-mouthed
amphoras nevertheless remained relatively unchanged. In addition to consis-
tency in typology, the localized production of oval-mouthed amphoras
increased in the Neopalatial era and included sites such as Petras, Palaikastro,
Zakros, the Mirabello region, and various locations in central Crete (Day 1997,
221, 224–26). It seems that while each of the major coastal towns had at least
one center of ceramic production that supplied many sites in the surrounding
hinterland, there was also a complex pattern of imported goods from elsewhere
on the island (Day 1997, 226). This pattern continues from the Protopalatial era
but increases in scale. Many sites have produced oval-mouthed amphoras in at
least two distinct fabrics, demonstrating an intensive trade in bulk commodities
at this time. For example, central Cretan oval-mouthed amphoras were found
at a diverse range of sites including Riza, Klimataria and Petras, as well as
Makrygialos, Diaskari, Gournia, and Pseira (Day 1997, 224–26). In addition, an
oval-mouthed amphora from Pseira, as well as one at Palaikastro, was manu-
factured in Zakros clay, showing a possible coastal trade route (Day 1997, 227 n.
46; Knappett and Cunningham 2012, 213).
Despite the destructions at the end of MM III and the changes due, in part, to
the Theran eruption in LM IA, consumption of oval-mouthed amphoras
continued to be relatively large-scale and widespread at both palatial and non-
palatial sites (Driessen and Macdonald 1997; Driessen 2013). Oval-mouthed
amphoras are well represented in the MM III levels at the court-centered
buildings at Galatas, Knossos, and Phaistos, as well as the town of Palaikastro
and the villas at Alonaki and Haghia Triada. In LM IA period contexts, oval-
mouthed amphoras have been found at Galatas, Knossos, and Palaikastro, as
well as Papadiokampos and Pitsidia. Finally, oval-mouthed amphoras are fre-
quently present in many destruction contexts dated to the end of LM IB
including Knossos, Galatas, Kommos, Mochlos, Karoumes, Papadiokampos,
and Pitsidia (Pratt 2016a).
The quantities of oval-mouthed amphoras at each different type of site
remain relatively consistent throughout the three Neopalatial periods, with
some sites standing out more than others. This consistency supports the idea
that Minoan economic networks remained remarkably resilient despite the
multiple setbacks encountered during the Neopalatial era (Knappett et al.
2011). The central position of Knossos both before and after the Theran
eruption, for example, is demonstrated by the large number of oval-mouthed
amphoras published and mentioned in excavation reports (Hatzaki 2007a,
192–193).28 Similarly, at Kommos, it is noted that during the MM III period
82 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

the oval-mouthed amphora remains relatively popular and the number of oval-
mouthed amphoras recovered from Palaikastro in Neopalatial contexts is sig-
nificantly greater than in contexts of the preceding Protopalatial era
(Betancourt 1990, 39). It seems that while estimating the varying frequencies
of oval-mouthed amphoras in relative terms between the Protopalatial and
Neopalatial eras on Crete is not straightforward, we may nevertheless see
a continuation of the vessel’s distribution at both palatial and non-palatial
sites throughout the island and an increase in the overall frequency of the
shape at these sites.
The increased scale of production, more production locations, and increased
scale of distribution networks within the island and between major centers was,
I suggest, a response to an increase in demand to supply island-wide networks
attached to palaces. These practices resulted in oil and wine becoming even
more critical to the functioning of the economy and maintenance of social
activities.
The patterns of production presented here, with almost every regional
center producing its own oval-mouthed amphoras, but also exchanging with
others, suggests a localized production strategy. In a localized mode of produc-
tion, fabric sources of a particular type of vessel are variable between regions,
coinciding with the disparate locations of producers who are meeting the needs
of their own settlements and some neighbors.29 A localized mode of produc-
tion for oval-mouthed amphoras, coupled with their complex distribution
patterns, suggests that many regions produced local vessels, filled them with
local produce, and shipped them to various other sites on the island. Indeed,
many of the pressing contexts mentioned earlier are associated with amphoras:
Phourni (LM I), Vathypetro (LM IA), Palaikastro (LM IB), Kato Zakros (two
presses dated to LM IB). It is particularly relevant that these presses are located
in different types of contexts: a cemetery, a rural villa, a non-palatial town, and
a palatial town. In the case presented here, the localized production strategy of
oval-mouthed amphoras, with many non-palatial settlements producing their
own versions, suggests that the administration located at the palace centers did
not have direct control over production.

Protopalatial to Neopalatial: Long-Distance Exchange

In addition to the increase in amphora production and the expansion of intra-
island distribution networks during the Neopalatial era, there is also an expo-
nential increase in long-distance overseas trade. This change reinforced the
status of oil and wine as critical to the functioning of the economy.
Archaeological evidence suggests a general increase in long-distance overseas
trade and supports a particular interest in shipping large quantities of oil and
wine. Specifically, a new type of transport container, the transport stirrup jar,
 COMMERCI A L EX CHAN G E: R EGI ON AL AN D LON G D I STA N CE 83

was created at the beginning of the Neopalatial era and was immediately used to
ship bulk quantities of oil and wine to the Aegean islands, the Greek mainland,
and the Anatolian coast. The early features and characteristics of transport
stirrup jars, and their imitation outside of Crete, support the idea that the
liquids contained within the vessels were considered of increased value.

Intensified Trade Networks. Between the Protopalatial and Neopalatial

eras there seems to be a “fundamental metamorphosis” in the character of
southern Aegean interaction (Knappett and Nikolakopoulou 2005, 175).
Instead of a gradual increase in exportation of Minoan wares, there is
a sudden change sometime during the MM IIIA period. At Akrotiri on
Thera, Minoan imports jump from only 2.5 percent of the ceramics in repre-
sentative deposits dated to MM IA–II to 11.5 percent during MM IIIA and
increase from there (Knappett and Nikolakopoulou 2005, 176). The same
pattern is visible at Miletus on the western Anatolian coast. Minoan imports
make up about 2 percent of the pottery until after MM IIB when imports and
imitations increase substantially. The types of imported Cretan wares at both
Akrotiri and Miletus are generally related to feasting: drinking, pouring, and
storage vessels. These types remain relatively constant throughout the different
phases, but with a greater range during the Neopalatial era. Imitation of Cretan
wares at Akrotiri and Miletus coincide with the sudden burst of imported
material. By LM IA there is considerable local manufacture of Minoanizing
wares at Miletus. The rise of Knossos as a major hub in interregional networks
might have had a significant impact on the existing exchange networks.
Indeed, it has been suggested that the beginning of the Neopalatial era marked
the development of “affiliation networks” beyond the traditional exchange
networks (Knappett and Nikolakopoulou 2005, 181). These affiliation net-
works were directed outward from Crete, with little reciprocal influence from
the islands or Anatolian coast.

Intensified Trade Using Amphoras. Whatever the precise mechanisms

through which these networks flourished, it is nevertheless clear that
a significant increase in Cretan oil and wine production was necessary to
fulfill the increase in external demand. It is therefore not surprising that one
of the best-represented types of exported vessels from Crete was the oval-
mouthed amphora. While a few Cretan oval-mouthed amphoras had made
their way outside Crete in the Protopalatial era to places such as Miletus
(Raymond 2005, pl. XLVIc) and Ayia Irini (Overbeck 1989, 100 no. AQ-41,
pl. 61; 103 no. AR-22, pl. 62), the expanded Neopalatial Minoan network
increased its shipment abroad significantly. Cretan oval-mouthed amphoras
and their imitations have been found on a few islands including Thera
(Marinatos 1968–1976, vol. 1, 32, fig. 44, 45, pl. B, 7–8; vol. 2, 38, fig. 23;
84 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

vol. 4, 35 pl. 66a-b; vol. 7, 29 pl. 43d; Nikolakopoulou 2009, 34), Melos
(Atkinson and Bosanquet 1904, 136, 172, pl. XXVII, 2; Renfrew et al. 2007,
252–56), Keos (Cummer and Schofield 1984, 112 no. 1319, pl. 80, 117 no.
1414, pl. 80, 124 no. 1533–38, pl. 83), and Kos (Morricone 1972–1973, 164,
fig. 277).30 Neopalatial oval-mouthed amphoras have also been identified on
the Greek mainland at Pylos (Blegen 1954, pl. 38a) and Mycenae
(Furtwängler 1879, 8, pl. XI, 600, fig. 441; Wace 1932, 79 no. 5, pl. XLII).
In addition, one Neopalatial oval-mouthed amphora was found on
a shipwreck off the Laconian coast of the Greek mainland (Spondylis 2012)
and about ten fragments of these vessels have been recovered from the
Egyptian site of ‘Ezbet Rushdi (Czerny 1998, 46, fig. 21). Compared to
their Protopalatial-era distribution, oval-mouthed amphoras of the
Neopalatial era, along with their liquid contents, were shipped to the most
important nodes within the broader southeast Aegean exchange network.

Invention of a Specialized Container: The Transport Stirrup

Jar. Sometime in the MM III period, while the oval-mouthed amphora was
popular, the transport stirrup jar, a new bulk liquid transport container, was
invented. Like its later descendant (Furumark Shape 164), the early transport
stirrup jar was a closed vessel form with a narrow, tapering or cylindrical neck
rendered “false” by being capped with a solid clay disk, the true spout being
attached separately at the shoulder.31 Two vertical handles are located to either
side of the false neck, attached at the lower shoulder and at opposite sides of the
disk. It is clear that early transport stirrup jars, like a few oval-mouthed
amphoras, moved off-island (Haskell 1985, 225). In fact, a small coarse
Cretan stirrup jar found in a Period V context at Ayia Irini on Keos can be
dated as early as MM III, roughly contemporaneous with the vessel’s invention
(Haskell 1985, 222, no. 4). This immediate exportation may suggest that
transport stirrup jars were created specifically for longer-distance transport. In
addition, early transport stirrup jars are recovered in almost equal numbers on
Aegean islands as on Crete. Even by the end of the Neopalatial era the transport
stirrup jar was still found in fairly limited numbers on Crete, albeit at a large
number of sites (see later). On the islands, as on Crete, transport stirrup jars are
frequently found alongside amphoras, both of which were made in similar sizes
(Haskell 1985, 224). For example, on Thera, both vessel types are recorded
from living areas and storerooms (Haskell 1985, 227; household: no. 23, store-
room: nos. 19–22). It is also informative that all contemporary neighboring
cultures of the eastern Mediterranean, such as the Canaanites and Egyptians,
maintained the use of amphoras for their transport needs, both local and long-
distance.32 This juxtaposition might suggest a deliberate choice to retain the
oval-mouthed amphora for interregional Cretan transport, as opposed to intra-
 COMMERCI A L EX CHAN G E: R EGI ON AL AN D LON G D I STA N CE 85

Aegean transport, for which the transport stirrup jar may have been specifically
designated.
There are a few features of the transport stirrup jar’s production and use that
suggest their heightened value relative to the oval-mouthed amphora. These
features include a complicated production technique, the addition of labeling
mechanisms, and their restricted distributions. The introduction of transport
stirrup jars in MM III could represent a sign of a different concept of palatial
economy otherwise signified by changes in architecture, settlement layout, and
iconography, among other things (e.g., Driessen 2001, Driessen and Schoep
1995, Macdonald and Knappett 2013). In the Neopalatial era, transport stirrup
jars remained specialized containers restricted to elite contexts, possibly func-
tioning as a prestige item.
The transport stirrup jar was a very complicated vessel to make. When
compared to the contemporary oval-mouthed amphora, there were multiple
extra steps needed to create the transport stirrup jar, including the creation of
a narrow neck, its cap, and the addition of a true spout on the shoulder. While
later Cretan transport stirrup jars are consistently made of medium-coarse to
coarse fabrics, early transport stirrup jars could be produced in comparatively
fine fabrics despite their designated use as transport containers (Ben-Shlomo
et al. 2011, 331). As is clear from the discovery of failed attempts to create these
pots, a potter would have had to possess specialized knowledge to produce
these complicated vessels. The exact origins or prototypes of transport stirrup
jars are unclear, which suggests that it truly is a product invented at the
beginning of the Neopalatial era by contemporary potters (Haskell 1985).
Additionally, Neopalatial transport stirrup jars commonly exhibited
a number of interesting features, including pierced holes through the extended
edges of the jar’s false neck disk (e.g., Shaw 1981, pl. 51b), and a very small loop
on the shoulder (Figure 2.9a), both of which could have functioned as features
intended to facilitate the attachment of labels (Haskell 1985, 223). These were
not air-holes as they did not go through into the neck. These features were not
necessarily included on all transport stirrup jars from this early period but seem
to have been very common and were generally limited to the Neopalatial and
Monopalatial eras. Early transport stirrup jars also had the option of a functional
third handle and “spout horns,” small, curved projections on the spout that
were most likely used to strap down the stopper. When taken together, these
features seem to indicate a certain desire to carefully control the contents of
transport stirrup jars and clearly mark their ownership (Haskell 1985, 223). In
addition to ownership or labeling features, most Neopalatial transport stirrup
jars are elaborately decorated in floral or abstract designs. This is in contrast to
oval-mouthed amphoras, the majority of which have simple decoration (Pratt
2016a, fig. 3). The controlling features and decoration of transport stirrup jars,
in contrast to the contemporary oval-mouthed amphora, suggest that transport
86 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

stirrup jars and their contents were highly valued within the context of oil and
wine trade in the Neopalatial era.
Another indication for the high value afforded transport stirrup jars and their
contents is the immediate desire to create imitations of these vessels outside of
Crete. For example, a few transport stirrup jars from Thera appear to be locally
produced, suggesting not only that these new vessels were exported from
Crete, but also that they were quickly imitated on islands that were already
exhibiting signs of significant Minoan influence. Many of the locally produced
stirrup jars found at Akrotiri have strange production techniques and additional
features that suggest a sort of experimentation when trying to reproduce the
shape (Haskell 2016). This imitation suggests a strong demand for this vessel
shape, perhaps as an identifying marker of a particular liquid commodity or as
a status symbol reflecting the high value attributed to transport stirrup jars and
their contents (Haskell 1985, 225).
Compared to the widespread production and distribution of oval-mouthed
amphoras in the Neopalatial era, the production and distribution of the nascent
transport stirrup jar seems relatively restricted. Cretan transport stirrup jars in
the Neopalatial era are found in small numbers and mainly confined to palaces
(Malia, Zakros, Phaistos, Knossos, Galatas), important coastal settlements
(Mochlos, Kommos, Gournia, Palaikastro, Khania) and elite villas (Haghia
Triada, Vathypetro, Skinias) on the island (Pratt 2016a, table 3). This distribu-
tion may support the idea that right from the beginning, transport stirrup jars
were highly regulated and controlled, possibly even associated with Cretan
palatial administration. Indeed, it is interesting that the transport stirrup jar
appears in MM III just as Knossos is establishing its primacy architecturally and
artistically, perhaps indicating the transport stirrup jar’s place within a Cretan
political framework. Although more work is needed to fully understand this
phenomenon, the relatively high number of early transport stirrup jars at
Knossos and their continued use into the LM II period may contribute to
this idea. Moreover, the contexts in which early transport stirrup jars are found
frequently include oval-mouthed amphoras, perhaps suggesting that the trans-
port stirrup jar and the amphora served similar functions, as transport contain-
ers, from the moment transport stirrup jars were invented (Haskell 1985, 223).
For example, both transport stirrup jars and oval-mouthed amphoras are found
at Palaikastro (Bosanquet et al. 1902–1903, 283), Zakros (Platon 1971, 170, one
of the ten “amphoras” is a stirrup jar), and Knossos (Catling et al. 1979; Hatzaki
2007a, 193). Although spatial proximity alone would not indicate identical
functions, the similarities in range of size and physical attributes between the
two types of containers reinforce this idea.
A clear shift in the pattern of transport container distribution occurred in
the Neopalatial era. Namely, an increase in the overall quantity of contain-
ers in circulation and the invention of the transport stirrup jar (Table 2.3).
 COMMERCI A L EX CHAN G E: R EGI ON AL AN D LON G D I STA N CE 87

table 2.3 Minimum number of oval-mouthed amphoras and transport stirrup jars found at
large Minoan sites

Oval-mouthed amphora Oval-mouthed amphora Transport stirrup jar

Protopalatial Neopalatial Neopalatial

Knossos 13 72+ 17
Malia 80 1
Palaikastro 7 41+ 4
Phaistos 55 26 10

See Pratt 2016, Tables 1–4 for citations.

Intimately connected to these changes is the increasing prominence of

central-court buildings. The patterns in oval-mouthed amphora production
and distribution observed for the Protopalatial era continued relatively
unchanged into the Neopalatial era. Moreover, the distribution of oval-
mouthed amphoras at all types of sites, from palaces to farmhouses, supports
the idea that palaces did not have control over who could have access to the
commodities stored within.
Yet, it becomes particularly clear in the Neopalatial era that the palaces
became increasingly involved in commercial exchanges of surplus oil and
wine. At this point, the palaces increased their storage capacities and seem to
be intimately connected to the invention of the transport stirrup jar. The
restricted distribution of transport stirrup jars to elite contexts suggests that
they and their contents might have been particularly valued within the
realm of commercial exchange. The effort to restrict and control transport
stirrup jars, and presumably their contents, in the Neopalatial era is in stark
contrast to the following Mycenaean era when these vessels lose their
labeling devices and elaborate decoration and are instead mass-produced
and found throughout the eastern Mediterranean, a topic that will be
addressed in the following chapter. In its initial production, therefore,
perhaps the shape was intimately associated with elite activity, and was
consequently also a symbol of social power. It is certain, however, that
transport stirrup jars were not immediately adopted for widespread use and
that the numbers of oval-mouthed amphoras in use on the island remained
consistent.
This dual nature of bulk liquid commodity trade in the Neopalatial era
indicates the changing values associated with oil and wine and their place
within the Minoan economy. As both local and regional exchange networks
expanded due to palatial demand, there was an increase in production of the
commodities themselves and the containers needed to ship them. In addition, it
seems that exchange modes in the Neopalatial era required varying qualities or
types of oil and wine, as perhaps indicated by ligatured signs on the oil and wine
88 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

ideograms of Linear A, the invention of the transport stirrup jar, and the
varying degrees of elaborate decoration on containers. For example, the stirrup
jar might have, at least originally, been intended to hold a particular type or
quality of oil or wine, carefully labelled through attached tags. Patterns of
decoration on oval-mouthed amphoras and stirrup jars tend to overlap between
containers and sites. It is not inconceivable that these patterns once held some
meaning to the observer. Moreover, that palatial and other sites with many
stirrup jars and oval-mouthed amphoras have collections of these jars from
various production locations on the island might also indicate the collection of
different types and qualities of these commodities. These types and qualities of
surplus wine and oil, shipped in either oval-mouthed amphoras or transport
stirrup jars, indicate the existence of multiple levels within a thriving exchange
network throughout the Neopalatial era.

CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS

According to the principles outlined in the Introduction, a cultural commodity

is born out of the development of increasing links of dependency and the
continuous perception of that thing as high value. When the value of some-
thing remains high within the context of exchange, that thing retains its
stability within an entanglement. It retains its place. When something becomes
necessary for the functioning of an exchange, and not just sufficient or con-
venient, then that thing transitions from a level of dependence to one of
dependency. That is, when value and necessity are aligned, the relationship
transitions to a relatively inescapable bond. The changing patterns in the way
something is exchanged expose the configurations of value attributed to that
thing. Through archaeological remains of exchange contexts, it is possible to
trace those changing patterns.
How then does this idea of changing exchange patterns exposing changing
values and dependency apply to oil and wine in the Minoan palatial eras? Based
on a synthetic view of the evidence, we can see meaningful changes to patterns
in the scale, context, and characteristics of exchange modes from the
Protopalatial era to the Neopalatial era which, when considered together,
might indicate the changing ways the high value of oil and wine was con-
structed. At the same time, significantly, the evidence also indicates that a larger
portion of the population participated in the exchange of both commodities.
Commensal events changed in nature from sporadic, open events located
primarily in cemeteries during the Protopalatial era to frequent, regulated
events that strived to emphasize community while solidifying hierarchies
during the Neopalatial era.33 The various forms of evidence for these changes
include a huge increase in the relative proportion of drinking vessels in pottery
assemblages; vast deposits of drinking cups numbering in the many thousands,
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 89

some deposited in a ritualized, structured way; the presence of many wine

installations; the recording of large numbers of drinking cups in Linear A tablets
(e.g., HT 31 from Haghia Triada lists 3,700 conical cups); and the arrangement
of public space, with the existence of many open and formally constructed and
organized plazas and courts (Rutter 2004; Girella 2007; Hamilakis and Sherratt
2012, 192). The very beginning of the Neopalatial era, the MM III period, is
the initial stage in which emerging groups began to put emphasis on banquet-
ing habits as an instrument in creating selective affiliations or asserting distance
between hosts and guests. Wine and oil, once restricted commodities available
to the few, soon became accessible to the many. But this accessibility was
perhaps regulated and restricted to special events. In this way, wine and oil
continued to be facilitators of hierarchical distinctions despite the apparent
openness of participation. This range of access is what allowed the value of
wine and oil to remain high at the same time that both commodities were
perhaps introduced or solidified within the experiences of many more
inhabitants of Neopalatial Crete.
Changes to the patterns in commercial exchange from the Protopalatial to
the Neopalatial eras can also be interpreted as an indication of the elaboration of
cultural values surrounding the importance of oil and wine. The Neopalatial
era saw both an exponential increase in overseas trade and the introduction of
the transport stirrup jar. This new liquid transport container was produced and
used in a manner very different from the oval-mouthed amphora, which
continued to be in circulation alongside the new transport stirrup jar.
Features of early transport stirrup jars, such as its complicated construction
and various controlling features, hint at the special nature of this container and
its contents. In contrast to the oval-mouthed amphora, the restricted distribu-
tion of transport stirrup jars to upper echelon sites suggests that it was intimately
connected to the higher spectrum of social hierarchy. Moreover, it seems that
transport stirrup jars, unlike the oval-mouthed amphoras, were used to ship
commodities overseas immediately. At the same time, imitations found at
island and Anatolian sites imply that the container (and its contents) had
a different kind of reputation. Indeed, the contents seem to have been so valued
within Crete and the broader Aegean that it was necessary to imitate these
strange vessels to convey the same information. In this way, transport stirrup
jars became a kind of “brand” for Neopalatial Crete (see Wengrow 2008,
Bevan 2010). This brand, as a representation of the liquid contents, only
increased in value during the following Mycenaean palatial era, to which we
will return in the next chapter. We can, therefore, see significant shifts in the
patterns of commensal and commercial exchange during the Neopalatial era,
which strongly indicate an elaboration of the value of oil and wine within
newly constructed cultural contexts.
90 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

But how do we see dependence? Perhaps, instead, it is more plausible to look

for a transition from dependence to dependency – that inescapability, which
comes about when increased value and need come together. It must be
acknowledged immediately that there is no sure way to prove the presence
of dependency through archaeological material. For example, merely finding
a handful of cowry shells in a Papua New Guinea household would in no way
relate their significance. Without oral narratives and eye-witness accounts we
would be completely ignorant of the value attributed to such shells and the
absolute necessity to own them for the most important exchanges (such as
marriage; Lederman 1986, 86–87; Allibert 2000). While this is a historically
unrelated example, it nevertheless hints at the complicated relationship people
have with things and things with people. Dependency is perhaps easier to
understand when dealing with matters of life and death. Houseplants are
dependent upon people to give them water. Both plants and people are
dependent upon the sun for photosynthesis and vitamin D. One would die
without the existence of the other (Schöttker et al. 2014). Such connections of
dependency are easier to agree upon. For the Minoan palatial era, a relationship
of dependency between domesticated olive trees and grapevines and people is
easier to accept than a relationship of dependency between palatial authorities
and surplus oil and wine.
I suggest, however, that it is nevertheless possible to see such relationships of
dependency. Indeed, this transition from dependence to dependency between
people and oil and wine is visible not through examining one relationship, but
through the patterns produced over many. It is the increase in scale, not just in
feasting events, but also in production, storage, and amphora distribution, that
conveys some underlying connection. What I suggest is that there is a strong
correlation between these increases in scale and the transition from a relationship of
dependence to one of dependency. Yet, at the same time, the relationship becomes
circular – it perpetuates the dependency. The increase in scale of exchange
necessitates more oil and wine. The response is a production of more oil and
wine. The availability of more oil and wine promotes the use of both commodities
within more types and contexts of exchange. Yet, at the same time, I do not think
that the reasoning is circular. That is, dependency might result in production, but
production does not necessarily result in dependency. Just because something is
produced does not mean it automatically becomes necessary for exchanges. Again,
this is where the value of oil and wine must remain high in order for a relationship
of dependency to develop.
Given that the value of oil and wine remained high during the Neopalatial
era at the same time that the relationship between people and oil and wine
transitioned from one of dependence to dependency, how can we describe this
entanglement? The Introduction suggested that it is possible to visualize the
variation in centralization and scale of entanglements by means of an x–y grid
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 91

(Figure 1.1). Points on this grid would reflect the nature of the entanglement
at a given moment in time. Since entanglements are not a static fact, but
a continually changing dynamic relationship, it is impossible to categorize
them into rigid typologies. For the Neopalatial era, the entanglement could
be characterized as decentralized and relatively large scale (see Figure 1.2). The
entanglement is decentralized since the dependency between people and things
is not initiated, controlled, or sustained because of a particular node in the
network gaining centrality. In other words, the binding dependencies were not
generated or regulated by, say, a central authority, but rather the central
authority supports and reinforces such connections. While the authorities
connected to the operations of the central-court buildings did indeed affect
the degree to which people (farmers, landowners, press owners, potters, central
authorities, merchants, etc.) and things (grapevines, olive trees, presses, pots,
boats, etc.) depended upon each other, they did not directly control the
majority of production or exchange. Instead, the central authorities were
dependent upon a steady supply of oil and wine to be used in exchange
modes such as feasting and commercial trade. Their dependency, in turn,
acted as a driving demand for the increased production of oil and wine.
There are a few patterns in the archaeological record that support the
presence of a larger-scale and relatively decentralized entanglement in the
Minoan Neopalatial era. For production of oil and wine, the increase in
number of identifiable wine presses during the Neopalatial period was con-
centrated in non-palatial contexts. However, these non-palatial contexts
included larger urban houses and large rural villas, suggesting that wealthy
landowners, who were not necessarily outside the reach of the central author-
ity, were involved. Moreover, the nature of Neopalatial Linear
A administration archives suggests that central authorities did not closely
regulate land allocation or agricultural production, as we know to be the case
for the following Mycenaean era. This evidence might indicate that although
the central authorities had a significant stake in the production of surplus of
both liquids, they did not fully control their production or distribution. Instead,
vine and olive tree cultivation was relatively widespread on the island and
regional production was common.
Exchange contexts for oil and wine exhibit similar patterns. Feasting events,
although often conceived as connected to palatial authorities, were never-
theless performed in both palatial and non-palatial contexts. The evidence for
commensal events presented within this chapter highlights the large deposits
and designated buildings at non-palatial sites, such as Mochlos, Kommos, and
Palaikastro. At the same time, there is no denying that large-scale feasting
events took place in palatial contexts and seem to have been highly regulated.
This dichotomy is made especially clear when compared to the patterns in
feasting remains visible from the Prepalatial and Protopalatial eras. Before the
92 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

Neopalatial era, large-scale commensal events requiring large quantities of

surplus oil and wine seem to have been more homogenous in nature and
concentrated in funerary contexts.
For commercial exchange, both palatial and non-palatial sites were highly
integrated within the same trade networks. Oval-mouthed amphoras were
produced in many regions of the island beginning in the Protopalatial period
around the same time as the construction of the first court-centered buildings,
but before any distinct “palatial” authority.34 The regions producing amphoras,
and presumably their liquid products, also coincide with the locations of many
of these early palatial structures (Malia, Zakros, Petras, Mesara, Knossos), as
well as prominent villas. Patterns of consumption and distribution suggest that
early palaces probably did not exercise any particular authority in this sphere of the
economy. For example, distribution patterns imply that exchange was occurring
along the south coast between the Mesara region and Myrtos independently of
Malia, the site which seems to have had some (political?) connection to Myrtos
(Knappett 1999, 632). What this suggests is an independent economic pattern in
which goods were exchanged along various routes irrespective of political author-
ity. As discussed earlier, this practice of trading surplus commodities among each
region of the island continued relatively unchanged into the Neopalatial era, with
the addition of still more regional products. This inter-island oil and wine trade
supports the idea of relatively heterarchical corporate polities interacting with each
other. At the same time, the invention of the transport stirrup jar at the beginning
of the Neopalatial era and its connection to the court-centered buildings and
overseas trade suggests that the palaces were in no way excluded from commercial
exchange of oil and wine. Rather, they participated alongside other political
entities.
Overall, therefore, the evidence for production and exchange of surplus oil and
wine in the Minoan palatial eras presents an interesting paradox. On the one hand,
the authorities presiding over the central-court buildings did not directly control
the production or exchange of these commodities. Instead, the evidence points to
independent, though wealthy, people having the ability to control their own
vineyards and olive groves, process their own fruit, and perhaps exchange their
own oil and wine. On the other hand, however, it is clear that the central
authorities had some means of interaction with these producers in a way that
benefited the palaces. The ability to mass-produce amphoras along with oil and
wine to fill those amphoras was dependent on the presence of a relatively strong
central authority capable of presenting opportunities for labor conscription and
exchange outlets – internal and external trade, harbors, boats, and so on. After all,
the palatial storage magazines, Linear A tablets recording thousands of liters of oil
and wine, and the remnants of palatial feasts, all suggest the central-court buildings
played a significant role in the exchange of these two commodities. The influence
of both non-palatial and palatial people and things on the production and exchange
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 93

of surplus oil and wine thus supports the characterization of the Neopalatial
entanglement as relatively decentralized.
Yet, the question still remains: why did a decentralized entanglement exist at
this point in time? Ultimately, the dependency between people, oil, and wine
that came about during the Neopalatial era may be viewed as the result of
a shift in social structure from the Protopalatial era. Three new factors present
from the beginning of the Neopalatial era seem to have affected value and
dependency: namely, the increased centrality of palaces, the rise of Knossos as
a dominant influence, and the increasing competition between elites. The
construction of palaces at the start of the Neopalatial era corresponds with
a moment of population increase after a period of stress. The Minoan “state”
could therefore be viewed as an organizational response to sociopolitical
circumstances rather than as a social type (Knappett 1999, 618). The socio-
political circumstances seem to have included open tension and competition
between different groups that made up society. The central-court buildings
may therefore be considered the result of “community related practices,
bottom-up processes and collective corporate actions” where construction
of a central building reinforced collective group identity and stability, pre-
viously manifested through funerary complexes (Driessen forthcoming, 19).
As discussed earlier, this change coincided with alterations to feasting practices
which shifted from openly accessible funerary contexts in the Protopalatial era
to frequently occurring, regulated, and structured events that required steady
supplies of surplus oil and wine.
At the same time that court-centered buildings were constructed throughout
the island, one in particular came to acquire significance above the others –
Knossos. The rise of Knossos to cultural dominance over most of the island
seems to have had a hand in constructing the high value attributed to oil and
wine, and it may have contributed to the need for oil and wine in prominent
exchange modes. During the first part of the Neopalatial era, Knossos seems to
have acted as a major economic hub, channeling the regional networks of
Crete outward to other islands and to the west coast of Anatolia (Knappett and
Nikolakopoulou 2005, 182). Certainly, Knossos had a hand in the expansion of
surplus oil/wine shipped to locations outside Crete. In addition, it seems that
Knossos was instrumental in the invention and retention of the transport stirrup
jar, which became the dominant transport container for oil and wine, even after
the collapse of the Minoan palatial era. It does seem, however, that Knossos’s
hegemony was not absolute over the entire island. The extent of Knossian
influence over the island is highly debated (Popham et al. 1984; Langohr 2009;
Macdonald and Knappett 2013). It is likely that local autonomy in some
economic activities coexisted with an “overarching (Knossian) control in
other (ideological) spheres” (Knappett 1999, 638). This variation in control
would support the idea of a decentralized entanglement at this point in time.
94 OIL A ND WINE IN THE MINOAN PALAT IAL ERA

While Knossos certainly influenced the production of surplus oil and wine and
benefited from its exchange, there is no evidence to suggest that it controlled
the process. Indeed, by the end of the Neopalatial era after the disruptions
accompanying the Theran eruption, Knossos’s economic and ideological con-
trol seems to have faded, allowing local power groups to manage their own
economic affairs (Driessen and Macdonald 1997).
The last social factor that may have influenced the degree of dependency
between people, oil, and wine is the introduction of increased competition
between elites throughout the Neopalatial era. Indeed, it has been speculated
that increased competition might have ultimately contributed to the downfall
of Minoan society (Driessen 2010, 55). Certainly, by the end of the era, after the
Theran eruption, social, economic, and political unrest would have led to
opportunities for elites to gain power. For Zakros, the crisis provoked by the
eruption does not seem to have resulted in a contestation of the authority of the
local leading groups. It may have given them the opportunity to increase their
power and consolidate a dominant position. What we see is the emergence of
more complex and clearly hierarchical forms of social and political organiza-
tion, manifested by referencing Knossian styles, norms, and ideologies.35
These forms of social competition would have led to the desire to display
dominance and wealth through commensal events and through control of overseas
trade. Both of these activities would have required significant amounts of surplus
oil and wine, leading to an increase in dependency. The dramatic increase in
feasting activities has been linked to extreme fragmentation of the social and
political landscape of the Neopalatial era (Hamilakis 2002). Moreover,
Neopalatial settings of commensal events, characterized by architectural
elaboration and diverse “poles of convergence,” may have eventually promoted
increasing tension through categorization and segmentation, rather than
communality (Letesson and Driessen 2008, 212). Therefore, not only the event
itself, but its contexts, supported increasing tensions. Oil and wine can therefore
be used as “barometers” of social instabilities, rather than indicators of flourishing
civilization (Hamilakis 1999, 50). Hence, elites during the Neopalatial era would
have depended upon the constant supply of surplus oil and wine to facilitate their
legitimacy as rulers. The rituals and commensal politics involved with the
consumption of both liquids would have served to emphasize the status of the
individuals partaking in the events, whether that status was high or low.
From a broader perspective, one could ask why the entanglement between
people and oil and wine in the Minoan palatial era matters to the greater
trajectory of Greek history. The answer is that this era marked the beginning
of a never-ending relationship of dependency surrounding the production and
exchange of oil and wine. This “moment” (historically speaking) was the
“point of no return,” the entrapment that would hold Greek people together
with oil and wine to the point where their identities melded into each other. In
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 95

response, one could say that Crete is an isolated case. Yet, the reality is that the
Minoan palatial era started a chain reaction of dependency through elaboration
of cultural values related to essential exchange contexts that continued into the
Mycenaean palatial era, reached up to northern Greece (a place where wine
had already existed), and continued into the Iron Age through any and all
“disruptions,” cultural or historical. Indeed, as we will see throughout the
remaining chapters of this book, the same patterns in the archaeological record
of exchanges visible for Minoan Crete occur again and again with variations
resulting from social context. We will see that by the “eighth century revolu-
tion,” the “new” commensal or commercial exchanges were in no way
revolutionary.36
 THREE

CONTROLLING THE RELATIONSHIP

Oil and Wine in the Mycenaean Palatial Era

D espite the fall of the minoan palaces around 1450 bce,

olive oil and wine did not lose any of their status as cultural commodities.
As the influence of Mycenaean Greece expanded toward the end of the Late
Bronze Age, olive oil and wine remained integral aspects of social and political
exchanges. The Mycenaean palatial era (ca. 1450–1200 BCE) represents a
period when power and authority were concentrated at relatively homogenous
citadels on both the southern Greek mainland and Crete that shared a handful
of architectural and stylistic characteristics.1 On Crete, this era was marked by
the reoccupation of many sites along with the rise of Knossos, which emerged
as the dominant political and cultural center.2 Economic records written in the
Linear B script have been found at all Mycenaean palaces, both on the mainland
and Crete. These too were surprisingly homogenous in the types of things
recorded, though particular categories were differentially emphasized. In gen-
eral, the tablets focused on incoming and outgoing foodstuffs, festivals for
various gods, and cadastral surveys. Pervasive among all topics covered within
the records are olives, oil, grapes, and wine.
As outlined in this chapter, archaeological and written evidence suggest that
the palaces relied on huge surpluses of both liquids for most of their documen-
ted and undocumented affairs. Although written documents do not explicitly
record the details of oil and wine production, they are very concerned with the
control of vineyards and olive groves. In addition, archaeological remains of
presses and archaeobotanical data allow the reconstruction of a thriving, yet

96
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 97

centralized, industry. Linear B records and large quantities of material remains

indicate that both oil and wine were staples of Mycenaean exchange. Evidence
for the use of oil and wine within commensal exchanges is particularly rich.
Remains of feasting events, storage of feasting equipment, and bulk surplus
storage present at all palaces make clear the large scale of events at these
locations. Palatial documents confirm this picture and add invaluable informa-
tion about quantities of foodstuffs and utensils. Unlike the Minoan palatial era,
there is more evidence during the Mycenaean era for gift exchange, both with
deities and ancestors. Written texts record offerings of oil and wine to deities,
while the mortuary record of this era presents a detailed picture of the types and
quantities of containers used for offerings and provisions for the deceased.
Commercial exchange of surplus oil and wine, while not predominantly
recorded in the Linear B records, has a rich archaeological record. The trans-
port stirrup jar, which had been invented during the Minoan palatial era,
became standardized and mass-produced in the Mycenaean era. Their distribu-
tion became increasingly widespread, which highlights the interregional net-
works in place. At the same time, there is evidence for directed commercial
exchange between the palaces on Crete and those on the Mycenaean mainland.
Overall, the trend is one of centralization. Unlike the Minoan Neopalatial
era, Mycenaean oil and wine surplus production and exchange are character-
ized by the overarching control and regulation of a central authority. At the
same time, the value of surplus oil and wine was exploited on a broader
Mediterranean network as exchanges with Cyprus, the Near East, Egypt, and
Italy expanded considerably. Perhaps at this point we can see the more cen-
tralized entanglement of the Mycenaean era coming against and perhaps inter-
twining with the entanglements of other Mediterranean cultures. Ultimately,
these interconnections and shared values with the outside world might have
contributed not only to the downfall of the Mycenaean citadels (along with
other east Mediterranean places) but also the long-lasting exchange connec-
tions between East and West.

PRODUCTION OF OIL AND WINE

In contrast to the previous Minoan palatial era, patterns in pressing equipment

locations on Mycenaean Crete show trends toward centralization and monu-
mentalization. Documents written in Linear B present perhaps our best evidence
for centralized control over the production process. These include detailed land
management surveys, with attention to vineyards and olive groves. In addition,
many tablets record the collections of olives, oil, grapes, and wine from people
and places by the central authorities. These goods were then stored in or near the
palaces, or perhaps in controlled regional facilities. For the palaces, at least,
archaeological remains confirm the presence of large quantities of both oil and
98 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

wine in storage magazines. It should be noted, however, that most of the

evidence discussed ultimately derives from the palaces themselves, and are thus
biased. Yet, it is nevertheless clear that the Mycenaean central authorities had a
solid command over regional resources, with oil and wine at the heart of their
affairs.

Technologies of Wine and Oil Production

Unlike the Minoan palatial eras, the Mycenaean palatial era did not leave
behind much evidence for the direct production of oil and wine. The relative
abundance of pressing beds and vats recovered from Minoan contexts is con-
trasted by the relative absence of all types of pressing installations on the
mainland and islands. Only Akrotiri on Thera has recently produced a similar
installation. This absence could be due to the limited nature of the archae-
ological record. Most excavations at Mycenaean sites have focused on palatial
buildings, with little attention to the surrounding towns. It is also possible that
the installations in these locations were made of perishable material, such as
wood, and therefore unrecoverable. Or perhaps, more likely, pressing installa-
tions for oil and wine were located outside in the surrounding hinterland, a
common practice for later Classical pressing.3 Indeed, Linear B texts might
indicate that olives, at least, were pressed in the countryside with the oil
brought to the palace for storage or treatment (as discussed further on).
Either way, the lack of presses available to us on the Greek mainland and
other islands means that it is necessary to focus on the evidence present on
Crete during the Mycenaean era. Here, once again, there are relatively good
indications that the circumstances around pressing olives and grapes into oil and
wine had changed from the previous Neopalatial era. Whereas the number of
presses increased substantially in the Neopalatial era, they once again seem to
diminish in numbers during the LM IIIA/B periods. In addition, the location
of presses shifts from individual houses or villas to more centralized, communal
locations using large-scale pressing equipment.
Only six olive presses are catalogued by Platon and Kopaka (1993, 61–63
nos. 36–41) and all of them are dated to after the Minoan palatial period
(LM II–LM III). Two were found at Knossos, one in the “Unexplored
Mansion” Room B at Knossos, and another from a building recovered during
the Stratigraphical Museum excavations at Knossos. One press was found in
Magazine 34 in the palace at Phaistos and tentatively dated to LM III. Four
additional examples of stone installations might be related to olive presses based
on their shape and associated equipment. For example, a roughly circular, flat
stone was found on top of a built platform with a stone basin nearby at
Palaikastro, House D (Platon and Kopaka 1993, 66).4
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 99

The best-preserved oil press installations come from the port town of
Kommos. Two large-scale work stations for pressing oil were constructed
within the settlement in the “House with the Press” and in a cubicle directly
to the east of the “House with the Snake Tube” (Blitzer 1995, 528). These
spouted press beds were found resting on a built stone platform and associated
with carbonized olive stones. The press beds were most likely intended for use
with wooden beams and large-scale suspended stone weights (also found at the
site). Blitzer (1993, 167; 1995, 528) suggests that these new constructions may
indicate a change from individual household oil processing to communal
processing for the creation of surplus product in the Late Minoan III period.
Although this is only one example, Kommos is nevertheless significant since
this site became one of the major ports of the LM III period. Indeed, there is
evidence to suggest that the surplus oil produced at Kommos would have been
bottled in locally made transport stirrup jars and shipped from Crete to multiple
regions around the eastern Mediterranean.

Palatial Vineyards, Orchards, and Evidence for Land Management

Although direct production evidence in the form of pressing equipment is
limited for the Mycenaean era, other indirect archaeological and written
evidence suggests that Mycenaean central authorities had greater control over
vineyards and olive groves. The relative autonomy regarding the disposition of
agricultural production in Minoan Crete, as made evident by the lack of any
concern for land management or appropriation in Linear A records, seems to
have diminished substantially by the time Linear B, the script of mainland
Mycenaeans, was adopted on the island (Palmer 2002, 103). Indeed, cadastral
surveys became one of the most prominently recorded items in the Linear B
records of both Cretan and mainland palaces. Included in these cadastral
surveys were tablets listing orchards. These tablets indicate that the palatial
administration kept some track of who was growing vines, a topic to which we
will return shortly in more detail. But first, a brief overview of the basic
characteristics, context, and historiographical issues of Linear B will prove
useful.
The records written in the Linear B script were recorded on tablets, nodules,
and roundels. Linear B is a similar script to Linear A, but has been shown to be a
form of ancient Greek. On Crete, Linear B replaced Linear A after the collapse
of Minoan palaces at the end of the Neopalatial era. In general, these texts were
used to record mainly inventory lists and personnel records. Found in most
palaces of the Late Bronze Age on both the Greek mainland and Crete, Linear
B tablets record what comes in and goes out of the palace, both finished and
raw materials, including the person who brought the items and the person who
owed the items, or is in debt for the items. There are, however, significant
100 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

omissions within the topics presented on the tablets, even within the economic
realm. For example, there is only one instance of a commercial transaction
between polities (MY X 508, cloth from Mycenae to Thebes). There are no
recorded instances of external overseas trade, despite the fact that Mycenaean
objects are found abroad and imported objects are commonly found in the
archaeological record of Mycenaean Greece (Cline 1994; van Wijngaarden
2002; Burns 2012).5 These lacunae do, however, indicate that the activities that
were recorded, often in detail, had been sufficiently integrated into the palatial
bureaucracy and deemed worthy of supervision. Adding to these complications
of selectivity is the fact that the tablets are only preserved due to happenstance.
Originally, Linear B tablets would have been made of unfired clay and often
reused. Only those tablets subjected to severe (accidental) firing have been
preserved. Consequently, the general scholarly consensus is that the tablets we
have found mostly refer to the time at which the building was destroyed. We
therefore have a mere snapshot, indeed a blurry and broken snapshot, into the
administrative realities of Mycenaean palatial bureaucracy.
For our purposes, it is useful that one of the most prevalent topics recorded is
the management of estates and agricultural produce. The documents make
clear that olive trees and grapevines, their fruits, and the oil/wine produced
from them were cultivated and processed in great numbers during the Late
Bronze Age. Although the total amount of land over which the palaces had
direct control is debated, it seems that at least some of this land was used for
the cultivation of olive trees and grapevines. For example, the totaling tablets
(a-pu-do-si) of oil contributions to the Knossos Palace (tablets Fh 336+5503 and
Fh 367+5460) produce ca. 4,000 trees and ca. 3,960 trees, respectively. This
corresponds to 81,261 liters of olives, from which ca. 8,288 liters of oil might be
pressed out (Melena 1983, 105). Keeping in mind that this calculation is based
on only two tablets, we must assume that the actual amounts were far greater.
For comparison, in the 1950s, 13 million olive trees were growing on Crete
alone (Melena 1983, 106). It is also necessary to bear in mind that olive trees
only produce fruit every other year and there tends to be a regional pattern for
these fluctuating harvests. In other words, all of the olive trees in a certain area
will either produce fruit, or not. There will not be some that do and some that
do not. This may account for why numbers of trees and amounts of oil on
tablets are relatively small in some situations (Foxhall 1995, 242).
That the palace was at least concerned with some vineyards is made apparent
by Knossos tablet Gv 863, which may describe two different methods of raising
vines at a location very near to the palace, qa-ra in Linear B. The first line has the
word wo-na-si, a locative plural form of woinades “grapevines.” On the second
line, vines are called we-je-we, huiewes, meaning vines that are trained to climb
up trees (Palmer 1994, 59–60). Palmer suggests that the ideogram after these
words describes the age of the vine (Palmer 2002, 99). This one tablet implies
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 101

that palatial central authorities had some influence on decisions pertaining to

these two highly sophisticated methods for optimal vine growth. The notation
of the age of the vines is a surprising detail that also hints at the intensity with
which the palaces regulated vineyards, and presumably their produce. In
addition, the Knossos Gv tablets refer exclusively to vines and fig trees.
Specifically, tablet KN Gv 862 mentions 1,770, 405, 10, and 17 fig trees, then
20 and 225 vines. Tablet KN Gv 863 lists 420 vines and 104 fig trees; KN Gv
864 lists 69 vines, 53 fig trees, and another (illegible) number of vines (Platon
and Kopaka 1993, 93). The two species are in new combinations at Pylos
in tablet PY Er 880 where 1,100 vines (we-je) are followed by 1,100 fig trees
(su-za). These Knossos and Pylos tablets may indeed refer to the strategy of
growing grapevines up trees, and in this case, fig trees.
There has been a general consensus lately that, although the palaces did
control some choice pieces of land, which they doled out accordingly, they did
not own outright the vast stretches of land needed to produce the large
quantities of goods recorded in the tablets. The palaces may have relied upon
non-palatial landowners in the surrounding kingdoms (Palmer 2001, 60). For
example, a tablet from Pylos (Un 718) records wine delivered from four
separate donors. The wine is in varying amounts, but the total is VIN 6,
which translates to roughly 6,172.8 liters. Interestingly, wine is the only
commodity all four people provide, suggesting that all of their estates included
vineyards. In addition, the fifty record-keeping nodules recovered from the
Wine Magazine at Pylos included thirty-three individual seals, supporting the
hypothesis that the seals belonged to the wine producers, rather than to officials
collecting the wine (Palmer 1994, 163). That these landowners produced
multiple products is indicated on the reverse of a tablet from Mycenae (Ue
611) that records a delivery of commodities by a single person including two
kinds of olives, figs, and wine (Palmer 2002, 99). At Knossos, a tablet, F(2) 852,
might indicate collective olive groves. This tablet records “da-mo” olives
contributed to palatial stores, which might indicate these crops were produced
on damos land where damos means something like “village community.”
Whether this applies to all the tablets of this variety or if this tablet is distin-
guished from the others by listing it as from da-mo land is impossible to know
(Killen 1998). It is clear, however, that outside landowners were in no way
independent from the palaces. Wine producers in particular seem to have been
an object of concern for the palatial administration since there is a special title
for the individual in charge of collecting tithes, contributions, or taxes from
these independent vineyard owners: o-pi-ka-pe-e-we “overseer of vines” listed
on PY Jn 829.
To be able to requisition commodities like oil and wine, the central authorities
must have made themselves essential to small-scale subsistence cultivators. In the
Near East, this reliance between palace and farmer was accomplished by
102 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

controlling water sources. On average, the climate of Greece should not have been
arid enough to warrant this type of control. There is some indication, however,
that climate change occurring during the Mycenaean era would have produced
drier conditions at certain points in time.6 Evidence from a stalagmite at Mavri
Tripa cave off the coast of the southwest Peloponnese suggests that the period
around LH IIIA and the first half of LH IIIB was wetter but that an abrupt period
of drier conditions lasting two decades around 1250 BCE (LH IIIB) disrupted that
trend. The climate then ameliorated for a short period only to return to a clear
general trend toward more arid conditions after 1225 BCE that only intensified
around 1130 BCE (Weiberg and Finné 2018, 589). These data suggest that a
beneficial climate supported a phase of exploitation (LH II–LH IIIA) that then had
to shift toward conservation in LH IIIB. The variable climate during LH IIIB
might have made the function of the centralized authorities more important. This
is not to say, however, that olive trees and grapevines were necessarily directly
affected by this change toward aridity. Instead, other more water-hungry plant
species commonly found in Mycenaean-era palaeoenvironmental samples, such as
wheat, might have necessitated irrigation. It is possible, therefore, that the
Mycenaean palaces did indeed control some form of access to water resources,
or, more probably, the labor and investment resources needed to build water
management structures such as dams, wells, and irrigation canals, a trend also seen
in the Neopalatial era.
Alternatively, Foxhall (1995) proposes that the risk-buffering assistance these
central authorities provided was either bailing farmers out after crop failure, or
offering them access to inputs like capital or labor. While both may be correct,
more evidence is available to support the latter. Paul Halstead’s (1999, 2007)
work on wheat, flax, and cattle hypothesizes that the palace of Pylos, at least,
loaned expensive cattle to farmers during plowing season and personnel during
reaping season. In return, the palaces received a certain share of the finished
product. In the case of olives and vines, the central authorities may have been
able to mobilize the labor needed to harvest fruit, as well as control the
equipment and knowledge for production of the oil and wine.

Palatial Control Over Surplus Oil and Wine Collection

The types of records documented on Linear B tablets suggest that the
Mycenaean central authorities were concerned with controlling oil and wine
surplus collection. Compared to Minoan Linear A, Linear B tablets have many
more ideograms related to wine, vines, vineyards, olives, and oil. This fact
alone is significant since the Linear B tablets are notoriously selective about
what is and is not recorded. One of the most commonly recorded items is
olives, represented by the ideogram *122 OLIV, and recorded by dry measure-
ment (Table 3.1). Olive oil is a separate ideogram, *130 OLE, and is recorded
 table 3.1 Distribution by type of record of Linear B tablets recording olives

Distribution

Deficits Industrial (perfume Personal (direct/

Assessment (collection*) (inventory*) Religious (offering*) ingredient*) indirect distribution*) Total liters

MY Ue 652
Ue 611 v
864 864
liters
PY Un 138(a) (qe-te-a2) Ua 9 Un 2 − Fn series
5322+V* Ua 25 =696+V*
Un 138.5 An/Fn 7
=540V*
420.9 8,515.2 liters 979.2 liters 1,977.6 11,892.9
liters liters
KN F 157 E 842 Ap 5077
F 852 Uc 161 =60V*
F 841 =3264V*
F 845
F 851
F 844
F 853
F 854
F 5001
F 5043
F 7050
F 7345
E 669.1
E 669.2
E 670.1
=46,374V*

103
(continued)
104
table 3.1 (continued)

Distribution

Deficits Industrial (perfume Personal (direct/

Assessment (collection*) (inventory*) Religious (offering*) ingredient*) indirect distribution*) Total liters

74,198.4 liters 5,222.4 liters 96 79,516.8

liters
TH Ft 140 (land capacity) Ft 182 (unclear Ft series
=388 units purpose) =205+V*
=4560+V*
37,248 7,296 328 44,872
liters liters liters
From Palmer 1994, 101, 115, 121, table 5.2, 124, table 5.5; *=from Bendall 2007, 189–193 tables 5–9, 5–10, 5–11.
Dry: 1 unit=96 liters; T=9.6 liters; V=1.6 liters; Z=0.4 liters.
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 105

with liquid measurements (Table 3.2). Other items frequently associated with
olive oil are jars, presumably to store the quantities of oil listed. Wine is
represented by the ideogram *131 VIN along with a less frequent variant,
*131b (Table 3.3). The sign itself is incredibly consistent tablet-to-tablet

table 3.2 Distribution by type of record of Linear B tablets recording olive oil

Distribution

Assessment Deficits Religious Industrial Personal Total liters

MY − − − Fo 101 Fo 101
E-ro-pa-
ke-ta
A-ke-ti-ri-
jai (textile
workers)
86 liters 86

PY Fr 1201 − Fr tablets = − −
Fr 1203 297.75+ V* Un 267? Rations
Fr 1208 Fr 1184=
Fr 1214 324V*
=393+V*
628.8 476.4 518.4 liters 1,623.6
liters liters
KN F 851 a-pu-do-si: Fp(1) set Perfumery: o-no:
F 852 Fh 340 =241+V* Fh 371 Fh 347
=unk. quant. Fh 349 _______ Fh 5246 Fh 348
______ Fh 366 Fs tablets Fh 5446 Fh 361
Fh “descriptions +Fh 5503 =9.75V* Fh 5428 Fh 372
of oil”**: Fh 379 _______ Fp 5472 Fh 5431
zo-a/e-pi-ko- Fh 5451 Fh with =2103+V Fh 5447
wa= 1461+V* Fh 5459 toponym _______ =3,546+V*
po-ro-ko-wa +de Fh 5428 _______
=37+V* = 264+V* Fh 5435 Fh rations
to-qa/to-ro-qa = _______ (tanners) =237+V*
1081+ V* Fh offerings =223+ V*
ne-wo =380+V* =29+V* _______
_______ Fh 386
Fp offerings =7V
=58+V* (bronze-
smith)
5,374.4 14,432 liters 964.4 3,732.8 liters 6,052.8 liters 30,557.4
liters liters
Data from Tournavitou 1995, 275, table 6 with additions.
*
Pylos Fr series calculations from Bendall 2007, 96–97, table 3–2. Kn Fp(1) set from Bendall 2007, 107, table 3–4.
Kn Fs tablets from Bendall 2007, 110, table 3–5. Kn Fh o-no from Bendall 2007, 112–115, table 3–6.
**
Fh “descriptions of oil” tablets are of uncertain category, see Bendall 2007, 126–129. Liquid: 1 unit=28.8 liters;
S=9.6 liters; V= 1.6 liters; Z=0.4 liters.
106
table 3.3 Distribution by type of record of Linear B tablets recording wine

Distribution

Personal (direct/
Assessment Religious Industrial (perfume indirect
(collection*) Deficits (inventory*) (offering*) ingredient*) distribution*) Total liters

MY Ue 611 Ue 663 − − −
Ue 652
652.8 144.0 796.8
liters liters
PY Un 138 (qe-te-a2) Ua 17 Un 718 Un 267.7 Vn 20
Un 612 Un 2 Un 267.8 Gn 428
Un 47 Gn 720
Un 853 ____________
An 35.5–6 (o-no;
exchange)
374.4 1,515.2 902.4 633.6 12,729.6 16,155.2
liters liters liters liters liters
KN Gm 840 Uc 160.3 (LM II) Fs 2 − −
Gm 5788 Uc 160.4 (LM II) Fs 4
Gm 9878 Uc 161 Fs 11
(LM II) Fs 12
Fs 17
Fs 19
Fs 21
(continued)
 Fs 22
Fs 23
Fs 25
14,342.4 liters 1,781.6 liters 20.8 16,144.8
liters
TH Uo 121 Gp series
=535.25+V**
9.6+ 856.4 856.4

*= term used in Palmer 1994, 196, table 9.1; **= from Bendall 2007, 161–163, table 4–7.
Liquid: 1 unit=28.8 liters; S=9.6 liters; V= 1.6 liters; Z=0.4 liters.

107
108 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

(unlike other signs that can differ according to place or scribe), yet there seems
to be a contrast between the mainland and Cretan sign for VIN. In form, wine
ideograms found on Crete, including the Linear A signs, have hash marks going
diagonally from bottom left to top right. In contrast, those from the mainland
are drawn from top left to bottom right (Bennett 2002, 79). In addition to the
sign, the word wo-no (woinos, Mycenaean for “wine”) does not appear in the
Knossos archives but is known from Pylos, tablet PY Vn 20. The word wo-na-si
(woinasi “grapevines”), however, does occur on Knossos tablet KN Gv 863
(Palmer 2002, 96). Interestingly, a tablet where the ideogram and the word for
wine coexist has yet to be discovered (Palmer 1994, 28). Both wine and olive
oil were recorded in liquid units with reference to a large container (VIN) that
is probably the size of an amphora, not a pithos. The second size down from
VIN is “S,” which indicates a third of the large unit, VIN. The middle size,
“V,” is an eighteenth part of the liquid volume of a VIN and the smallest, “Z,”
is a seventy-second of the volume of a VIN (Bennett 2002, 80).
Mycenaean records, just like Minoan, were concerned with collecting oil
and wine. It is clear, however, that Mycenaean records dealt with much larger
volumes of commodities and collected on a much larger scale. For example, a
tablet from Knossos (Fh 366 [+] 5503) records about 10,000 liters of olive oil
collected from various villages (Godart 1968, 599). This increased interest in
volume, people, and places, as well as the integration of other activities into the
oil/wine sector, suggests that the central authorities had much more control
over what happened to surplus oil and wine than during the previous Minoan
era. While actual quantities of wine inscribed on Linear B tablets vary widely
between different palaces and archives, it is nevertheless clear that the palatial
administration was concerned with documenting precise quantities of oil and
wine as they gathered and dispersed to and from people and divinities
(Table 3.3).
In general, oil and wine seem to have been collected as part of taxation or
tribute payments to the palaces. As already mentioned, wine was brought in
from the countryside by orchard owners themselves or via collectors as a form
of taxation, assessment, or donation in the case of offerings to deities (e.g., PY
Un 718; see further on). The nodules from the Wine Magazine at Pylos suggest
not only that landowners brought in their own produce, but also that collectors
were involved (Figure 3.1). Seals repeated on multiple nodules, along with
inscriptions on the nodules themselves, suggest that a collector was also present
who may have received wine from at least two landholders and therefore acted
as intermediary to the palace.7 The tablet from Knossos mentioned previously,
Fh 366 [+] 5503, probably represents a totaling record for olive oil coming in as
a form of tax or contribution from the surrounding villages. The tablet records
the amount V 6107 which, according to the absolute volumes estimated by
Chadwick, is about 10,000 liters (Chadwick 1976, 107–108). The quantities of
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 109

(a)

(b)

(c)

3.1 Clay sealings from the Wine Magazine with variations of the wine ideogram. Blegen and
Rawson 1966, fig. 303 no. 26 (a), no. 28 (b), and no. 30 (c). Courtesy of The Department of
Classics University of Cincinnati
110 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

wine and oil collected from landowners varied, but were perhaps assessed as a
direct percentage of projected or actual yield of the trees, rather than appor-
tioned indirectly according to administrative districts. This strategy is possibly
illustrated on a tablet from Knossos, Gm 840, which records wine collected by
the a-pu-da-se-we in large, disproportional amounts from each source, rather
than equal amounts.8
Whatever the strategy, the sheer amounts of wine and oil collected by the
palaces are impressive. Inventory tablets found at palaces on the Mycenaean
mainland and Crete record both large and small amounts of oil and wine among
other commodities, generally known as mixed-commodity tablets. The major-
ity of tablets record fewer than 20 units (VIN) of wine, but two tablets record
abnormally huge amounts. Pylos tablet PY Vn 20 records 410 units (11,808
liters) assessed from nine towns in the Hither Province and Knossos tablet KN
Gm 840 records an even larger amount of 498 units (14,342.4 liters) or more
(Palmer 1994, 60). The most likely explanation, as put forth by Palmer (2002,
103), for these seemingly absurd numbers is that both these tablets probably list
amounts collected per district. Another possibility could be an accrual over
time, but most Linear B documents do not seem to serve this type of function,
as they deal with mainly one-time transactions within a single year or season.
The Mycenaean palaces were concerned with collecting surplus olive oil and
wine for a number of purposes. It has been suggested that the palaces practiced a
form of redistribution called “mobilization” where goods collected by the
palace were not usually redistributed to the villages, although we do have
some instances of this happening. Rather, goods were more often used by
palace personnel (Palmer 2001, 53). One of the most prominent purposes for
collected oil and wine was the production of perfumed oil. That at least some
Mycenaean palaces directly controlled the production of perfumed oil is
clear. Pylos is perhaps the most well-known example, although there is
archaeological and written evidence that Knossos and Mycenae were also
deeply invested. At Pylos there are records for both the raw olive oil and the
various ingredients to be added (AN 616 r, Un 249, Un 267, Un 592 kept in
Archive room 7–8 Shelmerdine 1985, 8). Tablets dealing with the collection
of raw materials for perfume manufacture include references to basic oil from
both palatial stores and from outside the palace. Additives include coriander,
cyperus, and henna, which might have been used to dye the oil (Shelmerdine
1985, 17–23, 151). Four perfumers are mentioned in the Pylos tablets and
seem to have been under direct control of the palatial administration, with
their kitchen located within the palace walls (Courts 42 and 47) and all of their
supplies and provisions deriving from the palace itself (Shelmerdine 1985, 59;
Murphy 2012, 251). That the perfumers received some of their raw oil from
within palatial stores and some from outside the palace suggests that the
administration was able to collect surplus oil when needed. In addition,
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 111

Pylos’s preoccupation with the perfumed oil industry evidently spilled over into
wine consumption as one tablet, PY Un 257, records both varieties of wine as
ingredients for perfumed oil (Palmer 2002, 99). It is also clear that the palatial
administration had near-complete control over the production of perfumed oil,
unlike during the Neopalatial era on Crete when we have no evidence for the
palaces directly controlling any aspect of oil or wine manufacture. Access to
perfumed oil would have acted as a means of reinforcing and creating the Pylian
(and perhaps broader Mycenaean) social hierarchy and exchange relationships
(Murphy 2012, 254). One way we can see this connection is by the presence of
small closed jars for perfumed oil in almost every tomb discovered on mainland
Greece, a topic which will be discussed later in the chapter.

Palatial Storage of Surplus Oil and Wine

Just as in the Minoan palatial era, the Mycenaean palaces have a significant
amount of space dedicated to storage of surplus commodities (Table 3.4). Oil
and wine seem to have featured prominently among the types of perishables
stored. At Pylos on the Greek mainland, the Wine Magazine contained
twenty-five large pithoi sunk into the floor (Figure 3.2). The cache of clay
nodules marked with the Linear B sign for wine were found inside the door-
way, suggesting that this room was used for incoming shipments of wine
(Palmer 1994, 146; Figure 3.1). The pithoi would have had a total capacity
of at least 4,682 liters of wine, but perhaps upward of 6,293.325 liters, not
including the ten holes where pithoi were once placed (Palmer 1994, 146 and

table 3.4 Minimum number of individual vessels and low-end estimate of volume held for contexts at
Mycenae and Pylos

Context Pithoi Transport stirrup jars Total volume (liters)

Mycenae: HOM 13 29 2,796–3,637

(2,431–3,272 liters) (ca. 365 liters)
Mycenae: HWM 8 50 2,171–2,683
(1,496–2,008 liters) (ca. 675 liters)
Wine Magazine at Pylos 25 4,682–8,803
(4,682–6,293 liters)
+ 10 missing pithoi
Pylos storerooms 23–34 28 5,236–7,028
(5,236–7,028 liters)
Pylos Rm 53 17 229
(ca. 229 liters)
TSJ volume calculations by average FS 164 capacity of 13.5 liters (Haskell 1984, 101, n. 28). Pithos volume
calculations based on Wine Magazine estimates.
112 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

(a)

(b)

3.2 The Wine Magazine (Rooms 104 and 105) at Pylos. Blegen and Rawson 1966, fig. 254 (a)
and fig. 256 (b). Courtesy of The Department of Classics University of Cincinnati
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 113

Appendix 7.2). The palace’s concern for producing perfumed oil necessitated
its storage. Room 23 has been identified both as a storage area for perfumed oil
and as a scribal center for recording its disbursement (Figure 3.3; Blegen and
Rawson 1966, 136; Shelmerdine 1985, 87–88). An adjacent room, Room 24,
also seems to have functioned as an oil storeroom with large pithoi in benches
around the wall and a sealing (Wr 1437) with the word AREPA inscribed on it
(Shelmerdine 1985, 88). Rooms 32 and 38 may have also been storerooms
associated with perfumed oil, as posited by the original excavators (Blegen and
Rawson 1966, 156–160, 170–173). Based on the number of rooms dedicated to
storage of wine, oil, and especially perfumed oil, the administration at Pylos, at
least, had significant control over these surplus commodities.
Outside of Pylos, storage areas of Mycenaean palaces dedicated to oil and
wine can be identified. At Mycenae, rooms filled with transport stirrup jars

3.3 Pylos Rooms 23 and 24 from northeast. After Blegen and Rawson 1966 fig. 102. Courtesy of
The Department of Classics University of Cincinnati
114 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

3.4 Cretan transport stirrup jar from Mycenae’s House of the Oil Merchant (no. 9099) with
multiple seal impressions on clay spout cap. Photo by author

were discovered in the Ivory Houses just outside the citadel (Table 3.4). Some
of the stirrup jars had their clay stoppers preserved with many seal impressions
on them (Figure 3.4). These various means of marking and recording wine and
oil containers provides insight into the highly regulated palatial mechanisms for
controlling and storing these two commodities. Although not much of the
palace at Thebes has been excavated, a storage jar has been found that was tested
for residue. The result was that olive oil had been inside; a welcome affirmation
that Pylos was not the only palace concerned with olive oil and its variants
(Evans and Garner 2008, 139).
Linear B records also provide evidence for central authorities storing surplus
commodities, including oil and wine, outside of the palace. Even the larger
estimated capacity of the Wine Magazine at Pylos would not have been large
enough for the totals of wine entered in the Linear B tablets (e.g., Vn 20: 11,808
liters). This discrepancy might allude to the existence of other storage areas.
Palmer (1994, 119) suggests that there was perhaps one stockpile in each district
for the agricultural products collected as tax or rent throughout the kingdom.
Officials such as the du-ni-jo and me-za-wo-ni in PY Un 138 and pa-ra-we-wo in
PY Vn 20 might have been responsible for both collecting and distributing
from these stores.

Production of Value: Qualities and Types of Mycenaean Wine and Oil

That Mycenaean administration was concerned with the type, quality, and taste
of oil and wine is indicated by variations in the ideograms, their ligatured signs,
and associated adjectives. There are three ideograms for wine: *131a, *131b,
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 115

and *131c. Palmer (1995) suggested that *131a is wine and *131b is vinegar
because it is associated with perfume manufacture. However, there is no
indication in any ancient source that perfume manufacture needed vinegar.
Stanley (1999, 107) suggests instead that *131a refers to a superior wine, while
*131b is an inferior wine that might have been produced from a second
pressing of the grapes with added water. The ideogram *131c is a rare variation,
detected in only three texts and two clay nodules. The nodules are from the
Wine Magazine at Pylos. One of them has on its reverse a seal impression with
the word “e-ti-wa-no.” Stanley (1999, 108) interprets this to mean “genuine”
(cf., Ventris and Chadwick 1973, éτανον) and so may be a designation of a
particularly extraordinary vintage that needed to be authenticated.
In addition to quality, Linear B tablets might also indicate flavor of wines.
One of the nodules records the word me-ri-ti-jo, which has been translated by
Chadwick as from melitios, a form of μελι (honey). Honeyed wines are not
uncommon in the ancient world (e.g., Plut. 2. 672b) and are in fact one of the
favorite epithets for wine in the Homeric poems (see Appendix; Il. 6.264; Od.
7.182. μελιηδης Il. 4.346; 6.258; 10. 579; 12. 320; Od. 3.46; 9.28; 14. 78; 16.52;
18.151, 426; 21.293). Confirmation that this adjective refers to added honey
and not just “sweet” comes from recent residue analyses, which often indicate
the presence of honey alongside wine signatures (McGovern 2003, 264).
Further confirmation is offered by the fact that “sweet” does occur as a separate
adjective modifying wine in the Linear B tablets. Knossos tablet Uc 160 has the
addition of de-re-u-ko, which has been connected with γλευκος, or “sweet.”
This adjective is later associated with the “free-run” juice of grapes before they
have been crushed (Hesychius s.v. γλευκος). This juice, still produced today, is
the sweetest and is made by the pressure of the weight of the grapes themselves
or by gently pressing the grapes. Alternatively, sweet wine can be made by
drying the grapes in the sun for a few days before pressing, thereby concentrat-
ing the juices within (cf., Hesiod’s Works and Days).
Yet, the quality and perhaps taste of wine are not the only designations
preserved in the Linear B records. In addition to variations in ideogram shape
and accompanying adjectives, the ideograms are often modified by the addition
of one to four diagonal bars in the lower portion of the ideogram. These bars
differ not only in number, but also in direction. They can be slanted left to
right, right to left, or meeting in the center in a herringbone pattern. Stanley
(1999, 109–111) makes a convincing argument for these diagonal lines repre-
senting the age of the wine. In this scenario, the absence of any diagonals would
indicate new wine and the addition of diagonals would correspond to the
number of years the wine has been stored. The herringbone pattern was
perhaps an indication of the oldest and finest wines as it is only associated
with *131c. Of course, there is no way to prove that these diagonal bars
correspond with a single year, or even age. Indeed, other scholars have
116 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

attributed the differences in the number of bars to scribal inconsistencies

(Bennet 1996). Yet, it is nevertheless temping to accept Stanley’s proposition
since ancient wines were unlikely to survive past three or four years old without
turning to vinegar. Moreover, in later literary works it is clear that the age of
wine did indeed contribute to its value. In the Homeric poems, for example,
there are several indications that aged wine was considered a prestige item (e.g.,
Od. 2.337–342, 3.388–392).
The ideograms for olives and olive oil are both modified by a number of
syllabograms in ligature or accompanying adjectives. The syllabograms most
commonly in ligature with the OLIV ideogram are TI and A, possibly repre-
senting different types of oil. Melena (1983), responding to J. Chadwick’s
(1976, 121) initial suggestion, argued that A (short for agrios or “wild”) repre-
sented oil from wild olives, while TI signified oil from cultivated trees (tithasos
or “domesticated”). He suggested that the large amounts of wild olives in the
Linear B tablets (proportion of seven wild to two domesticated; Hadjisavvas
2003, 117) were specifically for producing perfumed oils. This seems to be
supported by the ancient author Dioscorides (I.30) who says that oil from wild
olives is more suitable for being squeezed out because wild olives have a low
grease index (Melena 1983, 102). However, this argument is only speculative
and based solely on one (much later) ancient author. Lin Foxhall (2007) draws
attention to ethnographic examples that show the unsuitability of wild olives
for producing large quantities of high-quality olive oil. In particular, the ratio of
olives to oil is about 20:1 for wild olives and 5–6:1 for domesticated olives
(Foxhall 1995, 242 n. 12). She therefore proposes that A and TI represent two
qualities of oil (Foxhall 1995, 242). In addition, activities related to perfumed
oil were frequently recorded. In the Linear B tablets perfumed oil had two
forms: a more liquid one (OLE which signifies oil) and a thicker unguent type
(AREPA; Shelmerdine 1985, 31).
A real concern for added value is perhaps visible here in the Linear B records.
If these interpretations of the variations in the wine and oil ideogram are
correct, it becomes clear that Mycenaean Greeks were very attuned to the
qualities of wine and oil. This, in turn, suggests that each quality would have
been connected with a certain hierarchical value. Just as we today rank wines
and oils based on many factors, so too did the Mycenaean Greeks. At the same
time, having access to the best wines and oils would have been a mark of
prestige. Exchanging those commodities in the context of feasts, rituals, or
trade would have gained the owner significant social and real capital.

COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: STATE-SPONSORED FEASTING

Olive oil and wine remained integral components of commensal exchanges

after the collapse of the Minoan palaces. Yet, how their value was constructed
 COMMEN SAL E XCHA N GE: STATE- S PO NS O R ED FEAS TI NG 117

within these exchange contexts changed as these two commodities were used
and controlled in different ways. Archaeological remains of commensal events
on the Greek mainland and Crete suggest, overall, that during the Mycenaean
era (LM/LH II–III periods), feasting activities were concentrated at a few major
centers and can be characterized by exclusion and control.9 On Crete, the
change in social organization of commensality is particularly striking as the
previous Minoan inclusive feasting events were generally replaced by elite
gatherings restricted both spatially and socially. The scale of commensal
exchanges also changed. On the mainland, feasts increased exponentially in
scale compared to the previous Middle Helladic era. On Crete, however,
the scale of events seems to have generally decreased compared to the
Minoan Neopalatial era. In addition, during these events, specific ritualistic
practices of wine drinking involving elaborate pouring and toasting hinged
on the use of new, stemmed cups and the introduction of large containers for
mixing. Ultimately, through lavish demonstrations of generosity and piety,
state-organized feasting emphasized the role of the state in underpinning and
legitimizing social and political structures (Bendall 2001, 445). This dominant
role of the state in large-scale, yet divisive, commensal events helped shape
the way in which value was attributed to oil and wine, as well as the strength
and complexity of dependencies surrounding the exchange of these two
commodities in this particular context.

Change in Context and Scale at Palatial Commensal Events

At the heart of commensal events in the Mycenaean palatial era were the
palaces.10 The palaces not only became the most prominent location for most
of the large-scale events, but they also seem to have influenced, if not con-
trolled, events located elsewhere, such as at sanctuaries and cemeteries. Hence,
banquets and feasts in the Mycenaean palatial era were primarily regulated,
sponsored, and organized by the central authorities. The origins of convivial
practices on the mainland appear to have been rooted in the private sphere of
elite social values of the Middle Helladic period, which emphasized generosity
and hospitality in the framework of direct, reciprocal transactions. These
transactions never involved large groups, as suggested by occurrences of pairs
of identical serving vessels in both settlements and wealthy tombs (Wright
2004, 141–143, tables 1–5; Borgna 2004, 263). Middle Helladic, pre-
Mycenaean banquets served mainly as an assertion of vertical differentiation
and as a materialization of the ideology of a limited segment of society. Only in
the Late Helladic period did different settings for the banquets – both funerary
and domestic – emerge. Although the nature of the feasts was generally
homogenous and derived ultimately from the sponsoring activity of palatial
authorities, the performances themselves could have had different purposes,
118 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

such as facilitating communal participation on religious occasions (Borgna

2004, 262).
At the same time that the context of feasting changed, participation seems to
have expanded from restricted elites to include much of the population. Yet,
the “symposiastic” structure – the intimate elite aspect – of the feast continued
to be central to its practice, as demonstrated by the diacritical nature of the
archaeological evidence. That is, elaborate drinking sets found in important
rooms are often juxtaposed by hundreds of plain cups in exterior (or external)
spaces. At Pylos, the analysis of thousands of drinking cups found in different
groups led to the conclusion that the palace was a site for both elite drinking
parties and large festival gatherings (Figure 3.5; Whitelaw 2001). There, feasts
varied in size and function. Smaller ones were private, but public ones were
large enough to feed several thousand people (Stocker and Davis 2004, 72).
Nakassis (2010) in an estimation of food and participants from the Linear B
tablets concludes that the largest feasts could feed 10,000–15,000 people,
which, according to the population estimates by Whitelaw (2001), would
have constituted approximately one-third of the population of Messenia.
This suggests that feasts were tiered; different groups in the social hierarchy
would feast at the same time but in different parts of the palace (Bendall 2004;
Stocker and Davis 2004, 71). Bendall (2004) places the most elite participants in
Hall 6 (the Megaron); the second tier in Hall 65; more general groups in Courts
63 and 88; and the lowest tier in Court 58 in front of the palace. Fox (2008)

3.5 Pylos feasting equipment, including kylix cups and kraters for mixing wine. Photo by author
 COMMEN SAL E XCHA N GE: STATE- S PO NS O R ED FEAS TI NG 119

concurs that Halls 6 and 65 are more private while courtyard locations are more
public.
On Crete, the restriction in feasting locations reflects the political geography
of the island. In general, political power became more centralized with a
simultaneous decrease in intra-regional competition. The evidence on Crete
suggests that in areas where Mycenaean ideology was strongly present feasts
decreased in scale from the previous Neopalatial era with drinking cups no
longer found in huge numbers (Borgna 2004, 264; Kallitsaki 1997).11 Instead,
what we see is interplay between different modes of feasting. There seems to
have been a tension between the observance of mainland patterns, which often
emphasized exclusion and restriction, and the more inclusive corporate mode
inherited from the Neopalatial past. Banqueting was more widely practiced and
less strictly controlled than on the mainland, and “definitely independent of a
diacritical pattern of exclusivity” (Borgna 2004, 268). Evidence for this dual
nature of commensal events on Mycenaean Crete comes from the tableware
used during these occasions. From LM II onward, the pottery used in com-
mensal exchanges and convivial ceremonies is finely executed and generally
decorated (Borgna 2004, 266). Differentiated sets of vessels may indicate similar
multidimensional aspects of banqueting. For example, at LM III Phaistos, open
communal or regional participation on the Acropoli Mediana is indicated by
the high quantity of mixing bowls. At the same time, a more restricted, elite
commensal event used for maintaining elite connections and authority seems to
have taken place in the Casa a ovest (Borgna 2004, 254).
Huge amounts of surplus oil and wine would have been needed for com-
mensal events of this size. The Pylos disbursement tablets might give some
indication of the scale of surplus collection and distribution. Tablet PY Vn 20 is
one of only three existing tablets from the mainland that deals solely with wine.
It records a disbursement of wine to the nine towns in the Hither Province. On
it, the largest amount is sent to pe-to-no (2,880 liters) and the smallest to ri-jo (576
liters). The amounts of wine listed produce a total of 410 units or 11,808 liters of
wine. These tablets may suggest that the palace supplied wine for consumption
during festival or ritual celebrations.
Perfumed oil and unguents also played a prominent role in feasts. The
quantities of perfume for consumption at commensal events as recorded in
Linear B tablets (Un 6, Un 718, Un 853, Un 1177), while insufficient for
distribution to all the estimated participants, were nevertheless prodigious
(approximately 24 liters; Murphy 2012, 257). In addition, Bendall (2001, 260)
argues that at least 86 percent of the Linear B Fr disbursement tablets refer to
perfumed oils in religious contexts and several of these are feasting activities.
Bendall (2002, 260) also notes that unguents are only recorded in relation to
feasts on the Pylos tablets. However, it is not entirely clear exactly how
perfumed oil was used at feasts. Fappas (2008, 369–373) suggests that the
120 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

Mycenaean use of perfumed oil may have been similar to Near Eastern or
Egyptian practices. In the Near East, perfumed oil was used to anoint kings,
priests, and priestesses after a feast, and Egyptian records imply that everyone at
a feast had oil on their heads. Another purpose for the perfumed oil at feasts
could have been, essentially, party favors. Although the gifts given to people
visiting the palace are not listed on the Linear B tablets, it is plausible to envision
that perfume was given out at feasts, based on the reference to special oil “for
the guests” (ke-se-ni-wi-jo; Fr 1231; Bendall 2007, 101; Shelmerdine 1985, 79–
80; 2007, 44).

Change in Commensal Equipment

The most prominent drinking cups of the Mycenaean era became the kylix and
champagne cup, both of which have a stemmed, open design (Figure 3.5). On
Crete, the plain conical cup was still present, but fewer in number. Kylikes in
particular seem to have been specifically associated with the Mycenaean
palaces. This change in cup is accompanied by a change in large serving vessels.
While pouring vessels like jugs are still common, a new type of container, the
krater, was introduced. Kraters, and perhaps also large deep bowls, were used
for mixing wine with water and other ingredients. The drink would then be
ladled from the krater into the kylikes creating a “punch bowl” effect.
These changes in tableware have a few broader implications. The first is that
there must have been a change in the economics of pottery demand and
production. Instead of mass production of plain conical cups, we see fewer,
more time-consuming but elaborate vessels. The second implication of the
new drinking equipment is that the change in shape came with the “embodi-
ment of a drastic change in table manners, drinking etiquette and social
organization of commensality” (Hamilakis and Sherratt 2012, 193).
Specifically, performativity in serving and drinking attained new potency, as
kylikes and champagne cups are meant to be raised and shown, rather than
hidden in the palm of the hand (Figure 3.6). These shapes also reveal a decline
in the illusion of social homogeneity and corporatism embodied by the conical
cup. The stylistic elaboration and regulation of Mycenaean kylikes and drink-
ing vessels, in contrast to the Minoan focus on preparation and manipulation
activities (shown by elaborate pouring vessels), suggest that consumption was
subject to ritual codes and constituted an important social arena for the
negotiation of power and status (Borgna 2004, 266). As we will see in
Chapter 4, kylikes were irrevocably entangled with the palatial authorities to
the point that when the palaces collapsed, kylikes quickly disappeared.
The new emphasis on certain performative actions while serving and drink-
ing wine during commensal exchanges is also supported by iconographic
representations. During the Late Bronze Age, pictorial decoration on drinking
 COMMEN SAL E XCHA N GE: STATE- S PO NS O R ED FEAS TI NG 121

3.6 Drinking scene on a pictorial krater found at Tiryns. After Kilian 1980. Image by author

equipment, such as large kraters for mixing wine and water, can provide clues
to the social context of, in this case, wine use (Figure 3.6). A number of these
vessels have been found painted with a feasting scene where seated people,
often in pairs, raise up what looks to be a stemmed kylix drinking cup. On some
scenes, one seated person stands out and may represent royalty or a deity
(Figure 3.7). These “toasting” scenes are paralleled by contemporary wall
paintings from Pylos and Knossos (Wright 2004, 2009). The fresco known as
the Campstool Fresco at Knossos suggests that large feasts were not restricted to
the palace of Pylos, but were a culturally widespread phenomenon. The act of
“toasting” was part of an elite ideology shared by other common representa-
tions on ceramics such as chariots and supernatural creatures (e.g., sphinxes).
Surprisingly, kraters are not often found in settlement, ritual, or mortuary
contexts on mainland Greece at this point in time (this trend changes after
the palatial collapse). Rather, they appear to have been made especially for the
export market. The fact that Mycenaean pictorial kraters were commonly
exported from the Greek mainland (especially the Argolid) to Cyprus and the
Near East may suggest that the Aegean was particularly well known for its wine
consumption (Steel 2004; Papadopoulos 2011).

Commensal Exchange at Non-Palatial Sites: Suburban, Ritual, and Funerary

There is some archaeological and textual evidence that feasting also took place
at several non-palatial sites including provincial settlements, ritual locations,
and cemeteries. However, the types of equipment used during these feasting
events, including a large number of kylikes, suggest that most commensal
122 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

3.7 Gold signet ring from the Tiryns “hoard.” National Archaeological Museum, Athens, no.
6208. Photo by author

events were in some way influenced by the palaces and that emulation was
intended (Fox 2012, 48). That the palaces might have been directly involved in
provincial feasts is indicated by a tablet from Pylos, Vn 20, where nine towns of
the Hither Province were given large quantities of wine, presumably for
regional feasts (Palmer 1994, 76–78; Bendall 2004, 109–110; Hruby 2006,
119–120). This perhaps suggests simultaneous feasting across the polity, and
employing the palaces’ generosity in provisioning wine to its subjects for
sociopolitical aims (Hruby 2006, 121).
Religious feasts hosted at sanctuaries seem to have been highly regulated by
palatial administration. Detailed records of goods going to sanctuaries indi-
cate a close relationship between the palace and the religious realm. Indeed,
events in sacred locations were recorded in the same way as palatial events.
The majority of the items allotted to sanctuaries came from palace stores or
were administered directly by the palace. Wine and oil were two of the most
frequently listed commodities given to sanctuaries. The large quantities of
both liquids suggest that most allotments were designated for ritual feasting
events. A tablet from Pylos, Un 2, dedicates almost 600 liters of wine to the
sanctuary at Pakijana, located near Pylos, on the occasion of the initiation of
the head of the Mycenaean state, the Wanax. Supplies for feasts in honor of
deities were often recorded in palatial archives. PY Un 718 records supplies
collected for a feast in honor of Poseidon and PY Fr 343 and 1217 records a
festival in honor of the same god at Pakijana, the re-ke-e-to-ro-te-ri-jo festival
(Hruby 2006, 113). Another religious festival recorded in the Pylos records is
directly connected to wine. The “festival of the new wine” (me-tu-wo ne-wo,
Fr 1202) was probably a seasonal occasion. In addition, wine is often included
on the Knossos Fs series tablets, which list supplies for feasting connected to
sanctuaries and deities.
 COMMEN SAL E XCHA N GE: STATE- S PO NS O R ED FEAS TI NG 123

The above textual evidence is supported by archaeological remains of

commensal events found in palatial and non-palatial cultic areas. It is not
surprising that feasting took place in ritual locations attached to the citadels.
At Mycenae, there are remains of commensal events in the Cult Center that
include animal bones, shellfish, and the predominance of consumption vessels,
with large quantities of kylikes. Residue analysis conducted on vessels from the
Cult Center indicates that several amphoras, stirrup jars, and a kylix found in
the Room with the Fresco had remains of wine (Tzedakis and Martlew 1999,
189–190, 196–198). Similarly, the Shrine Area at Midea had a food preparation
room (II) that contained many deep bowls, culinary equipment, food remains,
and cooking jars with organic residue (Walberg and Reese 2008). Non-palatial
sanctuaries also seem to have hosted commensal events. At Ayios Konstantinos
on Methana, burnt bones and cooking equipment were found mixed with
consumption debris. Likewise, the sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas at Epidauros
included a terrace around an altar used for feasting. Remains include ashes,
animal bones, and drinking vessels (Lambrinoudakis 1981, 59–65). Similar
deposits have been discovered at Haghia Triada in the Argolid and Profitis
Ilias cave near Tiryns. In all of these locations, drinking vessels, and especially
kylikes, played a prominent role in the ritual festal activities. Feasts at sanctu-
aries were occasions of palatial administrative effort and resource expenditure.
Indirect influence on the part of palatial authorities is perhaps seen in the
context of commensal exchange in funerary contexts. As in all Mycenaean
feasting contexts, wine and oil played a prominent role. Here, however, we
must rely solely on archaeological evidence since there are no obvious records
of supplies for funerary feasts in the Linear B archives. This section is confined
to contexts indicating larger-scale commensal events. The smaller-scale use of
oil and wine in libations and grave offerings will be addressed in the next
section on non-commensal gift exchange.
Feasting debris found in cemeteries shows that rituals occurred directly in the
tomb chamber or in the dromos (entrance way) leading up to the stomion
(opening). Alternatively, the feast could be held near the tomb area with the
debris swept down to be covered in the filling of the dromos. The commensal
events taking place at gravesites were probably family affairs, marked by
homogeneity in drinking equipment. Drinking of beverages (presumably
wine) at funerary feasts is widely attested from at least the Early Mycenaean
period. Drinking rituals played their most significant role during the palatial
period, with appearance of numerous kylikes in and around tombs. Parallel to
feasting remains in palatial and ritual contexts, the rise of kylikes deposited in
cemeteries coincides with the rise of the palaces. Cemeteries allow a certain
amount of diachronic investigation, whereas palaces tend to show us a static
picture of the very last moments of their habitation. In burial contexts, kylikes
were not deposited in tombs before LH IIIA; they became more common
124 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

around LH IIIA2–B1 and were abundant in LH III B2 (Cavanagh 1998, 111;

Gallou 2003, 88–89; Dakouri-Hild 2003, 150–153). That palaces had some
connection to funerary feasts might be indicated by some specialized ceramic
equipment found in palatial storerooms. At Pylos, a few rare types of vessels
(incense burners and miniature kylikes) have been found in the palatial pantries
that are out of place: they are almost always associated with cemeteries (Lis
2008, 24). The discovery of funerary equipment in a palatial context, along
with the predominance of kylikes, suggests the practices of the palatial autho-
rities had a significant impact on funeral feasts.

OIL AND WINE IN GIFT EXCHANGE

As in the Minoan Palatial era, oil and wine figured prominently in Mycenaean-
era gift exchanges. Although non-commensal gift exchange is more difficult to
discern in the archaeological record, we can nevertheless see some form of it
when approaching offerings to deities and to the dead. Within these exchanges,
the person giving the object to the god or deceased is interacting with them on
a personal level. At the same time, it cannot be denied that the giver ultimately
wishes for something in return, whether that is general goodwill or something
more concrete. Hence, we can view cult offerings and grave goods as gifts
embedded in an exchange process. For the Mycenaean palatial era, oil and
wine were intimately tied to these reciprocal acts between humans and nonhu-
man (or no longer human) entities. Olive oil and wine became necessary
components in libation practices, offerings, and other ritualized actions, such as
“toasting,” that are archaeologically visible through the equipment used and left
behind in sanctuary and cemetery settings. The patterns in use of oil and wine
within these exchange contexts reflect meaningful changes and continuities in
sociocultural practices, values, and connections with things.

Gifts to the Gods

Wine and oil were frequently given to the gods in two ways: libations and
offerings. However, the same practical and interpretive issues concerning these
acts in the Minoan palatial era apply to the Mycenaean era as well. It is only
through analogy with later historical eras that we can reconstruct any relatively
convincing interpretation of archaeological remains representing libations or
gifts to the gods. Archaeological remains from a few ritual sites might present
evidence for the practice of libation. The primary liquid used in libations is
assumed to be wine due to the frequent presence of drinking cups around
possible libations areas (Hägg 1990, 183). The prevalence of kylikes in ritual
contexts has led Hägg (1990, 183) to say that “the kylix may in fact have been the
most common Mycenaean libation vessel, thus used in both divine cults and funerary
 OIL AND WINE IN GIFT EXCHANGE 125

ritual” (emphasis original). There are some indications, however, that other
liquids such as milk, honey, or blood were also used. One of the most recent
archaeological discoveries of a possible installation for libations in a ritual setting
comes from the sanctuary at Ayios Konstantinos on eastern Methana, dated to
the LH IIIA-B period. In Room A primary cultic installations were found
including votive terracottas on the steps of a bench, as well as eight kylikes and a
large triton shell with the tip cut off for libations. The shell may have been used
for ritual pouring and drinking of liquids, a type of Mycenaean libation
proposed by Hägg (1988, 105). The practice of libation was also indicated by
two diminutive vessels, a conical rhyton and plain dipper. Nearby, the upper
segment of a large coarse-ware jar was found resting on the floor upside down
and might have been a receptacle for liquid offerings. With it were cups, a
dipper, and an animal-head rhyton. It is often assumed that rhyta in the shape of
animals were used for blood libations, but this is not certain (Konsolaki-
Yannopoulou 2001, 215). Similar upside-down jar installations have been
found in the house-shrines at Asine (Hägg 1981, 91–94) and Berbati (Persson
and Akerström 1937–1938, 59–63). At Asine, a jug with the bottom cut off was
placed upside down next to an altar. At Berbati, a fine krater was placed in the
corner of a room half sunk into the earth with an intentionally made hole
through the bottom.
One of the most famous installations for libation rituals was found in the
megaron at the Palace of Nestor at Pylos. There, next to the throne, were two
basins cut into the plaster floor connected to each other by a channel. Around
these cuttings on the floor were scattered miniature kylikes (Blegen and
Rawson 1966, 85–88). In the megaron at Pylos, the presence of miniature
kylikes, the frescos of toasting on the walls, and the overall assemblages of
feasting debris might suggest that wine was intended to be poured into that
receptacle as the wanax exchanged with the gods before he drank from his own
kylix. At Mycenae, the designated Cult Center has a few installations that seem
appropriate for receiving libations. In the Tsountas House Shrine, a round
depression in an altar might have been used as a receptacle for liquid libations.
In parallel to the non-palatial shrines mentioned earlier, this same room had a
shallow runnel in the stucco floor leading from the altar to a two-handled jar
sunk into the floor (Hägg 1990, 178). Necks of amphoras were also fixed in
position in rooms T5 and T7, suggesting that they too were receptacles for
libations (Hägg 1990, 180). The ceramic shapes used, large jars or amphoras,
might also hint toward a specifically wine-based liquid. The presence of much
wine in these cultic areas is supported by residue analysis conducted on a few
vessels from the Cult Center, including the Room with the Fresco. Some
vessels were determined to have held wine, while a cooking jar seems to have
held a form of retsina: wine with added pine resin (still a popular drink in
Greece today; Martlew 2004, 135).
126 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

Evidence for wine and oil as offerings directly to the gods is more plentiful as
it draws on both archaeological and written sources. It is clear from the
discussion of ritual feasting above that much of the Mycenaean palaces’
resources were dedicated to activities of a religious nature. In her work on
these ritual resources, Bendall (2001, 446) highlights the fact that of the palatial
goods recorded on the tablets, 17 percent from Pylos and 5 percent from
Knossos include references to the religious sphere. Within these religious
resources, the tablets provide evidence for several large-scale gifts in the form
of taxation (part of the whole production, do-so-mo; e.g., to Poseidon PY Es
tablets), as well as “donations” in small quantities of several commodities or
finished products to the gods (e.g., Pylos Fp 1+31; Kyriakidis 2001, 128). At
Pylos and Knossos, olive oil was the most common commodity recorded as
offerings. It appears primarily in the Pylos Fr series and Knossos Fh, Fp and F
series. The majority of Fr tablets record disbursements to deities, shrines, and
persons, but a few are associated with inventories and movements of goods
within the industry. For the non-industrial disbursements within the Fr group
at Pylos, 71 percent of the oil recorded was clearly designated for religious
offerings. However, it is also clear that much more oil was available to the
palace than is attested in the offering tablets. In all, amounts certainly or
probably recorded as offerings to deities represent 26 percent of overall
amounts attested (Bendall 2001, 447–448). At Knossos, too, there is a bias
toward recording religious offerings. Forty-one percent of the oil recorded
on Knossos disbursement tablets is allocated for religion. But, when looking at
the total amounts of oil coming into the palace, it seems that these offerings
really only make up about 10 percent (Bendall 2001, 449). The quantities of oil
given to these deities vary considerably. The largest disbursement for an
offering at Knossos is ca. 70 liters, five entries record more than 30 liters,
fourteen entries are in the 10–30-liter range, thirty-three entries in the 3–10-
liter range, and twenty-eight entries are less than 2 liters. A similar situation is
present at Pylos.
Often the individual deities are named as the receivers of these gifts of oil.
One of the most prominent deities in the tablets is the goddess Potnia. The
adjective “Potnian” (PY Un 249) was used to describe a perfumer, as well as the
perfume intended for the goddess (Lupack 2007, 56; Shelmerdine 1985, 20).
Potnia also received perfumed oil “for (the pieces) of wehanos cloth, as oint-
ment” (we-a2-no-I a-ro-pa; PY Fr 1225; Nosch and Perna 2001, 475, 477). A
variation of this goddess, the Potnia *Aswiya (a-si-wi-ya), perhaps a foreign
deity, was “owed” (to-so qe-te-jo) a very large amount, 94 QT units, of per-
fumed oil (Morris 2001, 424). Bendall (2014) argues that this large amount on
tablet Fr 1206 was given to Potnia Aswiya as a one-time (or once a year?) gift
and shipped to her sanctuary in Anatolia. A different goddess, the “Divine
Mother” (ma-te-re te-i-ja) was given a large quantity (100 QT) of specifically
 OIL AND WINE IN GIFT EXCHANGE 127

sage-scented oil. Unlike the gift to Potnia Aswiya, this does not seem to be an
annual gift since a single month or festival (me-tu-wo ne-wo; the “New Wine”) is
specified (Morris 2001, 424). Male gods also frequently received scented oils.
The exact identification of the Di-pi-si-jo(i) or Dipsioi is unclear, but they are
associated with oil on five tablets. They have been interpreted as the Thirsty
Ones, which might indicate the collective dead (Guthrie 1959, 45). However,
this word has also been interpreted as a place name (Shelmerdine1985, 73, 127–
128) or a reference to the Minoan Genii, a type of divinity known from Crete
(S. Morris 1992, 209). The god known as the “Thrice-hero” is also offered oil
(PY Fr 1204). Perfumed oil was certainly a necessary commodity for the gods,
not only as offerings, but perhaps also for the proper worship of the gods.
At least three Pylos Fr tablets, which list offerings of perfumed oil, have as a
date the name of religious festivals: pa-ki-ja-ni-jo (Fr 1224), to-no-e-de-te-ri-jo
(Fr 1222), and re-de-to-ro-te-ri-jo (Fr 1217; Bennett 1985, 30; Murray 1979, 300;
Palmer 1994, 112).
Wine was probably the second-most common commodity listed as offerings
to the gods. One of the most interesting discoveries comes from the palace at
Thebes where over fifty tablets record wine as the sole commodity offered to
gods and religious personnel. This situation recalls the Minoan propensity to
treat wine as a specialized commodity during the Neopalatial era. At Thebes,
the format of these wine entries resembles the Knossos olive oil offering tablets.
According to Palmer (2002, 99), “this implies that wine at Knossos and Pylos
was a valued offering to the gods and may have had its own offering series as
olive oil did; its presence only on tablets listing a variety of food items is due to
the accident of preservation.” That large quantities of wine were directly given
to deities is demonstrated by a few important tablets. Poseidon received more
than 170 liters of wine directly and 600 liters of wine were given to the
sanctuary at Pakijana (Py Un 718). Gods often received precious drinking
vessels with which they could receive their wine offerings. On a tablet from
Pylos (Tn 316), thirteen gold vessels, including three kylikes and two chalices,
are to be distributed to several gods (Palaima 2004, 220–221). The gods’ thirst
(for wine?) is reinforced by a scene on a ring from Tiryns, where hippo-shaped
daemons carry elongated pitchers to a seated goddess holding up a kylix cup
(Whittaker 2008, 91 n. 20).
Some of these texts could be describing provisions for daily meals for the
gods, a practice often attested in Mesopotamia, Sumeria, Babylonia, and among
the Hittites. In the Knossos Fs series, wine and oil, along with four other
commodities, were delivered in small fixed amounts to sanctuaries or deities
(e.g., pa-de Fs 8) in Crete (Murray 1979, 140–141, 268). These gifts are most
plausibly interpreted as token offerings, because the amounts are too small to
feed a large number of people. One hypothesis is that these small gifts were
meant to work in connection with kernoi, round ritual stones with small,
128 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

circular depressions around the outside (de Fidio 1977, 109). Interestingly, on
these eighteen tablets, amounts are calculated proportionally according to a
formula: wine and oil appear in consistent proportion to figs, wheat and honey.
It is therefore conceivable to glimpse the value of wine and oil in relation to
other food items (Palmer 1994). Consistently, there is: twice as much wine as
oil; half the amount of honey to oil; wine and wheat in the same amount; three
times as many figs as wine. It is therefore possible that oil was twice as expensive
as wine, and honey was twice as expensive as oil. Wine was three times more
valuable than figs and had the same value as wheat. Of course, this is speculative
and these proportions could just as plausibly be connected to the amounts
necessary for specific rituals.
The Linear B tablets also provide a tantalizing glimpse of individual people
giving gifts of oil and wine directly to gods. On a tablet from Pylos, Un 718,
*Egkhes-aluon (presumably the wanax) gives a variety of goods, including wine
and a bull to Poseidon. On the same tablet, three other individual people give
varying amounts of wine to Poseidon, presumably from their own estates. In this
case, the goods are clearly not provided by the palace itself. Rather, the palace is
acting as an overseeing body for the exchange, perhaps even physically collecting
and delivering the goods to the god (Palmer 1994, 103).
Archaeological evidence for offerings given to gods is less forthcoming.
There are, however, a few indications of this practice in the equipment
found within sanctuaries. Small tripod offering tables are commonly found in
Mycenaean shrines including: the Temple in the Cult Center at Mycenae
(Room 18; Moore and Taylour 1999, 84–85), Room A at Methana
(Konsolaki-Yannopoulou 2004, 64), the Shrine Area at Midea (Walberg
2007, 62), and the West Shrine at Phylakopi (Renfrew 1985, 340).
Significantly, at Mycenae, an offering table was set in front of a ritual terracotta
figure, similar to one found at Pylos. In this case, it is almost as if the god is
present and physically receiving the offering. In this context, perhaps kylikes
found there were for presentation of wine to the gods (Whittaker 2008, 91–92).
This case is a good example of the blurred lines between libation and offering as
gift exchange and commensal exchange. Archaeological evidence is especially
vague when it comes to distinguishing between these types of exchanges using
oil and wine. Combined with written evidence, however, variations in the
type of exchange occurring between people and the divine is easier to see. In all
situations, oil and wine seem to have been integral to the proper functioning of
the act itself.

Gifts to the Dead

The predominance of drinking vessels including cups, jugs, kantharoi, and
goblets, in mortuary contexts from as early as the Middle Bronze Age attests to
 OIL AND WINE IN GIFT EXCHANGE 129

the importance of drinking as a symbol of status in the afterlife (Wright 2004,

18). That the deceased required liquids and drink offerings can be seen through
remnants of libations given to the them and gifts to the dead placed within
graves. In contrast to the Minoan palatial era, archaeological evidence for
libations and offerings is relatively plentiful during the Mycenaean palatial era
and can be used to reconstruct predominant practices and how those practices
changed over time and region.12 The types of vessels and, in some cases, the
residues from within, suggest that olive oil and wine were the most common
liquids used for both libations and grave offerings. The value of oil and wine in
these contexts therefore remained high as they became necessary components
of any ritualized gift exchange with the dead.
Although libations are an “evanescent custom,” libations connected with
mortuary ritual can be inferred both inside tombs and, most prominently,
outside the entrance to tombs (Cavanagh 1998, 106).13 At the cemetery of
Magoula in Galatas a Mycenaean tholos tomb (Tomb 1) contained an altar-like
structure and kylikes of normal and miniature size. This equipment might
indicate the practice of libation or other ceremonies related to the altar
(Konsolaki-Yannopoulou 2001, 218). However, the presence of animal
bones might indicate that ritual dining took place here as well. At Apatheia
in Galatas, a group of Mycenaean chamber tombs presented evidence for
libation rituals inside the tomb. Deposited near their inner entrance were
small plain jugs with an empty space where a person could have stood to
perform the offering (Tombs B1, A1, A5; Konsolaki-Yannopoulou 2001,
217). One of these jugs even had a carefully pierced hole at the belly after
firing, which would have allowed the liquid to pour out in an interesting way.
This idea of liquid being poured into the vessel through one opening, then
poured out another is a staple attribute of vessels called rhyta. These ritual
vessels were always associated with libation and have been found within more
cemeteries than sanctuaries (Koehl 1981, 186).
The most common ritual act of libation to the dead was performed in front
of the entrance to Mycenaean tombs. The presence of smashed kylikes is often
interpreted as a “farewell toast.” This custom seems to have been restricted in
both time and distribution, specifically connected to Mycenaean palatial
regions. This ritual for the deceased has been noted at cemeteries associated
with Mycenae, Prosymna, Dendra, Kokla, Asine, Berbati, and Deiras in the
Argolid, and Volimidia in Messenia (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 115). The
number of kylikes found can range from one to over forty. For example, two
kylikes were found smashed in front of the entrance of the tholos tomb at Kokla,
Argolid, along with the skeletons of two intact sheep or goats. Their intactness
emphasizes that these acts were part of ritual activities, rather than dining
activities (Demakopoulou 1990, 121, figs. 21–23). On the other end of the
spectrum, seventy kylikes were found at Panaghitsa tomb 1 at Mycenae; forty
130 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

kylikes were found in the entrance of tomb 13 at Dendra; and up to thirty-four at

Prosymna tomb 10 (Aström 1977, 106, 112). In contrast, kylikes are almost
unknown from the hundreds of tombs in the region of Achaia in the northwest
Peloponnese (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 115).
In reference to the variations present in this particular “toasting” exchange
with the dead, Cavanagh (1998, 106) states, “if the precise occasion is open to
uncertainty, the broad import of the custom is accepted. This is a liminal rite, at
the blocking of the tomb, it is a classic rite of separation involving the smashing
of the vessels, and evidently a collective rite involving more than one mour-
ner.” Moreover, the overlap between libations to the gods and to the dead is
exemplified by the paintings on the Haghia Triada sarcophagus. Side A depicts
two priestesses accompanied by a lyre-player, performing pouring rites. The
officiating priestess pours the contents of a bucket into a large krater. A red line
extending from the bucket to the krater has been interpreted as blood
(Marinatos 1968, 26), but could also be wine (Long 1974, 36).
Gifts to the dead, or grave offerings, are found in almost every tomb of this
period. Based on the types of ceramic shapes present, it is clear that oil and wine
were essential components of these gifts. Residue analysis can help confirm that
oil and wine were contained within these vessels. At the LM III cemetery of
Armenoi a small stirrup jar contained pure olive oil without any other detect-
able ingredient (Beck et al. 2008, 23). At Mycenae, residue analysis suggests that
some of these vessels contained wine, maybe even resinated wine (French
2011a). That Mycenaeans believed it was necessary for the deceased to have
some amount of oil and wine can be inferred from the vast amount of oil and
wine containers found in tombs. While the quantity and quality of containers
varied, it seems that a jug and a drinking cup in any material was indispensable
and everyone was entitled to at least one of each (Protonatariou-Deilaki 1990,
80). The jug and drinking cup make specific claims to the presence and
necessity of wine for the proper burial of a deceased person.
Oil too seems to have been valued in a similar way. The earliest Mycenaean
burial customs include unguent vessels, first alabastra, then stirrup jars. The use
of the unguents is debated, although the two most prominent ideas relate to the
anointment of the body or perfumed oil as “an especially appropriate offering”
(Cavanagh 1998, 106). Once established in the seventeenth century BCE, this
custom of accompanying burials with oil flasks persists for well over a thousand
years. The consistency in the types of vessels found within Late Bronze Age
tombs, especially those closer to palatial regions, is striking. Just as the palaces
seem to have had a hand in the practice of funerary feasts, they may have also
influenced the giving of funerary offerings. Cavanagh and Mee (1998, 135) in
their thorough study of Mycenaean tombs, believe that the palaces might have
directly controlled conspicuous display and the types of offerings placed in
 OIL AND WINE IN GIFT EXCHANGE 131

graves. If this is indeed the case, then the control that the central authorities
could exert over such exchanges was quite comprehensive.
Statistical analysis on the prevalence of vessel types within tombs of the
Mycenaean era confirms the overabundance of both closed pouring containers
and open cups intended for the use of the deceased. The presence of cups as
offerings (and perhaps not for ritual drinking by the living) is made most
apparent in the Kokla tholos tomb in the Argolid, where eight silver and
gold cups were found resting on an offering bench (Demakopoulou 1990,
119–122; Gallou 2003, 275).14 In the Argolid and Corinthia, the range of
pottery given to the dead is remarkably consistent. Open shapes consistently
form almost 40 percent of the assemblage of the tombs, whereas jars make up
about 15 percent, jugs 18 percent, unguent 13 percent, and oil containers 19
percent. In Messenia, there are more jugs and unguent containers and fewer
open shapes. Within these regions, there is an element of conservatism except
that stirrup jars displace alabastra in LH III. This widespread change might have
been influenced by palatial involvement in the perfumed oil industry
(Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 72). In contrast, kylikes are extremely rare in
Achaia and Elis, but open shapes were still represented by cups and bowls.
Here, alabastra and stirrup jars predominate, which might indicate less emphasis
on feasting (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 73–74). Still further variation is indicated
by tombs from Attica, where stirrup jars are nearly absent. This stark absence
led Emily Vermeule in the 1950s to remark “where are the stirrup-jars?”
(quoted in Cavanagh 1998, 109). That this was a particular choice by the
inhabitants of Mycenaean Athens is apparent when one considers that after
the palatial collapse, the stirrup jar became the most common vessel in Attic
tombs of the Postpalatial era, a topic to which we will return in the following
chapter.
One final aspect of grave gifts is worth mentioning. Although not as frequent
as small closed containers, large ceramic jars or amphoras for oil or wine have
also been found in Mycenaean tombs. For example, two large amphoras for
liquids were found near the feet of a boy in a tumulus (E, grave 5 (92)) at Argos
(Protonotariou-Deilaki 1990, 76, fig. 14a). Although it might seem strange to give
so much wine or oil to a child, it was a general trend that children in the Argolid
received more offerings than adults. This tomb also had gold sheets, daggers and a
sword (Protonotariou-Deilaki 1990, 79). In this case, the large amount of oil or
wine were perhaps symbolic of the youth’s status. Imported amphoras have also
been found in Mycenaean mainland tombs. Most prominently, Canaanite jars
imported from the Levant and Egypt have been found in tholos tombs at
Menidi, Pylos III, and chamber tombs: Athens Agora tomb 1 (N21-2),
Mycenae tombs 58, 94–95, Argos tomb 6, Asine tomb 2, and Thebes Kastellia
(Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 70 with references). Although the mainland
palaces imported large quantities of oil from Crete in transport stirrup jars
132 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

(to which we will return shortly), they only rarely deposit these vessels in
tombs. Instead, this particular type of gift seems to have been restricted to
Cretans, as transport stirrup jars are found in thirty-one tombs across Crete
(Haskell et al. 2011, 153–154).

OIL AND WINE IN COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE

Written and archaeological evidence from the Mycenaean palatial era suggests
that oil and wine were used for both large and small-scale commercial
exchanges. At the same time, the role of the central authority within these
exchanges becomes increasingly apparent, especially when compared to the
previous Neopalatial era. Palatial written documents record a handful of
commercial transactions involving oil and wine. These exchanges range from
payments for services to acquisition of different commodities. For example, a
tablet from the House of the Oil Merchant at Mycenae (MY Fo 101) was found
among many transport stirrup jars and pithoi and records oil (presumably from
those storerooms) to be distributed to textile workers (Tournavitou 1995).
Wine could be given to palatial workers for their craft or as payment. For
example, in the Pylos mixed commodity tablets, wine was apportioned as an
ingredient in perfume manufacture probably for its alcoholic/acidic nature or
fragrant odor (Palmer 1994, 116). An important mixed commodity tablet from
Pylos (An 35.5-.6) lists wine as one of several commodities exchanged for alum.
The presence of wine in relatively large amounts on this tablet suggests that the
recipient had the means to transport it (e.g., ship or pack animal) and a use for it
at his destination. The quantity of wine and its exchange for a precious metal
might imply that the recipient was a trader or merchant (Palmer 1994, 101).
These examples, though few, make clear the central authority’s control over
resources and its ability to exchange surplus oil and wine for required goods and
services.
The best evidence for commercial exchange strategies, however, remains
the material record. Specifically, surplus oil and wine trade during the
Mycenaean palatial era is characterized by mass production of transport stirrup
jars, increased regional and directional trade of oil and wine between Crete and
the mainland palaces, detailed administrative accounting of these transactions,
and an increase in the distribution of Cretan and mainland stirrup jars through-
out the Mediterranean.

Mass Production of Transport Stirrup Jars

Archaeological evidence suggests that during the Mycenaean palatial era, the
shape and decoration of transport stirrup jars became simplified at the same time
that there seems to be a shift to a centralized production strategy. The basic
 OIL AND WI NE IN COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 133

transport stirrup jar shape remained relatively consistent with those produced in
the previous Neopalatial era, with heights ranging from 38 to 48 cm and
capacities generally varying between 12 and 14 liters (Haskell et al. 2011,
Rutter 2014, Pratt 2016a, 44 n. 66). However, the idiosyncratic labeling
mechanisms including the addition of a third handle, pierced cap, and spout
horns, seem to have fallen out of use entirely. In addition, the prevalence of
highly decorated examples also diminished substantially. Instead, transport
stirrup jars are almost exclusively decorated with linear bands, although some
receive a stylized octopus design in the form of elongated wavy lines. Finally,
this era sees the introduction of Linear B inscriptions on the shoulders of some
stirrup jars.
Most of the transport stirrup jars manufactured on Crete were produced in
one of two regions: west Crete, which specialized in light-on-dark and Linear
B painted transport stirrup jars (Figure 3.8), and central Crete, which pro-
duced mostly dark-on-light (Figure 3.9). A few Linear B inscribed stirrup jars
originated from central Crete, but they are still quite limited in number when
compared with west Cretan vessels. A much smaller production location was
also located somewhere in east Crete (Haskell et al. 2011). Within these regions

3.8 West Cretan transport stirrup jar from the Kadmeion at Thebes marked with Linear B.
Haskell et al. 2011, Pl. 21, TH05. Image courtesy of H. Haskell and INSTAP Academic Press,
Philadelphia, PA
134 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

3.9 Central Cretan transport stirrup jar, LM IIIB, found in Tomb 50, Kourion, Cyprus. British
Museum GR 1896.2-1.265. BM Cat Vases C501. Photo by author

were subgroups, including at least two workshops in the area of Khania in west
Crete and a south-central variant, probably produced in the Mesara near
Kommos and Phaistos, some examples of which have a simplified octopus
decoration and “oatmeal” fabric (Day et al. 2011, 544, 546–547; Stockhammer
2008, 95 n. 466). Many Mesara transport stirrup jars are found in Mycenaean-
era (LM IIIB) contexts at Knossos, perhaps indicating a connection between
the south-central and north-central production regions (Haskell 2005, 239).
These patterns may indicate that transport stirrup jars were produced in a
relatively restricted number of regions on the island (Day et al. 2011; Pratt
2016a, 44). This pattern is made especially evident when compared with the
production patterns of amphoras, which maintained the regional production
strategy discussed in the previous chapter (see also Pratt 2016a, 53–54).
These patterns may indicate that transport stirrup jars were produced within
a centralized production system, where a smaller number of producers (or
clusters of producers) provided the majority of vessels to the other regions. In
this way, each production center or workshop cluster would have served a
relatively large geographical area encompassing multiple communities. The
vessels produced in this mode would have had consistent fabric sources (e.g.,
 OIL AND WI NE IN COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 135

Mesara Plain, Khania region) across large areas served by the few centers. In
addition, the vessels’ manufacturing techniques would have been consistent
over large regions, as would their form and decoration. For example, the
workshop in the Mesara Plain produced transport stirrup jars using the same
techniques and decorative motifs (including dark-on-light decoration and
octopus motifs). This is paralleled by the consistent light-on-dark decoration
and shape of transport stirrup jars originating from western Crete, despite the
possibility of multiple workshops clustered near Khania. In fact, these vessels
have a high degree of standardization in size and capacity, which may also be
evidence of a regulated production mode. Centralized production can nor-
mally be associated with an overarching administrative system that governs this
process (Keswani 2009, 112–113).
It is also in the Mycenaean palatial era that Linear B inscriptions are painted
on the belly or shoulder of the pots themselves before firing. Inscriptions on the
pots and texts related to the oil and wine industry may provide insights into
who made transport stirrup jars, the producers’ association with oil and wine
makers, and the type of oversight provided by provincial or palatial officials.
Most Linear B-painted stirrup jars (a.k.a. inscribed stirrup jars) derive from
Knossos and Khania (both administrations also used Linear B tablet recording),
although Khania seems to have been the predominant location for the use of
these signs. There is also some possibility for a limited number of Linear B
painted transport stirrup jars originating elsewhere. For example, three
inscribed stirrup jars found at Thebes (TH Z 866–868) most likely originated
from south-central Crete. As an added complication, the fabric of the jar found
at the Unexplored Mansion of Knossos is somewhat anomalous. Therefore, it is
impossible to say to what degree Knossos managed central Cretan inscribed
stirrup jars. In addition, a few inscribed stirrup jars have been found at Malia,
although fabric analyses suggest that they are imports from two or three other
regions (Driessen et al. 2014). Thus far, not one inscribed stirrup jar has been
recovered from Kommos. The lack of inscribed stirrup jars at this southern port
might suggest a different type of regulation or separate trade network from that
of transport stirrup jars originating in or emanating from the north coast of the
island. Linear B inscribed Cretan transport stirrup jars are often found at palaces
on the mainland, including large caches at Thebes and Tiryns as well as a few at
Mycenae. These palatial connections might suggest that the contents of Cretan
jars, and west Cretan jars in particular, were in high demand (Hallager and
Hallager 2011, 380).
The painted Linear B signs are usually large, can be hastily or carefully
painted, and may consist of one, two, or three words. By far the most frequent
type of inscription consists of single personal names in the nominative case.
Three-word inscriptions (personal name + toponym + personal name in
genitive) are second in frequency. There are also some single toponyms and a
136 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

single sign, wa, that may be an abbreviation of wa-na-ka-te-ro. The three-word

formula is similar to those on sheep tablets from Knossos that list the producer,
place of production, and collector who answers to the palace (Haskell et al.
2011, 90). Van Alfen (1997, 263) suggests that these signs were meant to be read
during the production process. Since it is only the collector formula that
appears on inscribed stirrup jars we should take this as the model formula for
all of the inscribed stirrup jars: single personal names or toponyms were
abbreviations of a longer implied formula. Therefore, the personal name is
the producer and the scribe recording the transport stirrup jars would already
know the toponym and second personal name (the collector’s name).
However, the first personal name leaves some debate. Is this the name of the
potter himself, the producer of the contents of the vessel, or someone else? A
logical compromise comes from Van Alfen (1997, 269) who suggests that the
personal name is of the manager of the oil bottling process and that he then
reports to the collector. The manager’s name on the jar indicates that the
obligation has been fulfilled. The function of the inscriptions, therefore, is to
trace and record the fulfillment of an individual’s obligation to provide the
contents of the jars to a higher authority (Van Alfen 1997, 254; for an alternative
view see Duhoux 2010 and Judson 2013). In this way, the low ratio of inscribed
stirrup jars to plain transport stirrup jars can be explained: there would be one
marked jar per batch whose meaning is subsequently obsolete once the jars are
submitted by the manager (Van Alfen 1997, 272). Other sources, like a seal
impression on the clay stopper of a jar, could convey information that the
written words did not. This secondary source of information may have been
the most important since we know transport stirrup jars and inscribed stirrup
jars were both reused.
The function of inscribed stirrup jar inscriptions as fulfillment markers means
that when the inscribed stirrup jars were produced there was a region-wide
centralized administration process and economic system. Without some form
of bureaucratic control, it is unlikely that transport stirrup jar production could
be organized and the jars exported en masse to the mainland (Van Alfen 1997,
265). The presence of the adjective wa-na-ka-te-ro on some inscribed stirrup jars
and its abbreviation (wa) necessarily means that the palaces were at least partially
involved, and at a very high level (TI Z 29, TH Z 839; abbreviated to wa on EL
Z 1; wa incised on disk of KH Z 16). We may even speculate that wa-na-ka-te-ro
in place of the collector’s name might indicate direct palatial control or own-
ership. This does not mean that the wanax himself received the oil but that he
was involved with its manufacture (Haskell 2004). Palatial involvement in
inscribed stirrup jar production is also suggested by correspondences between
place-names on the inscribed stirrup jars and those recorded at Knossos on
Linear B tablets (Haskell 1983, 121).
 OIL AND WI NE IN COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 137

Other bureaucratic means of recording palatial commodities align well with

the process of inscribed stirrup jar marking. Nodules were “contractual per-
formance records of individuals” in contrast to the tablets, which were archival.
Consequently, nodules were part of an immediate micro-sphere of the eco-
nomic hierarchy but affected the macro-sphere in that seals on the nodules
suggest a higher authority involved (just as inscribed stirrup jars would have also
been marked with a sealing). In this way both nodules and inscribed stirrup jars
operated within a closed system where much of the information would be
readily understood (Van Alfen 1997, 267). Since there are no words on the
inscribed stirrup jars denoting what type of transaction occurred (unlike
the nodules) there must have been only one. This one transaction suggests
that the manager of oil/wine bottling was probably under contractual obliga-
tion to the collector who in turn answered to the palace on a consistent basis. In
this case, the Linear B painted inscriptions on transport stirrup jars would not be
promotional but rather administrative (for an alternative view that inscribed
stirrup jars represent guest gifts, see Driessen et al. 2014).
Interestingly, there is little information in the various palatial Linear B
records on oil/wine and transport stirrup jar production. Since Linear B texts
were used only for archival purposes, and everyday transactions were more
suitable for other recording devices such as nodules, we may not expect to find
too many records of oil/wine production. Linear B texts record absolutely
nothing about transport stirrup jar production specifically, and very little on
ceramic production in general. However, transport stirrup jars may make an
appearance on a handful of tablets recording large oil distributions (PY Fr 1184;
KN K 700 and K778). In Linear B, ka-ra-re-we (khlarewes; cf. Hesychius, 502:
χλαρόν· ἐλαιηρὸς κώθων; Shelmerdine 1985, 25) has been interpreted as
denoting the large coarse-ware stirrup jar. Two tablets from Knossos list
1,800 “stirrup jars” (K 700) and 180 “stirrup jars” (K 778), and a tablet from
Pylos (Fr 1184) lists 38 “stirrup jars” either containing or to be filled with just
over 500 liters of oil. At the very least the mention of transport stirrup jars
confirms that the palaces somehow received large numbers of these containers.
Moreover, the simplified characteristics of Mycenaean-era transport stirrup
jars, their centralized production, and their involvement in Linear B bureau-
cratic regulation support their important role in the increasingly complex
commercial exchanges regulated by palatial authorities.

Widespread Transport Stirrup Jar Distribution

Compared to the previous Minoan Neopalatial era, the distribution of trans-
port stirrup jars during the Mycenaean palatial era underwent a dramatic
change at multiple levels. First, transport stirrup jars were increasingly used
for regional trade on Crete in place of oval-mouthed amphoras. Second,
138 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

Cretan transport stirrup jars are found in large quantities in the storage areas of
mainland Mycenaean palaces, suggesting a form of directional trade between
the two regions. In addition, sealing practices on the stoppers of transport
stirrup jars suggest a complex network of connections between palatial autho-
rities regulating the distribution of these vessels and their contents. Moreover,
this increasingly complex exchange network necessitated access to more over-
seas transportation, which was made possible only through relationships with
skilled craftsmen, merchants, sailors, boat builders, and the boats themselves.

Increased Regional Trade on Crete: Transport Stirrup Jars vs. Oval-

Mouthed Amphoras. The Monopalatial era (LM II–IIIA1) on Crete, I
suggest, was a transitional phase when transport stirrup jar production
increased at the same time that amphoras continued to be used. Although a
lack of good LM II contexts on Crete precludes any definitive statement, it
may be significant that many transport stirrup jars have been found in LM II
contexts at Knossos, perhaps signifying that the Knossos administration
already favored transport stirrup jars over amphoras for the transport and
storage of liquids. Although individual published examples of transport stir-
rup jars are few, it has been observed that they were far more prominent than
amphoras in large storage contexts of, for example, the Knossos Unexplored
Mansion. Indeed, Popham et al. (1984, 176) note the paucity of large
amphoras in the storerooms of the Mansion and suggest that its occupants
preferred the stirrup jar.
The ensuing destruction of Knossos in LM IIIA2 did not, however, hamper
the spread of Cretan transport stirrup jar production and distribution (Haskell
1983, 125; 1997, 108; see also Haskell 1997, 107; Borgna 2003, 158).15 In fact,
the collapse of Knossian supremacy and establishment of regional administra-
tive centers seem to have initiated an exponential rise in the use of transport
stirrup jars on the island, as well as their shipment in bulk to the Mycenaean
mainland (Haskell 1985, 226). During this Final Palatial period (LM IIIA2–
IIIB), the apparent division of the island into several independent political
entities elicited major changes in settlement patterns on the island (Rutter 1999,
148 n. 1; see also, e.g., Hallager 1987; Shelmerdine 1992). These new regional
centers are marked by major building programs at Tylissos, Haghia Triada, and
Haghia Triada’s principal port town at Kommos (Rutter 1999, 139–140;
Langohr 2009, 104–138, 192–206, 219–233). The use of the word wa-na-ka-
te-ro on the inscribed stirrup jars, as discussed earlier, indicates that the states of
LM IIIB Crete must have had at least one kingdom (Hallager 1987, 182–183;
Hallager and Hallager 2011, 380). In terms of timing, it seems that political
restructuring happened shortly after if not at the same time as the destruction of
Knossos early in LM IIIA2. This is best seen in the Mesara with the building
programs at Haghia Triada (Rutter 1999, 150 n. 14; Langohr 2009, 112–115)
 OIL AND WI NE IN COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 139

and Kommos (Langohr 2009, 129–137). The restructuring of power on the

island produced an increase in regionally distinct ceramic styles, affecting both
transport stirrup jars and amphoras.
Despite their restricted production locations, as discussed earlier, transport
stirrup jars traveled throughout the island in increasing numbers. Data from
Final Palatial deposits indicate that relative quantities of transport stirrup jars
increased dramatically, while those of amphoras declined, especially during the
LM IIIB period (Pratt 2016a, 43, table 7). A comparison of transport stirrup jars
and amphoras found at Khania suggests that while the numbers of both
fluctuate from LM IIIA2 to LM IIIB2, their percentage of the whole ceramic
deposit stays relatively stable: there are always more than twice as many
transport stirrup jars as amphoras. Kommos has a slightly different trend, with
transport stirrup jars surpassing round-mouthed amphoras only in the LM IIIB
period. However, Kommos seems to have had an entirely different trajectory
from that of other sites on Crete, as demonstrated by its invention and
large-scale use of their own type of container: the plain short-necked
amphora (Rutter 2000). Although only one example (at Knossos) has been
identified outside of Kommos, the short-necked amphora has been recov-
ered by the hundreds at Kommos itself and was locally produced (Day et
al. 2011). The exact role of these amphoras is unclear, but they were
discontinued by the end of the period. At Knossos, the number of
transport stirrup jars recorded at the site during the LM IIIB period is
quite high, but it is uncertain how many amphoras were present during
the same period. Based on these data, it seems that during the Final
Palatial era on Crete, both transport stirrup jars and amphoras were used
for trade on the island. Throughout this era, however, transport stirrup
jars became much more popular, surpassing amphoras at most sites as the
most common Cretan bulk liquid transport container.

Directional Trade between Crete and Mycenaean Palaces. The

Mycenaean era on Crete marks not only the time when transport stirrup jars
became a popular interregional transport container but also the point when
there was a rapid increase in Cretan transport stirrup jar shipment overseas to
various regions of the Mediterranean. Data on the number and origins of
transport stirrup jars found outside of Crete demonstrate that the greatest
numbers of them (both Cretan and other) are found in mainland Mycenaean
palatial contexts (Haskell et al. 2011; Ben-Shlomo et al. 2011; Pratt 2016a). The
earliest securely dated context in which we find Cretan transport stirrup jars is
the House of the Wine Merchant at Mycenae, which is dated to LH IIIA (late).
The fifty Cretan transport stirrup jars found there indicate that even the initial
shipments of these vessels to the mainland were substantial.
140 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

The large-scale exchange of transport stirrup jars between Crete and the
mainland Mycenaean palaces could indeed represent some form of directional
trade (Haskell 2005; Kanta 2005; Stockhammer 2008, 92–99; Haskell et al.
2011, 125–131). Specifically, Cretan transport stirrup jars are concentrated at a
few key palatial centers in the Argolid (Tiryns, Mycenae, Midea), the
Peloponnese (Menelaion; Catling 2009, 369), and Boeotia (Thebes), stored
in basement facilities, and only rarely placed in more public spaces
(Stockhammer 2008, 281; Ben Shlomo et al. 2011, 335). Conspicuously absent
is the palace at Pylos in Messenia. Despite Pylos’s apparently close connections
with Crete in both architectural and artistic styles (Immerwahr 1990, 96–137;
Hiller 1996; Nelson 2001; Rutter 2005a, 20–32), only two Cretan transport
stirrup jars have been identified there (Haskell et al. 2011, nos. PYL02, PYL05).
Instead, there are many mainland-style transport stirrup jars recovered from the
site. This may indicate that the palace at Pylos acquired its bulk oil locally or
from another, closer region (Dickinson 2005, 56). Although future excavations
might change this picture of Cretan transport stirrup jar distribution, current
data suggest that the quantities of these vessels found at the above mainland
palatial centers (i.e., more than 100 at each Mycenae and Thebes) outnumber
the quantities recovered archaeologically at their places of origin on Crete.
Other evidence for large-scale directional trade using Cretan transport
stirrup jars and the involvement of Mycenaean palatial administration comes
from the unique seal impressions found on the clay stoppers plugging the spouts
of these containers (Figure 3.4). Seal stones were a common method of
authentication during the Late Bronze Age. Taking the form of rings or
bracelets, seal stones were intimately connected to the owner and could act
as a form of personal signature. It is therefore significant when patterns in seal
impressions can be located, suggesting the actions of a single individual. When
included in economic transactions, seal impressions can help indicate where a
particular item was produced or received and by whom. For example, a
transport stirrup jar found at Mycenae on the Greek mainland has a stopper
bearing a bovid sealing; according to petrographic analyses the jar originates
from central Crete. However, the stopper itself seems to have originated from
west Crete. The central Cretan transport stirrup jar was therefore sealed at
Khania prior to being shipped to and subsequently found at Mycenae
(Stockhammer 2008, 276–277. For the seals, see Tomlinson and Day 1995,
317, table 32). In addition, a stopper with the same bovid sealing closed another
transport stirrup jar at Mycenae, but the jar itself is almost certainly of mainland
manufacture (Haskell 1997, 103).
For the LM/LH IIIB period, some scholars have speculated that Cretan
transport stirrup jars represent tribute sent to certain Mycenaean palaces by
Cretan elites, who were based at regional centers on the island (Maran 2005,
427–429; Stockhammer 2008, 277–278; see also Haskell 2004; Haskell et al.
 OIL AND WI NE IN COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 141

2011, 125–126).16 The examples of sealing patterns above support this idea.
Both Stockhammer and Haskell suggest the possibility that Khania acted as a
funnel through which all the Cretan transport stirrup jars made their way to
mainland centers, thereby explaining the presence of both central and western
types of transport stirrup jars at Mycenaean palaces (Stockhammer 2008, 267;
Haskell et al. 2011, 120). This idea is corroborated by the discovery of both
regional varieties of transport stirrup jars at Khania. In addition, Khania has the
highest numbers of Mycenaean imported LH IIIA2 and LH IIIB1 pottery,
which indicate its particularly close relationship with the mainland (Hallager
2005). The status of Khania as a regional administrative center with connec-
tions to the Mycenaean mainland is clear from the use of Linear B and the
presence of Mycenaean cultural practices and ceramic styles.

Expanding Connections: Mediterranean Distribution of Aegean

Transport Stirrup Jars. The relationship between Crete and the mainland,
as outlined earlier, is only one part of a much larger and complex story.
Transport stirrup jars were shipped to many other regions of the eastern
Mediterranean. As a consequence, these containers are often concentrated at
harbor locations – both on Crete (Khania, Kommos, Palaikastro, perhaps
Poros-Katsambas) and in the Levant and Cyprus – and found on almost all
Late Bronze Age shipwrecks. Demand for Aegean oil and wine fluctuated but
reached its pinnacle during the late Mycenaean era. Clearly, Mycenaean olive
oil and perfumed oils, in particular, had a high value in the economic network
of the Late Bronze Age Mediterranean.

Distribution by Land
Transport stirrup jars are found in large quantities at Near Eastern ports like Tell
Abu Hawam and Ugarit. Evidence for possible directional trade with the Near
East can be demonstrated by the seemingly reciprocal trade in Canaanite jars
from Tell Abu Hawam to Kommos and in transport stirrup jars from south-
central Crete to Tell Abu Hawam (Ben-Shlomo et al. 2011, 346). Out of
roughly forty transport stirrup jars found at the Levantine port of Tell Abu
Hawam, twenty-four were examined for provenance by Ben-Shlomo et al., who
concluded that seventeen had been manufactured in south-central Crete and seven
showed “no evidence of Cretan provenance” (Ben-Shlomo et al. 2011, 340, table
1). Some of the transport stirrup jars identified as non-Cretan may originate from
the Greek mainland (Ben-Shlomo et al. 2011, 339 n. 92). In turn, roughly one-
third of the Canaanite jars recovered from Kommos are products of the region
around Tell Abu Hawam (Rutter 2006a, 646–688, 712–715; 2006c, 859–863;
Stockhammer 2008, 276; Ben-Shlomo et al. 2011, 348; Day et al. 2011, 551).
142 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

More than sixty Canaanite jars have been recovered from Kommos, which is by far
the largest number of Canaanite jars in one location in the Aegean.
Cyprus was also the recipient of many transport stirrup jars. Additionally,
several transport stirrup jars bearing incised Cypro-Minoan marks have been
found at various locations in the eastern Mediterranean. This corpus include
thirty-five medium-sized transport stirrup jars from the Argolid and Crete with
Cypro-Minoan signs (Döhl 1979; Haskell et al. 2011, 128); two or three
examples from Tell Abu Hawam (Ben-Shlomo et al. 2011, 339 n. 88, 343 n.
107–109); two from Zawiyet Umm el-Rakham (Snape 2003, 67–68, fig. 4);
four from the Uluburun shipwreck (Day 1999, 68; Haskell et al. 2011, 130); one
from Knossos, one from Kommos, and one from Tripiti (Hirschfeld 1993, 312,
316–317); and one from Salamis Island (Lolos 2003, 113, fig. 24). These marks
are commonly found on ceramic and metallic commodities and have been
convincingly interpreted as commercial marks indicating Cypriot involvement
at some stage in the product’s shipment (Hirschfeld 1993, 2002, 2004, 2011).
Transport stirrup jars seem to have made a small, but nevertheless significant,
impact in the west; a few examples have been found in southern Italy (Haskell
et al. 2011, Ben-Shlomo et al. 2011). Possibly most telling is the discovery of
transport stirrup jars on all three known Late Bronze Age shipwrecks: the
Uluburun, the Point Iria, and the Cape Gelidonya. That Greek olive oil had
a high status in the Late Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean may be best
showcased by the presence of transport stirrup jars at the Egyptian city of Tel
el-Amarna. Kelder (2009) proposes that these jars may have been a diplomatic
gift from a ruler in Greece to the Pharaoh of Egypt himself.
That wine, too, could have been exported in transport stirrup jars can be
inferred from the other most commonly exported Aegean items. The most
popular ceramic shapes exported from Greece to Cyprus, the Levant, and
Egypt were wine drinking sets that included painted kraters, jugs, kylikes,
and cups. These were in fact so popular that local Near Eastern artisans
reproduced copies soon after the originals infiltrated the indigenous ceramic
repertoire. We may speculate that resinated wine was a delicacy, as a parallel to
perfumed oils, since traces of this substance have been detected in small,
decorated stirrup jars, a shape that is found throughout the Near East.

Distribution by Sea
The realities involved with shipping large quantities of Mycenaean oil and wine
would have resulted in intensified relationships between palatial authorities,
merchants, shipbuilders, and the ships themselves. It is clear that the oil and
wine commercial industry, as implicated by the distribution of transport stirrup
jars, relied heavily upon maritime transportation. Indeed, transport stirrup jars
have been found on almost every Late Bronze Age shipwreck thus far
 OIL AND WI NE IN COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 143

discovered. The shipwreck found off the southern coast of Turkey at Uluburun
had at least fourteen transport stirrup jars onboard at the time of its sinking. Ten
of these transport stirrup jars were analyzed by Haskell et al. (2011) with the
result that seven were originally from central Crete. These stirrup jars were
most likely reused and traveling back to the Aegean. We cannot, therefore,
draw conclusions about the high ratio of central Cretan transport stirrup jars as
it relates to Mycenaean palatial agency and Near Eastern connections.
The Point Iria shipwreck, however, presents a very different case (Figure
3.10). Found off the coast of the Argolid, the ship seems to have been carrying
mainly ceramic transport containers at the time it sank. A group of eight
transport stirrup jars were onboard and, based on chemical and petrographic
analyses, all come from south-central Crete and probably the same workshop.
The close typological grouping and the location of the shipwreck might
demonstrate directed export between south-central Crete and the Argolid
(Haskell 2005, 213). The late date of the Point Iria shipwreck, around 1200
BCE, supports the idea that trade connections between central Crete and the
mainland continued down to the very last years of the Mycenaean palaces.
Around the same time or slightly later, another ship faltered off the southern
coast of Turkey. The Cape Gelidonya shipwreck had at least four transport
stirrup jars onboard. Out of the two that were analyzed, one came from Crete,
but it is uncertain where exactly. Two other shipwrecks, found near the island
of Dokos and at Kosta-Hermionid on the Greek mainland (southern Argolid)
produced at least one transport stirrup jar each, though chemical and petro-
graphic research has yet to be conducted (for Dokos see Lolos 1991, 18; for
Kosta Hermionid see Lolos 1995, 77, 79, fig. 22).

Aegean Imitations of the Transport Stirrup Jar. Cretan transport stirrup

jars, though most prevalent, were not the only versions produced. Instead,

3.10 Transport stirrup jar cargo of the Point Iria shipwreck. Photo by author
144 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

there is increasing evidence for the creation and circulation of imitations in the
eastern Mediterranean region during the period from ca. 1400 to 1200 BCE
(Ben-Shlomo et al. 2011, 335).17 Although most transport stirrup jars found on
the mainland were imported from Crete, it seems that some regions on the
Greek mainland produced their own versions (Figure 3.11; Blegen and
Rawson 1966, 403–406; Thomas 1992, 2005; Day and Haskell 1995;
Stockhammer 2008, 92–94; Haskell et al. 2011, 22 [Type D]; Mitrou:
Kramer-Hajos and O’Neill 2008, 213, nos. D93 and D94). Unlike Cretan
traditions, using multiple pastes for different parts of the transport stirrup jar is
not found on the Helladic mainland (Haskell et al. 2011, 332; see also
Stockhammer 2008, 93 n. 445–447). In addition, mainland transport stirrup
jars are made of comparatively fine fabrics and often feature single firing holes
or piercings found near the handle bases or near the attachment to the false
spout (P.M. Day and Haskell 1995, 96–97; Stockhammer 2008, 93 n. 449).
Decoration of mainland transport stirrup jars is always dark-on-light, usually
consisting of simple bands around the body with occasional decoration on the
shoulder and crosses, spirals, or concentric circles on the false spout. In general,
it seems that mainland transport stirrup jars are relatively few in number, at least
compared to Cretan versions, and may have maintained a regional distribution.
Transport stirrup jar production has been identified within the Argolid
(Thomas 1992, 322 n. 117), as well as in Boeotia near Thebes (Day and
Haskell 1995). Mainland transport stirrup jars have also been recovered from
the palace at Pylos in Messenia, though no chemical analyses have been
conducted to determine their exact provenance.

3.11 Mainland Greek transport stirrup jar from Zygouries. After Thomas 1992, 576, fig. 42.2.
Image by Chelsey Gareau
 OIL AND WI NE IN COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 145

Recent research has also brought to light possible production locations of

transport stirrup jars at various points along the western Anatolian coast. These
transport stirrup jars are characterized by their fine fabric, including gray-
burnished examples from Troy, dark-on-light painted examples in a highly
micaceous fabric possibly produced at Miletus, and two handmade examples
with burnished surfaces from the Uluburun wreck, possibly from Rhodes. At
Troy in Phase VIg levels, two stirrup jars were found that seem to have been
produced in the local Gray Minyan Ware and one in local Tan Ware whose
bodies resemble common Trojan jugs (Figure 3.12; Blegen et al. 1953, 240,
figs. 388.3, 388.4, 395.13, 442.21). The excavator surmised that these vases
might represent a Trojan variation of the stirrup jar made with local clays,
which were found along with at least five other transport stirrup jars that
seemed to be products of a single workshop (Blegen et al. 1953, 74).
Interestingly, on the Uluburun shipwreck there were at least two examples
of a similar style stirrup jar made with clay originating from Asia Minor (Haskell
et al. 2011, 87). In addition, on the island of Rhodes one transport stirrup jar
matches the gray ware one from the Uluburun wreck. Although it has not been
confirmed by scientific analyses yet, another strange gray ware stirrup jar was
found at the Mycenaean palatial site of Midea (Demakopoulou et al. 1997–
1998, 63, fig. 16). These four occurrences suggest that Trojan potters may have
produced their own version of stirrup jars and subsequently shipped them to

3.12 Trojan Gray Ware transport stirrup jar. Blegen, Caskey, and Rawson 1952, fig. 331(b)
34.320. Courtesy of The Department of Classics University of Cincinnati
146 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

destinations in the Aegean. Based on morphology alone, they seem to be

related to mainland style transport stirrup jars rather than Cretan.
Farther south along the coast of Asia Minor, the settlement of Miletos is now
considered to be a Minoan and later Mycenaean stronghold. At least eight
Minoan and Mycenaean pottery kilns have been found along with locally
produced Aegean wares (Gödecken 1988; Niemeier 1997). These wares were
accompanied by frescoes, Aegean architecture, and possibly even Minoan/
Mycenaean ritual. Cemeteries outside of the city produced a few transport
stirrup jars and it may be possible to speculate that those too were locally made
although no scientific testing has been conducted as of yet. In addition, a few
transport stirrup jars recovered from the Mycenaean coastal site of Tiryns on
the Greek mainland seem to have an origin at Miletus, suggesting that these too
were distributed outside of Asia Minor (Stockhammer 2008, 97–98).
A more concrete example of transport stirrup jar production comes from the
Dodecanese island of Rhodes (Figure 3.13). This large island was a major
stopping point for merchants crossing the eastern Mediterranean. It is not
surprising, therefore, that the local repertoire of ceramics is a mix of Aegean,
Cypriot, and Levantine styles. Mycenaean styles dominate the island’s ceramic
production in LH IIIB, resulting in local copies of Aegean originals (Mee 1982,
11–33, 23, 122–33; Benzi 1992, 69–70). During their study of transport stirrup
jars around the Mediterranean, Haskell et al. (2011) chemically and petrogra-
phically tested transport stirrup jars from tombs at the Rhodian cemetery of
Ialysos. Stylistically, seven of these transport stirrup jars seemed to form their
own type-group (Haskell et al. 2011, 22, Group E) and were found to be of
local Rhodian clay. This may suggest that Rhodes had its own transport stirrup
jar production center, although it is uncertain whether they were shipped
elsewhere. In addition, there is some evidence to suggest limited transport

3.13 Rhodian transport stirrup jar. After Haskell et al. 2011, 20 fig. 2.28 Group E no. IAL07.
Image by Chelsey Gareau
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 147

stirrup jar production on the Cyclades or Kythera. Their provenance from the
Cyclades or Kythera is suggested based on the high proportion of silver mica in
their fabrics. The few possible examples that have come to light, however,
derive from Postpalatial Tiryns, which might complicate their origins in the
palatial era (Stockhammer 2008, fig. 22, 97, 152–153, 190, 216).
Based on these multiple imitations of a relatively unwieldy shape, it seems
that transport stirrup jars may have had a symbolic value in and of them-
selves. As will be further discussed later, the transport stirrup jar may also
have acted as a kind of “brand” representing the source and quality of its
contents, thereby simultaneously having an extra-Aegean symbolic value. The
distinctive shape of transport stirrup jars was unique in the Mediterranean at
this time. It would therefore be easily recognized on the wider
Mediterranean market as it travelled outside of Crete and mainland Greece.

CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS

Oil and wine were undoubtedly two of the most crucial components of social,
political, and economic exchanges (and all combinations thereof) in the
Mycenaean palatial era. Oil and, especially, wine became critical for the
successful enactment of commensal exchanges, as demonstrated not only by
archaeological remains of immense palatial storage facilities, but also through
documented quantities reaching thousands of liters of wine. Exchanges with
the dead and with deities also required significant portions of wine and oil to be
toasted, libated, and offered. Large-scale economic exchanges using specialized
containers for transporting immense quantities of oil and wine became rela-
tively common and are represented through distributions of transport stirrup
jars from Italy to Asia Minor. During the Mycenaean palatial era, the high value
attributed to oil and wine, as carried over from the Minoan palatial era, was
formulated in new ways through the calculations of different agents
participating in the above exchanges. These same networks of people
and things created an entanglement that increased in scale and centrality
when compared to the previous Minoan entanglement. Oil and wine not
only retained their importance, but became further solidified as true
cultural commodities – that is, commodities that were not only useful,
convenient, or trendy, but in fact necessary for the proper enactment of
the commensal, gift, and commercial exchanges.
How does the evidence for exchange of oil and wine, as presented in this
chapter, reflect changing relationships of value and dependency between
people and those two commodities? Based on a synthetic view of the data,
we can see meaningful changes to patterns in the scale, context, and character-
istics of exchange modes from the Minoan era to the Mycenaean palatial era
that, when considered together, display the different ways in which the high
148 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

values of oil and wine were constructed. At the same time, the evidence also
indicates that a larger portion of the population participated in the exchange of
both commodities.
For commensal exchange, large-scale events changed in nature from being
largely inclusive in the Minoan era to divisive in the Mycenaean era, emphasiz-
ing social stratification and power through participatory contexts and
equipment.18 Although the locations for these events remained centralized,
regulated, and restricted, they adopted new inside/outside divisions that high-
lighted the status of the individuals positioned in those locations. In addition,
the quality of drinking equipment was directly proportional to the location of
the participant. The move from pouring wine into small hidden conical cups to
ladling wine from mixing bowls into kylikes to be raised up highlights the
changing values associated with performative drinking rituals. In addition,
regulated perfumed oil manufacture within the Mycenaean palace can be
contrasted with the relatively loose regulations of the Minoan palatial era.
This shift might suggest that palatial authorities sought to exclusively control
the production of these oils in order to affect the value of the commodity
within exchange contexts. The increasing importance of wine and oil to
commensal exchanges can also be viewed when comparing pre-Mycenaean
practices to those of the palatial era. As highlighted in this chapter, there was a
significant increase in the scale and frequency of events on the Greek mainland
throughout the course of the Late Bronze Age as the palatial authorities
increasingly gained (bureaucratic?) control. Diacritical feasting events used
surplus wine and oil for the maintenance of elite ideologies and power through
the control of their value within the collective consciousness.
The high value of oil and wine in the Mycenaean palatial era can also be seen
through archaeological and written evidence for non-commensal gift
exchange. On Linear B tablets, wine and oil are the two most common
commodities listed as offerings to deities. Both commodities were also given
as gifts to the deceased. These gifts seem to have come in the form of libations
and grave goods. Remains of kylikes and jugs found at the entrance to tombs
suggest pouring and drinking rituals, a sort of “farewell toast.” Inside the tombs,
the deceased was almost always given both containers with unguent/perfumed
oil and jugs and drinking cups. The value of oil and wine as gifts, at least within
religious and funerary contexts, is incontrovertible. That this high value was
constructed differently in the Mycenaean palatial era can best be seen by the
control (either direct or indirect) that the palatial authorities seem to have
exerted over funerary and ritual practices involving oil and wine. The homo-
geneity of ritual drinking and gifting equipment within regions where palatial
authorities existed is indicative of their influence.
Changes to patterns in commercial exchange from the Minoan to the
Mycenaean palatial eras can also be indicative of new ways of formulating the
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 149

high value and importance of oil and wine. The direct value of olive oil is made
apparent on a tablet from Pylos where olive oil was exchanged for alum, a
precious metal. An indirect value for oil is also indicated by the mass production
of stirrup jars, their overseas shipment, and their imitation in other
Mediterranean locations. For commercial exchange, the specialized transport
stirrup jar, invented in the previous era, was mass-produced at a small number
of sites on Crete. Some of them received labels in Linear B and hundreds of
them have been found in palatial storerooms. Transport stirrup jars were
shipped all over the eastern Mediterranean and have been found on nearly all
shipwrecks. Yet, their value is perhaps most strongly seen when taking into
consideration the plethora of imitations created throughout the eastern
Mediterranean during the Mycenaean era. Why would a cumbersome
Minoan pot become so popular in the Mycenaean era? Ultimately, these
many attempts to imitate the transport stirrup jar shape suggest that the high
value of these jars and their contents was constructed within a larger network
that incorporated many more and varied agents at this particular point in time.
Based on their distribution, it seems that transport stirrup jars had a substantial
presence on the Mediterranean market during the Mycenaean era. They not
only carried Mycenaean commodities but also acted as representations of
Aegean commodities to many different populations. This value afforded to
stirrup jars and their contents compelled at least some people to create their
own versions and exchange them.
As discussed in the previous chapter, we can acknowledge the fact that there
is no sure way to prove the presence of dependency through archaeological
material. Nevertheless, it is useful to examine the patterns produced over many
relationships between people, oil, and wine. It is the increase in scale, not just in
feasting events, but also in production, storage, and amphora distribution, that
conveys some underlying connection. For the Mycenaean palatial era, we can
also see an increase in directionality and a decrease in the overall number of
major nodes within the relationship. What I suggest is that there is a strong
correlation between these changes and the strengthening of a relationship of
dependency. The value of oil and wine within exchange contexts, as outlined
earlier, is made explicit by the size, ubiquity, and status of exchange events.
This value is only accessed through the ability to gather and distribute surplus
agricultural commodities. In turn, surplus agricultural commodities accessed a
network of influence and power that extended beyond the palace and into the
hinterland, affecting the land, plants, and the people that tended them. Not
only were the olive trees and grapevines drawn into an increasingly intense
relationship with humans as more and better fruit was demanded, but also
people became increasingly reliant on each other to provide the resources –
including surplus labor – to create sufficient amounts of oil and wine, as
required by central authorities. At the same time, elites and aspiring elites
150 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

needed skilled potters to produce the thousands of specialized drinking cups

necessary for state-sponsored feasts, as well as religious and funerary events.
Although potters are not frequently mentioned in Linear B records, there is
some indication that a few potters were attached to the palace at Pylos and still
others specialized in kylix manufacture (Whitelaw 2001). Therefore, the high
value of oil and wine within the cultural economy of Mycenaean-era Greece
was intimately tied to the increasing strength of the dependencies between
people and things that enveloped the production and exchange of these
commodities.
When thinking about the variation in scale and centralization of entangle-
ments over time, the Mycenaean relationships around oil and wine became
larger in scale and more centralized compared to the previous Minoan era. In
general, more centralized entanglements are actively affected by the centrality
of one particular node or type of node. That is, certain nodes have more
influence than others. For Mycenaean Greece, the central authorities, seated
in palatial structures, regulated most aspects of surplus production, distribution,
and consumption. That is not to say that they controlled every aspect of the
economy. Rather, the palatial authorities seem to have had an influence,
whether direct or indirect, in the choices made during acts of exchange. This
certainly included an influence on the value of the things exchanged and their
importance within the broader network of relationships.
There are a few patterns in the archaeological record that support the
presence of a more centralized entanglement in the Mycenaean palatial era.
When it comes to production, presses and processing equipment used for the
manufacture of oil and wine are no longer found in private residences. Instead,
they are found in centralized locations in settlements or within the palaces
themselves. In addition, Linear B writing on transport stirrup jars implies the
explicit involvement of the palatial authorities, who presumably had a direct
effect on the production and shipment of some olive oil and wine. For
commensal exchange, even though the palaces were not exclusive producers
of wine and oil, they nevertheless seem to have taken a leading role in the
creation of specific religious and social associations with eating and drinking.19
The palatial authorities achieved these associations through exclusive state-
sponsored feasting events. The influence exerted over non-palatial feasting can
be seen through the archaeological record of funerary feasts, which seem to
imitate state-sponsored events. In non-commensal gift exchanges, the palaces
also seem to have had some influence. Specifically, palaces controlled, perhaps
exclusively, perfumed oils. Most burials included small, decorated containers
usually interpreted as containing scented oils, which perhaps had to come from
palatial stores. A shift in the type of small containers themselves might indicate
palatial control since palaces seem to have adopted stirrup jars as the container
of choice and the use of these vessels for funerary gifts increased substantially
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 151

during the Mycenaean palatial era. In addition, Linear B records indicate that
the palaces controlled and regulated ritual offerings of oil and wine to various
deities, even offerings originating outside of the palaces.
Patterns in commercial exchange during the Mycenaean palatial era also
suggest the entanglement became more centralized. Palatial involvement in the
production of transport stirrup jars increased dramatically in the Mycenaean
era. Whereas, during the Minoan Neopalatial era, the introduction of the
transport stirrup jar was itself a marker of the increase in dependency on surplus
oil and wine for long-distance commercial exchange, it is clear that this shape
transitioned to a more prominent role in commercial exchange during the last
part of the Late Bronze Age. Specifically, while Neopalatial central authorities
seem to have been concerned with regulating the limited quantities of transport
stirrup jars and their contents, assigning them increased value, Mycenaean
palatial authorities were more concerned with their streamlined production
en masse. In addition, much of the commercial exchange that took place in the
Neopalatial era bypassed the central authorities using more local or regional
oval mouthed amphoras. This type of exchange diminished in the Mycenaean
era. At the same time, directional trade between Crete and the mainland palaces
increased substantially using transport stirrup jars. The central authorities and
palaces were unequivocally the most prominent nodes in the network of
relationships during the Mycenaean palatial era. While they certainly did not
retain exclusive rights to the production and exchange of oil and wine, they
nevertheless seem to have been heavily involved in surplus management.

Oil and Wine as Cultural Commodities in the Mycenaean Era

The high value of oil and wine and the increasing relationships of dependency
between people and these two commodities were affected by three new factors
present from the beginning of the Mycenaean era: the increased centrality of
palaces, the increasing reliance of central authorities on the produce of the
hinterland, and the increasing importance of overseas trade.
The Mycenaean palatial era of the Late Bronze Age institutionalized the
dependency between people and oil and wine through the institutionalization
and homogenization of physical structures, ritual actions, and commercial
transactions. The palaces reinforced the dependency already in place from the
previous Neopalatial era by directly producing those dependencies and con-
trolling them. Mycenaean palatial architecture was highly standardized
throughout the Greek mainland and Crete. This standardization implies a
standard of actions and events that took place there. Commensal events, with
oil and wine playing prominent roles, obtained a significant amount of atten-
tion from palatial authorities, as recorded in the Linear B records and the
archaeological remains of feasting supplies, including wine and oil storage,
152 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

found within palaces. In the Mycenaean world, banqueting became a powerful

competitive instrument, peculiar to small-scale network communities. It has
been argued that political actors of exclusionary polities, such as the Mycenaean
palaces, developed a political system around their monopoly of sources of
power based on a network of exchange relations, in which the individual
dimension never faded (Galaty and Parkinson 2007). Oil and wine became a
significant source of power for Mycenaean elites, especially within the context
of commensal and commercial exchange where large quantities of surplus were
required. Consequently, feasts would occur frequently and “constitute an
active and dynamic means of social exclusions and attainment of power”
(Borgna 2004, 266–267).
The palatial need for large surpluses of oil and wine did not stop at the level
of state-sponsored events. The payment texts found in the palace at Pylos
record enough food, including wine, to fully support ca. 1,800 individuals for
1 month, about 60 percent of the population of the town. This is not as
extensive as classical redistribution, but it is clear that palatial disbursements
represent a substantial contribution to staple consumption within the Pylian
polity (Nakassis 2010, 138). Certainly, some of this distribution was intended
for supplying communal commensal events of one kind or another, but the
details surrounding these events are unclear.
This outstanding palatial dependency on surplus commodities for large-scale
exchange might have resulted in significant consequences to the overall entan-
glement. Indeed, one could argue that the palatial assertion of dependency on
oil and wine overstepped the natural balance between production and con-
sumption, thereby destabilizing the entanglement surrounding the oil and wine
industry. Specifically, there was a sudden necessity for a massive increase in the
production of commodities, not least oil and wine, and the containers necessary
to transport, store, and consume them. This value as a result of need produced
an increased dependency on the people and products of the hinterland.
The topics covered in the Linear B records already indicate a significant
investment in the control and regulation of agricultural land. This focus on land
survey is a product of the Mycenaean economy, not a holdover from the
Minoan palatial era. While the extent of the control of the palaces over territory
is greatly debated, it is nevertheless clear that they did not directly own most of
the land. Instead, surplus was acquired through taxation and assessment.20 The
tablets also suggest that the palaces not only acquired goods, but also people in a
similar way. Linear B records from Pylos (e.g., PY An 207) suggest that workers
did not work for the palace in their own villages, but were recruited from there
for service at the palace or some other central location. These personnel include
religious workers, sawyers, potters, goldsmiths, bow-makers and perhaps
leather-sewers (Killen 2006, 84). Considering the limited number of topics
covered by Linear B tablets, the large quantity of texts related to acquiring
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 153

surplus goods or labor is indicative of the palatial dependency on these products

and people for the proper functioning of exchanges. In any model of the
Mycenaean economy (wealth finance, staple finance, or prestige), there is a
necessity for huge support from the hinterland through both direct contribu-
tions of commodities and indirect contributions through payment or rations
(Nakassis 2010).21
The value of oil and wine and their status as cultural commodities was also
greatly affected by the increasing importance of overseas trade to the cultural
economy of Mycenaean Greece. Mycenaean elites relied on external trade for
the acquisition of goods that empowered them (Burns 2010). This desire for
prestige goods generated a need to supply external markets with products.
Perfumed oil (and perhaps wine) seems to have been one of the primary exports
of the Mycenaean world. The most commonly found Mycenaean imports at
sites in the Mediterranean are small, closed, elaborately decorated vessels (most
likely for holding perfumed oils), followed by open vessels associated with wine
drinking, such as kylikes and kraters. For example, out of a total of 206
imported Mycenaean vessels found in the tombs at Ugarit, 101 were closed
vessels (stirrup jars, piriform jars, alabastra, and flasks) and 77 were consumption
vessels (kraters, cups, stemmed cups, bowls; van Wijngaarden 2002, 288). At
the site of Enkomi on Cyprus, mortuary contexts produced 973 imported
Mycenaean ceramics, of which 467 were consumption vessels and 426 were
small closed vessels (van Wijngaarden 2002, 296). From LH I–LH IIIB, 348 sites
around the central and eastern Mediterranean received Mycenaean pottery
(van Wijngaarden 2002, 302–303 Map 1).
Prominent within this collection of imported Mycenaean ceramic shapes is
the transport stirrup jar, which conveyed bulk quantities of Aegean oil and/or
wine throughout the Mediterranean. The stirrup jar became a type of “brand”
for Aegean products (Bevan 2010). This brand was based on stirrup jar recogni-
tion, which stimulated the imitation of stirrup jars throughout the eastern
Mediterranean. Demand for these Aegean commodities by other
Mediterranean cultures perpetuated the propagation of the brand and its
imitations. This scenario is very different from the previous Neopalatial era.
Previously, the value of oil and wine was purely contained within the Minoan
palatial economy and its access to surplus commodities. The palaces then used
surplus oil and wine to maintain transactions necessary for the longevity of the
elites currently in power. Yet, at that point, access to surplus oil and wine was
not entirely within their control. In the Mycenaean palatial era, however,
control of surplus oil and wine became a staple concern of palatial administra-
tion. By controlling large quantities of surplus oil and wine, as well as their
containers, the elites could tap into a larger Mediterranean economy. Once
firmly established within this Mediterranean economy, an external demand for
Aegean oil and wine helped to perpetuate the central authority’s control.
154 O I L A N D WIN E I N T H E MY CE N A EA N P A L AT I A L E R A

Because there was an increase in the production of surplus oil and wine, elites
gained access to a larger maritime market. Access to the market meant access to
precious materials, signs of wealth and power. Acquisition of these materials, in
turn, fueled the desire to produce, and therefore control, more surplus produc-
tion of oil and wine. This situation differs dramatically from the previous
Neopalatial era when surplus oil and wine was not predominantly used as a
means of interacting with other people and the things that surround them.
Instead, surplus was used primarily as an internal mechanism of power and
value acquisition.
The Mycenaean-era desire to regulate the production, distribution, and
consumption of surplus oil and wine could not be maintained. This tenuous
situation became especially apparent once the broader external market sub-
stantially diminished after the destruction of major Near Eastern cities and
social disruptions at the end of the Late Bronze Age. After all, it was the ability
to tap into this broader exchange network that was simultaneously providing
power to central authorities while driving a desire to exert that power over the
production process. The disruption to that market for surplus Mycenaean oil
and wine was certainly one of the factors leading to the collapse of the palace
economy. These moments of decline are when the negative connotations of
dependency come into play. Dependent on the Mediterranean market for
commercial exchange of oil/wine, the Mycenaean elites were perhaps not
readily able to acquire necessary prestige objects and resources like metals.
Although these Bronze Age relationships between Mediterranean cultures, as
well as the shared value of oil and wine, might have contributed to the downfall
of the Mycenaean citadels (along with other east Mediterranean regions), they
may also have contributed to the maintenance of some form of exchange
connections throughout the “Dark Ages.”
FOUR

MAINTAINING THE RELATIONSHIP

Oil and Wine in Postpalatial Greece

A round 1200 bce, the mycenaean palaces suffered a

dramatic decline. Along with this socioeconomic turning point came
significant changes to the ways oil and wine were produced and exchanged.
And yet, both commodities remained integral to the functioning of the same
types of exchanges present in the previous palatial eras. Their status as cultural
commodities, as things having a high value and deep entanglement with the
world around them, only seems to solidify during the centuries following the
Bronze Age collapse. In fact, tracing the roles of oil and wine in the cultural
economy of Postpalatial Greece provides an intriguing window onto broader
continuities and changes from the previous Palatial era. The ways in which
social structures, hierarchies, and economic opportunities adapted to a world
without palaces are accessible through the lens of oil and wine as these
commodities continued to be exchanged during commensal, gift, and com-
mercial events.
Explanations for why the Mycenaean palaces all seem to have undergone
either total or partial collapse around the same time are many and varied
(Dickinson 2010; Middleton 2010, 2017; Maran 2011). Both internal and
external stimuli seem to have played a role and may have worked together to
bring down the political and economic structures in place during the palatial
Bronze Age. Earthquakes, droughts, and influxes of new people, even
nonhostiles, are some of the more popular external causes attributed to
the collapse. As will be discussed further in this chapter, the climate does

155
156 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

indeed seem to undergo significant changes at this point in time, which

might have contributed to stresses already in place. Internal political and
social conflicts and mismanagement are also factors that might have con-
tributed to the downfall of Mycenaean society. For example, perhaps the
large-scale building projects commissioned by the ruling elite in the last part
of the palatial era depleted the countryside of necessary labor for harvesting
crops and supplying the palace with surplus products (Maran 2010).
However, building projects at Tiryns, such as dams and cyclopean walls,
and at Mycenae suggest that at some point there was conflict and crisis
mitigation (wells, storage, defensive walls, and entrances) but that these
issues seem to have been addressed before the final collapse took place.1 The
general consensus among scholars is that a combination of factors, different
for each region of Mycenaean Greece, worked together with the result that
the political and social structures in place were no longer sustainable or
desirable.
After the collapse of the palaces, the Greek world entered into a period of
transition. At one point, the Postpalatial era (LH/LM IIIC in ceramic chron-
ology terms) was thought to have been exceedingly desolate, broken compared
to the previous apex of cultural sophistication. However, the last 40 years of
excavations at Postpalatial sites have brought to light a new interpretation of the
society that persisted after the downfall of the palatial hierarchy. Indeed, many
if not most of the Mycenaean palatial sites continued to be occupied, some of
them, like Tiryns, even growing in size (Kilian 1978, 468–470). Evidence for
immediate reoccupation can be detected at Tiryns, Mycenae (Iakovidis 2003;
French 2007, 2011b;), Midea (Thomatos 2006, 186–188), Argos, and even
Pylos (Lafayette Hogue 2016).
Other non-palatial sites were reoccupied or newly established and seem to
have prospered for multiple generations. Some of the most prominent non-
palatial sites include Aigeira in Achaia, Korakou in the Corinthia, Lefkandi on
the island of Euboea, and many sites in coastal Lokris, Phocis, and Attica.
Indeed, this coastal region of central Greece and Euboea, straddling the Euripos
Strait, seems to have gained in importance from the previous palatial era. New
building projects at prominent sites like Mitrou, Kynos, and Lefkandi suggest
that their strategic location along the Euboean Gulf and their connections to
each other, as well as other regions, promoted prosperity (Lemos 2014, 171).
Inland sites such as Kalapodi, Agnanti, Elateia, and cemeteries such as Rema
Pharmaki, Spartia, Golemi, Sventza, and possibly Vagia all seem to have not
only continued occupation in the Postpalatial era, but also flourished (Kramer-
Hajos 2008, 129). As we will see, this particular region’s importance continues
into the Early Iron Age.
At many of the reoccupied sites, construction of new dwellings signals the
emergence of new social and cultural ideologies. The construction of
 OI L A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GR EECE 157

multiple large buildings within a single settlement might signal the emer-
gence of independent oikoi or households. It has been argued that the ruling
class of these Postpalatial settlements was composed of individuals from these
oikoi. Perhaps some of them had been connected to the previous Mycenaean
political system, such as the survival of provincial seats of the Mycenaean qa-
si-re-we, as suggested for the site of Lefkandi (Lemos 2014, 178–179).
Whoever these elites were exactly, it is clear they had the capability to
recruit the manpower necessary for building walls (Naxos, Lefkandi),
reorganizing the layout of settlements (Tiryns, Lefkandi, Aigeira), and
maintaining contact with other sites and other peoples. After the palatial
collapse, elite groups established or hung onto power gradually throughout the
twelfth century and consolidated their rule in LH IIIC Middle. This vying for
power directly in the aftermath of palatial collapse could be responsible for the
destruction present at a number of sites at the end of LH IIIC Early (Xeropolis,
Kynos and Aigeira; Lemos 2014, 179). Once established, it seems clear that elites
at Postpalatial sites were responsible for social cohesion and cooperation. As
discussed further on, one of the main ways in which this could be achieved was
through communal events, such as feasting and ritual worship.
Based on these observations about governance, demographics, and trade, it
can be suggested that the Postpalatial era in Greece was characterized by an
existential conflict between the memory of a palatial past and the reality of
the present and future. At the same time that socially significant areas of the
palace were reused, such as the megaron, new types of buildings were
constructed on top of the old foundations. Burial rites carried on as before
in reused and/or new chamber tombs in most regions, at the same time that
new cremation practices were introduced. Types of objects such as seals
made of precious stone, once regarded as the highest form of status marker,
continued to impress as part of the cultural memory of the surviving elites.
Such keimelia could make use of powerful symbols to establish links with the
past, as demonstrated by the Tiryns hoard (Maran 2006, 2011). However, the
persistence of these symbols could also suggest that social order was highly
unstable, and in the long run these links with the past became detrimental to
the legitimization of power (Lemos 2014, 180). The site with the most
prominent connections to its Mycenaean past, Tiryns, lost its importance
by the end of the Postpalatial era. Yet Tiryns was part of a broader trend felt
at most of the reoccupied sites of the Argolid. By four or five generations
after the end of palatial rule, the collective memory of the past seems to have
given way to the realities of the present and new ways of managing social and
economic affairs. Indeed, one could surmise that by the end of the LH IIIC
period, “life was very different” (Lemos 2014, 180). At the same time,
however, the continued use of oil and wine in relatively consistent exchange
158 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

contexts signals a significant effort to continue social and economic

traditions.

PRODUCTION OF OIL AND WINE

There is no doubt that the collapse of the Mycenaean palaces resulted in

significant changes to the political, social, and economic world of Greece.
Entangled in all of these realms of human existence are agricultural practice and
its products. Changes to how olive oil and wine were produced and how any
surplus products were stored can reflect the broader socioeconomic changes
occurring at Postpalatial settlements, including who had control of these
commodities. While the Minoan era left behind pressing beds indicating
where and at what relative scale oil and wine had been produced, the
Mycenaean palatial era was less forthcoming. Indeed, as mentioned earlier,
most of our evidence still comes from Crete and we are left without any
evidence on the Greek mainland for pressing equipment despite the fact that
we know without a doubt that a great amount of oil and wine was produced
throughout the region. Unfortunately, we are faced with the same circum-
stances in the Postpalatial era of mainland Greece. There are no obvious
remains of ceramic or stone pressing equipment datable to this period. The
only possibility is an oval-shaped “shallow tub or watering trough,” measuring
0.75 m in width by 1.43 m in length, cut out of a limestone block with a hole in
the west end “for emptying” found at Korakou in Corinthia (Blegen 1921, 84;
Rutter 1974, 546; Thomatos 2006, 199). However, their complete absence
might indicate that the evidence either does not survive due to its ephemeral
material, or perhaps these activities were taking place out in the countryside,
where little archaeological exploration has taken place.
Another option for why there is absolutely no evidence for pressing equip-
ment in the Mycenaean palatial or Postpalatial eras, is the possibility that the
pressing strategies and associated equipment were different and, consequently,
have not yet been identified. A decrease in scale of production might corre-
spond with the use of nonspecialized equipment, such as a mortar and pestle or
related technologies, as well as tools produced with perishable materials. Such is
the case at the Neolithic sites off the Carmel coast in the Levant where the
earliest evidence for olive oil production has been discovered (Hadjisavvas
2003, 117; Foxhall 2007, 13). As discussed in the Introduction section
on pressing installations, there are a few ancient examples of Type II or
rock-cut/built rectangular pressing basins or platforms. These installations
were often chiseled out of bedrock in vineyards. There, grapes would be
crushed, the must collected, and transferred to ceramic containers (e.g.,
Bronze Age bi-level basins at Agarak in Armenia and on Minoan Gavdos).
Similar installations were used up to the early modern period (e.g., La Rioja,
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 159

Spain; see Chapter 1). Remains of such rural presses would be very hard to
discover in the archaeological record. Indeed, even if one were to stumble
upon the bedrock cutting, it would not necessarily be immediately clear what it
had been used for and even more difficult to prove it had been used for the
treading of grapes.
Despite the lack of obvious pressing installations for wine or olive oil, it is
nevertheless certain that olives and grapes did indeed continue to be cultivated
along with most if not all of the other types of agricultural produce planted in
the palatial era. A growing body of archaeobotanical evidence indicates that
after the palaces collapsed, towns, especially those not previously highly inte-
grated with a palace economy, continued to produce the same individual
components of the palatial-period agricultural system (Foxhall 1995; Schachl
2006 [Aigeira]; Livarda and Kotzamani 2006 [Xeropolis]; Pasternak 2006
[Tiryns]; Wallace 2010, 35–36). For example, archaeobotanical remains from
Nichoria and Methana suggest that virtually the same subsistence crops con-
tinued to grow in the Early Iron Age, including olives and grapes. Indeed,
many storage and occupation areas found in Postpalatial settlement contexts
contain remains of either olives or grapes. For example, at Korakou, a large
quantity of carbonized olive pits was found fallen between the central build-
ing’s earthen platform and column base (Blegen 1921, 86, n. 1). In general, and
where information is available, it seems that Postpalatial socioeconomic man-
agement on both the Greek mainland and Crete supported a broad agricultural
strategy that included the cultivation of different species of cereal, legumes, and
fruit (Lemos 2014, 178). Olives and grapes continued to be staple products.
Cultivation continuity for most of the same plants also seems to have
involved a continuation in surplus production. This surplus, however, was
no longer funneled into palatial storerooms. Instead, both large and smaller
houses in most Postpalatial settlements have their own storage facilities (Lemos
2014, 177). As discussed further on, this surplus storage strategy might indicate
that the entanglement in place from the previous era had altered to become
more localized and perhaps independent or self-sufficient.
While there is no question that olive oil and wine would have been
produced after the collapse of the palaces, the scale of production and
where it took place or who was involved are hard to pinpoint. Without
identifiable pressing equipment, it is impossible to determine with certainty
where production of olive oil and wine was taking place, and by association,
who might have had control over this process. Therefore, it may be useful to
examine, in brief, the production trends of other products commonly produced
in the Bronze Age and generally regarded as essential to daily life.2 In her work
on the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Greek economy, Sarah Murray
(2012 2017) examined in detail the evidence for production of textiles, pottery,
and metals at excavated settlement sites. The data indeed indicate marked
160 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

changes in the location and extent of production between the Palatial and
Postpalatial eras. Specifically, there was a meaningful decrease in the scale of
industrial production after the palatial collapse, with large complexes like
those at Poros-Katsambas and Kommos falling out of use, replaced by
localized small-scale work at individual sites (Murray 2012, 209). Ceramics,
which had not been produced within major settlements in LM/LH IIIB,
were made and fired on a village-by-village basis in the LM/LH IIIC period.
Evidence for textile production is similarly distributed. In addition, after the
collapse of the palaces, centralized control of the bronze industry likewise
dissolved, which led to local communities having access to metal resources
and their trade. The result was a sudden explosion in the use of bronze for
personal adornment, along with new import distributions in the LM/LH
IIIC period. These changes in scale and location of production indicate that
after the palatial administration disappeared, economic scale and structure
were altered significantly. While there is limited material indication of the
production of many everyday goods within LB IIIB sites, LB IIIC sites, in
contrast, show “remarkable and wide-ranging evidence of industrial activity”
(Murray 2012, 207). Since these production trends apply to three of the most
common and important products – pottery, textiles, and metals – perhaps oil
and wine also shifted from centralized, large-scale production to localized,
smaller-scale production.

Changes to Surplus Storage Practices

The spatial patterns for storage of surplus agricultural products, including oil
and wine, changed dramatically in the Postpalatial era. The Minoan
Neopalatial and the Mycenaean palatial eras saw the centralized storage of
much surplus goods, which were then mobilized for multiple modes of
exchange, including large commensal events. In the Postpalatial era, however,
storage of surplus goods shifted to the level of households, or at least wealthy
households, including, but not limited to, the leaders of communities. In the
previous palatial eras, most storage was located with the palaces or in adjacent
buildings dedicated to surplus storage. In the Postpalatial era, surplus storage
seems to have been placed not only within or around central buildings, but also
within other large houses located in the same settlement. For example, at
Tiryns, Building T on top of the old Mycenaean megaron was associated
with a row of twelve pithoi, interpreted as holding supplies for feasts
(Figure 4.1; Maran 2001, 118). In addition, many rooms in the Lower
Citadel contained storage containers and unbaked clay bins including Room
224 (Kilian 1988, 111), Kammer 14 (Kilian 1982, 399), Room 127 (Kilian 1983,
280–281, 287), and Rooms 106/106a (Kilian 1978, 459; Kilian 1979, 383).
Rooms 106/106a also contained equipment for consuming and storing wine
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 161

4.1 Model of Tiryns during LH IIIC. View of the Upper Citadel with Building T from
a southerly direction. Photo: ARW-Modellbau, Thomas Weber, re-mastered by Dipl.-Arch.
M. Kostoula. Image courtesy of J. Maran and reproduced by permission of Archaeopress

and oil including a trefoil jug, a stirrup jar, four kraters, and many stirrup jar
stoppers, one of which had a seal with a goat impressed nine times on it
(Thomatos 2006, 193).
At Mycenae, pithoi seem to have been found throughout the LH IIIC levels
(Sherratt 1981, 78). Just like Tiryns, pithoi were also accompanied by bins made
of unbaked clay. At the Granary, Wace mentions two pithoi and “the rest – and
they were many – were vessels in shape like small tubs about 0.70 m high and
0.50 m in diameter, with thick walls of unbaked clay” (Wace 1921–23a, 48). In
the remains of the pithoi and small tubs were carbonized grains such as vetches,
barley and wheat (Wace 1921–23, 49). Other rooms of the LH IIIC period of
the citadel contained similar storage features. House M, located on the north-
west side of the Acropolis just inside the fortification wall, had a vestibule,
central room, and rear chamber (Mylonas 1966b, 17, 27–31). An area to the
south of this house acted as a road that led to storage rooms in north and east.
North of House M and west of an upper courtyard were corridors leading to
storage rooms to the west (Mylonas-Shear 1968, 235–248). Ceramic evidence
suggests that the storage rooms, courtyards and corridors were all in use during
LH IIIC (Mylonas 1968, 29, 31). Even the citadel at Pylos, which had been
badly burned at the end of LH IIIB contained LH IIIC occupation, including
162 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

a large storage area above Room 38 with at least thirty pithoi and other large
jars (Lafayette Hogue 2016, 153).
Sites that had no palatial past also show evidence for increased storage
capacity within or near large houses in the LH IIIC period. At Korakou,
Building P, which has evidence for feasting, also produced a large quantity of
carbonized olive pits (Blegen 1921, 86, n. 1) and has storage facilities. These
features suggest that whoever lived there controlled not only resources, but
also, perhaps, ritual activities (Fox 2012, 65). The substantial buildings found on
the acropolis at Aigeira also have evidence for multiple large storage rooms,
some of which contained bins full of barley, beans, and vetches, and also kilns,
indicating that the settlement had adequate resources and subsistence organiza-
tion. During Phase Ib of the LH IIIC site, the household areas included
a pottery kiln and storage room with two batteries of clay bins set on the
floor and filled with carbonized fruit. One amphora was found lying on a clay
platform. Bins were half filled with barley, beans, vetches, and figs. The kiln
and storage room lined a courtyard in which was a large clay bin filled with
ashes (Alram-Stern 2003, 19).
The large Postpalatial site of Kynos, located on the coast of Lokris, has also
produced evidence for large storage areas, as well as industrial activities. Most
buildings contained storage areas and the discovery of kilns provides evidence
that workshops were also housed in the buildings (Kramer-Hajos 2008, 39). In
one house, an LH IIIC clay floor contained many pithoi in situ used as a storage
facility (AD 40, pl. 59). Other pithoi with seeds and round, clay storage bins in
earlier floor levels suggest the area was used as storage quarters in at least three
consecutive phases, indicating that agricultural produce from the plain of
Atalanti was stored centrally at Kynos (Kramer-Hajos 2008, 39). As mentioned
earlier, Lefkandi too had a decentralized storage strategy, with most houses
having excellent storage capacities (Lemos 2014, 171). Phase 1 has at least nine
circular bins of unbaked clay and other clay receptacles and large storage pithoi.
Among the finds of this phase were carbonized figs, olives, and remains of spelt
mixed with barley (Popham and Sackett 1968, 11–13). Phase 2 had more
unbaked clay bins. Storage areas were incorporated in house complexes along-
side other functions – usually pertaining to food preparation. In all these cases,
the desire to continue producing labor-intensive surplus commodities may
have been triggered by competition in the form of conspicuous consumption
and control over resources, an aspect of social life that had clearly continued
from the Palatial period.

The Possible Effects of Climate Change

As outlined in Chapter 1, broad paleoenvironmental changes occurred over the
course of the Bronze and Iron Ages. In what way, if any, did these climate
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 163

fluctuations affect the production of oil and wine during the Postpalatial era
within the larger network of dependencies between people and agricultural
production more generally? Large-scale climate change and severe weather
conditions, such as drought or excessive rain, are no longer considered major
factors in the demise of the Mycenaean palaces (Middleton 2010). While
micro-climate variation cannot be ruled out (such as, perhaps, in Messinia),
the once popular belief that long-term (over 200 years) drought affected the
entire eastern Mediterranean during and after the palatial collapse does not hold
true. Instead, recent archaeological exploration has provided sufficient infor-
mation about the Postpalatial revival on the Greek mainland to suggest con-
tinued occupation of the land and perhaps even increased fertility. The
abandonment of large-scale water management features like those seen in
Minoan and Mycenaean palatial eras might suggest that they were no longer
necessary. Many of the large-scale built features of the palatial eras were
intended to defend against floods or increase arable land. At Tiryns, a
dam and river diversion prevented flooding (Deger-Jalkotzy 1998, 120;
Maran 2006, 126) and around Gla major hydrological work drained the
Kopais basin to increase agricultural land (Loader 1998, 101–109). Based on
multiple paleoclimate proxies (e.g., oxygen-isotope speleothems, stable carbon
isotopes, sea-surface temperatures, and changes to foraminifera), it has recently
been argued that the end of the Late Bronze Age gradually ushered in an era of
cooler temperatures and aridity, replacing the severe bi-modal seasons which
brought large-scale seasonal flooding in the Minoan and Mycenaean palatial
eras (Drake 2012; Brooke 2014, 299).3 Overabundance of water and flooding
can be even more detrimental to crop growth than lack of water, at least in the
short term. If around 1200 BCE the climate slowly shifted toward increasing
aridity, then the water management features intended to contain, drain, or
divert, would no longer have been needed and the crops may have, at first,
benefited from reduced rainfall (Drake 2012, 1866; Weiberg and Finné
2018, 589).
In support of the obsolescence of such features is the apparent increase in
quality of vegetation and crops during the Postpalatial era. Grain from the LH
IIIC Argolid was even larger and better quality than during the previous palatial
era (Deger-Jalkotzy 1998, 122). It has been suggested that the palatial collapse
opened up vast amounts of land to regeneration and renewal, making crop
production much less strenuous. In addition, plentiful land and perhaps
a decrease or dispersal of population (at the same time that some nucleation
occurred in other areas) did not require the large-scale water management
features once necessary for intensive subsistence in a relatively densely popu-
lated land. Indeed, one of the main factors in a community’s resilience is the
ability to move during climate changes (Nelson et al. 2016, table 1.1). The end
of the Postpalatial era, however, might have been detrimentally affected by the
164 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

same climate change toward aridity, as it increased in severity (Drake 2012,

1868; Weiberg and Finné 2018, 589). Evidence for site abandonment and
widespread population shift is more apparent at the start of the Early Iron
Age, when the palatial sites in the Argolid, which had been reoccupied and
even expanded in the Postpalatial era (Tiryns, Midea, Mycenae, Asine),
became mostly depopulated. Instead, there appears to be a shift in population
density toward the north where natural water resources were more plentiful
(see Chapter 5). The strategies around the cultivation of grapevines and olive
trees would have likely been affected by both long-term climate change toward
aridity and short-term climate variation. Environmental components, how-
ever, were certainly secondary to the sociopolitical factors around the shifts
visible in the relationship between people, oil, and wine.

MODES OF EXCHANGE: COMMENSAL, GIFT, AND COMMERCIAL

Despite changes to political and social structures after the collapse of the
Mycenaean palaces, prominent exchange modes requiring surplus oil and
wine remained constant. Feasting, non-commensal gift-giving in the context
of ritual and funerary offerings, and commercial exchange can be documented
for the Postpalatial era. All, however, underwent significant changes in struc-
ture and scale, affecting the ways in which oil and wine were valued. At the
same time, some features carried over from the Palatial era attest to the lingering
values still present and acted upon in the Postpalatial era. Therefore, the
following sections trace the changes and consistencies in exchange modes of
the Postpalatial era and examine how these changes affected the place of oil and
wine within the society and how oil and wine continued to play a role in the
formation of Greek cultural identity.

COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: FROM REGIONAL TO LOCAL

As Wright (2004, 129) noted in his study of Mycenaean feasting, “the

evolving and changing form of feasting appears to be a sensitive gauge of
changes in sociopolitical structure, and a useful way to think about conti-
nuity through periods of transformation, such as the Postpalatial transition to
the Iron Age.”4 Indeed, feasting remained one of the dominant exchange
modes of the Postpalatial era but underwent meaningful changes in location,
practice, and scale. As will be discussed, many of the changes to feasting
practices seem to reflect the desire of elites to reference past palatial activities
while adopting new practices in order to gain support, power, and supremacy.
At the heart of feasting practices remained the necessity for surplus oil and,
especially, wine. Changes in the use of surplus oil and wine within feasting
contexts are manifested through changes in types of drinking equipment,
 COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: FROM R EGIONAL T O LOCAL 165

location of feasts, and the characterization of feasts. The following discussion

will not provide in-depth and detailed discussions of every known feasting
context.5 Instead, focus is placed on patterns evident in the archaeological
record that might indicate changing trends in physical locations of commensal
events and types of drinking equipment that represent specific practices.

Changes to Feasting Contexts

The tension between Palatial past and Postpalatial present in the context of
feasting can easily be seen in the locations chosen for commensal events. Three
categories can be perceived: (1) buildings used for feasting placed directly on
top or next to previous Mycenaean megara but with new features (central
column row, no hearth), (2) new buildings built for feasting that kept
Mycenaean features (e.g., hearth and altar), and (3) new feasting locations
with new features. People who continued to live in palatial sites often built
large buildings overtop the ruins of the previous palatial megara. These large
buildings frequently contain evidence for feasting events. More specifically,
there seems to be a desire to maintain continuity in feasting location, but
rearrange the building’s architectural features, abandoning some key elements
of palatial past and adopting new ones. The settlements of Tiryns, Midea,
Mycenae, Mitrou, and Pylos all have evidence for a Postpalatial building on
top of or near the palatial megaron used for commensal events. At Tiryns, the
“Antenbau” or Building T on the Upper Citadel occupied the eastern part of
the Mycenaean megaron and was built to incorporate the palatial throne but
abandon the central hearth, replacing it with a central row of columns
(Figure 4.1; Kilian 1981, 53–54; Maran 2000, 14–15; 2001, 115). It has been
suggested, however, that Building T was not the residence of a leader, but
instead served as the meeting hall for elite members of the community where
feasts would take place (Maran 2000, 2001, 2011).
The nearby settlement of Midea has similar evidence, with the LH IIIB
megaron on Terrace 10 reused during the LH IIIC period. Similar to Tiryns,
alterations were performed including the removal of the central hearth and
installation of a central row of columns (Walberg 1995, 87; 2007, 66–67). In
addition, one room at the back of the megaron, Room XI, was used for food
preparation as it had been in the palatial era. Remains of feasting events include
pottery, animal bones, and a ladle found in the center of the megaron with
residues of oil and meat (Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 127; Walberg and Reese
2008, 242).
The evidence from Mycenae is less prominent, but there does appear to have
been an LH IIIC building placed perhaps directly in front of the former
megaron (French 2002, 136). Elaborate drinking and eating wares found nearby
might suggest that feasting once had taken place in that building. Specifically,
166 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

a large deposit of very high-quality pottery was found washed down to the
citadel wall from some building higher up (French 2002, 136; Thomatos 2006,
142). Although it is not clear from which structure the fine pottery originated,
feasting seems to have remained in practice around the area.6
The reuse of Mycenaean megara does not seem to be confined to the
Argolid. At Mitrou, on what is now an island off the coast of Lokris (though
had been attached to the mainland in the Bronze Age), a substantial LH IIIC
building (Building B) was constructed on top of the ruins of the Mycenaean
central building (Building D). As at Tiryns and Midea, this Postpalatial building
contained a central row of columns in place of a large hearth (Van de Moortel
and Zahou 2005, 41–44). In addition, a room (Building C) adjacent to the
northwestern wall of Building B held a large deposit of intact pottery that
included a wheel-thrown cooking pot containing bones of a piglet. This
equipment suggests the presence of feasting activities in the adjacent central
building. The replacement of a central hearth by a row of columns at Tiryns,
Midea, and Mitrou might suggest that focus shifted from the large communal
megaron hearth to, perhaps, individual household hearths.7 In addition, the
outside courtyard was no longer used, so there does not seem to have been an
inside/outside separation as argued for the large-scale palatial feasts of the LH
IIIB period. It is impossible to know for sure what these changes imply or
whether they imply the same things at each site. These architectural trends,
however, do point to significant alterations in the fundamental attributes of
palatial buildings, which must, in some way, correspond to changes in the
practices performed in these spaces, that is, commensal events.
Finally, evidence reexamined from Postpalatial levels at the palace of Nestor
at Pylos suggests that feasting and storage of surplus might have continued in
this location after the destruction of the palace by fire (Lafayette Hogue 2016,
153–155). Specifically, a block of rooms was reoccupied (38, 40, Porch 41 and
Court 42) and a dump of at least 348 broken and discarded kylikes, pithoi, large
jars, and tripods was found in Court 42. In addition, Room 38 contained more
than thirty pithoi and other large jars. It is unclear, however, just how fre-
quently these events would have taken place, and whether there had been
a settlement in the area, or if these remains were more singular.
Feasting contexts in the Postpalatial era also included new buildings with old
features, essentially the opposite phenomenon as presented earlier. The best
example comes from Korakou in Corinthia. This non-palatial site was
a flourishing settlement in LH IIIB that continued without serious interruption
into the LH IIIC period. At that point, a large house (P) was built and seems to
have been the largest and most elaborate building in the settlement. The
excavation director, Carl Blegen (1921, 89), thought of it as “undoubtedly
the home of a very substantial citizen.” The central room of the building
contained a large central hearth with a column base to the north, an earthen
 COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: FROM R EGIONAL T O LOCAL 167

platform interpreted as a possible altar, and a low L-shaped bench (Fox 2012,
64). In addition, the eastern room bears clear evidence for cooking and many
kylix drinking cups were found. In all, the pottery from House P reveals a clear
bias toward ceramic shapes connected with drinking rituals, in quantities
greater than one family’s requirements. Ritualization of drinking activities
might thus be implied (Fox 2012, 65).
Finally, the Postpalatial era presents evidence for entirely new locations
where feasting took place, outside the confines of the palatial past. Non-
palatial sites, like Aigeira and Lefkandi, were occupied in the LH IIIC period
and saw substantial building in the first part of the period. A large building on
the top of the acropolis at Aigeira, although badly damaged, had much evi-
dence for feasting, including many pots used for serving and mixing wine
(Figure 4.2; Alram-Stern 2003, 2007; Deger-Jalkotzy 2003; Gauss 2009).
Lefkandi was also significantly built up in the Postpalatial era and the settlement
at Xeropolis became increasingly wealthy. It too had a large building, dubbed
the “Megaron” by its excavators, where there is much evidence for food
storage, preparation, and consumption from the LH IIIC Middle period into
the Early Iron Age (Lemos 2014, 171). Interestingly, Xeropolis also presents
evidence for smaller-scale feasting at individual elite homes. Homes dating to
Phases 1 and 2 had specific rooms for food preparation and storage, separated
from the dining areas. In the West House during Phase 1, the basement
(room 11) served as a “kitchen” and food storage area. Finds from the room
above it included cups, deep bowls, and scoops and suggest food was consumed
there (Evely 2006, 13, 16). The amount of ceramics found there indicates that it
was for average family use: five deep bowls, three cups and three kylikes (Evely
2006, 22). Although this type of consumption differs from large-scale feasting, it

4.2 Krater found in the ash layer above Phase II floor at Aigeira, Achaia. After Deger-Jalkotzy
2003, 71. Image by author
168 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

nevertheless appears that wealthy families maintained some amount of surplus

wine, at least, to consume on certain occasions, as indicated by their supply of
kylikes. During Phase 2 of Xeropolis, commensality increased beyond family
meals and there is evidence for large-scale feasting from Yard 8/9 between the
North and South Houses. Here, a large collection of drinking equipment
(kylikes, deep bowls, and kraters) was disposed (Evely 2006, 48). These feasting
activities continued into Phase 3 of the site as debris accumulated. It is assumed
that the actual dining took place within the buildings around this yard, where
drinking equipment (kylikes, kraters) and liquid storage containers (amphoras,
hydrias) have been found (Evely 2006, 51).
A similar situation was present at Tiryns, despite the fact that Building
T existed for communal feasting on the Upper Citadel. Large buildings located
in the Lower Citadel and Lower Town of the site provide evidence for larger-
scale commensal activities. For example, Megaron W in the Lower Town was
even larger than Building T and also had an axial line of three columns down
the center (Thomatos 2006, 195). In addition, a room in the northeastern
Lower Town, Raum (Room) 8/00, was apparently destroyed toward the
end of the Postpalatial era during the middle of a feast (Stockhammer 2008).
Tables with drinking sets, spits for grilling meat, and large liquid storage
containers were found standing in-situ. One of the storage containers was
a large Cretan transport stirrup jar saved from the previous LH IIIB period.
Instead of being placed in a basement, as before, this particular container was
displayed in the entryway to the room. We might therefore assume that its
contents, presumably olive oil, were, at this point, a prized possession.
One last context with evidence for large-scale feasting is rural ritual loca-
tions. That is, sanctuaries intended for regional participation. The temple at
Kalapodi presents just such a case. Evidence for human activities there dates
back to the Early Bronze Age, but the site gained in significance during the LH
IIIC period. Thought to be the sanctuary of the oracle of Apollo at Abai, at least
in later Greek history, the LH IIIC sanctuary was primarily open-air in nature.
Animal remains and the discovery of mainly bowls, cups, and cooking pots
suggest emphasis on communal dining. Such practices imply both a celebrated
location and occasion (Morgan 1996; Livieratou 2011). Feasting practices here
continued throughout the period and into the Early Iron Age.
In the cases presented earlier, the role of feasting as a local activity becomes
relatively clear. Oil and wine would have functioned within these contexts as
commodities for exchange between individuals who presumably know each
other and live close to one another. We might assume, therefore, that surplus
oil and wine would have decreased in quantity as it was now only needed to
supply local feasting occasions, not large-scale regional feasting such as those
taking place in the Minoan and Mycenaean palatial eras. At the same time, oil
and wine seem to have maintained or even increased their value within
 COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: FROM R EGIONAL T O LOCAL 169

commensal contexts as large-scale production was no longer active and elites

relied only on local supplies to sustain their activities, which were no less
important for maintaining social authority and cohesion.

Changes to Feasting Equipment

Perhaps one of the best markers for a change in feasting practices in the
Postpalatial era is a change in the equipment used for drinking. As in the
Neopalatial and Mycenaean palatial eras, shifts in the type and decoration
of feasting equipment can signal a shift in the participants, their relative
asymmetries, and even the broad goal of the commensal acts themselves, such
as community cohesion or, alternatively, exclusion. In the Postpalatial era, the
most significant change is a move away from the kylix drinking cup and
pouring equipment, such as jugs, to cups and bowls and especially the krater,
a large open container used for mixing wine with water and other additives
(Table 4.1). These changes in equipment seem to denote a move from
practices centered on pouring and toasting to practices centered on mixing
and small-scale communal drinking of the symposion variety. Indeed, as we
will see, the krater would continue to be the central feature of drinking
parties and feasts throughout the Early Iron Age and into the Archaic and
even Classical periods. We can also see the loss of mass-produced, plain
drinking ware in favor of a restricted amount of slightly more elaborate,
though by no means flashy, drinking wares. In the Postpalatial era, we
therefore witness the gradual abandonment of once prominent palatial prac-
tices and values. In their place, the political and social realms of the new
world were gradually developing their own ways of expressing themselves
through feasting practices, practices which became the hallmark of later
Greek culture.

table 4.1 Number and percentage of the whole ceramic assemblage of kylikes and deep bowls/skyphoi from
the LH IIIB to LH IIIC periods

LH IIIB LH IIIB LH IIIC LH IIIC LH IIIC # LH IIIC

# Kylix % Kylix Kylix # Kylix % Bowls % Bowls

Pylos c.7,106 63.89%

Midea 16 2.46% 4 4.65% 31 36.05%
Isthmia 25 33.78% 1 9.09% 5 45.45%
Korakou 6 50% 17 27.87% 14 22.95%
Xeropolis c.100 4.53%
Perati 4 0.33% 78 skyphoi 6.37%
Nichoria 45 1159

From Fox 2012, tables V.1, V.4, V.7, V.8

170 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

The krater was not a newly developed shape in the Postpalatial era. In fact, it
had been produced in Mycenaean Greece for quite some time during the
palatial era. However, it was never favored among the Mycenaeans themselves.
Instead, decorated kraters were produced in the Argolid and shipped east to
Cyprus, eventually making their way to the Levant where they are often found
in mortuary contexts. For whatever reason, however, the krater, and its
emphasis on mixing, gradually became the object of choice for feasting in the
Mycenaean homeland after the collapse of the palaces. Although merely spec-
ulation, perhaps the palatial authorities had a hand in the production and
shipment of these shapes abroad and their restricted use on the mainland.
Once this regulation no longer existed, but the ability to produce them and
their associated export value remained, people decided to adopt the krater for
themselves.
Kraters for mixing wine are present at all of the feasting contexts discussed
earlier, from those recalling palatial pasts to those establishing entirely new
settings. Indeed, within many of these contexts an abundance of kraters has
been found, often decorated. A list of all kraters found in Postpalatial contexts is
out of the scope of this chapter (for LH IIIC Middle see Thomatos 2006).
Instead, examples are provided that illustrate the variety of feasting contexts
within which kraters have been found and any patterns of deposition are
examined. At Midea, the excavators have noted that an “exceptional amount”
of kraters were found in the megaron area, which has been interpreted as
a storage place for these vessels (Walberg 2007, 140–44). In this context, the
presence of kraters has been interpreted as a sign of elite power, associated with
those dwelling in the megaron (Fox 2012, 61–62). Indeed, kraters are found in
other contexts referencing the palatial past in both the Argolid and central
Greece, such as Tiryns, Mycenae, Mitrou (Kramer-Hajos 2008, 45) and Kynos.
At Kynos especially, the krater is considered the “most indisputable shape of the
LH IIIC middle pottery” (Dakoronia 2007, 119).
It is also clear, however, that kraters are present in contexts that do not
reference any palatial past and are not the largest or most prominent buildings in
a settlement. The feasting contexts of Xeropolis at Lefkandi, as discussed earlier,
all produced kraters, especially in Phase 3 of the settlement when they not only
increase in quantity, but also in decoration. This shift perhaps indicates an
increasing emphasis on drinking and mixing rituals over the course of the
Postpalatial era, as rituals and associated equipment of the previous era were
gradually replaced. At Aigeira, a non-palatial site, kraters are also found in
abundance and increase in quantity during the second and third phases of the
LH IIIC period. Indeed, the largest building on the acropolis during the middle
of the period, the “House of the Krater with Fringed Decoration,” produced
many fragments of large and elaborately decorated kraters and is named after
a large, elaborately decorated krater found smashed in the center of the room
 COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: FROM R EGIONAL T O LOCAL 171

(Deger-Jalkotzy 2003, 68). It appears, therefore, that kraters were indeed

associated with elites and feasting activities, but perhaps represent an entirely
new way of displaying and negotiating status in an era of renegotiation in most
aspects of life.
In addition to the adoption of kraters and associated mixing rituals, the
Postpalatial people gradually abandoned the kylix drinking cup, once so
incredibly abundant in the palatial past. Indeed, we might interpret the kylix
as a symbol of the palatial authorities that was best shunned during a time of
renegotiating hierarchies. In this way, one could disassociate oneself with an
oppressive, or at least meddlesome, palatial authority. We see this trend in kylix
use at both palatial and non-palatial sites. At Midea, the deep bowl easily
replaced the kylix. The deep bowl and related shapes seem to be associated
with krater usage. At Midea, the LH IIIC ceramic material was dominated by
kraters, deep bowls, and shallow angular bowls (24.4, 13.9, and 9.3 percent,
respectively; Walberg 2007, 140, fig. III-2). At Kynos, the dominant shape is
the deep bowl, here always two-handled, with the monochrome version most
popular (Dakoronia 2007, 122). The other prevailing shape found in large
numbers at Kynos is the semiglobular cup, which remains almost unchanged
throughout the whole LH IIIC period and was produced until as late as the
Sub-mycenaean period. As at most other sites, kylikes do not appear in great
numbers at Kynos (Dakoronia 2007, 122).
One contrasting example, however, is House P at Korakou. Just as the
builders of this house included references to palatial architectural features,
such as a central hearth and altar, the occupants and participants maintained
the use of kylikes and pouring vessels. The three most popular forms found in
the structure are the kylix, deep bowl, and cup. For the larger vessels, those
intended for pouring are popular and include the hydria, oinochoe, and jug.
Included among the containers were three stirrup jars, probably indicating the
presence of oil consumption at the commensal events that took place there
(Fox 2012, 65). At this location, therefore, feasting rituals purposely referenced
the palatial past, despite the more prevalent trend on the Greek mainland to
adopt vessels associated with mixing rituals.
Finally, the general trends in decoration of feasting equipment tend toward
relatively plain smaller vessels, such as cups and bowls, with the emphasis placed
instead on decoration of larger vessels central to the activities, namely, kraters.
Drinking cups are no longer mass produced as they were in the palatial eras.
Instead, smaller-scale collections of drinking cups are found within feasting
contexts or in debris associated with large houses. These drinking cups, how-
ever, remain relatively plain in decoration, often monochrome, or with simple
designs. It is clear, however, that decoration of kraters was an important aspect
of commensal ritual. This feature began in the palatial era when kraters were
decorated with scenes of elite ideology, such as chariots, and otherworldly
172 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

creatures, such as griffins. In the Postpalatial era, however, the decoration of

kraters shifts slightly to emphasize war, conflict, and hunting with some
regional specialization. According to Fox (2012, 76), of the total number of
pictorial vessels showing elite scenes, chariot scenes make up 3.3 percent during
the LH IIIB period, 16.2 percent during the LH IIIB/C period, and 26.3 per-
cent during the LH IIIC period. Scenes of foot soldiers or battle scenes are
almost nonexistent in the LH IIIB period, and make up 11.1 percent in the LH
IIIB/C period and 11.8 percent in the LH IIIC period. Hunting scenes are
perhaps the most novel invention of the Postpalatial era as they make up
7.9 percent of pictorial scenes during this time, but were virtually nonexistent
in the previous palatial era.
At Kynos, one ceramic workshop seems to have specialized in the produc-
tion of pictorial pottery, the majority of which were kraters. There, emphasis
was placed on warriors and ships, a relatively uncommon iconographic scene
during the palatial era (Dakoronia 1996, 2003, 2006). This should perhaps not
be surprising since Kynos was a wealthy coastal settlement that seems to have
been intimately connected to other coastal sites. Indeed, it has been speculated
that the wealth evident at Kynos was a result of piratical or aggressive behavior
toward other regions. If this is the case, then the iconography displayed on
kraters, the central features of feasting events, would have reflected the values
and sources of power for the elites residing there. Indeed, this connection
between kraters and elite ideology has been recognized at other sites (Deger-
Jalkotzy 2003, 68; Fox 2012, 66) and seems to be the general trend evident for
the time period, one that would continue into the Early Iron Age.

The Scale and Character of Feasts in the Postpalatial Era

The trends in context, storage, and equipment just discussed reveal overall
changes to the nature of feasting in the Postpalatial era. First, it is clear that
there was a significant decrease in the scale of commensal events. Feasting was no
longer a large-scale, highly organized event where multiple tiers of society were
constructed and reinforced through diacritical practices. Instead, feasting became
a venue for demonstrating a leader’s status and domination over others while
maintaining community integrity through a two-tier division of social status
(Fox 2012, 60). While it is clear that most contexts in which feasting activities can
be identified contained remains equivalent to supra-household usage, the num-
bers of drinking cups do not remotely come close to the hundreds of kylikes
found in palatial contexts like those at Pylos, Mycenae, and Tiryns.
Although events were smaller in scale, the ability to control surplus and
mobilize it in specific ways for ultimately political ends was nevertheless still in
place. Certainly, one of the most important and necessary surplus commodities
was wine, with oil no doubt being another valued item. As in the palatial eras
 G I FT E XCH AN GE: F UN ER AR Y A ND R I TUAL O FFER I NGS 173

before, without wine the feast could not take place. Indeed, the central feature of
the feast, the krater, was intended for mixing wine with water and other
ingredients and displayed the most prominent ideological symbols. The ability
to provide feasting occasions seems to have remained one of the most prominent
means of legitimizing someone’s higher status amongst the many. In other
words, commensal events offering wine and food in regulated ways still worked.
That superiority and legitimization seems to have had a prominent role in
feasting events of the time is evidenced by the decoration on kraters, promoting
warfare, hunting, and perhaps sea-raiding. Emphasis on military prowess can also
be seen in the funerary trends of the period, with an increase in burials often
called “warrior tombs” and the inclusion of weapons in burials.

GIFT EXCHANGE: FUNERARY AND RITUAL OFFERINGS

Non-commensal gift-giving continued to be an important mode of exchange

during the Postpalatial era. The difficulty in detecting non-commensal gift
exchange in the archaeological record is perhaps mitigated by focusing on ritual
offerings to the gods and grave goods to the dead. The Minoan and Mycenaean
palatial eras presented much evidence for this type of exchange by way of not
only physical remains, but also written documents listing the types and quan-
tities of offerings. During those periods, as discussed in Chapters 2 and 3, large
quantities of olive oil and wine were common gifts to the gods and to the dead.
Evidence for this exchange mode in the Postpalatial era, however, is much
harder to detect. Written documents had gone out of use and the total data
available for ritual contexts is meager. Thankfully, we do have a relative
abundance of cemeteries and, consequently, we are able to see patterns in the
types and quantities of grave goods.
Where feasting evidence is more oriented toward trends in surplus wine
exchange, funerary gift-giving presents us with more evidence for the
exchange of surplus oil, especially treated oil like perfume or unguents.
Wine, however, still seems to have played a part, though it may have been
certain types of scented or flavored wines. The skills and knowledge needed to
produce perfume and flavored wines was apparently not lost during the palatial
collapse. This retention is a testament to not only the importance of these
commodities but also perhaps their wider availability, such that when the
palace administration disintegrated, the technology was preserved elsewhere,
unlike, for example, writing. That these commodities were more widely
accessible in the Postpalatial era is suggested by the relative ubiquity of per-
fumed oil and wine containers within tombs, as discussed in subsequent
sections.
When examining the archaeological record of cemeteries, one must take
care to distinguish between objects that were left within the tomb as offerings
174 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

and objects that are the remains of ritual activities performed by the living.
More specifically, grave goods should be contrasted with the remains of
funerary feasts. While the funerary feast certainly would have been a site of
surplus oil and wine use, it does not fall into a category of explicit exchange
per se since one would assume the participants would be a collective family
group, not hosting other groups, which would indeed involve exchanging
surplus commodities. In contrast, vessels containing surplus oil and wine acting
as grave goods could be considered as a form of gift exchange in the sense that
the living family members are giving surplus goods to the deceased as a gift for
the afterlife, not expecting anything in return, at least directly. In any event,
funerary feasts are surprisingly scarce in the Postpalatial era, as no evidence for
such events has been found at the most prominent and well-studied cemeteries,
such as Perati and the Kerameikos in Athens (Fox 2012, 80). Instead, drinking
vessels and containers for liquids were placed inside the tomb, apparently as
grave offerings in addition to the oil and unguent containers. Indeed, at Perati,
containers for liquids formed 19.1 percent of the pottery assemblage and
drinking vessels 15.3 percent (Iakovides 1980, 25). These form the second
and third largest functional groups respectively, after perfume containers.
Only toward the end of the Postpalatial era and into the Protogeometric period
do we find increasing evidence for the reinstating of funerary feasts.
Specifically, at the cemetery of Elateia, pottery found in dromos fills predomi-
nantly belonged to open shapes like kraters, kylikes, cups, and bowls. These
deposits date from the LH IIIC Middle period into the Middle Protogeometric
period, so they tend to be later, when the practice of funerary feasting once
again became popular (Deger-Jalkotzy 2007).
While funerary evidence from the Postpalatial era is relatively abundant
compared to settlement and ritual data, the number of complete or even
partially excavated cemeteries is few. Most of the data available come from
single burials that happen to have been excavated due to human intervention or
rescue operations. These haphazard burials, while important in their own right,
are not as useful when trying to determine long-term patterns in value and use
over larger population groups. It is therefore necessary to rely on a small
number of cemeteries that have been more completely excavated and pub-
lished. These include Perati in Attica, the Kerameikos in Athens, and Elateia in
Phokis. Although the data are biased in favor of east-central Greece, they
present evidence against which it is possible to compare a smaller amount of
data from other regions of Greece. In addition, these more completely exca-
vated cemeteries do cover the entire Postpalatial era, with Perati leaning more
toward the beginning of the era and Elateia toward the middle and end.8 This
distribution allows us to more clearly see changing patterns in choices of grave
offerings over time, as well as regional differences. Finally, despite the small data
set, it does appear that the overall patterns evident at Perati and Elateia do
 G I FT E XCH AN GE: F UN ER AR Y A ND R I TUAL O FFER I NGS 175

(a)

(b)

4.3 (a) Small fine stirrup jar from Perati cemetery. After Mountjoy 1999, Fig. 219.439. (b) Small
fine amphoriskos from Perati cemetery. After Mountjoy 1999, Fig. 215.403. Image by Chelsey
Gareau

generally match with the evidence from other, less completely studied, sites
(Thomatos 2006, 167).
In the Postpalatial era, the most predominant shapes placed in tombs as grave
offerings were small, decorated stirrup jars and amphoriskoi (Figure 4.3).
176 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

Based on earlier and later analogies, as well as scientific evidence, it is generally

accepted that small stirrup jars and amphoriskoi were used for perfumed oil and
unguents, respectively. Chemical residue analyses performed on six small
stirrup jars dating to the Mycenaean palatial era resulted in evidence that
these containers were used for both oil and wine (French 2011a, 70). It is
generally argued, however, that the oil and wine contained within these small
vessels would have been treated in some way, most plausibly as perfumed or
spiced. Perfumed oil workshops of the LH IIIB period are all associated with
many small stirrup jars (Shelmerdine 1985, Thomas 1992). As discussed in
Chapter 3, texts written in Linear B closely document the production of
perfumed oil as a valued commodity and the palaces did appear to produce
a surplus. Based on the textual evidence available, we know that surplus
perfumed oil was often given to the gods and even designated for guest gifts
(xenwios) along with cloth. Although the majority of evidence comes from the
previous palatial era, the continuity in shape and elaborate decoration of small
stirrup jars and amphoriskoi would allow a certain amount of confidence in
assuming they contained the same types of liquids in the Postpalatial era.
Examples of small stirrup jars dating to the LH IIIC Middle period are most
commonly decorated in a linear scheme accompanied with zonal motifs. The
shoulder zone is always decorated, many times with the spout area treated
differently. Exceptions to this type of decoration are a considerable number of
vessels executed in the Close, Octopus, and Pictorial styles. By the late phase,
monochrome areas become more common as do reserved lower bodies with
a band at the base (Thomatos 2006, 22).9 For LH IIIC Middle amphoriskoi, the
two-handled type is most common and, in general, they are sparsely decorated
in terms of zonal motifs (Thomatos 2006, 46).
Both small stirrup jars and amphoriskoi are by far more frequently found in
cemetery rather than settlement contexts (Thomatos 2006, 261, chart 1.1).10 In
general, and especially toward the beginning of the era, small stirrup jars
outnumber amphoriskoi. Over time, the small stirrup jar increased in fre-
quency after the collapse of the palaces, maintained high levels in the early
part of the LH IIIC period, then steadily diminished in numbers toward the end
of the period when amphoriskoi seem to become more popular. By the
Protogeometric period, small stirrup jars mostly went out of use. During the
Postpalatial era, by far the majority of small stirrup jars found in funerary
contexts are locally made. There are, however, often a couple examples within
a cemetery that can be identified as imported from other regions of Greece.
Significantly, the local production of small stirrup jars might also suggest a local
production of the liquid contents.
At Perati, small stirrup jars are present in almost every tomb and when
present are almost always more numerous than other shapes (Thomatos 2006,
282–91, table 2.1.1). The ratio between amphoriskoi and stirrup jars was about
 G I FT E XCH AN GE: F UN ER AR Y A ND R I TUAL O FFER I NGS 177

1:2 (Iakovidis 1970, 153, 198; Deger-Jalkotzy 2007, 135). Indeed, most of the
relative chronology of the site is based on the changing attributes of small
stirrup jars (Iakovidis 1980). The tombs at the cemetery of Elateia have
produced more than 470 burial vases, which cover a span of time from LH
IIIC Middle through Early and Middle Protogeometric. Here, as at Perati,
closed shapes predominate and the most frequent shapes were amphoriskoi
(28.6 percent), small jug (22.5 percent), and stirrup jar (17 percent). Indeed,
open shapes are “exceedingly rare” within the tombs themselves, although they
do appear outside the tomb as debris from, presumably, feasting activities
(Deger-Jalkotzy 2007, 134). During the LH IIIC Middle period, amphoriskoi
and stirrup jars are in equal frequency at Elateia, which compares well with
Ialysos on Rhodes (Mee 1982, 30–38) and the cemeteries in Kephallonia
(Souyouzoglou-Haywood 1999, 64–67). This trend is in contrast with the
cemeteries at Medeon in Phokis, Achaia (Papadopoulos 1977/1978), and of
Skyros (Parlama 1984, 368–371), where amphoriskoi were by far outnumbered
by stirrup jars and other shapes. It is therefore possible that the remarkable
frequency of amphoriskoi may be defined as a characteristic feature of LH IIIC
Middle at Elateia, perhaps representing a local preference. Despite changing
frequencies, in all cemeteries large and small, it is clear that the two most
common shapes deposited as grave offerings were the small stirrup jar and
amphoriskos, followed by jugs, which would have also carried liquid
commodities.
Based on these data, we may say with some confidence that small amounts of
surplus oil, and perhaps also wine, contained in small stirrup jars and amphor-
iskoi were commonly given as gifts to the dead in the Postpalatial era. Although
the total number of liquid offerings was not large, especially compared to the
evidence presented by the palatial Linear B archives, it is nevertheless signifi-
cant that people continued to produce costly and specialized aromatic oils and
treated wines to give away as gifts. In this sense, the nature of these commod-
ities as surplus is particularly apparent: they are not consumed at any time.
Instead, they are taken out of use and placed with the dead. That small stirrup
jars and amphoriskoi are practically confined to tomb contexts might indicate
that they were produced and intended only for the funerary realm. However,
evidence from Perati, at least, suggests that most if not all of the vessels placed
within the tombs were slightly used (Thomatos 2006, 168). This use-wear
might indicate that small stirrup jars and amphoriskoi were precious vessels
containing valued liquids during a person’s lifetime and, when that person died,
were deposited along with the dead as a type of sacrifice. In other words, the
vessel and its contents were so valued that they were taken to the grave.
On the other hand, the two cemeteries that provide the most evidence,
Perati and Elateia, both appear to be particularly wealthy. The number of
imports and metal objects found in many of the tombs suggest that each
178 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

cemetery represents a prosperous community. With this in mind, the idea that
surplus oil and wine contained in small decorated vessels was highly valued still
holds true, but on a more communal, rather than personal, level. That is, as
wealthy communities, they had the means and knowledge to produce surplus
supplies of perfumed oil and wine, whereas it is possible that smaller, less
connected communities would not have had access to such goods and
exchange opportunities. Finally, the high value of these objects and their
contents is also made evident by the elaborate decoration often adorning the
vessels. Styles known as Close and Pictorial took much effort and were gen-
erally reserved for high-status markers such as kraters. The fact that small stirrup
jars were also elaborately decorated with elite symbols suggests that they too
acted as status markers within a shared community of value-creation.

COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE: SIMPLIFICATION AND LOCAL

RESOURCEFULNESS

Over the last few decades, one of the biggest debates among scholars of ancient
Greece concerns what exactly happened to long-distance connections after the
Mycenaean palatial collapse. Did eastern Mediterranean trade cease to exist?
Were the Postpalatial people living on the Greek mainland cut off from
imported raw materials and finished products that once seemed to be the
focus of much economic activity? Did large seagoing vessels, like that of the
Uluburun wreck, cease to travel between the Levant, Cyprus, and Greece
bringing shipments of metals, resins, and foodstuffs? While the most prevalent
arguments have highlighted discontinuity, in fact, the most recent and thor-
ough research contradicts notions of isolation.
Based on recent evidence from vibrant Postpalatial sites like Tiryns, scholars
are now arguing that trade both within the Aegean and with the East did not
necessarily decline during the final palatial phases or during the Postpalatial
phases (Maran 2010, 247). The elites of the Postpalatial Argolid, at least, seem to
have been able to acquire both raw materials and valuable finished products
through long-distance trade networks (Maran 2010, 247). The overall decrease
in the quantity of objects imported and found in the archaeological record may
instead have to do with a drop in demand for imports rather than with
a decrease in import availability (Murray 2012, 2017). Based on her analysis
of all known objects imported during the Postpalatial era, Murray (2012, 102)
suggests that “ . . . patterns in the number of import totals would be best
understood as an epiphenomenon of population fluctuation, rather than
a cause or effect of social phenomena.” In other words, although imports
were quantitatively less numerous than in the palatial era, they were not
particularly more unusual in terms of the number of imports relative to
population size. Ultimately, then, trade did not cease to operate at any time
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 179

after the collapse of the Mycenaean palaces and a “credible connection”

persisted between Greece and other distant lands (Murray 2012, 94).
Although trade in general does seem to have continued throughout the
Postpalatial era, does trade in bulk oil and wine also persist? And if so, who is
behind this trade and for what purpose? For long-distance imports of finished
products, it has been argued that Palatial acquisition of commodities for the
purpose of group legitimization gave way to uncontrolled access for the
purpose of individual enrichment. It has also been suggested that the agents
moving and trading the commodities transitioned from palatial officials to
outsiders such as Cypriots and Italians in the LH IIIC period (Murray 2012,
464, table 5.5). Specifically, the absence of copper and tin monopolization by
palatial authorities in the LH IIIC period allowed for regional exploitation of
external trade routes. For example, people living in the area of Achaia in the
west Peloponnese seem to have established closer connections with trade
routes to Italy in order to obtain bronze (Giannopoulos 2008, 255). And,
based on the presence of Near Eastern imports and an abundance of bronze
objects, the community connected to the Perati cemetery seems to have had
direct access to the Attic copper mines and consequently established new
trading relationships with the east to obtain tin necessary for producing bronze
(Iakovidis 1969, 1970; Murray 2012, 326–327, 335, 421–425).
But should we really view Postpalatial people as passive receivers of trade
performed by Cypriots and Italians, or is it possible to see some active role for
the inhabitants of Greece as they sought to re-establish or establish new values
and hierarchies through multiple modes of exchange? One piece of evidence
for an active approach to trade by Postpalatial people comes from iconography
on ceramics. As discussed earlier, the Postpalatial pictorial pottery presents an
increase in the depiction of conflict and hunting and legitimating activities. In
addition, some regions have produced many scenes of seafaring, ships, and even
battles at sea (Dakoronia 1987, 1996, 1999; Dakoronia 2002, plates 3–5;
Wachsmann 1998, figures 7.8, 7.15, 7.16). The area where these scenes are
most abundant is coastal Lokris, Phokis, and Euboea. At the settlement of
Kynos, one workshop seems to have specialized in the production of pictorial
pottery. There, a number of LH IIIC Middle kraters were found depicting
warriors with javelins and shields on ships (Figure 4.4; Dakoronia 1996, 2003,
2006). Other kraters depict ships with oars and steering oars, suggesting that the
galley ship, a faster and safer ship, continued to be constructed after the palatial
collapse and into the Early Iron Age (Wedde 2000, 2005, 2006; Eder 2006;
Crielaard 2006). Galleys needed a crew of at least twenty oarsmen and up to
fifty oarsmen for larger versions (depiction from Tragana has space for fifty oars:
Mountjoy 1999, 357–358; Eder 2006, 551). Not only would an infrastructure
be needed for the maintenance and management of these ships, but also
a continued purpose for their use. Obviously, warfare was one such purpose,
180 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

4.4 Representation of a ship on pottery from Kynos-Livanates. After Lemos 2014, 170, Fig. 4a.
Image by author

but it should not be a stretch to consider their use for other ventures, such as
trade. Indeed, if Postpalatial bureaucracy, whatever its exact formation, was
able to muster the manpower to produce large ships and use them, it would not
be surprising that these same local leaders were able to produce and exchange
surplus agricultural products, such as oil and wine.
For Postpalatial trade in oil and wine specifically, the best archaeological
evidence remains large ceramic transport containers. As in all other aspects of
the Postpalatial Greek world, the scale of production and distribution of con-
tainers diminished, resulting in less robust data from individual sites. However,
based on recent excavations and publications of important sites, it is nevertheless
possible to see some significant patterns in the production and distribution of
large ceramic containers. When compared to the trends of previous eras, these
Postpalatial patterns can provide insight into changes in the value of oil and
wine and the structure and scale of dependencies around their production and
distribution. Concerning the production of ceramic transport containers, three
main patterns emerge: the gradual loss of specialized containers, the simplifica-
tion of technological characteristics, and homogenization of style.

Loss of Specialized Containers

The two most prominent containers used to transport bulk liquids in the
Minoan and Mycenaean palatial eras, the oval-mouthed amphora and the
transport stirrup jar, disappeared entirely by the end of the Postpalatial era.
For the oval-mouthed amphora, this shape had already been gradually phased
out during the LB IIIB period as the transport stirrup jar increased in popularity
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 181

4.5 Cretan Postpalatial transport stirrup jar with octopus wavy lines from Halasmenos.
Tsipopoulou 2004, 110, fig. 8.5 no. 92-9. Image courtesy of M. Tsipopoulou and INSTAP
Academic Press, Philadelphia, PA

(Pratt 2016a). By the first phase of the Postpalatial era, it is clear that oval-
mouthed amphoras were entirely discontinued.
Transport stirrup jars had a more complicated trajectory but were never-
theless abandoned by the end of the Postpalatial era. Interestingly, while the
large transport variety of the shape clearly diminished in number, the small
fineware version increased exponentially, becoming the most prevalent closed
shape of the era, especially on the Greek mainland. On Crete, where transport
stirrup jar production had been concentrated during the palatial era, their
production continued, but they were morphologically very different from
most of their Late Bronze Age predecessors (Figure 4.5). Data from sites
throughout the island suggest that the tall, conical variety, so popular in LM
IIIB, disappeared from the Cretan LM IIIC repertoire, replaced by ovoid or
globular bodies. Another distinctive feature of LM IIIC transport stirrup jars is
the appearance of an air hole pierced into the false-spout cap. These holes can
sometimes reach upward of 1 cm in diameter (see, e.g., no. K. 36 from Karphi,
Day 2011, 246, fig. 8.3).
Based on the distribution and production patterns visible in the archaeological
record of Postpalatial Cretan sites, I have suggested elsewhere (Pratt 2016a) that
a localized production strategy was used for LM IIIC transport stirrup jars,
a strategy similar to the one used for contemporary amphoras and distinctly
different from that of the previous Final Palatial era. For example, the production
of local transport stirrup jars has been identified at Khania (Hallager and Hallager
2000, pl. 68c.1, no. 70-P1156), Thronos Kephala (D’Agata and Boileau 2009,
182 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

185, 196, 202), and Karphi (Day 2011, 341, 345). This localized production
pattern fits well with the overall trends of Postpalatial production discussed
earlier. Each site seems to have been relatively self-sufficient, producing their
own necessary products such as pottery, textiles, and metal objects, and trading
some of those products with other sites. Despite the localized production of
transport stirrup jars on Crete in the Postpalatial period, the shape nevertheless
went out of use by the end of the era throughout the island.

Use of Household/Simple Shapes

In place of oval-mouthed amphoras and transport stirrup jars, people through-
out Crete and the Greek mainland widely adopted a simpler type of container
for transport needs: the round-mouthed amphora (Figure 4.6). While this was
not a new shape in either location (LH IIIA2, Mountjoy 1999, 1:116), its
prevalence increased dramatically after the collapse of the Mycenaean palaces.
Throughout the early and middle phases of LB IIIC, round-mouthed amphoras
continued to be rim handled. By the late phase, however, neck-handled,
round-mouthed amphoras were introduced and seem to have functioned
alongside the still common rim-handled version. Despite the common shape,
Cretan and mainland versions had their own characteristics. Mainland

4.6 Postpalatial round-mouthed amphora from Halasmenos. Tsipopoulou 2004, 110, Fig. 8.4.
96-358. Image courtesy of M. Tsipopoulou and INSTAP Academic Press, Philadelphia, PA
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 183

amphoras (FS 69) have a thickened and often hollow lip and a ring base,
whereas Cretan varieties often have everted lips and flat bases (Mountjoy
2009, 290–91). These respective characteristics are in keeping with the general
trends of ceramic production in each region. In terms of motifs, however,
mainland FS 69/70 amphoras typically have scroll motifs on the shoulder, and
some Cretan round-mouthed amphoras follow this trend (see, e.g., Mountjoy
1999, 1:175, no. 377, fig. 50). When the neck-handled, round-mouthed
amphora (FS 70) is introduced in the later part of the LB IIIC period, there
indeed seem to be affinities between the mainland and Cretan versions.
Specifically, some late examples on Crete have twisted handles, a feature that
can also be observed on some late LH IIIC amphoras found in Attica and
surrounding regions (Mountjoy 2009, 290, fig. 4).
Just like the remaining production of Postpalatial transport stirrup jars, on
Crete the production of round-mouthed amphoras was localized. Although
the types of amphoras and their decoration remained relatively homogenous
throughout the island (predominantly rim-handled, round-mouthed amphoras
with banded decoration), they were produced at many different sites, including
Thronos Kephala (at least two workshops),11 Halasmenos (Tsipopoulou 2004,
105), Karphi, Palaikastro Kastri, and Kavousi Vronda. The quantities of
amphoras recovered from these sites indicate that amphora use increased during
the Postpalatial era at many settlements throughout the island. In the early part
of the period, transport stirrup jars may have continued to outnumber
amphoras, as demonstrated by their prevalence at Khania. However, during
the middle of the LM IIIC period, amphora quantities seem to have increased
dramatically (Pratt 2016a).
The Greek mainland seems to have followed similar trends. Like settlements
on Crete, Postpalatial sites on the Greek mainland produced local round-
mouthed amphoras. Unlike Cretan sites, however, mainland settlements con-
centrated on a repertoire of three large shapes – the jug, amphora, and hydria –
all of which had basically the same formation techniques and decorative motifs.
In fact, so many sites on the Greek mainland and islands produced such similar
pots that the existence of a koine has been suggested (Figure 4.7). Mountjoy
(2009) outlines a regional “East Mainland-Aegean Koine” that began in the LH
IIIC Middle period and became fully recognizable in the Late period. This
koine is based primarily on these three large closed shapes, with the addition of
a straight-sided krater. It is interesting that all shapes could be associated with
wine storage, transport, pouring, and consumption.
While all four of these shapes might often be referred to as “household”
items, during the Postpalatial era it seems that at least two, and perhaps three of
them, adopted a transport role as well. As already noted, round-mouthed
amphoras had been used as transport containers on Crete for quite some
time, but their transport role on the mainland seems to have come about
184 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

(a) (b)

(c)

4.7 LH IIIC East Mainland-Aegean Koine: examples of (a) Hydria FS 128. After Mountjoy
2009, Fig. 6.1; (b) Amphora FS 70. After Mountjoy 2009, Fig. 8.1; and (c) Krater FS 282. After
Mountjoy 2009, Fig. 9.5. Images by author

only during the last part of the palatial era and the Postpalatial era. This role is
demonstrated by mainland amphoras discovered at the Point Iria shipwreck.
Excavators found three Mycenaean rim-handled coarse-ware amphoras among
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 185

other more common coarse-ware bulk transport containers, including eight

Central Cretan transport stirrup jars, and three Cypriot pithoi (Lolos 1999;
Phelps et al. 1999). These amphoras are the first southern Aegean amphoras to
be found on a shipwreck. However, the most surprising and informative aspect
of these amphoras is the presence of Cypro-Minoan incised marks carved on
the handles (Figure 4.8). These marks are used within Eastern Mediterranean
exchange networks, possibly by Cypriot middlemen, and confirm the
amphoras’ role as containers for commodities, as opposed to, for example,
domestic water containers for crew members (Lolos 1999, 45–47; 2003;
Karageorghis, et al. 1998, 32–34. For the role of Cypro-Minoan potmarks see
Hirschfeld 1999, 2001, 2002, 2004). The presence of Cypriot marks on the
Mycenaean amphoras from the Point Iria wreck implies that these vessels had
already passed through an established trade network. The evidence available
suggests that these amphoras had moved from a domestic transport role to

4.8 Mycenaean rim-handled amphora, A99, recovered from the Point Iria Shipwreck with
potmarks on handles. Photo by author
186 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

a long-distance transport role and were consequently marked for a process of

distribution.
It is becoming increasingly clear that hydrias were also used for transport
purposes during the Postpalatial era. Hydrias produced within the “koine”
received the same body and handles as amphoras, but acquired an additional
handle on the belly or shoulder. The designation of these shapes as “hydrias”
based on later Classical varieties used mainly for water perhaps clouds our
ability to view them as anything other than water containers. Yet, if viewed
within their archaeological contexts, hydrias of the Postpalatial era could have
easily served to transport other liquids, such as oil and wine, if the need arose.
An example of their use within explicitly transport contexts comes from the
Modi shipwreck. There, thirteen large, linear-decorated Late Helladic IIIB or
IIIC hydrias were discovered (Agouridis 2011: 30–31, figs. 14–16).12
In addition, the prevalence of hydrias at Postpalatial sites on the Greek mainland
noticeably increases throughout the era. In the publication of the Postpalatial levels
at Mycenae, French often comments on the large quantity of hydrias in these
contexts (French 2011b, 34, 46, 65, 78). Indeed, before the LH IIIC period, hydrias
were altogether rare. French (2011b, 46) notes that before LH IIIC Middle
examples with both linear decoration and simple motifs have not yet been found
and that “the rise in popularity [of hydrias] in LH IIIC, however, seems striking.”
French goes on to ask, “Does this imply some change in liquid storage/transport
methods?” I believe the answer is an unequivocal yes.
The disappearance of transport stirrup jars and the overall acceptance of
amphoras as the common transport container would necessarily lead to the adop-
tion of similar shapes for similar purposes. Indeed, the designation of a “koine” for
the prevalence of similarly formed and decorated hydrias, amphoras, and jugs
might obscure the underlying reason for these broad regional affinities. When
thinking of a “koine,” most often one thinks of highly decorated fineware shapes.
The fact that this particular “koine” is made up of four very large, sparsely decorated
shapes might give us pause. Could it be that instead of similar trends in pottery
production preferences, we are seeing a shared value system in place that results in
similar styles of transport and consumption containers that serve to mark the
contents of the containers in a programmatic or identifiable way? It is particularly
striking that all of the shapes could easily be associated with wine. Similar to Cretan
production of oval-mouthed amphoras in the Neopalatial era, sites on the Greek
mainland produced their own “sets” for wine that have similar styles and functions
making them easily exchangeable. Therefore, one could say that what we call
a “koine” existed because of the presence of trade in commodities contained within
the similarly styled pots. It is the result of commercial activity, not the cause of it.
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 187

Simplification of Technological Characteristics

One of the most significant changes in the patterns of Postpalatial transport
container production was the overall simplification of techniques used to
produce the available shapes. On Crete, where transport stirrup jars continued
to be produced on a limited and diminishing scale, the specialized techniques in
place from the previous palatial eras disappeared. Potters no longer produced
transport stirrup jars in two joined halves, nor were different pastes used for
handles, spouts, and bases (Haskell 1981, 192–95; Rutter 2006b, 542–43; Ben-
Shlomo et al. 2011, 332). In addition, potters widened the base, in effect
decreasing the ratio of base diameter to height, a feature that Day suggests
represents a storage function rather than use as a transport vessel (Day 2005,
435). For example, LM IIIC transport stirrup jars at Karphi have an average base
to height ratio of 0.46 (range of 0.38–0.55) compared with an average of 0.27
(range 0.22–0.30) for LM IIIB transport stirrup jars found on the Uluburun
shipwreck and at Mycenae.13 This means that the width of the bases, in
proportion to the height of the vessels, increased by more than one-third.
What these trends in Postpalatial amphora production suggest is an overall
move toward technological simplification and the desire for flexibility in use.
Specifically, we see the abandonment of two relatively complicated pots in
both manufacture and decoration, the oval-mouthed amphora and transport
stirrup jar, in favor of the round-mouthed amphora (and related hydria), which is
easily constructed and received little decoration. In addition, round-mouthed
amphoras are multi-purpose. In contrast to the narrow spout of the transport
stirrup jar and restricted mouth of the oval-mouthed amphora, the wider mouth
of the round-mouthed amphora allows the vessel to be more flexible in the types
of commodities contained within. Therefore, from a purely functional point of
view, round-mouthed amphoras were ultimately the better choice, thereby
sealing the fate of transport stirrup jars within a Postpalatial Aegean socio-
economic context (Rutter 2000, 184).
On the Greek mainland, the three common large closed shapes – jugs,
amphoras, and hydrias – were all formed with the same technique for the
body, then acquired additions that allow us to distinguish one from the other.
One handle for jugs, two for amphoras, and three for hydrias. Indeed, it is often
very difficult to distinguish one from the other when looking at sherd material.
For example, one sherd from Troy found in House 761 in VIIb2 context has
been identified as an import of this Greek “koine” but the exact shape could not
be distinguished between the three large closed vessels (Mountjoy 2009, 291).
The standardized formation techniques for each of these large shapes contribute
to the overall trend toward simplification and flexibility. A potter could
produce many standard body shapes, then add individualizing features as he
or she saw fit or as the demand arose.
188 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

Regional Networks
What had once been an interregional and Aegean-wide trade in oil and wine
during the Palatial eras shrank considerably in the Postpalatial era and moved
toward establishing local, regional networks. This is certainly not surprising
considering the overall decrease in population and settlement reorganization.
However, as noted at the beginning of this section, trade in general did not
cease entirely and may not have even slowed down. Instead, some sites
maintained or acquired long-distance connections to the east and west and
focused on acquiring metals and precious finished objects. In this situation,
without the presence of an overarching palatial authority to regulate where
the imports were distributed, we can imagine the creation of local and
regional trade networks to support the distribution of imports to other
areas of Crete and the Greek mainland interested in their consumption. At
the same time, the products exchanged for those imports would likely have
included value-added commodities, like oil, wine, and their derivatives.
Through containers used to transport these commodities, like amphoras,
hydrias, and the few remaining transport stirrup jars, we can trace some of
these local and regional networks.
On Crete, the general trend during the Postpalatial era was one of increased
localized production of specifically rim-handled, round-mouthed amphoras
coupled with interregional trade (Figure 4.9). Like oval-mouthed amphoras in
the Protopalatial era, LM IIIC rim-handled, round-mouthed amphoras were
widely distributed throughout the island as interregional transport containers
for bulk produce. Petrographic analyses conducted at Thronos Kephala and
Halasmenos suggest that a few round-mouthed amphoras were nonlocal.14
That transport stirrup jars were still used for some regional transport purposes,
at least during the first phases of the Postpalatial era, can be demonstrated by the
presence of a few imported examples at several sites. Nonlocal transport stirrup
jars have been identified at Khania (perhaps from Knossos; Hallager and
Hallager 2000, pl. 50, no. 71-P0736/0763/0779/77-P0719), Thronos
Kephala (perhaps from south-central Crete; D’Agata and Boileau 2009, 185,
196, 202, nos. SY67, THK04/72), Halasmenos (Tsipopoulou 2004, 108, fig.
8.5, nos. 92–99; 105, fig. 8.2), and Kavousi Kastro (perhaps from Knossos and
Palaikastro; Mook and Coulson 1997, 349, no. 49). In contrast, the examples
from Karphi demonstrate that at this site, at least, transport stirrup jars func-
tioned more frequently as locally produced storage containers than as transport
containers. Only one out of the eighty-seven examples can be securely identi-
fied as an import.
Continued trade in bulk liquid commodities between Crete and the Greek
mainland is perhaps demonstrated by the discovery of Cretan transport con-
tainers in Postpalatial levels at Tiryns. A Cretan rim-handled, round-mouthed
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 189

4.9 Number of transport stirrup jars and round-mouthed amphoras at LM IIIC sites on Crete.
See Pratt 2016, 49, table 8 for references. Image by author

amphora with banded decoration was found in an LH IIIC (early) context

(Maran 2005, 422).15 This type of amphora had never, to my knowledge,
appeared off the island until that point, suggesting that the Cretan amphora,
as a transport container, may have been promoted to a long-distance role at that
time. Additionally, transport stirrup jars may have retained their use within the
Crete-Mainland trade network, although only for a brief extent of time in the
beginning of the Postpalatial era. In the LH IIIC (early) phases of Tiryns Stadt
Nordost (phases 1 and 2), there are thirty-three fragments of distinct Cretan
transport stirrup jars present. In LH IIIC (middle) (phases 3 and 4), there are
seven Cretan transport stirrup jars present, and in LH IIIC (late) (phase 5) no
transport stirrup jars are present.16 The significant drop-off in transport stirrup
jar numbers implies that the connection with Crete lasted for only a short time
after the LH IIIC transition at Tiryns.
On the Postpalatial mainland, regional trade networks for bulk oil and
wine can perhaps be seen through the distribution of amphoras and hydrias.
However, more work is needed to fully understand the extent to which
these vessels were exchanged. For example, at Elateia-Alonaki, a large two-
handled amphora (T.XII/A4) found in Tomb XII/87 was imported from
Achaia, as made evident by its hard and dark brownish-red fabric, typical of
Achaian products (Deger-Jalkotzy 2003, 64). Elateia was situated on the main
routes of the Mainland from north to south and from east to west. It
190 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

therefore comes as no surprise that Elateia received not only items of

exchange from various directions, but also cultural influences. Finds at
Elateia of amber, glass beads, and Italic metal objects demonstrate that the
people of Elateia were involved in the transportation of goods of trans-
Adriatic origin along the “Great Isthmos Corridor” route (Deger-Jalkotzy
2007, 144). In addition, the discovery of amphoras and hydrias on shipwrecks
around the coast of the Peloponnese suggests that these containers and their
contents were shipped by sea in addition to overland routes. This versatility
fits well with the trends of transport container production and the desire for
simplicity and flexibility.
In addition to the few traces of trade in bulk quantities of oil and wine, it is
also possible to see trade in oil, wine, and derivatives on a smaller scale.
Specifically, trade using small stirrup jars, amphoriskoi, and flasks was relatively
abundant during the Postpalatial era, as attested by imported examples at most
sites. For example, the cemetery at Elateia-Alonaki has a few small fine
decorated stirrup jars and amphoriskoi imported from the Argolid and Achaia
(Deger-Jalkotzy 2007, 130–133). In addition, Cretan products, especially small
stirrup jars, continued to travel to coastal sites in Laconia (Demakopoulou
2009), Tiryns (Maran 2005), and island sites such as Naxos (Vlachopoulos
2003). As mentioned earlier, small stirrup jars and amphoriskoi are most often
found in funerary contexts. However, at the coastal Lokrian site of Kynos, the
stirrup jar is “strongly represented” (Dakoronia 2007, 121). They tend to be
small or medium size, have fine well-fired clay, and are decorated with groups
of thin lines around the belly or elaborated triangles on the shoulder or with
degenerated pleonastic octopus motifs. Kynos is best known for its pottery
manufacturing, especially pictorial kraters and elaborate containers. Is it possi-
ble, then, that potters at Kynos were producing small stirrup jars to be filled
with perfumed oils and wines, then traded within local and regional markets
and eventually deposited in tombs? Until more stirrup jars from Kynos are
identified at other Postpalatial sites, this idea is mostly speculative. It does,
however, highlight the local and regional character of trade networks at this
time.

Limited Long-Distance Trade in Oil and Wine

It should briefly be mentioned that there is some evidence suggesting continued
long-distance trade in bulk oil and wine during the first part of the Postpalatial
era. Specifically, the exportation of transport stirrup jars from Crete in LM IIIC
may be demonstrated by finds on Cyprus and possibly even Egypt (Maran 2005,
416; Haider 2007). As mentioned at the outset of this section, some scholars
have argued that during the Postpalatial era, seafaring entrepreneurs were mostly
non-Greeks and included Cypriots and Italians. These people were therefore
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 191

responsible for the continuity of long-distance trade networks during this era of
transition. If this is the case, then perhaps we should not be surprised to find
Postpalatial transport containers from Crete on the mainland or Cyprus. Indeed,
multiple sites on the island have produced both fragments and whole vessels that
are Postpalatial in style and archaeological context. Enkomi, Hala Sultan Tekke,
and Maa Palaikastro each have fragments of Cretan transport stirrup jars. They
are all in LC IIIA or IIIB levels (post 1200 BCE). Some scholars have dismissed
these as earlier vessels being reused or somehow infiltrating later strata (Haskell
1981). However, more evidence has come to light since then, especially on
Crete itself, to suggest that Postpalatial transport stirrup jars on Cyprus may not
be out of the question. Catling (1997) interpreted the Postpalatial Cypriot
transport stirrup jars differently. He noticed that the frequency of Minoan
transport stirrup jars rises markedly in Enkomi and Hala Sultan Tekke from
LC II to LC IIIA. This distribution would suggest that more vessels were
coming in after the collapse as there would not be enough of them beforehand
to produce the distribution evident after 1200 BCE. They must, therefore, have
been coming directly from Crete (Maran 2005, 416).
Another long-distance connection might be hinted at in wall paintings from
the tomb of Ramesses III (Figure 4.10). Haider (2007) suggests that Egyptian

4.10 Postpalatial Cretan transport stirrup jars depicted on the walls of Ramesses III’s tomb. After
Haider 2007, 187, fig. 3 A,D. Image by author
192 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

pharaohs were still receiving or acquiring Cretan transport stirrup jars after the
palatial collapse. The four vessels pictured on the walls of Ramesses III’s tomb
match the characteristics of Cretan Postpalatial transport stirrup jar morphology:
wide, flat base and belly decorated in simple bands or designs. Haider (2007) draws
attention to correspondingly decorated transport stirrup jars found at Tourloti,
Episkopi, and Karphi and suggests that the elites at these three settlements might
have been in direct or indirect contact with Egyptian merchants and elites. As we
have already discussed, however, Postpalatial stirrup jars were relatively wide-
spread across the island with their production sites at different locations. At this
point it is impossible to say exactly which settlements were in contact with foreign
merchants, if any. That there was a possibility for contact, and with an area as far
away as Egypt so soon after the collapse of the palaces, is the most important aspect
of this discovery. However, it must be acknowledged that even if one could prove
the presence of Postpalatial transport stirrup jars in Egypt, those containers were
nevertheless soon discontinued in favor of the amphora.

Trade Conclusions
The amphora may thus have been adopted as the primary transport container in
the Postpalatial era as a result of changing socioeconomic conditions after the
collapse of LM/LH IIIB social structures. Newly established hierarchies and
population patterns led to new social needs that prompted the preference for
a morphologically simpler and more flexible product, the amphora, over
a complicated and possibly restricted vessel, the transport stirrup jar. This hypoth-
esis is supported by quantitative data that show amphora production and variability
increased throughout the LM IIIC period (Pratt 2016a). Schiffer (2011, 52)
suggests that “technologies tend towards stability but are changed as people solve
problems presented by altered societal and environmental factors.” If this is the
case, then we must assume that the appearance of new social needs prompted these
technological changes. The social processes underlying these changes were new
peer competitions and new social groups created after the Mycenaean palatial
collapse. Stockhammer (2008, 283) suggests that a change in the significance of the
transport stirrup jar in Postpalatial Tiryns is linked to a change in the Postpalatial
social system.
These same connections can be seen on Crete, where during the LM IIIC
period social change prompted transport stirrup jars and amphoras to be
regarded and used differently (Schiffer 2011, 43–49). Coupled with
a deliberate and consistent change in vessel morphology across the island,
the trade pattern suggests that while the major palatial centers on the main-
land had ceased their high demand for Cretan transport stirrup jars, local
centers on Crete may have retained enough authority to continue reduced
production of a modified version. More specifically, emerging Cretan elites
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 193

in the LM IIIC period relied on controlling special resources and technolo-

gical knowledge, which could have been manifested in the production of
transport stirrup jars and their contents (Borgna 2003, 164). The LM IIIC
Cretan elite may have sought to align themselves with the previous LM IIIB
regional administrative authorities by maintaining the same ceramic shape to
ship their commodities. As the power of these new elites waned by the
middle of the LM IIIC period, however, people may have viewed transport
stirrup jars in a new light. Desiring a simpler and more flexible vessel, people
may have shifted to amphora use.

CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS

Despite significant changes to the scale, context, and characteristics of

exchange modes from the Palatial to the Postpalatial era, both olive oil and
wine remained integral components of sociopolitical and economic life. Based
on the trends visible in commensal, gift, and commercial exchanges, both
commodities retained a high value and deep entanglement within the Greek
cultural milieu. Yet, the ways in which that value was constructed and the
character of the entanglement adapted as the memory of the Mycenaean palaces
waned and new social and economic networks were established. By focusing
on the transitions in scale and characteristics of exchange modes using surplus
oil and wine, it is possible to see patterns produced as a result of changes to how
the value of these commodities was constructed within the cultural economy.
Compared to the previous Palatial era, the entanglement visible in the
Postpalatial era diminished in scale but retained some of the centralization
that characterized Mycenaean entanglements.
Archaeological evidence of commensal events suggests that the scale of
feasting decreased substantially and took on particularly personal or cohesive
characteristics, focusing on legitimizing the local ruler or maintaining local
social ties. Patterns in storage magazines and containers suggest that smaller
quantities of oil and wine were being produced and reserved. This smaller scale
of surplus retention could be the cause and result of both commodities becom-
ing more restricted, reserved for special exchange contexts. Consequently,
within these feasting exchanges, the high value of oil and wine would have
been constructed by fewer participants than during the previous Palatial era.
Unlike the large-scale diacritical commensal events within palatial settings, the
prestige and power associated with providing oil and wine during Postpalatial
commensal events would have been based on having access to any surplus of
these two commodities and exchanging it with a select group of people.
Within the context of gift exchange, the value of oil and wine remained
high, but was perhaps constructed in a slightly different way from the previous
Palatial era. There was a continuity in the frequent inclusion of vessels
194 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

containing small amounts of perfumed oil and wine as funerary gifts. At the
same time, however, these containers received more elaborate decoration and
were perhaps more restricted to wealthy tombs. That the value of oil and wine
was constructed within a smaller, perhaps more local, network of agents is
supported by the local production of the ceramic containers and, presumably
their contents, instead of importing them from elsewhere.
The simplifications in technological characteristics of transport jar produc-
tion and the loss of specialized containers also suggests a change in the value of
their contents. If oil and wine were once given designated containers, which
were then marketed on a larger eastern Mediterranean commercial network,
the change to simple, homogenous, and multipurpose containers suggests that
bulk quantities of oil and wine were no longer marketed and perceived in the
same way. It is perhaps the equivalent of name-brand wine or oil disappearing
in favor of the “generic” brand. This is perhaps also reflected in the local and
regional character of trade networks at this time. The small scale of trade in bulk
commodities using similarly styled containers would imply a certain degree of
interchangeability. This would be useful when negotiating a value for oil and
wine to be used on a regional trade network where the types of dependencies
between people and these two commodities would have been very similar.
These changes in the physical remains of exchanges might suggest that without
the centralized connections in place from the previous Palatial era, the high
value of oil and wine was constructed within more local contexts.
Characteristics of dependency between people and things, though harder to
view through the archaeological record, can nevertheless come to the fore
through combined patterns of production, storage, and exchange. When it
comes to commensal exchange in the Postpalatial era, the appearance of smaller
feasting venues suggests that fewer people were involved within each occasion.
At the same time, each settlement, and perhaps each large household or oikos,
held its own commensal events as signifiers of status and wealth. Therefore, the
dependencies between people, oil, and wine would have altered toward more
local networks of reliance. There was no longer a central palatial authority from
which dependencies were generated and controlled. Instead, local leaders or
authorities would have aided in the maintenance of local dependencies on the
production of surplus oil and wine, their storage in centralized or oikos-based
residences, and their exchange. These dependencies continued to include
specialized craftspeople who made the containers for oil and wine storage
and consumption, but now it seems clear that these craftspeople resided locally.
A decrease in the overall scale of dependency upon oil and wine for gift
exchange is supported by the small amounts of the liquids themselves. No
longer are palaces concerned with producing large amounts of surplus per-
fumed oil. Instead, local leaders and elites seem to be maintaining the produc-
tion of these commodities for their own use within small-scale exchange
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 195

contexts and, specifically, funerary offerings. The disappearance of the small

stirrup jar toward the end of the Postpalatial era might signal the continued
decrease in dependency upon oil and wine for this particular exchange mode.
Perfumed oil and wine might have declined in importance as grave offerings at
the end of the period, although their overall value never seems to disappear as
oils and wine continued to be produced and were reinstated as the predominant
offerings to the deceased in the Early Iron Age.
For commercial exchange, the dependencies between people and between
people and things would have diminished substantially as specialized contain-
ers, requiring specialized knowledge, were discontinued. In fact, it seems that
most, if not all, local potters would have been capable of producing the standard
amphora-type seen both on Crete and on the Greek mainland. People would
be less dependent on other people and that dependency would no longer have
been created by the central authorities, who were the main consumers of bulk
oil and wine transported in transport stirrup jars.
Based on these trends in feasting, gift, and commercial exchange visible in
the archaeological record of the Postpalatial era, I suggest that the entanglement
in place from the previous Palatial era diminished substantially in scale and
moderately in centrality, gaining a more “local” character. Specifically, the
Postpalatial entanglement shifted toward an overall decrease in the number of
nodes within the entanglement’s network and their physical proximity to one
another. A small-scale supply of surplus oil and wine seems to have been
produced locally, reserved, and carefully controlled by local authorities in
order to be used for exchange modes that supported their ability to acquire
such value-added goods. In all three of these exchange modes, it is possible to
see the establishment of relatively heterarchical nodes that interact with one
another using similar value systems. These value systems are constructed by
collective agencies that are symmetrical, meaning the people and things have
assimilated similar ideas of what value is and how it is achieved, thereby
allowing for more fluid exchanges between networks of collective agencies
and their valuation of commodities. This is evidenced in the very similar
attributes of architectural setting and equipment for commensal activities,
types of containers used for funerary gifts of oil and wine, and the homogenous
styles of liquid transport containers used throughout Crete and the Greek
mainland. The specifically local character of oil and wine entanglement
seems to have grown as new regional koines formed along with differing social
structures, and supra-regional institutions, such as extra-urban sanctuaries,
came into existence.
At the close of the Postpalatial era, turmoil once again came to many of the
settlements on both the mainland and Crete. Prominent sites, including Tiryns,
Kynos, Lefkandi, and Mycenae suffered dramatic declines, even more precipitous
than after the palatial collapse. In fact, it is now widely believed that the
196 OIL A ND WINE IN POSTPALATIAL GREECE

destructions at the end of the LM/LH IIIC period were more severe and far-
reaching than those that brought about the beginning of the Postpalatial era. One
factor that might have contributed to this second collapse is increasingly intense
climate change. The onset of an arid phase that seems to have helped agriculture
thrive at the beginning of the LH IIIC period might have intensified into a long-
term drought. Climatologists believe that the years around 1000 BCE in Greece
would have been particularly severe, only to decrease in severity during the
ensuing three centuries (Brooke 2014, 299; Weiberg and Finné 2018, 589). This
climate change might have sparked social disruptions in an already unstable
political environment. Olive and grape production certainly would have been
affected by these changes as both plants, but especially grapes, are sensitive to water
shortages. If this is the case, we can imagine that the exchange modes necessitating
large surpluses of oil and wine would increasingly break down, especially com-
mensal activities where the goal is legitimization and cohesion. As discussed in
Chapter 5, one reaction to these changes is a shift in the population density toward
the north where water was more plentiful.
At the end of the Postpalatial era, four or five generations after the collapse of
palatial rule, the collective memory of such an intricate system of bureaucracy
and surplus maintenance would have all but disappeared and the realities of
local and regional networks would have set in. At that point, it was the
responsibility of local rulers and their regional connections to maintain the
strength of their settlements through the enactment of exchanges necessary for
the functioning of a society based on communal ideals and values. If people
were dependent upon oil and wine for the proper functioning of commensal
acts, rituals, and commercial exchange, how did negative climatic trends affect
the production of surplus and the value of these commodities? The next
chapter explores how the status of oil and wine as cultural commodities in
Early Iron Age Greece necessitated adaptation on multiple levels to continue
their production and exchange.
FIVE

REBUILDING THE RELATIONSHIP

Oil and Wine in Early Iron Age Greece

A lthough the status of oil and wine as cultural

commodities continued into the Early Iron Age (ca. 1000–750 BCE), the
specific roles of these commodities and their entanglement with people shifted
as significant social, economic, and political changes occurred. Demographic
changes along with changes in burial practices and architectural techniques, not
to mention the loss of written language and many Bronze Age artistic practices,
signal a new phase of Greek life. In this period, surpluses in oil and wine remain
visible in the archaeological record through evidence such as feasting assem-
blages, iconography, burial equipment, and large-scale deposits at regional
sanctuaries. In addition, there is some evidence to suggest continued use of
surplus oil and wine for commercial exchange, or at least long-distance
exchange of some sort. The amphora type known as “North Aegean” is
found not only throughout this region of Greece, but also along the coast of
Thessaly, in the Thermaic Gulf region, and even at sites along the Anatolian
coast including Troy. In combination, evidence from this period suggests that
surplus oil and wine continued to be used in similar exchange contexts as the
previous Bronze Age, but in different social contexts related to different cultural
connections, regional networks, and a new northwest Aegean koine (Map 5.1).1
In many regions of Greece, Early Iron Age sociopolitical contexts diverged
from the preceding Postpalatial era, affecting the ways in which oil and wine
were produced and exchanged. Archaeologically, these changes can be seen
through architecture, settlement characteristics, and burial trends. For example,

197
198 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

map 5.1 Map with the northwest Aegean koine highlighted. After Gimatzidis 2011, 968. Image
by author

the beginning of the Early Iron Age brought a transformation in building

techniques in central Greece, including the (re)introduction of curvilinear
buildings and cist tombs. These features, however, had never disappeared in
areas of Thessaly and Macedonia where large apsidal buildings have been
attested for the Late Bronze Age (e.g., Kastanas; Crielaard 2006, 285; Lemos
2002, 150; Mazarakis-Ainian 1997). During the Early Iron Age, most northwest
Aegean settlements would have been scattered and small, between thirty and
fifty people, while some others were larger such as Athens, Lefkandi, and
Thessaloniki Toumba.
Settlements of the Early Iron Age were generally characterized by stability,
a necessary feature for the continued maintenance of tree crops and the
production of oil and wine. During the Protogeometric period, at least, there
is no evidence for major abandonments or destruction of sites (Lemos 2002,
 OI L A ND W I NE I N EAR LY I R ON AG E GR EECE 199

191). Settlements in central Greece shared a number of features, yet the most
interesting is that there was usually one house that stood out from the others
because of its size, location, or other features. This structure is generally labeled
as a ruler’s dwelling or cult structure (Mazarakis-Ainian 1997; Descoeudres
2008, 355). In contrast, settlements in Macedonia appear to be less hierarchical,
or perhaps oligarchic, as houses located on the summit of mound sites tend to
be relatively homogenous (Margomenou 2005). This is not to say, however,
that a leader or leaders of the community did not exist. At the same time, each
compound contained extensive indications of crop storage, mainly in pithoi,
and extensive facilities for the preparation and consumption of large quantities
of food and wine (Andreou and Psaraki 2007, 402). Indeed, during the Early
Iron Age it seems that the success of leaders in both the south and north
depended in part upon control of land and labor and the use of animals as
a sign of wealth (Palmer 2001, 67; Andreou 2003).
One of the major developments of the Early Iron Age is the emergence of
regional and settlement-specific sanctuaries. These places became significant
contexts for oil and wine exchange through commensal events and offerings.
Archaeological data suggest that there were fewer than 40 sanctuaries and cult
palaces in the ninth century, which rose to almost 60 in the Middle Geometric
period and 120 in the second half of the eighth century (Descoeudres 2008,
322). A particular advancement was the creation of a building strictly used for
cultic activity, the temple. But this development was gradual. At the beginning
of the Early Iron Age local cultic activities still seem to have been performed
under the auspices of the ruler in his house (Mazarakis-Ainian 1997, 2007). At
the same time, regional sanctuaries were created or continued from the Late
Bronze Age. For example, the temple at Kalapodi presents evidence for unin-
terrupted cult activities from the Late Bronze Age through the Early Iron Age
and into the Archaic period, corresponding to the continuous occupation of
most sites in the broader vicinity (Livieratou 2011, 152). Material culture of the
area also finds parallels in the offerings deposited at Kalapodi throughout the
transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age.
The Early Iron Age was a time of movements, both large and small, within
the Aegean and the broader Mediterranean, a trend that facilitated the con-
tinued exchange of surplus oil and wine. The period is marked with the
movement of people, commodities, and ideas, in part fueled by the foundation
of colonies, and smaller trading ventures. Throughout all of these various scales
of movement, Greeks maintained settlement continuity and agricultural stabi-
lity in many mainland regions, though some more than others. The Greek
movements westward to Aeolis, Ionia, and Doris are only discussed by much
later authors (e.g., Strabo 13.1.3–4) and are consequently skewed, necessitating
a critical assessment.2 Perhaps more historically concrete, though not without
its criticisms, is the movement of southern Greeks northward to Thessaly and
200 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

Macedonia. Later Greek authors often characterize these movements as colo-

nial foundations. For our purposes here, the most important and possibly
earliest colonies are said to have been founded in the north Aegean by
Euboeans. Specifically, historical tradition places the Euboeans at the founda-
tions of Mende and Methone in the eighth century BCE.3 Evidence often cited
for Early Iron Age movement north comes in the form of a type of skyphos
(cup) with pendant semicircle decoration that came to represent Euboean
presence or influence.4 Other possible forms of evidence for Euboean presence
in Macedonia may come from sanctuaries, such as the Sanctuary of Poseidon
Pontios near Mende, though this too is questionable.5 Although it is uncertain
whether Euboeans settled in the Chalkidike and Pieria at such an early date, by
the eighth century BCE a new wave of colonists came from the Euboean cities
of Chalcis and Eretria. However, Euboeans were not the only people moving
north, but were part of a larger movement of people from diverse places such as
Andros, Corinth, and Paros.
As these demographic and social trends developed in the Early Iron Age, oil
and wine continued to hold prominent places in commensal, gift, and com-
mercial exchanges, but were valued and used in new ways. The changes in
patterns of production and exchange of oil and wine from the Postpalatial era to
the Early Iron Age convey meaningful information about how sociopolitical
and economic hierarchies and networks developed and were maintained
during a period of supposed isolation and regression. Indeed, by examining closely
how the relationships between people and oil and wine adapted over these few
hundred years, it becomes increasingly clear that people continued many of the
same traditions and connections from previous eras but used innovative strategies
to cope with their changing social and environmental contexts.

PRODUCTION OF OIL AND WINE

Continuing the trend from the last two eras, there is a significant dearth of
pressing equipment or installations of any kind from Early Iron Age settlements
on the Greek mainland. Even in regions where only a few centuries later
written sources will testify to its thriving oil or wine production (e.g., Mende
in Chalkidike or even Klazomenai in Ionia), no obvious evidence for the
physical crushing of olives and grapes in the Early Iron Age survives. As was
the case for the Late Bronze Age and Postpalatial era, this in no way indicates
a halt in oil and wine production. Instead, we are faced with the same
possibilities for the previous 400 years or more. On the Greek mainland,
whatever process existed during the Palatial and Postpalatial eras for crushing
olives and grapes most likely survived into the Early Iron Age and either is not
visible archaeologically, or we have yet to find or identify the pressing installa-
tions. As mentioned in Chapter 1, possibilities for the reasons behind our lack
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 201

of grape/olive presses include their use only in the countryside where few
excavations have taken place, their simple construction (e.g., shallow bedrock
cuttings), or their construction using perishable material (for grapes, wooden or
woven baskets). That production of oil and wine certainly continued in the
Early Iron Age is attested by a few types of archaeological evidence, including
archaeobotanical remains such as olive pits, crushed grape pips, and pollen, as
well as specialized storage containers/facilities. In addition, a change in climatic
conditions from the Late Bronze Age might have affected the cultivation
strategies of both olives and grapes, thereby forcing people to adapt in ways
that are archaeologically visible.

Archaeobotanical Evidence
One of the best resources for evidence of olive and grape cultivation in the
Early Iron Age is archaeobotanical remains including seeds, charcoal, and
pollen. However, when approaching the analysis of olive and vine cultivation,
it must be kept in mind that the Early Iron Age is characterized by regionalism,
with some areas reacting to the new environment differently and therefore
implementing differing agronomic strategies based on population density,
hierarchical institutions, and external contacts. But, in general, it seems that
agricultural practices in all regions of Greece remained relatively unchanged
from the Postpalatial era. People maintained similar ratios of arboreal, cereal,
and pastoral management, but changed the scale of cultivation (Palmer 2001;
Foxhall 2007). This is perhaps most evident in the north Aegean where areas
without Mycenaean palaces (and hence without “collapse”) produced clear
continuity in agronomic regimes and consumption practices (Papadopoulos
2005).
Evidence for continuity of olive cultivation into the Early Iron Age comes
from southern and central Greece. Despite some evidence for decreasing scales
of cultivation, archaeobotanical remains of olives are present at most sites
where data have been systematically collected, even those in more remote
regions. For example, the settlement of Nichoria in western Messenia lasted
around 200 years and raised sheep and goats for meat. Cattle were most likely
used primarily for draft animals rather than meat despite a 30–40 percent
increase in their numbers from the Bronze Age. Seed remains found during
excavation show that grains, grapes, olives, figs, and peas were exploited (Shay
and Shay 1978). This is further supported by charcoal from pruned branches of
olive, fig, and grape (Palmer 2001, 69). Pollen cores from the region do show
a general decrease in the overall quantity of olive tree pollen compared to the
previous Late Bronze Age. This decrease is likely due to the general population
decline evident in Messinia after the collapse of the Mycenaean palace at Pylos.
Farther north at Delphi, a rectangular building dated to the tenth century BCE
202 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

contained a hearth with animal bones and olive stones (Luce 1992, 698–700;
1993, 623–631).
On the availability of olive oil, Lin Foxhall (2007, 17) suggests that olive oil at
this time should be considered a semi-luxury commodity, available at times in
smaller quantities to a large section of society but not necessarily an everyday
staple. An Early Iron Age restriction for olive oil may be due to limited access to
an olive press and the labor necessary to tend and harvest large orchards. Only
some regions had sufficient levels of population and stability to support exten-
sive olive cultivation (Crielaard 2011, 97). One of these regions might have
been Attica, where pollen analysis suggests an increase in olive cultivation after
1150 BCE at the same time that pollen associated with large-scale cereal
cultivation decreased substantially (Kouli 2011). Based on pollen levels, similar
intensification of olive exploitation has been suggested for the Argolid
(Sheehan 1979; Jahns 1993), Kotihi lagoon (Lazarova et al. 2009), and
Messenia (Engel et al. 2009) during Geometric, Archaic, and Classical times.
When it comes to oil, northern Greece presents an entirely different situa-
tion from central and southern Greece. For the Bronze and Iron Ages, there is
very little evidence for the cultivation of olives farther north than Thessaly.6
The colder and wetter climate did not easily support olive trees (Kroll 2000,
65). Instead, archaeobotanical evidence suggests that people in northern
Greece relied primarily on other oil-producing plants and perhaps some
imported olive oil from the south. Alternative oil-producing plants included
linseed, flax, Lallemantia, Gold of Pleasure (Camelina sativa L.), and poppy.
Poppy remains are relatively abundant and even make up 7 percent of the
botanical remains from Kastanas (Megaloudi 2004, 156). Lallemantia was
introduced to northern Greece during the Bronze Age, perhaps via the metals
trade with the Near East. It has been found at Mandalo, Archondiko, Assiros,
Kastanas, and Ayios Mamas. Other oil plants include linseed, identified at
Makriyalos and Arkadikos from the sixth millennium and as pure concentra-
tions in the Bronze Age at Archondiko and Assiros (Jones and Valamoti 2005).
Groups of these oil plants have been found together in storerooms. At Assiros,
poppy, Lallemantia, and linseed were found in the same storeroom (Jones and
Valamoti 2005), and Gold of Pleasure (Camelina sativa L.) was found with
poppy and linseed as pure concentrations at Kastanas (Kroll 1983). The proces-
sing of these plants to extract oil would have taken much more effort and skill,
with very little oil produced in return. It seems clear, therefore, that oils in
northern Greece were more restricted and were probably not produced in
significant surplus quantities.
Archaeobotanical evidence for grape cultivation is present at most suffi-
ciently excavated sites throughout Greece and is especially prominent in the
north. Bronze and Iron Age sites with evidence for grape exploitation include
Servia, Mandalo, Archondiko, Angelochori, Kastanas, Assiros, Toumba
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 203

Thessaloniki, Mesimeriani Toumba, Agios Mamas, Dimitra, Sitagroi, Diktili

Tash, and Skala Sotiros (Valamoti et al. 2015, 127 with refs.). At Thessaloniki
Toumba, wine-making is indicated by archaeobotanical remains, including
numerous grape pips and skins (Andreou 2003; Andreou and Psaraki 2007,
403). Archaeobotanical evidence from Kastanas suggests that during the Late
Bronze Age grape seeds appear to be thinner than in previous periods. This,
plus the large number of weeds, might indicate that cultivation had reached the
limits of possible exploitation (Kroll 1983). During the Early Iron Age,
although the variety of cultivated plants was reduced, the quality of production
was significantly improved. The size of fruits increased and the quantity of
weeds was reduced, suggesting that a more sustainable, less intensive, agri-
cultural strategy was adopted (Margomenou 2005, 195). Sites in northern
Greece that have levels dating to the end of the Early Iron Age and beginning
of the Archaic period, such as Karabournaki and Polichni, have also produced
archaeobotanical assemblages with evidence for grape exploitation (Valamoti
2005). These trends are not confined to the north. Many Protogeometric sites
farther south have produced evidence for grapes including Iolkos, Kalapodi,
Delphi, and Nichoria (Megaloudi 2004, 152).
In contrast to the evidence available for the restricted access to oil, wine
seems to have been a more accessible commodity. For example, at eighth-
century Zagora, there is no evidence for elite control of any particular com-
modity, and vessels associated with the consumption of wine (kraters, skyphoi,
kantharoi, and kotylai) have been recovered from every excavated area of the
settlement (McLoughlin 2011, 917). This ubiquity does not, however, mean
that each household was capable of producing the amounts of surplus necessary
for exchange. In addition, the evidence for Zagora comes from the end of the
Early Iron Age, a time when transitions in the overall value and dependency on
oil and wine changed substantially, as will be discussed in Chapter 6.

Specialized Storage for Bulk Agricultural Commodities

Other hints of continuity in olive oil and wine production, or at least the ability
to produce a surplus of bulk commodities, come from an increase in storage
capacity at multiple prominent sites. This change is represented by a dramatic
increase in pithos sherds in LH IIIC Late, the Submycenaean period and the
Protogeometric period in the areas of Lokris and Phokis (Lis and Rückl 2011;
Caroline Belz, pers. comm., notices an increase in incised pithos sherds
during survey of the area around Mitrou). In a study of pithoi with impressed
decoration, Lis and Rückl (2011, 162) suggest that the real floruit of this shape
occurred during the Middle and Late Geometric period at sites such as
Lefkandi, Corinth, Tiryns, and Argos. In addition, many of these pithoi
recovered from Mitrou seem to have been produced at nearby Kalapodi.
204 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

Another workshop may also be located near the coastal site of Kynos (Lis and
Rückl 2011, 162).
The time-consuming decoration of impressed pithoi suggests that they had
some purpose beyond mere storage. As objects of display, they “embody or
manifest owners’ ideas and intentions in reaction to the goods stored in them”
which might indicate the role of the surplus toward social or political goals (Lis
and Rückl 2011, 162). While it is not always necessary to have an elite-based
hierarchy for the production of surplus, evidence nevertheless exists for the
presence of an elite class (e.g., the Toumba building at Lefkandi, evidence for
feasting at Kalapodi, and elite tombs at Elateia). The large number of pithoi
found at the sanctuary of Kalapodi and their production nearby might indicate
the presence of a priest class or some form of religious personnel with the
capability to manipulate the production and distribution of surplus agricultural
material. The desire to continue producing labor-intensive surplus commod-
ities may have been triggered by competition in the form of conspicuous
consumption and control over resources, an aspect of social life that had clearly
continued from the Palatial period.
A similar situation seems to have occurred on the island of Andros during the
Geometric period. In this case, however, a certain type of pithos, the applied-
relief pithos, seems to have been specifically fabricated to hold wine.7 In
particular, McLoughlin (2011, 919) suggests that these vessels might have
contained aged wines as described in Homer’s Odyssey, when Telemachos
goes to get provisions from his father’s storeroom for his journey to Sparta
(Od. 2.337–355). As speculated for the pithoi in Early Iron Age central Greece
discussed earlier, it is possible that the high visibility of the applied-relief
decoration served to advertise the high quality of the contents and promote
the owner’s surplus to prospective buyers (McLoughlin 2011, 920).
McLoughlin concludes that if Zagora was an exporter of surplus wine, then
traders might have stopped there while providing passage for the Tenian-
Boiotian applied-relief pithos makers. It is an interesting coincidence that
both Naxos and Rhodes were famous for both their applied-relief pithos
makers and their wine (McLoughlin 2011, 920). Other pithoi found in Crete
and Boiotia seem to mimic certain traits typically reserved for amphoras, such as
two handles extending from shoulder to neck (Ebbinghaus 2005, 53). These
handles were purely decoration since a jar this size would not have been easily
lifted, especially when full. The pithoi found on Zagora may, therefore, be part
of a much broader trend where pithoi became status markers as a form of
“conspicuous storage” (Ebbinghaus 2005, 69). Based on the presence of incised
pithoi at the beginning of the Early Iron Age, it might be speculated that
“conspicuous storage” had already been a popular means of acquiring prestige
for many generations.
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 205

Possible Effects of Climate Change

There is some indication that climatic shifts at the end of the Bronze Age might
have not only played a role in the downfall of the Mycenaean palatial regime,
but also may have ushered in the dramatic sociocultural and demographic
changes characteristic of the Early Iron Age in Greece. As discussed in the
introduction, it is difficult to align evidence for broad climate change with
archaeological data in a specific region of the Mediterranean since each
region often experienced slightly different climatic events. Yet despite the
intervariability common for the eastern Mediterranean climate, proxy evi-
dence does suggest that the southern Aegean experienced “rapid climate
change” characterized by particularly cool temperatures and dry conditions
at the turn of the millennium (Mayewski et al. 2004). The steady increase in
aridity that might have at first benefited crop production and reduced the
need for water management structures such as dams, canals, and drainage
channels seems to have changed sharply around 1000 BCE. Around 1000
BCE, a “deep solar minimum” occurred that resulted in abnormally cold
conditions for a short amount of time. At the same time, or slightly before,
a strong “Siberian High” sent “outbursts of cold winter weather” as far south
as the Aegean Sea (Brooke 2014, 301; Weiberg and Finné 2018, 589). These
events equate to a “perfect storm” of climate change affecting the people in
southern Greece around the transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Early
Iron Age. This “terminal Bronze Age crisis of 1200–1000 BC” is considered
“one of the major setbacks of global population growth” (Brooke 2014, 271).
In contrast, the turn of the millennium in northern Greece was character-
ized by constant wetter conditions. Proxy data from stalagmites and lake
cores in the northern Aegean region point unquestionably toward a more
humid phase that lasted from ca. 1450 to 750 BCE (Psomiadis et al. 2018). At
the same time, however, proxy evidence indicates that northern Greece was
also subjected to rapid cooling around 1050 BCE. Although both southern
and northern Greece experienced cooler temperatures, northern Greece
benefited from continued water availability whereas southern Greece
plunged into drier conditions.
It is impossible to know the exact effects of these climatic changes on the
cultivation of olives and grapes. However, based on modern scientific research
and historical data from the last millennium, as outlined in Chapter 1, it is
possible to know the general reactions of grapevines and olive trees to cooler
and drier environments. Short-term reactions include limited growth and
hiatus in fruit production. Over the long-term, however, cooler conditions
would force olive tree cultivation to seek warmer regions if temperatures
during winter were commonly below freezing. Historical trends suggest that
206 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

during extended dry conditions, grapevine cultivation shifted toward higher

elevations and latitudes seeking out areas with more available water.8
It is possible, therefore, that the relatively high humidity of the northern
Aegean during the Early Iron Age would have resulted in increased grape
cultivation. It could be speculated that at least at the beginning of the Early Iron
Age, the cool and dry change might have played a role in the desire for
populations to seek more northerly habitations, such as Pieria and
Macedonia, where rainfall is much more plentiful and fresh water is abundant.
Perhaps this explains why the only ceramic bulk liquid transport containers in
existence at this time seem to originate from Thessaly and Macedonia (as
discussed further on).

MODES OF EXCHANGE IN THE EARLY IRON AGE

As in previous eras, the remains of commensal events, funerary offerings, and

large ceramic transport containers, suggests that oil and wine continued to
play prominent roles in Early Iron Age exchange contexts. Like the
Postpalatial era, the Early Iron Age presents less abundant archaeological
evidence for exchange events than the Palatial eras when excess and grand
scales were the norm. Yet it is nevertheless possible to see surplus in
transaction as many of the contexts discussed later display clear evidence
for scales above household use. Despite another round of cultural and
demographic shifts at the end of the Postpalatial era, oil and wine maintained
their status as cultural commodities. Although the high value of both com-
modities was constructed differently as the scale, context, and frequency of
exchange events changed, the relationship of dependency continued from
the previous era. Oil and wine were not only highly valued, but also
necessary commodities for the proper functioning of feasts, offerings, and
commercial transactions in the Early Iron Age.

COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: LOCAL, REGIONAL, AND RITUAL

There are significant changes in feasting practices from the Postpalatial era to
the Early Iron Age. As in former eras, however, wine seems to have remained
the central focus of these commensal events, as drinking paraphernalia con-
tinued to dominate feasting assemblages. The exchange of oil during these
events, although less obvious within the material record, can nevertheless be
assumed based on the presence of ceramic shapes associated with perfumed oils.
The value and dependency on these two liquids does seem to shift, however, as
new feasting practices took root. We can see these changes in the use of surplus
oil and wine for feasting exchange through the archaeological record via the
use of new feasting locations (leaders’ dwellings, regional temples), changes in
 COMMEN SA L EX CHAN GE: LOCAL, R EG I ON AL, AN D R I TU AL 207

feasting equipment (kraters, bowls, disappearance of kylikes, disappearance of

small stirrup jars), and a change in the overall nature of feasts (religious aspects
are central). Although evidence for feasting events in northern Greece is
minimal, it is possible to see patterns in the ceramic assemblages of prominent
settlement sites such as Thessaloniki Toumba and Kastanas that indicate changes
to feasting habits and the value of wine. These changes remained consistent
throughout the Early Iron Age, from about 1000 to 750 BCE, allowing the
period to be treated as a whole (Fox 2012, 67).

Changes to Feasting Contexts

Feasting in “Leaders’ Dwellings”. A principal feature of commensal
events that seems to have remained constant from the Postpalatial era is
the location of sociopolitical commensality within the largest dwelling of
a settlement. Locations that have the strongest evidence for feasting events
are often termed “rulers’ or leaders’ dwellings” (Mazarakis-Ainian 1997)
and tend to be centrally located buildings. These buildings also tend to be
associated with ritual and storage elements/installations, implying religious
and economic superiority within the sociopolitical realm. The designation
of these buildings as houses for community leaders is based primarily on
the presence of objects considered “domestic” in nature, such as loom
weights and cooking installations. Based on ethnographic analyses of
chiefdom societies, however, central buildings are not necessarily the
homes of chiefs, but more akin to community centers over which the
chiefs have authority (Metcalf 2010, 317–318). Within these buildings,
“domestic” activities, such as weaving and cooking, could indeed take
place, especially if the products of these activities were intended for
communal events or consumption. The difference between the designa-
tion of large central buildings as leaders’ dwellings versus a leader’s com-
munity hall is that once that leader has moved on one way or another, the
building is passed down to the next person in line. Of course, these two
designations are not mutually exclusive. One only has to think of the
White House and its use as both a residence for the President of the
United States and his main offices and meeting rooms.
Semantics aside, it is clear that in central and southern Greece, at least,
evidence for feasting exchanges requiring surplus oil and wine comes from
these leaders’ dwellings. Examples span the Protogeometric to Late Geometric
periods (tenth to eighth centuries BCE) and include Unit IV-1 at Nichoria
(EPG-EG), Megaron B at Thermon (MG), the Toumba building at Lefkandi
(MPG), Building A at Mitrou (PG), the apsidal building at Asine (MPG-LG),
Unit IV-5 at Nichoria (MG), and the apsidal building at Xeropolis-Lefkandi
(LG). Nichoria’s Unit IV-1 provides some of the best evidence for feasting
208 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

including large amounts of pottery and animal bones covering the floor
throughout the use of the building (around 200 years; McDonald et al. 1983,
26, 39; Figure 5.1). Furthermore, the pottery was dominated by skyphoi,
indicating an emphasis on drinking rituals (Fagerström 1988a, 34, 128;
1988b, 39).
Megaron B at Thermon in Aetolia was constructed during the LH IIIC
period and was in use until the later ninth century. Unlike most of the other
leaders’ dwellings, it was rectangular in plan. Evidence for feasting there takes

(a)

(b)

5.1 Plan of (a) Nichoria, Unit IV-1. McDonald et al. 1983, 36, fig. 2-22 and (b) Nichoria, Unit
IV-5. McDonald et al. 1983, 49, fig. 2-27. Images reproduced courtesy of University of
Minnesota Press
 COMMEN SA L EX CHAN GE: LOCAL, R EG I ON AL, AN D R I TU AL 209

the form of ashes, bones, and sherds deposited on a paved area in front of the
building (Mazarakis-Ainian 1997, 125–135; Papapostolou 2011). The only
leaders’ dwelling larger than Thermon with evidence for feasting is the burial
known as the Heroön at Lefkandi. Despite arguments over whether the large
apsidal building found in the Toumba cemetery at Lefkandi on Euboea was
originally intended as a leader’s dwelling or just an elaborate mortuary monu-
ment, feasting events were certainly one clear aspect of the activity that took
place there (Popham et al. 1980; Popham and Lemos 1996; Morris 1999,
228–239; Antonaccio 2002; Whitely 2002; Lemos and Mitchell 2011). Large
amounts of drinking wares, including many elaborate kraters, were found
inside the fill covering the collapsed building (Lemos 2002, 203).
Farther up the coast at Mitrou, an apsidal building (Building A) was con-
structed in the early Protogeometric period on top of its LH IIIC predecessor
(Building B), while the surrounding settlement changed dramatically in plan.
Within this large central building remnants of commensal events were found,
including pedestalled cups, deep bowls, skyphoi, jugs, kraters, and pithoi.
Fragments of five large kraters suggest that feasting took place on a supra-
household scale (Van de Moortel and Zahou 2011, 336). Around the same time
at Asine in the Argolid, an apsidal building around the same size as Unit IV-1 at
Nichoria was constructed. Despite the few finds recovered, evidence for
feasting included pithos fragments in the apse area and sherds from drinking
and pouring vessels (skyphoi, oinochoai) in the central area (Fagerström
1988a, 127).
In the following Geometric period, two examples of leaders’ dwellings with
some evidence for commensal events have been found. It is clear, however,
that by this time in the Early Iron Age, preferences and strategies once again
began to shift. After the destruction of Unit IV-1 at Nichoria, Unit IV-5 was
constructed in its place following the same plan and included a large courtyard
(Figure 5.1; McDonald et al. 1983, 51). While there is no direct evidence for
feasting within the building, there are large concentrations of course-ware
pottery and storage containers within the building and outside. An apsidal
building at Xeropolis-Lefkandi does, however, show continuity in hosting
commensal events into the Geometric period. Although it has a shorter lifespan
than most other buildings discussed thus far, there is direct evidence for
feasting, including pithoi in the apse area and commensal equipment in the
main area, such as skyphoi, mugs, kotylai, two kraters, and an oinochoe
(Popham et al. 1980, 14).
A trend that is perhaps visible within the examples presented here is the
gradual reduction in scale, frequency, and control over commensal events
throughout the Early Iron Age. By the eighth century, it seems that feasts
took place on a smaller scale within the remaining “leaders’ dwellings.” In
addition, there appears to be an emphasis on storage, exemplified by the
210 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

excessive numbers of pithoi and storage pits found at Nichoria Unit IV-5
(McDonald et al. 1983, 53), the apsidal building at Asine (Fagerström 1988a,
137), and the apsidal building at Xeropolis-Lefkandi (Popham et al. 1980,
24–25). At the same time, what we see during the Early Iron Age is the
simultaneous increase in large-scale commensal events taking place at regional
locations, particularly sanctuaries.

Feasting at Regional Sanctuaries. As mentioned at the outset of this

chapter, one of the major new features of the Early Iron Age is the development
and articulation of regional sanctuaries. Even sanctuaries that would later
become famous Panhellenic sites, such as Olympia and Isthmia, received
their initial success after the collapse of the Mycenaean palaces. This success
then continued to increase as regional sanctuaries were used as common
meeting grounds for elites from multiple settlements. Some of the earliest
evidence for the use of these sanctuaries is not a built temple, but the remains
of successive large-scale feasting events.
One of the best examples of feasting at a regional sanctuary comes from
Kalapodi. Recently interpreted as the sanctuary of the oracle of Apollo at Abai
(Niemeier 2008), there is evidence that cultic activities began on the site during
the Late Bronze Age and took the form of open-air rituals. Feasting events are
attested from the LH IIIC period throughout the Early Iron Age, the evidence
for which includes animal remains and the discovery of mainly bowls, cups, and
cooking pots (Morgan 1996; Livieratou 2011). In addition, a well-preserved
Late Protogeometric krater was found in situ on the floor of the
Protogeometric temple (Lemos 2014, 168, fig. 3). The pottery found there
shares similarities to pottery from Euboea, east Lokris, Thessaly, and east Attica,
suggesting that the people meeting there for commensal events came from
these regions (Lemos 2002, 221). Interestingly, in the earliest phases, the vessels
used were primarily monochrome, which would have produced
a homogenizing effect (Morgan 1999, 382; Fox 2012, 93). It has been suggested
that the large number of pithoi and vessels for storing and cooking implies that
the early character of the site was connected with agricultural and pastoral
festivals where exchange of goods, beliefs, and ideas was taking place, at the
same time that cultural links were maintained through communal sacrifices and
feasting (Lemos 2002, 221).
Similar evidence for commensal events comes from the earliest levels at the
sanctuary of Poseidon at Isthmia. A redeposited assemblage of cups and skyphoi
mixed with burnt animal bones and ash indicates ritual eating and drinking
took place there during the Early Iron Age. Located near a major communica-
tion route connecting the Peloponnese with central Greece, Isthmia presented
an opportune place for communal dining activities (Morgan 1994, 113; 1998,
77; 1999, 305). Evidence suggests that no serious attempt was made to divide
 COMMEN SA L EX CHAN GE: LOCAL, R EG I ON AL, AN D R I TU AL 211

social groupings during these feasts or to place significant investment into

differentiated dining equipment before the eighth century. In the sanctuary’s
earliest phases, vessels used were standardized in form, suggesting that, like
Kalapodi, attendees at the feasts were not diacritically distinguished through the
equipment, at least (Morgan 1999, 382).
At Olympia, evidence for cultic activity starts in the second half of the
eleventh century primarily in the form of votive dedications (Morgan 1990,
29; Lemos 2002, 194). Throughout the Early Iron Age dedications became
more elaborate and always included tripod-cauldrons. This large, valuable
feasting vessel symbolically referenced the owner’s or dedicator’s ability to
host such feasts, thus embodying the power to acquire food and labor (Fox
2012, 93). Within the Early Iron Age cultic area, evidence for feasting includes
many ceramic vessels predominated by small open shapes such as cups,
kantharoi, and skyphoi. Larger shapes necessary for wine drinking, such as
kraters and pouring vessels, have also been found. The primary location for
commensal events and sacrifices would have been the area around the later Altis
where an Early Iron Age altar was found along with many animal bones in
a black stratum around the later Pelopion. Unlike Kalapodi and Isthmia, the
events at Olympia seem to have emphasized competition among elites instead
of cohesion and communal integrity. In both cases, however, the consumption
of a large amount of wine was certainly a highlight of the event.
Smaller sanctuaries with evidence for Early Iron Age feasting events include
Mt. Hymettos in Attica, Apollo Daphnephoros at Eretria, and the “sacred
house” of the Academy in Athens. The small sanctuary on Mt. Hymettos
began in the Protogeometric period and seems to have hosted smaller-scale
feasts. Pottery found there is simple and of inferior quality perhaps suggesting it
was intended for lower-class people or that emphasis was placed on commun-
ality and the experience of feasting and worshiping together (Morgan 1990,
28–29 contra Langdon 1997, 120–121). Pottery is predominated by wine
drinking equipment including oinochoai, skyphoi, and other types of cups.
The sanctuary of Apollo Daphnephoros dates to the Middle Geometric II
period and, at that point, consisted of a bothros-type alter and hearth. Unlike
Hymettos, pottery found there is of high quality and is associated with burnt
animal bones. Finally, the Late Geometric “sacred house” of the Academy in
Athens has been variously interpreted as a cult place or house within a later
cemetery (Mazarakis-Ainian and Alexandridou 2011, 167). Just outside the
structure, however, are the remains of a large deposit of ca. 200 complete
kantharoi and cups dated to the Early Geometric period. Their context is not
entirely clear, but it is possible that they accumulated over time, pointing to
recurrent visits at this site where a certain activity related to ritual drinking
regularly took place.
212 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

In northern Greece, evidence for commensal events at an extra-urban sanctuary

might be present at Poseidi near Mende in the Chalkidike. Interpreted as the later
Sanctuary of Poseidon Pontios, it consisted of four cult buildings (Vokotopoulou
1990; Tiverios 2008, 14–15). The earliest cult activities are attested from the
beginning of the first millennium BCE, seemingly already from the eleventh
century, if not earlier (Mazarakis-Ainian 2012, 57). A substantial apsidal cult
building (ΣΤ) was constructed in the Protogeometric period where evidence for
eating, drinking, and sacrificial rituals has been found. The interior of the building
had a clay floor within which were placed pits containing the remains from burnt
sacrifices. In the center of the structure was a circular heap of ashes and burnt
matter, over one meter high, commonly interpreted as an ash altar. Cult activities
were taking place here already in the Sub-Mycenaean period as attested by
numerous ashes, burnt fat earth, calcinated bones of small and large animals,
seashells, and broken vases. At this point, however, it is not entirely clear whether
this apsidal structure was enclosed (Mazarakis-Ainian 1997, 43). Earlier and later
pottery found there displays links with Thessaly and Euboea. The designation of
this sanctuary as evidence for north Aegean regional feasting is complicated since it
has been used to argue for the presence of southern Greeks. Mazarakis-Ainian
(2012, 57) speculates that this sanctuary was originally dedicated to Poseidon and
represents the early date of southern Greek or Euboean presence in the north
Aegean. It is therefore not clear whether a tradition of feasting within regional or
extra-urban sanctuaries existed within the “indigenous” culture of northern
Greece.
The pattern visible for feasting at sanctuaries in the Early Iron Age is one of
gradual embellishment and increasing scale of events. Although some sanctu-
aries seem to have promoted unity while others emphasized competition, all
sanctuaries not only continued to be used throughout the Early Iron Age, but
also formalized feasting spaces by constructing built platforms and temples.
Dependency on wine for social feasting occasions was therefore merged with
dependency on wine for ritual events. It is clear from our earliest recorded texts
that libation rituals necessitating wine were already an established practice,
suggesting their roots within the Early Iron Age, at the latest. Overall, then,
changes to feasting locations from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age
suggest an emphasis on a central authority’s ability to acquire large amounts of
oil and wine, whether that central authority was the leader of a settlement or
a regional sanctuary. Without these surpluses of oil and wine, commensal
events would not function as conveyors of religious and social power.

Feasting Equipment: Emphasis on Individualization

Like the emphasis placed on central buildings as locations for feasts, the pre-
dominant shapes used for oil and wine consumption carried over from the
 COMMEN SA L EX CHAN GE: LOCAL, R EG I ON AL, AN D R I TU AL 213

Postpalatial era. In southern and central Greece, kraters were still the most
highly decorated vessels and the most necessary piece of equipment for mixing
wine with water and other ingredients. Kraters also seem to have retained their
elite character, as they are often found in contexts associated with elite dining,
such as the fill of the Toumba at Lefkandi. Lemos (2002, 203) suggests that the
large number of kraters found there demonstrates its importance in
Protogeometric households. Various forms of bowls and cups generally make
up the bulk of equipment used in commensal events. Specifically, during the
Protogeometric period skyphoi and deep bowls are predominant. In an inter-
esting proposition, Fox (2012, 136) postulates that the deep bowl, because of its
larger capacity, might have performed a more communal function, perhaps
akin to a small krater. In addition, the morphology of the deep bowl provides
space for decoration and the capacity to dip smaller cups inside. Thus, deep
bowls might have functioned as a means toward emulating the elite use of
kraters within commensal contexts as these practices became more popular in
LH IIIC, spreading to lower echelons of the social hierarchy (Fox 2012, 137).
The Early Iron Age might therefore have been a time of “democratization” of
drinking activities, especially toward the end of the period when wine produc-
tion seems to have been more accessible.
While the abovementioned statement might apply to lower-class individuals, it
is nevertheless clear that elites continued to distinguish themselves from the others
through allusions to feasting and, specifically, surplus wine consumption and
control. Through feasting equipment, this is perhaps best demonstrated by the
ever-increasing size of kraters and amphoras during the Early Iron Age, to the point
of non-functionality. Starting in the Middle Protogeometric period, certain pots
have been found that suggest they must have been created for symbolic purposes.
For example, an Attic Middle Protogeometric amphora imported to Lefkandi is
83 cm high (Figure 5.2; Catling and Lemos 1990, pl. 80) and a Euboean Middle
Protogeometric krater, also found at Lefkandi, is 80 cm high (Catling and Lemos
1990, pl. 54). Both vessels would have been impractical to move once full, and
instead highlight the prestige of the donor and receiver. This is especially evident
considering the elite mortuary context of these vessels. The emphasis on size of
wine-related vessels reaches its height in the Late Geometric period, when pots
were created that were taller than an average person. Examples include amphoras
of the Dipylon Gate (e.g., Dipylon Master, Athens 804, H. 1.55 m) and the Middle
Geometric I kraters at the Kerameikos (Kerameikos 1254, from grave 43, H.c.
1.0 m; Kübler 1954, pl. 22). Coldstream (2011) suggests that the enlarged size of
wine-containing pots such as kraters and amphoras show the value and status of
wine.
In terms of the vessels used for drinking, the Early Iron Age marks the
point at which the kylix was fully discontinued in central Greece and parts of
the Peloponnese. In its place, the skyphos was preferred (Figure 5.3). It is
214 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

5.2 Imported Attic MPG belly-handled amphora from Lefkandi no. 898. H. 83 cm. Catling and
Lemos 1990, pl. 80. Reproduced with permission of the British School at Athens

5.3 Skyphos from Lefkandi, Skoubris tomb 33. After Desborough 1972, 198, pl. 45. Image by
author

interesting to note, however, that the kylix was not entirely abandoned
everywhere. In western Greek areas, such as Messenia, Achaia, Aetolia,
Elis, and Ithaca, the kylix was retained and there seems to have been
a reluctance to adopt Protogeometric styles (Lemos 2002, 195). This is
 COMMEN SA L EX CHAN GE: LOCAL, R EG I ON AL, AN D R I TU AL 215

a good example of the regional character of Early Iron Age Greece and the ability
of individual sites or groups of sites to create their own styles without the
influence of an overarching authority, even if that style includes a decision to
retain the markers of the former authority. Everywhere else, the skyphos was
produced in large quantities. Whereas plain kylikes were used to reduce guests to
one or two tiers of status in the Bronze Age palaces (e.g., Pylos), skyphoi
presented the possibility for individuality. Through the use of skyphoi, finer
nuances of status could be portrayed and delineated. Size and elaboration of
decoration could play a role in differentiating guests. In this way, Early Iron Age
commensal events provided the opportunity for more nuanced displays of status,
as opposed to the rigid delineations of palatial feasts (Fox 2012, 137). Of course,
people living during the Early Iron Age would not have any direct memory of
Bronze Age palatial feasts, but the sentiment remains true. The variation seen in
skyphoi and deep bowls was a product of the sociocultural milieu of the Early
Iron Age and the constant vying for power endemic to the type of hierarchies
established after the palatial collapse. After all, feasts are inherently agonistic, often
symbols of instability within a society, where the display of power and prestige is
paramount (Dietler 1996, 2001).
Similar sentiments seem to have been at play in the north. Although little
information is known about actual feasting locations, changes in eating and
drinking equipment over time can indicate changes in feasting practices and
social attitudes toward commensal events. The best evidence for these changes
comes from the large settlements at Thessaloniki Toumba and Kastanas.
Evidence for feasting at Thessaloniki Toumba comes from the patterns of
pottery consumption and the introduction of new types of tablewares asso-
ciated with the consumption of wine (Figure 5.4). In order to fully appreciate
the changes taking place in the Early Iron Age, it is necessary to review briefly
the broader trajectory of feasting equipment at this site. In the Middle Bronze
Age (Phases XIV–IX), tablewares were predominantly homogenous, com-
posed of local handmade undecorated and burnished wares with an emphasis
on cups and bowls. In the earlier part of the Late Bronze Age (Phases VIII–VI),
however, the introduction, in very limited numbers, of two new types of
decorated tablewares, matt-painted and incised, indicates a change in com-
mensal habits and values. Both types seem to be associated with the storage of
small amounts of liquids (incised) and the consumption of liquids (matt-
painted). At the same time, the settlement itself underwent reorganization
and there is evidence for a more structured hierarchy and bureaucracy
symbolized by the discovery of a small number of clay stamp-seals
(Andreou and Psaraki 2007, 407). The presence of these new tablewares
combined with the social restructuring might indicate the rise of a new
drinking etiquette performed at some special festive occasions where
a special liquid, presumably wine, was consumed.9
216 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

5.4 Frequency of decorated ceramics per 100 m3 at Toumba Thessaloniki by phase. After
Andreou 2003, 210, fig. 11. Image by author

This diacritical separation between a small number of decorated wares and

the majority of traditional local wares continued into the later part of the Late
Bronze Age. At this point, we see the introduction, first in small amounts, then
increasingly more, of Mycenaean-style wheel-made pottery. At the same time,
the amount of incised ware decreased and the amount of matt-painted wares
more than doubled (Andreou and Psaraki 2007, 413). The increased presence of
matt-painted ware and its features signify a wider acceptance and more frequent
performance of the festive practices introduced in the previous era. Despite
their increase from the previous phase, however, matt-painted wares were still
a very small percentage of the assemblage and seem to have been produced by
a small number of potters who supplied their luxurious and specialized products
to several settlements in a wider region. The idiosyncrasies and unique attri-
butes of each matt-painted vessel suggest that they were perhaps connected to
the identity of the owner and their elite status.
At the same time, Mycenaean vessels were imported in small numbers, then
quickly imitated as their status increased. Most of the Mycenaean-style pottery
produced in northern Greece can be characterized as special serving sets for the
consumption of wine in festive occasions that highlighted drinking (Andreou
and Psaraki 2007, 416). Specifically, the demand for luxury vessels for wine
consumption by the local communities determined the adoption of only
a select number of decorated shapes including deep bowls, cups, kraters, jugs,
and amphoras (Andreou 2003). What these adopted styles suggest is that during
 COMMEN SA L EX CHAN GE: LOCAL, R EG I ON AL, AN D R I TU AL 217

the Late Bronze Age, the act of wine drinking during feasts became formalized
and was used as a method of power differentiation. Wine itself had been
produced in that region for millennia (Valamoti 1998).
By the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Early Iron Age in
northern Greece, Mycenaean style tablewares had almost entirely replaced the
once popular matt-painted vessels (Figure 5.4). The later part of the Late
Bronze Age (Phase IV) at Thessaloniki Toumba, equivalent to the LH IIIC
period in the south, is characterized by large compounds constructed on the top
of the mound and by an imposing casemated enclosure wall built around the
slopes. Interestingly, Mycenaean-style vessels have been recovered from all
excavated houses of Phase IV at Thessaloniki Toumba, although they make up
only around 5.5 percent of the ceramic assemblage (Andreou 2003). This may
indicate that the symbolic meaning of feasts and ceremonial drinking had been
once again reinterpreted toward integration of households and the creation of
larger and stronger community groups (Andreou and Psaraki 2007, 417).
The sudden rise in Mycenaean-style pottery during the phase (II) equivalent
to the Protogeometric period in the south suggests the intensification of
feasting occasions (Figure 5.4). Specifically, small open and large closed shapes
predominate the assemblage of wheel-made pottery, more than doubling the
overall number of Mycenaean-style pottery found compared to the last two
Late Bronze Age phases. More than 130 small open and around 100 large closed
shapes have been identified from Phase II (PG) compared to just over 30 small
open and 20 large closed shapes during Phase III (Andreou 2003, fig. 2). These
numbers coincide with the import and local production of common southern
Greek Protogeometric shapes such as deep bowls, amphoras, and skyphoi.
Interestingly, the krater is not produced in large numbers at Thessaloniki
Toumba, although it is attested more often at nearby Kastanas. This differen-
tiated adoption suggests individualized demands and practices associated with
drinking. As discussed for the southern Greek regions, kraters were the main
vessel for drinking occasions and were exponentially adopted during the
Postpalatial era, though relatively rare before. These patterns might suggest
that in some regions of northern Greece, the local populations retained some of
their own drinking practices instead of entirely accepting the practices asso-
ciated with drinking equipment from the south. When it comes to the absence
of kraters, it is tempting to interpret this act as the refusal to mix wine with
water, a feature of later Macedonian practices that was often chided by southern
Greeks.10
These differential adoption strategies once again highlight the regionalism
that is characteristic of Early Iron Age Greece in general. Despite scholarly
focus on their presence, it is nevertheless the case that these wheel-made vessels
make up only a small percentage of the overall pottery assemblages recovered
from Early Iron Age sites in the north. This perspective suggests the continuity
218 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

of specialized, regional value attached to commensal activities and specifically

wine drinking.

Change in the Nature of Feasts: Religious Aspects

The evidence for large-scale feasts requiring surplus oil and wine in the Early
Iron Age suggests that the overall nature of feasts changed from the Late Bronze
Age. Specifically, we can see the accentuation of religious aspects of the feast,
both within leaders’ dwellings and within the context of regional sanctuaries.
While the religious nature of commensal events at sanctuaries is relatively
obvious, leaders’ dwellings present a few internal and external features that
suggest the feasts taking place there were also associated with religious rituals.
Indeed, most leaders’ dwellings, especially those used in the beginning of the
Early Iron Age, included built circular platforms (Nichoria Unit IV-1; Fox
2012, 69), altars (apsidal building at Asine; Wells 1983, 34; Mazarakis-Ainian
1997, 297; Lemos 2002, 221), or bothroi/ritual pits (Megaron B at Thermon;
Mazarakis-Ainian 1997, 133). These installations suggest leaders’ concerns with
controlling not only sociopolitical practices, but also religious practices. In
these situations, the leaders of communities would increase their power
through the practice of religious ceremonies that seem to have also retained
a commensal component.11
The cultic nature of the leaders’ dwelling has been thoroughly examined by
Mazarakis-Ainian (1997), who suggests that throughout the Early Iron Age the
ritual functions that took place within the leaders’ dwelling gradually shifted
toward the establishment of urban temples as sociopolitical hierarchies chan-
ged. By the eighth century BCE, there does not appear to be any direct
evidence for the performance of religious rituals within leaders’ dwellings.
Neither Nichoria Unit IV-5 nor Xeropolis house contained ritual elements
in the form of debris or purpose-built installations. Instead, it seems that leaders’
economic superiority was emphasized through the use of storage pithoi and
granaries. At the same time, the first temples were constructed in the eighth
century for both urban and extra-urban use. There, large-scale feasts were held
and religious ceremonies took place in a “neutral” location. Of course, com-
petition was certainly a large part of these festivities, as elites competed through
consumption of prestigious and valuable commodities like various types and
qualities of oils and wines.
One final aspect of Early Iron Age feasting practices that highlights the ritual
character of commensal events is the resurrection of the funerary feast after an
apparently widespread hiatus in the Postpalatial era. The funeral feast was
a practice with a long history and would continue to play an integral role in the
experience of death throughout the Archaic and Classical eras. The funerary feast
presented an opportunity to enact social hierarchies, but may also have had
 GIFT EXCHANGE: F UN ERARY OFFERINGS 219

a connection to maintaining ritual behavior as a cultural identifier (Fox 2012, 79).

For our purposes here, it is especially important that these ritual behaviors
included, at their heart, the consumption of wine and the use of oils. Evidence
for funerary feasts take the form of ceramics associated specifically with wine, such
as kraters, cups, and pouring vessels (e.g., fill around Lefkandi tombs, Popham
et al. 1980, 215; Agora GR. XXVII, Blegen 1952, 280; Argos tombs 89, 90, 163,
Courbin 1974, 129). If the funerary feast was in fact a cultural identifier, then oil
and wine were very much caught up in that expression of cultural identity.

Feasting Conclusion
The evidence presented in this section suggests that feasting retained
a prominent position within exchange modes during the Early Iron Age.
Ceramic and archaeobotanical data show that surplus oil and wine were
essential features of these exchanges. In addition, the shift toward feasts as
part of religious rituals both within settlement contexts and extra-urban sanc-
tuaries probably increased the dependency between people, oil, and wine as
they became necessary components of proper ritual activities. Despite these
continuities, however, it is clear that the overall scale of feasting events
decreased, especially when compared to the palatial era. The total number of
vessels recovered from feasting sites makes apparent the more intimate nature of
commensal events in the Early Iron Age. This smaller scale of events is perhaps
due to an overall restriction to elite-only participation. Or, perhaps the smaller
scale of feasts is a direct result of decreased settlement occupation and the
dispersal of settlements over a wider area of the landscape. In either case, the
accumulation and control of surplus oil and wine seems to have been a central
concern of leaders within a settlement, as demonstrated by the presence of
storage facilities in or around many leaders’ dwellings. This scenario applies
mainly to southern and central Greece, whereas in northern Greece, the
currently available evidence points to a more distributed form of storage
where each household retained its own supplies of surplus goods
(Margomenou 2005). It seems clear, however, that these surplus goods
included much wine and were still used for exchange during large-scale feasting
events (Andreou 2003). Of course, this northern strategy seems to eventually
apply to the south as well, when leaders’ dwellings go out of use and the
creation of relatively independent oikoi occurs toward the end of the Early Iron
Age (Mazarakis-Ainian 1997, 2001, 2007, 2012).

GIFT EXCHANGE: FUNERARY OFFERINGS

Oil and wine continued to be necessary components of gift exchange in the

Early Iron Age. The best evidence available for Early Iron Age practices using
220 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

surplus oil and wine for non-commensal gift exchange remains funerary offer-
ings. Distinct from funerary feasts, it is clear that vessels intended specifically for
offerings to the dead continued to be deposited within tombs. Among these
offerings, some general trends can be observed, though regional practices must
always be taken into consideration. General changes in funerary offerings
involving oil and wine include: the discontinuation of small decorated stirrup
jars; the invention of new shapes, such as the lekythos, to replace stirrup jars;
and the offering of large closed vessels, such as hydrias and amphoras, most
likely containing oil or wine.
Dramatic changes to funerary practices that had begun in the Postpalatial era
came to full fruition during the Early Iron Age. The introduction of cremation
and the widespread shift to single burials are often cited as the most prominent
changes. The reasons behind these changes are unknown and quite contentious
among scholars (see, among others, Snodgrass 1977; Mee and Cavanagh 1984,
49–64; Morris 1987; Lemos 2002, 184–186). It is becoming increasingly clear,
however, that diversity in burial practices is the true characteristic of Early Iron
Age cemeteries, in contrast to an all-encompassing shift. Indeed, many regions,
such as Thessaly and Crete, retained the practice of multiple burials, while
other regions had practiced burials in cist tombs throughout the Late Bronze
Age (Dickinson 1983, 55–67). The general uniformity in burial practices, as
observed for the Mycenaean palatial era, was abandoned in favor of regional
and even local preferences as multiple types of burials could occur within the
same cemetery (Lemos 2002, 151–190; Dickinson 2006, 183–195). Perhaps this
diversity signifies growing individual or group agency and the ability to act
upon one’s own wishes after the collapse of the palaces (Dickinson 2009, 16).
The adoption of new funerary practices, however, does not seem to have
affected the types of offerings given to the deceased. Indeed, all varieties of
tomb-types – cremations, cist tombs, chamber tombs – appear to contain very
similar vessels and, in certain cases, weapons, jewelry, and imports. In addition,
the practice of funerary libations may have persisted. At Torone on the
Chalkidike, for example, two fragmentary kantharoi (T10-1, T10-1a) were
found level with the cover slabs of Inhumation Tomb 10. These perhaps
represent a farewell toast to the dead (Papadopoulos 2005, 385).
The most commonly deposited vessels within tombs of the Early Iron Age
are small containers associated with oils and unguents, including the lekythos,
amphoriskos, pyxis, and kalathos. Despite its extreme prominence during the
Postpalatial era, the stirrup jar was entirely abandoned at the beginning of the
Early Iron Age. In its place, the lekythos was created and continued to be
associated purely with funerary contexts into the Classical era (Figure 5.5;
Mountjoy 1986, 199; Stubbings 1947, 24). Lekythoi are found in tombs all over
central Greece and Euboea but were especially popular in Attica (Lemos 2002,
72–74). Most burials in Athens, at least, were provided with between one and
 GIFT EXCHANGE: F UN ERARY OFFERINGS 221

5.5 MPG Attic lekythos from Grave I-Grotta 1971, Naxos Museum Inv. no. 6393. Image by
author

four vases, but during the Early Protogeometric and Late Protogeometric eras
some burials received many vessels with the redundancy of lekythoi being
especially prominent (e.g., Kerameikos grave PG A with seventeen vases,
mostly lekythoi; Krause 1975, table 17.19).
Amphoriskoi, on the other hand, were particularly popular in the northwest
Aegean region (Euboea, Boeotia, Phokis, east Lokris, and Thessaly) and are
found in great numbers at the cemetery of Lefkandi on Euboea. Interestingly,
they are not found in Athens after the initial stage of the Protogeometric
period. They are, however, common in the Argolid, although with their
own local shape and decoration (Lemos 2002, 216). Except for a few
tombs of either richness (no more than a dozen vases) or completely without grave
goods, the grave gifts of the Protogeometric Argolid were relatively standardized.
Specifically, Hägg (1983, 28) noticed the regularity in expenditure: two pots, a cup
and a jug, form a sort of “standard set.” This standard set highlights the importance
of (wine) drinking to both the living and the dead. Moreover, the preference
between lekythoi and amphoriskoi highlights regional preferences and points to
group cohesion.
Small closed containers like lekythoi and amphoriskoi certainly held various
forms of scented oils and wines. Anointment of the body and the use of
perfumed oils within funerary rituals seem to have been a practice that con-
tinued from the Late Bronze Age through the Early Iron Age (Eder 2006, 556).
222 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

The relatively large number of small oil-containing vessels found in tombs at

Lefkandi and Athens might indicate a regional specialization in the production
of these oils (Crielaard 2011, 97). It seems plausible that the location of the
production of containers should not be too far from the location of the
manufacture of the contents. Despite our lack of knowledge about the location
and social context of perfumed oil production, it is clear that production of
surplus for its exchange, especially as funerary gifts, continued throughout the
Early Iron Age. Refined or perfumed oils were labor-intensive products that
seem to have retained their high ritual and social value. Indeed, they appear to
be consumed in contexts very similar to those before the palatial collapse, but
perhaps on a much smaller scale.
The second common trend visible throughout the Early Iron Age and in
most areas of Greece, but especially northwest Greece, is the use of large closed
ceramic shapes for funerary gifts. Large containers, such as hydrias and
amphoras, were not often found within tombs during the Postpalatial era. At
the beginning of the Early Iron Age, however, we see more elaborate funerary
offerings, which often include larger amounts of surplus commodities con-
tained in large pots. These pots would have otherwise been used for storage or
transport of surplus within the realm of the living. That these vessels were full at
the time of deposition is relatively clear. Many Athenian graves contained
storage vessels that had been stoppered (or plugged) in a way that suggests
they were filled with food products (e.g., Kerameikos grave PG 38, 40, 43, 44;
Kübler 1954, 24). Indeed, by the Archaic period gifts of food to the dead were
so common that installations were created to accommodate the practice. Called
“Opferrinne” by the original excavators, offering trenches were created where
ceramics were dedicated and food was placed for the deceased (e.g.,
Andronikos 1968, 84–85, 90; Kurtz and Boardman 1971, 40, 66; Whitley
1994, 217; Deoudi 1999, 42–43; Lemos 2002, 156).
Hydrias, which, as we said in Chapter 4, could be used within a local
exchange role, were also found as grave offerings during the Early Iron Age.
Specifically, in the Protogeometric period, hydrias were produced in a larger
and smaller size. The smaller size, around 20 cm high, was almost always used
for grave offerings and was frequently found in the tombs at Lefkandi (Lemos
2002, 66). Hydrias with similar decoration to those found at Lefkandi have also
been found in tombs on Skyros and in Thessaly. For example, one vase from
Kapakli in Volos has a zigzag on the belly drawn with a multiple brush in
a manner very similar to a vase from Lefkandi (Lemos 2002, 66). These
similarities might suggest a small-scale regional trade in the contents of small
hydrias. As they are associated primarily with grave offerings, perhaps they
contained a type of perfumed oil or wine made especially for funerary gifts.
The use of amphoras for funerary gifts, as opposed to cinerary urns, is best
attested in regions of the northwest Aegean. Although neck and belly-handled
 GIFT EXCHANGE: F UN ERARY OFFERINGS 223

amphoras are best known as containers for cremated remains, especially in

Athens, they also seem to have performed a function similar to the hydrias
discussed earlier. Specifically, neck-handled amphoras of a particular type are
sometimes found in graves in Euboea, east Lokris, Phokis, Thessaly, and
Macedonia, and are placed among the funerary gifts of the deceased. This
type of amphora, often termed “North Aegean,” is a strong indication that they
contained liquid commodities, either oil or wine, as they are most commonly
used for commercial exchange of surplus and are more often found in settle-
ment contexts, to which we will return shortly. The use of North Aegean
amphoras as gifts to the deceased throughout the Early Iron Age is indicative of
the value of their contents. The cemeteries where these pots are found are large
and characterized by a high amount of relative wealth. In particular, we may
highlight the presence of North Aegean amphoras within tombs at the ceme-
tery of Elateia (e.g., Tomb LXXXVII; Deger-Jalkotzy 1999, 199). There,
chamber tombs had been used for multiple generations, extending into the
Late Bronze Age (Deger-Jalkotzy 1999). Many burials contained precious
metal objects and heirloom pieces, including imports (Deger-Jalkotzy 1999).
North Aegean amphoras have also been recovered from the cemetery at
Lefkandi (Catling 1996). In the north, North Aegean amphoras have been
found as grave gifts at many cemeteries, including Torone, Marmariani, and
Mende (Pratt 2014, 190–198). Like hydrias, North Aegean amphoras belonging
to the later stages of the Early Iron Age were produced in two sizes, with the
smaller size more frequently associated with funerary contexts and used as gifts
to the dead (Catling 1998, 153; Papadopoulos 2005, 426–430).
The use of North Aegean amphoras as gifts within burial contexts, especially
elite burials, demonstrates their restricted availability as a high-value item. The
high value placed on North Aegean amphoras during the early/middle
Protogeometric period is further demonstrated by an example found at the
Toumba cemetery at Lefkandi, pyre 11/12 (Figure 5.6). The pot, already
demarcated as a status item by its association with this tomb, was actually an
antique at the time of its deposition and had been repaired using lead clamps.
Coupled with signs of wear on the interior surface, it is clear that this amphora
had been used and its contents consumed prior to its reuse as a burial object
(Catling 1996, 126). Its importance as an object in itself (and not just the
contents) is demonstrated by its repair (and therefore not suitable for storing
liquids) and subsequent reuse and deposition. It seems, therefore, that early
North Aegean amphoras, at least, had a dual nature that lead to their use within
two modes of exchange. The first was its value as an imported object symboliz-
ing surplus wealth and, consequently, given as funerary gifts. The second was its
value as a utilitarian vessel that was used for the commercial exchange of surplus
oil or wine.
224 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

(a)

(b)

5.6 Upper half of an early North Aegean amphora found at Lefkandi Pyre 11/12 with (a) three
notches on edge of left handle and lead repair clamps and (b) incised mark on top of left handle.
Catling 1996, pl. 43. Reproduced with permission by BAR Publishing

COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE: SPECIALIZED AMPHORAS AND

INTERREGIONAL NETWORKS

Commercial exchange, or trade, did not cease during the Early Iron Age. Over
the last 30 years of excavation and study, a clearer picture of life after the palatial
collapse and before the rise of the polis has significantly brightened an age that
traditionally has been considered exceedingly “Dark.” John Boardman perhaps
put it best when he said, “A shared Dark Age does not mean that two-way
traffic stopped, merely that it ceased to be archaeologically visible or culturally
influential” (Boardman 2006, 515). Although evidence for writing in Greece is
still lacking, other signs of communication have surfaced, including marks on
pots and balance weights (Papadopoulos 1994; Kroll 2008). The number and
contexts of imported objects has increased to the point where the argument
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 225

solely for “heirlooms” can no longer persist. Instead, finds from Lefkandi and
other Early Iron Age sites, especially within the northwest Aegean regions,
show continued contact with non-Greek people (Murray 2012, 420–463).
Furthermore, sites in Euboea and along coastal east Lokris and Phokis, such
as Xeropolis (Davidson et al. 2010), Kynos (Dakoronia 1996, 161; 1999;
Kounouklas 2009), and Mitrou (Van de Moortel and Zahou 2011), have
produced evidence or likely scenarios for the existence of harbors
(Demesticha and Pratt 2016).
One of the main drivers for continued long-distance exchange was the
demand for metals. Based on isotopic analyses of metal objects, it seems that
the silver and copper mines at Lavrion continued to function after the palatial
collapse.12 It is conceivable that these resources became more accessible to local
populations, such as the residents at nearby Perati, who used the metals for their
own purposes and perhaps also traded them regionally.13 This situation seems
to persist into the Protogeometric period when bronze remained the most
common metal deposited in burials (Murray 2012, table 4.15) despite the
ubiquity of iron ore (Papadopoulos 2014, 181). However, the most important
ingredient of bronze is tin, and tin had to be imported from distant locations
like Iran, Afghanistan, or the British Isles (Gillis and Clayton 2008; Gillis and
Clayton 2008). Arguments that Early Iron Age people relied solely on the
recycling of old bronze to make new implements, thereby circumventing the
necessity for new tin, have been overturned by scientific analyses indicating
that the percentage of tin within Early Iron Age bronzes did not decrease
overall (Jones 1980, 455–457; contra Snodgrass 1971). This is not to say that
recycling did not happen, but rather imported tin was still available.
The continued import of metals into Greece implies there were specific
commodities traded in turn. Some scholars posit that Phoenicians would have
been seeking slaves, iron, or silver from the Laurion mines (Mazarakis-Ainian
2006, 194; Stos-Gale and Gale 1982; Thompson, Balmuth, and Stos-Gale
2001).14 Other scholars suggest that agricultural products, including olive oil,
were the main objective. Indeed, Euboea’s incredibly fertile Lelantine Plain
was apparently the cause of a long-lasting war involving much of the region,
although the exact chronology and details are debated (Descoeudres 2008,
317). In parallel, Phoenicia was suffering from a shortage of agricultural
products for its growing population.15 Although situated in a fertile area of
the Levantine coast, Tyre may have suffered from a deficit in foodstuffs from
the tenth century onward due to population pressure (Aubet 1993, 56). Both
contemporary and later textual sources refer to overpopulation and the need
for agricultural commodities, such as grain and oil.16 The Phoenician search
for agricultural supplies was not limited to Lefkandi and is even preserved in
Homer’s Odyssey (Book 15: 402–483) when Eumaeus recalls Phoenician
traders coming to Syros for foodstuff in exchange for keimelia during his
226 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

childhood. In support of Greek agricultural products traveling to the Near

East, Descoeudres (2008, 319), Courbin (1993, 109), and Boardman (2006,
514) each cite amphora fragments of Protogeometric date, now identified as
North Aegean amphoras. Although based mainly on speculation, all three
authors designate these amphoras for the transportation of olive oil.
Although the demand for certain imports continued, other aspects of Late
Bronze Age and Postpalatial trade did change. Contacts with Italy, for example,
seem to have ceased entirely. In addition, the “economic geography” of
Greece likely shifted, as the “center of gravity” of imports moved north and
east during the Early Iron Age (Murray 2012, 371). Eventually, this center of
gravity came to rest on what we have been calling the northwest Aegean
region.

Old Wine in New Containers: the North Aegean Amphora

Within these renewed and shifting exchange networks, is it possible to see the
resurgence of trade in surplus oil and wine? The answer seems to be “yes.”
Specifically, the Protogeometric period marks the point when a new type of
specialized container is introduced into Aegean exchange networks. This
container, the North Aegean amphora, seems to have been created for the
express purpose of transporting liquid commodities within interregional
exchange networks centered on the northwest Aegean and connected to
broader north Aegean and western Anatolian locations. This type of amphora
has been found throughout central Greece, Thessaly, Macedonia, many at
Troy, sites along the Anatolian coast, a few sites in the Levant, and even
Pithekoussai off the Italian coast. The very existence of North Aegean
amphoras was unknown until Richard Catling published a large collection of
these amphoras from excavations at Troy (Catling 1998, Lenz et al. 1998).
While these vessels had been mentioned previously, they had never received
the type of attention that generates greater awareness, and subsequent publica-
tion, of other examples around the Aegean (Hertel 2011). Over the past 15
years or so a sufficient number of North Aegean amphoras have come to light
such that we have the ability to begin to discuss their production, distribution,
and consumption (Papadopoulos 2005; Gimatzidis 2010; Kotsonas 2012,). That
these amphoras held oil or wine seems plausible based on chemical analyses
conducted on five later North Aegean amphoras from the site of Methone
located in Pieria on the coast of the Thermaic Gulf. Residue analysis produced
traces of beeswax and plant-based fatty acids, which are generally interpreted as
sealing agents (Kiriatzi et al. 2013). These results seem to support the assump-
tion that the contents of North Aegean amphoras were liquid-based. Most
scholars agree that the specific contents would most likely have been olive oil
and/or wine (Catling 1998; Gimatzidis 2010; Kotsonas 2012).
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 227

It is clear that the North Aegean amphora was produced throughout the
Early Iron Age. It is not clear, however, where it was produced and how
exactly the shape changed over time. Three diachronic variations of the North
Aegean amphora shape were outlined by Catling (1998): Group I, Transitional,
and Group II. The chronology of the North Aegean amphora is, however, far
from clear as none of the examples found within central Greece come from
tightly sealed stratified contexts. Instead, much of Catling’s chronology is based
on style, ultimately reliant on the Attic and Euboean styles. Consequently,
there is probably much more overlap between these three types of North
Aegean amphoras than the current linear typology suggests. In addition, the
majority of information published since Catling’s typology was first introduced
(1998) focuses mainly on the last, and most prevalent, Group II North Aegean
amphoras (Gimatzidis 2010; Kotsonas 2012). In my view, the main issue of
contention is the designation of “transitional” versions of the shape and
whether they are later than the Group I type or are local variations coexisting
with the Group I. The most recent chemical and microscopic analyses of North
Aegean amphoras suggest the latter might indeed be the case, to which we will
return shortly.
Due to the controversial and problematic nature of North Aegean amphora
chronology, especially during the first part of the Early Iron Age, I take
a slightly different approach to their analysis. Here, I will refer to “early
North Aegean amphoras” (Figure 5.7), encompassing both Group I and
Transitional versions, while retaining the designation “Group II North
Aegean amphora” (Figure 5.8). This binary division is helpful when trying
to see long-term patterns in production and exchange. In addition, Group II
amphoras are easily distinguished from their predecessors, as a significant shift in
shape and manufacturing techniques occurred at that time. This change has
resulted in not only their identification at far more excavations, but also in
a more robust scholarly discussion.
Despite the controversy over the relative chronology of North Aegean
amphora types, it is certainly the case that the shape remains remarkably
consistent over a long period of time, a fact that also hinders a neat classification.
This consistency in technological and stylistic features (ridge at the base of the
neck; double-ribbed strap handles, concentric circle decoration on shoulder)
does support the argument that they are part of the same tradition throughout
the Early Iron Age.
Although very little concrete information is known about the exact origins
of early North Aegean amphoras, some notion of production regions has been
distinguished based on stylistic, macroscopic, and very limited chemical ana-
lyses (Map 5.2). For North Aegean amphoras found in Protogeometric and
early Geometric contexts, suggested production locations include central
Greece (East Lokris; Catling 1998, 162), Thessaly (Jacob-Felsch 1988, 198;
228 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

5.7 Early North Aegean amphora from Troy. After Catling 1998, pl. 1:3. Image by author

5.8 Group II/late North Aegean amphora from Sindos. After Gimatzidis 2010, pl. 43 no. 361.
Image by author
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 229

Jones 1996, 199–120; Catling 1998, 159, 162), the Chalkidike (Mende and
Torone; Papadopoulos 2005; Tiverios 2008; Mazarakis-Ainian 2011, 2012),
Troy (Hertel 2003, 129; Aslan et al. 2014), Pergamon (Mommsen and Japp
2009; Schneider and Japp 2009; Japp 2009; Hertl 2011, 81), or Klazomenai
(Aytaçlar 2004, 24). The most recent chemical analysis (NAA) of eleven
samples of “Group I” amphoras from Troy suggests local production (Aslan
et al. 2014). The term “local,” however, needs to be defined better with respect
to the general region of northwest Anatolia. In addition, a few North Aegean
amphoras found at Kastanas (Kat. Nr. 417, 419, fig. 34.343) have variations
between each other, including a rim-handled version, that have lead Jung
(2002, 178–179) to suggest separate, regional, production locations entirely
distinct from the Trojan examples.
Given these recent data, it seems that no clear geographical region stands out
as the producer of early North Aegean amphoras. Instead, these amphoras are
defined by their heterogeneity of production. Variation in manufacturing
techniques but retention of stylistic characteristics might suggest an emphasis
on regional production centers, as opposed to centralized or local strategies.
These regions would share a common value and knowledge about the
amphoras and their contents. The result would be very similar products
produced in different locations that encode necessary information for consu-
mers. In this case, the decoration and idiosyncratic features of early North
Aegean amphoras might have signaled to the knowledgeable buyer/recipient
the vessel’s content, quality, or general (but not specific) origin.
The separation of Group II amphoras from the others is a less contentious
issue. Group II North Aegean amphoras are remarkably standardized, appear
only in the Middle Geometric and Late Geometric periods, and have a very
distinctive body shape (Figure 5.8). The peak of its production, however, came
in the middle of the eighth century BCE when the Group II amphoras reached
their widest distribution. They differ from their Protogeometric counterparts in
a number of ways. First, they seem to come in two “sizes.” The larger version is
highly standardized with a height of about 60 cm and an estimated capacity of
about 50 l. The height of the smaller version varies between 35 and 40 cm.
Smaller amphoras tend to be decorated with cross-hatched triangles, whereas
larger versions continue to be decorated with concentric circles or semi-circles,
normally in sets of three (Gimatzidis 2010, 259).
They too were produced according to a regional strategy, but their exact
origins are more confined (Map 5.2). Petrographic and chemical analyses have
confirmed Group II North Aegean amphora production locations at or near
Sindos, Methone, Mende, and Troy (Aslan et al. 2014). This suggests that
a more specific area, the Thermaic Gulf, was a primary producer of the shape
(Kotsonas 2012, 155; Kiriatzi et al. 2013). Consequently, a move has been made
to change the vessel’s name from “North Aegean amphora Group II” to
230 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

map 5.2 Possible production locations for early North Aegean amphoras (red) and Group II/late
North Aegean amphoras (blue). Image by author

“Thermaic Gulf amphora” (Kotsonas 2012). Based on available evidence, it

seems that from the Protogeometric to the Geometric period, North Aegean
amphora production locations coalesced to form a very solid regional character.
A similar situation existed in the later Archaic and Classical eras when regional
styles of amphoras were used in multiple locations to signal the specific type of
contents within the containers – generally regional variations in wine (e.g.,
Mendaian amphoras; Papadopoulos and Paspalas 1999; Lawall 2004). The
continuity in idiosyncratic features and overall decoration on the Group II
amphoras does, however, suggest that the same knowledge and meaning
ascribed to Protogeometric versions continued into the later part of the Iron
Age. That these semiotics were conferred within a commercial context can be
demonstrated by the presence of pot marks on most examples and their
distribution pattern both within and beyond the Aegean.

Use of Pot Marks for Commercial Purposes?

The presence of pot marks on North Aegean amphoras throughout the Early
Iron Age, spanning over 300 years, demonstrates that these liquid containers
were continually designated as transport containers involved in a multitiered
commercial network. Based on the current available evidence it seems that
over time, as the vessel itself became more standardized, pot marks became
more prevalent. The increase in pot marks might be an indication of an increase
in the complexity of oil and wine exchange and the various actors involved.
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 231

Marks placed on pots, both before firing and after, can signal a number of
meanings, none of which can ever be absolutely certain. Pot marks can signal
the involvement of particular actors in the transport of goods, lending
a commercial connotation to otherwise unmarked pots. Early Iron Age pot
marks are more enigmatic due to their fewer numbers and inconsistency in
both location and symbol. The most comprehensive examination of pot marks
in the Early Iron Age came to the conclusion that they may have been used by
the potters themselves to distinguish particular orders (Papadopoulos forth-
coming, 1994). Evidence gathered over the last 15 years has added to the
number of pot marks, as well as the repertoire of marked pots.
Many early North Aegean amphoras were marked either before or after
firing, demonstrating a degree of organization to the patterns and nature of
commercial activity in oil and wine (Catling 1996, 130). Pot marks on North
Aegean amphoras dated to the Protogeometric period have been found at the
Toumba cemetery at Lefkandi and at Troy. The best-preserved amphora from
Troy has two marks incised after firing on the belly (Catling 1998, 151). The
marks themselves do not conform to the marking system present on local
Trojan vessels and may therefore represent an import. The amphora found
on pyre 11/12 at Toumba cemetery at Lefkandi is dated to ca. 950 BCE and also
has two post-firing incised marks, one on each handle (Catling 1996, 128).
These marks do not conform to local Euboean-style marks. Since both the
Trojan and Lefkandian amphoras are considered imports and both have incised
signs, they could plausibly be treated as commercial marks (Catling 1998, 165).
In addition, the presence of two sets of marks and the differences in their
execution may indicate that the amphora had been involved in more than
a single episode of exchange (Papadopoulos 1994; Catling 1996, 128). The gap
of 50–100 years between the Trojan and Lefkandi examples further demon-
strates the long-term use of pot marks for commercial means or identification.
Other early North Aegean amphoras have marks that were painted before
the vessel was fired. Published examples include a cross painted on the neck of
an amphora from Kastanas, another from Kastanas with rows of dots next to the
handle, a cross painted on an amphora from Pherai/Chloe, and a vertical row of
dots painted on an amphora from Iolkos (Gimatzidis 2010, 265; Papadopoulos
1994, 446 A38, pl. 113.f). Support for these marks having a commercial mean-
ing comes from their find-contexts in settlements, as opposed to cemeteries,
however it is impossible to distinguish their exact meanings (Papadopoulos
1994, 463). The application of the marks before firing might suggest that the
purpose of the pot (or its contents) was already decided as the pot was created.
This is in contrast to incised post-firing marks that have the impression of being
an added piece of information to an already existing communication code.
Based on current data, it seems that pot marks were not always applied to early
North Aegean amphoras. Gimatzidis (2010, 267) speculates that this is because
232 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

there was a general lack of uniformity in shape, size, and decoration of the pots
themselves so that, although they were probably used as commercial vessels, the
market did not require the application of pot marks to distinguish between
different varieties or production location (as they did for later versions).
Pot marks, both pre- and post-firing, are by far most prevalent on Group II
North Aegean amphoras or “Thermaic Gulf” amphoras. As the vessel became
more standardized in size, shape, and decoration, pot marks seem to have been
more common. Indeed, pot marks exist on nearly every preserved Group II
North Aegean amphora. Gimatzidis (2010, 264) posits that the pre-firing marks
must have been made by the potters and have to do with the use of the vessels,
essentially standing for a communication code since all the other features of
Group II North Aegean amphoras were standardized. There is a wide reper-
toire of pre-firing painted marks positioned on the neck, body, and handles.
The signs on the neck are generally larger than those painted on the body. The
most common painted marks are sets of dots (similar to the earlier example
from Kastanas).
Post-firing marks were probably intended for some point during the vessel’s
sale since these marks are found on sherds from different locations in the north
and northwestern Aegean. They are mostly located on handles and include
simple symbols or lines. A unique mark found on a few amphoras is a small,
drilled pit(s) on the handles (Gimatzidis 2010, 266). The standardized nature of
later North Aegean amphoras may have made pot marks necessary for the
dealer to distinguish particular shipments, customers, or production regions.
The marks do not seem to designate capacity, since there is no correlation
between size and the marks themselves, nor do they seem to show contents as
the repertoire of marks is too large (Papadopoulos 1994; Gimatzidis 2010, 267).
As suggested for marks on early North Aegean amphoras, in cases where more
than one post-firing mark is present, it is likely that the vessel had changed its
contents or owner at least once (Gimatzidis 2010, 268; Kotsonas 2012, 162).
Although the precise meanings of these pre- and post-firing marks are
unknown, they nevertheless provide a tantalizing hint at the commercial nature
of North Aegean amphoras and the relatively sophisticated trade networks
already in place by the Early Iron Age.

Exchange Networks: From Interregional to Long-Distance

In Chapter 4, it became clear that after the collapse of the Mycenaean palaces,
trade in surplus oil and wine seems to have diminished down to a local or
regional scale. The Postpalatial era was characterized by small-scale networks
that utilized available household vessels, or simplified versions of previous
palatial-era vessels, to seemingly “make-do” during a period of widespread
transition. The Protogeometric period marks a shift toward organized,
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 233

expanded interregional networks that supplied multiple areas with surplus oil
and/or wine. The newly developed North Aegean amphora was used to
transport bulk liquid commodities both within the northwest Aegean and
beyond. In the Protogeometric period, three major areas seem to have been
connected by trade using North Aegean amphoras (Map 5.3). The first is
a cluster of sites in central Greece, but specifically the coastal region connecting
Lokris, Boeotia, and the island of Euboea. While published numbers of early
North Aegean amphoras are not great, as they are often very fragmentary, the
number of sites involved is perhaps more significant. Most excavated settle-
ment and cemetery sites in the above regions have produced at least one
example, including the cemetery at Elateia (10), the large site of Kynos (1+),
the sanctuary of Kalapodi (1+), Atalanti (1), Mitrou (2+), Agnanti (1), and
Lefkandi (4+ in Toumba and fragments from Xeropolis). The second region
includes coastal sites in northern Greece where a few early North Aegean
amphoras have been found: Thessaly: Iolkos, Volos/Kapakli; Macedonia:
Sindos, Thessaloniki Toumba, Kastanas, Assiros; Chalkidike: Sane, Torone,
and Mende (Catling 1998; Pratt 2014, table 3, maps 8 and 9).

map 5.3 Distribution of early North Aegean amphoras with number and find context indicated.
Image by author
234 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

The third major area to receive early North Aegean amphoras is the north-
west coast of Asia Minor, specifically the site of Troy, with smaller numbers at
Klazomenai and possibly Pergamon and Ephesos (Map 5.3). Over the course of
a century of excavation at Troy, early North Aegean amphora fragments have
been discovered in almost every part of the Protogeometric and sub-
Protogeometric levels of the citadel (level VIIb2). At least 150 fragments of
these amphoras have been recovered and recorded (Aslan et al. 2014, 285). At
Klazomenai, more than seven examples have been recovered in recent excava-
tions on the floors of houses and in pits outside. It is argued that these pots are
locally made (Aytaçlar 2004, 20–24). In addition, the two pots recovered from
Pergamon have also tested as locally made, but on close inspection there are
significant morphological differences from the typical early North Aegean
amphoras, suggesting a local variant (Catling 1998, 155–162; Gimatzidis
2010, 252–255). In addition, the island of Lemnos produced many examples
of early North Aegean amphoras, perhaps thirty or more (Cultraro 2004;
Danile 2009, 323, fig. 27). The abnormally large number of fragments from
Troy may be explained by the size of the site and the volume of excavations
undertaken there. These three clusters within the distribution of early North
Aegean amphoras – coastal central Greece, northern Greece, and the west coast
of Anatolia – suggest a general distribution pattern moving between east and
west across the Aegean Sea. Based on the high number of vessels found,
Lemnos may have acted as a way station or stopping point along the way.
This bimodal network may have led to settlements producing their own
versions (e.g., Pergamon and Troy) if the chemical analyses are accurate.
At the same time, or perhaps slightly later, there is evidence for a north-south
mode of North Aegean amphora distribution that connected central Greece
with Thessaly and Macedonia. In Thessaly, a large number of sites have
produced early versions of North Aegean amphoras. Specifically, the sites of
Pyrasos, Pherai/Chloe, Marmariani, Skyros, and Iolkos each have produced at
least one example (Catling 1998; Gimatzidis 2010). Farther north, sites in
Macedonia and the Chalkidike also seem to have been active within this
early exchange network. Sindos has at least six examples and the cemetery of
Torone has at least six as well (though many more belly-handled examples).
These vessels are smaller than the following Group II and do not have regular-
ized features. In addition, their presence in the Torone cemetery may lead us to
question whether these particular examples are part of the same North Aegean
amphora tradition as elsewhere, or whether a local network is at play. Without
knowing the production locations of early North Aegean amphoras, it is
impossible to say with 100 percent certainty that the amphoras found in these
Greek regions were part of the same commercial network. It is entirely
possible, for example, that many smaller networks existed on a more local
scale. Counter to this idea, however, is the impressive continuity in vessel
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 235

features and morphological characteristics that not only span centuries, but also
a large geographical space.
The dramatic increase in numbers of pots and sites at which they have been
discovered, along with the common use of pot marks, strongly suggests that
Group II North Aegean amphoras were part of a large and complex commer-
cial network, especially when compared to other north Aegean products or any
transport closed shape of the same period (Gimatzidis 2010, 262).17 This
distribution network continued to involve settlements in coastal Asia Minor,
but also extended the network’s boundary into the western Mediterranean
(Maps 5.4 and 5.5). Since Group II North Aegean amphoras were most likely
produced at one or more locations near the Thermaic Gulf, the renewed
connection with Asia Minor suggests a healthy commercial network moving
west to east. Thasos, an island located approximately halfway between the two
regions, has produced a “large number” of Group II North Aegean amphora
fragments in a port/settlement context (Gimatzidis 2002). Moving east from
that location, at least thirty fragments of Group II North Aegean amphoras have
been recovered in multiple settlement contexts within the citadel of Troy
(Lenz et al. 1998). Additionally, one pot has been identified on Lesbos
(Pyrrha) and Group II North Aegean amphoras have been recovered from
Samos (Gimatzidis 2010, 262 n. 1603).
A new node in the commercial network was created in the western
Mediterranean by the addition of Pithekoussai to the North Aegean amphora’s
distribution list (Map 5.4). Here, two Group II North Aegean amphoras have
been recovered from the cemetery, and one from the acropolis (Gimatzidis
2010, 262 n. 1603). Since only a very small percentage of the colony has been

map 5.4 Distribution of Group II/late North Aegean amphoras outside of the north Aegean
region. Image by author
236 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

excavated, we may expect to find many more Group II North Aegean

amphoras, which would add to the strength of the complex distribution net-
work of the Late Geometric/Early Archaic period. Group II North Aegean
amphora networks also continued the connections with southern Greece, as
established in the Protogeometric period. These amphoras are found in rela-
tively large numbers at Eretria and Lefkandi on Euboea. This suggests an
intensified southerly connection with cities in central Greece, at least in the
oil and wine trade. The distribution networks of Group II North Aegean
amphoras, therefore, comprised an extended west-east trajectory as well as
a north-south trajectory.
At the same time that Group II North Aegean amphoras had a very wide
range in their distribution, it is also clear that they were distributed locally in the
areas of central Macedonia, Thessaly, and the Chalkidike (Map 5.5; see also
Pratt 2014, table 3, maps 10 and 11). Because of the high standardization of
these vessels, it is difficult to determine regional exchange patterns. However,
there may be two slight variations in Group II North Aegean amphora

map 5.5 Distribution of Group II/late North Aegean amphoras within the north Aegean region.
Image by author
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 237

production that could signal either different production locations, or, possibly,
a change over time. The one variation has more of a biconical body and a taller
neck, while the other is more oval (egg-like) with a shorter neck. Both are
found at the large settlements of Kastanas and Sindos, but it is possible that one
variation was a product of one site, and the other produced at the other site,
suggesting an inter-site commercial network. In support of this smaller, but
intense network in the north Aegean, the site of Iolkos has produced at least 900
fragments of “clearly imported” Group II North Aegean amphoras, though
Sindos supposedly has the highest number of these vessels (Catling 1998;
Gimatzidis 2010). The list of sites in the Thessaly/Macedonia region with
a few examples of Group II North Aegean amphoras (both published
and unpublished) is very long but includes Volos, Assiros, Marmariani,
Thebes, Leivithra, Halos, Thessaloniki Toumba, Polichni, Methone,
Akanthos, Archondiko, Nea Philadelphia, Aspros, Sariomer, Gona,
Agrosykia, Perivolaki, Aphytis, Kochei at Neos Marmaras, Eion/Amphipolis,
Kavala, Leukopetra, Neochori, Sfendami, Kranie at Platamon, Nea
Nikomideia, Gallikos, Axiochori, Argilos, Edessa, Lebet Table, Kritsana,
Therme, Nea Kallikrateia, Olynthos, Perivolaki Lagada, Sane Pallinis,
Aphytis, and Mende (Gimatzidis 2010, 375; Kotsonas 2012, 154 ff). Where
the sherds have been published, however, there are normally fewer than three
listed. One site that should be promising in future publications is Karabournaki,
where at least two Group II North Aegean amphoras are published, one in
front of an oven (Tiverios 2009; Manakidou 2010). The site has also produced
a few pottery workshops. Most interesting is the identification of large wine-
making installations throughout the site and large quantities of archaeobotani-
cal evidence for grape pressing (Tiverios, Manakidou, and Tsiafaki 2003, 193).
Perhaps this site was a bottling location for the wine shipped in Group II North
Aegean amphoras, which “serve for the overseas promotion and marketing of
‘Thermae’ wine.”18

Commercial Exchange: Conclusions

The production and distribution patterns observed for North Aegean amphoras
throughout the Early Iron Age suggest a gradual shift from localized production
and regional distribution to regional production and interregional distribu-
tions. At the beginning of the Early Iron Age, the many production locations
suggested for early North Aegean amphoras might indicate that they were
produced on a relatively local scale but exchanged within a larger area. In
a localized mode of production, fabric sources of a particular type of vessel are
variable between regions as the producers probably resided in many different
communities, supplying their own settlement and perhaps some close neigh-
bors (Keswani 2009, 112–113). This is a similar situation to the production of
238 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

oval-mouthed amphoras in Proto- and Neopalatial Crete, as discussed in

Chapter 2. In both cases, despite local production strategies, the resulting
amphoras featured very similar technological and stylistic features. A localized
mode of production for early North Aegean amphoras, coupled with their
complicated distribution patterns, suggests that many regions produced local
vessels, filled them with local produce, and shipped them to various other sites
around the Aegean. Their standardized decoration remained consistent, sug-
gesting it formed some sort of “label” or identification method, most likely for
their contents. Since the vessels were produced in various locations, the
decoration could not have signaled their specific origin.
Over time, the local strategy of production employed for early North
Aegean amphoras seems to have shifted toward a more regional approach, as
the production locations coalesced into a few identifiable, geographically
restricted, places. Specifically, all the data point to a primary production
location within the Thermaic Gulf region of northern Greece. Interestingly,
variability within the general ceramic fabric type suggests multiple production
locations within that geographical zone. Combined with the vessel’s absolute
standardization and mass production, we might assume that production trans-
formed into a regional strategy, not quite restricted enough to be considered
“centralized,” but certainly integrated enough to create little deviation from
a particular shape and decoration. At that point the decoration might have
even transitioned to a type of “brand” that signaled the unique quality or type
of commodity, most likely wine, contained within (Wengrow 2008; Bevan
2010). The Early Iron Age transition from local to regional production
strategies for standardized bulk liquid transport containers would set the
stage for the ensuing Archaic and Classical eras when many regions of the
Greek world produced their own containers and products to fill them.

CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS
The early Iron Age Mediterranean was a world of fluid boundaries, where consumption played
an important role, the whole functioning as a network, without a center. Although the
culmination of this development was the invention of coinage in the later seventh
century BC, the real search for structured commodities of value goes back to the Late Bronze
and early Iron Age
(Papadopoulos 2014, 190).

Although this statement was made in reference to the search for metals and
their use as standards of value, it is certainly possible to apply the same senti-
ments to value-added commodities like oil and wine.19 Perfumed oil, for
instance, was tightly controlled by palatial authorities in the Bronze Age.
When those palatial social structures transformed in the Early Iron Age, there
was continuity in the high value attributed to perfumed oil through its use as
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 239

grave gifts and its continued exchange throughout regional and long-distance
networks in small, elaborate containers. Likewise, the production and
exchange of flavored, aged, or imported wines continued uninterrupted from
the Late Bronze Age to the Archaic era when their high value is made clear not
only in the archaeological remains of commensal events but also in literary
works such as the Homeric epics (see Appendix A). Wine and oil, therefore,
could be considered one of these “structured commodities of value” that could
be easily controlled, distributed, and consumed.
Three major developments characterize the trajectory of surplus oil and wine
exchange in the Early Iron Age. The first is a change in how the high value
attributed to these commodities was constructed as networks of calculative
agencies shifted from local to regional in scope. This change in the way oil and
wine’s value was conceived developed as an outcome of the increasing con-
nectivity and effectiveness of networks that came about during the course of
the Early Iron Age. The second is a change in the dependencies between
people and oil and wine as networks of people and things expanded. The result
of these first two developments is the expansion of the more localized entan-
glements observed in the Postpalatial era to larger-scale and less centralized
entanglements during the Early Iron Age. Entanglements developed a more
“regional” character as small-scale, or more “local,” dependencies between
people and things coalesced into a larger network that shared similar values and
similar exchange contexts in which those values were manifested. The third
major development in the trajectory of surplus oil and wine exchange is the
transformation of the north Aegean into a “middle ground” for the confluence
of various Mediterranean people – their ideas, values, and practices.
That a shift in the construction of value, from a local to regional level,
occurred during the Early Iron Age can be demonstrated through the
development of a northwest Aegean koine and the production and exchange
of increasingly standardized amphoras. The northwest Aegean koine is the
expansion and evolution of the “East Mainland – Aegean koine” of the LH
IIIC late period. The large, closed shapes, such as hydriai and amphoras, that
made up the shared value system of that era shifted northward and expanded
to include more vessel types, such as cups. The added shapes, however,
seem to have complemented the larger vessels in that they are mostly
concerned with the consumption and pouring of wine, the liquid presum-
ably contained within the large closed shapes. In the Early Iron Age, the
areas of Euboea, Boeotia, Phokis, east Lokris, Thessaly, and even
Macedonia and Chalkidike, all shared preferences for the same particular
shapes and decorations (Gimatzidis 2011, 960). These preferences often
overlapped with Attica and the northern Cyclades. While there is some
evidence for trade in these ceramic vessels, most of the examples found are
locally produced. The presence of the same types of containers produced
240 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

with the same motifs in these regions suggests a similar set of practices
associated with the use of these vessels. Since these vessels include various
types of cups, jugs, kraters, lekythoi, amphoriskoi, and other types of
containers and consumption equipment, we might assume that the parti-
cular shared practices had to do specifically with wine and processed-oil
exchange and consumption.
Shared production, exchange, and consumption of particular vessels and
their associated commodity would imply the same or similar values calculated
by similarly composed local networks of calculative agencies. This could mean
that the similarities viewed in the archaeological record between the pottery of
different regions is not the result of the domination of one region over others
(e.g., the “Euboean koine”) nor is it the sole result of trade. Rather, what we see
as a “koine” is really a shared system of values and practices, all centered around
the consumption of wine and oil and their role within the cultural identity of
a region. In this way, a “koine” is nothing more than a shared value system. No
single node within a regional network controls the value system – it is gener-
ated and influenced simultaneously by multiple nodes within the network.
Even if some styles existed at a particular place first (e.g., pendent semicircle
skyphos in Euboea) the value attributed to the style comes from the acceptance
of that style by other nodes. The value does not emanate from a particular node,
nor is it imposed by one node. There is no political control associated with this
regional value system (as in the previous Mycenaean palatial era). Therefore,
the northwest Aegean “koine” is a wonderful, archaeologically visible, demon-
stration of the development of regional networks of value during the Early
Iron Age.
Another means by which we are able to see the development of regional
networks of value during the Early Iron Age is by the exchange and consump-
tion of North Aegean amphoras. From the Protogeometric to the Late
Geometric periods, we can trace a shift in their value as calculative agencies
changed and expanded to a regional level. Early North Aegean amphoras and
their contents seem to have been consumed as prestige goods as they are
consistently found within large buildings in settlements (Pratt 2014, table 3,
maps 8 and 9) and are often found as grave gifts within wealthy graves. Their use
as an object to be placed within a tomb as a gift is significantly different from
their later use as burial containers – an exploitation of their functionality as large
vessels. There is even some speculation that early North Aegean amphoras may
have initially functioned as a type of tribute from Lokris to Troy, following the
myth of the “Locrian Maidens” (Catling 1998, 164; S.P. Morris 2007, 60–62).
Early North Aegean amphoras, therefore, seem to have been highly valued
within all three prominent exchange contexts: commensal events, gift-giving,
and trade.
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 241

In contrast, later Group II North Aegean amphoras were used in a more

utilitarian manner. Their treatment as prestige objects is no longer clearly
evident. What comes to the fore is their strictly utilitarian use as large containers
suitable for transportation of liquids overseas. When Group II North Aegean
amphoras are found in funerary contexts, they are usually used as burial
containers, not as gifts to the deceased.20 The contexts in which later North
Aegean amphoras were exchanged emphasize the utility of these vessels, as well
as a clear change in their value. This change, from prestige object to utility
vessel, might be due to the expansion of the network calculating the value of
the amphora. By the end of the Early Iron Age, North Aegean amphoras were
mass-produced on a regional level and traded by long-distance networks; they
were no longer restricted in number and geographical distribution. North
Aegean amphoras were therefore caught up in the regional value system
created during the Early Iron Age as smaller local networks interacted with
one another on an increasingly intense scale.
The second major development that characterizes the trajectory of surplus
oil and wine exchange in the Early Iron Age is a shift from dependencies with
a more “local” character to a more “regional” character. In the Postpalatial era,
each settlement site seems to have maintained its own storage of surplus,
produced its own supply of essential goods, and hosted its own commensal
events. The result of these activities was the construction of localized depen-
dencies between people and things. In the Early Iron Age, however, broader
regions or groups of settlements seem to have participated within the same
networks of dependency. Regionalization was certainly not new, but the
distinctive products of these regions and the dependencies surrounding their
production and exchange came to the fore as more effective networks allowed
wider access to the most desirable of these regional commodities. This is
perhaps best seen in the transition in production locations of North Aegean
amphoras from many places distributed around the Eastern Aegean to
a concentration in the Thermaic Gulf region.
In addition, dependencies with a regional nature developed out of the
formation and increasing influence of regional sanctuaries. Although some of
the earliest evidence for large-scale feasting in the Early Iron Age is located in
rulers’ dwellings, it is uncertain how much surplus the leaders were able to
acquire and distribute themselves. Instead, we have clear evidence for the use of
religious installations. Eventually, however, leaders’ dwellings were equipped
with large and prominently displayed storage facilities, perhaps emphasizing
their ability to command such resources. At this time, regional sanctuaries
gained in prominence as locations for large communal commensal events.
Toward the end of the Early Iron Age, as the ritual character of large-scale
feasts increased and included more echelons of people, the overall dependency
between oil/wine and people would have once again increased.
242 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

The dependencies between people would have also been stretched to the
regional level during the Early Iron Age through disparities in settlement size.
Settlement patterns suggest that some settlements were large enough to com-
mand labor necessary to produce surplus oil and wine while others would not
have had the resources. The need to move surplus commodities between
settlements is attested by production of standardized containers (North
Aegean amphoras). In these instances, the dependencies between people and
oil and wine were generated not by a central node (like a palace) but by a shared
system of practices and values. People were dependent upon wine because they
valued it as a necessary component of, for example, a feast or libation. People
were dependent on oil because it was a necessary component of, among other
things, the burial process. After the palatial collapse, there was no reason to
keep producing surplus oil and wine other than the fact that people valued
those products and desired them within particular exchange modes. The fact
that these values were not maintained across the collapse in all instances is
demonstrated by the abandonment of other things like kylikes, stirrup jars, and
even record keeping using written language. The use of oil and wine within
established social practices, such as funerary feasts and sacrifices at regional
sanctuaries, solidified their place within the socio-cultural milieu of the Early
Iron Age.
The evidence for production strategies and distribution of North Aegean
amphoras supports the idea that larger-scale, less centralized or “regional”
entanglements were forming during this era, particularly during the second
half of the Early Iron Age. In the definition proposed here, regional entangle-
ments have a small number of influential nodes that are strongly linked
together. These clusters are then connected with weaker links to other entan-
glements, thereby creating an enclosed group of entanglements that share
similar attributes, values, and dependencies. The characteristics of Group II
North Aegean amphoras provide evidence for the existence of a regional type
of entanglement. Specifically, North Aegean amphoras seem to have been the
forerunners of a trend in Greek amphora production where the characteristics
of the vessels themselves act as identifying markers of the region from which the
contents originated. Later Archaic and Classical transport amphoras continued
this trend as they were labeled by specific regions (e.g., Chian or Samian). It has
become increasingly clear, however, that these different amphoras actually
represented a much broader region. Based on ceramic, numismatic, and literary
evidence from Torone, Papadopoulos and Paspalas (1999, 165) suggest that the
famed “Mendaian” wine of the Classical era actually derived from multiple
cities in the larger area of the Chalkidike, rather than from the city of Mende
specifically. This realization can also be applied to Group II North Aegean
amphoras. Based on ceramic fabric composition, multiple production regions
manufactured Group II North Aegean amphoras. It is also clear that the vessels
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 243

were highly standardized in size, shape, and decoration. This suggests that like
later amphoras from the same region, Group II North Aegean amphoras
represented a large area of production in liquid commodities and did not signal
one particular origin. Group II North Aegean amphoras may have been the
ancestor that affected later homogeneity in shapes of north Aegean amphoras,
especially Thasian, Akanthian, and Mendaian. Each of these vessels share
morphological traits and even used similar marking systems (Lawall 1995,
156; Papadopoulos and Paspalas 1999, 179). The regional dependencies
between people, oil, and wine established by the end of the Early Iron Age
therefore set the stage for the ensuing Archaic and Classical periods.
North Aegean agency may have been a defining characteristic in the devel-
oping entanglement between people and oil and wine in the Early Iron Age.
For North Aegean amphoras, the only common denominator between early
and late examples is, in fact, the north Aegean, and specifically the region
around the Thermaic Gulf and Chalkidike. In this way, the North Aegean
acted as a veritable “middle ground” where multiple actors interacted with
each other; actors that included southern Greeks, Phoenicians, and Trojans,
just to name a few. In this sense the North Aegean functioned as
a chronological bridge, essentially connecting the end of the Bronze Age
with the beginning of the Archaic period through the continued maintenance
of commercial ties with regions outside Greece. During the eighth century, the
north Aegean formation of a homogeneous system of amphora production,
starting with the Group II north Aegean amphora, may have prompted
a southerly response in the region of Attica and Euboea, to which we will
return in Chapter 6. By the time of the North Aegean amphora’s abandonment
in the north, the south had initiated a large-scale production of its own
amphoras, the “SOS” and Corinthian A.
At the end of the Early Iron Age, entanglements characterized as more
“regional” were fully formed and transitioned into the Archaic period by
acquiring more overt political associations. The development of the Greek
polis and the exponential increase in Greek movement abroad complicated and
problematized the foundational networks of the Early Iron Age. The common
trends observed in the values and practices manifested in production of north-
west Aegean pottery disappeared once and for all at the end of the Late
Geometric period. Euboean imports in Macedonia, Thessaly, and the
Cyclades were replaced by Corinthian and East Greek tableware.
Significantly, local northwest Aegean pottery was not influenced by the
newly introduced south and east Greek wares (Tiverios 1993, 556–567; 1998,
250–251; Gimatzidis 2011, 963). This might suggest that the regional entangle-
ment that had developed out of shared values and dependencies during the
Early Iron Age was no longer operating. Instead, smaller regions developed
their own values and dependencies as political institutions began to formalize
244 OIL A ND WINE IN EARLY I RON A GE GREECE

and settlements coalesced. The values and dependencies on oil and wine
developed during the Early Iron Age, however, did not dissipate. Instead,
those influences strengthened the cultural need for surplus oil and wine within
social and economic exchanges. As a result, the early Archaic period marks the
point when surpluses of Greek oil and wine and their associated practices were
exchanged within a broader Mediterranean network of people and places,
resulting in the solidification of these two commodities as signifiers of
specifically Greek culture.
SIX

EXPANDING THE RELATIONSHIP

Oil and Wine in the Early Archaic Period

A s the era known as the “eighth century revolution”

(Hägg 1983; Morris 2009) brought light back into the “darkness” of the
Early Iron Age, the production and exchange of oil and wine flourished.1 Their
role as markers of Greek culture, imbedded in the actions of daily life and
central features of special occasions, solidified further still. It is in the early
Archaic period that olive oil and wine, as Greek cultural commodities, began to
develop an overt symbolism juxtaposed with the predominant consumable
commodities of neighboring cultures. As Greeks started to move outward from
the archipelago, cultural norms and tendencies clashed and it is possible to see
archaeologically the creative ways in which oil and wine were subsumed (or
not) into other regimes of value and relationships.
The beginning of the Archaic era (ca. 750 BCE) marks a significant transi-
tional point in the history of Greek culture. Along with population explosion
came consolidation through formalizing the city-state or polis2 and dispersal
through colonization. This process, however, was a slow and variable one. In
some regions, population coalescence started in the eleventh century, while
true urbanization and monumental architecture is not attested on the Greek
mainland before the sixth century (Morris 1991, 40).3 In addition, poleis formed
over different historical trajectories. Some settlements expanded gradually, like
Knossos, while others, like Athens and Corinth, appear to have been the result
of the fusion of multiple smaller villages (Hansen 2006, 51–53; Hall 2007,
74–75). The people governing such spaces also varied throughout the Early

245
246 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

Iron Age and into the Archaic era. The political situation attested for the
eleventh to ninth centuries, essentially the presence of “big-men” or “chiefs”
appears to also be the case for the eighth century, at least in some prominent
regions.4 It is only in the seventh century that developments toward the
emergence of the state can be identified. The first move in that direction was
a shift toward authority based on ascribed status, where emphasis is given to the
office itself rather than the person who holds it.5 Second was the emergence of
hierarchical classes. The often designated “leisure class” seems to have held
a monopoly on these newly ascribed offices (see Duplouy 2006; Rose 2009; van
Wees and Fisher 2015). These elite classes were perhaps the result of the
coalescence of small communities, each headed by their own chieftains, into
larger urban societies (Hall 2013, 13). By the sixth century there is archae-
ological evidence for built structures to house assemblies and councils, with
some of the first at regional sanctuaries such as Delos, Delphi, and Olympia
(Scott 2010, 41–74, 146–180). As discussed throughout this chapter, the for-
mation of the polis and a bureaucratic state certainly affected the characteristics
of the entanglement between people and oil and wine and the ways in which
the value of those commodities was constructed.
Contemporaneous to the formation of the polis and intimately tied to the
expansion of commercial networks during the Archaic period, is the phenom-
enon generally termed colonization (Map 6.1).6 Perhaps surprisingly, more
recent archaeological research has suggested that Greek settlements abroad did
not maintain close connections with their mother cities, neither supplying

map 6.1 Extent of Greek and Phoenician colonization. Image by author

 OI L A N D WI N E I N THE EAR LY A RC HAI C PERI OD 247

material goods nor conforming to their home traditions and values.7 Instead,
Greek settlements in regions like Sicily and the Italian peninsula were from the
start independent city-states, called apoikiai (literally “home away from
home” – Finley 1976, 174). By taking a fresh look at the earliest moments of
contact, one can gain a clearer idea of how indigenous people first interacted
with Greek culture and how the newly settled Greeks integrated or shunned
local values (Antonaccio 2004; Hodos 2006; Dietler and López Ruiz 2009).
Whatever the exact reasons for the establishment of Greek settlements abroad,
it is clear that the last generation of the eighth century BCE was responsible for
establishing one new settlement every 2 years in Sicily and south Italy.8 The
details and impact of these various ventures will be particularly relevant during
the discussion of the role of surplus oil and wine in Archaic-era commercial
exchange, to which I return later.
Economic enterprise became an increasingly important aspect of Greek life as
Archaic Greek poleis gradually coalesced into concrete forms of political and
ideological expression and Greek colonies spread throughout the Mediterranean.
At the same time, interactions between Greeks and other Mediterranean cultures
increased dramatically as population movements expanded the potential market to
an all-time high. Based on archaeological and literary evidence, we know that
exports from Greece at this time in the Archaic period consisted mainly of
agricultural surplus. Archaeobotanical evidence suggests that the primary crops
produced included cereals, olives, and grapes. In this way, agricultural production
constituted the main pillar of the Greek economy. Yet, what was the motivation
behind producing these goods? In general, the debate has been divided between
the desire to attain self-sufficiency and the “acquisitive drive,” the desire to attain
things for the sake of prestige or desire (Van Wees 2009, 450). This acquisitive drive
was fueled by two major activities: the creation of surplus and its subsequent trade
and competition for wealth. In the Greek Archaic period, surplus agricultural
product was generated by farmers or, more accurately, wealthy estate owners.
These estate owners can be represented as “princes” in the case of Homeric poetry
(such as Odysseus himself) or as “farmers” (wealthy land owners) in the case of
Hesiod’s Works and Days.9 Farmers, in this sense of the word, seem to have been
able to trade their own surplus for desirable goods, even without the involvement
of middlemen (Descoeudres 2008, 338). Significantly, in Works and Days, Hesiod
clearly states that he can export his agricultural surplus (line 631) and that he enjoys
wine imported from Biblis (line 589; see Appendix B).10
At the same time, the natural environment created favorable conditions for
such enterprises for the first time in centuries. Consequently, olives and grapes
seem to have become two of the most intensely cultivated plants in most
regions of Greece. Perhaps as a response to the North Aegean amphora of
the Early Iron Age, Attica and Corinth invented their first bulk liquid transport
amphoras around the middle of the eighth century. Not surprisingly, these
248 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

containers and their products of oil and wine were immediately shipped
abroad, taking advantage of the nascent markets generated by new colonies
and contacts. It is therefore clear that surplus oil and wine were inextricably
bound to the political, social, and economic developments of the Archaic era.
This bond is most apparent when examining the transformations of the role of
oil and wine within new exchange contexts.

PRODUCTION OF OIL AND WINE

Patterns in the locations of vineyards and olive groves, pressing installations,

and bulk storage areas provide insights into how and by whom oil and wine
were produced and controlled. Additionally, the general scale of manufacture
(household, community, regional) can aid in understanding how the value of
these commodities was constructed and the types of relationships of depen-
dency generated by the production of oil and wine. Unfortunately, like the eras
before it, the Archaic period does not present much direct evidence for the
production of oil and wine. In fact, only two presses have been securely dated
to the Archaic period and two to the later Classical period. The lack of olive
and grape presses in the archaeological record, however, has not hindered
most scholars in reconstructing a vibrant economy involving agricultural
surplus. Other, indirect, evidence for the production of oil and wine, such
as archaeobotanical remains, literary accounts, and later Classical analogies
permit some insight into Archaic Greek practices.

Technologies of Oil and Wine Production

The reasons for the near absence of archaeologically visible press installations in
Archaic contexts are the result of a number of factors. The first is that presses
were often located out in the fields closer to where the fruits were harvested,
rather than in the city, although there are a few possible examples of urban
presses (as discussed further on). Indeed, presses have been found in the
countryside of Greece during archaeological surveys, but they seem to date
to the Hellenistic period at the very earliest, with most of them dating to the
Roman period (surveys that found press beds: Methana, Southern Argolid,
Kea, Lakonia, Atene; Foxhall 2007, 173–204, table 6.2).
The multipurpose nature of presses, taking on various tasks not limited to
olive and grape pressing, also contributes to their invisibility. As presses were
often made of stone, these useful pieces of equipment were commonly reused
and taken out of their original contexts. In addition, Archaic and Classical
Greek olive pressing was probably done on a smaller scale and was less
professionalized than later Hellenistic and Roman farming. The result is
a fewer number of more diverse types of presses (Foxhall 2007, 132).
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 249

Multiple methods of pressing olives and grapes were most likely in use at the
same time and likely varied in degree of technological sophistication. On the
one hand, a press could be as simple as a slightly concave stone on top of
which fruit would be placed and a cylindrical roller would be pushed (Foxhall
1993, 193; 2007, 179–180). On the other hand, presses could be complicated
installations requiring specialized skill and knowledge to construct, such as
a “lever and weights” press or Roman-era trapetum (Brun 1993). Large,
expensive, specialized crushers were only good value if there was
a particular need for processing olives on a very large scale. This was probably
not the case for most of Archaic Greece (Foxhall 1993, 193).
The two archaeologically attested pressing facilities dating to the Archaic
period come not from the Greek peninsula itself but from Azoria on Crete and
Klazomenai – a (Greek) city on the west coast of Anatolia.11 Both date to the
sixth century BCE and are of the same type, generally referred to as a “lever-
and-weights” or “beam” press that involved exerting large amounts of pressure
by means of a wooden beam fixed on one end and weighed down on the other
by large stones (Brun 2004, 13–16; Foxhall 2007, 134–139). These types of
presses were often used for larger-scale production and the urban location of
both presses supports the idea that they were for communal use or their
products were destined for communal activities.
The olive pressing installations at Azoria were located in the Service
Building next to a large Civic Building and a communal dining area interpreted
as an andreion (Haggis et al. 2011). Here, two rooms were associated with olive
oil production and storage. The east room contained multiple pithos jars and
fragments of crushed olive pits. The west room was at a lower level and twice
the size of the east room and connected by a small half doorway or window.
This room contained a hearth and long bench. Parallel to this bench along the
south wall there are three niches or sockets. A stone mortar block, cylindrical
stone (roller crusher), and a slab-built bin were also found in the room. Taken
together, the evidence suggests an installation for processing olive oil.
Specifically, a “lever and weights” press (or “beam press”) with a “roller and
bed”-type crusher (Foxhall 2007, 134–139). No press beds were recovered
in situ on top of the bench itself, but two fragments of rectangular press beds
were found in a layer of wall collapse and destruction debris at the level of the
top of the bench. A third intact press bed was found reused and built into the
later Hellenistic room that was constructed on top of the destruction debris in
the northern end of the eastern storeroom. They are square-trough type with a
tapering rim. No separation tank or jar were found in situ below the press
bench, but a complete olive-oil separator (spouted jar) was recovered in the
adjacent storeroom in the central rooms of the Service Building and a base
fragment of another separator, probably reused, was found in the small
Hellenistic room built over the eastern room.
250 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

Archaeobotanical remains and residue analyses confirm the use of this

equipment for the large-scale production of olive oil. Preliminary analysis of
residue on the press-bed fragments show spikes of oleic acid, the typical
signature of olive oil (Haggis et al. 2011, 50 n. 120). In addition, deposits of
crushed olives were recovered across the floor of the west room and especially
in the area immediately north of the press bench and east of the basin.
Fragmentary carbonized olive endocarps were found in a hearth in the oil
press room as well as on the floor surfaces of houses throughout the site. The
ones in the press room were numerous and highly fragmented with dull,
rounded edges, almost certainly indicating the use of olive cakes (or pomace)
as fuel (Rowan 2015, 468).12 The installation and accompanying material at
Azoria preserves evidence for all stages of oil processing (crushing, pressing,
settling, and separation), providing the best-preserved example of a lever-and-
weights style press from the Archaic Greek Aegean. The prevailing interpretation
is that the Service Building, including the olive press and its products, was used
primarily for large-scale production and storage of food and objects related to
activities in both adjacent buildings (Haggis et al. 2011).
The Greek city of Klazomenai on the west coast of Anatolia provides the
only other example of an olive press dated to the Archaic period. The press is
located in the western sector of the city and appears to have had two
successive phases of use. As reconstructed by its excavators, the press
would have been a “lever and weights” or “beam” press like the one
found at Azoria (Brun 2004, 13–16). Olives were placed in sacks or baskets
and stacked on top of a stone press bed on top of which a crushing stone
would be placed. Pressure would be applied to the crushing stone by means
of a wooden beam that was fixed on one end and weighed down on the
other by large stones. At Klazomenai, the installation consisted of a room or
courtyard with fifteen pits cut into the bedrock, not all of which were in
simultaneous use. Facilities for crushing, pressing and separating olive oil
have also been reconstructed.
Foxhall (2007, 136), however, suggests that this press also could have been
used for crushing grapes to make wine, as indicated by the plastered floor. An
example of Archaic-era beam presses used in the production of wine
can perhaps be demonstrated by an image on a sixth-century skyphos
(Figure 6.1). It depicts a man hanging from the beam to add extra weight as
it is used to press sacks of fruit. In this instance, it seems more likely that the
fruits are grapes since the whole contraption is resting on a rather flimsy looking
table. The amount of pressure necessary for crushing olives would require that
the table be impossibly sturdy (Foxhall 1993, 184). This is perhaps another
example of the multifunctional properties of pressing installations in the ancient
Greek world. Although the good preservation of these Archaic installations
allow us to reconstruct more fully the exact pressing mechanisms (i.e., lever and
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 251

6.1 Black Figure Skyphos depicting a lever press, sixth century BCE, Attic. 10.2 × 15.3 cm
(Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Foundation H. L. Pierce 99.525). Photograph ©2020 Museum of
Fine Arts, Boston

weights), it is likely that these types of presses existed since the Late Bronze
Age, as discussed in Chapters 2 and 3 (Foxhall 2007, 136).
Later Classical-era presses are likewise scarce in the archaeological record.
Only two have been convincingly identified, one at Halieis in the southern
Argolid (Jameson 1969, 2001; Foxhall 2007, 143–148) and the other at
Olynthos in the Chalkidike (Cahill 2002, 239–241). These fourth century
presses are not directly applicable to the Archaic period, but they are useful
for identifying long-term trends. The most important observation about the
presses at Halieis and Olynthos is that both pressing installations appear to have
been multi-use, just like the one at Klazomenai. At Halieis, Foxhall (2007,
146–147) argues that the nature of the installations suggests flexibility in the
type of activity taking place and that the equipment seems apt for grape
crushing in particular. Similarly, the evidence for presses at Olynthos does
not match typical beam press remains. Some features appear to be more suited
to wine pressing (House A xi 10; Foxhall 2007, 150), while others allow for the
extra force and catchment basins needed for olive pressing (House A 6; Foxhall
1993; 2007, 153). In addition, the fact that only two presses have been identi-
fied, and they are in opposite geographical locations, solidifies the idea that
most production of olive oil and wine took place in non-distinct areas, like
agricultural fields and ephemeral structures. Scenes illustrated on Classical-era
red and black figure vases and coins also point to the prominence of countryside
settings when treading grapes (Immerwahr 1992).
252 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

Oil and Wine Production: Literary Evidence

Various forms of literature also provide indirect evidence for production of
surplus oil and wine, both large- and small-scale.13 None of these sources,
however, are straightforward and all require careful interpretation. Because of
the complications surrounding the interpretation of the earliest Archaic Greek
literature, and specifically Homer and Hesiod, appendices are provided that
present a complete examination of oil and wine exchange in those works.
Leaving the Homeric poems aside for now, perhaps the most informative
written evidence for oil and wine production comes from Hesiod’s Works
and Days. Since Appendix B lists all the passages that mention oil or wine and
includes commentary, here, focus is placed solely on one passage that is
particularly relevant to our discussion of oil and wine production, when the
narrator is instructing his brother, Perses, on the best time of year and techni-
ques to harvest grapes for wine: “When Orion and Sirius come into the middle
of the sky, and rosy-fingered Dawn sees Arcturus [in mid-September], then,
Perses, pluck off all the grapes and take them home (οικαδε). Set them out in
the sun for ten days and ten nights, then cover them up in the shade for five, and
on the sixth draw out (αϕυσσαι) the gift of much-cheering Dionysus into
storage-vessels (αγγε’)” (Works and Days, lines 609–614; see also Appendix B).
This passage is important for a few reasons. The first is that it demonstrates that
farmers in the Archaic period already had sophisticated methods for producing
the best wines. In this particular case, drying the grapes in the sun concentrates
the sugars in the fruits so that when they are pressed, a sweeter wine will be
produced.
The second important implication of the abovementioned passage is
subtler. Hesiod, although very detailed about exactly how many days to
leave the grapes in the sun and shade, does not provide details about the
methods of “drawing out” the must. This means that either the process of
pressing the grapes was so well established that it did not need to be
discussed, or that the particular method chosen was not important enough
to warrant discussion. This fits well with the archaeological evidence dis-
cussed earlier concerning various types of multi-use equipment. The third
implication is the location in which these activities took place. Perses is
instructed to take the grapes home after they have been harvested. In this
case, the narrator would most likely be referring to a farmstead, since the
Works and Days is generally about how to manage yourself and your
agricultural affairs (including slaves and wives) as a “gentleman-farmer”
(van Wees 2009). Although it is impossible to say with certainty that the
grapes were then pressed in the same location, i.e., “at home,” it does seem
that a well-off farmer had control over his own grapes on his own country
estate. Certainly this would have included the help of slaves and workers, but
 PRODUCTION OF OIL A ND WINE 253

it is nevertheless a relatively autonomous situation. The emphasis on storage

jars and, in other parts of the work, surplus foodstuff, suggests that Hesiod is
concerned with producing a certain amount of surplus wine that would be
necessary for household affairs. This surplus would be on the level of what
Foxhall (2007, 38) calls “domestic production.”14 In this mode, households
would produce surpluses well beyond subsistence in order to increase social
and symbolic capital. Domestic needs for surpluses could be very high,
especially for the purposes of exchange of the kinds discussed throughout
this book. Indeed, smaller-scale commensal events, gifts, and overseas com-
mercial trade exchanges are all mentioned in Hesiod’s Works and Days. This
one passage is therefore exceedingly important for understanding the overall
trends of wine production in the Archaic period, despite problems concern-
ing the exact date, author, and audience of the work.

Effects of Climate Change: The “Homeric low” and Its Benevolent Aftermath
As we have observed throughout this book, climate change played a role in the
scale and location of vine and olive cultivation. From the Bronze Age shift to
bimodal seasons to the Postpalatial solar minimum, the “Preclassical global
crisis” impacted the ways in which people interacted with the natural environ-
ment and the dependency plants had on people to stabilize otherwise inhos-
pitable agricultural conditions (e.g., too much water or not enough water). The
Preclassical global crisis, a shift toward a cooler and drier climate in the
Mediterranean, seems to have ended in the eighth century (Brooke 2014,
299). However, it went out with a bang. Around 800 BCE, a deep solar
minimum occurred along with a strong Siberian High, which pushed cold
winter weather south.15 Brooke (2014, 301) refers to this low point as the
“Homeric Low.” What this means is that climate was generally colder and drier
during the Early Iron Age with a final blow around 800 BCE of a particularly
cold burst. However, the 50-year period following such a major solar mini-
mum would have seen increased precipitation and much warmer conditions,
and thus better growing conditions in the Mediterranean (Manning 2013, 113).
A variety of palaeoenvironmental records from the west, central, and east
Mediterranean suggest generally moister conditions for the period after about
750 BCE (Kaniewski et al. 2010; see also Manning 2013, 113–114 for refer-
ences). There are also some indications that the Mediterranean should have
received an increase in small, nonerosive, rainfall during winter and spring
associated with a period of major solar cooling (Vita-Finzi 2008). Manning
(2013, 114) suggests that all of these conditions should have provided a more
positive regional context for agriculture, especially in contrast to the aridity of
the twelfth to eighth centuries BCE in the eastern Mediterranean. The result
was a beneficial environment for human populations, and especially for those in
254 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

the lower elevation and more arid-risk regions such as Athens and central
Greece (Manning 2010, 41–44).
Thus, the change in climate during the course of the eighth century might
have been one factor contributing to the re-initiation of large-scale surplus
production of oil and wine in southern Greece after a hiatus during the Early
Iron Age.
The experience of an overall “low” followed by significant recovery can be
described as ecological resilience. The model of “resilience theory” posits that
natural and social systems evolve through adaptive cycles of expansion, crisis,
and reorganization, with long-range cumulative trajectories. When it comes to
crisis, and especially climate change, humans act to avert or deflect exogenous
impact in order to extend and transform the adaptive cycle. Crisis, therefore,
creates a reformation of social, cultural, and political forms as people adapt and
recover from its various consequences. It is argued that, historically, the result
of this cycle of resilience is the creation of increasingly sophisticated varieties of
the state (Redman 2005; Schwartz and Nichols 2006; Butzer 2012; Brooke
2014, 268). The formation of the Archaic polis, population movements abroad,
the aggrandizement of regional temples, and the formalization of social institu-
tions might have all been responses, at least partially, to the “Homeric Low”
and its aftermath.

EXCHANGING OIL AND WINE IN THE ARCHAIC PERIOD

Compared to previous eras, early Archaic period exchange contexts involving

olive oil and wine were characterized by expansion in both scale and types of
events. The Early Iron Age and Postpalatial era seem to have had very restricted
types of occasions with smaller numbers of participants when oil and wine
would be exchanged. To some extent, this restriction was carried forward from
the Mycenaean palatial era when the central administration seems to have taken
a primary role in the regulation of oil and wine use, even though the scale of
exchange was much grander. Archaeological evidence dated to the Archaic
period suggests that an openness to new events, new participants, and new
contexts came about at this time. The types of commensal events identifiable in
the archaeological record expands and includes public, communal events in
both secular and sacred contexts, as well as private events that could be larger or
smaller in scale. Exchanges with the divine and deceased continued to rely on
oil and wine in relatively large quantities and it is possible to identify different
types of ritual contexts, such as built cemetery platforms, ancestral tombs, and
depositional pits. Commercial exchange, too, expands in the early Archaic
period with trends toward larger-scale, longer-distance exchange alongside
smaller-scale, more local ventures. The types of people involved in exchanging
oil and wine in commercial contexts also seems to expand, or at least formalize,
 COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: COMMUNAL, PRIVATE, AND R ITUAL 255

as indicated by evidence for different professions. Across all three exchange

contexts, oil and wine continue to be indispensable. As explored later, both
commodities were integral to the proper functioning and success of feasts,
rituals, and commercial ventures.

COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: COMMUNAL, PRIVATE, AND RITUAL

The role of oil and wine in commensal events became increasingly prominent
throughout the Archaic era. The prominence of oil and wine was greatly
affected by the diversification of types and contexts of commensal events at
the same time that their scale and frequency increased dramatically from the
previous Early Iron Age. As the social and political institutions discussed earlier
gradually came into existence, albeit in an erratic and complicated fashion,
forms of commensality necessarily shifted to accommodate these new relation-
ships between people. Indeed, the trend of feasting in leaders’ dwellings, once
visible in the Early Iron Age, gave way during the course of the eighth century
to arguably two different categories of large-scale feasting: that in urban temples
and that in public mess halls. In addition, the increased importance of regional
sanctuaries made evident in the previous era came to full fruition during the
Archaic era as regional temples became monumentalized and associated com-
mensal events expanded in constituency and regularity, though not in an
egalitarian way. Finally, the Archaic era witnesses the introduction of private,
elite feasts, generally referred to as “Symposia.” These Symposia do not seem to
have been “secular” parties, but rather, had their own religious connotations.
The pervasiveness of religious attributes to all forms of commensality has been
addressed by Schmitt Pantel (1997, 7) in her monumental work on public feasts.
Ancient Greek life is fundamentally inseparable from religious connotations
and all meals, whether “sympotic” or not, had a religious dimension. The
omnipresence of ritual within all forms of feasting events is the logical result of
Early Iron Age practices where leaders retained control of commensal
exchange both between people and between people and gods. As social
structures changed during the Archaic era, various levels of people would
have desired to access the same types of commensal exchange as they them-
selves vied for social supremacy. Indeed, the religious aspects of all types of
commensal exchange became ever more prominent during the course of the
Archaic era as those social structures and institutions fought for solidification.
Archaic era commensal exchange is therefore characterized as much by its
ritual aspects as by its diversity. The variety of practices visible not only in the
archaeological record but also in literary sources, such as the Homeric epics,
operated in different contexts (Hodkinson 1997, 90–91). These contexts
were at first very fluid, seemingly indefinable or, rather, having multiple
definitions. During the course of the seventh and sixth centuries, however,
256 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

we can trace the gradual definition of commensal forms, their constituency,

and their practices. One of the major divisions, as we will see, is between
public and private feasting, both of which highlight the increasingly institu-
tionalized divisions between elite and everyone else. Murray (1990, 5) dis-
tinguishes four “ideal types” of commensality in the Archaic era: the
religious festival, the military common meal, the public meal granted as an
honor by the polis, and the symposion for pleasure. However, as Schmitt
Pantel (1997) convincingly demonstrates, there were many variations within
those types and many of the types of commensal events overlapped in
emphasis. Consequently, she views Archaic commensality on a sliding scale
that, at the same time, has multiple axes between public and private, religious
and secular, elite and common, military and pleasure, and so on. In no
instance, especially during the first half of the Archaic era, are we able to
see, in any form of evidence, clear distinctions between the “ideal types” of
commensal events. It is only toward the very end of the Archaic era that
iconographic and written evidence provides clearer distinctions between
some events, like Symposia.
The evidence for the use of oil and wine within commensal exchange
contexts blossoms for the Archaic era. No longer are we dependent solely
upon the archaeological record, as was the case for the Early Iron Age. Instead,
the increasingly sophisticated illustrations on ceramic vessels provide invaluable
iconographic evidence for various forms of commensal activities. In addition,
the adoption of the written alphabet from the East by the Greeks in the eighth
century allowed knowledge of writing to gradually expand in scope through-
out the Archaic era. Consequently, we have at our disposal more written
sources attesting to the value and role of oil and wine within different feasting
contexts. Despite their outward utility, however, written sources are imbued
with ideological biases and chronological complications. Accordingly, it has
been argued that, for the Archaic era at least, it is necessary to consider written
sources carefully and instead focus more on archaeology as “a document of
social realities” (Erickson 2011, 381). Despite the apparent typology of com-
mensal events described in written sources, archaeological evidence often
remains entirely indistinct when it comes to the exact type of event recovered
from the extant material remains. Attempts to delineate characteristics of event
types often fail. Hypothetically, the presence of decorated kylikes and kraters
should indicate Symposia, while more plain cups such as skyphoi, kotylai, and
the kothon are perhaps associated with lower classes of drinking and selling
wine by the glass (Kelly-Blazeby 2006). This distinction, however, is never
very neat and we often find various types of cups in private settings, as well as
kraters in large-scale events at sanctuaries. Indeed, it has been pointed out that
the largest number of kraters from any context of drinking comes from Athens
(also from where most of our iconographic and written evidence derives). We
 COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: COMMUNAL, PRIVATE, AND R ITUAL 257

should therefore be hesitant to ascribe the same types of drinking activities, like
the Symposion, onto other regions of Greece (Kelly-Blazeby 2006, 210).
Feasting in the Archaic era is characterized by diversity of types, pervasive-
ness of religious contexts, and restructuring of social relationships both within
large-scale feasts and between types of feasts. Oil and wine were consequently
used as both leveling and differentiating commodities during the Archaic era.
That is to say, in general, many more people had access to some oil and wine at
the same time that quantity, quality, and equipment used varied substantially
between participants. In the following discussion of the role of oil and wine in
Archaic commensal exchange, focus is placed primarily on archaeological
evidence in the form of architectural contexts and commensal equipment to
highlight the aspects discussed earlier. At the same time, other iconographic
and written evidence are included for which interpretations and date are
relatively secure.

Regional Sanctuaries: Division of Community

In Chapter 5, we traced the increasing prominence of regional sanctuaries
within the landscape of Early Iron Age Greece and how commensal events at
those sanctuaries provided neutral meeting places for regional elites where
competitive display seems to have played a major role. Within those contexts,
oil and wine were prominent items given and consumed between people and
between people and the gods. Throughout most of the Early Iron Age, feasting
remains at extra-urban sanctuaries were not located within built structures and
were generally uniform, often interpreted as egalitarian, and primarily com-
posed of plain drinking cups. However, the centerpiece of the event, the krater,
was ornately decorated, at first with scenes of battle, hunting, and other-
worldly creatures, later with abstract geometric designs. Thus, most commensal
exchanges in these locations seemed to highlight the equal, but elite, status of
the participants. These Early Iron Age trends changed dramatically during
the second half of the eighth century BCE. Not only do we see the construc-
tion of monumental temples and built structures to house these events, but we
also see a change in the types of equipment used, as well as a division between
ornate and plain wares. Unfortunately, the number of sanctuaries with exca-
vated and published levels dating to the eighth century is exceedingly small.
Glimpses at these contexts are often offered at many regional sanctuaries (e.g.,
in preliminary reports or through a handful of sherds) but are not complete
enough to provide any interpretations. Focus is therefore placed on two
sanctuaries, which provide the most complete picture of eighth-century
changes to commensal events, Isthmia in the Corinthia and Iria on the island
of Naxos (for an extensive review of the evidence for commensal events at
sanctuaries in the eighth century, see Wecowski 2014, 159–187).
258 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

Built structures for large-scale commensal events can be identified at

a handful of sanctuaries dating to the early Archaic era. At first, these structures
were probably made of wood with a paved floor, perhaps one area receiving
more attention (raised, an awning) than the majority. Later, these structures
would be formalized into built dining halls called hestiatoria where public,
communal, or religious feasts would take place (see Schmitt Pantel 2011,
209–221, 312–313 and Euripides’ Ion 1128–1170). At the sanctuary at
Isthmia, mid-late eighth-century architectural changes include the construc-
tion of a separate dining area. Within this area, was a terrace (East Terrace I) that
included a sheltered area (Morgan 1994, 125–126). This constructed division of
space might signal a change from equality to formalization of divisions among
festival attendees. Similarly, at the sanctuary of Iria on the Greek island of
Naxos, what was once an open-air context for dining became a built, divided
space. The second temple, built during the second half of the eighth century,
housed ritual dining on a smaller scale while the masses presumably dined
outside. Later, in the early seventh century, dining moved to two buildings,
one apsidal and one rectangular, where seated and reclined dining (the latter
would have been trendy) perhaps took place together (Wecowski 2014, 172).
The division of space over the course of about 100 years changed but never-
theless retained a sense of in versus out both physically and metaphorically. At
the end of the seventh century, however, we see the construction of permanent
hestiatoria buildings.
Along with changes to the physical contexts of sanctuary feasts, we can see
a distinct change in the types and quality of equipment used by the participants.
Just as the architecture suggests a division between the few and the many, so too
do the ceramic drinking wares indicate a smaller amount of elaborate, high-
quality wares in contrast to a large amount of plain, standard cups. At Isthmia,
the built, sheltered terrace contained remains of fewer and higher quality
ceramic vessels, whereas the remaining area contained mostly standardized
vessels. Morgan (in Gebhard and Hemans 1992, 20) remarks that throughout
the course of the eighth century at Isthmia, there was an increasing use of fine
decorated pottery in ritual activity. Similarly, evidence from Iria on Naxos
suggests a change from deposition of locally produced black-glazed kyathos
vessels in the third-quarter of the eighth century to rich ceramic forms such as
kraters, skyphoi, and kantharoi. Many were found ritually destroyed or cere-
monially deposited in a nearby stream (Simantoni-Bournia 2002, 277–278).
Based on these two examples and the available evidence from other sanctuaries
(see Wecowski 2014, 159–187), it seems that a general trend toward the use of
elaborate drinking vessels started to emerge in the first part of the Archaic era.
The increase in elaborate skyphoi and painted kraters might reflect greater
display by wealthier participants within the context of a sacred space, suggesting
the use of commensal exchange as competition on neutral ground. At the same
 COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: COMMUNAL, PRIVATE, AND R ITUAL 259

time, the division of space between a smaller, exclusive area and a larger dining
area highlights the social distinctions in place at this time. The evidence
available for feasting at sanctuaries in the Early Iron Age seems to indicate an
elite, perhaps egalitarian, situation (see Chapter 5). By the end of the eighth
century, commensality at sanctuaries seems to have been available to a wider
section of the population from which elites had to distinguish themselves by
means of space and objects (Morgan 1994). This division also suggests that wine
and oil (oil perhaps used for anointing oneself and “freshening up”) were
available, in special religious feasting contexts, to a wider selection of the
population. It is impossible to say, however, who these people were and just
how wide the selection would have been. As in later Archaic and Classical eras,
it is unlikely that everyone participated in the exchange of these commodities.
Nevertheless, the changes visible to commensal exchanges in sanctuary con-
texts suggest that oil and wine might have, in some way, decreased in value as
they became more available. At the same time, however, it is clear that they
were no less necessary for the enactment of these exchanges. In fact, the
ritualization and institutionalization of religious commensal exchange would
have solidified the necessity of oil and wine within these practices.

Public Feasting: The “Democratization” of Wine and Oil?

Forms and characteristics of public feasting or banquets – communal dining on
a large-scale within a polis – is well attested in written sources for the later
Classical and Hellenistic eras and has received a good amount of scholarly
attention (Schmitt Pantel 1980, 1997; Erickson 2011). In the Classical era,
public drinking rooms were open to any man who had been chosen by lot to
fill certain positions in the Athenian government. In some way, they were
a democratic reworking of the Symposion and we know that at least two
groups of magistrates, the nine archons and six junior archons, ate together.16
At Sparta, public messes, or syssitia, were limited to men and supplied by the
agricultural surplus of its members (van Wees and Fisher 2015, 39). The earliest,
Archaic forms of this practice, however, are more obscure. Nevertheless,
evidence presented later suggests that something akin to this public or com-
munal form of commensal exchange existed by the end of the eighth century in
some settlement locations. Even in the Homeric epics there is a well-defined
opposition between dining in a private house and dining in a public dining hall,
a demios oikos (e.g., Odyssey XX 262–267, see Appendix A). For the Archaic era,
one argument sees Early Iron Age leaders’ dwellings bifurcated over time into
either sacred urban space (Mazarakis-Ainian 1997), or public dining halls
(Wecowski 2014, 178). This hypothesis works relatively well in the sense
that, as we saw in Chapter 5, leaders’ dwellings in the Early Iron Age took
on both aspects of social communal life, sacred and profane, and mingled the
260 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

two together under the auspices of the head of the community, whoever he
was. When this social structure broke down in many areas of Greece, we see
the formation of oikoi – of distinct households – which seem to have acted as
a community.
It is, in fact, possible to interpret some structures within early Archaic
settlements as having been used for large-scale feasting. In his search for
locations where early forms of Symposia might have taken place in the early
Archaic era, Wecowski (2014, 159–187) highlights certain buildings within
settlements that might have housed communal banquets, and specifically wine
drinking activities. These buildings share a number of similar characteristics.
Most are monumental, carefully built, have benches (often in apses), and are
internally divided into two or three rooms. In addition, they are often located
either in the center of town where a leader’s dwelling once stood, or in
industrial quarters where, it is argued, much of the wealth and surplus of the
community was regulated (Mazarakis-Ainian 2007). At Oropos, a community
in Attica across the Euripos strait from Lefkandi and Eretria on Euboea, there
are two structures that could be interpreted as communal feasting halls (Figure
6.2). The first is a large, domestic ovoid building, Building Iota, which pre-
serves fragments of drinking vessels, cups, skyphoi, and kraters from the late
eighth century BCE. Next to this structure is Building Theta, a 5 × 12 m apsidal
construction erected at the end of the eighth century and continued in use into
the seventh century. There is no evidence for industrial activity within, despite
the fact that it is located in an industrial quarter of the settlement. Within
Building Theta, drinking vessels, decorated kraters, and lekythoi were recov-
ered. Strangely, many burials of stillborns or infants were also found under the
floor of this building and in the surrounding area. It has therefore been
interpreted by some as having a cultic function (Mazarakis-Ainian 2002,
161). Other scholars see a more communal aspect to the cultic nature of this
structure and its associated finds (Crielaard 2007, 180–181). This has led
Wecowski (2014, 178) to posit that the presence of frequent commensal
activities in a neutral space within the settlement suggests a specialized desig-
nation as a communal dining hall.
Across the Euripos strait, the site of Viglatouri on Euboea has produced
a structure, Building A, which has tentatively been identified as a public dining
hall. Dated to the Late Geometric period, Building A is oval and only slightly
smaller than Building Theta at Oropos (4.90 × 9.0 m). Inside, numerous
fragments of kraters, jugs, skyphoi, and two amphora bases have been found.
In the surrounding area, a huge number of cups and at least ten kraters have also
been found (Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1998, 64). Similar to Building Theta at
Oropos, Building A was built above multiple earlier cist graves, although
these appear to have been emptied of human remains (or were never intended
to house them). The adjacent paved square to the north of the building was also
 COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: COMMUNAL, PRIVATE, AND R ITUAL 261

6.2 Oropos. Simplified plan of metal working complex with building Theta and Iota, eighth and
seventh centuries BCE. Modified from Mazarakis Ainian 2001, 154, fig. 19. Image by author

built on top of earlier graves. The whole area was cordoned off from the rest of
the settlement by a stone enclosure. Building A and its associated structures
have been interpreted as the location of a hero cult where feasts would take
place in honor of that person (Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1998, 68–69). However, it is
also possible that the commensal events taking place there were public in
nature, suggesting an overlap between sacred and secular dining activities
(Wecowski 2014, 182). As we have already discussed, this would not have
been unusual, especially during a very transitional period, before the formal
institutionalization of public banquets in the Classical era.
One final example of a potential public dining space is at the nearby site of
Eretria on Euboea. In the “aristocratic quarter” where the later sanctuary of
Apollo Daphnephoros stands, a much earlier structure had been built. This
mid-eighth century building, called the Daphnephoreion by its excavators,
does not seem to have been a pre-temple of Apollo. Abundant feasting remains
were recovered from inside the building dating to the Late Geometric period.
On top of this structure was placed the larger apsidal hekatompedon temple in
the later seventh century. The Daphnephoreion and the later hekatompedon
were interpreted as a leader’s dwelling-turned-temple by Mazarakis-Ainian
(2006, 195). However, Wecowski (2014, 186) adds that it might have also
262 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

turned into a communal dining hall. Evidence for a commensal aspect of these
buildings is provided by a smaller adjacent building, Building 150, added in the
eighth century and coexisting with the Daphnephoreion. It has been interpreted
as an elite dining hall built for such a purpose when the community outgrew the
preexisting Daphnephoreion. According to Wecowski (2014, 186), Building 150
marks a change from private to communal activities at the sanctuary, even before
the construction of the first hekatompedon of Apollo in the second half of the
eighth century. The discovery of a large imported Attic krater (at least half
a meter in diameter) found in situ sitting on a built clay platform at the end of
the apse of the building solidifies this theory (Figure 6.3).
The possibility that public dining and drinking halls could have existed
during the eighth century fits well with the general trends observed in the
changes to feasts held at regional sanctuaries. At this point, oil and wine were
becoming more available to a wider section of the population. Who exactly
was supplying the wine and oil for these public feasts must have varied.
Certainly as the bureaucracy of the polis started to formalize and institutions
were created for the purpose of supplying such public spaces, there is no doubt

6.3 Middle Geometric II Attic krater from Building 150 in the Sanctuary of Apollo
Daphnephoros in Eretria (maximum diameter of the foot 50 cm). Drawing S. Verdan; courtesy
of the Swiss School of Archaeology in Greece
 COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: COMMUNAL, PRIVATE, AND R ITUAL 263

that wine and oil would have been collected by those in charge, perhaps as taxes
or sacred surplus (e.g., the sacred olive trees discussed earlier) and distributed
accordingly. At such an early time, however, it is unclear whether people
wishing to dine at the public hall had to contribute a certain amount of surplus
food/drink or whether someone or some group sponsored such communal
commensal events. Either way, surplus oil and wine would have been necessary
components of all events and were consequently exchanged within various
contexts, both explicit (sponsored events) and implicit (taxes and distribution).
At the same time, the formalization of public feasting events would have
provided the impetus for an elite reaction through the formalization of private
feasting events.

Private Feasting: Oil and Wine as Status Markers

Private feasting events, small-scale restricted commensal exchange, certainly
took many forms during the Classical era, and especially during the Archaic era,
when dividing lines in general were perhaps more blurred. However, the
private feasting event par-excellence was the Symposion, made famous in
many later Classical-era texts.17 The Symposion proper was a very specific,
regulated type of drinking party for a small minority of elite men. Moreover,
most of our evidence for such events comes from specifically Athenian contexts
(Kelly-Blazeby 2006, 18). Classical and later texts (e.g., Athenaeus VIII 265d)
often mention a widespread Greek custom of each guest of the Symposion
bringing contributions. Indeed, even late Archaic vase paintings show banqu-
eters with baskets (Wecowski 2014, 68 n. 172 with references). However, not
all Symposia were reciprocal banquets. Other texts suggest that Symposia could
be organized at the expense of their hosts (e.g., Banquets of Plato and
Xenophon). When it comes to the Archaic era, however, our evidence
suggests much more nuanced variation between public and private, sacred
and profane (Schmitt Pantel 1990).
As mentioned earlier, Wecowski (2014) has attempted to find early sympotic
events in the archaeological record of Late Geometric Greece. He defines
symposia more generally, with their main features as a separation between
the meal and the ensuing drinking party, a nocturnal setting, and a heightened
sense of revelry amongst the participants, to put it mildly. In this way, he is able
to include events characterized as private and public, small- and large-scale,
elite and non-elite (Wecowski 2014, 169). Here, however, focus is solely
placed on the Archaic evidence for private, restricted, and generally elite events
known from the later Classical era as Symposia. This distinction is necessary
because it represents a meaningful change from the previous Early Iron Age.
That is to say, in the previous Early Iron Age there is little evidence for the
existence of commensal exchanges independent from the leader and what
264 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

seems to be his control on the supply of surplus foods, especially valuable, and
yet necessary commodities like oil and wine. When the social structure of the
Early Iron Age breaks down in some areas of Greece, and the later polis starts to
come into existence we see the inception of a division between public and
private, non-elite and elite, whereas previously there seems to have been only
one head figure/family and the rest. The difference is relatively subtle, but the
effects are far-ranging, as has already been seen in the archaeological record of
feasting in sanctuaries and communal spaces. Hence, it is necessary to examine
the final aspect of the repercussions of the end of the Early Iron Age and
beginning of the Archaic era, the formation of exclusionary commensal
exchanges.
In later eras, private feasting events took place in the andron of a home,
essentially the dining room, replete with couches around the walls of the room
for reclining and a stand or table in the middle from which the food and drink
would be served. Unfortunately, these specialized rooms within wealthy
households are not archaeologically visible in any certain way until the end
of the fifth century when floor mosaics highlight the locations for couches.
Nevertheless, it is perhaps possible to see some indications in Archaic-era
settlement remains for smaller rooms used for commensal events, although
the evidence is rather ambiguous. The best example comes from the well-
excavated and published settlement of Zagora on Andros. The last phase of the
settlement has been dated to 725–700 BCE and is characterized by a more
compact and regular plan with elaborate residential complexes, often com-
posed of two or more ovoid buildings and a surrounding enclosure wall. One of
these residential complexes provides some good evidence for private commen-
sal events. Unit H41 contained a permanent hearth, next to which Unit H40
contained potsherds of commensal and domestic pottery. Nearby, Units H24,
H25, and H32 were used for storage and habitation, while Unit H33 has been
interpreted as a courtyard (Langdon 2008, 266; Wecowski 2014, 175).
Unfortunately, this site was abandoned rather methodically, so much of the
household equipment was taken with the inhabitants as they left.
Consequently, any interpretation of the function of rooms requires caution.
Outside of archaeological remains, other Archaic-era evidence, such as
iconography and text, might point to the existence of small-scale elite com-
mensal exchange in the early Archaic era. Already, at the end of the eighth
century, reclined banquet scenes have been identified on Corinthian ceramic
vessels (Figure 6.4). In general, these scenes include three or four men, often
bearded, who lounge on individual beds. Before them are tables with dishes
and drink. Under the beds and tables are depicted dogs and stools. On the walls
behind the men are diverse objects, some of which had direct connections to
commensal activities, such as oinochoai, phialai, lyres, and drinking horns.
Other scenes show objects not directly connected to dining, but certainly
 COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: COMMUNAL, PRIVATE, AND R ITUAL 265

6.4 Attic column krater; Ptôon Painter, ca. 580–570 BCE, from Cerveteri. Louvre E 623. Photo
by author

connected to elite ideology, such as armor and weapons. These very early
scenes of dining, with their elite symbols, restricted number of participants, and
trendy practices, might indeed signal this other, private, form of commensal
events created or elaborated in opposition to the increasingly widespread
participation in communal, public, or religious feasts. These scenes would be
gradually replaced at the beginning of the sixth century as Attic pottery became
more prevalent and, consequently, Attic scenes of Symposia proper became
popular, replete with nude boys, prostitutes, and Dionysiac symbols.18
Archaic texts have also been helpful when trying to identify a private, elite
type of commensal exchange. Many scholars have suggested that a large part of
extant Archaic poetry, such as Archilochus, Solon, Alcaeus, and Hipponax, was
created for singing within the context of a Symposion (e.g., West 1974; Vetta
1983; Bowie 1986, Bowie 1993; Irwin 2005; Clay 2016). Other ancient
authors, however, suggest more inclusive contexts for recitation, such as the
syssita (Tyrtaeus, Terpander, and Alcman; Bowie 1990; Nagy 1990). Even
Pindar does not give primacy in his work to any of the forms of feasting, but
references the dais (sacrificial banquet), xenia (meal of hospitality), and the
symposion relatively equally. Since a full analysis of the forms of feasting in
Archaic Greek poetry is beyond the scope of this research (for this, see Schmitt
266 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

Pantel 1990, 1997), the following discussion concentrates on our earliest

evidence that combines written and archaeological aspects.
One of the earliest inscriptions in Greek ever to be found, in fact, seems to
reference Symposion-style commensality. The Cup of Nestor was found at
Pithekoussai, a joint Greek-Phoenician-indigenous settlement located on an
island, Ischia, off the coast of modern-day Naples on the west coast of the
Italian peninsula. One of the main contingents living there seems to have
been Euboean traders/colonists. There, from the San Montano necropolis,
a Late Geometric kotyle, dated between 725 and 710 BCE, was found with
an inscription in Chalcidian (Euboean) script. The inscription has been
translated: “I am Nestor’s cup, good to drink from. | Whoever drinks
from it, straightaway that man | will be seized by the desire belonging to
fairly crowned Aphrodite.” (CEG I, no. 454 = Meiggs-Lewis, no. 1 = SEG
XIV, no. 604). The details of this cup’s discovery, its characteristics, and its
interpretation have all been well addressed by others and need not be
reiterated here (see Buchner and Russo 1955; Watkins 1976; Murray 1994;
West 1994; Bartoně k and Buchner 1995; Faraone 1996; Wecowski 2014,
127–139). Based on this inscription alone, many scholars have hypothesized
the existence, already in the eighth century, of the formal characteristics of
later Classical Symposia. Most recently, Wecowski (2014, 171) states that the
symposion was “a well-established social custom in the LG period” based on
the inscription’s references to competitive male displays combined with
erotic sentiments (Wecowski 2014, 138). The funerary context of the cup,
despite the richness of the tomb itself (Tomb 168 had twenty-eight items;
Pithekoussai I, 212–223), does not provide conclusive information as to the
original context of its use: was it owned by an elite member of Pithekoussan
society who used this cup during elaborate, exclusive drinking parties, or was
it owned by someone who would have attended public dining halls? It is
impossible to say for sure, but the fact that the Cup of Nestor has some of the
earliest written Greek in existence, and in poetic verse, might indicate that
the owner was no common man.19
One other type of private commensal event deserves mention: the wedding
feast. Although there is very little Archaic-era evidence for wedding feasts and
vase paintings do not tend to depict the wedding feast itself, slightly later literary
evidence suggests that wedding feasts could be quite large undertakings (as they
often are today) hosted by private individuals.20 Wine played a very prominent
role in these occasions and, unlike the typical symposion, there is increasing
evidence (although mostly later in date) that both men and women dined and
drank together at these occasions.21 Later textual sources even joke about this
mixed situation, often at the expense of women’s propriety, suggesting that
women “soak up wine like sand” (Menander, Dyskolos 949). Although wed-
ding feasts would have been a less frequent occasion, they nevertheless provide
 COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: COMMUNAL, PRIVATE, AND R ITUAL 267

another context where private individuals were supplying large amounts of

wine, at least, at a private event.
Taken together, the archaeological, iconographic, and textual evidence
suggests that already by the end of the eighth century, some form of exclusive,
elite feasting took place where wine drinking was a major aspect of the event.
For our purposes here, it is significant that by this point in time, elites would
have been producing surplus quantities of oil and wine in order to host such
events or to contribute to such events. That is to say, no longer was the
production and storage of surplus oil and wine in the hands of a single person
or group. Rather, the very existence of elite gatherings, at the exclusion of the
general public, suggests that production of surplus oil and wine, even on
a smaller scale, became relatively widespread and individualistic. In other
words, whereas public dining halls and regional sanctuaries might have been
supplied by communal surplus production, elite gatherings attest to surplus
production and exchange of a very personal nature. Indeed, this aspect of early
Archaic commensal exchange fits well with what we know about the con-
temporary production of oil and wine, as discussed earlier and made explicit in
Archaic literature, such as Hesiod’s Works and Days.

In-between Public and Private: Funerary Feasts

One last category of feast present in the archaeological record of the Archaic era
consists of commensal events held within cemeteries or near/in specific tombs,
a hallmark of Greek funerary culture. Within each chapter of this book we have
traced the changing forms of funerary feasts, dating back to Bronze Age Crete,
if not long before. During the Archaic era, funerary feasts once again became
formalized with the addition of built structures within which the events would
have taken place. A built platform at Asine is dated to the late eighth century
and was placed within a prominent Geometric cemetery on the Barbouna Hill.
Three circular stone platforms were set on a built and delineated terrace.
Among these platforms was a deposit of Late Geometric pottery (forty vessels)
that had been broken on the spot: amphoras, oinochoai, one-handled cups, and
a krater. In addition, a hearth with burnt earth and bones of sheep or goat was
associated with coarse and handmade cooking pottery. Here, it is likely that
ritual eating and drinking was associated with the circles and the funerary
context, as well as perhaps the performance of libations (Hägg 1983, 189–193).
At the same time, there seems to have been a trend toward the construction
of house-like buildings in some cemeteries where feasts honoring the recently
deceased and perhaps also more distant ancestors took place. The exact nature
of these feasts, whether they were restricted to immediate family or were more
open to the community as a whole, is relatively unclear. There are some
indications that both forms existed and perhaps varied regionally. In Athens,
268 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

for example, Building A in the Tholos Cemetery of the Agora appears to have
been used as a dining hall. The remnants of many feasts, including dining and
drinking equipment, as well as food remains, suggests that it was used for
multiple occasions. The small size of the building and its location near clusters
of graves belonging to multiple generations of one or two clans, might suggest
that this particular building was used for more private, family events, rather
than large-scale communal feasts (Wecowski 2014, 181). In contrast, a Late
Geometric apsidal building in the Barbourna cemetery at Asine has more than
ninety vessels from in and around the structure, consisting mainly of cups and
jugs (Mazarakis-Ainian 1997, 71 Building S). Similarly, though more contro-
versial in nature, is a late eighth-century building at the Academy at Athens.
Located in a cemetery, layers of sacrificial debris and miniature vessels suggest
a cultic function. In addition, nearby deposits consist of more than 200 Early
Geometric kantharoi and 40 Late Geometric vessels, respectively (Mazarakis-
Ainian 1997, 142; Fox 2012, 88–89). Despite these properties, the explicitly
funerary nature of the Late Geometric building has come into question
(Mazarakis-Ainian and Alexandridou 2011).
What we can see, therefore, is the continuation of some form of feasting as
a central aspect of the funerary ceremony throughout the geometric era and
into the Archaic. Based on an analysis of the patterns in types of pots present in
tombs of the Kerameikos cemetery in Athens, Belletier (2003) highlights the fact
that during the seventh century drinking cups became particularly prominent,
compared to pouring vessels (Figure 6.5). However, he is quick to note that the
banquet is not an eighth-century fad or a symbol of new values manifested
primarily in the seventh century, but rather the banquet is “a practice which
appears, on the contrary, as an obligatory stage of the funeral ceremony for which
the Greeks do not conceive the absence” (Belletier 2003, 81).22
As another type of feast associated with the funerary realm, tomb cults
became relatively popular in the Archaic era. Cults associated with specific
tombs are not new. In fact, the presence of cults around ancient ruins, including
cemeteries, has been pointed out as far back as the Bronze Age (e.g., Prent
2005). During the first part of the Archaic era, however, tomb cults surge in
visibility and seem to take on an extra dimension of importance. The defining
characteristic of these tomb cults is the presence of ritual feasting deposits
around specific tombs that would have been considered ancient relative to the
eighth-century context (Morris 1988, 755; de Polignac 1995[1984], 140; Whitley
1995, 58; Alcock 2002, 146). Many of these deposits are found within stone-built
constructions in and around the ancient tombs. For example, at Prosymna,
thirteen out of fifty-two tombs showed evidence of ritual feasting/drinking.
Tomb XXVI had a “nest” of Late Geometric drinking ware at the back of the
chamber (Blegen 1937a, 93; Antonaccio 1995, 63) and Tomb IX had a layer of
black earth at the back of the chamber and carbonized matter around which
 COMMENSAL EXCHANGE: COMMUNAL, PRIVATE, AND R ITUAL 269

70 Drinking vessels Mixing vessels Serving vessels

Pouring vessels Perfume vessels Transport vessels

60
Percentage of total offerings

50

40

30

20

10

0
0

0
90

85

80

75

71

65

60

55

50

48
0-

0-

0-

0-

0-

0-

0-

0-

0-

0-
95

90

85

80

75

71

65

60

55

50
6.5 Percentage of drinking, mixing, serving, pouring, perfume, and transport vessels within the
total assemblage of offerings found in Attic tombs during the time period 950–480 BCE. After
Belletier 2003, 76–77, fig. 3. Image by author

votives were placed: four bronze vessels, four coarse-ware vessels, a jug, and a cup
(Blegen 1937a, 164–165). The purpose of these cults must have varied, but their
primary function was to connect contemporary society with a form of power
located in the past (Alcock 2002, 146). In addition, for settlements attempting to
assert their claims to territory, tomb cults served as a way to associate the living
inhabitants with those people who had once occupied the land. There is no
evidence that any of the tombs where these feasting events took place had known
individuals within or that they belonged to specific heroes or ancestors. Instead,
their anonymity ensured participants’ ability to project whatever persona or
qualities necessary for that moment. It could be conceived, for example, that
honoring the people who resided within the ancient tombs through commensal
events would serve to appease the dead and incur their good favor as protectors
(Whitley 1995, 58).

Feasting Conclusions
Overall, then, Archaic-era commensal exchange can be characterized by
diversification and intensification. Whereas feasting in Early Iron Age contexts
seems to have been confined to large central buildings, leaders’ dwellings, or
a very few regional cult sites, Archaic commensal events took place at very
diverse locations. Some of these locations, like central buildings and regional
sanctuaries, continued from the past. Others, however, like private elite
270 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

symposia, were a relatively new phenomenon. New, here, in the sense that
these events do not seem to have the same exclusivity of performance that they
once carried. That is, in the Archaic era, literary, iconographic, and archae-
ological evidence suggests that many wealthy landowners were able to create
enough surplus produce, including oil and wine, to host their neighbors, at
least, if not many more. We can imagine that these private events were a certain
reaction to the inclusivity of dining halls and temple feasts. It is certain, though,
that by the end of the Archaic era, as the population of Greece exploded and
subsequently moved off to distant regions of the Mediterranean, far greater
numbers of people, at multiple levels of society, had access to oil and wine at
various events on a more frequent basis than the centuries before.

GIFT EXCHANGE: DEITIES, DECEASED, AND THE LIVING

In the early Archaic period, olive oil and wine maintained their high value as
offerings to divinities and to the dead. Certain actions, like libations at tomb
contexts, carried over from the past and continued to rely on oil and wine as
necessary commodities. At the same time, new or formalized contexts for
offering oil and wine appeared at both sanctuaries and cemeteries. In addition,
the early Archaic era does present some potential evidence for gifts to the
living, that is, gifts between elite individuals or families that are associated with
wine or oil. As in the previous chapters, non-commensal gift exchange is
a more difficult mode to detect in the archaeological record and varies immen-
sely over time and space. We are therefore still beholden to the regions of
Greece that have been most explored archaeologically and published thor-
oughly. Thankfully, one of these regions is Attica where much of our informa-
tion about commensal exchange and commercial exchange derives. Other
areas that have produced some interesting regional variety are Euboea and
the Argolid. This section presents the evidence available for gift exchange,
focusing on the early Archaic era as much as possible, with a few necessary
forays into later Archaic and Classical practices and trends. Focus is placed on
archaeological remains rather than written sources, although at times it is useful
to cite contemporary and later authors. Appendix A addresses the role of oil and
wine in non-commensal gift exchanges within the Homeric epics, so these
works will be referenced minimally in this section.

Gifts to the Gods

The primary non-commensal gifts given to the gods involving oil and wine
were libations. The act of pouring libations certainly existed throughout the
eras this book addresses. The Archaic era, however, is the first time that we
have clear evidence of this act, though mostly written. The written sources
 GIFT EXCHANGE: DEITIES, DECEASED, AND THE LIVING 271

make clear that by this time in Greek history, “invocation and prayer are
inseparable from libation . . . in order to supplicate the gods aright at all,
a libation is therefore required” (Burkert 1985, 71; e.g., Il. 6.259; 24.287; Od.
3.41 f.; 7.163; 13.50 f). The Greek poetic word used for the giving of oil and
wine (less frequently honey, milk, or water) was leibein or loibe. In prose the
words spendein or sponde and cheein or choe were more prevalent and seem to
have denoted different types of libations or occasions where the type of vessel
used played a major role. The verb spendein is associated primarily with
a wine libation where the wine is gently poured from a hand-held jug or
bowl. A sponde was performed whenever wine was drunk and is a fixed
formula in Homer (Iliad 9.177, six times in the Odyssey; Burkert 1985, 70; see
Appendix A).
When it came to wine drinking during commensal events, there was always
a moment when a sponde occurred. During the later Archaic and Classical eras,
we know that libations happened during symposia and followed a relatively
standard formula. The “three kraters” libation involved successive offerings to
deities each time a new krater of wine was mixed. First, to Zeus and the
Olympians, then to the Heroes, and finally to Zeus Teleios. Alternatively,
you could begin with a libation to the Agathos Daimon and end with Hermes
(Burkert 1985, 70–71). It is interesting, however, that we rarely find artistic
images of this moment during the symposion despite the popularity of such
scenes in general. Lissarrague (1995) has collected a handful of images that
might refer to the sponde during a symposion but noted the ambiguity of most
scenes. A couple of fragments of cups from the Athenian acropolis show
a reclining man holding a phiale (open dish associated with libations) and
speaking the words “Ζευ Σοτερ”; while another fragment depicts a kantharos
with the inscription “Σπενδο τοι δαιμονι τοι αγαθοι” (Athens Acr. 434;
Lissarrague 1995, 128, fig. 2). Instead of being explicit, the relationship between
libations and wine consumption is more often depicted through association.
Many libation scenes are located on pots generally designated for holding wine,
such as amphoras, kraters, stamnoi, and cups. Most of these images show both
men and women holding oinochoai along with various cups or phialai, often
near or over altars, or pouring the wine onto the ground (e.g., Louvre G54; see
Lissarrague 1995 with references).
A choe libation involved the complete tipping and emptying of a larger vessel,
which may be held or may stand on the ground. This type of libation was most
often associated with the dead or chthonic gods (Burkert 1985, 70). The
lekythos vessel was intended primarily for oil libations of this kind and they
are one of the most frequently found vessels in ritual contexts, especially
funerary, to which we will return shortly (Burkert 1985, 194). Other libations
of this kind involved wine and were particular to events or the deities invoked.
For example, Pindar mentions a situation where before embarking on
272 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

a voyage, it was necessary to mix wine in kraters and empty them into the sea
along with prayers and vows (Pind. Pyth. 4.193–200; Thuc. 6.32.1 f.).
Another gift of oil and wine given to the gods was the “first fruits” offering.
This gift, however, is only attested in written sources and constituted the
offering of first bits of food whether acquired by hunting, fishing, gathering,
or agriculture (Burkert 1985, 66; see also Jim 2014). Later written sources of the
Classical era mention bringing various tithes of agricultural produce to various
deities. For example, Xenophon describes his first fruits offerings to his Artemis
sanctuary, which were subsequently redistributed “by the goddess” during
a festival: “to those encamped in tents the goddess gave barley meal, bread,
wine, nuts, and olives, and a portion of the sacrificed animals from the sacred
herd and a portion of the hunted animals” (Xenophon Anabasis 5.3.9). In this
case, “the tithe is transformed into the gift which the goddess in turn offers to
her guests at the festival” (Burkert 1985, 67). This particular example highlights
the complicated nature of gift exchange and the many “misrecognitions”
involved with the giving and receiving of gifts.23 At the same time, it highlights
the fact that these first fruits might be quite substantial and often included grapes
and olives and their liquid products. The co-occurrence of oil and wine is
particularly prominent in another example from Arcadia. In this case, the first
fruits offering stands on its own in contrast to a commensal context where
sacrifice would be involved. In Phigaleia in Arcadia, offerings were made from
“the fruits of cultivated trees and especially the fruit of the vine, along with
honeycombs and raw wool still full of its grease. These they place on the
altar . . . then they pour oil over them” (Pausanias 8.42.11). Although these
written sources are much later than the early Archaic era (fourth century BCE
and second century CE, respectively), they nevertheless point to a long-held
tradition of giving a portion of olives/oil and grapes/wine to the gods that was
a necessary exchange for agricultural success.

Gifts to the Dead

For trends in non-commensal gifts given to the dead, grave goods remain our
best source of information. The quantity, quality, and type of grave goods
differed between settlements, between cemeteries, and even between burial
types. The cemeteries in Athens, and especially the Kerameikos cemetery,
provide the most complete dataset for analyzing the role of surplus oil and
wine within these offerings during the Archaic era. In Archaic inhumation
graves the offerings were normally inside the burial pit and sometimes included
rich offerings, though some offerings were placed outside in special pits or
ditches. In contrast, the cremation graves often had no, or very poor, furnishings,
while the offerings were placed in special deposits, offering places, or offering
ditches, apart from, or associated closely with, the grave. This change perhaps
 GIFT EXCHANGE: DEITIES, DECEASED, AND THE LIVING 273

indicates a shift in emphasis of the burial rites to after the burial pit has been
closed (Kurtz and Boardman 1971, 71, 75–76; Sourvinou-Inwood 1983, 47;).
When it comes to the offerings themselves, the Kerameikos cemetery pre-
sents some general trends over the course of the Archaic era (Figure 6.5).
Belletier (2003) has calculated the relative prevalence of each type of grave
good over time. In the Kerameikos cemetery in Athens, tablewares make up
70 percent of the tomb offerings in the eighth and seventh centuries. Drinking
cups, in particular, rise from 5 percent of the total assemblage from the
cemetery between 850 and 800 BCE to more than 50 percent between 800
and 710 BCE, remaining above 30 percent until 550 BCE. Pouring vessels
follow a similar trend. Interestingly, kraters, too, became relatively more
prevalent from 750 to 600 BCE, whereas none had been attested before that
point (Belletier 2003). Bohen (1997, 54–55) has noted that the type of krater
changed over time as well. The standard krater disappeared abruptly from the
repertoire of Athenian vase shapes before the end of the eighth century and was
replaced by new forms of kraters, most often used as grave markers in the
seventh century. Similarly, perfumed oil and unguent containers jumped from
20 to 60 percent of the material from the eighth to the end of the seventh
century (Belletier 2003, 76–77). During this time, the horse pyxis, one of the
more prevalent types of pyxides in the previous Early Iron Age, disappeared
entirely before the end of the eighth century (Bohen 1997, 54–55).
These trends suggest that, in Athens at least, deposition of pottery related to
wine drinking, and perhaps wine itself, increased dramatically during the second
half of the eighth century and into the seventh. If the pouring vessels found within
the graves were full, then this would signal a significant increase in the amount of
surplus oil and wine used as gifts to the dead. Of course, the pouring vessels might
have been full and then emptied as a libation to the deceased before being placed
within the tomb. As mentioned earlier, the pouring of libations for the dead was
a standard practice and necessarily included wine and oil. A later classical inscrip-
tion highlights not only the ubiquity of such practices, but also the great amount
of surplus allotted for libations and grave gifts. A funerary law from Iulis on the
island of Keos dating to second half of the fifth century [SIG3 1218] was intended
to limit ostentation at a funeral: “Bring not more than three choes of wine to the
tomb and not more than one chous of olive oil, and bring back the vessels” (Dillon
and Garland 2010, 105). In the case of the early Archaic era in Athens, it seems that
not only were people bringing more than that amount of oil or wine, but they
were indeed leaving the vessels within or near the tomb as offerings.

Gifts to the Living

Archaic literary evidence presents the only solid evidence for oil and wine used
as gifts given from one elite person to another. Although this is a topic
274 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

addressed in the Appendix, it is worth mentioning one example here. In the

Odyssey, Odysseus gives Ismarian wine to the Cyclops Polyphemos that had
been given to Odysseus as a gift by Maro the priest of Apollo (Book 9,
195–215). In the Homeric epics, we also have evidence for objects associated
with wine drinking exchanged as gifts. The most prominent example is the
silver krater given to Telemachus by Menelaus who had received it from
Phaidimos, king of the Sidonians (a.k.a. Phoenicians; Book 15, 115–120).
This exchange of objects related to wine drinking is perhaps also visible in
the archaeological record. Coldstream (1983, 2009) has argued that a handful of
impressively decorated Attic kraters found in elite Cypriot tombs were origin-
ally given as gifts during the person’s life. The most complete example is an
Athenian pedestalled krater dating to the Middle Geometric II period that was
found in tomb I of the Salamis cemetery along with twenty Attic skyphoi and
twelve pendent-semicircle vessels from the northern Cyclades. Coldstream,
following Desborough (1979, 122), suggests that this drinking set represents
two separate gifts from people living in the Aegean (Coldstream 1983, 200).
Perhaps the most famous example of a possible gift is the Cesnola krater found
at Kourion on Cyprus. Dated to the late eighth century, this krater is Euboean
in origin and extravagantly ornate. Although impossible to confirm,
Coldstream is resolute in his interpretation: “It surely came to Kourion as
a gift, presented by some Euboean nobleman to grace the banquets of a Cypriot
prince, with the capacity to entertain a large gathering” (Coldstream
1983, 206).
Similar ornate Athenian vessels have been found in Samaria in Israel,
Tyre, Hamath on the Orontes, and even Huelva in Iberia. A few other
examples come from areas closer to Attica. Tombs on Crete have produced
several ornate Attic vessels that might represent direct connections between
people living on the island and those on the mainland. One example is
from Tomb 219 of the Knossos North Cemetery. There, a middle
Geometric II Attic flat pyxis, low-footed krater with lid with an oinochoe
on top, and large belly-handled amphora (104 cm high) were discovered
(Coldstream 1983, 204–205). Although it is clear that not all of these
represent direct gifts from Athenians, Coldstream (1983, 203) stresses that
not only were these kraters originally destined for elite consumption in
Athens, but they also continued to represent elite society despite being
relocated to the other end of the Mediterranean. It is also important that
these objects had an explicit association with wine and oil and its exchange.
It is, of course, impossible to say with any certainty whether these objects
were in fact given as gifts. The tantalizing anecdotes from the Homeric
epics can only provide a glimpse into what might have been a relatively
common mode of exchange within which oil and wine played a significant
role.
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 275

COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE: REGIONAL AMPHORAS AND

MEDITERRANEAN NETWORKS

The second half of the eighth century marks the point when multiple regions of
the Greek world simultaneously started producing their own versions of relatively
standardized amphoras for the transport of bulk liquid commodities like oil and
wine. Although it is possible that surplus was being disposed of through other
means, the production of a specialized amphora shape necessarily means that the
region produced large amounts of surplus destined for export, since other types of
containers would have been sufficient for daily or even local use. The shape of an
amphora is particularly conducive to long-distance maritime travel and developed
a unique technological trajectory that emphasized this quality. Indeed, the produc-
tion of amphoras themselves is connected to the production of surplus liquid
commodity and the decision of a political community (Gras 2010, 111–112).
Different city-states in the Greek world seem to have initially, at least, produced
their own distinctive shapes so that presumably a jar from a particular city would
have been recognizable in the marketplace (Koehler 1996, 325). Successful trans-
mission of information by the amphora depended on the specificity with which its
shape or associated markings can be identified with a particular producing region.
Lawall (1995) uses the term regionalism to express this relationship. Regionalism of
a given amphora is defined both by the degree to which that amphora’s shape is
unique to one geographical region and by the physical extent of that region (Lawall
1995, 14). A specific reference to one city and its territory by a given amphora type
cannot be assumed (see also Papadopoulos and Paspalas 1999). As we have seen in
Chapter 5, this regionalism was already forming in the ninth century as North
Aegean amphoras became more prevalent and standardized. It has been further
conjectured that each community had one type of jar for oil and one for wine in
the Archaic period (Gras 1987, 41). Although this practice has been attested in at
least one case (Chalcis on Euboea), we do not have any indication that this was
a widespread phenomenon. Indeed, there is more evidence to suggest that
amphoras, especially in the early Archaic era, were multipurpose, as had probably
been the case throughout the pre-Classical eras in general.
Rather than presenting a detailed history of the production and distribution
of all Archaic Greek amphoras within this section, it is more important to
understand the transition from small-scale commercial exchange in the Early
Iron Age to large-scale long-distance exchange in the Archaic era. To this end,
focus is placed primarily on the first half of the Archaic era and, consequently,
the first Greek amphoras to be produced and exported on a large scale. At the
same time that Group II North Aegean amphoras were being mass-produced in
northern Greece, filled with oil or wine, and widely distributed throughout the
north Aegean and Tyrrhenian seas, certain areas of southern Greece began to
produce their own versions of liquid transport containers. In particular,
276 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

0 10 cm

6.6 Early Corinthian A amphora. Knapp and Demesticha 2016, 47a. Drawing by I. Katsouri (after
Vandiver and Koehler 1986: fig. 7B); courtesy of A. B. Knapp and S. Demesticha

Corinth produced a handmade transport amphora (Figure 6.6), while Attica

and Euboea started to produce and export the “SOS” amphora during the
middle of the eighth century (Figure 6.7). Like their northern counterpart,
they are large, bulbous containers designed to carry substantial amounts of
liquid commodities. Besides that one similarity, however, SOS and Corinthian
A amphoras derive from entirely different traditions. After Group II North
Aegean amphoras were discontinued around 700 BCE, both southern types of
amphoras continued to be quite prominent in Archaic Mediterranean markets,
especially in the west. The reasons for this renewed desire to bottle and export
surplus agricultural product are not known. There are, however, a few social
and economic trends happening at this time in Greek history that may have
been factors contributing to the desire and ability to produce, bottle, and ship
surplus in distinctive transport containers. In what follows, the major charac-
teristics of SOS and Corinthian A amphoras are briefly outlined, then aspects of
their local and long-distance distribution are discussed, as well as their relation-
ship to the commercial exchange of oil and wine more broadly.

Introduction of New Regional Containers for Commercial Oil/Wine Exchange

The archaeological record of the second half of the eighth century suggests
a relatively sudden production of new types of amphoras in Greece. As
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 277

6.7 Early Athenian SOS amphora from Phaleron. National Archaeological Museum, Athens no.
14489. Photo by author

mentioned earlier, the earliest examples were produced in central Greece and
immediately shipped abroad to over 150 locations (Map 6.2; Pratt 2015).
Production of the large, “SOS” amphora started in the latter half of the eighth
century BCE and was derived predominantly from the local fine-ware
amphora tradition, although there are some features in both decoration and
shape that might suggest a link to North Aegean amphoras (Figure 6.7; see
Pratt 2015). SOS amphoras were produced in both Attica and Euboea, where
a Chalcidian variation has also been identified (Jones 1986, 706–712). Which
area developed the shape is up for debate (Gras 1988, 293; Pratt 2015, 217–220).
Like the North Aegean amphora before it, the SOS amphora should perhaps be
regarded as a regional amphora, not linked specifically to Athens or any other
polis. Despite this regional style, however, it is clear that SOS amphoras
originating from Attica were by far the most commonly exported outside of
Greece: out of 141 sites with SOS amphoras, only 17 sites have identified
a possible Euboean example (Map 6.2; Pratt 2015, fig. 7).
The pioneering work of Johnston and Jones (1978) demonstrated not only
the existence of these multiple production locations, but also the great variation
in decoration, size, and shape over their 100-year lifespan. Both variations of
SOS amphoras are wheel-made, painted, and quite large, with bulbous bodies
278
map 6.2 Distribution map of SOS amphoras within the Mediterranean, with provenance distinguished. Image by author
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 279

and a tall foot. Their name derives from the distinctive design frequently,
though not always, painted on their necks, which resembles a sigma-omicron-
sigma. In addition, Chalcidian versions seem to have their own variation of
neck decoration (Johnston and Jones 1978, 111, 133). Between their initial
production and their discontinuation, SOS amphoras evolved to the extent that
it is relatively straightforward to determine the date of a specific pot based on its
morphology and decoration (Johnston and Jones 1978, 133; Pratt 2015,
214–215).
The contents of SOS amphoras are debated. While it is generally assumed
that they contained olive oil, there are a few indications that they could have
also contained wine. One such indication is found on the François vase where
the god Dionysos carries an SOS amphora on his back (Figure 6.8; Docter
1991). In addition, a seventh-century Attic oenochoe, or wine pitcher, has
a painted image of a large amphora in the shape of an SOS (though without the
“SOS” marking on its neck; Young, R 1938 p. 417 also Foxhall 2007, 18, fig.
1.6). It has been speculated that perhaps SOS amphoras were initially used for

6.8 Detail of the François Vase (Museo Archeologico, Florence) with Dionysos carrying an
SOS-like amphora on his shoulder. Image by Chelsey Gareau
280 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

wine, but were then relegated to oil after Solon’s agricultural reforms, discussed
earlier. But it seems more likely that these amphoras were multipurpose and
could have been used for both commodities, as has been the trend for most pre-
Classical transport containers. After the end of the seventh century BCE, SOS
amphoras were gradually replaced by the “à la brosse” amphora, which was not
exported in large numbers and was discontinued by the fifth century BCE. The
SOS/à la brosse amphora type became the ancestor of the famous Panathenaic
amphora (Valavanis 1986; Johnston 2007; Tiverios 2007). Although
Panathenaic amphoras are found in small numbers throughout the
Mediterranean, its primary purpose was not that of a commercial transport
container. Indeed, after the SOS, Athens never again produced its own com-
mercial amphora. The exact reasons for this secession are unknown.
Around the same time as the SOS, or slightly later, Corinth started produ-
cing its own transport amphora (Figure 6.6). Derived from the common
storage amphora of the region, its flat base was transformed into a distinctive
pointed toe for seaborne trade (Demesticha and Pratt 2016). Unlike SOS
amphoras, Corinthian amphoras were handmade and undecorated.
Following Farnsworth (1964, 224–225; 1970, 10–11), Whitbread (1995,
255–346) confirmed the origin of Corinthian amphoras, based on their dis-
tinctive fabric with mudstone inclusions endemic to the regions around
Acrocorinth. Koehler’s (1981) research has defined multiple versions of
Corinthian amphoras, the earliest being the Corinthian A, followed by the
Corinthian A’ in the last quarter of the sixth century BCE and the Corinthian
B amphora later still. Because the questions addressed here are concerned with
the early part of the Archaic period, focus is placed only on the Corinthian
A amphora. Work by Sourisseau (2006) at the Sicilian cemetery of Camarina-
Rifriscolaro has identified six types within the Corinthian A designation. Types
1 and 2 are the earliest and are in use until just after 580 BCE, when Type 3
comes into use until around 540 BCE, and so on. Based on the quality of the
vessel’s fabric, the content of Corinthian A amphoras has been assumed to be
olive oil. Later Corinthian amphoras, however, seem to have held wine, which
suggests that the region produced a surplus of both commodities. Why, then,
would it be unlikely that earlier Corinthian amphoras, like SOS, could have
been used for exchange of both commodities? Ultimately, since both oil and
wine were essential elements of Greek life, as this book has argued, the contents
of amphoras as one or the other is relatively unimportant. What is important is
that a sizeable surplus of both commodities had been produced to the extent
that they were used within large-scale commercial exchanges.
Due to the longer lifespan of Corinthian amphoras, they are often assumed
to be the most prevalent Greek amphoras found abroad, at least in the central
and western Mediterranean. A detailed study of their early distribution along-
side SOS amphoras, however, suggests a more nuanced distribution pattern
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 281

(Map 6.3; Pratt 2016b). Indeed, it seems that SOS amphoras are more promi-
nent in the archaeological records of eighth and early seventh-century con-
texts, whereas Corinthian amphoras only became more prevalent as SOS
amphoras were discontinued. Nevertheless, the distribution patterns of both
shapes suggest continued local and regional networks of commercial exchange
of oil and wine, along with the exponential increase in the complexity of long-
distance networks.

Continuity and Expansion of Local and Regional Networks from the Early Iron Age
The beginning of the Archaic era marks a point when local and regional
networks in central and southern Greece increase in complexity. As discussed
in Chapters 4 and 5, local commercial networks were maintained after the
palatial collapse and throughout the Early Iron Age. Oil and wine surplus were
included in these commercial networks as settlements interacted with each
other on a relatively small scale, often using local domestic containers, like table
amphoras and hydrias, or small decorated containers like stirrup jars, alabastra,

map 6.3 Comparison of quantities of Corinthian A and SOS amphoras in Sicily, dated to the eighth and
seventh centuries BCE. Pratt 2016b, fig. 4, table 1 . Image by author
282 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

jugs, aryballoi, and lekythoi. By the second half of the eighth century, local and
regional distributions of SOS and Corinthian A amphoras, along with evidence
for local wine shops (and probably oil as well), suggest an expansion of
commercial exchange in oil and wine within and between regions.
The widespread distribution of Attic SOS amphoras within Attica itself
suggests that they were used as containers of surplus oil and wine for commer-
cial sale and were reused, perhaps sold, as burial containers. In central Greece
and the Peloponnese, SOS amphoras are found at sixteen sites. Within Athens,
at least thirty-four were found in the Athenian Agora, where many have incised
marks on the handles and shoulders (for graffiti on SOS amphoras more
generally, see Johnston and Jones 1978 within an update in Pratt 2015).
Research conducted on later Classical amphoras of the Athenian Agora has
convincingly demonstrated the association of similar markings on amphoras
with the presence of kapeleia, or taverns, where wine would be sold “by the
kotyle” (Lawall 2000). The practice of selling wine in smaller amounts to
individuals was a widespread phenomenon, as attested by both epigraphic
and iconographic evidence. An inscription from Thasos in the north Aegean
is part of the regulation of the wine trade. This inscription incorporates a ban on
kotulizein, prohibiting wine being sold by the kotyle or “breaking the bulk”
(Davidson 1997, 392). In addition, an amphora by the Princeton Painter depicts
a scene of wine-selling on its reverse including two buyers, one with a wineskin
and one with a pitcher, and a seller. That a similar practice existed in Archaic
Athens is perhaps attested by the presence of similar markings on SOS
amphoras (Davidson 1997, 54; Kelly Blazeby 2006, 36). It may not be
a coincidence that the earliest standardized amphoras produced in Attica
were simultaneously used for local commercial exchange of their contents.
In addition to their use for local commercial exchange of oil and wine, SOS
amphoras and Corinthian A amphoras seem to have been caught up in
exchange between nearby regions. First, Athens and Corinth themselves
seem to have had a close commercial relationship. The Corinthian handmade
coarse-ware amphora is distinctive as one of the first imports to Athens after the
Mycenaean period in the second quarter of the eighth century BCE. Brann
(1962, 28) describes this shape as the “first herald” of a flood of Corinthian
imports that account for a large proportion of the ceramic contents of most
abandoned water wells by the last quarter of the eighth century BCE, lasting
until the sixth century BCE when imports decrease dramatically. In turn,
fragments of Attic SOS amphoras have been found in most excavated areas of
Archaic Corinth. Farther afield, early Archaic SOS and Corinthian amphoras
have been found at many sites in northern Greece including Methone, Mende,
and Thasos. Although SOS amphoras have been found at sixteen sites in
northern Greece, most are later versions suggesting an increase in commercial
connection between northern Greece and southern Greece over the course of
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 283

the Archaic period. In contrast, SOS amphoras have been identified at only
four Aegean islands (Crete, Rhodes, Keos, and Thera), all of which date to
the second half of the Archaic era (Pratt 2014, maps 12 and 17).

Establishment of Large-Scale, Long-Distance Commercial Exchange

The most significant change in the pattern of commercial exchange of oil and
wine visible through amphora distribution is the exponential expansion of the
Early Iron Age network in the second half of the eighth century to include
places as distant as the Atlantic coast of Iberia and the eastern coast of the Black
Sea (Map 6.2). Before delving into the patterns produced by early Archaic
Greek amphora distributions, it is necessary first to mention that the inter-
pretation of these data requires caution. To begin with, the number of
amphoras from each site, even the largest collection (a few hundred), is the
same size as an average shipload of amphoras in classical antiquity (on occasion
a few thousand are reported, e.g., Demosthenes, Against Lakritos–35. 10; Millett
1983). In addition, the representative sample from each site is significantly
disparate as recording methods, reporting, and extent of the excavations all
vary. Thus, it must be said that these data may be used only as general indicators
of the prevalence of one amphora type or another at a site. Such shortcomings,
however, can be mitigated by taking into account the prevalence of SOS and
Corinthian A amphoras relative to other amphoras, such as indigenous and
regional types, and relative to other types of imports. By doing so, one gains
a better sense of how any particular type of amphora is actually integrated into
the way the site functions over time. In addition, the breadth of data and
number of sites sampled should provide enough of a dataset to see some
patterns and make some meaningful observations.
That being said, what we see is a rapid expansion in the number of sites with
Greek amphoras and the quantity of Greek amphoras found there. At the same
time, the nodes already in place in the Early Iron Age on the coast of Anatolia,
the Levant, and the north coast of Africa continue to receive Greek oil and
wine. Attic SOS amphoras have been found at nineteen sites in those regions,
many of which have early versions of the shape, suggesting continuous contact
(Pratt 2014, map 19). Indeed, a few of the sites, such as Al Mina, were recipients
of Group II North Aegean amphoras before they were discontinued and
southern Greek amphoras flooded the network. We know from later
Classical written sources that surplus Greek oil and wine continued to be
shipped to these eastern and southern regions of the Mediterranean in increas-
ing quantities. An Egyptian customs register from 475 BCE records that from
mid-February to mid-December three or four Greek ships per month passed
through the port with a peak of five at the end of summer. This number can be
compared to a total of six Phoenician ships for the year. The register records
284 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

that all Greek ships brought wine, olive oil (possibly scented), and empty
pottery, and the return freight carried wheat (van Wees 2009, 459). This pattern
suggests that early Archaic era commercial exchange, visible through SOS and
Corinthian A amphora distributions, used the networks and connections
already in place from previous centuries. As larger quantities of Greek surplus
oil and wine were exchanged as mutually valued commodities between multi-
ple groups of people around the Mediterranean, these networks were then
amplified significantly.
Interestingly, the highest concentrations of Attic SOS amphoras within the
Mediterranean are not found in central Greece but in Italy and Sicily, where
some of the earliest Greek colonies were established. On the Italian peninsula,
twenty-four sites have produced at least one example of an Attic SOS amphora,
nine of which have identified early versions including Policoro, Metaponto,
Incoronata, Otranto, Cerveteri, Cumae, and Pithekoussai. Over fifty sites have
reported at least one Corinthian amphora, with early eighth and seventh
century Corinthian A type amphoras at perhaps fifteen sites including Pale,
Cavallino, Vaste, Siris, Incoronata, Sybaris, Crotone, Caulonia, Metauros,
Reggio, and Pontecagnano (Berlingò 1995, 422–424; Klug 2013). Since dis-
cussion of all Greek enterprises in the central Mediterranean is beyond the
scope of this chapter, only a few settlements are highlighted that seem to have
participated significantly in the commercial exchange of surplus Greek oil and
wine. Overlapping with the discussion of Group II North Aegean amphora
distribution in Chapter 5, the site of Pithekoussai played a major role in the
commercial exchange of Greek oil and wine in the Archaic era.24 There,
around forty SOS amphoras and twenty-six early Corinthian A amphoras
have been found both in settlements and cemeteries (Di Sandro 1986;
Buchner and Ridgway 1993; Berlingò 1995, 428–429; Klug 2013; Pratt
2014). Located on the small island of Ischia opposite the Italian coast,
Pithekoussai was neither an emporion nor an apoikia. The best description of
this site is an enoikismos or cohabitation where Greeks lived with Phoenicians
and other people from diverse regions. It seems that the number of people from
different origins was very high and included Greeks from multiple regions,
such as Euboea and Corinth, as well as people from Campania, Etruria, Latium
vetus, north Africa, Sardinia, north Syria, and Phoenicia (Ridgway 2000, 30).
Here these people lived, intermarried, traded, manufactured, and farmed
together (D’Agostino 2006, 222; Antonaccio 2009, 321).
A similar situation seems to have existed on Sicily. A total of twenty-one sites
have produced evidence for at least one Attic SOS amphora and more than
forty sites have Corinthian A amphoras, although most are later examples (Pratt
2016b). Eighth and early seventh-century Corinthian A amphoras have been
found at Naxos, Milazzo, and Syracuse, which is perhaps not altogether
surprising since they are some of the earliest Greek settlements on Sicily
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 285

(Map 6.3; Albanese Procelli 1996; Sacchetti 2012; Klug 2013). One would
expect Syracuse to have an overabundance of early Corinthian amphoras since
this settlement was the one and only official Corinthian foundation (ca. 733
BCE; Thucydides 6.3–5; Strabo 6.2). Yet, despite the lack of published data on
the number of early Corinthian amphoras at Syracuse, it too seems to have
a high number of SOS amphoras compared to the other colonies (Pelagatti
1982; Albanese Procelli 1996: 99–102). For Sicily, at least, SOS amphoras seem
to be slightly more prevalent than Corinthian A amphoras in the earliest levels
of the first Greek colonies established on Sicily (Pratt 2016b). Megara Hyblaea
(founded ca. 728 BCE) stands out for its noticeably high number of SOS
amphoras and pattern of Greek imports over time. In the second half of the
eighth and the seventh century BCE, Corinthian fine-ware products make up
over 90 percent of the imported pottery; yet very few Corinthian amphoras
were present. At the same time, only a handful of Athenian fine-ware vessels
have been found, but SOS amphoras were imported in large quantities. Here,
as well as at other sites, Attic amphoras seem to act very independently from
Athenian fine-ware distributions. By the end of the Archaic period, however,
roughly 600–500 BCE, not only did Corinthian A amphoras become more
prevalent, but Corinthian and SOS amphoras were only two of many types of
Greek amphoras being consumed at Sicilian sites. For example, at Camarina
Rifriscolaro, out of 657 total amphoras recovered from the site thus far, 209 are
Corinthian and only 36 are SOS. In addition, 183 East Greek amphoras, 182
West Greek amphoras, and 41 non-Greek amphoras (Etruscan and
Phoenician-Punic) were also present (Sourisseau 2006).
The distribution of Attic SOS and Corinthian amphoras in the far west,
including Iberia and the northwest coast of Africa, takes on a slightly different
pattern (Pratt 2015). A total of twenty-four sites have reported Attic SOS
amphoras, though most have very few, and only five sites report early exam-
ples. Although many small fine Corinthian vessels, like aryballoi, are found at
Iberian sites, no early Corinthian A amphoras have yet been identified.
Corinthian amphoras seem to be more prevalent toward the end of the
Archaic period. Greek presence in the western Mediterranean, and specifically
Iberia, took place much later than their Italian and Sicilian expeditions. On the
basis of literary sources and archaeological data, it seems that Phoenicians were
much more active on the Iberian Peninsula than Greeks and had established
many colonies even by the eighth century. It was therefore not Greeks
themselves, but Phoenicians who were bringing Greek amphoras and their
products to Iberia in the early Archaic period.25 For example, the site of
Toscanos was founded in the mid-eighth century as a commercial enclave
and has evidence for a large market building. There, at least fifty SOS amphoras
have been reported (Pratt 2015, table A1). Material remains excavated suggest
connections to Pithekoussai, Cyprus, and the eastern Mediterranean
286 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

(Antonaccio 2009, 317). The first Greeks to actually set sail to Iberia and the
west seem to have been individuals interested in tapping into the thriving
metals trade that the Phoenicians had been exploiting. One of the first Greeks
to do this, at least according to tradition, was the Samian, Kolaios who sailed to
Tartessos (Iberia) in the second half of the seventh century (Herodotus, Hist.
4.152). The first clear evidence for Greek presence on Iberia was not until the
establishment of Emporio around 575 BCE by Greeks from Phocaea.
The sheer number of sites in the central and western Mediterranean that
participated in exchange of the earliest Greek amphoras is impressive. The
simultaneous mass production of standardized amphoras in central Greece and
their shipment abroad suggests a direct connection between the two. In other
words, people living in Attica and Corinth produced amphoras for the purpose
of long-distance exchange. The patterns in amphora distribution may corre-
spond with multiple facets of Greek historical occurrences, but the waves of
colonization movements played particularly large roles. We might speculate
that these commodities were exported via local merchants or a third party (or
both) for two main reasons: to acquire goods that local elites desired as status
symbols in a system of changing fashions or to aid a newly founded colony. In
both cases, Greek oil and wine had to be highly valued by Greeks and non-
Greeks alike such that their bulk shipment overseas was deemed essential.

Evidence for the Identity of Merchants: Greeks, Phoenicians, and Cypriots

It is difficult to tell, with any certainty, who the people were that transported
Greek amphoras and their contents. It is most likely, however, that multiple
people, both Greek and non-Greek, participated in the commercial exchanges
that produced the distribution patterns discussed earlier. Greek merchants
certainly played a role, but the exact identities and the poleis or regions from
which they originated are more difficult to discern. It has long been assumed
that Corinthian merchants were very active within the Archaic Mediterranean.
The primary reason for this assumption is the great amount of Corinthian
pottery found throughout every region of the Mediterranean. However, the
vast majority of this pottery is composed of small closed shapes or drinking cups
that could have easily been picked up by anyone passing through the isthmus
over which Corinth had control. For larger items, like Corinthian amphoras
and their contents, the arguments for direct distribution by Corinthian ships is
more complicated. When it comes to provisioning colonies, there is only one
primary Corinthian colony: Syracuse. Syracuse did spawn secondary and even
tertiary colonies (Heloros, Kamarina, Maestro, Modica), but it is unclear how
much involvement Corinth would have had in their establishment and provi-
sion. Most interesting for our discussion is that Attic SOS amphoras were found
in all of these colonies. It is possible that Corinthians were making relatively
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 287

regular trips abroad with both their own ceramics and goods as well as goods
from the surrounding region, like Attica. But why would there be any need for
Attic oil if Corinthian amphoras also supposedly contained oil? An explanation
for this pattern is harder to provide. Geography may also play a factor, but to
a lesser extent. The Corinthian isthmus problem would affect the choice of
amphoras one was able to take to western areas. Indeed, it has been shown that
eastern Mediterranean amphoras tended to stay in the east and western
amphoras in the west (Lawall 2006). Certainly, Corinthians would have capi-
talized on this by providing a ready supply of liquid produce for anyone
traveling overseas from that departure point. This provides an answer for the
supposed predilection for Corinthian oil and wine in the west, as reflected by
the large number of Corinthian amphoras at most sites, not to mention
aryballoi and other fine wares. Attic SOS amphoras may have been thrown
in the mix when supplies were low or to accommodate specific preferences.
Support for Corinthian actors moving Attic SOS amphoras comes from a later
context in the Black Sea region. There, at Istria, a late Attic SOS amphora was
found with Corinthian-Megarian writing on it, possibly suggesting the origin
of the merchants (Dupont 1995–1996, 87).
It is certainly possible for other, less archaeologically visible groups of Greeks
to have participated in the distribution of SOS amphoras. For example,
Aeginetans were known for their skill as seafarers and quite a few SOS
amphoras have been found on the island (Hesiod fr. 205 Merkelbach-West;
Houby-Nielsen 2009, 198). In addition, Samians are alluded to in later sources
as being some of the first seafarers to reach the far western Mediterranean.
Herodotus includes the story of the Samian named Kolaios who was the first
Greek to reach Tartessos (Herodotus, Hist. 4.152). However, if this person
existed, he did not perform his deeds earlier than about 640 BCE (Shefton
1982, 344). Certainly, these suggestions from later literary sources attest to the
heterogeneous nature of the Greek merchants and seafarers traveling the
western Mediterranean at this time.
That Phoenicians acted as prominent merchants carrying Greek amphoras
throughout the Mediterranean can be attested through patterns in the distribu-
tion of commercial goods, their presence at known commercial settlements,
and literary sources. Many sites in Iberia received Greek SOS amphoras before
any direct Greek activity had reached that part of the western Mediterranean.
In 1982, Brian Shefton convincingly demonstrated a connection between the
find-spots of early Attic SOS amphoras, early Corinthian aryballoi, and
Phoenician enterprise, particularly in Iberia. Based on these distributions, he
suggested that Phoenicians were the primary movers of Attic SOS amphoras,
along with most other Greek goods, at least in the early part of the Archaic
period. He went on to suggest that perhaps Pithekoussai, as a settlement with
both Greek and Phoenician traits, acted as a transshipment point (Shefton 1982,
288 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

342). The expanded SOS distribution provided here continues to support this
idea. More Phoenician colonies can now be added to the distribution, includ-
ing Carthage and Motya, as well as in Etrurian assemblages rife with Phoenician
merchandise and iconographies (i.e., Cerveteri [Gill 1988, 8], Veii, Vulci).
A greater number of Iberian sites with SOS amphoras have also been added that
seem to be restricted to Phoenician contacts in the early Archaic period
(Gonzales de Canales et al. 2006, 15). Additionally, Phoenician presence at
Ischia has been elaborated since Shefton’s publication. Evidence now strongly
suggests that the island was populated by both Greeks and Phoenicians.
A particularly striking piece of evidence is an SOS amphora with both
Aramaic and Greek graffiti (Garbini 1978) and an enchytrismos burial using
a Greek amphora that had been inscribed with Phoenician writing.
That Phoenicians were concerned more generally with large-scale bulk
trade in wine can be demonstrated by the discovery of two shipwrecks off
the coast of Egypt. Dated to the eighth century BCE, the Tanit and Elissa ships
each carried a massive cargo of Phoenician torpedo-shaped amphoras that were
highly standardized and specialized for the transport of wine. The existence of
these ships demonstrates that early exchanges were not merely cabotage as
described by Herodotus (Histories 3.6) but could represent directed trade of
bulk materials (Drakides et al. 2010, 99). Although these ships appear to have
only been carrying distinctively Phoenician wine, a recent review demonstrates
that the distribution of Phoenician eighth century torpedo amphoras seems to
align very well with the distribution of early SOS amphoras, showing a clear
connection between SOS distribution and Phoenician enterprise (Kasseri 2012,
307; Pratt 2014, Map 20). We might assume, therefore, that Phoenicians were
not solely concerned with bulk shipments of their own wine, but were also
content to carry Greek commodities for, presumably, commercial purposes.
Finally, archaeological evidence may also point to Cypriot involvement in
the distribution of surplus Greek oil and wine. It seems relatively clear that
over the course of the Early Iron Age, a prominent Greek presence evolved
on Cyprus (Iacovou 2006). In 673 BCE more than half of the ten Cypriote
states were ruled by kings with Greek proper names (as recorded by
Essarhaddon’s royal scribes; Iacovou 2006, 261). Iacovou (2006, 269) suggests
that Cypriote kingdoms where Arcado-Cypriot dialect was used for state
administration claimed a Greek identity. This historical background may
provide some clues to the presence of a Cypriot graffito on an Attic SOS
amphora recovered at Mende in the North Aegean (Vokotopoulou and
Christidis 1995). The graffito was inscribed in Cypriot script with the
name (of trader or owner) followed by abbreviated patronymic (te-mi) and
an abbreviated ethnic (Se=Salamis) (Vokotopoulou and Christidis 1995,
7–8). Interestingly, there is an identical graffito from the Policoro cemetery,
suggesting that the same person was involved with the manufacture or sale of
 COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE 289

these vessels. Other evidence for the Cypriot connection comes from the
same jar at Mende, which has three incised horizontal lines on one handle,
a pot mark common on Cypriot pottery representing capacity (Masson
1983). Since Salamis has the heaviest concentration of SOS amphoras on
Cyprus, and the person’s graffito identified himself as from Salamis, it is
possible that Cypriot merchants acted as some sort of node along the
economic network of Attic SOS amphoras.
The many actors involved with the distribution of early Greek amphoras
provide multiple nodes within the greater economic network of the Archaic
period. These patterns of trade might be a result of either sporadic contact or
a result of a high level of knowledge and high frequency of contact. Robin
Osborne (2007) suggests that the latter is more likely since it requires
a discriminating demand and would result in nonrandom patterning, which
seems to be the case.

Commercial Exchange: Conclusions

The Archaic period was the first time that bulk oil/wine shipped in large
ceramic amphoras consistently moved along established networks, especially
toward the west. The previous Early Iron Age saw the maintenance of some
commercial economy in oil/wine, but certainly limited in scope and volume.
Likewise, the Late Bronze Age trade in transport stirrup jars focused mainly on
local transactions, only venturing sporadically to eastern markets (and even
more rarely western ones). Based on the data presented in this chapter, it seems
relatively clear that by the middle of the Archaic period, commercial exchange
was a major aspect of the oil and wine industry. SOS and Corinthian
A amphoras were widely disbursed throughout the Mediterranean. The pro-
duction and commercial exchange of oil and wine were inextricably linked to
the major cultural developments of the Greek Archaic period. The formation
of Greek poleis facilitated the organization of labor and the accretion of wealth
to produce oil and wine on a large scale, resulting in enough surplus not only to
export to newly founded colonies in the form of assistance, but also to export in
exchange for other desired goods. These goods then fueled the generation of
wealth and status that, in turn, concentrated wealth even more, consequently
maintaining the cycle. In addition, oil and wine facilitated cultural interactions
with new, indigenous populations as Greek people moved into previously
remote areas and tapped into desired resources and even larger trade networks.
The first southern Greek amphoras played a major role in this increasingly
complicated and cyclical web of economic and political interactions. These
commercial networks may have built upon networks that had previously been
established by trade using North Aegean amphoras, as well as others. Archaic
Greek amphora trade expanded these networks in both distance and scale,
290 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

essentially paving the way for later large-scale movements of oil and wine from
many other regions of the Mediterranean.

CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS

The previous chapter explored how the relationships of value and dependency
between people, oil, and wine in the Early Iron Age gradually increased in scale
while developing a regional character. This pattern was especially prominent in
northern Greece where surplus oil and wine production and exchange
flourished. This chapter explored how during the second half of the eighth
century, this same pattern started to shift south. The development of the
Greek polis and the exponential increase in Greek movement abroad com-
plicated and problematized the foundational networks of the Early Iron Age
as demography, political structures, and religious institutions changed, some-
times very quickly with drastic effects. These effects included a multiplicity of
commensal events, the continuation and formalization of funerary and ritual
gifts, and an exponential increase in oil and wine trade, as discussed earlier.
Oil and wine therefore remained highly valued and indispensable for the
proper functioning of multiple types of exchanges. As cultural commodities,
the ways in which oil and wine were exchanged and consumed can help
elucidate contemporary sociopolitical and economic changes.
Based on a synthetic view of the evidence, we can see meaningful changes to
patterns in the scale, context, and characteristics of exchange modes from the
Early Iron Age to the Archaic era in central Greece which, when considered
together, indicate that the high value of wine was constructed through different
networks of calculative agencies. In other words, during the early Archaic era,
the value of oil and wine was perceived as high due to their use in new and
varied types of exchanges, to less centralized control of resources, and to an
increase in the overall scale of exchanges. First, new opportunities for exchan-
ging oil and wine developed during the course of the early Archaic era. Early
Archaic commensal events were characterized by variety in scale, participants,
and contexts. No longer were feasting events controlled by a single person or
group, overtly displaying power and competing with others for aggrandize-
ment. Instead, by the second half of the eighth century, commensal exchanges
were used between elites through more subtle modes, often in neutral loca-
tions. Other events with a broader base of participants, like communal dining
halls and sanctuary festivals, made oil and wine available to a larger section of
the population. Novel contexts for gift exchange also came about during this
time, as both regional sanctuaries and polis-based cults became formalized and
included competitive displays by elites, as well as participation by non-elites.
Opportunities for commercial exchange of oil and wine also seem to have
expanded at this time. In addition to the obvious expansion of traditional
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 291

commercial networks, oil and wine were also used in smaller-scale transactions.
During the Archaic era there is some evidence that wine, at least, was given as
wages in exchange for services rendered. Some of the earliest written legal and
administrative documents include jugs of must (fermenting wine) as payment
for salary, services, and other contributions.26 For example, a document from
Dattalla, a city in eastern Crete, lists fifty prochoi (jars or liquid measures) of must
as partial payment to its official scribe, Spensitheos, which equates to approxi-
mately a year’s supply of wine (Marangou 1999, 269). As new mutations of each
exchange mode developed, oil and wine remained central features, highly
valued by the different groups of people who exchanged and consumed them.
Second, the early Archaic period seems to have introduced an era when
more people had access to the resources necessary for the production and
exchange of oil and wine. These resources included people for labor, land for
planting, and wealth for acquiring necessary equipment such as amphoras and
drinking paraphernalia. The multitude of feasting events and contexts suggests
that many more people, at various levels of social status, were able to provide oil
and wine during these occasions. It seems that wine, at least, was produced by
most wealthy landowners with the expectation that they would use it to their
social advantage. Surplus oil and wine, therefore, became a symbol of status
rather than a symbol of power, as it had been during the era of chiefs/big-men.
It was not a problem that multiple people were able to exchange surplus oil and
wine – it was not a threat. Rather, it was a sign of belonging to the same group,
to the same level of social importance. Archaic literature, such as Homer’s
Odyssey and Hesiod’s Works and Days, suggests that it was deemed proper to
host neighboring elites for feasts at your own house, then expect a reciprocal
invitation to follow suit (see Appendices A and B for further discussion). We
might surmise that this new openness to surplus oil and wine affected the
overall value of these commodities, as dictated by a significantly different
network of calculative agencies.
Third, the perception of wine and oil as high-value would have also been
affected by an overall widening of access to these commodities through the
significant increase in scale and frequency of feasting events and in an increase
in overall availability of these commodities through commercial exchange.
This is most evident in the elaboration and institutionalization of sanctuary
feasts and communal dining halls. It seems reasonable to assume that the
participants of these large-scale communal events included most of the males
in a community or communities, if not an even larger section of the popula-
tion. The evidence for women’s participation in these events is very scarce, but
later literary sources might indicate that they were not entirely excluded from
the world of commensal events and wine-drinking (Schmitt Pantel 2001;
Kelly-Blazeby 2006, 29–32). Moreover, it has recently been argued that com-
mensal events, even small-scale gatherings where wine played a prominent
292 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

role, were not restricted to elite values, but were a common, shared value among
all members of a community (van Wees and Fisher 2015, 25–26). The distinction
between elites and non-elites was therefore not the commensal event itself, but
rather the elaboration of the event through status symbols such as imported food,
high-quality wine, metal or decorated equipment, servants, and entertainment.
That wine and oil were available more generally is indicated by the appearance or
formalization of wine shops and bars. Although the most concrete written and
archaeological evidence appears later in the Archaic period and Classical era,
there is some indication that these establishments existed well before.27
Greek movement abroad also presents an opportunity to observe not only
the high value that was placed on Greek oil and wine, but also the construction
of that value on a Mediterranean-wide scale. The place of oil and wine within
the Greek regime of value was affected by the maintenance of that regime
outside of the traditional Greek homeland and coming into contact with non-
Greek regimes of value. The high value of oil and wine was therefore con-
structed long-distance as Greeks themselves maintained, to some degree, their
value systems across space and time. Of course, overall values change over time,
but when it comes to oil and wine, both commodities were continually
imported from the Greek mainland to Greek colonial ventures over hundreds
of years. It is not new that Greek oil and wine were consumed on a large scale in
other parts of the Mediterranean. The Late Bronze Age also presented that
pattern. What is new during the Archaic period, however, is the continued
large-scale exchange of these products between Greek settlements after moving
away from the traditional Greek homeland. Although imported oil and wine
might have originally acted as a start-up supply for the proper functioning of
Greek colonies, their continued importation long after the possibility of local
production makes clear that the high value of these commodities was the
driving factor.28 Imported oil and wine would have functioned as luxury
items, once local production of oil and wine reached a level adequate to fill
local needs (Foxhall 1998; Brun 2010, 426–427, 2011). Greek settlers chose to
consume these imported commodities over locally available products. Despite
the relatively early production of oil/wine and amphoras on Sardinia (Docter
2007), at Pithekoussai (Sourisseau 2011), and even within indigenous Sicilian
sites, Greek settlements on Sicily seem to have preferred mainland Greek
commodities. It is not until the later part of the Archaic period when we see
large-scale imports of central Mediterranean amphoras into Greek settlements.
The distribution patterns of SOS and Corinthian A amphoras over 250 years
highlight the agricultural and economic choices made by Greeks living in
Sicily. It is certain that grapevines and olive trees existed and were grown on
Sicily and the Italian Peninsula, well before the arrival of the Greeks.29 And,
even if they had not existed, it would have only taken 10–20 years to produce
a viable crop. Why, then, did Greeks import oil and wine from Greece if not
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 293

for the special value attributed to these commodities? It also seems to be the case
that newly established Greeks chose not to adopt the values and tastes of local
indigenous populations. Despite the local production of hydromel and its
subsequent shipment in local amphoras (Dominguez 2006, 326–328), Greeks
do not seem to have imported or consumed any of this product. This fact, when
compared to the choice by indigenous southern Italians and Sicilians to con-
sume Greek oil and wine, as well as produce Greek-style amphoras, highlights
the variability of cultural interaction and the agency with which individual
people approach the consumption and production of new items.30
The situation evident in the Greek poleis of Sicily, with regards to oil and
wine importation and consumption, also brings to the fore the idea of depen-
dency as one of the factors contributing to the stability and tautness of the
entanglement between people and these two commodities. Although, as I have
often said throughout this book, it is relatively impossible to prove dependency
in its true sense through the archaeological record, exchange and consumption
patterns, such as those discussed earlier, can at least point toward a relationship
of need beyond superficial desire. Indeed, this connection of dependency
between people, oil, and wine is visible not through examining one relation-
ship, but through the patterns produced over many. It is the increase in scale
and diversity across all three exchange modes covered here that conveys some
underlying connection. The increase in scale and diversity of commensal
events and their established place within a community’s regime of value
would have solidified the need for surplus oil and wine. In turn, this need
would have fueled the commercial exchange of these two commodities. And,
as in all relationships, a circular feedback loop developed whereby the increased
presence of surplus oil and wine on a larger, more complex commercial market
further prompted the spread of commensal exchange not only throughout
Greek communities, but also abroad as Greek people moved around the
Mediterranean as both entrepreneurs and settlers.
All of these changes to commensality, gift exchange, and trade from the Early
Iron Age into the Archaic period would have transformed the nature of the
entanglement between people, oil, and wine. The relationships of dependency
and the agencies constructing value in southern Greece at this time worked to
expand the entanglement in scale while becoming more decentralized and
fostering a “regional” character. These changes would have been similar to
those in the northern Aegean slightly earlier. More and bigger events, along
with population increase and demographic shifts, would have led to a wider
network of interconnected nodes. Different types of nodes played relatively
equal parts in the network of dependencies between people, oil, and wine that
made up the entanglement. Within this network, one can imagine that some
nodes would have taken a more central position than others, such as larger poleis
and Panhellenic sanctuaries, but, in general, there would not have been a single
294 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

node creating and controlling the overall dependency on surplus oil and wine
manifested by their indispensability within these new forms of commensal,
ritual, and commercial exchanges. By the end of the Archaic era, most of
Greece and the Aegean could be characterized as made up of broad regions that
shared a particular value system at the same time that they had their own
distinctive characteristics (e.g., dialect, ceramic style, institutions, consumption
preferences, etc.). Shared among all of them, however, was a dependency on
large amounts of surplus oil and wine. This dependency eventually led to many
Greek regions producing their own surplus of one or the other of these
commodities (or both) and using them, not only for themselves, but for
exchange with other regions for different commodities, even different types
of wine or oil.
This larger-scale and more decentralized or “regional” entanglement can be
highlighted through a number of new patterns, attributes, and nodes within
commensal, gift, and commercial exchanges. First and foremost, commensal
exchange was radically affected by the crystallization of Panhellenic or regional
sanctuaries and the (gradual) development of formal poleis. The early Archaic
period witnessed an exponential growth in the number of religious buildings,
many of which were located within settlements, but others were in locations
that did not seem to fall under any particular settlement’s control. For example,
some sanctuaries developed at this time that would eventually give a religious
identity and unity to whole regions and groups of cities like Delos for the
Ionians or Thermos for the Aetolians. In these cases, it is clear that the activity
and influence of the sanctuary was not completely subordinated to the politics
and culture of a single city even when its administration eventually belonged to
one polis (e.g., Elis for Olympia; de Polignac 2009). It is possible, therefore, to
see various types of a “sacred centrality” function in different contexts and
periods (de Polignac 2009, 435). The Panhellenic sanctuary of Olympia pre-
sents a very good example of a sanctuary that has its roots in the Early Iron Age,
as demonstrated primarily through archaeological remains of large-scale com-
mensal events (Morgan 1990). Here, the presence and activity of the local
population existed alongside more regional participation. Specifically, we can
see a conflict between locally emerging elites in the towns of both Pisa and Elis
as they competed for greater roles and visibility in the sanctuary, its adminis-
tration, and its cults through commensal activities. It is only at the beginning of
the sixth century that the creation (or formal appearance) of a distinct cult
officially signals the role played by the Eleans in the administration of the
sanctuary. In these cases, the sanctuary contributed to the rise of the cities, not
the other way around (de Polignac 2009, 437). Commensal events using large
quantities of surplus oil and wine were central not only to the functioning of
these types of regional sanctuaries but also to the competition between elites
taking place there.
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 295

Broad trends in funerary gifts related to wine and oil, as well as similar practices,
suggest the coalescence of entanglements with a regional nature within the realm
of gift exchange. As discussed in this chapter, wine-drinking paraphernalia, includ-
ing cups, jugs, and, at times, kraters became standard grave equipment for the
deceased. Although this general trend is not very different from any time period
before the Archaic era, there are some changes to the types of equipment that signal
regional cohesion in practice. For example, the use of skyphoi cups and lekythoi
specifically within Attica signals a preference witnessed over a larger area of
people than previously attested in the Early Iron Age. The establishment of
family- or clan-based ritual dining areas near associated burials also suggests
a regional preference that spread around Attica. In the Argolid, the presence
of tomb cults with evidence for wine drinking seems to be a more regional
practice, though future archaeological work could prove otherwise.
Commercial exchange presents a very clear example of larger-scale, decen-
tralized entanglements appearing in central Greece during the Archaic era. The
first standardized transport amphoras produced there are distinctly regional in
character. SOS amphoras are not only produced in multiple areas of Attica, but
also in Euboea. Indeed, it is unclear which area produced the shape first.
Moreover, a completely different type of container was produced around the
same time in the Corinthia, where a plain handmade version was preferred.
The production of these two distinctly regional containers continued through-
out the Archaic era, perhaps demonstrating the steadfastness of the regional
nature of entanglements surrounding oil and wine at this point. In addition, the
movement of both types of containers suggests early and frequent commercial
exchange between different regions. Corinthian handmade amphoras are some
of the first Corinthian imports to reach the Athenian Agora.
It is interesting to note that by the end of the Archaic era, these regional
characteristics of the entanglement seem to be countered by a resurgence of
distinctively local or group statements of cohesion. Specifically, in the sixth
century, the Symposion proper comes into being with its rules and very specific
elite ideologies that are intended as exclusionary tactics (Murray 1990; Schmitt
Pantel 1997; Wecowski 2011, 9–12). At the same time, around 600 BCE, powerful
cities took control of external, regional sanctuaries and transformed them into
manifestations of their own influence, wealth, and prestige (de Polignac 2009,
437–438). For example, changes modified not only the internal organization of the
sanctuaries but also their territorial orientations including the creation of sacred
ways and processions.31 These local or group responses to broader regional trends
certainly affected the entanglement between people, oil, and wine through the
reorientation of commercial exchange to effectively provide necessary supplies to
elites and poleis-sponsored sanctuaries, respectively. These new trends do not mean
the dissolution of regional entanglements but rather the inclusion of new connec-
tions of dependencies and value within them.
296 OI L A N D WI N E I N T HE EAR LY AR CHAI C PERI OD

These relationships of value and dependency surrounding oil and wine, as

demonstrated through observable patterns in production and exchange, provide
meaningful insights into the sociopolitical and economic trends of early Archaic
Greece. Specifically, the patterns in exchange of oil and wine observed here reflect
the idea that the early Archaic period was marked by demographic expansion and
social unrest or restructuring. By the end of the eighth century, the area around
Attica and Corinth, at least, had enough people living close enough together for
a long enough time to produce large amounts of surplus oil and wine, not only for
themselves but also to ship abroad and exchange with both Greek and non-Greek
people. Indeed, it is widely accepted that demographic expansion increased sub-
stantially during the Archaic period. From the tenth to the fourth century BCE,
there was a steady population growth throughout Greece of approximately
0.25 percent per annum. However, this growth might have reached up to
1.0 percent per annum in the period from the late eighth through the fifth century
(Snodgrass 1980, 19–25; Scheidel 2003; Forsdyke 2006, 335–336). Surplus oil and
wine production would have benefited significantly from an excess of labor that
perhaps was lacking or harder to come by in the previous centuries.
The different types of commensal events initiated in the early Archaic period
support the idea that people were not only increasing in number but also coalescing
and dividing into relatively distinct groups. Whereas the Early Iron Age seems to
have been roughly divided between those invited to the feast and those who were
not, the early Archaic period presents a very different picture. Even by the end of
the eighth century, there seems to have been much more nuance as to who was
invited to what feast and, consequently, who had access to what types and
quantities of oil and wine. Although the debates surrounding the social structure
of the early archaic period are intense and numerous, the evidence from oil and
wine exchange suggests that new groups definitely did emerge in the early archaic
period as people were trying to define themselves using oil, wine, and their
contexts of consumption and exchange.32 Elites, whatever their exact makeup,
were characterized primarily by their ownership of large amounts of land and their
desire to compete with each other. Indeed, “competitive acquisitiveness” was the
driving factor behind elite lifestyle and included grand displays of wealth, such as
hosting elaborate commensal events and acquiring foreign goods (Foxhall 1998;
van Wees and Fisher 2015, 29–30).
The archaeological remains of commercial exchanges of oil and wine provide
meaningful insights into the formalization of professional groups during the
Archaic period, especially merchants and traders. Of all the earliest amphoras,
Attic SOS amphoras have the highest number of names and marks on them. The
names were engraved post-firing during the commercial life of the pot and might
represent a middleman involved in the sale of the amphoras and their contents
(Johnston and Jones 1978; Pratt 2016). The fact that Athens had no formal colonies
of its own also means that merchants from other places or professional merchants
 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS 297

from Athens were taking these amphoras with them for, most likely, commercial
gain.33 It is unclear when labels were placed on the groups of people involved with
commercial exchange but, by the end of the Archaic period, three professions
came to the fore. The first is emporoi or traders who traveled by sea using someone
else’s ship, but owned the goods they traded, though did not produce the goods
themselves (Reed 2003, 7). A second category, naukleroi, refers to people who
actually owned a seagoing merchantman. Reed (2003, 65), however, provides
a third term that is perhaps most useful: maritime trader or prekteres. These are free
or unfree men who derive most of their livelihood from traveling by sea to buy and
resell goods either for their own profit or for the profit of their owner.34 This
category of independent maritime traders and agent traders was most likely
involved in much of the early Archaic trade and derived from a number of different
ethnic regions. Additionally, there seems to have been a professionalization of
middlemen involved with the sale of oil and wine on a smaller, local scale. Indeed,
there is evidence from Archaic literature that taverns already existed where lower-
quality wine could be bought in smaller quantities.35 This profession ties into the
new accessibility of oil and wine to a wider selection of the population.
By the end of the Archaic period, the values and dependencies on oil and
wine set in place continued to thrive throughout the Classical era. Indeed, by
the end of the sixth century, many more regions of Greece produced their own
olive oil or wine and shipped surplus in standardized containers. Even a century
later, there were so many different amphoras on the market that specialists are
still attempting to identify their origins (Whitbread 1995; Lawall 1995, 2004,
2011). This multiplicity of production locations becomes especially difficult
when one takes into account the expanding markets for surplus oil and wine
exchange in the central and western Mediterranean, not to mention the Black
Sea region. It is at this point that oil and wine became signifiers of identity to
many other cultures around the Mediterranean, cultures that had once been
considered in opposition to Greeks in part because of their ignorance of olive
oil and wine. And yet, despite this widening of oil and wine availability,
Greeks, now spread all around the Mediterranean, nevertheless maintained
these two commodities as indispensable staples of their own lives.
 SEVEN

CONCLUSION
Cultural Commodities and the Future of Oil and Wine

T he conclusion of the book ties together the themes of

the previous five chapters by examining the overall patterns visible
regarding production of oil, wine, and transport containers, and the modes of
exchange used to distribute these commodities. A long-term view of the role of
oil and wine in pre-Classical Greek cultures leads to some meaningful observa-
tions. The first is the overall dynamic stability of both commodities as witnessed
through changing characteristics of entanglements. The dynamic stability of oil
and wine was supported by the importance of shared values and practices
intimately tied to the construction of what it meant to be elite. The second
observation made possible by a long-term view is the development of oil and
wine as cultural commodities within Greek communities.
Finally, taking up the historical ecology approach outlined in the
Introduction, the Conclusion addresses the implications of this historical
study on modern issues of agriculture and commerce in the Mediterranean.
As the Mediterranean once again enters into dramatic climate change today, it
is important to understand more fully the outcomes of these changes in the past
and how populations adapted to and, eventually, thrived in new conditions.
Indeed, even in modern Greece the cultivation of olive trees and grapevines,
along with the production of olive oil and wine, are essential aspects of the
culture. Yet, it is becoming increasingly clear that the environment of many
regions of Greece is changing and new solutions for the future of these cultural
commodities need to be addressed.

298
 DY N AMI C ST AB I L I T Y 299

DYNAMIC STABILITY: SHARED VALUES AND THE CONSTRUCTION

OF ELITENESS

The entanglement between people and oil and wine maintained what we could
call a dynamic stability in pre-Classical Greece. Dynamic stability is the idea that
something can remain the same overall while experiencing slight changes over
time. Included is the ability to be resilient in the face of outside forces. The
conclusion of each chapter highlighted the ways in which the entanglement
between people, oil, and wine transformed in scale and centralization, but
never disentangled even after the Late Bronze Age collapse.
The stable aspect of the entanglement between people and oil/wine from the
Bronze Age to the Archaic period has to do, in part, with the “fluidity” of oil and
wine as technological products – they can be produced and “invented” in multiple
places at the same time because both plants were relatively ubiquitous and because
their products were durable and portable. Carl Knappett (in Bevan 2014, 407) has
observed a similar trajectory for amphoras and surely this is no coincidence.
Amphoras were inextricably caught up in the entanglement surrounding oil and
wine and would have reacted in tandem. For example, after the Bronze Age
Palatial collapse, not only did the overall entanglement shift from centralized to
local, but also amphoras moved from mass-produced specialized containers to
locally produced household shapes. Standardized amphoras were once again
produced as the entanglement changed and expanded in the Early Iron Age.
The stability of the entanglement between people, oil, and wine was also
facilitated by shared values and practices. Many of the eastern Mediterranean
regions shared an affinity for wine and even more for oils, especially perfumed.
The cultures of prehistoric Greece were particularly invested in the manufac-
ture and consumption of perfumed oils and wines, attested most poignantly by
the documentation of the comings and goings of thousands of liters of both
liquids within their palatial administrative archives written in Linear B. This
investment seems to have been due, in part at least, to the market made
available by the demand for both products by the other cultures around
them. If this large-scale market, best attested by the Uluburun shipwreck,
had not been in place due to shared values, it is conceivable that Bronze Age
Greek cultures would not have needed such a robust and tightly controlled
network surrounding the production of oil and wine. In other words, if the
calculative agencies of various communities around the eastern Mediterranean
had not produced similar values for oil and wine, the entanglement between
people, oil, and wine in Greece would not have been so strong, or to use
a word from Ian Hodder (2010), so “taut.” After the collapse that affected most
cultures in the eastern Mediterranean, southern Greek cultures maintained
their value of oil and wine and shared it even more prominently with people
living in the north Aegean.
300 CONCLUS I ON

One of the best archaeologically visible demonstrations for shared values

related to oil and wine is the presence of similar pottery shapes used to contain
or consume these two commodities. In ceramic terminology, one often refers
to the presence of a koine where one regional style seems to dominate over
others. A koine is often seen as the result of population movement, political
domination, or lack of artistic capability by others. Yet, it is more likely that
shared values and practices are the underlying causes for the adoption of
a particular style of ceramic pot. That this is the case can be demonstrated by
the selectivity apparent in adoption patterns. For example, the shared artistic
styles and ceramic shapes in the northwest Aegean during the Early Iron Age is
often called the “Euboean koine” because some of the shapes seem to have been
first introduced in Euboea. However, after the excavation and publication of
many sites in northern Greece, these shapes and styles, such as the skyphos cup
and concentric circles, might have actually been adopted there relatively
simultaneously and cannot be viewed as merely on the receiving end. In
addition, not every Euboean shape was adopted. Indeed, one of the most
distinctive southern Greek shapes, the krater used to mix wine and water, has
not often been found in the north. However, skyphoi cups, smaller closed
shapes, and certainly north Aegean amphoras are found in abundance at sites in
the north and south. This pattern suggests that a shared value of wine and oils
permitted the fluidity of associated equipment at the same time that exact
practices in consuming the commodities differed.
The dynamic aspect of the entanglement between people and oil and wine,
that is, its mutability over time, was in large part due to the changing nature of
what it meant to be elite and how that was manifested through the entangle-
ment with oil and wine. What it meant to be elite was caught up in the
production, exchange, and consumption of oil and wine. The entanglement
with these two commodities became an important factor of elite construction
because oil and wine continued to be highly valued, although for slightly
different reasons and in different ways over time. How elite status was con-
structed, vis à vis oil and wine, also changed over time. Elites in some eras
placed emphasis on having control over the production and storage of these
commodities, while at other times elites placed emphasis on having control
over their exchange. Control over production included not only the control of
land and people to work that land, but also the control of knowledge used for
adding value to the products, such as perfume manufacture and flavored wines.
Control over the exchange of oil and wine included local exchange, such as
using the commodities as payment for services, as well as long-distance
exchange, such as bulk trade with neighboring cultures.
In all eras, however, eliteness was manifested through different ways of
controlling the consumption of oil and wine. And not just the act of embody-
ing these commodities, but in the specific knowledge-based practices
 DY N AMI C ST AB I L I T Y 301

associated with their consumption. These practices changed over time and
included pouring, mixing, and toasting. Of course, entangled with these
practices were the specific and necessary items needed to not only perform
the task appropriately, but also to reaffirm the eliteness of the actions and the
person performing them. Items like elaborate jugs necessary for pouring in the
Minoan palatial era, decorated kylikes for toasting in the Mycenaean palatial
era, and symbolically charged kraters for mixing in the Postpalatial and Iron
Ages.
Over time, changes occurred in the domain of the relative numbers of (elite)
people with control over the production, exchange, and consumption of oil
and wine and in what contexts that power was concentrated. Moreover, the
changing nature of the construction of elite status, manifested through the
entanglement with oil and wine, had a direct impact on how non-elites had
access to these two commodities. In other words, the ways in which entangle-
ment worked for non-elite groups depended on the character of the entangle-
ment of wine and oil with elites.
In the Minoan palatial era, production of oil and wine was more generally in
the hands of a broader group of elites. Specifically, production of wine, at least,
seems to have intensified greatly during the Neopalatial era but was a relatively
widespread activity taking place in urban homes, rural villas, and palaces. The
exchange of surplus oil and wine was perhaps bifocal. A broader group of elites
took part in regional exchanges, as exemplified by the movement of oval-
mouthed amphoras, while a smaller group of elites might have conducted
small-scale, long-distance exchange using transport stirrup jars. Consumption
took place in both palatial and ritual settings and intensified during the
Neopalatial era with an increase in frequency and types of commensal events.
During these events, there is some evidence that elites would have controlled
the practices of commensality, including the act of pouring. Elite status was
therefore displayed through type and quality of equipment used. The nature of
elite construction in the Minoan palatial era meant that non-elites had differ-
ential access to wine and oil. One could speculate that non-elites had access to
wine and oil through production as laborers and through consumption during
communal events. However, in these communal events, there seems to have
been a suppression of knowledge of practices since the use of plain, homo-
genous conical cups was the norm and in obvious contrast to the tableware used
by elites.
As the Minoan palatial system gradually declined ushering in an era domi-
nated by the Mycenaean palaces, the entanglement between people, oil, and
wine increased in scale further while becoming centralized in nature. Evidence
suggests that a smaller group of elites was generally in control of oil and wine
production and large-scale storage was concentrated in palaces only.
Mycenaean elites were also concerned with the control of added-value
302 CONCLUS I ON

knowledge, such as perfume manufacture and flavored wine. Exchange of

oil and wine also assumed a different character as a smaller group of elites
continued to take part in regional exchange on Crete (continuing to use oval-
mouthed amphoras) while perhaps a different group of elites controlled large-
scale long-distance exchange using transport stirrup jars. Palatial elites also used
surplus oil and wine in small-scale local exchanges in the form of payments and
offerings. This same small group of palatial elites also controlled oil and wine
through their consumption in strictly palatial settings. Moreover, there seems
to have been a control of commensal practices, such as mixing and toasting. In
this era, elite status was displayed more through the quality of the equipment
used, not the type, as demonstrated by the various levels of kylikes found in the
palace at Pylos. This tight control of oil and wine production, distribution, and
consumption had an effect on the access that non-elites enjoyed. They perhaps
had access through production as laborers as in the previous era. Consumption,
however, assumed a different character as non-elites only had access through
state-sponsored and segregated events in palatial settings. There, however,
non-elites used similar equipment to elites, but of a lesser quality. In this case,
social cohesion was achieved through knowledge of practices by both elites and
non-elites.
The dynamic stability of oil and wine and the strength of the relationships of
dependency and value surrounding these two commodities are perhaps best
seen immediately after the Bronze Age collapse. Despite the fact that the
Mycenaean palatial elite had maintained a tight grip on the production and
exchange of oil and wine, both commodities continued to function in many of
the same ways during the Postpalatial era. However, the relationships of
dependency and construction of the high value of oil and wine did change
significantly as the entanglement between people and these two commodities
shrank considerably in scale and became more decentralized in comparison to
the palatial past. In the Postpalatial era, oil and wine were produced and
exchanged on a much smaller scale and controlled by a smaller group of elites
who seem to have concentrated surplus storage in their own households. At the
same time, both commodities continued to be exchanged in commensal
events, but they seem to have been much more restricted using equipment
designed to highlight the common elite status of participants. In these cases,
elite status was displayed through the control of practices, such as mixing using
kraters, and the person’s presence at the event. These same elites might have
also taken part in some regional exchange. No longer was the production of
specialized containers regulated by a central authority. Instead, large pots
commonly used as household containers, such as hydriai and round-mouthed
amphoras, transitioned into multifunctional and convenient transport contain-
ers when needed. Moreover, a vast zone encompassing central Greece, Crete,
and the islands shared similar production techniques and styles that seem to
 DY N AMI C ST AB I L I T Y 303

have enabled fluid transfers of surplus oil and wine between groups of people.
This koine strengthens the idea that oil and wine exchange remained
a significant aspect of, specifically, elite social interaction despite the dramatic
social and demographic changes occurring throughout the eastern
Mediterranean at this time. The smaller-scale nature of oil and wine produc-
tion, distribution, and consumption make insights into non-elite access to these
commodities impossible to discern. It is unclear whether non-elites had any
contact with oil and wine during the Postpalatial era.
The end of the Postpalatial era and the beginning of the Early Iron Age are
often seen as the moment of the total break from Greece’s palatial past. And yet,
elites continued to value oil and wine as a significant marker of status. During
the first part of the Early Iron Age, when the “local” nature of the entangle-
ment persisted from the previous Postpalatial era, surplus storage, commensal
events, and even gifts to the divine seem to have been concentrated in “leaders’
dwellings” or large, often centralized buildings within settlements. However,
as time progressed, a new venue for oil and wine storage and exchange gained
prominence, namely, regional sanctuaries. There is some evidence to suggest
that regional sanctuaries, such as Kalapodi and Olympia, not only held large
commensal events but also controlled the surplus commodities necessary for
their enactment. That more people once again gained access to oil and wine as
status markers is suggested by evidence for commercial exchange. The
archaeobotanical remains from settlements of the Early Iron Age, combined
with the distribution of newly invented north Aegean amphoras, suggest
a growing production of these commodities, and in particular wine, over
the course of a few centuries. By the end of the Early Iron Age, the north
Aegean amphora was mass-produced in a handful of locations concentrated
around the Thermaic Gulf and shipped to distant locations including
Pithekoussai off the coast of Italy and Al Mina on the Levantine littoral. It
might be possible to speculate that non-elite access to oil and wine in the
Early Iron Age began as almost nonexistent but increased as production of the
commodities, their containers, and their exchange increased over time.
The number of elites and non-elites with access to not only the commodities,
but also the knowledge, technologies, and networks surrounding oil and wine
grew exponentially by the end of the eighth century. A multiplicity in scale and
types of exchange events came about during the early Archaic period that reflects
rapidly developing social structures, hierarchies, and political and religious
institutions. Commensal events ranged greatly from small- to large-scale
and from private to public. Elite status was reaffirmed by the type of
context a person was able to participate in, such as exclusive symposia and
funerary banquets, and the quality of equipment used during communal
and ritual events. The formalization of communal dining halls and large-
scale communal commensal events at sanctuaries opened up access to oil
304 CONCLUS I ON

and wine such that both commodities were valued by non-elites in very
different ways from the previous Early Iron Age. Moreover, the formalization
of commercial venues for oil and wine acquisition allowed both elites and
non-elites greater access to these commodities outside of specialized or
sponsored events. As Greek colonies spread throughout the Mediterranean
Sea, Greek oil and wine came into the hands of new people, both elite and
non-elite, and came up against other highly valued commodities, which, in
turn, shaped their value in different ways. At home, Athens and Corinth
developed their own respective bulk transport amphoras and produced the
surplus to fill them. Abroad, those Attic and Corinthian containers and their
contents were brought to newly founded Greek settlements, as well as
indigenous settlements, and settlements established by other non-natives,
such as Phoenicians. The value of Greek oil and wine was therefore con-
structed not only within the Greek cultural milieu, but also as commodities
on a broader Mediterranean market.
From the Bronze Age to the Archaic era, the nature of what it meant to be
elite changed and was thoroughly entangled with the material world as exem-
plified by oil and wine. This connection helped to maintain the high value of
oil and wine and therefore secure their place within the broader entanglement.
At the same time, however, the various ways in which elites used these
commodities to reify their positions contributed to the dynamic nature of the
entanglement surrounding oil and wine. How and to what degree these
commodities were present in the lives of people changed significantly as social
structures shifted from less hierarchical to more hierarchical and back again.
Moreover, the types of access non-elites had to oil and wine depended on these
changing characteristics. A long-term view highlights how different social
groups experienced these commodities differently over time. The specific
ways in which these groups of people engaged with oil and wine contributed
to the variability of these commodities from the Bronze Age to the Archaic era.

OLIVE OIL AND WINE AS CULTURAL COMMODITIES

The dynamic stability and resiliency discussed earlier lead to the question: Why
go to all this trouble for two commodities not necessary for human survival?
This book has argued that the necessity came about due to a change in the
relationship between people and oil and wine from one of mutual benefaction
to one of dependency. People became dependent upon oil and wine for the
proper functioning of social and economic exchanges and they valued these
commodities as essential goods and therefore non-substitutable. A libation
would not work without wine (cf., Cattle of the Sun episode in the Odyssey
Bk. 12). A burial would not be proper without perfumed oils. And a feast would
not be impressive without large quantities of both. As argued here, this switch
 OLIVE OIL AND W INE AS CULTU RAL COMMODITIES 305

from dependence to dependency seems to have occurred in the Minoan

Neopalatial era and worked to maintain the dynamic stability of the entangle-
ment through to the Archaic period. The inextricability despite unfavorable
conditions is what makes oil and wine cultural commodities.
At the onset of this book, I defined “cultural commodity” as things that have
become deeply entangled with humans by means of value formation within the
contexts of exchange and that, ultimately, cultural commodities become signif-
iers of identity, deeply rooted in social and ideological practices rather than
products functioning strictly within an economic context (see Chapter 1). It is
this second part of the definition, that cultural commodities become part of
a group’s identity, that is harder to prove. A person or group’s “identity” in
general is a very arduous and greatly debated topic (Konstan and Saïd 2006).
Broekaert et al. (2016, 8) put it well: “Identity is a complicated notion entangling
the past, the present and the future; the heritage, the surroundings and self-
projections. Identity is the result of a dynamic process.” Arguments for how to
define a person or group’s identity range widely and often intertwine with
definitions of ethnicity and culture (Barth 1969; Malkin 2001; Derks and
Roymans 2009; Demetriou 2013). This is most clear when considering
a definition of “cultural group” proposed by Jonathan Hall (2009, 605): “a cultural
group [is] one which grounds its identity in a set of shared symbols (ideas, beliefs,
values, attitudes, and practices), selected from the totality of social existence and
endowed with a particular signification for the purposes of communicating
distinctiveness . . .” (emphasis added; see also Dougherty and Kurke 2003). By
this definition, cultural commodities would fit into the largest category, that is,
the shared symbols that make up identity within a cultural group.
When it comes to the topic of “Greek identity,” it becomes clear that one
can only begin to see signs of such a concept emerging at the very end of the
time period covered in this book. Before this point, “Greekness” did not exist.
Indeed, the most famous account of “Greekness” comes from Herodotus in the
fifth century. Herodotus (8.144.2) has the Athenian delegation pronounce
before the battle of Plataea in 479 BCE: “Then again, there is the matter of
Greekness (to Hellénikon) – that is, our common blood, common tongue,
common cult places and sacrifices and similar customs; it would not be right
for the Athenians to betray all this.” And yet even this later account seems to be
flawed in so far as scholars have argued that within its literary context the
statement is not only propagandistic but also an afterthought (Hall 2009, 604;
2002). Indeed, by the middle of the fifth century, it seems that “similar
customs” in particular were favored as a means of identifying “Greekness”
over linguistic or religious similarity or even kinship (Hall 2002, 189–194). The
production, exchange, and consumption of wine and olive oil could be
considered part of those “similar customs” in the pre-Classical era, which
defined group identity (see also Davidson 1997, 40).
306 CONCLUS I ON

Ideas about the formation of Archaic-era Greek identity often come from
early written sources such as Homer’s Odyssey, where Odysseus and his
comrades are pitted against “others” and their strange mannerisms, customs,
and beliefs (e.g., Cartledge 1993; Malkin 1998; Harrison 2002; Mitchell
2007). Between the stories in the epics and the real movement of Greeks
overseas encountering new people, Greek identity is often assumed to be
defined in opposition to others both real and fictive. It is here where the
specific Greek practices around the production and consumption of olive oil
and wine seem to play a significant role. In the world of Odysseus, people
encountered on his journey home are often distinguished by their victuals in
nomenclature and/or habits. In this way, eating and dining habits were
privileged as a means of identification and whether people were “like us”
or not. It is often in the moment of dining that the character of new
acquaintances is revealed and wine drinking takes a particularly prominent
role within these interactions as an indicator of proper conduct or miscon-
duct (Hobden 2013, 69). On the positive side, the Phaeacians welcome
Odysseus with convivial banquets, familiar libations to shared gods (e.g.,
Hermes Argeiphontes, Book 7.134–8), and proper guest–host relations. The
Phaeacians drink wine mixed in a krater with water and libations are always
poured first before drinking, as well as at the end of the feast (e.g., 7.182–4,
228). These practices are in stark contrast to the Cyclops, who not only eats
Odysseus’s companions but also drinks unmixed wine to his ultimate
detriment.1
In the historical world of the eighth through seventh centuries, both wine
and oil seem to have played a prominent role in the interactions between
Greeks moving west and indigenous people. Indeed, Purcell (2006, 23) has
suggested that the seventh and sixth centuries BCE could be labeled the “First
Mass Sympotic Period.” As discussed in the conclusion to Chapter 6, there is
significant diversity in the ways in which people exchanged and consumed oil,
wine, and their containers. As one of the first signs of Greek presence abroad,
wine and oil amphoras infiltrated not only the newly founded Greek settle-
ments, but also the preexisting indigenous settlements, sanctuaries, and ceme-
teries. The contemporaneity of the movement of people alongside their
amphoras strongly emphasizes the importance of oil and wine to the settlers
themselves. At the same time, the discovery of the same types of amphoras in
elite burials, for example, along with Greek-style drinking equipment and
small, decorated oil containers suggests that both commodities were used as
a means of interacting with the customs of Greek settlers. That is not to say,
however, that indigenous people immediately changed their own customs to
match those of the Greeks, but rather used their own agency to decide what
does and does not appeal to their own sense of identity. In some cases, then, oil
and wine must have acted as a bridge between customs and group identities
 OLIVE OIL AND W INE AS CULTU RAL COMMODITIES 307

while at the same time solidifying the individual and unique identities of each
group.2
This mutability of identity symbols has been a feature throughout the book
as oil and wine were used as both markers of distinction and connection since
the Bronze Age. In other words, identities can be generated both “opposition-
ally” and “aggregatively” through perceived similarities (Hall 2009, 607). The
common production of oil and wine (although different customs of consump-
tion) between Greeks and, for example, Near Eastern cultures leads to more
fluid interaction and even exchange of ideas. Oil and wine were exchanged
between the Aegean and the Levant alongside finished goods that acted as
primary prestige symbols within the Mycenaean palace economy. A good
example of the transmission of ideas across cultural boundaries through the
common practice of wine drinking is the eventual adoption by the Greeks in
the later part of the Archaic era of the reclining banquet from Near Eastern
neighbors who had been using couches (Greek klinai) for centuries (Boardman
1990; Murray 2009, 514; Hobden 2013, 9 n. 19; Baughan 2013). This might also
be the case with the practice of anointing oneself with oil, a very ancient Near
Eastern and Egyptian tradition (see Fappas 2012 for the Bronze Age roots of this
similarity). Oil and wine therefore have a long history of commodities that
simultaneously act as a means of group identification or cohesion and group
delineation or segregation.
At the beginning of this book, Thucydides’ “Archaeology” or “account of
early events” (Histories 1.2.1–2) was highlighted as a picture of how the fifth-
century Greek believed the people inhabiting Greece before him lived. He
presents quite a stark, barren, and isolated existence when people lived noma-
dically incapable of planting, specifically, fruit trees. This book aimed to show,
through the lens of oil and wine, that Thucydides’s concept of his own past was
far from reality. In fact, despite a fluctuating climate and dramatic changes to
sociopolitical structures, pre-Hellenes achieved and maintained all of the
attributes that Thucydides thought they lacked. This book traced how people
did indeed cultivate olive trees and grapevines from almost the outset of settled
life on the archipelago and Crete. The Minoan palatial era marked the start of
extensive production and exchange of oil and wine, culminating in an entan-
glement that moved beyond dependence to dependency. This entanglement
surrounding oil and wine was then maintained and even strengthened in the
Mycenaean palatial era as social and commercial networks expanded further.
Not only did people continue to cultivate the olive and grapevine after the
collapse of the Mycenaean palaces around 1200 BCE, but they also adopted
innovative and adaptive solutions to the problems faced by climate change and
population movements. Production shifted toward more hospitable regions at
the same time that exchange networks were maintained, even across the
Aegean. By the end of the Early Iron Age and beginning of the Archaic era,
308 CONCLUS I ON

it was increasingly clear that the regional entanglements surrounding oil and
wine were expanding and interacting at more complex levels. The close of the
pre-Classical period marks the point when Greek oil and wine, as cultural
commodities, were deeply entrenched within group identity, produced in
large quantities of surplus, and exchanged over vast stretches of the
Mediterranean. The pre-history of oil and wine, therefore, challenges long-
held notions of decline, isolation, and darkness. These cultural commodities
were as much entangled in Greece’s past as they are in Greece’s future.

LEARNING FROM THE PAST: CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE FUTURE

OF GREEK OIL AND WINE

I would like to conclude by addressing the implications of this historical study

to modern issues of agriculture, commerce, and the Mediterranean’s changing
environment. As outlined in Chapter 1, an historical ecology approach takes
a long-term perspective that encompasses not only the past but also the future.
One of the main purposes of this approach is to understand long-term human–
environmental interactions in order to avoid, mitigate, and reverse adverse
ecological effects in the future (Van der Leeuw et al. 2011; Armstrong et al.
2017). In doing so, there is a possibility of learning future possibilities from
history. In Greece, olive oil and wine have remained cultural commodities,
defining identity and forming a staple of livelihood and diet. Greece still leads
the world in per capita olive oil consumption with each person consuming
nearly 18 kg yearly, according to figures from the European Commission
(followed in a distant second by Spain 12.6 kg, Italy 10.9 kg, Cyprus 7.5 kg,
Portugal 7.4 kg, and France 1.7 kg; Butler 2013). Moreover, olive culture has
a very strong social component since labor costs represent about 80 percent of
the oil’s production costs (Benoit and Comeau 2005, 269). The number of
people needed to tend and harvest olives on a large scale means that many
peoples’ livelihoods are based entirely or in part on olive oil. Indeed, research
conducted in 1999 on the island of Lesbos found that out of 176 olive grove
operators, over 90 percent said the prevailing reason for continued cultivation
was purely for pleasure. The second most popular reason (for 75 percent of the
operators) was the preservation of their ancestral heritage and about 90 percent
of the operators said they would like their descendants to continue cultivating
olives on their land in the future (Giourga et al. 2008). Production of wine also
requires large labor forces yet the scale of viticulture in Greece is slightly smaller
than olive oil. Until 2009, around 80 percent of Greek wine was sold within
Greece itself, although this is rapidly changing, a point to which we will return
later (Anson 2012).
As the Mediterranean once again enters into dramatic climate change today,
it is important to understand more fully the outcomes of these changes in the
 CLI MA TE CHAN GE A ND THE FU TU RE OF OIL A ND WI NE 309

past and how populations adapted to and, eventually, thrived in new condi-
tions. According to some current models used by climate experts,
a hypothetical average global warming of 1℃ is expected to occur between
now and 2025 and is projected to have multiple effects in the Mediterranean.
First, a warming would occur ranging from 0.7℃ to 1.6℃ depending on the
area. Warming would be highest in the Mediterranean Basin with a rise in
summer temperature twice that in northern Europe. The mean monthly
temperature during the Mediterranean warm season has the potential to
increase by 2℃ by 2030 and 4℃ by 2061–2090 (Moriondo et al. 2013, 828).
In addition, harsh winters would disappear by 2080 and hot summers would
become more frequent (Benoit and Comeau 2005, 30). Second, there will be
significant changes in rainfall during both winter and spring, with an increase in
rainfall in the north and a decrease in the south. In summer, a decrease in rainfall
is expected in both the north and south with the eastern Mediterranean region
experiencing decreases in excess of 20 percent from 2001 to 2030, 30 percent
from 2031 to 2060, and 35 percent from 2061 to 2090 (Moriondo et al. 2013,
828; IPCC 2007). In autumn, a reduction in rainfall is expected in the west but
an increase in the east and center. A decrease in total rainfall has already been
observed during the twentieth century in some Mediterranean areas and in
North Africa (Benoit and Comeau 2005, 30). Finally, there will be an increase
in the frequency, intensity, and duration of extreme meteorological events.
These include heat waves, summer drought, winter floods, and mudslides in
the north of the basin.
One of the biggest issues that Greece will face in the coming years is the
availability and accessibility of freshwater resources. The Mediterranean in
general is experiencing rising costs in water supply as dam sites are progressively
used up, water tables are significantly lowered, and the distances between
abstraction points and the water’s use are increased. Greece, in particular, is
hard-hit by these trends since the country’s landscape is very bimodal – the very
wet areas are very distant from the very arid areas. In addition, on Crete, the
Mesara valley has experienced 30 m falls in the water tables over the last 10 years
(Benoit and Comeau 2005, 86). This trend will continue as long as Greece
maintains its high level of irrigation. In Greece, 38 percent of arable land and
permanent crops are irrigated – one of the highest percentages in the basin
(compare, e.g., Israel 46 percent, Cyprus 27 percent, Italy 25 percent).
Combined with other factors, this trend results in rapidly increasing desertifi-
cation whereby Greece, Spain, and Italy are the hardest-hit countries of
Mediterranean Europe (Benoit and Comeau 2005, 269).
These changes will have a profound effect on all ranges of agriculture in the
Mediterranean Basin, but especially on the cultivation of olives and grapes.
This, in turn, will affect the world’s consumption of these two commodities
considering that in 2003, 95 percent of the world’s olive oil production (more
310 CONCLUS I ON

than 2.5 million tons) took place in the Mediterranean. The main producing
countries (from greater to smaller) are currently Spain, Italy, Greece, Turkey,
Syria, and Tunisia, although this order has been and will be changing rapidly.
Moreover, it is important to take into account the fact that world demand for
olive oil has practically doubled over the last 40 years and trade has increased by
a factor of five. It is unlikely that this demand on the Mediterranean region will
decrease any time soon (Benoit and Comeau 2005, 269).
Olive trees and grapevines are extremely sensitive to climate change and
react in different ways. Some experts believe that the olive tree will face “the
greatest climatic change that has been recorded since its spread into the
Mediterranean Basin” (Moriondo et al. 2013, 818). As a result, the areas capable
of cultivating olive trees are expected to adapt. Detailed studies measuring
current climate changes and their effects on olive growing regions within the
next 50 years predict that the increasing temperatures and aridity in the
Mediterranean region will expand potentially cultivatable areas for olive grow-
ing by 25 percent toward the north and higher altitudes.3 At the same time,
these studies show that southerly areas using rain-fed techniques will no longer
be sustainable (Moriondo et al. 2013, 818; Tanasijevic et al. 2014, 54). In
addition, general decreases in natural rainwater could be intensified due to
longer and more frequent dry spells. The areas that are predicted to be highly
affected by these rain-fed agricultural changes include the southern regions of
the Iberian countries, Italy, and Greece (Tanasijevic et al. 2014, 66). Future
models suggest that in Greece the regions north of Attica, including the
western coast and Albania, will not be viable for olive production as soon as
2030. In contrast, increased moisture in the mountainous region of south-
western Crete will be able to sustain olives, even though it currently does not
have olive cultivation. Interestingly, the model also predicted that from 2031 to
2060, the Peloponnese will sustain olives as today, but in different inland
regions and at higher elevations that will be cooler and wetter. By
2060–2090, even less of the Peloponnese will be viable, mainly restricted to
the southwest (Moriondo et al. 2013)
Trends in historical grapevine reaction to climate change, combined with
modern climate predictions, suggest a similar set of problems in terms of
shifting growing regions and resulting quality adjustments. Climate change
toward drier, warmer environments result in a general reduction of grape yields
combined with a decrease in quality induced by higher temperatures during the
growing season (Moriondo 2010, 565). Higher temperatures force grapevine
development to take place earlier and with a shorter growth period. The
shorter berry-ripening time combined with lower rainfall and longer dry spells
during the growth season result in a gradual reduction in the final yield. This
trend is shown to be exacerbated at higher elevations (400–600 m above sea
level), areas that are at the current limit of the grapevine cultivation area. The
 CLI MA TE CHAN GE A ND THE FU TU RE OF OIL A ND WI NE 311

areas currently suitable for viticulture are predicted to decrease by

25–73 percent in major wine-producing regions by 2050. Vine cultivation
will be forced to move toward higher elevations and higher latitudes. Attempts
to maintain vine quality and productivity in drying areas will result in increased
water use through misting or sprinkling, which has the potential to contribute
to freshwater conservation issues (Hannah et al. 2013).
In addition to general increases in aridity and temperature, extreme
meteorological events have already started to intensify. Most affected are
places where fresh water is already at a premium. Crete in particular has felt
the pressure of these rapid climate swings over the last 10 years and the olive
industry, which makes up 57 percent of the island’s total value of exports, has
been hard hit. In 2013, exceptionally warm winds blew in from Africa with
increased frequency causing temperatures to rise to over 40℃ for long periods of
time. This climate anomaly resulted in the total olive oil yield being less than half
of the island’s average (20,000 tons vs. 45,000 tons; Tejada 2013). That one
climate event resulted in about 200 million Euros in income losses while
production was lowered by 70 percent. Two years later, however, Crete
experienced the opposite end of the climate spectrum when olive oil exports
grew fivefold in 2015, up by 518 percent due to an especially abundant harvest
season in 2014 (Radinovsky 2015).
Although climate change toward drier and warmer conditions results in the
unviability of some areas that were once highly compatible to viticulture or
oleiculture, at the same time other regions will become suitable or will produce
better, higher-quality yields. In effect, climate change toward warmer, drier
conditions does not necessitate a discontinuation of olive or grape production,
but rather has the ability to shift growing regions considerably, resulting in
different areas (generally northward and/or higher) having the capability to
produce more and better-quality olive oil and wine.
Ultimately, the downfall of human populations comes not only from climate
change, but also from the unwillingness to effectively adapt. Indeed, leading
experts in the field have stated that “climate change calls for preventative,
curative and adaptive responses” (Benoit and Comeau 2005, 30). This is when
looking at changes to agriculture over long periods of time in the past can have
edificatory benefits. The trends in production and exchange of commodities
like oil and wine that are visible in the archaeological record of the pre-Classical
eras can point toward adaptations that ancient people made in response to
climate change. These adaptations, in turn, have the potential to help us
develop preventative measures that preemptively account for the types of
environmental changes that will take place over the next century. Although
our current socio-environmental situation is radically different from that of the
past, the underlying agents of change remain similar, such as dramatic popula-
tion shifts and the continuous need for fresh water. Over the course of the pre-
312 CONCLUS I ON

Classical eras addressed in this book, people adapted to their changing envir-
onment in innovative ways. Increased anomalies, such as flash floods, and an
unstable bimodal climate led to the construction of terraces, dams, canals, and
reservoirs in the Minoan and Mycenaean palatial eras. Extreme shifts to colder
and drier conditions in the Early Iron Age resulted in people changing primary
agricultural products (barley instead of wheat) and gradually moving cultivation
of more sensitive crops (such as olive trees and grapevines) to areas more
conducive to their survival (generally higher elevations and northward).
These adaptations and changes to agricultural strategies in the pre-Classical
periods are applicable today, with some modifications. Moreover, if imple-
mented soon, Greece’s olive oil and wine industry could not only survive, but
thrive. This potential strengthening to agricultural production is due primarily
to Greece’s overall abundance of fresh water compared to the rest of the basin.
Unlike almost all other Mediterranean countries, the overall available fresh
water in Greece is expected to remain constant. This boon is due primarily to
the abundance of water-rich mountainous regions. This is in contrast to other
olive oil and wine producing countries such as Spain, Italy, and Tunisia where
freshwater resources are expected to decline. Indeed, this would not be the first
time Greece’s unique natural environment has helped alleviate climate issues in
the rest of the basin. When the Little Ice Age destroyed olive trees throughout
the Mediterranean, Crete became a major supplier of olive oil and was export-
ing an average of 1,600 tons of oil a year to Marseilles alone by the 1730s
(Rackham and Moody 1996, 82).
However, Greece’s water resources come with a condition. That is, the
location of fresh water is distinctly contained in specific regions (generally
northwest as well as the central Peloponnese) leaving the rest of the country,
including the islands, extremely water-poor. This discrepancy will necessitate
even more innovative infrastructure to move water from one area to another.
Taking a look at the past, this infrastructure could take the form of canals for
shorter overland distances. Yet these infrastructure-based solutions tend to
work only in the short-term. Indeed, as climate change progressed in the
past, water management features were abandoned (although for multiple
reasons). Instead, long-term climate change required shifts in the growing
locations themselves. Instead of bringing the water to the crops, it was necessary
to bring the crops to the water. In the short-term, this solution would seem
very unlikely to gain favor with farmers who own the land on which they grow
their olive trees and grapevines and where they have established decades-old
orchards and vineyards. However, as fresh water becomes more expensive and
the once rain-fed regions are no longer viable, there may not be any other
choice. At that point, it may be too late for smaller-scale producers to move
their operations due to lack of resources that were perhaps spent on trying to
maintain failing production. Instead, it would be most beneficial for producers
 CLI MA TE CHAN GE A ND THE FU TU RE OF OIL A ND WI NE 313

and administrators to recognize the oncoming and inevitable changes and

perhaps offer incentives to start preparing for movements to regions that will
shortly become the best places to grow olives and grapes. This is obviously no
easy task. But based on the models for olive and grapevine reactions presented
earlier, we can reasonably predict where those regions will be in the near
future.
Beyond these agricultural strategies, the pre-Classical era has the potential to
guide choices that could improve the overall value of Greek olive oil and wine
on a global scale. First, the idea of “branding” has come up multiple times over
the course of this book. Greek oil and wine often received a recognizable status
on the broader Mediterranean market based on the consistent “look” of their
containers (Wengrow 2008; Bevan 2010). Whether producers intended for this
result or not, the creation of an Aegean “brand” of these two commodities
propelled their demand in foreign regions. This is especially the case for Late
Bronze Age stirrup jars and early Archaic-era SOS amphoras. Both of those
containers were copied in increasingly diverse regions of the Mediterranean
suggestive of their recognizable value within local markets.
This “branding” strategy has been severely neglected by Greek olive oil
producers in the modern era. Instead of creating their own distinctive contain-
ers and marketing their own oil, producers sell their products in bulk to other
regions where it is repackaged and branded as deriving from that region. Up to
10 years ago, 95 percent of Cretan olive oil was sold in bulk to Italy where it was
repackaged and branded as Italian. Since then, although this has changed to
45 percent with another 5 percent going to Spain, there is still much more
room for improvement (Radinovsky 2015). Selling in bulk means lower over-
head costs, but extremely low returns compared to packaging and selling
directly to consumers. Indeed, only 4 percent of Greek olive oil is exported
to the United States, and Americans are largely unaware of its high quality. At
the same time, there is a great potential for Greek olive oil brands to succeed.
The high quality and cold-press extraction technique of most olive oil in
Greece qualifies four-fifths to be designated as extra-virgin, compared with
about two-thirds in Italy and one-third in Spain (Meneley 2007; Glader 2015).
In addition, there is great potential for the Greek olive oil industry to capitalize
on the organic agriculture trend. By 2001, only 0.8 percent of cultivated land in
Greece was using organic agriculture compared to Italy’s leading 11.4 percent.
If adopted on a large scale, creating specialized brands for Greek olive oil has the
potential to increase profits and industry viability during the upcoming climatic
changes.
The Greek wine industry, once following a similar trend to olive oil, has
started to embrace the “branding” strategy. Until 2009, around 80 percent of
Greek wine was sold within Greece itself, not tapping into a broader, more
lucrative market. This is changing in recent years, however, as Greek wine
314 CONCLUS I ON

producers are starting to brand their products and market their wines around
the world. Not only are the varieties of grapes unique to Greece (Assyrtiko,
Moschofilero, Agiorgitiko, and Xinomavro) becoming internationally recog-
nized, but producers have also started to create distinctive brands highlighted
by unique label designs (Anson 2012; Vlachvei et al. 2012). Now, Greek wine is
shipped to more than thirty-five countries with three countries – Germany,
France, and the United States – representing about 66 percent of the total
volume exported (Daniels 2015). According to the data released by EDOAO,
the National Inter-Professional Organization of Vine and Wine, Greek wine
exports to the United States and Canada have increased by 39 and 55 percent,
respectively, in the last 5 years (Zikakou 2016). This is a tremendous improve-
ment that demonstrates the effectiveness of creating a distinctive Greek brand
and marketing it on a global scale.
As the Mediterranean approaches uncertain times, it is important to take
a critical look at long-term past trends. Our current situation will not be
identical to the problems experienced by ancient people. The past does not
necessarily repeat itself. But we must be vigilant and use the successes and
failures that have come before to shape the unique way we will approach our
own challenges, whether they are environmental, demographic, or social. For
Greece, olive oil and wine played a critical role in the shaping of Greek culture.
This did not happen spontaneously, but rather built up over millennia. Nor was
it a linear process but was filled with setbacks and resurgences. Throughout it
all, though, the resiliency of people and the connections and dependencies
between people, oil, and wine solidified the place of these commodities within
the entanglement of people and things that makes up Greek existence. The
production, exchange, and consumption of oil and wine developed both
unifying and dividing characteristics that ultimately created the common feel-
ing of belonging to a certain group, or not. In this way, both oil and wine
became entangled in the set of symbols that eventually came to define the
“Greek” cultural group. That symbolism of oil and wine continues today. Not
only are they indispensable to Greek social practice today, but they are also
becoming representatives of Greek culture to the world. The upcoming
challenge will be to support these two commodities to their full potential as
champions of Greek culture. Although the future of Greece’s oil and wine
industry is unclear, there is hope. By talking about these modern problems in
relation to the past, we are more likely to find effective solutions.
NOTES

1 INTRODUCTION
1. Indeed, modern scholars have long consid- Margaritis and Jones 2006, Margaritis and
ered oil and wine to be defining aspects of Jones 2008, Kelly-Blazeby 2008, Margaritis
ancient Mediterranean culture. In that semi- 2014, Vogeikoff-Brogan et al. 2014, Diler
nal work, The Emergence of Civilization (1972), et al. 2015. See also Brun 2003, 2004 for general
Renfrew demonstrated how the production overviews of oil and wine production from the
of surplus olive oil and wine was critical to Bronze Age to the Roman period.
the formation of complex societies in the 6. Oil (e.g., Hadjisavvas 2003, Foxhall 2007,
third millennium BCE. Similarly, broad- Blitzer 2014); Wine (e.g., Palmer 1994,
scoped works such as Braudel’s The Stanley 1999, McGovern 2003, 2009;
Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in McGovern et al. 1996; Bennett 2002;
the Age of Phillip II (1972), Horden and Mylopotamitaki 2002; Papakonstantinou
Purcell’s The Corrupting Sea (2000), and 2009); amphoras (e.g., Lawall 1995, 2004,
Broodbank’s The Making of the Middle Sea 2005, 2011; Whitbread 1995; Eiring and Lund
(2013), have all argued for a consistency in 2004).
the status of olive oil and wine as valued 7. See recent publications from sites such as
staples within Mediterranean societies. See Lefkandi (Antonaccio 2002, Evely 2006,
also Amouretti and Brun 1991; Hamilakis Lemos and Mitchell 2011), Oropos
1999; Brun 2003, 2004; McGovern 1995, (Mazarakis Ainian 2002, 2007), Zagora
2003, 2009; Foxhall 2007. (Gounaris 2015), Mitrou (van de Moortel
2. Book XIV: covering over 91 varieties of vine, and Zahou 2005, 2011, Rückl 2008,
38 varieties of foreign wine, 7 kinds of salted Kramer-Hajos and O’Neill 2008), central
wines, 18 varieties of sweet wine, and the list Greece (Kramer-Hajos 2008), Achaea
goes on. (Giannopoulos 2008), Eretria (Crielaard
3. Morris 1891; LSJ: “plant with fruit-trees”; see 2007, Verdan 2013, 2015), Perati (Murray
also Hornblower 1991, 9–10. 2018), Elateia (Deger-Jalkotzy 1990, 1999,
4. See more recently, for example, Morris 2003, 2004, Dakoronia 2004, Dakoronia
1992; Whitley 1991; Papadopoulos 1994, et al. 2009); and in general see, for example,
2014; Foxhall 1995; Osborne 1996; Langdon Mazarakis Ainian 1997, Lemos 2002, Deger-
1997; Mazarakis-Ainian 1997, 2001, 2011; Jalkotzy and Zavadil 2003, Thomatos 2006,
Tandy 1997; Morris 1999; Wallace 2000, 2006, Deger-Jalkotzy and Zavadil 2007, Deger-
2010; Eder 2004; Deger-Jalkotzy and Lemos Jalkotzy and Bächle 2009.
2006; Dickinson 2006; Lemos 2007; Deger- 8. See most recently, for example, Tzedakis and
Jalkotzy and Bächle 2009; Dickinson 2009; Jung Martlew 1999, Halstead and Barrett 2004,
2009; Crielaard 2011; Knodell 2013; Feldman Megaloudi 2004, Valamoti 2005, Livarda
2014; Kotsonas 2016; Murray 2017. and Kotzamani 2006, Margaritis and Jones
5. For the introduction of oil and wine in Greece, 2006, 2008, 2014, Mee and Renard 2007,
see, for example, Renfrew 1972, Valamoti Hitchcock et al. 2008, Tzedakis et al. 2008,
1998, Margaritis 2013, Blitzer 2014, Valamoti Sarpaki 2012, Voutsaki and Valamoti
et al. 2015, Valamoti et al. 2018. For the 2013, Spataro and Villing 2015, Papathanasiou
Classical period and later, see, for example, et al. 2015, Hruby and Trusty 2017.

315
316 NOT ES TO PAG ES 5 –1 2

9. Olive trees will not yield an optimal crop until Homeric heroes and later warriors in battle,
they are 25–35 years old, whereas grapevines which suggests that wine was added to water
take between 10 and 15 years (Valamoti et al. for “clearly antiseptic, antibacterial purposes”
2018, 177; Gillman et al. 1981). In addition, the for making water safer either for drinking or
labor required for optimal performance of both dressing wounds. A large number of bacteria
plants is quite high, though olive tree labor are killed by wine including the common
tends to be spread throughout the year while causes of food poisoning, for example, E. coli,
grapevines require not only maintenance Salmonella, and Staphylococcus. Cholera and
throughout the year but also a concerted effort typhoid germs are killed within 15 minutes of
to harvest quickly in the fall (Pliny Nat. Hist. exposure to red or white wine, irrespective of
14.3, 15.2; see also Chatterton 2003, 2004; whether the wine is mixed with water or not.
Traher 2007; and Roussos 2007 for details on Marinating foods in wine has additional bene-
the labor and techniques required to maintain fits from taste: this has to do with the alcohol,
olive groves in different Mediterranean but also due to the various bioflavonoids, phy-
environments). toalexines, proanthocyanidines, like quercetin,
10. There are a few accounts of olive stones present resveratrol, and many others, active as power-
in Neolithic sites in Thessaly, Macedonia, and ful antioxidants and free radical scavengers,
at Dimini, but they have since been identified fungicides and cholesterol regulators (Rimm
as later intrusions or misidentifications (see et al. 1991; Carper 1994; Lambrou-Philipson
Valamoti et al. 2018, 184). More concrete and Phillipson 2002, 69–70).
finds of olive stones are reported from Euboea 15. The idea of “entanglement” has multiple defi-
and Crete dating to the fourth millennium nitions and contexts. One definition has entan-
BCE (Valamoti 2009). The olive does not glement rooted in postcolonial theories of
seem to have been cultivated in northern cultural contact, as an alternative to ideas such
Greece until the historical periods with as “hybridity,” “creolization,” or “mixing”
a northern boundary of Thessaly and the more generally (Thomas 1991; Stockhammer
northeastern Aegean islands holding until the 2013). Here, entanglement will generally refer-
end of the ninth century BCE when some olive ence the theory promoted by Ian Hodder.
remains have been recovered at Krania Pierias However, mixing is an important aspect or
(Margaritis 2007), Thessaloniki Toumba (sixth result of entanglements that will be brought
century), and Argilos (fifth century; Valamoti out throughout the book.
et al. 2018, 186). Olive pollen records (as 16. Hodder’s definition of “thing” does not follow
opposed to stone or charcoal) in the north the strong distinction made by Ingold (2011, 5)
show some indication for olive growth during and others (e.g., van der Leeuw 2008) between
the Late Bronze Age. The peak of olive pollen, “object” and “thing” (but see Knappett 2011a).
however, remains between the Archaic and In the latter, it is possible to make a thing an
Roman periods. object by giving it meaning within an inter-
11. It is possible that in areas where wood was pretive framework (see also van der Leeuw
plentiful, press installations were made from 2008). Although there is some overlap, in this
wood such as oak (Sarpaki 2012, 215 n. 8; book, I will maintain Hodder’s definition of
Foxhall 2007, 202). “thing” and “object,” where “object” can be
12. Brun (2009), however, points out that this idea simply something more tangible and “thing” is
is not grounded in textual sources or archae- all-encompassing (Hodder 2012, 7–8).
ological evidence and would contradict most 17. It is useful here to tap into the language of
of the historical and ethnographic tradition. network theory. Network theory, however, is
13. Many more Cretan pressing installations have a topic of immense scope spanning multiple
been identified or published since 1993 and fields of inquiry. For archaeological applica-
recent excavations at Akrotiri on Thera have tions in the Mediterranean, see, among others,
also produced both Type I and Type III instal- Brughmans 2010; Knappett 2011a, 2011b,
lations, presented in Chapters 2 and 3. 2013; Knappett and Malafouris 2008;
14. Jouanna 1996; Lambrou-Philipson and Knappett and Nikolakopoulou 2005; Evans
Phillipson 2002, 69–70; Morris 2008, 114. and Knappett 2009. For a more historical
Wine was used to wash the wounds of the approach to the use of networks, see
 N OT ES TO PA GES 1 4– 2 3 317

Brysbaert 2011; Malkin 2003, 2011; Malkin construction of value is placed at the point of
et al. 2009; Collar 2007. For social and socio- exchange.
political networks, see Muson and Macri 2009; 22. Callon 1991. This idea of embeddedness is in
Carrington, Scott and Wasserman 2005; Knox, opposition to Polanyi’s idea of embeddedness,
Savage and Harvey 2006; Wasserman and Faust since Polanyi considered actors to be
1994. Here, I use the variable of centrality, embedded within a stable institutional frame,
which in network theory, describes the num- constituting the context in which economic
ber of edges/links connected to a particular activities take place (Polanyi 1957).
node (Borgatti 2005; Newman, Barabási and 23. While these three categories may seem basic, it
Watts 2006; Mizoguchi 2009). This does not will become apparent throughout the book
mean that entanglements are merely networks that they are nevertheless fitting for the archae-
or that the ideas that make up network theory ological and textual evidence available from the
can be haphazardly grafted onto entanglement prehistoric period of Greece.
theory (Hodder and Mol 2015). Rather, 24. For example, the “potlatch” of the Northwest
I believe that the concept of centrality, in par- Coast of North America (Boas 1897), South
ticular, is useful for the visualization of America (Hayden and Villeneuve 2011), Near
entanglements. East (Schmandt-Besserat 2001), Greek
18. For a thorough overview of the concept of Symposium (Lissarrague 1990; Murray 1990),
“value” in anthropological literature, see Rome, and so on.
Papadopoulos and Urton 2012. 25. See, for example, Malinowski 1922; Mauss
19. This is similar to the concepts of “regimes of 1923–1924; Bourdieu 1977; Godelier 1999.
value” and the “social life of things” espoused For a recent compilation of the most relevant
by Appadurai and Kopytoff (1986). scholarship on the Gift from the last century
20. The post-humanist approach (e.g., Appadurai including work by Mauss, Levi-Strauss,
1986, Kopytoff 1986, Latour 2005) is in oppo- Sahlins, and Bourdieu, see Schrift 1997.
sition to humanist perspectives of traditional 26. See most recently, Carlà and Gori 2014; Satlow
political economy theories from Adam Smith 2013; Nakassis, Galaty, and Parkinson 2016;
(1776) to David Ricardo (1817) to Marx (1906 Algazi, Goebner, and Jussen 2003; Lyons 2012.
[1867]) and even Polanyi (1944) who sup- 27. Indeed, feasting and gift exchange have been
ported a labor theory of value where value largely inseparable from Marcel Mauss’ (1923–-
was constructed at the point of production. 1924) The Gift to Michael Dietler’s work (e.g.,
The humanist perspective continued, though 2001).
altered with the introduction of the idea that 28. Gregory 1980; Mauss 1990, 230; Berking 1999;
humans are nonrational, by Malinowski Godelier 1999.
(1922), Mauss (1923–1924), and even 29. Other designations exist, such as “transport
Bourdieu (1977) with his theories of habitus jars” (e.g., the transport stirrup jar or
and doxa. For an overview of the history of Canaanite jar) and “maritime transport con-
economic anthropology and its application to tainers” (Knapp and Demesticha 2016). Here,
the ancient world, see Scheidel, Morris, and “amphora(s)” will be used as an all-encompass-
Saller 2007; Manning and Morris 2005; Walsh ing term when discussing transport containers
2014; see also Carrier 2005. more generally.
21. Although this cultural economy paradigm was 30. See also discussion in Knapp and Manning
created out of the globalized, market-driven 2016.
world that we live in, the term “market” here 31. It has become quite clear that subregions of the
does not necessarily mean the first-world Stock Mediterranean reacted to climate change in
Market or even post-industrialist mass-com- different ways depending on the general loca-
modity markets. Instead, we should understand tion of the area (East/West, North/South) and
“market” to mean the liminal space between its particular characteristics (e.g., elevation).
production and consumption that, in turn, A high number of palaeoclimatic and
affects the nature of production and consump- palaeoenvironmental studies from the central
tion (Callon and Muniesa 2005, 1229). Mediterranean to the Middle East point to
Therefore, to say that the cultural economy unquestionable but often poorly correlated cli-
paradigm is market-centric, means that the matic events. Spatial temperature variability in
318 NOT ES TO PAG ES 2 4– 31

particular can be quite substantial, even over 35. The presence of drier conditions is supported
short distances (Finné et al. 2011). For example, by a pollen core from Lake Kournas, Crete,
between 3250 and 2150 BCE cooler conditions which had Tilia pollen before 1400 BCE that
are evident in the northern Aegean subregion disappears entirely from 1400 to 1000 BCE.
and the southwest coast of Italy, along Moody (2005) suggests that the disappearance
with Romania and northeast Italy. At the of Tilia implies that annual drought levels
same time, however, warmer conditions are reached a point beyond which the tree could
outlined from the southeastern Aegean not survive. The fact that this species of tree
(Triantaphyllou et al. 2009). While these does not currently grow naturally in Crete
opposing signals might be explained by the might support the aforementioned view that
relative dominance between competing air the period after 1450 BCE ushered in a bimodal
masses (North Atlantic Oscillation and North climate, similar to present day (Tsonis et al.
Sea-Caspian Pattern Index), they nevertheless 2010, 529).
highlight the importance of microclimates and 36. Marine records indicate decreasing tempera-
regional variability when attempting to recon- tures in the Adriatic around 1050–850 BCE
struct the effects of climate change on human– and off the southern part of the west coast of
environment relationships (Lionello 2012, 89; Italy 1150–450 BCE.
Finné et al. 2014). 37. Finné et al. 2011, 3162 with citations.
32. Precise chronologies for both the palaeocli- Palynological records from Lebanon suggest
matic proxy data and the archaeological data increasing aridity after 1200 BCE with severe
are fundamentally important for making any aridity and desert-like conditions around 700
hypotheses about the relationship between BCE (Kaniewski et al. 2008). Palynological
the two datasets. Varying availability of such data from alluvial deposits near Gibala-Tell
accurate chronologies will influence the reso- Tweini suggest that drier climatic conditions
lution of arguments and the number of possible occurred in the Mediterranean belt of Syria
links one can discern among multivariate data- (coastal Syria) from the late thirteenth/early
sets (Weiberg et al. 2016). Depending on the twelfth centuries BCE to the ninth/eighth
time period and geographical location, archae- centuries BCE. Kaniewski et al. (2010) connect
ological chronologies can be greatly debated. this abrupt climate change at the end of the
This book will attempt to find a middle ground Late Bronze Age to region-wide crop failures
that includes the most recent and widely (Kaniewski et al. 2010). In contrast, Glais et al.
accepted chronologies for the Prehistoric (in press) identified by pollen data in the area of
Aegean (discussed earlier). For the climatic Dikili Tash that at the transition from the Late
proxy data, each record (speleothem, lake Bronze Age to the Iron Age (ca. 1350–1050
core, etc.) will have its own internal chronolo- BCE) there was an increase in the water level of
gical inconsistencies. Problems arise from the marsh leading to the development of wet-
limited availability of high-resolution palaeoarc- lands. The authors attribute this change to the
hives and problems of dating techniques (e.g., “Mediterraneanization” of the climate in the
C14). In general, it is possible to mitigate those Aegean area after ca. 1550 BCE that resulted in
inconsistencies by considering multiple proxy intensification in winter-season precipitation
records together with an integrated approach, and summer aridity (Kuhnt et al., 2008;
as discussed earlier. Psomiadis et al. 2018).
33. I thank an anonymous reviewer for this 38. There does indeed seem to be an increase in
suggestion. precipitation in some regions that had been
34. This north/south discrepancy is particularly experiencing aridity, yet other regions became
interesting given that the dramatic Theran more arid where there were previously wetter
eruption is estimated to have occurred conditions. In the Peloponnese, wetter condi-
between 1700 and 1600 BCE (see, e.g., tions are inferred around 850, 700, and 500
Manning 1999; Warburton 2009). The BCE (Finné et al. 2014). However, a drying
absence of significant recorded climate shifts trend from 950 to 450 BCE is suggested for the
in the south suggests that the deterioration in northern Aegean from a stalagmite in Kapsia
the northern Aegean was not provoked by cave, supported by a sediment record from
that event. Asea Valley, where wetter conditions lasting
 N OT ES TO PA GES 3 2– 4 6 319

until 750 BCE transitioned into a period of archaeobotanical remains from eating and
aridity (Finné et al. 2014). drinking equipment related to relatively large-
39. Indeed, many of these traditional groves have scale commensal events (Valamoti et al. 2015,
olive trees that are hundreds or perhaps even 2018). For the Late Bronze Age, trends in the
thousands of years old. styles of local drinking equipment, as well as
40. It is also important to note that different varieties the increasing presence of imported drinking
of grapevine will respond differently to warming. wares from southern Greece, suggest a vibrant
For example, an increase in temperature from 20 local use of wine in social context. To date,
to 30°C increased the weight of bunch primordia however, there are no indications that wine
four times in Riesling but Shiraz was unaffected was produced on a large-enough scale to war-
(Dunn 2005). In general, red varieties appear to rant the production of amphoras or other
tolerate warm conditions better than white vari- designated transport containers. Moreover,
eties (Schultz and Jones 2010, 141). As mentioned the evidence for the actual production of
earlier, however, there is no evidence that there wine, such as pressing facilities, is unidentified.
were different varieties of grapevine in the The lack of published archaeological informa-
ancient world as we have today (all were Vitis tion from excavated sites in northern Greece
vinifera). However, these data help identify gen- with Bronze Age levels makes it difficult to
eral patterns of reactions to warming during dif- reconstruct with any certainty the role of
ferent seasons. wine in the sociocultural contexts of this
41. The period designations used here are generally region. This situation changes dramatically for
accepted in the field. The absolute dates, how- the Early Iron Age and Archaic period when
ever, are often objects of much debate invol- northern Greek settlements are increasingly
ving long arguments over scientifically derived entangled in the production, distribution, and
dates (radiocarbon, dendrochronology, ice consumption of surplus wine, a topic to which
cores, etc.) versus archaeologically based dates Chapters 5 and 6 return.
(stylistic changes to ceramics, etc.). Here, 2. EM I (3200–2700 BCE) site of Aphrodite’s
I provide numbers meant to orient the reader Kephali near Ierapetra, East Crete, was
to the general time frame covered in this book a short-lived hilltop fort with at least nine
while providing specific reasons for altering pithoi holding both olive oil and wine; one
certain dates. For overviews of the most cur- pithos could hold 150–165 kg. This is the ear-
rent information on absolutes dates of the pre- liest evidence for large amounts of both com-
historic period in the Eastern Mediterranean, modities (Koh and Betancourt 2010). The
see, for example, Knapp and Manning amount of time needed for the development
2016; Manning 2010, 23, table 2.2; Dickinson of olive groves that were assumed to exist in
2006, 23; and Papadopoulos 2003, 146. For a Neopalatial culture is often underestimated.
discussion of the chronology of the Iron Age For this reason alone, it seems likely that inten-
on Crete, see Kotsonas 2008, 31–41. My sive manipulation of the olive plant would have
choices regarding the time periods and regions had to begin in the Early Bronze Age at the
of Greece covered in my work have to do latest (Blitzer 2014, 242).
primarily with where evidence for the three 3. The term “palace” is perhaps best seen as
main modes of exchange – commensal, gift, a commonly used holdover from early archae-
and commercial – was most plentiful. It was ological exploration on the island. The term
also necessary to consider the quantity of exca- “central-court building” is a more neutral
vations, surveys, and published archaeological description of these structures, allowing for
records. multiple interpretations and functions, but per-
haps betraying the building’s significance.
Here, both terms will be used for the sake of
2 DEVELOPING A RELATIONSHIP OF variation but with full knowledge of the lim-
itations of each.
DEPENDENCY
4. The Neopalatial era corresponds to MM III
1. Wine (but not olive oil) was produced in through LM IB in ceramic terminology. For
northern Greece about the same time as on the divisions of Protopalatial and Neopalatial
Crete as indicated by residue analyses and Crete, see Macdonald and Knappett (2013).
320 NOT ES TO PAG ES 4 7– 76

5. As discussed in the Introduction, it is also pos- Minet el-Beida have produced multiple exam-
sible that olives (and grapes) were processed in ples of this type of pressing installation (Callot
ways that are archaeologically invisible or in 1993; Brun 2004, 56–59). A thirteenth-century
countrysides where excavations rarely take example from the city center is composed of
place. a rectangular stone press and counterweight
6. In fact, Kopaka (1997) calculated another more found within a room. An adjacent room is
than forty ceramic presses since the publication interpreted as a paved mill opening onto
in 1993 found in central and east Crete a courtyard with three pithoi, a hearth, and
(Kopaka, K. 1997. The vine and wine in the olive stones (Callot 1987; Newton et al.
Prehistoric Aegean. In Conference Procee- 2014, fig. 2).
dings of the Hellenic Chemists, entitled 14. A large-scale spouted press bed found in the
Yesterday, today and tomorrow of the Cretan wine area of the Unexplored Mansion at Knossos is
products. Herakleio, 21–44). unpublished. In addition, stone olive presses
7. A few cases of iconography prove more pro- were found in the Late Minoan palace at
mising, including an ivory seal from Phaistos (Pernier 1951, 382–386) now visible
Chrysolakkos on Crete dated to MM I–MM in the palace storerooms, but their exact date is
II. The scene inscribed seems to depict a single unclear (Blitzer 1993, 167).
person crushing grapes with their feet in 15. Tzedakis and Martlew 1999, 166–168. This
a small, cylindrical vat that resembles Type mixture is not only known from the later
I installations (Platon and Kopaka 1993, 86). Homeric epics (see Appendix A) but also in
Parallels for this type of pressing technique Hittite and Akkadian texts that mention an
can be seen on wall paintings in Egypt, New Anatolian drink that seems to be a mixture of
Kingdom (Beitak 1986). beer and wine (Gorney 1995, 156).
8. See Platon and Kopaka 1993, 100–101, for 16. Interestingly, the number of tablets that record
a more detailed description; also Brun 2004, wine at Haghia Triada (21 out of 147) is greater
74–75. than the number of wine tablets from Knossos
9. For example, Epano Zakros Villa, Kato Zakros or Pylos, with their archives of a thousand or
House B, North-East House, Hogarth’s House more records (Palmer 2002, 100).
A, Hogarth’s House E, Hogarth’s House I, East 17. That environmental change was attributed to
Building, House A, Building G; see Platon and divine intervention might be indicated by the
Kopaka 1993, 55–59, nos. 25–32 and “divers.” inclusion of water into religious places in
10. Santorini remains a well-known producer of the LM IB period (e.g., Mochlos). In addition,
wine. Not only do they grow particular indi- the Neopalatial era sees the inclusion of the
genous varieties of white grapes (e.g., “Minoan Genius” or “Water Genius” into
Assyrtiko), but they have a unique way of religious iconography. She has been linked to
training the vines to grow on the ground in the Egyptian goddess Taweret and holds
a circle to minimize evapotranspiration and a (water?) pitcher (Flood and Soles 2014,
protect the vines from strong wind (Sarpaki 83–84).
2012, 218, 219, fig. 6). 18. In contrast to Mycenaean practices (and later
11. www.armenianheritage.org/en/monument/ LM II–LM IIIC practices, which were focused
Agarak/241; Pers. comm. Kristine on exclusion).
Martirosyan-Olshansky, January 2015. 19. At this point the communal events seem to start
12. https://simplyspain.wordpress.com/2011/09/ coalescing toward a regional scale, rather than
26/vino-pinxtos-amor-a-wine-tour-through- a settlement-specific scale.
la-rioja/ 20. Indeed, feasting and gift exchange have been
13. Contemporary parallels for this type of olive oil largely inseparable from Marcel Mauss’ (1923–
press have been found on Cyprus and on the 1924) The Gift to Michael Dietler’s work (e.g.,
Levantine coast. Building X at Maroni on 2001).
Cyprus has a large rectangular stone press bed 21. Gregory 1980; Mauss 1990, 230; Berking 1999.
on a mudbrick platform and is dated to LC IIC 22. Legarra Herrero 2014. For the Mesara/South
(ca. 1300 BCE) around the same time as the Coast see page 61, North-Central/Central
example from Kommos (Blitzer 1993, 172). page 89, Mirabello/Ierapetra page 116, and
The Levantine city of Ugarit and its port at East page 134.
 N OT ES TO PA GES 7 9– 9 6 321

23. Indeed, transport amphoras were in use on no analyses have been undertaken as yet (see
Crete as early as the EB II period (see Wilson Knappett and Nikolakopoulou 2008, 7–9, 29
et al. 2004, 2008). no. 9435).
24. Poursat and Knappett 2005, 154. Out of 71 31. Alternative names include “false-necked jar”
oval-mouthed amphoras listed, 65 fall into or “pseudostomos amphoreas” (Ben-Shlomo
this range. Two outliers have a capacity of 45 et al. 2011, 331; Haskell et al. 2011, 3).
liters (59 and 60 cm in height, respectively) and 32. The Canaanite jar had existed for hundreds of
were most likely employed for storage. Two years at this point and would continue to be
others have heights between 46 and 50 cm and used for hundreds more without significant
another two fall below the average with heights variation in style or function. For
around 25 cm (Poursat and Knappett 2005, a comparison of transport stirrup jars and
202–203). Canaanite jars, see Negbi and Negbi 1993.
25. While the presence of a “palace” at Malia dur- Recent scholarship has determined multiple
ing the Protopalatial period is debatable (see, production locations for the Canaanite jar,
e.g., Driessen 2002; Schoep 2006, 58; Poursat not only along the Levantine littoral, but also
2012, 182), it is clear that elites inhabiting on Cyprus. See Leonard 1995; Sugerman 2000;
Quartier Mu were intricately linked to the Bourriau et al. 2001; Serpico et al. 2003; Smith
commercial affairs of the settlement (Schoep et al. 2004; Pedrazzi 2005, 2007; Day et al.
2002, 2006). 2011; Rutter forthcoming.
26. Poursat and Knappett 2005. It is difficult to say 33. As discussed earlier, these are broad patterns
with any certainty why Malia and other centers observable for many sites. There are, of course,
have groups of amphoras from various loca- regional and site-specific differences within
tions around the island. Political or religious these general trends.
affiliations and collections could be one inter- 34. “In short, certain types of pottery were
pretation. Alternatively, the range of produc- involved in large-scale distribution and con-
tion locations might signal different types or sumption at a regional level significantly before
qualities of oil and/or wine imported into the the emergence of palatial authority.” (Knappett
palaces from their respective origins (I thank an 1999, 632).
anonymous reviewer for pointing out this 35. Vokotopoulos et al. 2014, 261. These charac-
possibility). teristics are often referenced as the Knossian
27. For example, ceramic regionalism is empha- “great tradition.” See also Platon 1974, 228.
sized in LM IB, whereas MM III and LM IA 36. Indeed, the “sympotic pair” (Wecowski 2014,
are characterized by more homogenous styles, 257) or the “commercial amphora” of the
especially connected with or influenced by Archaic era had already existed, in one way or
Knossos. For MM III, see papers in another, for millennia.
Macdonald and Knappett 2013. For LM IB,
see papers in Brogan and Hallager 2011, and,
more generally, see Driessen and Macdonald 3 CONTROLLING THE
1997, with an update provided in Driessen
RELATIONSHIP
2013.
28. Hatzaki (2007a, 172) lists several LM IA con- 1. These characteristics include a core megaron
texts where oval-mouthed amphoras are promi- building, large cyclopean circuit walls, similar
nent. In the Palace’s fourth Magazine, second artistic scenes painted in fresco technique, and
Cist, the deposit consisted of “mainly oval- large storage magazines. Although sizes of cita-
mouthed amphoras (imported and local),” dels varied considerably, they were neverthe-
some with running spiral decoration and others less largely homogenous.
with reed decoration (unpublished). For run- 2. The presence of this Knossian or Knossian-
ning spiral decoration, see Popham 1977, pl. style pottery has been interpreted as an attempt
28c, 28d; Haskell 1985, 225 n. 35. by a new Knossian elite to influence or exercise
29. Keswani 2009, 112–113. control over other parts of the island (Popham
30. It is possible that some of these oval-mouthed et al. 1984; Driessen and Farnoux 1997; Rutter
amphoras may in fact be local imitations, but 1999, 139; Brogan et al. 2002; Driessen and
322 NOT ES TO PAG ES 9 8– 11 7

Langohr 2007; Nodarou 2007, 75). It is clear, altitudes within the Mediterranean (e.g.,
however, that Knossos’ reach was not absolute, Epirus; Grove and Rackham 2001, 144). This
especially the eastern regions (Langohr 2009, evidence suggests that at one point, southern
21–35, 181–191, 212–218; Bennet 1990, 209). Greece and Crete had, by contrast, a cooler,
Additionally, Knossos is the only settlement on wetter type of climate that then transitioned to
Crete that continued the Neopalatial tradition the bimodal semi-aridity in place today.
of complexes of monumental court-centered 7. The term “collector” is derived from the Linear
settlement architecture, among other symbols B word a-ko-ra /agorā/ “collector” or a-ke-re /
of power referencing the Minoan past (Rutter agērei/ “he collects.” The definition of “collec-
1999, 139; Langohr 2009). The elite status of tor” has been debated for many years. Various
Knossos is further emphasized by the extreme interpretations of the roles of collectors include:
wealth in Knossian graves (Preston 2004). the owners of the type of good described,
3. See Chapter 1, “Oil and wine production: middlemen, beneficiaries, overseers, members
technologies and the archaeological record” of local elites, tax-farmers, tamkars (Bendall
section, for a more thorough discussion of 2007, 79). One of the more convincing interpre-
these data. See also Foxhall 2007, 172, tations is that of Killen (1979, 177): collectors
173–176, table 6.2, 182–204; Brun 2004, were “members of the nobility, the royal family,
84–130. or the like who were allocated part of the pro-
4. Contemporary parallels for this type of olive oil ductive capacity of the kingdom for their own
press have been found on Cyprus and on the benefit (hence their appearance as “owners” of
Levantine coast. Building X at Maroni on flocks, weaving work-groups, etc.), and whose
Cyprus has a large rectangular stone press bed names appear at more than one site because, as
on a mudbrick platform and is dated to LC IIC members of this class, perhaps as members of the
(ca. 1300 BCE) around the same time as the same dynasty, they tended to be given names
example from Kommos (Blitzer 1993, 172). from a certain limited stock.”
The Levantine city of Ugarit and its port at 8. The range of commodities may point to spe-
Minet el-Beida has produced multiple examples cialization in crops in certain areas. For exam-
of this type of pressing installation (Callot 1993; ple, cyperus appears in KN F 157 and MY Ue
Brun 2004, 56–59). A thirteenth-century exam- 652 in large quantities, but rarely in the other
ple from the city center is composed of Mycenae and Knossos tablets; this suggests that
a rectangular stone press and counterweight some farmers harvest it (perhaps those who had
found within a room. An adjacent room is inter- marshes on their land where it grows best), but
preted as a paved mill opening onto a courtyard it was not a main crop (Palmer 1994, 184).
with three pithoi, a hearth, and olive stones 9. Interestingly, one sector of society that seems
(Callot 1987, Newton et al. 2014, fig. 2). to have been mostly excluded from feasting
5. There is also some linguistic evidence for events was women. Examination of human
external contact: Ethnics as personal names: skeletons from burials at Pylos demonstrate
a-ku-pi-ti-jo (Aiguptios, KN Db 1105); mi-sa- through stable isotope analysis that women
ra-jo (Misraios, KN F 841); a-ra-si-jo (Alasios, ranked poorly for skeletal health, dental health,
KN Df 1229, Fh 369, X 1463); ku-pi-ri-jo and diet compared to males in the same con-
(Kuprios, KN Fh 372, PY Un 443, Cn 131, texts (Schepartz et al. 2009, 2011). Factors
719, Jn 320). Group ethnics: mi-ra-ti-ja involved included differential access to animal
(Milesian), ki-ni-di-ja (Knidian), ra-mi-ni-ja protein which might have been the result of
(Lemnian), a-*64-ja (Aswian). differential participation of women in palace
6. Drake 2012; Tsonis et al. 2010. Pollen cores feasts, for whom there may have been “no
from Crete might support these trends, as plant seat at the table” (Schepartz et al. 2011). The
species dependent on the presence of more Campstool fresco at Knossos and the megaron
water died out (Moody 2005). Tilia pollen, frescoes at Pylos seem to represent largely men
once abundant in Bronze Age levels of Greek seated at tables and lifting cups, while women
cores, gradually disappeared and remains absent typically appear in fresco scenes carrying offer-
to this day. Indeed, Tilia is now more common ings, less visibly in food transport and feast
in temperate European areas and only grows in preparation (at Pylos and Kea), or as performers
the cooler and wetter environments of higher at a feast (Tylisos, kea) (Wilson 2008).
 NOT ES T O PA G ES 1 1 7 –1 5 6 323

10. Although the term “palace” has been shown to trees were present in Late Bronze Age but only
be an inaccurate label for the central buildings became common after ca. 800 BCE (Jahns
associated with Mycenaean towns, it is never- 1993). Similar signatures are seen in cores
theless a useful stand-in until a better term is from Aliki Lagoon to the west of Corinth
widely agreed upon. along the gulf. Olive pollen, while present in
11. This is perhaps not the case for regions like East the Late Bronze Age, is not a substantial per-
Crete where symbols of Mycenaean influence, centage of the whole (Kontopoulos and
like kylikes, are rarely found. See Pratt and Avramidis 2003).
Momigliano 2017. 17. There are even examples of stirrup jars in
12. Minoan Neopalatial-era tombs are relatively faience and alabaster from Egypt (Brunton
scarce and remain mostly unpublished. It is and Engelbach 1927, 12, pl. XXV 4; see also,
therefore impossible to gain a general sense of e.g., British Museum no. 35413, Petrie
the types of gift exchanges performed with the Museum UC 16630; I thank an anonymous
dead. See Branigan 1993 and Legarra Herrero reviewer for this intriguing insight).
2014 for Pre-palatial and Protopalatial Minoan 18. To use Dietler’s (2001) terminology: from
funerary practices. patron-role to divided diacritical.
13. There are some sporadic indications that liba- 19. “there was a very specific complex of religious
tions were performed outside Pre- and and social associations bound up with wine
Protopalatial Minoan tombs, but it is unclear drinking, centered in particular on the palace
if this was a general custom (e.g., MM I: and palace society” (Cavanagh 1998, 111).
Platanos Tholos A annex has over 300 stone 20. Linear B records indicate a distinct interest in
bird’s nest bowls that are not suitable for drink- fiscal language and taxation. There are diverse
ing because of their thick lips and might instead verb and noun forms related to taxation (a-pu-
have been used for libations, see Legarra do-si and o(-pe-ro), do-so-mo) or tax emption
Herrero 2014, 62; MM I–III: Mandalia tomb (e-re-u-te-ro, o-u-di-do-si), as well as the use of
near Siteia. Platon (1959, 372) suggested over verbs or nouns with a more general transac-
fifty vases outside the tomb were offerings to tional meaning (e.g., δίδωμι, οφέλλω, φέρω).
the dead perhaps in libation rituals These words mostly continue their fiscal use in
(Georgoulaki 1996b, 148; Legarra Herrero alphabetic Greek and “prove that taxation in
2014, 285 no. 428)). The lack of published the Mycenaean palaces had a non-specific but
material from Minoan Neopalatial tombs well-defined and organized vocabulary, with
makes it impossible to determine whether liba- some tradition earlier than the tablets, and cap-
tions were performed within a funerary able of being enriched with technical terms,
context. whose meaning, in some cases, still escapes
14. Notice the parallel to tablet Tn 316 from Pylos us” (Varias 2006, 250).
where gods are also given silver and gold cups. 21. Staple finance is characterized by obligatory
15. On the destruction date of Knossos, see payments to the state in the form of basic
Popham 1970, 1997; Hood 1971, 2009; goods, which are then used to finance state
Bennett 1985; Warren 1989; Bennet 1990; activities, particularly the support of dependent
Driessen 1990, 2000. There is some debate labor. Wealth finance employs high-value
over when the palace and Linear B archives goods, manufactured products, to fund state
were destroyed. Some scholars date the operations. These valued goods are acquired
destruction to LM IIIA2 and others to LM through exchange, levied from local popula-
IIIB. Here, I follow Rutter (2000, 186; 2005a; tions, or produced by attached craft producers.
2006c, 861), Hatzaki (2007b, 197), and See Nakassis 2010.
Langohr (2009, 218) by placing the end of the
Monopalatial era sometime in the ceramic
phase known as LM IIIA2. 4 MAINTAINING THE
16. The mainland desire for Cretan olive oil might
RELATIONSHIP
have been instigated by the general lack of local
olive oil or good quality olive oil at that point 1. At Tiryns, the postern gates were sealed and the
in time. Palynological data from cores from larger northern gate was constructed along
Lake Lerna in the Argolid suggest that olive with upgrades to the central buildings. At the
324 NOT ES TO PAG ES 1 59 –1 8 3

same time, a dam was created to divert a stream Strong southern precipitation around 1400 BCE
away from the northern lower town possibly is shown by high lake levels in the Mediterranean
with the desire to open space for northern and central Europe suggesting the negative mode
settlement expansion. These improvement of the North Atlantic Oscillation. The high lake
projects were cut short, however, by the actual levels were interrupted at 1150 BCE when the
collapse (Maran 2010). Siberian High intensified, which resulted in
2. The production and exchange of meat would severe dry conditions for Southwest Asia
also be a useful comparison, especially since it (Brooke 2014, 301).
was consumed in commensal contexts. 4. For example, the krater and drinking cup
However, there is a significant lack of archae- became an icon of the warrior society of the
ological evidence related to how and how Iron Age.
much meat was “produced” and consumed in 5. For a relatively complete list of feasting con-
the Postpalatial era, or really any era before the texts, see Fox 2012.
Hellenistic period. See F. S. Naiden’s (2012) 6. “Clearly some person or group was using feast-
thorough examination of the evidence for meat ing as a method to display their superiority
consumption in sacrificial contexts and the through their choice of vessels, but there is no
various issues associated with the little evidence way at present of connecting this to what was
available (e.g., the type and size of the animals occurring on the site of the former palace”
changed over time and place, the quantities of (Fox 2012, 63).
meat from each animal also changed. The data 7. Walberg 1995, 90. There is currently no
are very skewed: only one study for the Bronze evidence to suggest an increase in the num-
Age (Pylos), one for the Geometric period ber of household hearths in LH IIIC
(Eretria), and ten for the Archaic and Classical settlements.
periods; see Naiden 2012, 61 n. 29 for refer- 8. Although the cemetery at Elateia was established
ences). It is also entirely unclear how many in the LH IIIA1 period and continued into the
people could be fed meat at a sacrifice or Roman era, the period of highest use was from
meal. The Panathenaia’s hecatomb (100 cattle the middle of the Postpalatial era into the
sacrifice) would have yielded 6,400–10,000 kg Protogeometric (Deger-Jalkotzy 1990, 2004,
of meat depending on the size of the cattle and 2007, 2009; Dakoronia 2004; Dakoronia et al.
the cuts of meat reserved for eating, which 2009).
could feed 3,200–4,000 people depending on 9. Thomatos 2006, 22–46: Catalog of every deco-
the size of the portion (2 kg or 0.25 kg each; rated stirrup jar in LH IIIC Middle contexts.
Naiden 2012, 66; see also Rhodes and Osborne 10. Thomatos 2006, 261 chart 1.1: Of the deco-
Greek Historical Inscriptions, nos. 63 and 81, rated and cataloged examples with which
where they estimate 20,000 people). Thomatos concerned herself, there are 101
3. The “Preclassical global crisis” (Brooke 2014, stirrup jars in tomb deposits and 9 in settle-
299) was shaped by a long epoch of lower solar ment deposits. Amphoriskoi are the second
input running from the fifteenth century BC to most common closed shape and most are
the eighth century BC with deep minima at found in tomb deposits: 63 in tomb deposits
1450, 1000, and 800. These solar minima seem and 6 in settlement deposits. Alabastra and
to have pushed south both the Intertropical jugs are 27 and 23, respectively, in tomb
Convergence Zone and the edge of the northern deposits and only 5 and 4, respectively, in
sea ice. These forces were compounded by settlement deposits.
a strong Siberian High, with initial symptoms at 11. D’Agata and Boileau 2009, 184–85, nos. SY1,
and after 1500 BC and strong points from 1150 to SY3, SY4, SY176; see also D’Agata 2003, 28,
850 BC, which for centuries controlled northern fig. 2.1; 2007, 99, fig. 21.1. Some of these
and probably global climates, sending outbursts of amphoras have been labeled “neck-handled”
cold winter weather felt as far south as the Aegean in the publications, but based on published
Sea and Red Sea. “As a final blow, just at the end drawings the handles appear to attach to the
of this Hallstatt cycle, solar insolation reached rim. I have therefore included them as “rim-
a minimum (the ‘Homeric’) at 800 BC not seen handled” in this chapter following the termi-
since 2900 BC, followed by another slightly shal- nology used in, for example, Watrous 1992;
lower minimum at 400 BC” (Brooke 2014, 301). Rutter 2006b; Day 2011.
 NOT ES T O PA G ES 1 8 6 –2 0 0 325

12. It seems that “hydrias” have been used in trans- also seven “West Aegean” transport stirrup jars,
port contexts in other time periods as well. nine “Cycladic/Kytheran” transport stirrup
Survey of an EH II–III shipwreck has recently jars, and one handmade transport stirrup jar.
been reported from the bay of Yagana, some In the middle phases there is one “Cycladic/
40 m off the coast in the channel between the Kytheran” transport stirrup jar.
Ionian islands of Ithaka and Kefallonia
(Evangelistis n.d.; Dellaporta 2011, 21). The
cargo of this wreck consists primarily of “large 5 REBUILDING THE RELATIONSHIP
vessels of closed shape,” some 40 cm in height).
They are termed “hydria” because they bear 1. For the main focus of this chapter, the regions
the characteristic three handles of these water of Boeotia, Phokis, Lokris, Euboea, Thessaly,
jars (two horizontal handles and a small vertical and Macedonia, what is now termed “north-
strap handle), but otherwise they indisputably west Aegean,” are most important (Gimatzidis
share the features of collar-necked jars 2011, 959). In particular, these regions contin-
(Evangelistis n.d., figs. 20 and 21; Dellaporta ued to be important and maybe even flourished
2011, 21, fig. 2). at a time when other areas, like the Argolid,
13. These calculations are based on the only nine were reduced to hamlets. Morphological simi-
transport stirrup jars at Karphi whole enough to larities in pottery styles existed in these regions
provide accurate measurements (Day 2011, nos. from the earlier phases of the EIA until the
K1.13, K26.10, K33.4, K36, K46, K114.7, end of the period and have therefore been
K147.15, M8.3, MK.14). The calculations of called the “northwest Aegean koine” or
base to height ratio of transport stirrup jars from “Thessalo-Cycladic Protogeometric and
the Uluburun shipwreck come from nos. Subprotogeometric” (Gimatzidis 2011, 959).
KW118, KW790, KW1188, KW1198, 2. Indeed, various scholars have questioned the
KW1429, KW1470, KW1977, KW5457, historicity of the Ionian (Papadopoulos 2005,
KW5520 (dimensions provided courtesy 580–588; Crielaard 2008; Vaessen 2014),
J. B. Rutter, pers. comm. 2014; see also Rutter Aiolian (Rose 2008), and Dorian (Schnapp-
2005). Dimensions for transport stirrup jars at Gourbeillon 1979, 1986, 2002) migrations. As
Mycenae come from thirteen vessels found in Papadopoulos (2005, 580) notes, “migrations,
the House of the Oil Merchant: nos. 9090, colonizations, and even invasions have domi-
9092, 9093, 9095–97, 9224, 9237, 9238, 9240, nated modern views of the myth-historical
9241, 9242, 24341 (personal examination). landscape of Early Iron Age Greece.”
14. For Thronos Kephala, see D’Agata and Boileau 3. See Thucydides 4.123.1. While the date of the
2009, 184–85, 194, 195, nos. SY1, SY3, SY4, first large movements to the Chalkidike and
SY12, SY176 (local); SY5, SY14, SY20 Pieria are not clear, it is certain that the areas
(imported). These are very similar to the had contact with Mycenaean Greeks as early as
Granary Style amphoras and later “East the Middle Bronze Age that continued into the
Mainland – Aegean Koine” amphoras early Mycenaean era at, for example, Torone
(Mountjoy 2009, 290–93). For Halasmenos, (Morris 2009).
see Tsipopoulou 2004, 105, fig. 8.2 (six vessels 4. Snodgrass 1994. This motif, however, does
made of Fabric 1; five of Fabric 2; one of Fabric appear in Macedonia at the same time or earlier
4; one of Fabric 5). than Euboea (Andreou 2009). Only when the
15. See also Stockhammer 2008, 279, no. 2432. It is decoration became standardized do the two
labeled a “short-necked amphora” by regions develop this shape in tandem. As
Stockhammer, but this is not the type of Gimatzidis (2011, 959) pointedly states,
“short-necked amphora” found at Kommos “today there is no doubt that all types of the
and published in Rutter 2000, 2006. Its fabric, pendant semicircle skyphoi were produced and
identified as “oatmeal,” is typical of south-cen- consumed at the same time both in Euboea and
tral Crete. Of course, this designation cannot Macedonia.” Additionally, Tiverios (2008, 8)
be verified unless chemical or petrographic points out that it does not matter if the
testing is conducted. Euboean-style pottery was imported or made
16. Stockhammer 2008, fig. 22, 152–53, 178, 190, locally because it still means there was Euboean
203–204, 216, 236. In the early phase, there are presence in northern Greece. Other authors
326 NOT ES TO PAG ES 2 00 –2 2 5

are more skeptical, calling into question the expansion of olives in the south (a crop
whether the existence of skyphoi necessarily capable of surviving in xeric conditions), and
implies the presence of Euboeans themselves barley in the north (Kouli 2011; Margomenou
or are the result of trade or solely indigenous 2005, 195). Kouli (2011, 275) observes that “it
invention (Papadopoulos 1997, 2011). is difficult to determine whether the observed
5. The Sanctuary of Poseidon Pontios near change of agricultural activities [shift from cer-
Mende has a large apsidal building with pottery eals to olive] should be ascribed to cultural or
dating to LM III/SM, Protogeometric, and religious causes or whether it was driven by the
Geometric periods. While an apsidal building 3500–2500 cal. year B.P. cool and dry climatic
alone would not signal Euboean presence, con- event.”
struction of four cult buildings, including one 9. Indeed, the excavator of the site has argued that
dating to the tenth century BCE, produced “the innovation marked by the appearance of
material interpreted as relating to Greek cult the decorated ‘tableware’ was the beginning,
practices (Tiverios 2008, 14–15). Tiverios during the earlier Late Bronze Age at Toumba,
(2008, 124) argues that, “what persuades us of a process of formalization of feasting, which
that the Greeks probably settled in these parts laid particular emphasis on the material culture
[the north Aegean] at such an early date related to the consumption of liquids”
[immediately after the Trojan War] is above (Andreou and Psaraki 2007, 409).
all the discovery near Mende of a purely 10. One technique that does seem to be immedi-
Greek sanctuary, the first phase of which ately adopted, however, is the use of the com-
dates back to the Late Mycenaean period. It is pass-drawn multiple brush technique to
precisely this find which forces us to break out produce concentric circle motifs. Indeed, the
of the straitjacket of dogmatic views in this use of this motif in the north is so widespread
discipline of ours and re-adjust our interpreta- and emphatic that its simultaneous coincidence
tion of the considerable body of evidence out- with central Greece and has led to speculation
lined above.” over its origin (Papadopoulos, Vedder, and
6. Valamoti and Jones 2010, 84; Kroll 2000; Schreiber 1998). Local ceramics from sites like
Valamoti, pers. comm. June 2015; Valamoti Thessaloniki Tomba and Kastanas are charac-
et al. 2018. It is only from the ninth century terized by the excessive use of concentric cir-
that the first relatively firm evidence for olive cles not only on the shoulder of large vessels, as
use appears at northern Aegean sites, specifi- in the south, but also on the body areas (Jung
cally at Krania Pierias (Margaritis 2007). It has 2002). In other regions of northern Greece,
recently been suggested that this sudden however, more conventional Early
appearance of the olive can perhaps be attrib- Protogeometric styles were adopted. Vessels
uted to population movements northward, as found in earlier graves at Torone and Koukos
mentioned earlier (Valamoti et al. 2018, in Khalkidhiki and the cemeteries of Vergina
188–189). and Olymbos to the west and south show more
7. These specific pithoi are in opposition to the affinities to southern Greek styles (Andreou
most common pithoi most likely used to col- 2009, 24 n. 21).
lect rainwater. Excavators noted that many 11. Fox 2012, 75: “Boundaries between sociopoli-
pithoi were positioned in outdoor areas, tical and religious/sanctuary feasting were
including courtyards, in order to collect rain- blurred in these buildings, and these all-
water (see also Ebbinghaus 2005 for other encompassing feasts in one location helped to
alternatives). stabilize society in a fragmented era.”
8. Whatever the precise role climate change 12. The copper and silver ores at Laurion in Attica
played, it is nevertheless clear that agronomic were exploited in some way since at least the
regimes changed dramatically after the end of Bronze Age (Aperghis 2013, 10; Stos-Gale and
the Late Bronze Age. As mentioned earlier, Gale 1982). At that point and until the late
pollen cores from multiple regions of southern Archaic period, people only exploited the
and central Greece, as well as archaeobotanical vein known as the First Contact, the shallowest
remains from northern Greece, indicate a shift zone of silver (Nicolet-Pierre 1985, 31; Davis
from a cereal-intensive strategy relying mainly 2014). The famous strike at Maroneia in 483/2
on wheat (a crop that requires much water), to (Ath. Pol. 22.7) was not the first area to be
 NOT ES T O PA G ES 2 2 5 –2 4 5 327

exploited, only the first to be particularly rich EIA, iron, the most useful metal for weapons
in silver. and tools, was plentiful in its raw ore form in
13. As pointedly stated by Murray (2012, 336) Greece and therefore could not easily be con-
“The residents of Perati wrested control of trolled or rationed” (Papadopoulos 2014, 181).
Lavriotic silver and copper mines from the Indeed, it has been speculated that ironwork-
cold dead hands of the Mycenaeans after the ing might have become more or less a domestic
palatial collapse, and grew wealthy producing activity (Snodgrass 2006, 127; see also Hesiod
bronze and distributing it to interested parties Works and Days, 492–494 where ironworking
in Greece.” She goes on to say that “the IIIC in the smithy was a public activity and com-
period was a bronze bonanza, and everyone monplace). It could be argued, however, that
who had been shut out of the bronze party despite its ubiquity in raw form, one still
finally got past the velvet rope” (Murray needed the knowledge and expertise to work
2012, 337). iron ore into useable tools and weapons.
14. Lead isotope analyses of more than 110 silver 20. When large amphoras are used as burial con-
objects found in the Near East determined that tainers, it is often assumed to be a purely func-
silver from Laurion and Siphnos was used for tional choice. It is possible, however, that they
some objects in seventh century BCE hoards held some other meaning. I thank an anon-
from Israel (Thompson, Balmuth, and Stos- ymous reviewer for the suggestion that the
Gale 2001, 307). wine in the amphora could have been first
15. Aubet 2001, 75–77. “The abundance of streams consumed as part of the funerary ritual.
in spring that could be used for irrigation is
found exclusively on the coastal plain, which
constitutes the real agricultural hinterland of 6 EXPANDING THE RELATIONSHIP
the Phoenician cities and which is in every
respect inadequate to feed the large conurba- 1. While the start of the time period addressed in
tions. The profound climatic and political this chapter (ca. 750 BCE) is a relatively
changes [at the end of the Bronze Age] would accepted benchmark, the end of the time per-
deprive the Phoenicians of a large part of their iod (ca. 600 BCE) deserves some comment.
raw materials and basic foods, since Phoenicia This book is concerned with tracing the very
was never able to become a genuine agricul- beginning of surplus oil and wine production
tural power.” Despite the fertility of the land and the place of these two commodities within
around Tyre, Phoenicia had a grain deficit due exchange modes as they changed over centu-
to the growing population. ries. The sixth century marks a point when
16. For example, the pact between Hiram of Tyre surplus production of oil and wine and the
and Solomon for grain (I Kings 5:23) and allu- creation of specialized containers for their
sions to overpopulation. exchange are no longer unique among the
17. The distribution patterns associated with attributes of Greek regions. That is, during
Group II North Aegean amphoras are much the sixth century many, if not most, regions
easier to discern through the archaeological of the Greek world started to produce their
record. This accessibility has to do with an own amphoras and exchange their own sur-
increase in the number of pots produced dur- pluses. In addition, the written sources avail-
ing the Late Geometric period, an increase in able by that time allow a much more detailed
their identification within the archaeological analysis of the sociopolitical milieu within
record, and an increase in their rate of publica- which these commodities functioned.
tion. Unlike earlier versions, Group II North I believe, therefore, that the sixth century
Aegean amphoras are highly standardized in requires its own book as an incredibly dynamic
both size and decoration. and robust time period.
18. “ . . . να χρησίμευαν για την υπερπόντια 2. The topic of the Greek polis has received much
προώθηση και την εμπορία του “θερμαίου¨ attention over the last few centuries by modern
οίνου” (Tiverios, Manakidou, and Tsiafaki scholars and over millennia by ancient authors.
2003, 193). For a discussion of the historiography of the
19. This connection is especially poignant since subject, see Vlassopoulos 2007, esp. 13–67 and
iron ore was relatively easily acquired: “In the 68–95. For a working definition of the Greek
328 NOT ES TO PAG ES 2 45 –2 5 0

polis, see Hansen 2006, 40–41, “a polis was Hellenistic, and Roman eras, such as
a small institutionalized self-governing society, Thucydides (books 6 and 7), Strabo, or
a political community of adult male citizens Eusebius, have been used as evidence for this
(politai or astoi), who along with their families same type of colonial expansionist action, the
lived in a –usually – fortified city (also called characteristics of which involve establishing
polis or sometimes asty) or in its hinterland a new colony that is intimately tied to the
(chora or ge) along with two other sets of inha- motherland, and then insisting on subduing
bitants, free non-citizens (xenoi or often metoi- the indigenous people, who are almost always
koi) and slaves (douloi).” See also the multiple at a disadvantage.
volumes published by the Copenhagen Polis 7. Recent work has stressed the importance of
Centre, among which are Hansen and questioning the false assumptions generated
Raaflaub 1995 and 1996, Hansen 1996, by the colonial analogy while prioritizing
Nielsen 1997, Hansen 2007. Hansen (2006, archaeological evidence and asking non-biased
41) suggests a terminus ante quem of ca. 650 for questions of the material culture (Hurst and
polis as a city-state. For alternative designations Owen 2005; Antonaccio 2007, 2009).
to “city-state” see discussion in Hansen 2006, Archaeological evidence, while at times con-
7–30, 62–67; 2000b. In Archaic Greek litera- tradictory to the literary sources, is perhaps
ture, there is a discernable focus on the polis and a more reliable source of information concern-
the divisions between those who do and do not ing the earliest presence of Greeks abroad and
live in poleis (e.g., Sappho Fr. 57 Lobel-Page; their changing relationships to the landscape
Alkaios fr. 130B Lobel-Page; Theognis 53–60; and indigenous people.
see also Hansen 2007, Hansen 2000a). 8. Antonaccio 2007, 202; Osborne 2007. One
3. Morris 1991, 40. It has even been suggested rough estimate suggests that the departure of
that since the earliest poleis emerged in areas a few hundred men each year led a total of
that had been under the control of Mycenaean 20,000–40,000 leaving the Aegean over the
palaces (Snodgrass 1980, 44), it is reasonable to course of the later eighth and seventh centuries
assume their roots can be found in the “shat- BCE, maybe 2–3 percent of all adult males and
tered fragments of the centralized bureaucra- a far higher percentage in seagoing regions
cies of the Late Bronze Age” (Hall 2013, 10, (Morris 2007, 219).
van Effenterre 1985; contra Hansen 2006, 41). 9. In Works and Days, Hesiod’s brother Perses has
4. For example, sixteen wealthy burials were at least six full time staff including three slaves
found by the West Gate in Eretria on Euboea and hired men. Although Hesiod uses terms
and dated to ca. 720–680 (Bérard 1970). These such as “poverty” and “hunger,” these expres-
burials are a fraction of the estimated popula- sions must be understood in light of the quite
tion of between 1,000 and 2,000 people high standard of living that he expected. In
(Morris 1991) and are reasonably considered later Classical Greece, everyone who could
the ruling family. Similarly, at Argos there is not afford to live off the labor of others was
evidence for only one or two very wealthy deemed to live in “poverty” (Van Wees 2009,
warrior graves, with no evidence for aristo- 445). See Appendix B for further discussion of
cratic cemeteries (Hall 2013, 12; Hall Hesiod’s Works and Days.
2007, 128). 10. Archaeological material supports this acquisitive
5. For example, we see the appearance of annually drive since “grave goods . . . show that at least
rotating, named magistracies in place of the some farmers produced surpluses with which
more generic term basileus (e.g., law at Dreros they could acquire non-essential goods”
(M&L 2/Fornara 11) with a magistrate named (Descoeudres 2008, 330). Perhaps the best
the kosmos who holds office only once in any example of this is the presence of ceramic
10-year period). model granaries placed within tombs (e.g., the
6. The assumption that Greeks “colonized” “rich Athenian lady” Liston and Papadopoulos
regions of the Mediterranean is one based on 2004).
the pervasive analogy of European colonialism 11. For more information and images, see: www.
of the sixteenth through mid-twentieth centu- klazomenai.com/isliginikinciev resi_eng.htm
ries (Lyons and Papadopoulos 2002; Dietler 12. The use of olive cakes or pomace (the leftover
2005). Greek written texts of the Classical, material from production of olive oil) has also
 NOT ES T O PA G ES 2 5 2 –2 8 4 329

been identified at Minoan Chamalevri (Sarpaki secluded or restricted, not in opposition to

1999) and Mochlos (Hamilakis 1996, 3; Sarpaki “political” (see Schmitt-Pantel 1990, 25).
and Bending 2004, 126) where a large concen- 18. For a full discussion of this iconographic transi-
tration of fragmented olive stones was found tion, see Schmitt Pantel 1997, 17–31.
inside a room used for bronze-working 19. Or, really, boy in this case. Skeletal remains
(Rowan 2015). suggest he was between the ages of 10 and 14.
13. Literature of the sixth century BCE (e.g., See discussion in Wecowski 2014, 251–255.
Solon’s poetry and reforms) is considered out Note, however, that his discussion of distinctly
of the scope of this book, which takes as its sympotic paraphernalia in tombs rests on the
terminus the cessation of Attic SOS amphora presence of jugs and cups, a trend that, as we
production. Indeed, the sixth century deserves have seen, was prevalent from the Minoan
its own book as a very dynamic time even Bronze Age onwards.
within the purview of oil and wine production 20. For vase paintings, the exception is the feast for
and exchange, including the invention of the Perithous and Hippodameia with the Centaur
Panathenaic amphora in Athens and the veri- intrusion; for example, calyx-krater by the
table explosion of surplus wine, oil, and Nekyia Painter ca. 450 BCE; Vienna 1026.
amphora production in Greek regions all over Oakley and Sinos (1993, 24) assume that the
the Mediterranean. wedding feast was “so similar to other sympo-
14. Domestic consumption of olive oil for sia” that it did not need to be depicted as it did
a wealthy household in classical Greece has not represent a wedding per se. We do have
been estimated at around 200–330 kg depictions of processions to the wedding, such
per year. This amounts to around 400–600 kg as on the famous François vase. Wedding feasts
per elaiona (2-year period). At an average pro- seem to have been very large: Plutarch asked
ductivity as low as 2.16 kg oil per tree per “why do people invite the most guests to wed-
elaiona, 185–306 trees would fulfill this ding feasts?” (Table-Talk; Quaest. Conv. 666d).
requirement. This is around 1.9–3.8 hectares 21. Burton 1998. See, for example, Athenaeus,
of olive trees if they were evenly spaced at Deipnosophistae 14.644d; Menander, Samia
around 80–100 trees per hectare. If oil yields 287–288; Plutarch, Moralia VIII, Quaestiones
per tree were higher, then fewer trees would be Convivales 3.1, 666D-666E; see also Euripides,
needed (Foxhall 2007, 216). Iphigenia Aulidensis 720, 722–723. But it is
15. This major solar minimum lasted 90 years unclear whether they dined in the same
with the peak dated to ca. 817 (Steinhilber room, at different tables, or a combination
et al. 2009) or 765 BCE (Usoskin et al. 2007). (Oakley and Sinos 1993, 22).
There was very low solar activity around 22. “est un usage qui apparaît, au contraire, comme
830–740 BCE. It was perhaps the largest une étape obligatoire de la cérémonie
solar minimum of the past 3,000 years and funéraire” and for which “les Grecs ne
was plausibly linked to global climate change conçoivent pas l’absence”.
(Manning 2013, 112). Also known as the 2800 23. Bourdieu 1972, 223; for Bourdieu’s theory of
years BP event or the Iron Age Cold Period misrecognition applied to ritual more gener-
in Europe or the Initial/First Phase of the ally, see Bell 1992.
sub-Atlantic. 24. There is also evidence for local wine and possibly
16. Hesychios tells us that there were three public oil production at a farmstead near the main
dining rooms in Athens: Prytaneia/Tholos, settlement of Pithekoussai, Punta Chiarito
Thesmophoreion/Thesmotheteion, and Pryta- (De Caro and Gialanella 1998; Gialanella 1994).
neion; Rotroff and Oakley 1992, 38. Evidence for wine production from ninth cen-
17. Here, I capitalize “Symposion” to distinguish tury BCE Italian sites suggests that the knowledge
the very specific and standardized event (e.g., for domesticating and pressing wine was already
Murray 1983; Kelly-Blazeby 2006, 18) from in place before Greek colonists arrived.
the more general term “symposion” often Discovery of wine residue at Longola
used to designate any form of drinking party (Poggiomarino) near Pompeii has been dated to
separate from eating (Schmitt Pantel 1997; the ninth century BCE. The same site contained
Wecowski 2014, 169). In addition, the word an area with pips that had signs of having been
“private” here is used solely in its meaning as pressed (Cicirelli and Albore Livadie 2008).
330 NOT ES TO PAG ES 2 85 –2 9 6

25. Pratt 2015, 231–232. There is also a striking Pompeii has been dated to the ninth century
correlation between the find-spots of eighth- BCE (Cicirelli and Albore Livadie 2008). The
century Phoenician amphoras and Athenian same site contained an area with pips that had
SOS amphoras throughout the Mediterranean signs of having been pressed (Cicirelli and
(see Pratt 2015, 232, and Kasseri 2012). Albore Livadie 2008). Most recently, Langgut
26. Papakonstantinou 2009, 9 n. 29; Spensitheos et al. (2019) suggest that the olive was first
decree (Kadmos 9 [1970] 124.12–13=SEG domesticated in the Italian Peninsula around
27.631=Nomima I 22), 50 prochoi (jars or liquid 1400 BCE.
measures) of must; IC IV 79.4–5 (=Nomima 30. In the central and western Mediterranean, SOS
I 30=IGT no. 154) 100 prochoi of must; IC IV amphoras and their contents seem to be the
77, B3 (=Nomima I 49=IGT no. 152) 3 mea- forerunners of other Attic ceramic exports
sures of must; IC IV 72, 10.37–39 a prochous of and tend to be counted as the earliest Attic
wine; IC IV 144.4 100 prochoi of must. imports to many sites. For example, at the
27. See below. There is evidence from Archaic indigenous settlement of Morgantina on
literature that taverns already existed where Sicily, fragments of Attic SOS amphoras
lower-quality wine could be bought in smaller found in the settlement area of the Cittadella
quantities (Hippon. fr. 79.18; West refers to date from the late seventh century and are the
erpin as the object of the trade of a tavern- earliest imports identified. Other Attic pottery
keeper nicknamed “swindler” (skotos)). is rare until the third quarter of the sixth cen-
28. The need for a start-up supply might have tury BCE (Lyons 1996, 29; Antonaccio 2004).
stemmed originally from a lack of cultivated In Iberia, the earliest Greek objects found in
grapevines and olive trees when the colonists some quantity are Attic SOS amphoras and
first arrived, both of which can take 10 years to Corinthian ceramic material, mostly kotylai.
produce substantial fruits (Gras 2010, 112). This Many of the Attic SOS amphoras date to the
need would have resulted in a sort of “assis- late eighth and early seventh century and can
tance policy” as articulated by Gras (1988; also be found with other imports, such as
2010, 112). In his definition, the metropolis Cypriot bichrome IV ware (Shefton 1982,
would have sent necessary commodities, such 338–339). The inclusion of SOS and
as oil and wine, to the newly founded settle- Corinthian A amphoras in elite indigenous
ments as a form of aid or start-up supplies, tombs and ritual contexts might support the
rather than for purely economic gain. Based idea that Greek oil and wine held a high value
on the evidence presented here, such assistance in local contexts (Brun 2011, 107; Pratt 2014,
did not necessarily come directly from the 268–271). For example, SOS amphoras are
metropolis, since Athenian SOS amphoras found within Etruscan tombs as burial gifts
(made with distinctly Attic clays) make up (Pratt 2014, 264–270).
a large portion of the earliest attested transport 31. The most prominent examples are the sanctu-
containers. ary of Demeter at Eleusis being enveloped by
29. Wild olive trees and grapevines have been pre- Athens and the creation of the Sacred Way
sent in the central Mediterranean since the last (Mylonas 1961; Sourvinou-Inwood 1997;
glaciation (Brun 2010, 425; Langgut et al. Binder 1998); the Samian Heraion being
2019). The date of their first domestication turned away from the sea via a new entrance
and use for oil and wine production, however, and official pathway to the city (Duplouy 2006,
is a matter of much debate. Recent DNA stu- 190–203; Zapheiropoulou 1997); and the sanc-
dies have shown that western domesticated tuary of Apollo at Didyma being claimed by
olive trees and grapevines are hybrids of the Miletus (Tuchelt, Schneider, Schattner 1996;
local wild plants and the eastern Mediterranean Duplouy 2006, 203–214; Giannisi 2006,
domesticated variety (Breton et al. 2006; 28–33).
Arroyo-García et al. 2006). Evidence for wine 32. There are multiple debates surrounding the
production from ninth century BCE Italian people who made up each level and the correct
sites suggests that the knowledge for domesti- label to apply to these groups. Options range
cating and pressing wine was already in place from “aristocrats” made up of lineage-based
before Greek colonists arrived. Discovery of kinship groups (Pierrot 2015; Ober 1989,
wine residue at Longola (Poggiomarino) near 55–60; Donlan 1999) to the “leisured class”
 NOT ES T O PA G ES 2 9 7 –3 1 0 331

made up of men who owned a certain (large) assume that erpis is some kind of a slang term
amount of land and lived off the labor of others for poor-quality wine. See West 1974, 144;
(Ste. Croix 1981; Davies 1984, 28–29; van Gerber 1999, 415.
Wees 2006; Rose 2009, 2013; van Wees and
Fisher 2015). The simplest way to describe
these levels is elite and non-elite (Duplouy 7 CONCLUSION
2003, 2006; Morris 1987).
33. While Athenians did not seem to participate in 1. Redfield 1983; Dougherty 2001, 123–127. In
establishing apoikia in the same manner as, say, contrast to the Odyssey, the Iliad makes little
Corinth, there are some indications that distinction between Greeks and non-Greeks in
wealthy Athenian families had interests in all the criteria that would later define
oversees locations, such as the Peisistratidai at “Greekness” according to Herodotus. As Sissa
Sigeon and the Philiadai in Macedonia and the explains (Sissa and Detienne 2000, 18) in her
Chalkidiki. account of “Homeric Anthropology”: “the
34. These prekteres are in contrast to both Greek resemblance between the men on the two
aristocrats sailing on their own (Reed 2003, 64) opposed sides is almost total. All mortals, what-
and the coastal voyages of farmers. The ever their origin, be they Hellene or Asiatic,
Homeric tradition does make clear that elites speak the same language, don the same, inter-
also took part in trade as a means of deriving changeable arms, eat the same food in the same
profit, despite stereotypes associated with mer- fashion, and sacrifice to the same gods.”
chants (Ulf 2009, 87; e.g. Od. 3.70–4; Il. 7.- 2. Similarly, “ . . . people do things with culture . . .
467–75; von Reden 1995, 61–68; Winter certain symbols can be actively and deliberately
1998). In addition, there were farmers or crafts- selected and employed to communicate
men who engaged in emporia by traveling in distinctiveness . . . ” (Hall 2009, 610, emphasis
order to sell elsewhere the goods they them- original; See also Dietler 2007).
selves grew or made, which is precisely the case 3. Decreasing precipitation and increasing annual
encountered in Hesiod’s Works and Days temperatures are already causing changes to cul-
(652–682; Van Wees 2009, 460; Descoeudres tivation habitats. Olive cultivation is now again
2008, 338). moving into northern Italy. A national statistical
35. Hippon. fr. 79.18; West refers to erpin as the survey indicates a consistent expansion of olive
object of the trade of a tavern-keeper nick- cultivation beyond the previous northern limit
named “swindler” (skotos). Commentators (Salvati et al. 2013).
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agouridis, C. 2011. “The Late Bronze Age IIIC Middle, edited by S. Deger-
shipwreck off the islet of Modi Jalkotzy and M. Zavadil, 15–26.
(Poros).” Skyllis 11(2): 25–34. Veröffentlichungen der
Albanese Procelli, R. M. 1996. “Appunti Mykenischen Kommission 30.
sulla distribuzione delle anfore com- Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen
merciali nella Sicilia arcaica.” Kokalos Akademie der Wissenschaften.
XLII: 91–137. Amouretti, M.-C. 1992. “Les boissons
Alcock, S. E. 2002. Archaeologies of the Greek hors du symposion.” In La sociabilité
Past: Landscape, Monuments, and à table. Commensalité et convivialité à
Memories. Cambridge: Cambridge travers les ages, edited by M. Aurell,
University Press. O. Dumoulin and F. Thélamon, 69–75.
Algazi, G., V. Goebner and B. Jussen, eds. Rouen: Publications de l’Université de
2003. Negotiating the Gift: Pre-Modern Rouen.
Figurations of Exchange. Göttingen: Amouretti, M.C. and J.P. Brun, eds. 1993.
Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht. La production du vin et de l’huile en
Allibert, C. 2000. “Des cauris et des Méditerranée, Supplément 26 du BCH.
hommes. Réflexion sur l’utilisation Paris: École française d’Athènes.
d’une monnaie-objet et ses Andersen, Ø. and D. T. T. Haug. 2012.
itinéraires.” In L’extraordinaire et le “Introduction.” In Relative
quotidien, variations anthropologiques, Chronology in Early Greek Epic Poetry,
edited by C. Allibert and edited by Ø. Andersen and
N. Rajaonarimanana, 57–79. Paris: D. T. T. Haug, 1–19. Cambridge:
Karthala. Cambridge University Press.
Alram-Stern, E. 2003. “Aigeira-akropolis: Andreadaki-Vlasaki, M. 1997. “Poli
the stratigraphy.” In Late Helladic IIIC Xanon: Oikopedo N. Kaniamou.”
Chronology and Synchronisms. Proceedings ArchDelt 47, B’2 (1992): 566–574.
of the International Workshop held at 2002. “Are we approaching the Minoan
the Austrian Academy of Sciences at Palace of Khania?” In Monuments of
Vienna, May 7th and 8th, 2001, Vienna, Minos: Rethinking the Minoan Palaces,
edited by S. Deger-Jalkotzy and edited by J. Driessen, I. Schoep and
M. Zavadil, 15–21. Wien: Verlag R. Laffineur, 157–166. Liege:
der Österreichischen Akademie der Université de Liège; Austin: University
Wissenschaften, Österreichische Aka- of Texas at Austin, Program in Aegean
demie der Wissenschaften philoso- Scripts and Prehistory.
phisch-historische Klasse Denkscriften. Andreou, S. 2003. “Η Μυκηναϊκή
Alram-Stern, E. 2007. “Characteristic κεραμική και οι κοινωνίες της
Small Finds of LH IIIC from Aigeira κεντρικής Μακεδονίας κατά την
and their Context.” In LH IIIC Ύστερη Εποχή του Χαλκού
Chronology and Synchronisms II: LH (Mycenean pottery and societies of

332
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 333

central Macedonia during the Late 14–42. Aarhus: Aarhus University

Bronze Age).” In The Periphery of the Press.
Mycenaean World, Proceedings of the 2nd 2004. “Siculo-Geometric and the Sikels:
Interdisciplinary Colloquium, Lamia 1999, ceramics and identity in eastern
edited by N. Kyparissi Apostolika and Sicily.” In Greek Identity in the Western
M. Papakonstantinou, 191–210. Mediterranean. Papers in Honour of Brian
Athens: Ministry of Culture. Shefton, edited by K. Lomas, 55–82.
2009. “Stratified wheel made pottery Mnemosyne, Supplements, Volume:
deposits and absolute chronology of 246. Leiden: Brill.
the Late Bronze Age to Early Iron 2007. “Colonization: Greece on the
Age transition at Thessaloniki move, 900–480.” In The Cambridge
Toumba.” In LH III C Chronology Companion to Archaic Greece, edited by
and Synchronisms III: LH III C Late H. A. Shapiro, 201–224. Cambridge:
and the transition to the Early Iron Age. Cambridge University Press.
Proceedings of the International Workshop 2009. “The Western Mediterranean.” In
held at the Austrian Academy of Sciences A Companion to Archaic Greece, edited
at Vienna, February 23rd and 24th, 2007, by K. A. Raaflaub and H. van Wees,
edited by S. Deger-Jalkotzy and 314–329. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
A. E. Bächle, 15–40. Vienna: Verlag Aperghis, G. 2013. “Athenian mines, coins,
der Österreichischen Akademie der and triremes.” Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte
Wissenschaften. Geschichte, Bd. 62(H. 1): 1–24.
Andreou, S. and K. Psaraki. 2007. Appadurai, A. 1986. “Introduction: com-
“Traditions and innovation in the modities and the politics of value.” In
Bronze Age pottery of Thessaloniki The Social Life of Things: Commodities
Toumba. Food and drink consumption in Cultural Perspective, edited by
and ‘table ware’ ceramics.” In The A. Appadurai, 3–63. Cambridge:
Struma/Strymon River Valley in Cambridge University Press.
Prehistory. Proceedings of the International Archibald, Z. 2013. “Joining up the dots:
Symposium ‘Strymon Praehistoricus’, making economic sense of pottery dis-
Kjustendil-Blagoevgrad (Bulgaria) and tributions in the Aegean and beyond.”
Serres-Amphipolis (Greece), 27.09–- In Pottery Markets in the Ancient Greek
01.10.2004, edited by H. Todorova, World (8th–1st centuries B.C.) Proceedings
M. Stefanovich and G. Ivanov, of the International Symposium held at the
397–420. Sofia: Gerda Henkel Stiftung. Université libre de Bruxelles
Andronikos, M. 1968. Totenkult. Arch- 19–21 June 2008, edited by
aeologia Homerica III. W. Göttingen: A. Tsingarida and D. Viviers, 133–157.
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Bruxelles: CReA-Patrimoine.
Anson, J. 2012. “Greek exports rise despite Armstrong, C. G., A. C. Shoemaker,
crisis.” Decanter Wine News. www I. McKechnie, A. Ekblom, P. Szabó,
.decanter.com/wine-news/greek- P. J. Lane, A. C. McAlvay, et al. 2017.
exports-rise-despite-crisis–31086/ “Anthropological contributions to his-
Antonaccio, C. 1995. An Archaeology of the torical ecology: 50 questions, infinite
Ancestors. Tomb Cult and Hero Cult in prospects.” PLOS ONE 12(2):
Early Greece. Lanham, MD: Rowman e0171883.
and Littlefield. Arroyo-García, R., L. Ruiz-García, R.
2002. “Warriors, traders, and ancestors: Ocete, M. A. López, C. Arnold, A.
the ‘heroes’ of Lefkandi.” In Images of Ergul, G. Söylemezoglu, H. I. Uzun,
Ancestors, edited by J. M. Højte, F. Cabello, J. Ibánez, M. K. Aradhya,
334 BIBLIOGR APHY

A. Atanassov, I. Atanassov, S. Balint, J. Aytaçlar, N. 2004. “The Early Iron Age

L. Cenis, L. Constantini, S. Gorislavets, at Klazomenai.” In Klazomenai, Teos
M. S. Grando, B. Y. Klein, P. E. and Abdera: Metropoleis and colony.
McGovern, D. Merdinoglu, I. Pejic, F. Proceedings of the International Sym-
Pelsy, N. Primikirios, V. Risovannaya, posium held at the Archaeological
K. A. Roubelakis-Angelakis, H. Museum of Abdera 20–21 October 2001,
Snoussi, P. Sotiri, S. Tamhankar, P. edited by A. Moustaka, E. Skarlatidou,
This, L. Troshin, J. M. Malpica, M.-C. Tzannes and Y. Ersoy, 17–41.
F. Lefor and J. M. Martinez-Zapater. Thessaloniki: University Studio Press.
2006. “Multiple origins of cultivated Baccarin, A. 1990. “Olivicoltura in Attica fra
grapevine (Vitis vinifera L. ssp. sativa) VII e V sec. A.C. Trasformazione e
based on chloroplast DNA crisi.” Dialoghi di Archeologia 8(1): 29–33.
polymorphisms.” Molecular Ecology 15: Bar-Matthews, M., A. Ayalon and
3707–3714. A. Kaufman. 1998. “Middle to Late
Aschenbrenner, A. 1972. “A contemporary Holocene (6500-year period) paleo-
community.” In The Minnesota climate in the Eastern Mediterranean
Messenia Expedition. Reconstructing region from stable isotopic composi-
a Bronze Age Regional Environment, tion of speleothems from Soreq Cave,
edited by W. A. MacDonald and Israel.” In Water, Environment and
G. R. Rapp Jr., 47–63. Society in Times of Climatic Change,
Minneapolis: University of edited by A. S. Issar and N. Brown,
Minnesota Press. 203–2014. Amsterdam:Kluwer.
Aslan, C. C., L. Kealhofer and P. Grave. Bar-Matthews, M. and A. Ayalon. 2011.
2014. “The Early Iron Age at Troy “Mid-Holocene climate variations
reconsidered.” Oxford Journal of revealed by high- resolution speleothem
Archaeology 33: 275–312. records from Soreq cave, Israel and their
Åström, P. 1977. The Cuirass Tomb and Other correlation with cultural changes.” The
Finds at Dendra. Part I: The Chamber Holocene 21(1): 163–171.
Tombs (with the collaboration of N.M. Baray, L. 2007. “La question du don dans
Verdelis, N-G. Gejvall and H. les sociétés celtiques.” In Don et sciences
Hjelmqvist). SIMA 4. Göteborg: Paul sociales. Théories et pratiques croisées, edi-
Åströms Förlag. ted by E. Magnani, 29–70. Dijon:
Atkinson, T. D. and R. C. Bosanquet et al. Editions universitaires de Dijon.
1904. “Excavations at Phylakopi in Barnard, H., A.N. Dooley, G. Areshian, B.
Melos.” Journal of Hellenic Studies, Gasparyan, K.F. Faull. 2011.
Supplement 1. London. “Chemical evidence for wine pro-
Aubet, M. E. 1993. The Phoenicians and the duction around 4000BCE in the Late
West: Politics, Colonies and Trade. Chalcolithic Near Eastern
Cambridge: Cambridge University Highlands.” Journal of Archaeological
Press. Science 38: 977–984.
Avolio, E., F. Orlandi, C. Bellecci, Barth, F. ed. 1969. Ethnic Groups and
M. Fornaciari and S. Federico. 2012. Boundaries: The Social Organization of
“Assessment of the impact of climate Culture Difference. Boston: Little,
change on the olive flowering in Brown.
Calabria (southern Italy).” Theoretical Bartonek, A. and G. Buchner. 1995. “Die
and Applied Climatology 107(3e4): ältesten griechischen Inscriften von
531e540. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/S Pithekoussai (2. Hälfte des VIII. bis 1.
00704-011–0500-2. Hälfte des VII. Jhs.).” Die Sprache,
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 335

Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 37(2): 2014. “Gifts to the goddesses: pylian

129–231. perfumed olive oil abroad?” In KE-
Baughan, E. P. 2013. Couched in Death. RA-ME-JA. Studies Presented to
Klinai and Identity in Anatolia and Cynthia, edited by W. Shelmerdine,
Beyond. Madison, WI: The D. Nakassis, J. Gulizio and S. A. James,
University of Wisconsin Press. 141–162. INSTAP Prehistory Mono
Bell, C. 1992. Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice. graphs 46. Philadelphia PA: INSTAP
Oxford: Oxford University Press. Academic Press.
Belletier, M.-P. 2003. “La ‘Politique de la Bennet, J. 1990. “Knossos in context: com-
mort’: observation sur les tombes parative perspectives on the linear
attiques aux époques géométrique et B administration of LM II–III
archaïque. In Symposium: Banquet et Crete.” AJA 94(2): 193–211.
representations in Grèce et à Rome. Bennett, E. L., Jr. 1985. “The first
Colloque international, Université de Mycenaean inscribed tablets ever
Toulouse-Le Mirail, mars 2002, CRATA. found on the Greek Mainland.” In
Pallas 61, edited by Ch. Orfanos and J.- Contributions to Aegean Archaeology:
C. Carrière, 71–82. Toulouse: Presses Studies in Honor of William
universitaires du Mirail. A. McDonald, edited by N. C. Wilkie
Ben-Shlomo, D., E. Nodarou and and W. D. E. Coulson, 37–48.
J. B. Rutter. 2011. “Transport stirrup Publications in Ancient Studies 1.
jars from the Southern Levant: new Minneapolis: Center for Ancient
light on commodity exchange in the Studies, University of Minnesota.
Eastern Mediterranean.” AJA 115(3): Bennett, E. 2002. “What must we know
329–353. about Minoan and Mycenaean wine?”
Bendall, L. M. 2001. “The economics of In Oinos Palaios Idypotos: To Kritiko Krasi
Potnia in the linear B documents: apo ta Proïstorika os ta Neotera Chronia.
palatial support for Mycenaean reli- Kounavoi: Dimos ‘N. Kazantzakis’,
gion.” In Potnia: Deities and Religion 24–26 Apriliou 1998, edited by
in the Aegean Bronze Age [Aegaeum A. K. Mylopotamitaki, 77–85. Irakleio:
22], edited by R. Laffineur and Ypourgeio Politismou Archaiologiko
R. Hägg, 445–452. Liège: Institouto Kritis, Praktika tou
Université de Liège. Diethnous Epistimonikou Symposiou.
2004. “Fit for a king? Hierarchy, exclu- Bennet, J. 1996. “Marks on Bronze Age
sion, aspiration and desire in the social Pottery from Kommos,” in Kommos
structure of Mycenaean Banqueting.” I: The Kommos Region and Houses of the
In Food, Cuisine and Society in Prehistoric Minoan Town. Part 2: The Houses of the
Greece, edited by P. Halstead and Minoan Town, edited by J.W. Shaw
J. C. Barrett, 105–135. Sheffield and M.C. Shaw, 313–321.
Studies in Aegean Archaeology 5. Princeton: INSTAP Academic Press.
Oxford: Oxbow Books. Benoit, G. and A. Comeau, eds. 2005.
2007. “How much makes a feast? A Sustainable Future for the
Amounts of banqueting foodstuffs in Mediterranean. The Blue Plan’s
the linear B records of Pylos.” In Environment and Development Outlook.
Colloquium Romanum. Atti del XII London: Earthscan.
Colloquio Internazionale di Micenologia, Benveniste, É. 1973. Indo-European
edited by A. Sacconi, M. Del Freo, Language and Society. Translated by
L. Godart and M. Negri, eds., 77–101. E. Palmer. Coral Gables, FL:
Pisa: F. Serra. University of Miami Press.
336 BIBLIOGR APHY

Benzi, M. 1992. Rodi e la civiltá micenea. Bietak, M. 1986. Ein Altägyptischer

Rome: Gruppo editoriale Weingarten in einem Tempel-bezirk
internazionale. des Neuen Reiches. Anzeiger der
Bérard, C. 1970. Eretria 3: l’hérôon à la porte Österreichischen Akademie d. Wissen-
de l’ouest. Bern: publication de l’Ecole schaften, Phil.-hist. Kl. 122: 267–278.
Suisse d’Archéologie en Grèce, Binder, J. 1998. “The early history of the
Editions Francke. Demeter and Kore Sanctuary at
Berking, H. 1999. Sociology of Giving. Eleusis.” In Ancient Greek Cult
London: Sage. Practice from the Archaeological Evidence:
Berlingò, I. 1995. “Importazione corinzie Proceedings of the Fourth International
nella siritide.” In Corinto e l’occidente: Seminar on Ancient Greek Cult,
Atti del trentaquattresimo convegno di Organised by the Swedish Institute at
studi sulla Magna Grecia, 417–430. Athens, 22–24 October 1993, edited by
Taranto: Istituto per la storia R. Hägg, 131–139. Stockholm:
e l’archeologia della Magna Grecia. Svenska Institutet i Athen.
Besnard, G., P. Baradat, C. Breton, B. Blackman, D. 2000–2001. “Archaeological
Khadari, and A. Berville. 2001. “Olive Reports for 2000–2001.” Archaeo-
domestication from structure of olea- logical Reports, 140–141.
sters and cultivars using nuclear Blegen, C. W. 1921. Korakou: A Prehistoric
RAPDs and mitochondrial RFLPs.” Settlement Near Corinth. Boston:
Genetics, Selection, Evolution 33: S251– American School of Classical Studies at
S268. Athens.
Besnard, G., P. Hernandez, B. Khadari, 1937. Prosymna. The Helladic Settlement
G. Dorado, and V. Savolainen. Preceding the Argive Heraeum.
2011. “Genomic profiling of plastid Cambridge: Cambridge University
DNA variation in the Mediterranean Press.
olive tree.” BMC Plant Biology 1952. “Two Athenian grave groups of
11: 80. about 900 BC.” Hesperia 21(4):
Betancourt, P. 1990. Kommos II: The 279–294.
Final Neolithic Through Middle Minoan 1954. “An early tholos tomb in western
III Pottery. Princeton: Princeton Messenia.” Hesperia 23(1): 158–162.
University Press. Blegen, C. W. and M. Rawson. 1966. The
2012. The Dams and Water Management Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western
Systems of Minoan Pseira. Philadelphia: Messenia, Vol. 1. The Buildings and
INSTAP Academic Press. Their Context. Princeton: Princeton
Beunza, D. and D. Stark. 2004. “Tools of University Press.
the trade: the sociotechnology of Blegen, C., J. L. Caskey and M. Rawson,
arbitrage in a Wall Street trading eds. 1953. Troy. 3: The Sixth
room.” Industrial and Corporate Settlement. Princeton: Princeton
Change 13(2): 369–400. University Press.
Bevan, A. 2010. “Making and marking rela- Blitzer, H. 1993. “Olive cultivation and oil
tionships: Bronze Age brandings and production in Minoan Crete.” In La
Mediterranean commodities.” In production du vin et de l’huile en
Cultures of Commodity Branding, edited Méditerranée, Bulletin de Correspondance
by A. Bevan and D. Wengrow, 35–86. Hellénique Supplément XXVI, edited by
Walnut Creek, Calif.: Left Coast Press. M.-C. Amouretti and J.-P. Brun,
2014. “Mediterranean containerization.” 163–175. Athens: École Française
Current Anthropology 55(4): 387–418. d’Athènes.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 337

1995. “Minoan implements and indus- Borgatti, S. P. 2005. “Centrality and network
tries.” In Kommos I, Part I, edited by flows.” Social Networks 27(1): 55–71.
J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw, Borgna, E. 2003. “Regional settlement
403–535. Princeton: Princeton patterns, exchange systems and
University Press. sources of power in Crete at the end
2014. “Preliminary notes on olive domes- of the LBA: establishing a
tication and cultivation in the connection.” SMEA 45: 153–183.
Prehistoic Aegean.” In Physis. 2004. “Aegean feasting. A Minoan
L’Environnement naturel et al relation perspective.” Hesperia 73: 247–279.
homme-milieu dan s le monde Égéen proto- Bosanquet, R. C., R. M. Dawkins,
historique. Actes de la 14e Rencontre M. N. Tod, W. L. H. Duckworth and
égéenne international, Paris, Institut J. L. Myres. 1902–1903. “Excavations at
National d’Histoire de l’Art (INHA), Palaikastro II.” BSA 9: 274–387.
11–14 décembre 2012, edited by Bottema, S. and A. Sarpaki. 2003.
G. Touchais, R. Laffineur and “Environmental change in Crete: a
F. Rougemont, 239–244. Leuven: 9000-year record of Holocene vegeta-
Peeters. tion history and the effect of the
Blok, J. H. and A. P. M. H. Lardinois, eds. Santorini eruption.” Holocene 13:
2006. Solon of Athens. New Historical 733–749.
and Philological Approaches. Mnemosyne Bourdieu, P. (1972) 1977. Outline of
272. Boston: Brill. a Theory of Practice. Translated by
Boardman, J. 1990. “Symposion furniture.” Richard Nice. Cambridge:
In Sympotica. A Symposium on the Cambridge University Press.
Symposion, edited by O. Murray, Bourriau, J., L. Smith and M. Serpico.
122–131. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 2001. “The provenance of Canaanite
Boardman, J. 2006. “Greeks in the East amphorae found at Memphis and
Mediterranean (South Anatolia, Amarna in the New Kingdom.” In
Syria, Egypt).” In Greek Colonization. The Social Context of Technological
An Account of Greek Colonies and Other Change: Egypt and the Near East
Settlements Overseas. Volume I, edited 1650–1150 B.C., edited by
by Gocha R. Tsetskhladze, 507–534. A. Shortland and M. Tite, 113–146.
Mnemosyne 193. Boston: Brill. London: Oxbow.
Boas, F. 1897. The Social Organization and Bowie, E. L. 1986. “Early Greek elegy,
the Secret Societies of the Kwakiutl symposium, and public festival.”
Indians. Washington, DC: G.P.O. Journal of Hellenic Studies 106:13–35.
Bogaard, A. 2017. “The archaeology of 1990. “Miles ludens? The problem of mar-
food surplus.” World Archaeology 49 tial exhortation in early Greek elegy.”
(1):1–7. In Sympotica: A Sympoium on the
Bohen, B. 1997. “Aspects of Athenian grave Symposion, edited by O. Murray,
cult in the age of Homer.” In New 221–229. Oxford: Oxford University
Light on a Dark Age: Exploring the Press.
Culture of Geometric Greece, edited by 1993. “Greek table-talk before Plato.”
S. Langdon, 44–55. Columbia, MO- Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of
London: University of Missouri Press. Rhetoric 11(4): 355–371.
Bonn-Muller, E. 2010. “First Minoan Branigan, K. 1993. Dancing with Death: Life
shipwreck.” Archaeology 63(1): 44–47. and Death in Southern Crete c. 3000–
http://archive.archaeology.org/1001/ 2000 BC. Amsterdam: Adolf M.
etc/minoan_shipwreck.html. Hakkert.
338 BIBLIOGR APHY

Brann, E. T. H. 1962. Late Geometric and Brogan, T. M., R. A. K. Smith and J. S. Soles.
Protoattic Pottery, Mid-8th to Late 7th 2002. “Mycenaeans at Mochlos?
Century BC. Princeton: American Exploring culture and identity in the
School of Classical Studies at Athens. Late Minoan IB to IIIA1 transition.”
Braudel, F. 1972. The Mediterranean and the Aegean Archaeology 6: 89–118.
Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip Broodbank, C. 2013. The Making of the
II. 2 vols., 2nd rev. ed., transl. 1972 Middle Sea. Oxford: Oxford
and 1973 by Sian Reynolds. University Press.
New York: Harper & Row. Brooke, J. L. 2014. Climate Change and the
Bray, T. L. ed. 2003. The Archaeology Course of Global History. A Rough
and Politics of Food and Feasting Journey. New York: Cambridge
in Early States and Empires. University Press.
New York: Kluwer Academic/ Brughmans, T. 2010: Connecting the dots:
Plenum Publishers. towards archaeological network
Breton, C., M. Tersac and A. Bervillé. analysis. Oxford Journal of Archaeology
2006: “Genetic diversity and gene 29(3): 277–303.
flow between the wild olive (oleaster, Brun, J.-P. 1993. “Les innovations techni-
Olea europaea L.) and the olive: several ques et leur diffusion dans les
Plio-Pleisocene refuge zones in the pressoirs.” In La production du vin
Mediterranean Basin suggested by et de l’huile en Méditerranée,
sequence repeats analysis.” Journal of edited by M.-C. Amouretti and
Biogeography 33(11): 1916–1928. J.-P. Brun, 539–550. BCH
Broekaert, W., R. Nadeau and J. Wilkins. Supplement XXVI, Athens: École
2016. “Introduction.” In Food, Française d’Athènes.
Identity and Cross-Cultural Exchange in 2003. Le vin et l’huile dans la Méditerranée
the Ancient World, edited by antique. Viticulture, oléiculture et proceeds
W. Broekaert, R. Nadeau and de fabrication (Collection des
J. Wilkins, 7–12. Brussels: Éditions Hesperides). Paris: Éditions Errance.
Latomus. 2004. Archeologie du vin et de l‘huile de la
Brogan, T. and A. Koh. 2008. “Feasting at Préhistoire à l’Époque Héllènistique.
Mochlos? New evidence for wine pro- Paris: Editions Errance.
duction, storage and consumption from 2010. “Viticulture et oléiculture grec-
a Bronze Age harbor town on Crete.” ques et indigenes en Grande Grèce
In Dais: The Aegean Feast, edited by et en Sicile.” In Grecs et indigenes de la
L. Hitchcock, R. Laffineur and catalogne à la Mer Noire: Actes des
J. Crowley, 125–131. Aegaeum 29. rencontres du programme européen
Liège: Université de Liège, Histoire de Ramses 2 (2006–2008), edited by
l’art et archéologie de la Grèce antique. H. Tréziny, 425–431, Paris:
Brogan, T. M. and E. Hallager, eds. 2011. Publications du Centre Camille
LM IB Pottery: Relative Chronology and Jullian, Éditions Errance.
Regional Differences, Acts of a Workshop 2011: “La produzione del vino in Magna
Held at the Danish Institute at Athens in Grecia e in Sicilia.” In La vigna di
Collaboration with the INSTAP Study Dioniso. Vite, vino e culti in Magna
Center for East Crete, 27–29 June 2007. Grecia. Atti del quarantanovesimo
Monographs of the Danish Institute at Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia,
Athens 11. Athens: Danish Institute at Taranto 24–28 settembre 2009, 95–142,
Athens. Taranto: Scorpione.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 339

Brunton, G. and R. Engelbach. 1927. Callon, M. and F. Muniesa. 2005.

Gurob. London: British School of “Economic markets as calculative col-
Archaeology in Egypt. lective devices.” Organization Studies
Brysbaert, A. ed. 2011. Tracing Prehistoric 26(8): 1229–1250.
Social Networks through Technology: Callot, O. 1987. “Les huileries du Bronze
A Diachronic Perspective on the Aegean, Récent à Ougarit, premiers éléments
Routledge Studies in Archaeology 3. pour une étude.” In Le centre de la ville
London and New York: Routledge. 38e-44e campagnes (1978–1984), edited
Buchner, G. and C. F. Russo. 1955. “La by M. Yon. 197–212. Paris: RSO
coppa di Nestore e un’iscrizione III, ERC.
metrica da Pitecusa dell’VIII secolo Callot, O. 1993. “Les huileries et l’huile au
av. Cr.” In Accademia Nazionale dei Bronze Récent: quelques exemples
Lincei. Rendiconti della Classe di syriens et chypriotes.” In La production
Scienze morali, storiche e filologiche viii du vin et de l’huile en Méditerranée,
10: 215–234. Supplément 26 du BCH, edited by
Buchner, G. and D. Ridgway. 1993. M. C. Amouretti and J. P. Brun,
Pithekoussai I. La Necropoli: Tombe 55–64. Paris: École française
10723. Scavate dal 1952 al 1961. Roma: d’Athènes.
Giorgio Bretschneider Editore. Canevaro, L. G. 2015. Hesiod’s Works and
Burkert, W. (John Roffan, transl.). 1985. Days: How to Teach Self-Sufficiency.
Greek Religion. Cambridge, MA: Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harvard University Press. Carlà, F. and M. Gori. 2014.
Burns, B. 2010. Mycenaean Greece, “Introduction.” In Gift Giving and the
Mediterranean Commerce, and the ‘Embedded’ Economy in the Ancient
Formation of Identity. Cambridge: World. Akademiekonferenzen, 17, edited
Cambridge University Press. by F. Carlà and M. Gori, 7–47.
Burns, B. E. 2012. Mycenaean Greece, Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.
Mediterranean Commerce, and the Carper, J. 1994. Food. Your Miracle Medicine.
Formation of Identity. Cambridge: New York: Harper Collins.
Cambridge University Press. Carrier, J. G. ed. 2005. Handbook of
Butler, J. 2013. “Greeks still world’s top Economic Anthropology. Northampton,
olive oil guzzlers.” Olive Oil Times. MA: Edward Elgar Publishing
www.oliveoiltimes.com/olive-oil- Limited.
basics/greeks-leading-olive-oil- Carrington, P. J., J. Scott and
guzzlers/35304 S. Wasserman, eds. 2005. Models and
Butzer, K. W. 2012. “Collapse, environ- Methods in Social Network Analysis.
ment and society.” In Proceedings of the Cambridge: Cambridge University
National Academy of Sciences of the Press.
United states of America 109(10): Cartledge, P. 1993. The Greeks: A Portrait of
3632–3639. Self and Other. Oxford: Oxford
Cahill, N. 2002. Household and City University Press.
Organization at Olynthus. New Haven/ Casabona, J. 1966. Recherches sur le vocabu-
London, Yale University Press. laire des sacrifies en grec. Aix-en-
Callon, M. 1998. “Introduction: the Provence: Publications des Annales
embeddedness of economic markets de la Faculté des Lettres.
in economics.” In The Laws of the Catling, E. A., H. W. Catling and
Markets, edited by M. Callon, 1–57. D. Smyth. 1979. “Knossos 1975:
Oxford: Blackwell. Middle Minoan III and Late Minoan
340 BIBLIOGR APHY

I Houses by the Acropolis.” BSA synchronous climate change 2800

74: 1–80. years ago: from peat in South
Catling, H. W. 1997. “Kypros, Kriti kai America.” Earth and Planetary Science
Aigaio kata tin Epochi tou Letters 253: 439–444.
Oreichalkou.” In Istoria tis Kyprou, edi- Chambers, F. M., J. R. G. Daniel, J. Alm, S.
ted by T. Papadopoulou, 371–430. Bartlett, C. Begeot, L. Bingham, M.
Leukosia: Idryma Archiepiskopou Blaauw, A. Blundell, F. Chambers,
Makariou G’. A’: Archaia Kypros. D. Charman, J. Daniell, R. Evershed,
Part A’: Fysikogeografiki Eisagogi E. Karofeld, A. Korhola, H. Kuester, J.
Proistorikoi Chronoi Scheseis pros Laine, M. Magny, D. Mauquoy, E.
Omorous Chorous. McClymont, F. Mitchell, P.
2009. Sparta: Menelaion I. The Bronze Oksanen, R. Pancost, K. Sarmaja-
Age. BSA Suppl. 45. London: British Korjonen, H. Seppa, U. Silasoo, B.
School at Athens. Steffanini, M. Steffens, E.-S. Tuittila,
Catling, R. W. V. 1996. “A Tenth-century M. Valiranta, J. van der Plicht, B. van
trade-mark from Lefkandi.” In Geel and D. Yeloff. 2010. “Peatland
Minotaur and Centaur. Studies in the archives of late-Holocene climate
Archaeology of Crete and Euboea pre- change in northern Europe.” PAGES
sented to Mervyn Popham, edited by News 18: 4–6.
D. Evely, I. S. Lemos and Chantraine, P. 1968–1980. Dictionnaire
S. Sherratt, 126–132. BAR étymologique de la langue grecque: histoire
International Series 638. Oxford: des mots. Paris: Klincksieck.
Archaeopress. Chatterton, B. 2003. “Pruning olive trees.”
1998. “The typology of the The Mediterranean Garden 34. www
Protogeometric and Subpro- .mediterraneangardensociety.org/oli
togeometric pottery from Troia and ves.html#1
its Aegean context.” Studia Troica 8: 2004. “Olive oil production.” The
152–187. Mediterranean Garden 41. www
Catling, R. W. V. and Lemos, I. S. 1990. .mediterraneangardensociety.org/
Lefkandi II. The Protogeometric Building olives.html#1
at Toumba, Part 1: The Pottery. Christakis, K. S. 2008. The Politics of Storage:
London: Thames and Hudson. Storage and Sociopolitical Complexity in
Cavanagh, W. 1998. “Innovation, conser- Neopalatial Crete. Prehistory Mono-
vatism and variation in Mycenaean graphs 25. Philadelphia: INSTAP
funerary ritual.” In Cemetery and Academic Press.
Society in the Aegean Bronze Age, edited Cicirelli, C. and C. Albore Livadie. 2008.
by K. Branigan, 103–114. Sheffield: “Stato delle ricerche a Longola di
Sheffield Academic Press. Poggiomarino: quandro insediamen-
Cavanagh, W. and C. Mee. 1998. A Private tale e problematiche.” In Nuove
Place: Death in Prehistoric Greece. SIMA ricerche archeologiche a Pompei ed
125. Jonsered: Paul Aströms Förlag. Ercolano (Studi della Soprintendenza
Chadwick, J. 1976. The Mycenaean World. Archeologica di Pompei 25), edited by
Cambridge: Cambridge University P. Guzzo and M. P. Guidobaldi,
Press. 473–487. Naples: Electa.
Chambers, F. M., D. Mauquoy, Civantos, L. 2001. “La olivicultra en el
S. A. Brain, M. Blaauw and mundo y en España.” In El Cultivo
J. R. G. Daniel. 2007. “Globally del Olivo, 4th edn, edited by D.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 341

Barranco, R. Fernández-Escobar, L. Collar, A. 2007. “Network theory and reli-

Rallo, 17–34. Madrid: Ediciones gious innovation.” Mediterranean
Mundi-Prensa. Historical Review 22(1): 149–162.
Clarke, J., N. Brooks, E. Banning, M. Bar- Constantin, S., A.-V. Bojar, S.-E. Lauritzen
Matthews, S. Campbell, L. Clare and and J. Lundberg. 2007. “Holocene and
A. Zerboni. 2016. “Climatic changes Late Pleistocene climate in the
and social transformations in the Near sub-Mediterranean continental envir-
East and North Africa during the ‘long’ onment: a speleothem record from
4th millennium BC: a comparative Poleva Cave (Southern Carpathians,
study of environmental and archaeolo- Romania).” Palaeogeography, Palaeo-
gical evidence.” Quaternary Science climatology, Palaeoecology 243: 322–338.
Reviews 136(C): 96–121. Courbin, P. 1974. Tombes géométriques
Clay, J. S. 2016. “How to construct d’Argos I (1952–1958). Paris: Vrin.
a sympotic space with words.” In 1993. “Fragments d’amphores
The Look of Lyric: Greek Song and protogéomètriques grecques à Bassit
the Visual, edited by V. Cazzato and (Syrie).” Hesperia 62(1): 95–113.
A. Lardinois, 204–216. Leiden: Brill. Crielaard, J. P. 2002. “Past or present? Epic
Cline, E. H. 1994. Sailing the Wine-Dark poetry, aristocratic self-representation
Sea: International Trade and the Late- and the concept of time in the eighth
Bronze Age Aegean. BAR Inter- and seventh centuries BC.” In Omero
national Series 591. Oxford: Tempus tremila anni dopo, edited by
Reparatum. F. Montanari, 239–296. Rome:
Cohen, B. ed. 2000. Not the Classical Ideal: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura.
Athens and the Construction of the Other 2006. “Basileis at sea: elites and external
in Greek Art. Leiden. Boston: Brill. contacts in the Euboian Gulf region
Coldstream, J. N. 1977. Geometric Greece. from the end of the Bronze Age to
London: Ernest Benn. the beginning of the Iron Age.” In
1983. “Gift exchange in the eighth cen- Ancient Greece from the Mycenaean
tury B.C.” In The Greek Renaissance of Palaces to the Age of Homer, edited by
the Eighth Century B.C.: Tradition and S. Deger-Jalkotzy and I. S. Lemos,
Innovation. Proceedings of the Second 271–297. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
International Symposium at the University Press.
Swedish Institute at Athens, 2007. “Eretria’s west cemetery revisited.
1–5 June, 1981, edited by R. Hägg, Burial plots, social structure and set-
201–206. Stockholm: Svenska tlement organization during the 8th
Institutet i Athen. and 7th centuries BC.” In Oropos and
2009. Greek Geometric Pottery. A Survey of Euboea in the Early Iron Age: Acts of an
Ten Local Styles and their Chronology, International Round Table, University of
Updated 2nd ed. Exeter: Bristol Thessaly, June 18–20, 2004, edited by
Phoenix Press. A. Mazarakis Ainian, 169–194. Volos:
2011. “Geometric elephantiasis.” In The University of Thessaly Publications.
“Dark Ages” Revisited. Acts of an 2008. “Ruderschiff und Schla-
International Symposium in Memory of chtengetös, Seekrieger und Händler
William D. E. Coulson, University of auf dem weindunklen Meer.” In Zeit
Thessaly, Volos, 14–17 June 2007, edi- der Helden (Katalog Sonderausstellung
ted by A. Mazarakis Ainian, Volume Karlsruhe), edited by C. Hattler and
II, 801–808. Volos: University of B. L. Karlsruhe, 37–46. Darmstadt:
Thessaly Press. Primus Verlag.
342 BIBLIOGR APHY

2011. “The ‘wanax to basileus model’ at Vienna, October 29th and 30th, 2004,
reconsidered: authority and ideology edited by S. Deger-Jalkotzy and
after the collapse of the Mycenaean M. Zavadil, 89–118. Österreichische
Palaces.” In The “Dark Ages” Akademie der Wissenschaften
Revisited. Acts of an International Philosophisch-historische Klasse
Symposium in Memory of William Denkschriften 362, Veröffentlichungen
D. E. Coulson, University of Thessaly, der Mykenischen Kommission 28,
Volos, 14–17 June 2007, edited by Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen
A. Mazarakis Ainian, Volume II, Akademie der Wissenschaften
83–111. Volos: University of D’Agata, A. L. and M.-C. Boileau. 2009.
Thessaly Press. “Pottery production and consump-
Cultraro, M. 2004. “The Northern Aegean tion in Early Iron Age Crete: the
in the Early Iron Age: an assessment of case of Thronos Kephala (Ancient
the present picture.” In To Aigaio Stin Sybrita).” Studi Micenei ed Egeo-
Proimi Epoxi tou Sidirou. Praktika tou Anatolici (SMEA) 51: 165–222.
Diethnous Sumposiou, edited by D’Agostino, B. 2006. “The first Greeks in
G. Stampolidis, 215–226. Athens: Italy.” In Greek Colonisation. An
Ministry of Cutlure. Account of Greek Colonies and other
Cummer, W. and E. Schofield. 1984. Keos: Settlements Overseas, edited by G.
Results of Excavations Conducted by the R. Tsetskhladze, 201–237. Mnemo-
University of Cincinnati Under the syne 193. Boston: Brill.
Auspices of the American School of Dakoronia, F. 1987. “War-ships on sherds of
Classical Studies at Athens. Vol. 3, LH IIIC kraters from Kynos.” In Tropis
Ayia Irini: House A. Mainz: Philipp 2. Second International Sym-posium on
von Zabern. Ship Construction in Antiquity, edited by
Czerny, E. 1998. “Zur Keramik von ‘Ezbet H. Tzalas, 117–122. Athens: Hellenic
Rushdi (Stand Mai 1997).” Ägypten Institute for the Preservation of
und Levante 8: 41–46. Nautical Tradition.
D’Agata, A. L. 2003. “Late Minoan IIIC – 1996. “Kynos . . . Fleet.” In Tropis 4.
Subminoan Pottery Sequence at Proceedings of the 4th International
Thronos/Kephala and its Connections Symposium on Ship Construction in
with the Greek Mainland.” In LH III Antiquity. Athens, 28–31 August 1991,
C Chronology and Synchronisms. edited by H. Tzalas, 159–171. Athens:
Proceedings of the International Workshop Hellenic Institute for the Preservation
Held at the Austrian Academy of Sciences of Nautical Tradition.
at Vienna May 7th and 8th, 2001, edited 1996. “Mycenaean East Lokris.” In Atti
by S. Deger-Jalkotzy, Sigrid and M. e memorie del secondo congress internazio-
Zavadil, 23–35. Wien: Verlag der nale di micenologia, Roma-Napoli, 14–20
Österreichischen Akademie der ottobre 1991 (Incunabula graeca 98), edi-
Wissenscha11ften, Österreichische ted by E. De Miro, L. Godart and
Akademie der Wissenschaften philoso- A. Sacconi, 1167–1173. Rome:
phisch-historische Klasse Denkscriften. “L’Erma” di Bretschneider.
2007. “Evolutionary paradigms and Late 1999. “Representations of sea-battles on
Minoan III. On a definition of LM III Mycenaean sherds from Kynos.” In
C Middle.” In LH III C Chronology and Tropis 5. Proceedings of the 5th
Synchronisms II: LH III C Middle. International Symposium on Ship
Proceedings of the International Workshop Construction in Antiquity, Nauplia,
Held at the Austrian Academy of Sciences 26–28 August 1993, edited by
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 343

H. Tzalas, 119–128. Athens: Hellenic Dakoronia, F., S. Deger-Jalkotzy and

Institute for the Preservation of S. Fabrizii-Reuer. 2009. “Elateia and
Nautical Tradition. the Mycenaean Heritage.” In Doron.
2002. “Further finds from Kynos.” In Timitikos Tomos yia ton Kathigiti Spuro
Tropis 7. Seventh International Iakovidi, edited by D. Danielidou
Symposium on Ship Construction in 211–229. Athens: Akademia Athenon.
Antiquity, Pylos, 26–29 August 1999, Dakouri-Hild, A. 2003. Value and values in
edited by H. Tzalas, 283–290. a Mycenaean society: production and con-
Athens: Hellenic Institute for the sumption of commodities in Late Bronze
Preservation of Nautical Tradition. Age east Boeotia, Greece, unpublished
2003. “The transition from Late Helladic Ph.D. dissertation, University of
III C to the Early Iron Age at Kynos.” Cambridge.
In LH III C Chronology and Daniels, J. 2015. “Greek crisis hits olive oil,
Synchronisms. Proceedings of the wine exports.” CNBC World
International Workshop Held at the Economy. www.cnbc.com/2015/07/
Austrian Academy of Sciences at Vienna 02/greek-crisis-hits-olive-oil-wine-
May 7th and 8th, 2001, edited by exports.html
S. Deger-Jalkotzy and M. Zavadil, Danile, L. 2009. “Lemnian Grey Ware.” In
37–51. Wien: Verlag der Pontic Grey Wares. International
Österreichischen Akademie der Conference Bucarest-Constantza,
Wissenschaften, Österreichische September 30th- October 3rd 2008, Pontica
Akademie der Wissenschaften philoso- XLII Supplementum I, edited by
phisch-historische Klasse Denkscriften. A. Avram, 305–323. Constanţa:
2004. “Elateia-Alonaki.” BICS 47: Muzeul de Istorie Naţionalǎ ş i
185–186. Arheologie.
2006a. “Early Iron Age elite burials in Davidson, D., C. Wilson, I. Lemos and
East Lokris.” In Ancient Greece: S. P. Theocharopoulos. 2010. “Tell for-
From Mycenaean Palaces to the Age mation processes as indicated from
of Homer, edited by S. Deger- geoarchaeological and geochemical
Jalkostzy and I. S. Lemos, investigations at Xeropolis, Euboea,
483–504. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Greece.” JAS 37: 1564–1567.
University Press. Davidson, J. 1997. Courtesans and Fishcakes.
2006b. “Mycenaean pictorial style at The Consuming Passions of Classical
Kynos, East Lokris.” In Pictorial Athens. London: Fontana Press.
Pursuits: Figurative Painting on Davies, J. K. 1984. Wealth and the Power of
Mycenaean and Geometric Pottery, edited Wealth. London
by E. Rystedt and B. Wells, 23–29. Davis, G. 2014. “Mining money in late
Stockholm: Swedish Institute of Archaic Athens.” Historia: Zeitschrift
Athens. für alte Gischichte, Bd. 63(3):
2007. “Rare burial gifts from 257–277.
Mycenaean chamber tombs in NE Day, L. P. 2005. “Response to Joseph
Phokis.” In Keimelion: Elitenbildung Maran, ‘Late Minoan Coarse Ware
und Elitarer Konsum von der Mykenischen Stirrup Jars on the Greek Mainland:
Palastzeit bis zur Homerischen a postpalatial perspective from the
Epoche, edited by E. Alram-Stern 12th century BC Argolid.’” In
and G. Nightingale, 59–64. Vienna: Ariadne’s Threads: Connections between
Verlag der Österreichischen Crete and the Greek Mainland in Late
Akademie der Wissenschaften. Minoan III (LM IIIA2 to LM IIIC).
344 BIBLIOGR APHY

Proceedings of the International Workshop J. C. Barrett, 45–62. Oxford:

Held at Athens Scuola Archeologica Italiana Oxbow Books.
5–6 April 2003, edited by A. L. D’Agata Day, P. M. and H. W. Haskell. 1995.
and J. Moody, 433–439. Athens: “Transport stirrup jars from Thebes as
Scuola Archeologica Italiana di evidence of trade in Late Bronze Age
Atene. Greece.” In Trade and Production in
2011. The Pottery from Karphi: A Re- Premonetary Greece: Aspects of Trade.
examination. BSA Studies 19, London: Proceedings of the Third International
British School at Athens. Workshop, Athens 1993, SIMA-PB,
Day, P. M. 1991. “A petrographic approach 134, edited by Carole Gillis, Christina
to the study of pottery in Neopalatial Risberg and Birgitta Sjöberg, 87–109.
East Crete.” Ph.D. dissertation, Jonsered: Paul Åströms Förlag.
University of Cambridge. Day, P. M., P. S. Quinn, J. B. Rutter and
1995. “Pottery production and con- V. Kilikoglou. 2011. “A world of
sumption in the Sitia Bay area dur- goods: transport jars and commodity
ing the New Palace Period.” In exchange at the Late Bronze Age harbor
Achladia: Scavi e ricerche della Missione of Kommos, Crete.” Hesperia 80(4):
Greco-Italiana in Creta Orientale (1991–- 511–558.
1993), edited by M. Tsipopoulou and L. De Caro, S. and C. Gialanella. 1998.
Vagnetti, 149–176. Incunabula Graeca “Novità pitecusane. L’insediamento
97. Rome: Consiglio Nazionale delle dio Punta Chiarito a Forio d’Ischia.”
Ricerche, Istituto per gli Studi In Euboica. L’Eubea e la presenza
Micenei ed Egeo-Anatolici, Gruppo euboica in Calcidi e in occidente, edited
Editoriale Internazionale. by M. Bats and B. D’Agostino,
1997. “Ceramic exchange between 337–353. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard.
towns and outlying settlements in De Fidio, P. 1977. I dosmoi Pilii a Poseidon:
Neopalatial East Crete.” In The una terra sacra di eta micenea. Incunabula
Function of the “Minoan Villa”: Graeca. Vol. LXV. Rome: Edizioni
Proceedings of the Eighth International dell’Ateneo & Bizzarri.
Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Deger-Jalkotzy, S. 1990. “Elateia (Phokis)
Athens, 6–8 June 1992, edited by und die frühe Geschichte der
R. Hägg, 219–228. ActaAth 4°, 46. Griechen. Ein österreichisch-grie-
Stockholm: Paul Åströms Förlag. chisches Grabungsprojekt.” AnzWien
1999. “Petrographic analysis of ceramics 127: 77–86.
from the shipwreck at Point Iria.” In 1998. “Die mykenische Peripherie
The Point Iria Wreck: Interconnections in und die Entwicklung politischer
the Mediterranean ca. 1200 B.C. Organisationformen von der myke-
Proceedings of the International Conference, nischen bis zur archaischen Ära.” In
Island of Spetses, 19 September 1998, edited Die Geschichte der hellenischen Sprache
by W. Phelps, Y. Lolos and Y. Vichos, und Schrift vom 2. zum 1. Jahrtausend
59–76. Athens: Hellenic Institute of v. Chr.: Bruch oder Kontinuität?, edited
Marine Archaeology. by N. Dimoudis and A. Kyriatsoulis,
Day, P. M. and D. E. Wilson. 2004. 331–343. Altenburg: DZA Verl. für
“Ceramic change and the practice Kultur und Wissenschaft.
of eating and drinking in Early 1998. “The Last Mycenaeans and their
Bronze Age Crete.” In Food, successors updated.” In Mediterranean
Cuisine and Society in Prehistoric Peoples in Transition: Thirteenth to Early
Greece, edited by P. Halstead and Tenth Centuries BCE, edited by
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 345

S. Gitin et al., 114–128. Jerusalem: 24th, 2007, edited by S. Deger-Jalkotzy

Israel Exploration Society. and A. E. Bächle, 77–116. Öste-rrei-
1998–1999. “Working for the palace: chische Akademie der Wissenschaften
some observations on PY An 26.” In Philosophisch-Historische Klasse Den-
A-NA-QO-TA: Studies Presented to J. T. kschriften 384, Veröffentlichungen der
Killen (Minos 33–34), edited by J. Mykenischen Kommission 30, Wien:
Bennett and J. Driessen, 65–81. Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie
Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de der Wissenschaften.
Salamanca. Delatte, A. 1955. Le cycéon, breuvage rituel
1999. “Elateia and problems of pottery des mystères d’Éleusis. Paris: Les Belles
chronology.” In Η Περιφέρεια Του Lettres.
Μυκηναϊκού Κόσμου. Α’Διεθνές Dellaporta, K. 2011. “Early seafaring in the
Διεπιστημονικό Συμπόσιο, Λαμία, Ionian Sea.” Skyllis 11(2): 19–24.
25–29 Σεπτεμβρίου 1994. 195–202. Demakopoulou, K. 1990. “The burial
Lamia: Ministry of Culture, 14th ritual in the tholos tomb at Kokla,
Ephoreia of Prehistoric and Classical Argolid.” In Celebrations of Death and
Antiquities. Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid.
2003. “Defining LH III C Middle at the Proceedings of the Sixth International
Cemetery of Elateia-Alonaki in Central Symposium at the Swedish Institute at
Greece.” In LH III C Chronology and Athens, 11–13 June 1988, edited by R.
Synchronisms. Proceedings of the interna- Hägg and G.C. Nordquist, 113–123.
tional workshop held at the Austrian Stockholm: Acta Instituti Atheniensis
Academy of Sciences at Vienna Regni Sueciae, Series In 4, XL.
May 7th and 8th, 2001, edited by Demakopoulou, K. 2009. “Laconia in LH
S. Deger-Jalkotzy and M. Zavadil, III C Late and Submycenaean: evi-
129–160. Wien: Verlag der dence from Epidauros Limera,
Österreichischen Akademie der Pellana, the Amyklaion and other
Wissenschaften, Österreichische Aka- sites.” In LH III C Chronology and
demie der Wissenschaften philoso- Synchronisms III: LH III C Late and
phisch-historische Klasse Denkscriften. the Transition to the Early Iron Age.
2004. “Pottery from Elateia-Alonaki.” Proceedings of the international work-
BICS 47: 187–188. shop held at the Austrian Academy of
2007. “Defining LH III C Middle at the Sciences at Vienna, February 23rd and
cemetery of Elateia-Alonaki in 24th, 2007, edited by S. Deger-
Central Greece.” In LH III Jalkotzy and A.E. Bächle, 117–132
C Chronology and Synchronisms II. LH Österreichische Akademie der
III C Middle, edited by S. Deger- Wissenschaften Philosophisch-
Jalkotzy and M. Zavadil, 129–160. Historische Klasse Denkschriften
Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen 384, Veröffentlichungen der
Akademie der Wissenschaften. Mykenischen Kommission 30,
2009. “From LH III C to the Early Iron Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen
Age: the Submycenaean period at Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Elateia.” In LH III C Chronology 2009. “Oi Apothikeutikoi Pseu-
and Synchronisms III: LH III C Late dostomoi Amphoreis tis Mideas. Nea
and the Transition to the Early Iron Stoicheia yia tis Scheseis Kretis kai
Age. Proceedings of the international work- Argolidas kata ton 13 AI. P.Ch.” In
shop held at the Austrian Academy of Doron. Timitikos Tomos yia ton
Sciences at Vienna, February 23rd and Kathigiti Spuro Iakovidi, edited by
346 BIBLIOGR APHY

D. Danielidou, 243–259. Athens. Dickinson, O. 2006. The Aegean from

Akademia Athenon. Bronze Age to Iron Age: Continuity and
Demakopoulou, K., N. Divari-Valakou, Change between the Twelfth and Eighth
P. Åström and G. Walberg. Centuries BC. London and New
1997–1998. “Excavations in Midea York: Routledge.
1995–1996.” Opuscula Atheniensia Dickinson, O. 2009. “Social Development in
22–23: 57–90. the post- palatial Period in the Aegean.”
Demesticha, S. and C. Pratt. 2016a. In From the Aegean to the Adriatic: Social
Maritime Transport Containers: into Organizations, Modes of Exchange, and
the Iron Age. The Aegean. In Interaction in Postpalatial Times (12th-11th
Mediterranean Connections: Maritime BC), edited E. Borgna and P. Cassola
Transport Containers and Seaborne Trade Guida, 11–20. Rome: Quasar.
in the Bronze and Early Iron Ages, by Dickinson, O. T. P. K. 1983. “Cist graves
A. B. Knapp and S. Demesticha, and chamber tombs.” BSA 78: 55–67.
132–147. New York: Routledge 2005. “Response to Jeremy B. Rutter,
Demetriou, D. 2013. Negotiating Identity in ‘Southern Triangles Revisited:
the Ancient Mediterranean. The Archaic Lakonia, Messenia, and Crete in the
and Classical Greek Multiethnic 14th–12th Centuries BC.’” In
Emporia. Cambridge: Cambridge Ariadne’s Threads: Connections between
University Press. Crete and the Greek Mainland in Late
Deoudi, M. 1999. Heroenkulte in Minoan III (LM IIIA2 to LM IIIC).
Homerischer Zeit. BAR International Proceedings of the international work-
Series 806. Oxford: Archaeopress. shop held at Athens, Scuola
Derks, R. and N. Roymans, eds. 2009. Archeologica Italiana, 5–6 April 2003,
Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity. The edited by A. L. D’Agata and
Role of Power and Tradition. J. Moody, 51–8. Tripodes 3. Athens:
Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene.
Press. 2010. “The ‘third world’ of the Aegean?
Desborough, V. R. d’A. 1972. The Greek Middle Helladic Greece revisited.” In
Dark Ages. London: Ernest Benn. Mesohelladika. The Greek Mainland in
1979. “A postscript to an Appendix.” In the Middle Bronze Age. BCH
Studies Presented in Memory of Supplement 52, edited by A. Philippa-
Porphyrios Dikaios, edited by Touchais, G. Touchais, S. Voutsaki
V. Karageorghis et al., 119–122. and J. Wright, 15–27. Athens: École
Nicosia: Lions Club of Nicosia. Français d’Athènes.
Descat, R. 1993. “La loi de Solon sur l’in- 2017. “The will to believe: why Homer
terdiction d’exporter les produits cannot be ‘true’ in any meaningful
Attiques.” In L’Emporion, edited by sense.” In Archaeology and Homeric Epic,
A. Bresson and P. Rouillard, edited by S. Sherratt and J. Bennet,
145–161. Publications du Centre 10–19. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Pierre Paris. Dietler, M. 1996. “Feasts and commensal
Descoeudres, J.-P. 2008. “Central Greece politics in the political economy.
on the Eve of the Colonisation Food, power and status in prehistoric
Movement.” In Greek Colonization. Europe.” In Food and the Status Quest:
An Account of Greek Colonies and other An Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited
Settlements Overseas. Volume II, edited by P. Wiessner and W.
by G. R. Tsetskhladze, 289–382. Schiefenhövel, 87–125. Oxford:
Mnemosyne 193. Boston: Brill. Berghahn Books.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 347

Dietler, M. 2001. “Theorizing the Feast. Edition. London and New York:
Rituals of consumption, commensal Routledge.
politics, and power in African con- Dimopoulou, N. 1999. “The Neopalatial
texts.” In Feasts. Archaeological and cemetery of the Knossian harbor-town
Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, at Poros: mortuary behavior and social
Politics, and Power, edited by ranking.” In Eliten in der Bronzezeit, edi-
M. Dietler and B. Hayden, 65–115. ted by V. L. Aravantinos, J. A. Barceló
Washington, DC: Smithsonian and C. Bockisch-Bräur, 27–36. Mainz:
Institution Press. Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen
2005. “The Archaeology of Colonization Zentralmuseums.
and the Colonization of Archaeology: Di Rita, F. and D. Magri. 2009. “Holocene
theoretical Challenges from an drought, deforestation and evergreen
Ancient Mediterranean Colonial vegetation development in the central
Encounter.” In The Archaeology of Mediterranean: a 5500 year record
Colonial Encounters: Comparative from Lago Alimini Piccolo, Apulia,
Perspectives, edited by G. Stein, 33–68. southeast Italy.” The Holocene 19:
Santa Fe: SAR Press. 295–306.
2007. “Culinary encounters: food, identity Di Sandro, N. 1986. Le anfore arcaiche dallo
and colonialism.” In The Archaeology of scarico Gosetti, Pithecusa. Naples.
Food and Identity, edited by K. C. Twiss, Docter, R. F. 1991. “Athena vs.
218–241. Carbondale: Southern Illinois Dionysos.” Bulletin Antieke Beschaving
University. 66: 45–50.
2009. “Social Development in the Post- 2007. “Transportamphoren.” In
palatial Period in the Aegean.” In From Karthago. Die Ergebnisse der hamburger
the Aegean to the Adriatic: Social grabung unter dem Decumanus Maximus
Organizations, Modes of Exchange, and (Mainz), edited by H. G. Niemeyer,
Interaction in Postpalatial Times (12th- R. F. Docter and K. Schmidt,
11th BC), edited by E. Borgna and 616–665. Mainz: Von Zabern.
P. Cassola Guida, 11–20. Rome: Döhl, H. 1979. “Bronzezeitliche Graffiti
Quasar. und Dipinti aus Tiryns II: Nach dem
Dietler, M. and B. Hayden, eds. 2001. Brand eingeritzte und gemalte
Feasts. Archaeological and Ethnographic Zeichen.” Kadmos 18: 47–70.
Perspectives on Food, Politics, and Domínguez, A. 2006. “Greeks in Sicily.” In
Power. Washington, DC: Smi- Greek Colonisation. An Account of Greek
thsonian Institution Press. Colonies and other Settlements Overseas,
Dietler, M. and C. López-Ruiz. 2009: edited by G. R. Tsetskhladze,
Colonial Encounters in Ancient Iberia. 253–357. Mne-mosyne supplement
Phoenician, Greek, and Indigenous 193. Boston: Brill.
Relations. Chicago: University of Donlan, W. 1982. “Reciprocities in
Chicago Press. Homer.” Classical World 75: 137–176.
Dillian, C. D. and C. L. White, eds. 2010. 1999. The Aristocratic Ideal and Selected
Trade and Exchange: Archaeological Papers. Wauconda, Illinois.
Studies from History and Prehistory. Dougherty, C. 2001. The Raft of Odysseus:
London: Springer. The Ethnographic Imagination of
Dillon, M. and L. Garland. 2010. Ancient Homer’s Odyssey. New York: Oxford.
Greece. Social and Historical Dougherty, C. and L. Kurke 2003.
Documents from Archaic Times to the “Introduction. The cultures within
Death of Alexander the Great. Third Greek culture.” In The Cultures
348 BIBLIOGR APHY

Within Greek Culture. Contact, Conflict, 27), edited by J.T. Killen and S.
Collaboration, edited by C. Dougherty Voutsaki, 96–112. Cambridge:
and L. Kurke, 1–22. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cambridge University Press. 2002. “‘The King must die’: some obser-
Doumas, C. 2014. “Le paysage côtier de la vations on the use of Minoan court
région d’Akrotiri, Théra, avant compounds.” In Monuments of Minos:
l’éruption volcanique du Bronze Rethinking the Minoan Palaces.
récent.” In Physis. L’Environnement Proceedings of the International
naturel et al relation homme-milieu dan s Workshop “Crete of the Hundred
le monde Égéen protohistorique. Actes de Palaces?” Held at the Université
la 14e Rencontre égéenne international, Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-
Paris, Institut National d’Histoire de Neuve, 14–15 December 2001, edited
l’Art (INHA), 11–14 décembre 2012, by J. Driessen, I. Schoep and
edited by G. Touchais, R. Laffineur, R. Laffineur, 1–14. Aegaeum 23.
and F. Rougemont, 141–144. Liege: Université de Liège.
Leuven: Peeters. 2010. “Spirit of place—Minoan as major
Drake, B. L. 2012. “The influence of cli- actors.” In Political Economies of the
matic change on the Late Bronze Age Aegean Bronze Age: Papers from
collapse and the Greek Dark Ages.” the Langford Conference, Florida
Journal of Archaeological Science 39: State University, Tallahassee, 22–24
1862–1870. February 2007, edited by D. J. Pullen,
Drakides, D., E. Nantet, M. Gras and 35–65. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
A. Esposito. 2010.” Chapitre 4: 2013. “‘The troubled island’ . . . 15
Echanges et Circulations.” In La years later.” Paper read at the con-
Méditerranée au VIIe siècle av. J.-C. ference “Thera and Minoan Crete:
Essais d’analyses archéologiques. Sous la New Insights into Two ‘Cultures
direction de Roland Etienne. 91–146. of Disaster,’” 26 January,
Paris: de Boccard. Heidelberg.
Driessen, J. 1990. An Early Destruction in the 2018. “Beyond the collective . . . The
Mycenaean Palace at Knossos: A New Minoan palace in action.” In From the
Interpretation of the Excavation Field- Foundations to the Legacy of Minoan
Notes of the South-East Area of Archaeology. Sheffield Studies in Honor of
the West Wing. Acta Archaeologica Keith Branigan, edited by I. Papadatos
Lovaniensia Monographiae 2. and M. Relaki. Oxford: Oxbow
Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit Books.
Leuven. Driessen, J., A. Farnoux and C. Langohr.
2000. The Scribes of the Room of the Chariot 2014. “Two more linear B inscribed
Tablets at Knossos: Interdisciplinary stirrup jars from Malia.” In Festschrift
Approach to the Study of a Linear for Wolf-Dietrich Niemeier for the
B Deposit. Minos Suppl. 15. Celebration of His 65th Birthday, edited
Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de by I. Kaiser, O. Kouka and
Salamanca. D. Panagiotopoulos, 25–40. Uni-
2001. “Centre and Periphery: Some versitätsforschungen zur Prähis-
Observations on the Administration torischen Archäologie 188. Bonn:
of the Kingdom of Knossos.” In Habelt.
Economy and Politics in the Mycenaean Driessen, J. and A. Farnoux, eds. 1997. La
Palace States (Cambridge Philological Crète mycénienne: Actes de la Table ronde
Society, Supplementary Volume n° internationale organisée par l’École
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 349

française d’Athènes (26–28 Mars 1991). entre les Xe et Ve siècles avant J.-C. Paris:
BCH Suppl. 30. Athènes: École Les Belles Lettres.
Française d’Athènes. Dupont, P. 1995–6. “Amphores archaïques
Driessen, J. and C. Langohr. 2007. de Grèce proper en Mer Noire. État
“Rallying Around a ‘Minoan’ Past: de la question.” Il Mar Nero 2: 85–101.
the Legitimization of Power at Ebbinghaus, S. 2005. “Protector of the
Knossos During the Late Bronze city, or the art of storage in early
Age.” In Rethinking Mycenaean Greece.” Journal of Hellenic Studies
Palaces II, edited by M. L. Galaty and 125: 51–72.
W. A. Parkinson, 178–189. 2nd rev. Eder, B. 2004. “Im Reich des Augeias: Elis
ed. UCLA Monographs 60. Los und Olympia zwischen 1200 und 700 c.
Angeles: Cotsen Institute Press. Chr.” Anzeiger der philosophisch- histor-
Driessen, J. and C. Macdonald. 1997. The ischen Klasse der Österreichischen Akademie
Troubled Island: Minoan Crete Before der Wissenschaften Wien 138: 89–121.
and After the Santorini Eruption. 2006. “The world of Telemachos: wes-
Aegaeum 17. Liège and Austin: tern Greece 1200–700 BC.” In
Université de Liège, and University Ancient Greece: From the Mycenaean
of Texas at Austin. Palaces to the Age of Homer, edited by
Driessen, J. and I. Schoep. 1995. “The S. Deger- Jalkotzy and I. S. Lemos,
architect and the scribe: political 549–580. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
implications of architectural and University Press.
administrative changes on MM II– Edwards, A. T. 2004. Hesiod’s Askra.
LM IIIA Crete.” In Politeia: Berkeley: University of California
Society and State in the Aegean Press.
Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 5th Eiring, J. and J. Lund, eds. 2004. Transport
International Aegean Conference/5e amphorae and trade in the Eastern
Rencontre égéenne internationale, Mediterranean: Acts of the international
University of Heidelberg, Archäologisches colloquium at the Danish Institute at
Institut, 10–13 April 1994. Vol. 2, edi- Athens, September 26–29, 2002
ted by R. Laffineur and W.- (Monographs of the Danish Institute
D. Niemeier, 649–664. Aegaeum 12. at Athens; v. 5). Aarhus: Aarhus
Liège and Austin: Université de University Press.
Liège, University of Texas at Austin. Ekroth, G. and J. Wallensten, eds. 2013.
Duhoux, Y. 2010.” La Fonction des Vases Bones, Behaviour, and Belief. The
à étrier Inscrits en Linéaire B.” Zooarchaeological Evidence as a Source for
Kadmos 49: 47–92. Ritual Practice in Ancient Greece and
Dunn, G. M. 2005. “Factors that control Beyond. Stockholm: Svenska Institutet
flower formation in grapevines.” In i Athen.
Transforming Flowers to Fruit, edited Engel, M., M. Knipping, H. Brockner,
by K. De Garis, C. Dundon, M. Kiderlen and J. C. Kraft. 2009.
R. Johnston and S. Partridge, 11–18. “Reconstructing middle to late
Mildura, Victoria: Austrialian Society Holocene palaeogeographies of the
of Viticulture and Oenology. lower Messenian plain (southwestern
Duplouy, A. 2003. “Les Eupatrides, ‘nobles Peloponnese, Greece): coastline
défenseurs de leur patrie.’” Cahiers du migration, vegetation history and
Centre Glotz 14:1–22. sea level change.” Palaeogeography
2006. Le prestige des élites: recherches sur les Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology 284:
modes de reconnaissance sociale en Grèce 257–270
350 BIBLIOGR APHY

Erickson, B. L. 2011. “Public feasts and (Aegaeum 29), edited by R.

private symposia in the Archaic and Laffineur, M.-L. Hitchcock, and J.
Classical periods.” In STEGA: The Crowley, 367–375. Liege: Université
Archaeology of Houses and Households de Liège.
in Ancient Crete. Hesperia suppl. 44, 2012. “Precious gifts and the circulation
edited by K. T. Glowacki and of oils in the ancient eastern
N. Vogeikoff-Brogan, 381–391. Mediterranean.” Talanta XLIV:
Princeton: American School of 157–182.
Classical Studies at Athens. Faraone, C. 1996. “Taking the “Nestor’s
Evangelistis, D. n.d. “Survey in Giagana Cup inscription” seriously: erotic
Bay Cephallonia.” In Tropis VIII: magic and conditional curses in the
Proceedings of the 8th International earliest inscribed hexameters.”
Symposium on Ship Construction in Classical Antiquity 15: 77–112.
Antiquity, Hydra, 27–31 August 2002, Farnsworth, M. 1964. “Greek pottery:
edited by E. H. Tzalas, Athens: a mineralogical study.” American
Hellenic Institute for the Journal of Archaeology 68: 221–228.
Preservation of Nautical Tradition. 1970: “Corinthian pottery: technical
Evans, J. and V. Garner. 2008 “Organic studies.” American Journal of
Residues in Pottery of the Bronze Archaeology 74: 9–20.
Age in Greece.” In Archaeology Meets Faure, P. 1964. Fonctions des caverns crétoises.
Science: Biomolecular Investigations in Paris: Boccard.
Bronze Age Greece: The Primary Feldman, M. 2014. Communities of Style:
Scientific Evidence, 1997–2003, edited Portable Luxury Arts, Identity, and
by Y. Tzedakis, H. Martlew, M. K. Collective Memory in the Iron Age
Jones, 125–143. Oxford: Oxbow Levant. Chicago and London:
Books University of Chicago Press.
Evely, D. ed. 2006. Lefkandi IV: The Bronze Finley, M. I. 1976. “Colonies: an attempt
Age. The Late Helladic IIIC Settlement at typology.” Transactions of the Royal
at Xeropolis. London: The British Historical Society 26: 167–188.
School at Athens. 1954. The World of Odysseus. New York:
Fågerström, K. 1988a. “Finds, function and The Viking Press.
plan: a contribution to the interpreta- Finné, M., K. Holmgren, H. S. Sundqvist,
tion of Iron Age Nichoria in E. Weiberg and M. Lindblom. 2011.
Messenia.” Opuscula Atheniensia 17: “Climate in the eastern Mediterranean,
33–50. and adjacent regions, during the past
1988b. Greek Iron Age Architecture: 6000 years – a review.” Journal of
Development Through Changing Times. Archaeological Science 38: 3153–3173.
Göteborg: Åström. Finné, M., M. Bar-Matthews,
Fappas, I. 2008. “The Use of Perfumed K. Holmgren, H. S. Sundqvist,
Oils during Feasting Activities: A I. Liakopoulos and Q. Zhang. 2014.
Comparison of Mycenaean and Near “Speleothem evidence for late
Eastern Written Sources.” In DAIS, Holocene climate variability and
The Aegean Feast. Proceedings of the 12th floods in Southern Greece.”
International Aegean Conference orga- Quaternary Research 81: 213–227.
nised by the University of Melbourne and Finné, M. and E. Weiberg. 2018. “Climate
the University of Liège, hosted by the change and ancient societies: facing
Centre for Classics and Archaeology, up to the challenge of chronological
Melbourne, 25–29 March 2008 control.” In The Resilience of Heritage:
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 351

Cultivating a Future of the Past. Essays in 2012. Feasting Practices and Changes in
Honour of Professor Paul Sinclair, edited Greek Society from the Late Bronze Age
by A. Ekblom, C. Isendahl and K.- to Early Iron Age. BAR-IS 2345.
J. Lindholm. Studies in Global Oxford: Archeopress.
Archaeology 23. Uppsala: Uppsala Foxhall, L. 1993. “Oil extraction and pro-
University. cessing equipment in classical
Flood, J.M. 2012. Water Management in Greece.” In La production du vin et de
Neopalatial Crete and the Development l’huile en Méditerranée, edited by M.-
of the Mediterranean Climate. C. Amouretti and J.-P. Brun,
Unpublished Master’s Thesis. 183–200. Paris: Boccard.
University of North Carolina at 1995. “Bronze to Iron: agricultural sys-
Greensboro. tems and political structures in Late
Flood, J. and J. Soles. 2014. “Water Bronze Age and Early Iron Age
management in Neopalatial Crete Greece.” Annual of the British School
and the development of the at Athens 90: 239–250.
Mediterranean dry-season.” In 1998. “Cargoes of the heart’s desire. The
Physis. L’Environnement naturel et al character of trade in the Archaic
relation homme-milieu dan s le monde Mediterranean world.” In Archaic
Égéen protohistorique. Actes de la 14e Greece: New Approaches and New
Rencontre égéenne international, Paris, Evidence, edited by N. Fisher and
Institut National d’Histoire de l’Art H. van Week, 295–309. London:
(INHA), 11–14 décembre 2012, edited Duckworth.
by G. Touchais, R. Laffineur and 2005. “Village to City: staples and luxu-
F. Rougemont, 79–84. Leuven: ries? Exchange networks and
Peeters. urbanization.” Proceedings of the
Forbes, H. 1993. “Ethnoarchaeology and British Academy 126: 233–248.
the place of the olive in the economy 2007. Olive cultivation in Ancient Greece:
of the southern Argolid, Greece.” In Seeking the Ancient Economy. Oxford:
La production du vin et de l’huile en Oxford University Press.
Méditerranée. BCH supplement French, E. 2002. Mycenae: Agamemnon’s
XXVI, edited by Amouretti and J.- Capital. The Site and its Setting.
P. Brun, 213–226. Athens: École Stroud: Tempus.
Française d’Athènes. 2007. “Late Helladic III C Middle at
Forsdyke, S. 2006. “Land, labor and econ- Mycenae.” In LH III C Chronology and
omy in Solonian Athens: breaking the Synchronisms II: LH III C Middle.
impasse between archaeology and his- Proceedings of the international workshop
tory.” In Solon of Athens. New held at the Austrian Academy of Sciences at
Historical and Philological Approaches, Vienna, October 29th and 30th, 2004, edi-
edited by J. H. Blok and ted by S. Deger-Jalkotzy and M.
A. P. M. H. Lardinois, 334–350. Zavadil, 175–187. Österreichische
Leiden: Brill. Akademie der Wissenschaften
Fox, R. S. 2008. “Tastes, smells and Philosophisch-historische Klasse
spaces: sensory perceptions and Denkschriften 362, Veröffentlichungen
Mycenaean palatial feasting.” In der Mykenischen Kommission 28,
Dais: The Aegean Feast [Aegaeum Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen
29], edited by L. A. Hitchcock, Akademie der Wissenschaften.
R. Laffineur and J. Crowley, 2011a. “The stirrup jar: does the West
133–140. Liège: Université de Liège. House evidence help or complicate
352 BIBLIOGR APHY

the problems?” In Our Cups Are Full: L. Ruiz, C. Diaz De La Guardia,

Pottery and Society in the Aegean Bronze M. M. Trigo and I. Chuine. 2009.
Age. Papers Presented to Jeremy B. Rutter “Olive flowering phenology varia-
on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday, tion between different cultivars in
edited by W. Gauß, M. Lindblom, Spain and Italy: modeling analysis.”
R. A. K. Smith and J. C. Wright, Theoretical and Applied Climatology 95:
68–75. Oxford: Archaeopress. 385–395.
2011b. Well Built Mycenae, Fasc. 16/17: Gauss, W. 2009. “The Last Mycenaeans at
The Postpalatial Levels. Oxford: Aigeira and their successors.” In LH
Oxbow. III C Chronology and Synchronisms III:
Frisia, S., A. Borsato and J. Susini. 2008. LH III C Late and the Transition to the
“Synchrotron radiation applications Early Iron Age. Proceedings of the interna-
to past volcanism archived in spe- tional workshop held at the Austrian
leothems: an overview.” Journal of Academy of Sciences at Vienna,
Volcanology and Geothermic Research February 23rd and 24th, 2007, edited
177: 96–100. by S. Deger-Jalkotzy and A.E. Bächle,
Furtwängler, A. 1879. Mykenische 163–182. Österreichische Akademie
Thongefäße: Festschrift zur Feier des der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-
fünfzigjährigen Bestehens des Deutschen Historische Klasse Denkschriften 384,
Archaeologischen Institutes in Rom. Veröffentlichungen der Mykenischen
Berlin: A. Asher & Co. Kommission 30, Wien: Verlag der
Galaty, M. L. and W. A. Parkinson, eds. Österreichischen Akademie der
2007. Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces II Wissenschaften.
(UCLA Mon 60). Los Angeles: Gebhard, E. R. and F. P. Hemans. 1992.
Cotsen Institute Press. “University of Chicago Excavations
Galili, E., D.J. Stanley, J. Sharvit, M. at Isthmia, 1989:I.” Hesperia 61: 1–77.
Weinstein-Evron. 1997. “Evidence Gehrke, Hans-Joachim. 2009. “States.” In
for earliest olive-oil production in A Companion to Archaic Greece, edited
submerged settlements off the by K. A. Raaflaub and H. van Wees,
Carmel Coast, Israel.” Journal of 395–410. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Archaeological Science 24: 1141–1150. Georgoulaki, E. 1996. “Cleaning of the
Gallou, C. 2003. “The cult of the dead in Minoan Tomb at Mantalia (Kato
central Greece during the Mycenaean Kephala) near Hagios Georgios
period.” Ph.D. dissertation, University Siteias.” Cretan Studies 5: 147–150.
of Nottingham. Gerber, D. 1999. Greek Iambic Poetry. From
Gamble, C. 2004. “Materiality and symbolic the Seventh to the Fifth Centuries BC.
force: a Palaeolithic view of sedentism.” Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
In Rethinking Materiality: The Press.
Engagement of Mind with the Material Ghilardi, M., D. Psomiadis, S. Cordier,
World, edited by E. Demarrais, D. Delanghe-Sabatier, F. Demory,
C. Renfrew and C. Gosden, 85–95. F. Hamidi, T. Paraschou,
Cambridge: McDonald Institute for E. Dotsika and E. Fouache. 2012.
Archaeological Research. “The impact of rapid early- to mid-
Garbini, G. 1978. “Un’iscrizione aramaica Holocene palaeoenvironmental
a Ischia.” La Parola del Passato 33: changes on Neolithic settlement
143–150. at Nea Nikomideia, Thessaloniki
Garcia-Mozo, H., F. Orlandi, C. Galan, Plain, Greece.” Quaternary
M. Fornaciari, B. Romano, International 266: 47–61.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 353

Gialanella, C. 1994. “Pithecusa: gli insedia- 17 June 2007, edited by A. Mazarakis

menti di Punta Chiarito. Relazione Ainian, Volume II, 957–970. Volos:
preliminarie.” In Apoikia. I più antichi University of Thessaly Press.
insediamenti greci in occidente: funzioni Giourga, C., A. Loumou, I. Tsevreni and
e modi dell’orgazzazione politica e sociale. A. Vergou. 2008. “Assessing the
Scritti in onore di Giorgio Buchner. Annali sustainability factors of traditional
di archeologia e storia antica NS 1, edited olive groves on Lesvos Island,
by B. D’Agostino and D. Ridgway, Greece (Sustainability and tradi-
168–204. Napoli: Istituto universitario tional cultivation).” GeoJournal 73:
orientale. 149–159.
Giannisi, Ph. 2006. Récits des voies. Chant et Girella, L. 2007. “Forms of commensal
cheminement en Grèce archaïque. politics in Neopalatial Crete.” Creta
Grenoble: J. Millon. Antica 8: 135–168.
Giannopoulos, T. 2008. “Die Letzte Elite Glader, P. 2015. Greece gets something
der mykenischen Welt: Achaia.” right! Plagues and pests in Spain and
In Mykenischen Welt: Achaia in Italy are opening markets for Greek
mykenischer Zeit und das Phanomen olive oil. Bloomberg Business Week.
der Kriegerbestattungen im 12.-11. www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/
Jahrhundert v.Chr, edited by 2015–08-20/greek-olive-oil-exports-
T. Giannopoulos. Bonn: Habelt. boom-as-italy-spain-s-prices-soar
Gill, D. W. J. 1988. “Silver anchors and Gladstones, J. S. 1992. Viticulture and
cargoes of oil: some observations on Environment, Adelaide: Winetitles.
Phoenician trade in the Western Godart, L. 1968. “Les quantites d’huile de
Mediterranean.” Papers of the British la serie Fh de Cnossos.” In Atti e
School at Rome 56: 1–12. Memorie del 1 Congresso internazionale
Gillis, C. and R. Clayton. 2008. “Tin and the di Micenologia, 598–610. Rome:
Aegean in the Bronze Age.” In Aegean Edizioni dell’Ateneo.
Metallurgy in the Bronze Age. Proceedings Gödecken, K. B. 1988. “A contribution
of an International Symposium at the to the early history of Miletus: the
University of Crete, Rethymnon, settlement in Mycenaean times and
Greece, on November 19–21, 2004, edi- its connections overseas.” In
ted by I. Tzachili, 103–110. Athens: Ta Problems in Greek Prehistory. Papers
Pragmata. Presented at the Centenary Conference
2002. “The colonisation of Thassos: A of the British School of Archaeology at
re-examination of the pottery of the Athens, Manchester April 1986, edited
early phases / Ο Αποικισμός της by E. B. French and K. A. Wardle,
Θάσου: η επανεξέταση της 307–318. Bedminster: Bristol
κεραμικής πρώιμων φάσεων της Classical Press.
αρχαίας πόλης.” In Archeologiko Ergo Godelier, M. 1999. The Enigma of the Gift.
sti Makedonia kai Thraki 16: 73–81. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Gimatzidis, S. 2010. Die Stadt Sindos. Göktürk, O. M. 2011. Climate in the
Rahden/Westf: Verlag Marie Leidorf Eastern Mediterranean through the
GmbH. Holocene Inferred from Turkish
2011. “The Northwest Aegean in the Early Stalagmites. Ph.D. Thesis. University
Iron Age.” In The “Dark Ages” of Bern, Switzerland.
Revisited. Acts of an International Gonzales de Canales, F., L. Serrano, and J.
Symposium in Memory of William D. E. Llompart, 2006. “The Pre-colonial
Coulson, University of Thessaly, Volos, 14– Phoenician emporium of Huelva ca.
354 BIBLIOGR APHY

900–770 BC.” BABESCH (Bulletin Conseil de l’Europe, Division de la

Antieke Beschaving) 81: 13–29. Coopé ration Scientifique.
Gorney, R. L. 1995. “Viticulture and 2010. “Plus de Vin, Moins d’Huile?
ancient Anatolia.” In The Origin and Retour sur les Amphores
Ancient History of Wine, edited by Corinthiennes dans la Méditerranée du
P. McGovern, S. Fleming and VIIe.” In La Méditerranée au VIIe siècle
S. Katz, 133–174. New York: av. J.-C. Essays d’Analyses Archéologiques,
Gordon and Breach Publishers. edited by Étienne Roland, 110–116.
Gounaris, A. 2015. “Zagora: the ‘Harvest’. Paris: de Boccard.
The Contribution of Zagora to the Grattan, S. R., M. J. Berenguer,
study of the built environment of the J. H. Connell, V. S. Polito and
Geometric period.” In Zagora in P. M. Vossen. 2006. “Olive oil pro-
Context: Settlements and Intercommunal duction as influenced by different
Links in the Geometric Period quantities of applied water.”
(900–700 BC), edited by J.- Agricultural Water Management 85:
P. Descœudres and S. Paspalas, 1–28. 133–140.
Mediterranean Archaeology 25. Greco, E. 2006. “Greek colonisation in
Sydney: University of Sydney. Southern Italy: a methodological
Graeber, D. 2001. Toward an Anthropological essay.” In Greek Colonisation. An
Theory of Value: The False Coin of Our Account of Greek Colonies and other
Own Dreams. New York: Palgrave. Settlements Overseas, Mnemosyne sup-
2005. “Value: anthropological theories of plement, edited by G. R. Tsetskhladze,
value.” In Handbook of Economic 169–200. Boston: Brill.
Anthropology, edited by J. Carrier, Gregory, C. 1980. “Gifts to men and gifts
439–454. Aldershot, UK: Edward to god: gift exchange and capital
Elgar. accumulation in contemporary
2011. “Consumption.” Current Papua.” Man, New Series 15(4):
Anthropology 52(4): 489–511. 626–652.
Graf, F. 1980. “Milch, Honig, und 2014. “On religiosity and commercial
Wein: Zum Verständnis der life. Toward a critique of cultural
Libation im griechischen Ritual.” economy and posthumanist value
In Perennitas: Studi in onore di theory.” Hau: Journal of Ethnographic
Angelo Brelich. 209–221. Rome: Theory 4(3): 45–68.
Edizioni dell’Ateneo. Guthrie, W.K.C. 1959. “Early Greek reli-
Gras, M. 1987. “Amphores commerciales gion in the light of the decipherment
et histoire archaïque.” Dialoghi de of Linear B.” BICS 6: 35–46.
Archeologia 5: 41–50. Hadjidaki, E. and P. Betancourt.
1988. “L’apport des amphores à la con- 2005–2006. “A Minoan shipwreck
naissance des commerces archaïques off Pseira Island, East Crete: prelimin-
en mer Tyrrhénienne.” In Navies and ary report.” Eulimene 6–7: 79–96.
Commerce of the Greeks, the Hadjisavvas, S. 2003. “The production and
Carthaginians and the Etruscans in diffusion of olive oil in the
the Tyrrhenian Sea: Proceedings of the Mediterranean, ca. 1500–500 BC.” In
European Symposium held at Ravello, Ploes, Sea Routes. Interconnections in the
January 1987, European University Mediterranean 16th–6th c. BC, Proceedings
Centre for Cultural Heritage, edited by of the International Symposium,
T. Hackens, 291–303. Strasbourg: Rethymnon, Crete, edited by
N. Stampolidis and V. Karageorghis,
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 355

117–123. Athens: A.G. Leventis 2007. “Stylistic diversity and diacritical

Foundation. feasting at Protopalatial Petras:
Hadjisavvas, S. and A. Chaniotis. 2012. a preliminary analysis of the Lakkos
“Wine and olive oil in Crete and Deposit.” AJA 111(4): 715–775.
Cyprus: socio-economic aspects.” In Haggis, D. C. and M. S. Mook. 1993. “The
Parallel Lives: Ancient Island Societies in Kavousi coarse wares: a Bronze Age
Crete and Cyprus. Papers arising from the chronology for survey in the
Conference in Nicosia organized by the Mirabello area, East Crete.” AJA
British School at Athens, the University 97(2): 265–293.
of Crete and the University of Cyprus, in Haggis, D.C., M.S. Mook, R.D.
November-December 2006, edited by Fitzsimons, C.M. Scarry, L.M.
G. Cadogan, M. Iacovou, K. Kopaka Snyder, and W.C. West III. 2011.
and J. Whitley, 157–173. British “Excavations in the Archaic Civic
School at Athens Studies 20, London: Buildings at Azoria in 2005–2006.”
The British School at Athens. Hesperia 80(1): 1–70.
Hägg, R. 1981. “The house sanctuary at Haider, Peter W. 2007. “Existierte noch
Asine revisited.” In Sanctuaries and ein Handelskontakt zwischen den
Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, edited agaischen Eliten der Nachpalastzeit
by R. Hägg and N. Marinatos, 91–94. und dem agyptischen Hof?” In
Stockholm: Swedish Institute of Keimelion, edited by E. Alram-Stern
Athens. and G. Nightingale, 173–190. Wien:
ed. 1983. The Greek Renaissance of the Österreichischen Akademie der
Eighth Century BC: Tradition and Wissenschaften.
Innovation. Stockholm: Svenska Hall, J. 2002. Hellenicity: Between Ethnicity
Institutet i Athen. and Culture. Chicago: University of
1983. “Funerary meals in the Geometric Chicago Press.
necropolis at Asine?” In The Greek 2004. “Culture, cultures and accultura-
Renaissance of the Eighth Century B. tion.” In Griechische Archaik: Interne
C.: Tradition and Innovation. Entwicklungen—Externe Impulse, edi-
Proceedings of the Second International ted by R. Rollinger and C. Ulf,
Symposium at the Swedish Institute at 35–50. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Athens, 1–5 June, 1981, edited by 2007. A History of the Archaic Greek
R. Hägg, 189–194. Stockholm: World, ca. 1200–479 BCE. Malden
Svenska Institutet i Athen. Mass.: Blackwell Publishing.
1990. “The role of libations in 2013. “The rise of state action in the
Mycenaean ceremony and cult.” In Archaic age.” In A Companion to
Celebrations of Death and Divinity in Ancient Greek Government, edited by
the Bronze Age Argolid. Proceedings of H. Beck, 9–21. Oxford: Wiley-
the sixth international symposium at the Blackwell.
Swedish Insitute at Athens, 11–13 June, Hall, J.M. 2009. “Ethnicity and cultural
1988, edited by R. Hägg and exchange.” In A Companion to
C. Nordquist, 177–184. Stockholm: Archaic Greece, edited by K. Raaflaub
Swedish Institute at Athens. and H. van Wees, 604–17. Malden
Haggis, D. 2005. Kavousi I: The MA and Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Archaeological Survey of the Kavousi Hallager B.P. 2005. “The Synchronisms
Region (Prehistory Monographs 16). Mainland-West Crete in the LM
Philadelphia, PA: INSTAP IIIA2-IIIB Period.” In Ariadne’s
Academic Press. Threads: Connections between Crete and
356 BIBLIOGR APHY

the Greek Mainland in the Postpalatial Mycenaean Palaces II: Revised and
Period (LM IIIA2 to LM IIIC), edited Expanded Second Edition, edited by
by A.L. D’Agata and J. Moody, 277– Michael L. Galaty and William
292. Athens: Scuola Archeologica A. Parkinson, 66–77. Los Angeles:
Italiana di Atene. The Cotsen Institute of Archaeology.
Hallager, E. 1987. “The inscribed stirrup Halstead, P. and J. C. Barrett, eds. 2004.
jars: implications for Late Minoan Food, Cuisine and Society in Prehistoric
IIIB Crete.” AJA 91(1): 171–190. Greece. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
2002. “Wine and pithoi: written and Hamilakis, Y. 1996. “Wine, Oil and the
archaeological evidence.” In Oinos Dialectics of Power in Bronze Age
Palaios Idypotos: To Kritiko Krasi apo ta Crete: A Review of the Evidence.”
Proïstorika os ta Neotera Chronia. OJA 15 (1):1–32.
Kounavoi: Dimos ‘N. Kazantzakis’, 1999. “Food technologies/technologies
24–26 Apriliou 1998, edited by of the body: the social context of
A. K. Mylopotamitaki, 61–67. wine and oil production and consump-
Irakleio: Ypourgeio Politismou tion in Bronze Age Crete.” World
Archaiologiko Institouto Kritis, Archaeology 31(1): 38–54.
Praktika tou Diethnous Epistimonikou 2002. “Too many chiefs? Factional com-
Symposiou. petition in Neopalatial Crete.” In
Hallager, E. and B. Hallager. 2000. The Monuments of Minos: Rethinking the
Greek-Swedish Excavations at the Agia Minoan Palaces, edited by J. Driessen,
Aikaterini Square, Kastelli, Khania I. Schoep and R. Laffineur, 177–199.
1970–1987. Vol II. The Late Minoan Aegaeum 23. Liege: Université de
Settlement, edited by E. Hallager and Liège; Austin: University of Texas at
B. Hallager. Stockholm: Paul Åströms Austin, Program in Aegean Scripts
Forläg, and Prehistory.
2011. The Greek-Swedish Excavations at the Hamilakis, Y. and S. Sherratt. 2012.
Agia Aikaterini Square, Kastelli, “Feasting and the consuming body
Khania, 1970–1987 and 2001. Vol. 4, in Bronze Age Crete and Early Iron
pts. 1–2, The Late Minoan IIIB:1 and Age Cyprus.” In Parallel Lives: Ancient
IIIA:2 Settlements. ActaAth 4°, 47. Island Societies in Crete and Cyprus
Stockholm: Svenska Institutet i Athen. 3000–300 BC, edited by G. Cadogan,
Halstead, P. 1999. “Surplus and share- K. Kopaka, M. Iacovou and
croppers: the grain production strate- J. Whitley, 187–207. London: British
gies of Mycenaean Palaces.” In School at Athens.
Meletemata: Studies in Aegean Hannah, L., P. R. Roehrdanz, M. Ikegami,
Archaeology Presented to Malcolm A. V. Shepard, M. R. Shaw, G. Tabor,
H. Wiener as He Enters His 65th Year. L. Zhi, P. A. Marquet and
Vol. II, edited by P. P. Betancourt, R. J. Hijmans. 2013. “Climate change,
V. Karageorghis, R. Laffineur and wine, and conservation.” Proceedings of
W.-D. Niemeier, 319–326. Liège: the National Academy of Sciences of the
Université de Liège, Histoire de l’art United States of America, 110(17):
et archéologie de la Grèce antique; 6907–6912.
University of Texas at Austin: Hansen, J. 2002. “Botanical evidence for
Programs in Aegean Scripts and wine in Prehistoric Crete.” In Oinos
Prehistory 2. Palaios Idypotos: To Kritiko Krasi apo ta
2007. “Toward a model of Mycenaean Proïstorika os ta Neotera Chronia.
Palatial mobilization.” In Rethinking Kounavoi: Dimos ‘N. Kazantzakis’,
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 357

24–26 Apriliou 1998, edited by 97–107. New York: Archaeological

A. K. Mylopotamitaki, 55–60. Irakleio: Institute of America.
Ypourgeio Politismou Archaiologiko Haskell, H. W. 1981. Coarse-ware
Institouto Kritis, Praktika tou stirrup-jars at Mycenae. BSA 76:
Diethnous Epistimonikou Symposiou. 225–238.
Hansen, M. H., ed. 1996. Introduction to an 1983. “From palace to town administra-
Inventory of Poleis. Acts of the tion: the evidence of coarse-ware stir-
Copenhagen Polis Centre. Vol. 3. rup jars.” In Minoan Society: Proceedings
Copenhagen: Munksgaard. of the Cambridge Colloquium, 1981, edi-
2000a. “A survey of the use of the word ted by O. Krzyszkowska and L. Nixon,
Polis in Archaic and Classical 121–128. Bristol: Bristol Classical Press.
sources.” In Further studies in the 1985. “The origin of the Aegean stirrup
Ancient Greek Polis, edited by jar and its earliest evolution and dis-
P. Flensted-Jensen, 173–216. tribution (MB III–LB I).” AJA 89(2):
Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. 221–229.
2000b. “Introduction. The concepts of 1997. “Trade and production in
the city-state and city-state culture.” ‘Mycenaean’ Crete.” In Trade and
In A Comparative Study of Thirty Production in Premonetary Greece:
City-State Cultures, edited by Production and the Craftsman, edited
M. H. Hansen, 11–34. by C. Gillis, C. Risberg and
Copenhagen: Kongelige Danske B. Sjoberg, 101–111. SIMA-PB 143.
Videnskabernes Selskab. Jonsered: Paul Åströms Förlag.
2006. Polis. An Introduction to the Ancient 2004. “Wanax to Wanax: regional
Greek City-State. Oxford: Oxford trade patterns in Mycenaean
University Press. Crete.” In XAPIS: Essays in Honor
ed. 2007. The Return of the Polis. The Use of Sara A. Immerwahr, edited by
and Meanings of the Word Polis in A. P. Chapin, 151–160. Hesperia
Archaic and Classical Sources. Stuttgart: Suppl. 33. Princeton: American
Franz Steiner Verlag. School of Classical Studies at
Hansen, M. H. and K. Raaflaub, eds. 1995. Athens.
Studies in the Ancient Greek Polis. 2005. “Region to region export of trans-
Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. port stirrup jars from LM IIIA2/B
1996. More studies in the Ancient Greek Crete.” In Ariadne’s Threads:
Polis. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Connections between Crete and the
Harissis, H. V. and A. V. Harissis. 2009. Greek Mainland in Late Minoan III
Apiculture in the Prehistoric Aegean: (LM IIIA2 to LM IIIC). Proceedings of
Minoan & Mycenaean Symbols the international workshop held at
Revisited. BAR International Series Athens, Scuola Archeologica Italiana,
1958. Oxford: Archaeopress. 5–6 April 2003, edited by
Harrison, T. ed. 2002. Greeks and A. L. D’Agata and J. Moody,
Barbarians. New York: Routledge. 235–241. Tripodes 3. Athens: Scuola
Haskell, H. 1984. “Pylos: Stirrup Jars and Archeologica Italiana di Atene.
the International Oil Trade.” In Pylos 2016. “Seaborne from the beginning:
Comes Alive: Industry and transport stirrup jars.” In Maritime
Administration in a Mycenaean Palace. Transport Containers in the Bronze-Iron
Papers of a Symposium, edited by C. Age Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean,
W. Shelmerdine and T. G. Palaima, edited by S. Demesticha and
358 BIBLIOGR APHY

A. B. Knapp, 129–144. Uppsala: 2011. “Das vorklassisches Pergamon und

Åströms Förlag. sien Siedlungsprofil.” Istanbuler
Haskell, H. W., R. E. Jones, P. M. Day and Mitteilungen 61: 21–49.
J. T. Killen. 2011. Transport Stirrup Jars Heubeck, A. 1992. “Commentary to
of the Bronze Age Aegean and East Odyssey Books XXIII-XXIV.” In
Mediterranean. Philadelphia: INSTAP A Commentary on Homer’s Odyssey.
Academic Press. Volume III, Books XVII-XXIV, by
Hastorf, C.A., and L. Foxhall. 2017. “The J. Russo, M. Fernández-Galiano and
social and political aspects of food sur- A. Heubeck, 313–418. Oxford:
plus.” World Archaeology 49(1): 26–39. Clarendon Press.
Hatzaki, E. M. 2007a. “Neopalatial (MM Hiller, S. 1996. “Knossos and Pylos: a case
III–LM IB).” In Knossos Pottery of special relationship?” Cretan Studies
Handbook: Neolithic and Bronze Age 5: 73–83.
(Minoan), edited by N. Momigliano, Hirschfeld, N. 1993. “Incised marks (post-
151–196. BSA Studies 14. London: firing) on Aegean wares.” In Wace and
British School at Athens. Blegen: Pottery as Evidence for Trade in
2007b. “Final Palatial (LM II–IIIA2) the Aegean Bronze Age, 1939–1989, edi-
and Postpalatial (LM IIIB–LM IIIC ted by C. Zerner, 311–318.
early): MUM South Sector, Long Amsterdam: J.C. Gieben.
Corridor Cists, MUM Pits (8, 1999. “Potmarks of the Late Bronze Age
10–11), Makritikhos ‘Kitchen,’ Eastern Mediterranean.” Ph.D. dis-
MUM North Platform Pits, and sertation, The University of Texas at
SEX Southern Half Groups.” In Austin.
Knossos Pottery Handbook: Neolithic 2002. “Marks on pots: patterns of use in
and Bronze Age (Minoan), edited by the archaeological record at Enkomi.”
N. Momigliano, 197–251. BSA In Script and Seal Use on Cyprus in the
Studies 14. London: British School Bronze and Iron Ages, edited by
at Athens. J. S. Smith, 49–109. Colloquia and
Hayden, B. 2014 The Power of Feasts: From Conference Papers 4. Boston, Mass.:
Prehistory to the Present. Cambridge: Archaeological Institute of America.
Cambridge University Press. 2004. “Eastwards via Cyprus? The
Hayden, B. and S. Villeneuve. 2011. marked Mycenaean Pottery of
“A century of feasting studies.” Annual Enkomi, Ugarit and Tell Abu
Review of Anthropology 40: 433–449. Hawam.” In La céramique mycénienne
Heidegger, M. 1971. Poetry, Language, de l’Égée au Levant, Hommage à Vronwy
Thought. Translated and collected by Hankey, edited by J. Balensi, J.-
Albert Hofstadter. New York: Harper Y. Monchambert and S. Müller
& Row. Celka, 97–103. Travaux de la
Hertel, D. 2003. “Protogeometrische, Maison de l’Orient de la
subgeometrische und geomtrische Méditerranée 41. Lyon: Maison de
Keramik Troias aus den Grabungen l’Orient et de la Méditerranée.
Schliemanns und Dorpfelds.” In 2011. “The Cypriot ceramic cargo of the
Probleme der Keramikchronologie des Uluburun shipwreck.” In Our Cups
sudlichen und westlichen Kleinasiens in Are Full: Pottery and Society in the
geometrischer und archaischer Zeit, edi- Aegean Bronze Age. Papers Presented to
ted by B. Ruckert and F. Kolb, Jeremy Rutter on the Occasion of His 65th
91–135. Bonn: Dr. Rudolf Habelt Birthday, edited by W. Gauss,
GMBH. M. Lindblom, R. A. K. Smith and
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 359

J. C. Wright, 115–120. Oxford: Athenon, Kentron Erevnis tis

Archaeopress. Archaiotitos.
Hitchcock, L. A., R. Laffineur and Horden, P. and N. Purcell. 2000. The
J. Crowley, eds. 2008. Dais: The Corrupting Sea. A Study of
Aegean Feast. Proceedings of the 12th Mediterranean History. New York:
International Aegean Conference/12e Wiley-Blackwell.
Rencontre égéenne internationale, Hornblower, S. 1991. A Commentary on
University of Melbourne, Centre for Thucydides. Volume I, Books I-III.
Classics and Archaeology, 25–29 Oxford: Clarendon Press.
March 2008. Aegaeum 29. Liège and Houby-Nielsen, S. 2009. “Attica: a view
Austin: Université de Liège, Histoire from the sea.” In A Companion to
de l’art et archéologie de la Grèce Archaic Greece, edited by K.
antique and University of Texas at A. Raaflaub and H. van Wees,
Austin, Program in Aegean Scripts 190–211. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
and Prehistory. Hruby, J. 2006. “Feasting and Ceramics: A
Hobden, F. 2013. The Symposion in Ancient View from the Palace of Nestor at
Greek Society and Thought. Cambridge: Pylos.” Ph.D. diss., University of
Cambridge University Press. Cincinnati.
Hodder, I. 2012. Entangled. An Archaeology Hruby, J. and D. Trusty, eds. 2017. From
of the Relationships between Humans and Cooking Vessels to Cultural Practices in
Things. Malden, MA: Wiley- the Late Bronze Age Aegean. Oxford:
Blackwell. Oxbow Books.
2014. “The entanglements of humans Hurst, H. and S. Owen, eds. 2005. Ancient
and things: a long-term view.” New Colonizations. Analogy, Similarity &
Literary History 45: 19–36. Difference, London: Duckworth.
Hodkinson, S. 1997. “The development of Iacovou, Maria. 2006. “Cyprus: from migra-
Spartan society and institutions in the tion to hellenisation.” In Greek
Archaic period.” In The Development of Colonisation: An Account of Greek
the Polis in Archaic Greece, edited by Colonies and Other Settlements Overseas,
L. G. Mitchell and P. J. Rhodes, edited by G. R. Tsetskhladze,
83–102. London-New York: 219–288. Volume 2: Greeks –
Routledge. Black Sea Region – Antiquities,
Hodos, T. 2006: Local Responses to Mnemosyne Supplementum 193,
Colonization in the Iron Age Leiden and Boston: Brill.
Mediterranean. London-New York: Iakovidis, S. 1969. Perati: To Nekrotapheion
Routledge. A: Oi Taphoi kai ta Euremata
Hood, S. 1971. “Late Bronze Age destruc- (Bibliotheketes en Athenais
tions of Knossos.” In First International Archaeologikes Etaireias 67) Athens:
Scientific Congress on the Volcano of En Athenais.
Thera, 15–23 Sept. 1969, edited by 1970. Perati: To Nekrotapheion B: Genikai
S. Marinatos and D. Ninkovich, Paratiriseis (Bibliotheke tes en
377–383. Athens: General Direction Athenais Archaeologikes Etaireias
of Antiquities and Restoration. 67) Athens: En Athenais.
2009. “Mycenaeans at Knossos.” In 1980. Excavations of the Necropolis at Perati.
Δώρον: τιμητικός τομός για τον Los Angeles: Institute of Archaeology,
καθηγητή Σπύρο Ιακωβίδη, edited University of California.
by D. Danilidou, 309–315. 2003. “Late Helladic IIIC at Perati.” In
Monograph 6. Athens: Akademia LH III C Chronology and Synchronisms.
360 BIBLIOGR APHY

Proceedings of the international workshop 2005. “The Holocene history of vegeta-

held at the Austrian Academy of Sciences tion and settlement at the coastal site
at Vienna May 7th and 8th, 2001, edited of Lake Voulkaria in Acarnania, wes-
by S. Deger-Jalkotzy and tern Greece.” Vegetation History and
M. Zavadil, 125–130. Wien: Verlag Archaeobotany 14: 55–66.
der Österreichischen Akademie Jameson, M. H. 1969. “Excavations at
der Wissenschaften, Österreichische Porto Cheli and vicinity, preliminary
Akademie der Wissenschaften report, I: Halieis, 1962–1968.”
philosophisch-historische Klasse Hesperia 38: 311–342.
Denkscriften 310. 2001. “Oil presses of the Late Classical/
Immerwahr, H. R. 1992. “New wine in Hellenistic period.” In Technai,
ancient wineskins. The evidence Techniques et sociétés méditerranéennes.
from attic vases.” Hesperia 61: 121–132. Homage à Marie-Claire Amouretti, edited
Immerwahr, S. A. 1990. Aegean Painting in by J.-P. Burn and P. Jockey, 281–299.
the Bronze Age. University Park: Penn Paris: MMSH/Maisonneuve et Larose.
State University Press. Janko, R. 1982. Homer, Hesiod, and the
Ingold, T. 2011. “Introduction.” In Hymns: Diachronic Development in Epic
Redrawing Anthropology: Materials, Diction. Cambridge: Cambridge
Movements, Lines, edited by University Press.
T. Ingold, 1–20. Anthropological 2012. “πρῶτον τε καὶ ὕστατον αἰὲν
Studies of Creativity and Perception, ἀείδειν: relative chronology and the
Farnham: Ashgate. literary history of the Greek epos.” In
Irwin, E. 2005. Solon and Early Greek Relative Chronology in Early Greek Epic
Poetry: The Politics of Exhortation. Poetry, edited by Ø. Andersen and
Cambridge: Cambridge University D. T. T. Haug, 20–43. Cambridge:
Press. Cambridge University Press.
Izdebski, A., K. Holmgren, E. Japp, S. 2009. “Archaometrisch-
Weiberg, S. Stocker, U. Büntgen, archaologische Untersuchungen an
A. Florenzano . . . E. Xoplaki. Keramik aus Pergamon und
2016. “Realising consilience: how Umgebung.” Istanbuler Mitteilungen
better communication between 59: 193–268.
archaeologists, historians and nat- Jim, T. S. F. 2014. Sharing with the Gods.
ural scientists can transform the Aparchai and Dekatai in Ancient Greece.
study of past climate change in Oxford: Oxford Classical Monographs.
the Mediterranean.” Quaternary Johnston, A. W. 2007. “Panathenaic
Science Reviews 136(C): 5–22. amphorae, again.” Zeitschrift für
Jacob-Felsch, M. 1988. “Compass-drawn Papyrologie und Epigraphik 161:
concentric circles in vase painting. 101–104.
A problem of relative chronology at Johnston, A. W. and R. Jones. 1978. “The
the end of the Bronze Age.” In SOS amphora.” Annual of the British
Problems in Greek Prehistory, edited by School at Athens 73: 103–141.
E. B. French and K. A. Wardle, Jones, G. and S. M. Valamoti. 2005.
193–199. London: Bristol Classical “Lallemantia, an imported or intro-
Press. duced oil plant in Bronze Age
Jahns, S. 1993. “On the Holocene vegeta- Northern Greece.” Vegetation History
tion history of the Argive Plain and Archaeobotany 14: 571–577.
(Peloponnese, southern Greece).” Jones, G. V. 2007. “Climate change and the
Veget Hist Archaeobot 2: 187–203. global wine industry.” Proceedings of the
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 361

Thirteenth Australian Wine Industry Judson, A. P. 2013. “The linear B inscribed

Technical Conference, Adelaide, Australia, stirrup jars.” Kadmos 52(1): 69–110.
28 July–2 August 2007. 1–8. www Jung, R. 2002. Kastanas. Ausgrabungen in
.linfield.edu/assets/files/Wine-Studies einem Siedlugshuegel der Bronze- und
/GregJones/AWITC%20GJones.pdf Eisenzeit Makedoniens 1975–1979. Die
Jones, G.V. and L.B. Webb. 2010. Drehscheibenkeramik der Schichten
“Climate change, viticulture, and 19 Bis 11. Praehistorische
wine: challenges and opportunities.” Archaeologie in Suedosteuropa, vol.
Journal of Wine Research 21(2–3): 18. Kiel: Verlag Oetker/Voges.
103–106. 2009. “Pirates of the Aegean: Italy – the
Jones, G. V., M. A. White, O. R. Cooper East Aegean – Cyprus at the end of
and K. Storchmann. 2005. “Climate the second millennium.” In Cyprus
change and global wine quality.” and the East Aegean, edited by
Climate Change 73(3): 319–343. V. Karageorghis and O. Kouka,
Jones, H. S. and J. E. Powell. 1942. 72–93. Nicosia: A.G. Leventis
Thucydidis historiae, 2 vols. Oxford: Foundation.
Clarendon Press., 1: 1942 (1st ed. Jusseret, S., J. Driessen and Q. Letesson.
rev.); 2:1942 (2nd ed. rev.) (repr. 2013. “Minoan lands? Some remarks
1:1970; 2:1967). on land ownership on Bronze Age
Jones, O. and P. Cloke. 2008. “Chapter 5. Crete.” In The Archaeology of Land
Non-human agencies: trees in place Ownership, edited by M. Relaki and
and time.” In Material Agency: D. Catapoti, 46–69. New York:
Towards a Non-Anthropocentric Routledge.
Approach, edited by C. Knappett and Kallitsaki, H. 1997. “The Mycenaean bur-
L. Malafouris, 79–96. Berlin: ial enclosure in Phourni, Archanes.”
Springer. In La Crète mycénienne: Actes de la
Jones, R. 1980. “Analyses of bronze and Table Ronde internationale organisée par
other base metal objects from the l’École française d’Athènes (BCH Suppl.
cemeteries.” In Lefkandi I: The Iron 30), edited by J. Driessen and
Age, edited by M. Popham, H. A. Farnoux, 213–227. Athens: École
Sackett, and P. Themelis, 447–459. française d’Athènes.
London: British School of Athens. Kaniewski, D., E. Paulissen, E. V. Campo,
1986. Greek and Cypriot Pottery. A Review H. Weiss, T. Otto, J. Bretschneider
of Scientific Studies. Athens: British and K. V. Lerberghe. 2010.
School at Athens Fitch Laboratory “Late second–early first
Occasional Papers. millennium BC abrupt climate
Jones, R.E. 1996. Appendix: Chemical changes in coastal Syria and their
Analysis of Mycenaean and possible significance for the history
Submycenaean Pottery from of the Eastern Mediterranean.”
Kalapodi. In Kalapodi i. Ergebnisse der Quaternary Research 74: 207–215.
Ausgrabungen im Heiligtum der Artemis Kaniewski, D., E. Van Campo, J. Guiot,
und des Apollon von Hyampolis in der S. Le Burel, T. Otto and
antiken Phokis. Band I, edited by C. Baeteman. 2013. “Environmental
Rainer C.S. Felsch, 115–120. Mainz: roots of the LBA crisis.” PLOS ONE
Verlag Philipp von Zabern. 8(8): e71004.
Jouanna, J. 1996. “Le Vin et la Medicine Kanta, A. 2005. “Response to Halford
dans la Grece Ancienne.” REG 109: W. Haskell, ‘Region to region
410–434. export of transport stirrup jars
362 BIBLIOGR APHY

from LM IIIA2/B Crete.’” In 1979. “Ausgrabungen in Tiryns, 1977.”

Ariadne’s Threads: Connections Archäologischer Anzeiger 1979: 379–411.
between Crete and the Greek 1981. “Zeugnisse mykenischer
Mainland in Late Minoan III (LM Kultausubung in Tiryns.” In
IIIA2 to LM IIIC). Proceedings of Sanctuaries and cults in the Aegean
the international workshop held at Bronze Age, edited by R. Hägg and
Athens Scuola Archeologica Italiana N. Marinatos, 49–58. Stockholm:
5–6 April 2003, edited by Swedish Institute at Athens.
A. L. D’Agata and J. Moody, 1982. “Ausgrabungen in Tiryns 1980.
223–234. Athens: Scuola Bericht zu den Grabungen.”
Archeologicca Italiana di Atene. Archäologischer Anzeiger 1982: 393‒430.
Karageorghis, V., et al. 1998. Από την ενάλια 1983. “Ausgrabungen in Tiryns 1981.
Κύπρο στον μυχό του πολυδίψιου Bericht zu den Grabungen.”
Αργους. Το ναυάγιο του Ακτωτηρίου Archäologischer Anzeiger 1983: 277‒328.
Ιρίων. Athens: Institute of Underwater 1988. “Mycenaeans up to date. Trends
Archaeological Research. and changes in recent research.” In
Kasseri, A. 2012. “Φοινικικοί εμπορικοί Problems in Greek Prehistory. Papers
αμφορείς από τη Μεθώνη Πιερίας.” Presented at the Centenary Conference of
In Κεραμέως παιδες, edited by the British School of Archaeology at
E. Kefalidou and D. Tsiafaki, Athens, Manchester, April 1986, edited
299–318. Thessaloníkı̄: Etaireía by E. B. French and K. A. Wardle,
Andríōn Epistı̄mónōn. 115‒152. Bristol: Bristol Classical Press.
Kelder, J. M. 2009. “Royal gift exchange Killen, J. T. 2006. “Conscription and
between Mycenae and Egypt: olives corveé at Mycenaean Pylos.” In
as ‘greeting gifts’ in the Late Bronze Fiscality in Myceanean and Near
Age Mediterranean.” AJA 113(3): Eastern Archives. Proceedings of the
339–352. Conference held at Soprintendenza
Kelly-Blazeby, C. F. 2006. “Kapeleion: Archivistica per la Campania, Naples,
Casual and Commercial wine con- 21 – 23 October, 2004, edited by
sumption in Classical Greece.” M. Perna, Paris: De Boccard.
Ph.D. dissertation, University of Killen, T. 1998. “The Rôle of the State in
Leicester. Wheat and Olive Production in
Keswani, P. 2009. “Exploring regional var- Mycenaean Crete,” Aevum 72, pp.
iation in Late Cypriot II–III pithoi: 19–23.
perspectives from Alassa and Kiriatzi, E., A. Kotsonas, M. Roumpou,
Kalavasos.” In The Formation of M. Besios, and G. Tzifopoulos.
Cyprus in the 2nd Millennium B.C.: 2013. Παραγωγή και διακίνηση
Studies in Regionalism During the κεραμικής στο Θερμαικό κόλπο
Middle and Late Bronze Ages. κατά τον ύστερο 8-πρώιμο 7 αι. π.
Proceedings of a Workshop Held at the Χ. πρώτα αποτελέσματα της
4th Cyprological Congress, May 2nd διεπιστημονικής μελέτης κεραμικής
2008, Lefkosia, Cyprus, edited by από το “Υπόγειο” της Μεθώνης
I. Hein, 107–126. Vienna: Verlag der Πιερίας. Conference Presentation.
Österreichischen Akademie der AEMTh.
Wissenschaften. Kislev, M. E. 1987. “Chalcolithic plant hus-
Kilian, K. 1978. “Ausgrabungen in Tiryns, bandry and ancient vegetation at
1976.” Archäologischer Anzeiger 1978: Shiqmim.” In Shiqmim I: studies concern-
449–470. ing Chalcolithic societies in Northern Negev
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 363

Desert, Israel (1982– 1984), BAR Archaeology, 14–18 April 2004, edited
International Series 356, edited by by R. Laffineur and E. Greco,
T. E. Levy, 251–279. Oxford: 175–184. Aegaeum 25. Liège and
Archaeopress. Austin: Université de Liège and
Klug, R. 2013: Griechische University of Texas at Austin.
Transportamphoren im regionalen und Knappett, C. and T. Cunningham. 2012.
überregionalen Handel: Untersuchungen Palaikastro Block M: The Proto- and
in griechischen und nicht-griechischen Neopalatial Town. BSA Suppl. 47.
Kontexten in Unteritalien und Sizilien London: British School at Athens.
vom 8. bis zum 5. Jh. v. Chr., Knappett, C. and L. Malafouris, eds. 2008.
Rahden: VML Verlag Marie Leidorf. Material Agency. Towards a Non-
Knapp, A. B. and S. Demesticha. 2016. Anthropocentric Approach. New York:
Mediterranean Connections. Maritime Springer.
Transport Containers and Seaborne Knappett, C., R. Rivers and T. Evans.
Trade in the Bronze and Early Iron 2011. “The Theran eruption and
Ages. New York: Routledge. Minoan palatial collapse: new inter-
Knapp, A. B. and S. W. Manning. 2016. pretations gained from modelling the
“Crisis in context: the end of the Late maritime network.” Antiquity 85:
Bronze Age in the Eastern 1008–1023.
Mediterranean.” American Journal of Knight, F. H. 1921. Risk, Uncertainty, and
Archaeology 120(1): 99–149. Profit. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Knappett, C. 1999. “Tradition and innova- Knodell, A. 2013. “Small-World Networks
tion in pottery forming technology: and Mediterranean Dynamics in the
wheel-throwing at Middle Minoan Euboean Gulf: An Archaeology of
Knossos.” BSA 94: 101–129. Complexity in Late Bronze Age and
2011a. “Networks of objects, meshworks Early Iron Age Greece.” Ph.
of things.” In Redrawing Anthropology: D. dissertation, Brown University.
Materials, Movements, Lines, edited by Knox, H., M. Savage and P. Harvey. 2006.
T. Ingold, 45–63. Anthropological “Social networks and the study of
Studies of Creativity and Perception, relations: networks as method, meta-
Farnham: Ashgate. phor and form.” Economy and Society
2011b. An Archaeology of Interaction: 35(1): 113–140.
Network Perspectives on Material Koehler, C. G. 1981. “Corinthian devel-
Culture and Society, opments in the study of trade in the
2013. “Introduction: why networks?” In fifth century.” Hesperia 50(4):
Network Analysis in Archaeology. New 449–458.
Approaches to Regional Interaction, edi- 1996. “Wine amphoras in ancient Greek
ted by C. Knappett, 3–16. Oxford: trade.” In The Origins and Ancient
Oxford University Press. History of Wine, edited by Patrick
Knappett, C. and I. Nikolakopoulou. E. McGovern and Stuart J. Fleming
2005. “Exchange and affiliation net- and Solomon H. Katz, 323–337.
works in the MBA Southern Aegean: Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach
Crete, Akrotiri and Miletus.” In Publishers.
Emporia: Aegeans in the Central and Koehl, R.B. 1981. “The functions of
Eastern Mediterranean. Proceedings of Aegean Bronze Age rhyta.” In
the 10th International Aegean Sanctuaries and Cults in the Aegean
Conference/10e Rencontre égéenne inter- Bronze Age. Proceedings of the Fifth
nationale, Athens, Italian School of International Symposium at the Swedish
364 BIBLIOGR APHY

Insittute in Athens, 12–13 May 1980, Kopytoff, I. 1986. “The cultural biography
edited by R. Hägg and N. of things: commoditization as pro-
Marinatos, 179–187. Stockholm: cess.” In The Social Life of Things, edi-
Acta Instituti Atheniensis Regni ted by A. Appadurai, 64–91.
Sueciae, Series In 4, XXVIII. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Koh, A. J. and P. P. Betancourt. 2010. Press.
“Wine and olive oil from an Early Kotsonas, A. 2008. The Archaeology of Tomb
Minoan I hilltop fort.” Mediterranean A1K1 of Orthi Petra in Eleuthera: The
Archaeology and Archaeometry 10(2): early Iron Age Pottery. Heraklion: The
15–23. University of Crete.
Koning, H. H. 2010. Hesiod, the Other Poet: 2012. “I enepigraphi keramiki tou
Ancient Reception of a Cultural Icon. Upogeiou: proeleusi, tipologia,
Leiden: Brill. chronologisi kai erminia.” In Methoni
Konsolaki-Yannopoulou, E. 2001. “New Pierias I, edited by M. Besios,
evidence for the practice of libations G. Z. Tzifopoulos and A. Kotsonas,
in the Aegean Bronze Age.” In Potnia: 113–304. Thessaloniki: Kentro
Deities and Religion in the Aegean Ellinikis Glossas.
Bronze Age. Aegaeum 22, edited by 2016. “Politics of periodization and the
R. Laffineur and R. Hägg, 213–225. archaeology of early Greece.” AJA
Liège: Université de Liège. 120(2): 239–270.
Konsolaki-Yannopoulou, E. 2004. “Myce- Koubouris, G. C., N. Kavroulakis,
naean religious architecture: the I. T. Metzidakis, M. D. Vasilakakis and
archaeological evidence from Ayios A. Sofo. 2015. “Ultraviolet-B radiation
Konstantinos, Methana.” In or heat cause changes in photosynthesis,
Celebrations: Sanctuaries and Vestiges of antioxidant enzyme activities and pollen
Cult Activity, edited by M. Wedde, performance in olive tree.”
61–92. Bergen: The Norwegian Photosynthetica 53(2): 279–287.
Institute at Athens. Kouli, K. 2011. “Vegetation development
Konstan, D. and S. Saïd, eds. 2006. Greeks and human activities in Attiki (SE
on Greekness. Viewing the Greek Past Greece) during the last 5,000 years.”
Under the Roman Empire. Cambridge: Vegetation History and Archaeobotany
Cambridge University Press. 21: 267–278.
Kontopoulos, N. and P. Avramidis. 2003. Kounouklas, P. 2009. “Ο Κύνος στην
“A late Holocene record of environ- Πρωτογεωμετρική Εποχή.” In
mental changes from the Aliki lagoon, Αρχαιολογικό ΄Εργο Θεσσαλίας και
Egion, North Peloponnesus, Greece.” Στερεάς Ελλάδας 2 (2006). Πρακτικά
Quaternary International 111: 75–90. Επιστημονικής Συνάντησης, Βόλος
Kopaka, K. 2015. “The Gavdos project. An 16.3–19.3.2006. Volume ΙΙ: Στερεά
island culture on the Cretan and Ελλάδα, edited by A. Mazarakis-
Aegean fringe.” The European Ainian, 989–997. Volos:
Archaeologist 46: 62–67. Πανεπιστημίου Θεσσαλίας and
Kopaka, K., Y. Christodoulakos, Υπουργείο Πολιτισμού.
G. Moschovi and P. Drosinou. Kramer-Hajos, M. 2008. Beyond the Palace:
2001. “Rock-cut presses in Mycenaean East Lokris. BAR
Gavdos.” In Proceedings of the 8th International Series 1781. Oxford:
Cretological Congress, A1, Irakleio Archaeopress.
1996, 557–580. Iraklio: Society of Kramer-Hajos, M. and K. O’Neill. 2008.
Cretan Historical Studies. “The Bronze Age site of Mitrou in
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 365

East Lokris: finds from the 1988–1989 LaFayette Hogue, S. 2016. “New evidence
surface survey.” Hesperia 77(2): of post-destruction reuse in the main
163–250. building of the Palace of Nestor at
Krause, G. 1975. Untersuchungen zu den Pylos.” AJA 120(1): 151–157.
ältesten Nekropolen am Eridanos in Lambrinoudakis, V. 1981. “Remains of the
Athen. Hamburg: Helmut Busche Mycenaen period in the sanctuary of
Verlag. Apollon Maleatas.” In Sanctuaries and
Kroll, H. 1983. Kastanas. Ausgrabungen in Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, edited
einem Siedlungs- hügel der Bronze- und by R. Hägg and N. Marinatos, 59–65.
Eisenzeit Makedoniens, 1975–1979: Die Stockholm: Swedish Institute at
Pflanzenfunde. Berlin: Spiess. Athens.
2000. “Agriculture and arboriculture in Lambrou-Phillipson, C. and J. Phillipson.
mainland Greece at the beginning of 2002. “The use of resins in ancient
the first millennium BC.” Pallas 52: wines.” In Oinos Palaios Idypotos: To
61–68. Kritiko Krasi apo ta Proïstorika os ta
Kroll, J. H. 2008. “Early Iron Age balance Neotera Chronia. Kounavoi: Dimos ‘N.
weights at Lefkandi, Euboea.” Oxford Kazantzakis’, 24–26 Apriliou 1998, edi-
Journal of Archaeology 27(1): 37–48. ted by Aik. Mylopotamitaki, 69–74.
Kübler, K. 1954. Die Nekropole des 10. bis 8. Irakleio: Ypourgeio Politismou
Jahrhunderts. Kerameikos: Ergebnisse der Archaiologiko Institouto Kritis,
Ausgrabungen 5.1. Berlin: Deutsches Praktika tou Diethnous Epistimonikou
Archäologisches Institut. Symposiou.
Kuhnt, T., G. Schmiedl, W. Ehrmann, Langdon, M. K. 1997. “Cult in Iron Age
Y. Hamann and N. Andersen. 2008. Attica.” In New Light on a Dark Age:
“Stable isotopic composition of Exploring the Culture of Geometric
Holocene benthic foraminifers from Greece, edited by S. Langdon,
the Eastern Mediterranean Sea: past 113–124. Columbia: University of
changes in productivity and deep Missouri Press.
water oxygenation.” Palaeogeography, Langdon, S. 2008. Art and Identity in Dark Age
Palaeoclimatology, and Palaeoecology 268 Greece, 1100–700 B.C.E. Cambridge:
(1): 106–115. Cambridge University Press.
Kulick, R. 2019. “Urban micromorphol- Langgut, D. et al. 2019. “The origin of olive
ogy: a microecological narrative of a domestication in the Mediterranean
Neopalatial neighborhood at Bronze Basin: the fossil pollen evidence.” The
Age Palaikastro, Crete.” Holocene 29(5): 902–922.
Geoarchaeology 2019: 1–18. Langohr, C. 2009. Périphéreia: Étude régionale
Kurtz, D. C. and J. Boardman. 1971. Greek de la Crète aux Minoen récent II–IIIB
Burial Customs. London: Thames & (1450–1200 av. J.-C.). Vol. 1, La Crète
Hudson. centrale et occidentale. Louvain-la-Neuve
Kyriakidis, E. 2001. “The economics of : Université Catholique de Louvain,
Potnia: storage in ‘temples’ of prehis- Presses universitaires de Louvain.
toric Greece.” In POTNIA. Deities Larson, S. 2007. Tales of Epic Ancestry:
and Religion in the Aegan Bronze Age. Boiotian Collective Identity in the Late
Proceedings of the 8th International Archaic and Early Classical Periods.
Aegean Conference Göteborg, Göteborg Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
University, 12–15 April 2000, edited by Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An
R. Laffineur and R. Hägg, 123–129. Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory.
Liège: Université de Liège. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
366 BIBLIOGR APHY

Lavee, S. and M. Wodner. 1991. “Factors Lazarova, M., A. Koutsios and

affecting the nature of oil accumula- N. Kontopoulos. 2009. “Holocene
tion in fruit of olive.” Journal of vegetation history of the Kotihi lagoon
Horticultural Science 66: 583–591. (northwest Peloponnesus, Greece).”
Lawall, M. 1995. “Transport Amphoras Quaternary International 261: 138–145.
and Trademarks: Imports to Athens Lederman, R. 1986. What Gifts Engender:
and Economic Diversity in the Fifth Social Relations and Politics in Mendi,
Century B.C.” Ph.D. dissertation, Highland Papua New Guinea.
University of Michigan. Cambridge: Cambridge University
2000. “Graffiti, wine selling, and the Press.
reuse of amphoras in the Athenian Legarra Herrero, B. 2014. Mortuary
Agora, ca. 430 to 400 B.C.” Hesperia Behavior and Social Trajectories in Pre-
69: 3–90. and Protopalatial Crete (Vol. 44).
2004. “Amphoras without stamps: chron- Princeton: INSTAP.
ologies and typologies from the Lemos, I. S. 2002. The Protogeometric Aegean.
Athenian Agora.” In ΣΤ´ Oxford: Oxford University Press.
επιστημονική συνάντηση για την 2014. “Communities in transformation:
ελληνιστική κεραμική. 445–454. an archaeological survey from the
Athens. Ministry of Culture. 12th to the 9th century BC.” Pharos
“Consuming the West in the East: 20(1): 161–192.
amphoras of the western Lemos, I. S. and D. Mitchell. 2011. “Elite
Mediterranean in the Aegean before burials in Early Iron Age Aegean.
86 BC.” In Old Pottery in a New Some preliminary observations con-
Century: Innovating Perspectives on sidering the spatial organization of the
Roman Pottery Studies (Monografie Toumba Cemetery at Lefkandi.” In
dell’Istiuto per I beni archeologici The “Dark Ages” Revisited: An
e monumentali 1), edited by International Symposium in Memory of
D. Malfitana, J. Poblome and J. Lund, William D. E. Coulson, edited by
265–285, Catania. A. Mazarakis Ainian, 635–644.
2011. “Socio-economic conditions and Volos: University of Thessaly.
the contents of amphorae.” In Lenz, D., F. Ruppenstein, M. Baumann and
Production and Trade of Amphorae in R. Catling. 1998. “Protogeometric pot-
the Black Sea, Acts of the International tery at Troia.” Studia Troica 8: 189–222.
Round Table Held in Kiten, Nessebar Leonard, A., Jr. 1995. “‘Canaanite jars’ and
and Sredetz, September 36–30, 2007, the Late Bronze Age Aegeo-Levantine
edited by C. Tzochev, T. Stoyanov wine trade.” In The Origins and Ancient
and A. Bozkova, 23–33. Sofia: History of Wine: Food and Nutrition in
St. Kliment Ohridski University History and Anthropology, edited by
Press/National Institute of P. E. McGovern, S. J. Fleming and
Archaeology and Museum, S. H. Katz, 233–254. Philadelphia:
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. Gordon and Breach.
2011. “Imitative amphoras in the Greek Letesson, Q. and J. Driessen. 2008. “From
world.” In Marburger Beiträge zur ‘party’ to ‘ritual’ to ‘ruin’ in Minoan
Antiken Handels-, wirtschafts- und sozial- Crete: the spatial context of feasting.”
geschichte, edited by H.-J. Drexhage, In DAIS. The Aegean Feast. Proceedings
T. Mattern, R. Rollinger, K. Ruffing of the 12th International Aegean
and C. Schäfer, 45–88. Rahden/ Conference held at the Unviersity of
Westf.: Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH. Melbourne, 25–29 March 2008, edited
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 367

by L. Hitchcock, J. Crowley and traditional knowledge combined.” In

R. Laffineur, 207–215. Aegaeum 29. Proceedings of the IVth International
Liège, Austin: Université de Liège, Congress of Ethnobotany (ICEB 2005),
The University of Texas at Austin. 435–437. İ stanbul: Efe Yayinlari.
Lionello, P. 2012. The Climate of the Livieratou, A. 2011. “Regional cult systems
Mediterranean Region. From the Past to in the transitional period from the Late
the Future. New York: Elsevier. Bronze to the Early Iron Age: compar-
Lis, B. 2008. “The role of cooking pottery ing the evidence from two different
and cooked food in the Palace of parts of mainland Greece, the Argolid
Nestor at Pylos.” Archeologia 57: 7–24. Plain and East Phokis.” In The “Dark
2009. “The sequence of Late Bronze/ Ages” Revisited. Acts of an International
Early Iron Age pottery from Central Symposium in Memory of William
Greek settlements—a fresh look at old D. E. Coulson, University of Thessaly,
and new evidence.” In LH IIIC Volos, 14–17 June 2007, edited by
Chronology and Synchronisms III: LH A. Mazarakis Ainian, Volume I,
IIIC Late and the Transition to the 147–164. Volos: University of
Early Iron Age, edited by S. Deger- Thessaly Press.
Jalkotzy and A. E. Bächle, 203–233. Loader, N. C. 1998. Building in Cyclopean
Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie Masonry. With Special Reference to the
der Wissenschaften. Mycenaean Fortification on Mainland
Lis, B. and Š. Rückl. 2011. “Our storerooms Greece. Jonsered: Paul Åströms Förlag
are full. Impressed pithoi from Late Lolos, Y. G. 1991. “Η κεραμεική και οι
Bronze/Early Iron Age East Lokris and προέκτασεις του.” Enalia 2(1/2):
Phokis and their socio-economic signif- 17–24.
icance.” In Our Cups Are Full: Pottery 1995. “Late Cypro-Mycenaean seafaring:
and Society in the Aegean Bronze Age. new evidence from sites in the Saronic
Papers Presented to Jeremy B. Rutter on and the Argolic Gulfs.” In Proceedings of
the Occasion of his 65th Birthday, edited the International Symposium: Cyprus and
by W. Gauß, M. Lindblom, the Sea, edited by Vassos Karageorghis
R. A. K. Smith and J. C. Wright, and Demetrios Michaelides, 65–87.
154–168. Oxford: Archaeopress. Nicosia: University of Cyprus.
Lissarrague, F. 1990. The Aesthetics of the 1999. “The cargo of pottery from the
Greek Banquet: Images of Wine and Point Iria Wreck: character and impli-
Ritual, trans. by A. Szegedy- Maszak, cations.” In The Point Iria Wreck:
Princeton: Princeton University Press. Interconnections in the Mediterranean ca.
1995. “Un ritual du vin: la libation.” In 1200 B.C. Proceedings of the International
In vino veritas, edited by O. Murray Conference, Island of Spetses,
and M. Tecusan, 126–144. London: 19 September 1998, edited by W. Phelps,
British School at Rome. Y. Lolos and Y. Vichos, 43–58. Athens:
Liston, M. A. and J. K. Papadopoulos. Hellenic Institute of Marine
2004. “The ‘Rich Athenian Lady’ Archaeology; Athina: Institouto
was pregnant: the anthropology of Enalion Archaiologikon Ereunon.
a Geometric tomb reconsidered.” 2003. “Cypro-Mycenaean relations ca.
Hesperia 73(1): 7–38. 1200 BC: Point Iria in the Gulf of
Livarda, A. and G. Kotzamani. 2006. Argos and Old Salamis in the
“Plant lore in ‘Dark Age’ Greece: Saronic Gulf.” In Ploes . . . Sea
archaeobotanical evidence From Routes . . . Interconnections in the
Lefkandi, Euboea, literal sources and Mediterranean, 16th–6th ca. BC:
368 BIBLIOGR APHY

Proceedings of the International Late Minoan Wells. Supplementary

Symposium held at Rethymnon, Crete, Volume no. 43. Athens: The British
September 29th–October 2nd 2002, edi- School at Athens.
ted by N. C. Stampolidis and Malinowski, B. (1922) 1961. Argonauts of
V. Karageorghis, 101–116. Athens: the Western Pacific. New York:
University of Crete and the A.G. Dutton.
Leventis Foundation. Malkin, I. 1998. The Returns of Odysseus:
Long, Ch. 1974. The Ayia Triadha Colonization and Ethnicity. Berkeley:
Sarcophagus: A Study of Late Minoan University of California Press.
and Mycenaean Funerary Practices and ed. 2001. Ancient Perceptions of Greek
Beliefs. SIMA 41. Göteborg: Paul Ethnicity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Åströms Förlag. University Press.
Luce, J. M. 1992. “Delphes. L’aire du char 2003. “Networks and the emergence of
des Rhodiens.” BCH 116(2): 686–704. Greek identity.” Mediterranean
1993. “Delphes. Fouille de l’aire du pilier Historical Review 18: 56–75.
des Rhodiens.” BCH 117: 619–631. 2011. A Small Greek World: Networks in
Lupack, S. 2007. “Palaces, sanctuaries, and the Ancient Mediterranean. Oxford:
workshops: the role of the religious Oxford University Press.
sector in Mycenaean economics.” In Malkin, I., C. Constantakopoulou and
Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces II K. Panagopoulou, eds. 2009. Greek
(UCLAMon 60), edited by and Roman Networks in the
M. L. Galaty and W. A. Parkinson, Mediterranean. New York: Routledge.
54–63. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute Manakidou, E. 2010. “Céramiques
Press. ‘indigènes’ de l’époque Géométrique
Lyons, C. 1996. Morgantina Studies, Volume et Archaïque du site de Karabournaki
V: The Archaic Cemeteries. Princeton: en Macédoine et leur relation avec les
Princeton University Press. céramiques importees.” In Grecs et
Lyons, C. and J. K. Papadopoulos. 2002: Indigènes de la Catalogne à la mer
The Archaeology of Colonialism. Los Noire, edited by H. Tréziny,
Angeles: Getty Research Institute. 463–269. Paris: Publications de
Lyons, D. 2012. Dangerous Gifts: Gender and Centre Camille-Jullian.
Exchange in Ancient Greece. Austin: Manning, J. G. and I. Morris, eds. 2005.
University of Texas Press. The Ancient Economy. Evidence and
Macdonald, C. F. and C. Knappett. Models. Stanford: Stanford University
2013. Intermezzo: Intermediacy and Press.
Regeneration in Middle Minoan III Manning, S. W. 1999, A Test of Time: The
Palatial Crete. BSA Studies 21. Volcano of Thera and the Chronology and
London: British School at Athens. History of the Aegean and East
MacGillivray, J. A. 1987. “Pottery work- Mediterranean in the Mid Second
shops and the old palaces in Crete.” In Millennium BC. Oxford: Oxbow
The Function of the Minoan Palaces. Books.
Proceedings of the Fourth International 2010. “Radiocarbon dating and climate
Symposium at the Swedish Institute in change.” In Climate Crises in Human
Athens, edited by R. Hägg and History, edited by A. B. Mainwaring,
N. Marinatos, 273–279. Stockholm: R. Giegengack and C. Vita-Finzi,
Svenska Institutet i Athen. 25–59. Lightning Rod Press:
MacGillivray, J. A., H. Sackett and Volume 6. Philadelphia: American
J. Driessen. 2007. Palaikastro: Two Philosophical Society.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 369

2013. “The Roman world and climate: C. Wright, 169–178. Oxford:

context, relevance of climate change, Archaeopress.
and some issues.” In The Ancient Marangou, A. 1999. “Wine in the Cretan
Mediterranean Environment between economy.” In From Minoan Farmers to
Sciences and History, edited by Roman Traders. Sidelights on the Economy
W. V. Harris, 103–170. Leiden: Brill. of Ancient Crete, edited by A. Chaniotis,
Maran, J. 2000. “Das Megaron im 269–278. Stuttgart: Steiner.
Megaron: Zur Datierung und Margaritis, E. 2007. “Archaeobotanical
Funktion des Antznbaus im investigations at the Geometric site
Mykenischen Palast von Tiryns.” of Krania, southern Pieria in
Archäologischer Anzeiger: 1–16. Macedonia, Greece.” Talanta 38/39:
2001. “Political and religious aspects of 123–132.
architectural change on the Upper 2013. “Distinguishing exploitation,
Citadel of Tiryns. The case of domestication, cultivation and pro-
Building T.” In Potnia: Deities and duction: the olive in the third millen-
Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age. nium Aegean.” Antiquity 87:
Aegaeum 22, edited by R. Laffineur 746–757.
and R. Hägg, 113–122. Liège: 2014a. “The Kapeleio at Hellenistic
Université de Liège. Krania. Food consumption, disposal,
2005. “Late Minoan coarse ware stirrup and the use of space.” Hesperia: The
jars on the Greek Mainland: Journal of the American School of Classical
a postpalatial perspective from the Studies at Athens 83(1): 103–121.
12th century BC Argolid.” In Margaritis, E. 2014b. “Acts of destruction and
Ariadne’s Threads: Connections between acts of preservation: plants in the ritual
Crete and the Greek Mainland in Late landscape of prehistoric Greece.” In
Minoan III (LM IIIA2 to LM IIIC). Physis. L’Environnement naturel et al rela-
Proceedings of the international workshop tion homme-milieu dan s le monde Égéen
held at Athens, Scuola Archeologica protohistorique. Actes de la 14e Rencontre
Italiana, 5–6 April 2003, edited by égéenne international, Paris, Institut
A. L. D’Agata and J. Moody, National d’Histoire de l’Art (INHA),
415–431. Tripodes 3. Athens: Scuola 11–14 décembre 2012, edited by
Archeologica Italiana di Atene. G. Touchais, R. Laffineur and
2006. “Coming to terms with the past: F. Rougemont, 279–286. Leuven:
ideology and power in Late Helladic Peeters.
IIIC.” In Ancient Greece: From the Margaritis, E. and M. Jones. 2006.
Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer, “Beyond cereals: crop processing
edited by S. Deger-Jalkotzy and and Vitis vinifera L. Ethnography,
I. S. Lemos, 123–150. Edinburgh: experiment and charred grape
Edinburgh University Press. remains from Hellenistic Greece.”
2011. “Contested pasts – The society of Journal of Archaeological Science 33(6):
the 12th c. B.C.E. Argolid and the 784–805.
memory of the Mycenaean palatial 2008. “Olive oil production in
period.” In Our Cups Are Full: Hellenistic Greece: the interpreta-
Pottery and Society in the Aegean tion of charred olive remains from
Bronze Age. Papers Presented to Jeremy the site of Tria Platania,
B. Rutter on the Occasion of his 65th Macedonia, Greece (fourth–second
Birthday, edited by W. Gauß, century B.C.).” Vegetation History
M. Lindblom, R. A. K. Smith and J. and Archaeobotany 17(4): 393–401.
370 BIBLIOGR APHY

Margomenou, D. 2005. “Food Storage, by J. Bourriau and J. Phillips,

Surplus, and the Emergence of 121–148. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Institutionalized Inequality: A Study Marx, K. (1867) 1978. Capital, Vol. I:
of Storage Jars and Food Storage for A Critical Analysis of Capitalist
Central Northern Greece in the Late Production. Translated by Samuel
Bronze Age and Early Iron Age.” Moore and Edward Aveling. Moscow:
Ph.D. dissertation, Ann Arbor: Progress.
University of Michigan. Masson, O. 1983. Les Inscriptions Chypriotes
2008. “Food storage in prehistoric north- Syllabiques, Reimpression Augmentee.
ern Greece: interrogating complexity Paris: ICS2.
at the margins of the ‘Myceanean Mauss, M. 1923–1924. “Essai sur le don.
World’.” Journal of Mediterranean Forme et raison de l’échange dans les
Archaeology 21(2): 191–212. sociétés Archaïques.” In L’Année socio-
Marinatos, S. 1949. “Ανασκαφων logique n.s. 1, 30–196; Engl. Transl.:
Βαθυπέτρου Αρχανων (Κρήτης)” The Gift: The Form and Reason for
Praktika Archailogike Hetaireia en Exchange in Archaic Societies (2002),
Athenais 1949: 100–109. foreword by Mary Douglas.
1968–1976. Excavations at Thera. 7 vols. New York, London: Routledge.
Athens: Archaeological Society. 1990. The Gift: The Form and Reason
Marston, J. M. 2011. “Archaeological mar- for Exchange in Archaic Societies.
kers of agricultural risk management.” London: Routledge. (Orig. pub.
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 30 1923.)
(2): 190–205. Mayewski, P. A., E. J. Rohling,
2012. “Agricultural strategies and politi- J. C. Stager, W. Karlen,
cal economy in Ancient Anatolia.” K. A. Maasch, L. D. Meeker,
American Journal of Archaeology, 116 E. A. Meyerson, F. Gasse, S. van
(3): 377–403. Kreveld, K. Holmgren, J. Lee-
2015. “Modeling resilience and sustain- Thorp, G. Rosqvist, F. Rack,
ability in ancient agricultural M. Staubwasser, R. R. Schneider
systems.” Journal of Ethnobiology 35 and E. Steig. 2004. “Holocene climate
(3): 585–605. variability.” Quaternary Research 62:
2017. Agricultural Sustainability and 243–255.
Environmental Change at Ancient Mazarakis Ainian, A. 1997. From Rulers’
Gordion. Gordion Special Studies Dwellings to Temples. Architecture,
8. Philadelphia: University of Religion and Society in Early Iron Age
Pennsylvania Press. Greece (1100–700 BC). Jonsered:
Martin, R. 2004. “Hesiod and the didactic Åström.
double.” Sythesis 11: 31–53. 2001. “From huts to houses in Early Iron
Martlew, H. 2004. “Minoan and Age Greece.” In From Huts to Houses.
Mycenaean technology as revealed Transformations of Ancient Societies.
through organic residue analysis.” In Proceedings of an International Seminar
Invention and Innovation. The Social Organized by the Norwegian and Swedish
Context of Technological Change 2: Institutes in Rome, 21–24 September 1997,
Egypt, the Aegean and the Near East, edited by J. Rasmus Brandt and
1650–1150 BC. Proceedings of L. Karlsson, 139–161. Stockholm:
a conference held at the McDonald Paul Åströms Förlag.
Institute for Archaeological Research, 2002. “Recent excavations at Oropos
Cambridge, 4–6 September 2002, edited (Northern Attica).” In In Excavating
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 371

Classical Culture: Recent Archaeology and Homeric Epic, edited

Archaeological Discoveries in Greece, by S. Sherratt and J. Bennet,
edited by M. Stamatopoulou and 101–115. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
M. Yeroulanou, 149–178. Oxford: Mazarakis Ainian, A. and A. Alexandridou.
Beazley Archive and Archaeopress. 2011. “The so-called ‘Sacred House’ of
2006. “The archaeology of Basileis.” In the Academy revisited.” In The “Dark
Ancient Greece: From the Mycenaean Ages” Revisited. Acts of an International
Palaces to the Age of Homer, edited by Symposium in Memory of William
S. Deger-Jalkotzy and I. S. Lemos, D. E. Coulson, University of Thessaly,
181–211. Edinburgh Leventis Studies Volos, 14–17 June 2007, edited by
3, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University A. Mazarakis Ainian, Volume II,
Press. 165–190. Volos: University of Thessaly
ed. 2007. “Oropos and Euboea in the Press.
Early Iron Age: Acts of an Mazarakis Ainian, A. and I. Levanti. 2009.
International Round Table.” “The Aegean.” In A Companion to
University of Thessaly, June 18–20, Archaic Greece, edited by
2004. Volos: University of Thessaly K. A. Raaflaub and H. van Wees,
Publications. 212–238. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
2007. “Architecture and social structure Mazzini, I., E. Gliozzi, R. Koci, I. Soulie-
in Early Iron Age Greece.” In Building Maersche, G. Zanchetta, I. Baneschi,
Communities: House, Settlement and L. Sadori, M. Giardini, A. van
Society in the Aegean and Beyond, edited Welden and S. Bushati. 2015.
by R. Westgate, N. Fisher and “Historical evolution and Middle to
J. Whitley, 157–168. British School Late Holocene environmental
at Athens Studies, Vol. 15. Athens: changes in Lake Shkodra (Albania):
British School at Athens. new evidences from micropaleonto-
2010. “Tombes d’enfants à l’intérieur logical analysis.” Palaeogeography,
d’habitats au début de l’Age du Fer Palaeoclimatology and Palaeoecology
dans le Monde Grec.” In L’enfant et 419: 47–59.
la mort dans l’Antiquité I, Nouvelles McCall, G. 1982. Association and power in
recherches dans les nécropoles grecques: reciprocity and requital: more on
Le signalement des tombes d’enfants, Mauss and the Maori. Oceania 52:
Table ronde, Athènes, Ecole française 303–319.
d’Athènes, 29–30 mai 2008, edited by McDermott, F. 2004. “Palaeo-climate
A.-M. Guimier-Sorbets and reconstruction from stable isotope
Y. Morizot, 67–95. Paris: de Boccard. variations in speleothems: a review.”
ed. 2011. The Dark Ages Revisited. 2 vols. Quaternary Science Reviews, 23(7–8):
Volos: University of Thessaly. 901–918.
2012. “Euboean mobility towards the McDonald, W. A, W. D. E. Coulson, and
north: new evidence from the J. Rosser, eds. 1983. Excavations at
Sporades.” In Cyprus and the Nichoria in Southwest Greece Volume
Aegean in the Early Iron Age. The III. Dark Age and Byzantine
Legacy of Nicolas Coldstream, edited Occupation. Minneapolis: Minnesota
by M. Iacovou, 53–76. Nicosia: University Press.
Bank of Cyprus Cultural McGovern, P. 1999. “Retsina, mixed fer-
Foundation. mented beverages and the cuisine of
2017. “Heroes in Early Iron Age Greece pre-classical Greece.” In. Minoans and
and the Homeric epics.” In Mycenaeans. Flavors of Their Time,
372 BIBLIOGR APHY

edited by Y. Tzedakis and palatial Period. BAR 2110. Oxford:

H. Martlew, 206–209. Greek Archaeopress.
Ministry of Culture, National 2017. Understanding Collapse. Ancient
Archaeological Museum. History and Modern Myths.
McGovern, P.E. 2003. Ancient Wine: The Cambridge: Cambridge University
Search for the Origins of Viniculture. Press.
Princeton: Princeton University Migowski, C., M. Stein, S. Prasad,
Press. J. F. W. Negendank and A. Agnon.
McInerney, J. 1999. The Folds of Parnassos: 2006. “Holocene climate variability
Land and Ethnicity in Ancient Phokis. and cultural evolution in the Near
Austin: University of Texas Press. East from the Dead Sea sedimentary
McLoughlin, B. 2011. “The pithos makers record.” Quat Res 66: 421–431.
at Zagora: ceramic technology and Millett, P. C. 1983. “Maritime loans and
function in an agricultural settlement the structure of credit in fourth-
context.” In The “Dark Ages” century Athens.” In Trade in the
Revisited. Acts of an International Ancient Economy, edited by
Symposium in Memory of William P. D. A. Garnsey, M. K. Hopkins
D. E. Coulson, University of Thessaly, and C. R. Whittaker, 36–52,
Volos, 14–17 June 2007, edited by London: Chatto & Windus.
A. Mazarakis Ainian, 913–928. Mitchell, L. 2007. Panhellenism and the
Volos:University of Thessaly Press. Barbarian. Swansea: Classical Press of
Mee, C. 1982. Rhodes in the Bronze Age: An Wales.
Archaeological Survey. Warminster, Mizoguchi, K. 2009. “Nodes and edges:
England: Aris & Phillips. a network approach to heirarchisation
Mee, C. and W. G. Cavanagh. 1984. and state formation in Japan.” Journal
“Mycenaean tombs as evidence for of Anthropological Archaeology 28(1):
social and political organisation.” 14–26.
OJA 3: 45–64. Mommsen, H. and S. Japp. 2009.
Mee, C. and J. Renard, eds. 2007. Cooking “Neutronenaktivierungsanalyse von
up the Past: Food and Culinary Practices 161 Keramikproben aus Pergamon
in the Neolithic and Bronze Age Aegean. und Fundorten der Region.”
Oxford: Oxbow. Istanbuler Mitteilungen 59: 269–305.
Megaloudi, F. 2004. “Agriculture in Montecchi, B. 2012. “Linear A banqueting
Mainland Greece at the lists?” Kadmos 51: 1–26.
Protogeometric period: a view from Moody, J. 1987. “The Minoan palace as
the archaeobotanical remains.” prestige artifact.” In The Function of
Eulimene 5: 151–160. Minoan Palaces, Proceedings of the 4th
Melena, J. L. 1983. “Olive oil and other International Symposium at the Swedish
sorts of oil in the Mycenaean tablets.” Instiute in Athens, 10–16 June, 1984, edi-
Minos 28: 89–123. ted by R. Hägg and N. Marinatos,
Meneley, A. 2007. “Like an extra virgin.” 235–240. Göteborg: Åström.
American Anthropologist, New Series 109 1997. “The Cretan environment: abused
(4): 678–687. or just misunderstood?” In Aegean
Metcalf, P. 2010. The Life of the Longhouse. Strategies: Studies of Culture and
An Archaeology of Ethnicity. New York: Environment on the European Fringe,
Cambridge University Press. edited by P. N. Kardulias and
Middleton, G. 2010. The Collapse of Palatial M. Shutes. Boulder, CO: Rowman
Society in LBA Greece and the Post- & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 373

2005. “Unravelling the threads: environ- Uppsala Symposium 1993, edited by

mental change in Late Bronze III.” In P. Hellström and B. Alroth, 41–57.
Ariane’s Threads: connections between Uppsala: Swedish Institute at Athens.
Crete and the Greek mainland in the post- 1998. “Ritual and society in the Early
palatial period, edited by A. L. D’Agata Iron Age Corinthia.” In Ancient Greek
and J. Moody, 443–470. Athens: Cult Practice from the Archaeological
Italian School at Athens. Evidence. Proceedings of the Fourth
2009. “Environmental change and International Seminar on Ancient Greek
Minoan sacred landscapes.” In Cult, organized by the Swedish Institute
Archaeologies of Cult: Essays on Ritual at Athens, 22–24 October 1993 (ActaAth-
and Cult in Crete in Honor of Geraldine 8, 15), edited by R. Hagg, 73–90.
C. Gesell, Hesperia Supplements 42, edi- Stockholm: Svenska Institutet i Athen.
ted by A. L. D’Agata, A. Van de 1999. Isthmia VIII: The Late Bronze Age
Moortel and G. C. Gesell, 241–249. settlement and Early Iron Age sanctuary.
Athens: American School of Classical Princeton: Princeton University
Studies at Athens. Press.
Mook, M. S. and W. D. E. Coulson. 1997. 2009. “The Early Iron Age.” In
“Late Minoan IIIC pottery from the A Companion to Archaic Greece, edited
Kastro at Kavousi.” In Late Minoan by K. Raaflaub and H. van Wees.
III Pottery Chronology and 43–63. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Terminology: Acts of a Meeting Held at Moriondo, M., F. Stefanini, and M. Bindi.
the Danish Institute at Athens, 2008. “Reproduction of olive tree
August 12–14, 1994, edited by habitat suitability for global change
E. Hallager and B. P. Hallager, impact assessment.” Ecological
337–365. Monographs of the Danish Modelling 218: 95–109.
Insitute at Athens 1. Athens: Danish Moriondo, M., G. Trombi, R. Rerrise,
Institute at Athens. G. Brandani, C. Dimbari,
Moore, A. D. and W. D. Taylour. 1999. The D. M. Ammann, M. Mariotti Lippi
Temple Complex. Well Built Mycenae: and M. Bindi. 2013. “Olive trees as
The Helleno-British Excavations within bio-indicators of climate evolution in
the Citadel at Mycenae, 1959–1969. the Mediterranean Basin.” Global
Fasc.10. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Ecology and Biogeography 22: 818–833.
Morgan, C. 1990, Athletes and Oracles. The Moriondo, M., M. Bindi, C. Fagarazzi,
transformation of Olympia and Delphi in R. Ferrise and G. Trombi. 2010.
the Eighth Century BC. Cambridge: “Framework for high-resolution cli-
Cambridge University Press. mate change impact assessment on
1994. “The creation of a sacral land- grapevines at a regional scale.” Reg
scape: Isthmia, Perachora and the Environ Change 11: 553–567.
early Corinthian state.” In Placing the Morricone, L. 1972–1973. “Cos—scavi
Gods. Sanctuaries and Sacred Space in e scoperte nel ‘Serraglio’ E in localita
Ancient Greece, edited by S. Alcock minori (1935–1943).” ASAtene 50–51
and R. Osborne, 106–143. Oxford: (34–35): 139–396.
Clarendon Press. Morris, C. D. 1891. Commentary on
1996. “From palace to polis? Religious Thucydides Book 1. Boston: Ginn and
developments on the Greek mainland Company.
during the Bronze/Iron Age transi- Morris, I. 1986. “The use and abuse of
tion.” In Religion and Power in the Homer.” Classical Antiquity 5(1):
Ancient Greek World. Proceedings of the 81–138.
374 BIBLIOGR APHY

1986. “Gift and commodity in Archaic Villa, 20–23 April 2006, edited by
Greece.” Man 21: 1–17. S. P. Morris and R. Laffineur,
1987. Burial and Ancient Society: The Rise 59–68. Aegaeum 28. Liège and
of the Greek City-State. Cambridge: Austin: Université de Liège, Histoire
Cambridge University Press. de l’art et archéologie de la Grèce
1988. “Tomb cult and the ‘Greek antique and University of Texas at
Renaissance’: the past in the present Austin, Program in Aegean Scripts
in the 8th century BC.” Antiquity and Prehistory.
62(4): 750–761. 2008. “Wine and water in the Bronze
1991. “The early polis as city and state.” Age: fermenting, mixing and ser-
In City and Country in the Ancient ving vessels.” In Dais: The Aegean
World, edited by J. Rich and Feast. Proceedings of the 12th
A. Wallace-Hadrill, 25–57. London: International Aegean Conference/12e
Routledge. Rencontre égéenne internationale,
1999. Archaeology as Cultural History: University of Melbourne, Centre for
Words and Things in Iron Age Greece. Classics and Archaeology,
Oxford: Blackwell. 25–29 March 2008, edited by Louise
2007. “Early Iron Age Greece.” In The A. Hitchcock, Robert Laffineur
Cambridge Economic History of the Greco- and Janice Crowley, 113–123.
Roman World, edited by Aegaeum 29. Liège and Austin:
Walter Scheidel, Ian Morris and Université de Liège, Histoire de
Richard P. Saller, 211–241. l’art et archéologie de la Grèce
Cambridge: Cambridge University antique and University of Texas
Press. at Austin, Program in Aegean
2009. “Chapter four. The eighth- Scripts and Prehistory.
century revolution.” In A Companion 2009. “Prehistoric Torone and the
to Archaic Greece, edited by Chalkidice: the Northern Aegean in
K. A. Raaflaub and H. van Wees. the Bronze Age.” BICS 52: 265–266.
Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Mountjoy, P. A. 1986. Mycenaean Decorated
Morris, S. 1992. Daidalos and the Origins of Pottery: A Guide to Identification.
Greek Art. Princeton: Princeton Goteborg: Paul Åströms Förlag.
University Press. 1999. Regional Mycenaean Decorated
Morris, S. P. 2001. “Potnia Aswiya: Pottery. 2 vols. Rahden: Deutsches
Anatolian contributions to Greek Archäologisches Institut, Verlag
religion.” In Potnia. Deities and Marie Leidorf.
Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age, edi- 2003. Knossos: The South House. BSA
ted by R. Laffineur and R. Hägg, Suppl. 34. London: British School at
423–434. Liège and Austin: Athens.
Université de Liège and University 2009. “LH III C Late: an east mainland—
of Austin. Aegean koine.” In LH IIIC Chronology
2007. “Troy between Bronze and Iron and Synchronisms III: LH IIIC Late and
Ages: myth, cult and memory in the Transition to the Early Iron Age, edi-
a sacred landscape.” In Epos: ted by S. Deger-Jalkotzy and
Reconsidering Greek Epic and Aegean A. E. Bächle, 289–312. Vienna:
Bronze Age Archaeology. Proceedings of Österreichischen Akademie der
the 11th International Aegean Conference/ Wissenschaften.
11e Rencontre égéenne internationale, Los Müller Celka, S., D. Puglisi and F. Bendali.
Angeles, UCLA – The J. Paul Getty 2014. “Settlement pattern dynamics
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 375

and natural resources in MM-LM (unpublished PhD dissertation).

I Crete: the case of Malia.” In Physis. University of Cambridge: Girton
L’Environnement naturel et al relation College.
homme-milieu dan s le monde Égéen proto- Murray, S. C. 2012. “Trade, Imports, and
historique. Actes de la 14e Rencontre Society in Early Greece: 1300–900 B.
égéenne international, Paris, Institut C.E.” Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford
National d’Histoire de l’Art (INHA), University.
11–14 décembre 2012, edited by 2017. The Collapse of the Mycenaean
G. Touchais, R. Laffineur and Economy. Imports, Trade, and Institutions
F. Rougemont, 431–440. Leuven: 1300–700 BCE. Cambridge: Cambridge
Peeters. University Press.
Murphy, J. M. A. 2012. “The scent of status: 2018. “Imported exotica and mortuary
prestige and perfume at the Bronze ritual at Perati in late Helladic IIIC
Age palace at Pylos, Greece.” In East Attica.” AJA 122(1): 33–64
Making Senses of the Past: Toward Mylonas, G. E. 1961. Eleusis and the
a Sensory Archaeology, edited by J. Day, Eleusinian Mysteries. Princeton:
243–265. Center for Archaological Princeton University Press.
Investigations, Occasional Paper No. 1966. “Ανασκφή Μυκηνών.” Praktika
40. Carbondale: Southern Illinois tes en Athenais archaiologikes Etaireias
University. 1963: 99–106.
Murray, O. 1983. “The symposion as social 1966a. “The east wing of the palace at
organization.” In The Greek Renaissance Mycenae.” Hesperia 35: 419–426.
of the Eighth Century B.C.: Tradition and 1966b. Mycenae and the Mycenaean Age.
Innovation. Proceedings of the Second Princeton: Princeton University
International Symposium at the Swedish Press.
Institute in Athens, 1–5 June, 1981, edited 1968. Mycenae’s Last Century of Greatness.
by R. Hägg, 195–199. Stockholm: Sydney: Sydney University Press.
Svenska Institutet i Athen. Mylonas-Shear, I. 1968. “Mycenaean
1990. “Sympotic history.” In Sympotica: Domestic Architecture.” Ph.D. dis-
A Symposium on the Symposion, edited sertation, Bryn Mawr College.
by O. Murray, 3–13. Oxford: Mylopotamitaki, A. K. 2002. Oinos Palaios
Clarendon Press. Idypotos: To Kritiko Krasi apo ta
1994. “Nestor’s cup and the origins of the Proïstorika os ta Neotera Chronia.
Greek symposion.” In APOIKIA. Kounavoi: Dimos ‘N. Kazantzakis’,
Scritti in onore di Giorgio Buchner 24–26 Apriliou 1998. Irakleio:
(= AION ArchStAnt, ns 1), edited by Ypourgeio Politismou Archaiologiko
B. D’Agostino and D. Ridgway, Institouto Kritis, Praktika tou
47–54. Naples: Istituto universitario Diethnous Epistimonikou Symposiou.
orientale Dipartimento di studi del Nagy, G. 1990. “Poetry and the ideology
mondo classico e del Mediterraneo of the polis: the symbolism of appor-
antico. tioning meat.” In Greek Mythology and
2009. “The culture of the symposion.” In Poetics, edited by G. Nagy, 269–275.
A Companion to Archaic Greece, edited Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
by K. Raaflaub and H. van Wees, 2001. “An evolutionary model for the
508–541. Malden, MA: Wiley- making of homeric poetry: compara-
Blackwell. tive perspectives.” In The Ages of
Murray, C.M. 1979. Mycenaean Religion. Homer. A Tribute to Emily Townsend
The Evidence of the Linear B Tablets Vermeule, edited by J. B. Carter and
376 BIBLIOGR APHY

S. P. Morris, 163–179. Austin: National Academy of Sciences 113

University of Texas Press. (2): 298–303.
2004. Homer’s Text and Language. Newman, M., A.-L. Barabási and
Urbana and Chicago: University of D. J. Watts. 2006. Structure and
Illinois Press. Dynamics of Networks. Princeton:
Nakassis, D. 2010. “Reevaluating staple Princeton University Press.
and wealth finance at Mycenaean Nicolet-Pierre, H. 1985. “Monnaies
Pylos.” In Political Economies of the archaiques d’Athènes sous
Aegean Bronze Age. Papers from the Pisistrate et les Pisistratides (c.
Langford Conference, Florida Statue 545-c. 510). II. Recherches sur la
University, Tallahassee, composition métalique des
22–24 February 2007, edited by Wappenmünzen en collaboration
D. J. Pullen, 127–148. Oxford: avec Jean-Nöel Barrando et Jean-
Oxbow Books. Yves Calvez.” Revue Numismatique
Nakassis, D., M. Galaty and W. Parkinson, 6(27): 23–44.
eds. 2016. “Discussion and debate: Nielsen, T. H. ed. 1997. Yet More Studies in
reciprocity in Aegean palatial societies: the Ancient Greek Polis. Stuttgart: Franz
gifts, debt, and the foundations of eco- Steiner Verlag.
nomic exchange.” Journal of Niemeier, W.-D. 1997. “The Mycenaean
Mediterranean Archaeology 29(1): 61–132. potter’s quarter at Miletus.” In
Neef, R. 1990. “Introduction, develop- TEHNI: Craftsmen, Craftswomen and
ment and environmental implications Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze
of olive culture: the evidence from Age. Proceedings of the 6th International
Jordan.” In Man’s Role in the Shaping Aegean Conference, Philadelphia,
of the Eastern Mediterranean Landscape, Temple University, 18–21 April 1996.
edited by S. Bottema, G. Entjes- Aegaeum 16, edited by R. Laffineur
Nieborg and W. Van Zeist, 295–306. and P. P. Betancourt, 347–352. Liège
Rotterdam: Balkema. and Austin: Université de Liège,
Negbi, O. and M. Negbi. 1993. “Stirrup- Histoire de l’art et archéologie de la
jars versus Canaanite jars: their con- Grèce antique; University of Texas at
tents and reciprocal trade.” In Wace Austin, Program in Aegean Scripts
and Blegen: Pottery as Evidence for and Prehistory.
Trade in the Aegean Bronze Age 2008. “Jahresbericht 2007. Ausgrabungen
1939–1989. Proceedings of the und Forschungen. Kalapodi.”Abteilung
International Conference held at the Athen 1 Beiheft, 2008: 99–102.
American School of Classical Studies, Nikolakopoulou, I. 2009. “‘Beware Cretans
Athens, Dec. 2–3, 1989, edited by bearing gifts’: tracing the origins of
C. Zerner, P. Zerner and J. Winder, Minoan influence at Akrotiri, Thera.”
319–329. Amsterdam: J.C. Gieben. In The Minoans in the Central, Eastern
Nelson, M. C. 2001. The Architecture of Epano and Northern Aegean—New Evidence,
Englianos, Greece. Ph.D. dissertation,. edited by C. F. Macdonald,
University of Toronto. E. Hallager and W.-D. Niemeier,
Nelson, M. C., S. E. Ingram, 31–39. Athens: Danish Institute at
A. J. Dugmore, R. Streeter, Athens.
M. A. Peeples, T. H. McGovern, Nodarou, E. 2007. “Exploring patterns of
M. Hegmon, et al. 2016. “Climate intra regional pottery distribution in
challenges, vulnerabilities, and Late Minoan IIIA–B East Crete: the
food security.” Proceedings of the evidence from the petrographic
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 377

analysis of three ceramic assem- 217–246. Princeton, NJ: American

blages.” In Archaeometric and School of Classical Studies at Athens.
Archaeological Approaches to Ceramics: Palmer, R. 1994. Wine in the Mycenaean
Papers Presented at EMAC ‘05, 8th Palace Economy. Aegeaum 10. Liège:
European Meeting on Ancient Université de Liège.
Ceramics, Lyon 2005, edited by 1999. “Perishable goods in Mycenaean
S. Y. Waksman, 75–83. BAR-IS texts.” In Floreant Studia Mycenaea.
1691. Oxford: Archaeopress. Akten des X. Internationalen
Nosch, M-L.B. and M. Perna. 2001. Mykenologischen Colloquiums in
“Cloth in the cult.” In Potnia. Deities Salzberg Vom 1.-5. Mai 1995. Band II,
and Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age, edited by S. Deger-Jalkotzy, S. Hiller
edited by R. Laffineur and R. Hägg, and O. Panagl, 463–485. Wein:
471–477. Liège and Austin: Verlag der Osterreichischen
Université de Liège and University Akademie der Wissenschaften.
of Austin. 2001. “Bridging the gap: the continuity
Oakley, J. H. and R. H. Sinos. 1993. The of Greek agriculture from the
Wedding in Ancient Athens. Madison: Mycenaean to the historical period.”
Wisconsin University Press. In Prehistory and History. Ethnicity,
Ober, J. 1989. Mass and Elite in Democratic Class and Political Economy, edited by
Athens. Princeton: Princeton D. W. Tandy, 41–84. Montreal:
University Press. Black Rose Books.
Olsen, B. 2014. Women in Mycenaean 2002. “Wine in Minoan Crete: the tex-
Greece: The Linear B Tablets from Pylos tual evidence.” In Oinos Palaios
and Knossos. London: Routledge. Idypotos: To Kritiko Krasi apo ta
Onac, B. P., S. Constantin, J. Lundberg and Proïstorika os ta Neotera Chronia.
S.-E. Lauritzen. 2002. “Isotopic cli- Kounavoi: Dimos ‘N. Kazantzakis’,
mate record in a Holocene stalagmite 24–26 Apriliou 1998, edited by
from Ursilor Cave (Romania).” Journal Aik. Mylopotamitaki, 95–103.
of Quaternary Science 17: 319–327. Irakleio: Ypourgeio Politismou
Orengo, H.A. and C. Knappett. 2018. Archaiologiko Institouto Kritis,
“Toward a definition of Minoan Praktika tou Diethnous
agro-pastoral landscapes: results of Epistimonikou Symposiou.
the survey at Palaikastro (Crete).” Palomo, M.J., F. Moreno, J.E. Fernandez,
American Journal of Archaeology 122(3): A. Diaz-Espejo, I.F. Giron. 2002.
479–507. “Determining water consumption in
Osborne, R. 2007. “Archaic Greece.” In olive orchards using the water balance
Cambridge Economic History of the approach.” Agricultural Water
Greco-Roman World, edited by Management 55 (1): 15–35.
W. Scheidel, I. Morris and R. Saller, Papadopoulos, A. 2011. “Business as usual:
285–286. Cambridge: Cambridge Cypriot demand for Aegean pottery
University Press. during the Late Bronze Age.” In
Overbeck, J. C. 1989. Keos. Vol. 7, Ayia Tracing Prehistoric Social Networks
Irini: Period IV. Mainz: Philipp von through Technology: A Diachronic
Zabern. Perspective on the Aegean, edited by
Palaima, T. G. 2004. “Sacrificial feasting in A. Brysbaert, 167–182. Routledge
the linear B documents.” In The Studies in Archaeology 3. London
Mycenaean Feast, edited by J. Wright, and New York: Routledge.
378 BIBLIOGR APHY

Papadopoulos, J. K. 1993. “To kill Papakonstantinou, Z. 2009. “Wine and

a cemetery: the Athenian Kerameikos wine drinking in the homeric
and the Early Iron Age in the Aegean.” world.” L’antiquité classique 78: 1–24.
Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 6(2): 2012. “A delight and a burden (Hes., Sc.
175–206. 400): wine and wine-drinking in
1994. “Early Iron Age Potters’ marks in Archaic Greece.” Ancient Society
the Aegean.” Hesperia 63(4): 437–507. 42: 1–32.
1997. “Phantom Euboians.” Journal of Papapostolou, I. A. 2011. “The new exca-
Mediterranean Archaeology 10(2): vations under the Early Archaic tem-
191–219. ple of Thermos: Megaron A,
2005. The Early Iron Age Cemetery at Megaron B and the ash-altar.” In
Torone. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute The “Dark Ages” Revisited. Acts of an
of Archaeology Press. International Symposium in Memory of
2011. “‘Phantom Euboians’—a decade William D. E. Coulson, University of
on.” In Euboea and Athens: Thessaly, Volos, 14–17 June 2007, edi-
Proceedings of a Colloquium in ted by A. Mazarakis Ainian, Volume
Memory of Malcolm B. Wallace, II, 127–146. Volos: University of
Athens 26–27 June 2009, edited by Thessaly Press.
J. E. Tomlinson, M. B. Wallace Papathanasiou, A., M. P. Richards and
and D. W. Rupp, 113–133. S. C. Fox, eds. 2015. Archaeodiet in
Athens: Publications of the the Greek world: Dietary reconstruction
Canadian Institute in Greece. from stable isotope analysis (Hesperia
2014. “Greece in the Early Iron Age: Supplement 49). Princeton, New
mobility, polities, commodities and lit- Jersey: The American School of
eracy.” In The Cambridge Prehistory of Classical Studies at Athens.
the Bronze and Iron Age Mediterranean, Parlama, L. 1984. Σκúρος στην Εποχη του
edited by A. B. Knapp and P. van Χαλκοú, Athens: private publication.
Dommelen, 178–195. Cambridge: Pasternak, R. 2006. “Bericht zu den
Cambridge University Press. archäobotanische Funde aus
Papadopoulos, J. K. and G. Urton. 2012. Stadt-Nordost.” Archäologischer
“Introduction.” In The Construction of Anzeiger 2006: 134–138.
Value in the Ancient World, edited by Pedrazzi, T. 2005. “Misure di capacità fra
J. K. Papadopoulos and G. Urton, Egeo e Levante durante la tarda Età
1–50. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute del Bronzo: Il contributo delle
of Archaeology Press. anfore.” Agoge 2: 55–66.
Papadopoulos, J. K. and S. A. Paspalas. 2007. Le giare da conservazione e trasporto
1999. “Mendaian as Chalkidian del Levante: Uno studio archeologico del-
wine.” Hesperia 68(2): 161–188. l’economia fra Bronzo Tardo II e Ferro
Papadopoulos, J. K., J. F. Vedder and I (ca.1400–900 A.C.). Ricerche di
T. Schreiber. 1998. “Drawing circles: Archeologia del Vicino Oriente 2.
experimental archaeology and the Pisa: Edizioni ETS.
pivoted multiple brush.” American Pelagatti, P. 1982. “I più antichi materiali
Journal of Archaeology 102(3): 507–529. di importazione a Siracusa, a Naxos
Papadopoulos, T. 1977–1978. Mycenaean e in altri siti della Sicilia Orientale.” In
Achaea. SIMA 55. Gotebörg: Paul La céramique grecque ou de tradition grec-
Aströms Förlag. que au VIIIe siècle en Italie central
1979. Mycenaean Achaea. SIMA 60. et méridionale, 113–180. Naples:
Göteborg: Paul Aströms Förlag. Publications du Centre Jean Bérard.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 379

Pernier, L. 1951. Il Palazzo Minoico di 1957. “The economy as instituted pro-

Festos, II. Il Secondo Palazzo. Rome: cess.” In Trade and Markets in the Early
La libreria dello Stato. Empires. Economies in History and
Persson, A. W. and Akerström, A. Theory, edited by K. Polanyi,
1937–1938. “Zwei mykenische C. M. Arensberg and H. W. Pearson,
Hausaltäre in Berbati.” Bulletin de la 243–270. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press.
Société Royale des Lettres de Lund, 59–63. Polignac, F. de. 1995[1984]. Cults, Territory,
Pfister, C., J. Luterbacher, G. Schwarz- and the Origins of the Greek City State,
Zanetti and M. Wegmann. 1998. translated by J. Loyd. Chicago: The
“Winter air temperature variations in University of Chicago Press.
western Europe during the Early and 2009. “Chapter twenty-two. Sanctuaries
High Middle Ages (ad 750–1300).” and festivals.” In A Companion to
The Holocene 8: 535–552. Archaic Greece, edited by K. Raaflaub
Phelps, W., Y. Lolos and Y. Vichos, and H. van Wees, 427–443. Malden,
eds. 1999. The Point Iria Wreck: MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Interconnections in the Mediterranean Pollan, M. 2001. The Botany of Desire:
ca. 1200 BC. Athens: Hellenic A Plant’s Eye View of the World.
Institute of Marine Archaeology. New York: Random House.
Pierrot, A. 2015. “Who were the Eupatrids Pope, K. O. 2004. “Geoarchaeology of
in Archaic Athens?” In ‘Aristocracy’ in the western Mesara.” In The Plain of
Antiquity. Redefining Greek and Roman Phaistos: Cycles of Complexity in the
Elites, edited by H. van Wees and Mesara Region of Crete, edited by
N. Fisher, 147–168. Swansea: The L. V. Watrous, D. Hadzi-Vallianou
Classical Press of Wales. and H. Blitzer, 39–57. Monumenta
Pigott, V. 2012. “On ancient tin and tin- Archaeologica 23. Los Angeles:
bronze in the Asian Old World: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at
further comments.” In Eastern UCLA.
Mediterranean Metallurgy and Popham, M. R. 1970. The Destruction of the
Metalwork in the Second Millenium BC: Palace at Knossos: Pottery of the Late
A conference in honor of James D. Muhly, Minoan III A Period. SIMA 12.
Nicosia, 10th-11th October 2009, edited Göteborg: Paul Åströms Förlag.
by V. Kassianidou and G. Papasavvas, 1977. “Notes from Knossos, part 1.”
222–236. Oxford: Oxbow Books. BSA 72: 185–195.
Platon, N. 1971. Zakros: The Discovery of 1997. “The final destruction of the
a Lost Palace of Ancient Crete. palace at Knossos: seals, sealings and
New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. pottery. A reconsideration.” In La
1974. “Η αρχαιολογική κίνησις εν Crète mycénienne: Actes de la Table
Κρήτη κατά τα έτη 1941–1947.” In ronde internationale organisée par l’École
“Χρονικά,” CretChron 1: 631–640. française d’Athènes (26–28 Mars 1991),
Platon, L. and K. Kopaka. 1993. “Linoi edited by J. Driessen and
Minoikoi. Installations minoennes de A. Farnoux, 375–385. BCH Suppl.
traitement des produits liquides.” 30. Athens: École Française
Bulletin de Correspondance Hellenique d’Athènes.
177(1): 35–101. Popham, M. R. and I. S. Lemos. 1996.
Polanyi, K. 1944. The Great Transformation. Lefkandi III, Plates. The Early Iron Age
The Political and Economic Origins of Cemetery at Toumba, The Excavations of
Our Time. New York: Farrar & 1981 to 1994. London: British School
Rinehart. of Archaeology at Athens.
380 BIBLIOGR APHY

Popham, M. R. and L. H. Sackett. 1968. 2016a. “The rise and fall of the trans-
Excavations at Lefkandi, Euboea port stirrup jar in the Bronze Age
1964–1966. London: Thames & Aegean.” American Journal of
Hudson. Archaeology 120(1): 27–66.
Popham, M. R., J. Betts, M. Cameron, 2016b. “Greek commodities moving
H. Catling, E. Catling, D. Evely, west: comparing Corinthian and
R. Higgins and D. Smyth. 1984. The Athenian Amphorae in the Early
Minoan Unexplored Mansion at Knossos. Archaic Period.” In Maritime Transport
BSA Suppl. 17. Oxford: Thames & Containers in the Mediterranean Bronze
Hudson. and Iron Ages, edited by A. B. Knapp
Popham, M. R., L. H. Sackett and and S. Demesticha, 195–213. Studies
P. G. Themelis, eds. 1979/1980. in Mediterranean Archaeology and
Lefkandi I. The Iron Age Settlement; Literature PB 183.
The Cemeteries, London: Thames & Preda, A. 2004. “Informative prices,
Hudson. rational investors: the emergence
Poursat, J.-C. 2012. “The emergence of of the random walk hypothesis
elite groups at Protopalatial Malia: and the nineteenth-century
a biography of Quartier Mu.” In ‘science of financial investments’.”
Back to the Beginning: Reassessing History of Political Economy 36(2):
Social and Political Complexity on Crete 351–386.
during the Early and Middle Bronze Age, Prent, M. 2005. Cretan Sanctuaries and
edited by I. Schoep, P. Tomkins and Cults. Continuity and Change from
J. Driessen, 177–183. Oxford: Late Minoan IIIC to the Archaic Period.
Oxbow Books. Leiden: Brill.
Poursat, J.-C. and C. Knappett. 2005. Preston, L. 2004. “A mortuary perspective
Fouilles exécutées à Malia: Le Quartier on political changes in Late Minoan
Mu. Vol. 4, La poterie du Minoen II–IIIB Crete.” American Journal of
Moyen II: Production et utilisation. Archaeology 108(3): 321–348.
ÉtCrét 33. Athens: École Française Protonatariou-Deilaki, E. 1990. Burial cus-
d’Athènes. toms and funerary rites in Prehistoric
2006. “Minoan amphoras and inter- Argolid. In Celebrations of Death and
regional exchange: evidence from Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid.
Malia.” In Proceedings of the 9th Proceedings of the Sixth International
Cretological Symposium. Elounta Symposium at the Swedish Institute at
1–6 October 2001. Vol. A1, Athens, 11–13 June 1988. Edited by R.
Proistoriki Periodos, Techni kai Hägg and G.C. Nordquist, 69–83.
Latreia, Elounda, edited by Stockholm: Acta Instituti Atheniensis
E. Tampaki and A. Kaloutsakis, Regni Sueciae, Series In 4, XL.
153–163. Heraklion: Etairia Psomiadis, D., E. Dotsika, K. Albanakis,
Kritikon Istorikon Meleton. B. Ghaleb and C. Hillaire-Marcel.
Pratt, C. E. 2014. “Critical Commodities: 2018. “Speleothem record of climatic
Tracing Greek Trade in Oil and Wine changes in the northern Aegean region
from the Late Bronze Age to the (Greece) from the Bronze Age to the
Archaic Period.” Ph.D. dissertation, collapse of the Roman Empire.”
University of California, Los Angeles. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,
2015. “The ‘SOS’ amphora: an update.” Palaeoecology 489: 272–283.
Annual of the British School at Athens Purcell, N. 2006. “Orientalizing: five
110: 213–245. historical questions.” In Debating
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 381

Orientalization: Multidisciplinary 2011[1972]. The Emergence of Civilization.

Approaches to Processes of Change in Oxford: Oxbow Books.
the Ancient Mediterranean, edited by Renfrew, C., N. Brodie, C. Morris and
C. Riva and N. C. Vella, 21–30. C. Scarre. 2007. Excavations at
London: Equinox. Phylakopi in Melos, 1974–77. London:
Raaflaub, K. 1997. “Citizens, soldiers, and British School at Athens.
the evolution of the early Greek Ricardo, D. 1817. On the Principles of
polis.” In The Development of the Political Economy and Taxation.
Polis in Archaic Greece, edited by London: John Murray.
L. Mitchell and P. J. Rhodes, 49–59. Ridgway, D. 2000. “Riflessioni
London: Routledge. sull’Orizzonte «precoloniale» (IX–
Rackham, O. and J. Moody. 1996. The VIII sec. a.C.).” In Magna Grecia e
Making of the Cretan Landscape. Oriente mediterraneo prima dell’età elle-
Manchester: Manchester University nistica. Atti del XXXIX Convegno di
Press. Studi sulla Magna Grecia. 91–108.
Radinovsky, L. 2015. “Cretan olive oil Naples: Istituto per la storia e l’arch-
exports grow fivefold.” Olive Oil eologia della Magna Grecia.
Times. www.oliveoiltimes.com/olive- Rimm, E. B, E. L. Giovannucci, W.-C.
oil-business/europe/cretan-olive-oil-e Willett, et al. 1991. “Prospective
xports-grow-fivefold/49352 study of alcohol consumption and
Rallo, L., D. Barranco, J.M. Caballero, C. risk of coronary heart disease in
Del Rio, A. Martin, et al. 2005. men.” Lancet 338(2): 464–468.
Variedades de Olivo en España. Robb, J. 2010. “Beyond agency.” World
Madrid: Mundi-Prensa. Archaeology 42(4): 493–520.
Raymond, A. 2005. “Importing culture at Rohling, E. J., P. A. Mayewski, A. Hayes,
Miletus: Minoan and Anatolians at R. H. Abu-Zied and J. S. L. Casford.
Middle Bronze Age Miletus.” In 2002. “Holocene atmosphere–ocean
Emporia: Aegeans in the Central and interactions: records from Greenland
Eastern Mediterranean. Proceedings of and the Aegean Sea.” Climate
the 10th International Aegean Dynamics 18: 587–593.
Conference, edited by R. Laffineur Rose, B. 2008. “Separating fact from
and E. Greco, 185–191. Aegaeum 25. fiction in the Aeolian migration.”
Liège and Austin: Université de Liège Hesperia 77(3): 399–430.
and University of Texas at Austin. Rose, P. W. 2009. “Class.” In A Companion
Redfield, J. 1983. “The economic man.” to Archaic Greece, edited by K. Raaflaub
In Approaches to Homer, edited by C. and H. van Wees, 468–482. Malden,
A. Rubino and C. Shelmerdine, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
218–247. Austin: University of 2013. Class in Archaic Greece. Cambridge:
Texas Press. Cambridge University Press.
Redman, C. L. 2005. “Resilience theory in Rossi, L., L. Sebastiani, R. Tognetti,
Archaeology.” American Anthropologist R. d’Andria, G. Morelli and
107(1): 70–77. P. Cherubini. 2013. “Tree-ring wood
Reed, C. M. 2003. Maritime Traders in the anatomy and stable isotopes show
Ancient Greek World. Cambridge: structural and functional adjustments
Cambridge University Press. in olive trees under different water
Renfrew, C. 1985. “The archaeology of availability.” Plant Soil 372: 567–579.
cult: the sanctuary at Phylakopi.” Rössler, M. 2007. “Von der Gabe zur
BSA/Supp. 18: 340. Abgabe: transaktionen im politischen
382 BIBLIOGR APHY

Kontext.” In Geschenke und Steuern, Πεπραγμένα του Η’ διεθνούς

Zölle und Tribute, edited by Κρητολογικού συνεδρίου, Ηράκλειο,
H. Klinkott, S. Kubish and R. Müller- 9–14 Σεπτεβρίου. Vol. A3,
Wollermann, 3–37. Leiden: Brill. Προϊστορική και αρχαία ελληνική
Rotroff, S. I. and J. H. Oakley. 1992. Debris περίοδος, edited by A. Karetsou,
from a Public Dining Place in the T. Detorakis and A. Kalokairinos,
Athenian Agora. Princeton: ASCSA. 177–188. Irakleio, Greece: Etairia
Roussos. P. A. 2007. “Training and prun- Kritikon Istorikon Meleton.
ing olives.” In the Proceedings of the 2004. “Ceramic sets in context: one
MGS Symposium: Dry Gardening – dimension of food preparation and
Philosophy and Practice, Athens 2007. consumption in a Minoan palatial set-
www.mediterraneangardensociety ting.” In Food, Cuisine and Society in
.org/olives.html#4 Prehistoric Greece, edited by P. Halstead
Rowan, E. 2015. “Olive pressing waste as a and J. C. Barrett, 63–88. Oxford:
fuel source in antiquity.” American Oxbow Books.
Journal of Archaeology 119(4): 465–482. 2005a. “Assessing the shipboard profile
Rückl, S. 2008. “The Spatial Layout of the of a regional ceramic assemblage: The
Protogeometric Settlement at Mitrou, Aegean pottery from the Uluburun
East Lokris (Central Greece): Social Shipwreck.” Paper read at the 106th
Reality of a Greek village in the 10th Annual Meeting of the
century BC.” M.A. thesis, University Archaeological Institute of America,
of Sheffield. 6–9 January, Boston.
Rundin, J. 1996. “A politics of eating: 2005b. “Southern triangles revisited:
feasting in early Greek society.” Lakonia, Messenia, and Cretein the
AJPh 117:179–215. 14th–12th Centuries BC.” In Ariadne’s
Rutter, J. 2006c. “Ceramic Evidence for Threads: Connections between Crete and
External Contact: Neopalatial and the Greek Mainland in Late Minoan III
Postpalatial.” In Kommos V: The (LM IIIA2 to LM IIIC). Proceedings of the
Monumental Minoan Buildings, edited International Workshop Held at Athens,
by J. Shaw and M. Shaw, 859–863. Scuola Archeologica Italiana,
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University 5–6 April 2003, edited by
Press. A. L. D’Agata and J. Moody, 17–64.
Rutter, J. B. 1974. “The Late Helladic Tripodes 3. Athens: Scuola
IIIB and IIIC periods at Korakou Archeologica Italiana di Atene.
and Gonia.” Ph.D. dissertation, 2006a. “Neopalatial and later Minoan
University of Pennsylvania. pottery.” In Kommos. Vol. 5, The
1999. “Cretan external relations during Monumental Minoan Buildings at
LM IIIA2–B (ca. 1370–1200 B.C.): Kommos, edited by J. W. Shaw and
a view from the Messara.” In The M. C. Shaw, 377–630. Princeton:
Point Iria Wreck: Interconnections in the Princeton University Press.
Mediterranean ca. 1200 B.C. Proceedings 2006b. “Ceramic evidence for external
of the International Conference, Island of contact: Neopalatial and Postpalatial.”
Spetses, 19 September 1998, edited by In Kommos. Vol. 5, The Monumental
W. Phelps, Y. Lolos and Y. Vichos, Minoan Buildings at Kommos, edited by
139–186. Athens: Hellenic Institute of J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw, 859–863.
Marine Archaeology. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
2000. “The short-necked amphora of 2014. “The Canaanite transport
the Post-Palatial Mesara.” In amphora within the Late Bronze Age
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 383

Aegean: a 2013 perspective on 2012. “Re-visiting the visibility of the

a frequently changing picuture.” In grape, grape products, by-products
KE-RA-ME-JA. Studies Presented to and some insights of its organization
Cynthia W. Shelmerdine, edited by from the prehistoric Aegean, as
D. Nakassis, J. Gulizio and guided by new evidence from
S. A. James, 53–69. Philadelphia: Monastiraki, Crete.” Interdiscipliaria
INSTAP Academic Press. Archaeologica III(2): 211–220.
2017. House X at Kommos: A Minoan Sarpaki, A. and J. Bending. 2004.
Mansion Near the Sea. Pt. 2, The “Archaeobotantical assemblages.” In
Pottery. Philadelphia: INSTAP Mochlos IC: Period III, Neopalatial
Academic Press. Settlement on the Coast. The Artisans’
Sacchetti, F. 2012. Les Amphores Greques Quarter and the Farmhouse at
dan le Nord de l’Italie. Editions Chalinomouri. The Small Finds, edited
Errance: centre Camille Jullian. by J. S. Soles et al., 126–131.
Sahlins, M. 1972. Stone Age Economics. Prehistory Monographs 9.
Chicago: Aldine-Atherton. Philadelphia: INSTAP Academic Press.
Sakellarakis, Y. A. and E. Sakellaraki. Satlow, M. L. 2013. “Introduction.” In The
1972. “Αποθέτης κεραμεικής της Gift in Antiquity, edited by
τελευταίας φάσεως των M. L. Satlow, 1–11. Oxford: Wiley-
προανακτορικών χρόνων εισ Blackwell.
Αρχάνας.” In “Χρονικά,” ArchEph Schachl, R. 2006. “Die archäobotanischen
1972: 1–11. Reste.” In Aigeira I, Die Mykenische
Sakellarakis, Y. and E. Sapouna-Sakellaraki. Akropolis, Faszikel 3, edited by
1997. Archanes: Minoan Crete in a New E. Alram-Stern and S. Deger-
Light. Athens: Ammos. Jalkotzy, 189–201. Vienna: Verlag
Salvati, L., A. Sateriano, A. Colantoni, der Österreichischen Akademie der
R. Di Bartolomei, L. Perini and Wissenschaften.
M. Zitti. 2013. “The northern shift Scheid-Tissinier, E. 1994. Les usages du don
in the geographical distribution of chez Homère: Vocabulaire et pratiques.
the olive tree – a bioclimatic Nancy: Presses universitaires de
indicator?” International Journal of Nancy.
Ecology and Development 24: 1–11. Scheidel, W. 2003. “The Greek demo-
Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E. 1998. “Geometric graphic expansion: models and
Kyme: the excavation at Viglatouri, comparisons.” Journal of Hellenic
Kyme, on Euboea.” In Euboica: Studies 123: 120–140.
L’Eubea e la presenza euboica in Scheidel, W., I. Morris and R. P. Saller.
Calcidica e in Occidente. Atti del 2007. The Cambridge Economic History
Convegno Internazionale di Napoli of the Greco-Roman World. Cambridge:
13–16 novembre 1996, edited by Cambridge University Press.
M. Bats and B. D’agostino, 59–104. Schepartz, L. A., S. Miller-Antonio and
Naples: Centre Jean Bérard: Istituto J. M. A. Murphy. 2009. “Differential
universitario orientale, Dipartimento health among the Mycenaeans of
del mondo classic. Meseia: status, sex and dental health
Sarpaki, A. 1999. “What did they pro- at Pylos.” In New Directions in the
duce?” In Minoans and Mycenaeans: Skeletal Biology of Greece, Hesperia
Flavours of Their Time, edited by Supplement 43, edited by
U. Tzedakis and H. Martlew, 35–43. L. A. Schepartz, S. C. Fox and
Athens: Kapon Editions. C. Bourbou, 155–174. Princeton,
384 BIBLIOGR APHY

NJ: American School of Classical 2002. Aux origines de la Grèce: XIIIe-VIIIe

Studies at Athens. siècles avant notre ère. La genèse du poli-
Schepartz, L. A., A. Papathanasiou, tique. Paris: Société d’édition Les Belles
S. Miller-Anontio, S. R. Stocker, Lettres.
J. L. Davis, J. M. A. Murphy, Schneider, C. and S. Japp. 2009.
E. Malapani and M. Richards. 2011. “Rontgenfluoreszenzanalysen von 115
“No seat at the table? Mycenaean Keramikproben aus Pergamon,
women’s diet and health in Pylos, Candarli, Elaia und Atarneus
Greece.” In Anthropology à la Carte, (Turkei).” Istanbuler Mitteilungen 59:
edited by L. Schepartz, 359–374. San 287–306.
Diego, California: Cognella. Schoep, I. 2001. “The role of the linear
Schiffer, B. M. 2011. Technological Change. A tablets in Minoan administration.”
A Behavioral Approach. Salt Lake City: Ktema: Civilisations de l’Orient, de la
University of Utah Press. Grèce et de Rome Antiques 26: 55–62.
Schmandt-Besserat, D. 2001. “Feasting in 2002a. “Social and political organization
the ancient Near East.” In Feasts. on Crete in the Proto-Palatial period:
Archaeological and Ethnographic the case of Middle Minoan II Malia.”
Perspectives on Food, Politics, and JMA 15(1): 101–132.
Power, edited by M. Dietler and 2002b. The Administration of Neopalatial
B. Hayden, 391–403. Washington, Crete. A Critical Assessment of the Linear
DC: Smithsonian Institution Press. A Tablets and Their Role in the
Schmitt-Pantel, P. 1980. “Les repas au Administrative Process. MINOS suppl.
Prytanée et à la Tholos dans 17. Salamanca, Spain: Ediciones
l’Athènes classique: Sitesis, trophè, Universidad de Salamanca.
misthos: Réflexions sur le mode de 2006. “Looking beyond the first palaces:
nourriture démocratique.” AION elites and the agency of power in
11: 55–68. EM III–MM II Crete.” AJA
1990. “Sacrifical meal and symposion: 110(1):37–64.
two models of civic institution in the Schöttker, B. et al. 2014. “Vitamin D and
Archaic city?” In Sympotica: mortality: meta-analysis of individual
A Symposium on the Symposion, edited participant data from a large consor-
by O. Murray, 14–36. Oxford: tium of cohort studies from Europe
Clarendon Press. and the United States.” British Medical
1997. La Cité au banquet: Histoire des repas Journal 348: g3656.
publics dans les cités grecques, 1st ed. Schrift, A. D. 1997. The Logic of the Gift:
Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne. Toward an Ethic of Generosity.
2001. “Les femmes grecques et l’and- New York: Routledge.
ron.” Clio 14: 155–181. Schultz, H. R. and G. V. Jones. 2010.
2011. La Cité au banquet: Histoire des repas “Climate induced historic and future
publics dans les cités grecques, 2nd ed. changes in viticulture.” Journal of Wine
Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne. Research 21(2–3): 137–145.
Schnapp-Gourbeillon, A. 1979. “Le Schwartz, G. and J. Nichols, eds. 2006.
Mythe dorien.” Annali del Seminario After Collapse: The Regeneration of
di studi del mondo classico: Sezione di Complex Societies. Tucson, AZ:
archeologia e storia antica 1: 1–11. University of Arizona Press.
1986. “L’invasion dorienne a-t-elle eu Scott, M. 2010. Delphi and Olympia. The
lieu?” In La Grèce Ancienne, edited by Spatial Politics of Panhellenism in the
C. Mossé, 43–57. Paris: Seuil. Archaic and Classical Periods.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 385

Cambridge: Cambridge University über ‘Die phönizische Expansion im wes-

Press. tlichen Mittelmeerraum’ in Köln vom 24,
Seaford, R. 2011a. “Libation.” In The edited by H. G. Niemeyer, Bis 27.
Homer Encyclopedia, edited by April 1979, 337–370. Mainz: Zabern.
M. Finkelberg, 474–475. Malden, Shelmerdine, C. W. 1985. The Perfume
MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Industry in Mycenaean Pylos. SIMA-
2011b. “Exchange.” In The Homer PB 34. Göteborg: Paul Åströms
Encyclopedia, edited by Förlag.
M. Finkelberg, 281–284. Malden, 1992. “Historical and economic consid-
MA: Wiley-Blackwell. erations in interpreting Myceneaen
Serpico, M., J. Bourriau, L. Smith, texts.” In Mykenaïka: Actes du IXe
Y. Goren, B. Stern and C. Heron. Colloque international sur les textes
2003. “Commodities and containers: mycéniens et égéens, Centre de
a project to study Canaanite l’Antiquité Grecque et Romaine de la
amphorae imported into Egypt dur- Fondation Hellénique des Recherches
ing the New Kingdom.” In The Scientifiques et École française d’Athènes,
Synchronisation of Civilisations in the edited by J.-P. Olivier, 569–590.
Eastern Mediterranean in the Second BCH Suppl. 25. Paris: Diffusion de
Millennium B.C. III: Proceedings of the Boccard.
SCIEM 2000 EuroConference, Haindorf, Sherratt, S. 1981. “The Pottery of LHIIIC
2–7 May 2001, edited by M. Bietak, and its Significance.” Ph.D. disserta-
365–375. Vienna: Verlag der tion, University of Oxford.
Österreichischen Akademie der 2004. “Feasting in Homeric epic.” In
Wissenschaften. The Mycenaean Feast, edited by
Shay, J., T. Shay. 1978. “Modern vegeta- J. Wright, 181–217. Princeton, NJ:
tion and fossil plant remains.” In American School of Classical Studies
Excavations at Nichoria in southwest at Athens.
Greece, vol 1: Site, environs and techni- 2017. “Homeric epic and contexts of
ques, edited by G. Jr. Rapp, S.E. bardic creation.” In Archaeology and
Aschenbrenner SE, 41–59. Homeric Epic, edited by S. Sherratt
Minneapolis: University of and J. Bennet, 35–52. Oxford:
Minnesota Press. Oxbow Books.
Shaw, A. B. 2005. “The Niagara Peninsula Simantoni-Bournia, E. 2002. “The early
viticultural area: a climatic analysis of phases of the Hyria Sanctuary on
Canada’s largest wine region.” Journal Naxos: an overview of the pottery.”
of Wine Research 16(2): 85–103. In Excavating Classical Culture: Recent
Shaw, J. W. 1981. “Excavations at Archaeological Discoveries in Greece, edi-
Kommos (Crete) during 1980.” ted by M. Stamatopoulou and
Hesperia 50(3): 211–251. M. Yeroulanou, 269–280. Oxford:
Sheehan, M. C. 1979. “The postglacial Archeopress.
vegetational history of the Argolid Simondon, G. 2007. L’individuation psychi-
peninsula.” Ph.D. dissertation, que et collective. Paris: Editions Aubier.
University of Indiana. Sissa, G. and M. Detienne. 2000. The Daily
Shefton, B. B. 1982. “Greeks and Greek Life of the Greek Gods. Stanford:
imports in the south of the Iberian Standford University Press.
Peninsula. The archaeological evi- Smith, A. [1776] 1965. An Inquiry Into the
dence.” In Phönizier im Westen: die Nature and Causes of the Wealth of
Beiträge des Internationalen Symposiums Nations. New York: Modern Library.
386 BIBLIOGR APHY

Smith, L. M. V., J. D. Bourriau, Y. Goren, S. Sherratt and J. Bennet, 1–9.

M. J. Hughes and M. Serpico. 2004. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
“The provenance of Canaanite Soles, J.S., et al. 2003. “The Chalinomouri
amphorae found at Memphis and farmhouse.” In Mochlos IA. Period III.
Amarna in the New Kingdom: results Neopalatial Settlement on the Coast: The
2000–2002.” In Invention and Artisans’ Quarter and the Farmhouse at
Innovation: The Social Context of Chalinomouri. The Sites. Edited by J.S.
Technological Change. Egypt, the Soles, 103–125. Prehistory
Aegean, and the Near East, 1650–1150 Monographs 7. Philadelphia:
B.C., edited by J. Bourriau and INSTAP Academic Press.
J. Phillips, 55–77. Oxford: Oxbow. Soles, J.S. 1992. The Prepalatial Cemeteries at
Snape, S. 2003. “Zawiyet Umm el- Mochlos and Gournia and the House
Rakham and Egyptian foreign trade Tombs of Bronze Age Crete. Hesperia
in the 13th century BC.” In Ploes: Sea Supplement 24. Princeton: The
Routes. Interconnections in the American School of Classical Studies
Mediterranean, 16th–6th ca. B.C. at Athens.
Proceedings of the International Sourisseau, J.-C. 2006. “Les Amphores com-
Symposium Held at Rethymnon, Crete, merciales de la nécropole de
September29th–October 2nd 2002, edited Rifriscolaro à Camarine.” In
by N. C. Stampolidis and Camarina. 2600 anni dopo la fondazione.
V. Karageorghis, 63–70. Athens: Nuovi studi sulla città e sul territorio. Atti
University of Crete and the A.G. del Convegno Internazionale. Ragusa, edi-
Leventis Foundation. ted by P. Pelagetti, G. Di Stefano and L.
Snodgrass, A. M. 1971. The Dark Age of De Lachenal, 7 dicembre 2002/7–9 aprile
Greece. An Archaeological Survey of the 2003 (Ragusa), 129–147. Rome: Ist.
Eleventh to the Eighth Centuries B.C. Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, Libr.
Edinburgh, University Press. dello Stato.
1977. Archaeology and the Rise of the 2011. “La diffusion des vins grecs
Greek State. Cambridge: Cambridge d’Occident du VIIIe au IVe s. av. J.-
University Press. C.: sources écrites et documents
1980. Archaic Greece. The Age of archéologiques.” In La vigna di
Experiment. London: J.M. Dent and Dioniso: vite, vino e culti in Magna
Sons. Grecia; atti del 49e convegno di studi
1994. “The nature and standing of the sulla Magna Grecia (Taranto 24–28 set-
early western colonies.” In The tembre 2009), edited by A. Arcangelo,
Archaeology of Greek Colonisation. 145–252, Taranto: Istituto per la storia
Essays dedicated to Sir John Boardman, e l’archeologia della Magna Grecia.
edited by G. R. Tsetskhladze and Sourvinou-Inwood, C. 1983. “Trauma in
F. De Angelis, 1–10. Oxford flux: death in the 8th century and
University School of Archaeology after.” In The Greek Renaissance of the
Monograph 40, Oxford: Oxford Eighth Century B.C.: Tradition and
University School of Archaeology. Innovation, edited by R. Hägg,
2006. Archaeology and the Emergence of 33–48. Stockholm: Swedish Institute
Greece. Ithaca, New York: Cornell of Athens.
University Press. 1997. “Reconstructing change: ideology
2017. “Homer, the moving target.” In and the Eleusinian mysteries.” In
Archaeology and Homeric Epic, edited by Inventing Ancient Culture, edited by
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 387

M. Golden and P. Toohey, 132–164. Stockhammer, P. 2008. “Kontinuität und

London and New York: Routledge. Wandel: Die Keramik der
Souyouzoglou-Haywood, C. 1999. The Nachpalastzeit aus der unterstadt von
Ionian Islands in the Bronze and Early Tiryns.” Ph.D. diss., Ruprecht-Karls-
Iron Age 3000–800 BC. Liverpool: Universität Heidelberg.
Liverpool University Press. 2013. “From hybridity to entanglement,
Spataro, M. and A. Villing, eds. 2015. from essentialism to practice.” In
Ceramics, Cuisine, and Culture: The Archaeology and Culture Mixture,
Archaeology and Science of Kitchen Archaeological Review from Cambridge
Pottery in the Ancient Mediterranean 28.1, edited by W. P. van Pelt, 11–28.
World. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
Spondylis, E. 2012. “A Minoan Shipwreck Stos-Gale, Z. A. and N. H. Gale. 1982.
off Laconia.” Enalia 11: 6–7. “The sources of Mycenaean silver
Stahl, M. and U. Walter. 2009. “Athens.” and lead.” Journal of Field Archaeology
In A Companion to Archaic Greece, edi- 9(4): 467–485.
ted by Kurt A. Raaflaub and Hans van Stubbings, F. H. 1947. “The Mycenaean
Wees, 132–161. Oxford: Wiley- Pottery of Attica.” BSA 42: 1–75.
Blackwell. Sugerman, M. O. 2000. “Webs of
Stanley, P. V. 1999. “Gradation and quality Commerce: The Archaeology of
of wines in the Greek and Roman Ordinary Things in Late Bronze Age
worlds.” Journal of Wine Research 19 Israel and Palestine.”
(2):105–114. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard
Ste. Croix, G. E. M. de 1981. The Class University.
Struggle in the Ancient Greek World. Tanasijevic, L., M. Todorovic,
London: Duckworth. L. S. Pereira, C. Pizzigalli and
Steel, L. 2004. “A reappraisal of the distri- P. Lionello. 2014. “Impacts of climate
bution, context and function of change on olive crop evapotranspira-
Mycenaean pottery in Cyprus.” In tion and irrigation requirements in the
La céramique mycénienne de l’Égée au Mediterranean region.” Agricultural
Levant, Hommage à Vronwy Hankey, Water Management 144: 54–68.
edited by J. Balensi, J.- Tandy, D. 1997. Warriors into Traders. The
Y. Monchambert and S. Power of the Market in Early Greece.
Müller Celka, 69–85. Travaux de la Berkeley: University of California Press.
Maison de l’Orient de la 2011. “Economy.” In The Homer
Méditerranée 41. Lyon: Maison de Encyclopedia, edited by
l’Orient et de la Méditerranée. M. Finkelberg, 226–228. Malden,
Steinhilber, F., J. Beer and C. Fröhlich. MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
2009. “Total solar irradiance during Tejada, M. 2013. “Greek olive oil produc-
the Holocene.” Geophysical Research tion down fifty percent.” Olive Oil
Letters 36: L19704. Times. www.oliveoiltimes.com/olive-
Stocker, S. R. and J. L. Davis. 2004. oil-business/europe/greek-olive-oil-
“Animal sacrifice, archives, and feast- production-down-fifty-percent/36909
ing at the Palace of Nestor.” In The Testart, A. 2007. Critique du don. Études sur
Mycenaean Feast, edited by la circulation non marchande, Paris:
J. C. Wright, 59–75. Princeton: Éditions Syllepse.
American School of Classical Studies Thomas, N. 1991. Entangled Objects.
at Athens. Exchange, Material Culture and
388 BIBLIOGR APHY

Colonialism in the Pacific. Cambridge, Volume 2: Greeks – Black Sea

MA: Harvard University Press. Region – Antiquities, Mnemosyne
Thomas, P. M. 1992. “LH IIIB1 Pottery Supplementum 193, Leiden and
from Tzoungiza and Zygouries.” Boston: Brill.
Ph.D. dissertation, University of 2009. “H Panepistimiaki anaskafi sto
North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Karabournaki Thessalonikis.”
2005. “A deposit of Late Helladic III B1 AEMTh 20 Chronia. 385–396.
pottery from Tsoungiza.” Hesperia 74: Tiverios, Μ., E. Μanakidou and
451–573. D. Tsiafakis. 2003. “Ανασκαφικές
Thomatos, M. 2006. The Final Revival of the έρευνες στο Καραμπουρνάκι κατά
Aegean Bronze Age: A Case Study of the το 2003.”Ο αρχαίος οικισμός. In Το
Argolid, Corinthia, Attica, Euboea, the Αρχαιολογικό Έργο στη Μακεδονία
Cyclades and the Dodecanese During LH και τη Θράκη 17: 191–199.
IIIC Middle. BAR-IS 1498. Oxford: Tjamos E. C., A. Graniti, I. M. Smith and
Archaeopress. F. Lamberti. 1993. “Conference on
Thompson, C. M., M. S. Balmuth and olive diseases.” EPPO Bulletin 23:
Z. A. Stos-Gale. 2001. “Ore- 365–550.
provenience testing of uncoined sil- Tomas, H. 2010. “Linear A versus Linear
ver: preliminary results and interpre- B administrative systems in the
tations of hoarded materials from the sphere of religious matters.” In
southern Levant.” American Journal of Espace civil, espace religieux en Égée
Archaeology 105(2): 306–307. durant la période mycénienne:
Tiverios, M. 1993. “Εισαγμένη κεραμική Approches épigraphique, linguistique et
από την διπλή τράπεζα της Αγχιάλου archéologique. Actes des journées
κοντά στη σημερινή Σίνδο.” Parnassos d’archéologie et de philologie
35: 553–560. mycéniennes tenues à la Maison de
1998. “The ancient settlement in the l’Orient et de la Méditerranée – Jean
Anchialos-Sindos Double Trapeza. Pouilloux les 1er février 2006 et 1er mars
Seven years (1990–1996) of archaeo- 2007, Boehm, edited by I. and S.
logical research.” In Euboica. L’Eubea Müller-Celka, Travaux de la
e la presenza euboica in Calcida e in Maison de l’Orient et de la
Occidente, Atti del Convegno Méditerranée 54, 121–133. Lyon:
Internazionale (Napoli 13–16 novembre Maison de l’Orient et de la
1996), edited by M. Bats and Méditerranée – Jean Pouilloux.
B. D’Agostino, 243–253. Naples. Tomlinson, J. and P. Day. 1995.
Publications du Centre Jean Bérard. “Comparison of petrographic and
2007. “Panathenaic amphoras.” In The chemical results.” In The “Ivory
Panathenaic Games: Proceedings of an Houses” at Mycenae, edited by
International Conference Held at the I. Tournavitou, 317–320. BSA Suppl.
University of Athens, May 11–12, 2004, 24. London: British School at Athens.
edited by O. Palagia and A. Spetsieri- Tournavitou, I. 1995. The ‘Ivory Houses’ at
Choremi, 1–19. Oxford: Oxbow Mycenae. Supplementary Volume no.
Books. 24. Athens: The British School at
2008. “Greek colonisation of the Athens.
Northern Aegean.” In Greek Traher, Chevrel. 2007. “Organic olives.”
Colonisation: An Account of Greek The Mediterranean Garden 47. www
Colonies and Other Settlements Overseas, .mediterraneangardensociety.org/oli
edited by G. R. Tsetskhladze, 1–154. ves.html#4
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 389

Triantaphyllou, M. V., A. Antonarakou, civilization.” Climate of the Past 6:

K. Kouli, M. Dimiza, G. Kontakiotis, 525–530.
M. Papanikolaou, P. Ziveri, Tuchelt, K., P. Schneider and
G. Mortyn, V. Lianou, V. Lykousis T. G. Schattner. 1996. Didyma,
and M. D. Dermitzakis. III.1. Ein Kultbezirk an der Heiligen
2009a. “Comparing late glacial–holo- Strasse von Milet nach Didyma.
cene plankton ecozones and pollen Mainz: von Zabern.
assemblage zones: basis for a multi- Tyree, E. L. 2001. “Diachronic changes in
proxy ecostratigraphy in the south- Minoan cave cult.” In Potnia. Deities
eastern Aegean Sea (E. and Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age,
Mediterranean).” Geo-Mar Lett 29: edited by R. Laffineur and R. Hägg,
249–267. 39–50. Liège and Austin: Université
Triantaphyllou, M. V., P. Ziveri, de Liège and University of Austin.
A. Gogou, G. Marino, Tzedakis, Y., H. Martlew and M. K. Jones
V. Lykougsis, I. Bouloubassi, K.- (eds.). 2008. Archaeology Meets Science:
C. Emeis, K. Kouli, M. Dimiza, Biomolecular Investi- gations in Bronze
A. Rosell-Melé, M. Papanikolaou, Age Greece. Oxford.
G. Katsouras and N. Nunez. 2009b. Tzedakis, Y. and H. Martlew, eds. 1999.
Late glacial-Holocene climate Minoans and Mycenaeans. Flavours of
variability at the south-eastern mar- their Time. Athens: National
gin of the Aegean sea. Maritime Archaeological Museum.
Geology 266(1–4): 182–197. Tzedakis, I. and E. Gavrilaki. 1995. “Η
Tsikritsis, M. 2002. “Wine in the linear ανασκαφή στο σπληλαιο
A archives.” In. Oinos Palaios Μελιδονίου.” Πεπραγμένα του
Idypotos: To Kritiko Krasi apo ta Ζ’Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου
Proïstorika os ta Neotera Chronia. [1995]: 888–891.
Kounavoi: Dimos ‘N. Kazantzakis’, Tzedakis, Y., H. Martlew and M. K. Jones.
24–26 Apriliou 1998, edited by 2008. Archaeology Meets Science:
Aik. Mylopotamitaki, 105–120 Biomolecular Investigations in Bronze Age
Irakleio: Ypourgeio Politismou Greece: the Primary Scientific Evidence,
Archaiologiko Institouto Kritis, 1997–2003. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Praktika tou Diethnous Ulf, Ch. 2009. “Rethinking cultural
Epistimonikou Symposiou. contacts.” Ancient West and East 8:
Tsipopoulou, M. 2004. “Halasmenos, 81–132.
destroyed but not invisible: new Usoskin, I. G., S. K. Solanki and
insights on the LMIIIC period in G. A. Kovaltsov. 2007. “Grand
the Isthmus of Ierapetra. First presen- minima and maxima of solar activity:
tation of the pottery from the new observational constraints.”
1992–1997 campaigns.” In Crete Astronomy and Astrophysics 471:
beyond the Palaces: Proceedings of the 301–309.
Crete 2000 Conference (prehistory mono- Vaessen, R. 2014. Cultural Dynamics in
graphs 10), edited by L. P. Day, Ionia at the End of the Second
M. S. Mook and J. D. Muhly, Millennium BCE: New Archaeological
103–123. Philadelphia: INSTAP Perspectives and Prospects. PhD disserta-
Academic Press. tion, University of Sheffield.
Tsonis, A. A., K. L. Swanson, G. Sugihara Valamoti, S. 2004. “Traditional foods and
and P. A. Tsonis. 2010. “Climate culinary novelties in Neolithic and
change and the demise of Minoan Bronze Age Northern Greece: an
390 BIBLIOGR APHY

overview of the archaeobotanical evi- 1st millennium BC.” Vegetation

dence.” In Cooking Up the Past. Food History and Archaeobotany 27: 177–195.
and Culinary Practices in the Neolithic Valavanis, P. 1986. “Les Amphores
and Bronze Age Aegean, edited by C. Panathénaïques et le commerce
Mee and J. Renard, 89–108. Oxford: Athénien de l’huile.” Bulletin de
Oxbow Books. Correspondances Hellénique. Supplement
Valamoti, S. M. 1998. “Η εκμετάλλευση 13: 453–460.
της αμπέλου στο χώρο της van Alfen, P. G. 1997. “The LM IIIB
Μακεδονίας και της Θράκηςκατά τη Inscribed Stirrup-Jars as Links in an
Νεολιθική και την Πρώιμη Εποχή Administrative Chain.” Minos 31–32:
του Χαλκού (The exploitation of the 251–274.
vine in Neolithic and early bronze age van de Moortel, A. and E. Zahou. 2005.
Macedonia and Thrace).” In “2004 Excavations at Mitrou, East
Αμπελοοινική Ιστορία στο χώρο της Lokris.” Aegean Archaeology 7: 39–48.
Μακεδονίας και της Θράκης, 2011. “The Bronze Age-Iron Age tran-
137–149. Athens: Politistiko sition at Mitrou in East Lokris.” In
Texnologiko Idryma ETBA. The “Dark Ages” Revisited. Acts of an
2005. “Αρχαιοβοτανικά δεδομένα από International Symposium in Memory of
το Κα ρ α μ π ο υ ρ ν ά κ ι: μια William D. E. Coulson, University of
προκαταρκτική έκθεση των Thessaly, Volos, 14–17 June 2007, edi-
ευρημάτων (Archaeobotanical evi- ted by A. Mazarakis Ainian, Volume
dence from Karabournaki: II, 331–347. Volos: University of
a preliminary examination of the Thessaly Press.
finds).” AEMTH 17: 201–204. van der Leeuw, S. E. 2008. “Agency, net-
Valamoti, S. M. and G. Jones. 2010. works, past and future.” In Material
“Bronze and oil. A possible link Agency: Towards a Non-Anthropocentric
between the introduction of tin and Perspective, edited by C. Knappett and
Lallementia to Northern Greece.” L. Malafouris, 217–247. New York:
Annual of the British School at Athens Springer.
105: 83–96. van der Veen, M. 2014. “The materiality of
Valamoti, S. M., D. Pascal, C. Chaido plants: plant-people entanglements.”
Koukouli, M. Dimitria and T. Zoi. World Archaeology 46(5): 799–812.
2015. “An archaeobotanical investi- Vandiver, P. and C. Koehler. 1986.
gation of prehistoric grape vine “Structure, processing, properties,
exploitation and wine making in and style of Corinthian transport
Northern Greece.?” In Olive Oil and amphoras.” In Ceramics and
Wine Production in Eastern Civilization v.2, Technology and Style,
Mediterranean During Antiquity, edited edited by W.D. Kingery and E. Lense.
by A. Diler, D. Senol and Columbus: University of Ohio Press.
U. Aydinoglu, 125–140. Izmir: Ege van Effenterre, H. 1985. La Cité grecque des
Universitesi Basimevi. origines à la défaite de Marathon. Paris:
Valamoti, S. M., E. Gkatzogia and Hachette.
M. Ntinou. 2018. “Did Greek colo- van Wees, H. 1995. “Princes at dinner.
nisation bring olive growing to the Social event and social structure in
north? An integrated archaeobotani- Homer.” In Homeric Questions, edited
cal investigation of the spread of Olea by J. P. Crielaard, 147–182.
europaea in Greece from the 7th to the Amsterdam: J.C. Gieben.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 391

2006. “Mass and Elite in Solon’s Athens: storica e critica, edited by M. Vetta.
the property classes revisited.” In Xiii–lx. Rome: Laterza.
Solon of Athens. New Historical and Vita-Finzi, Ca. 2008. “Fluvial solar sig-
Philological Approaches, edited by nals.” In Landscape Evolution:
J. H. Blok and Denudation, Climate and Tectonics over
A. P. M. H. Lardinois, 351–389. Different Time and Space Scales.
Leiden: Brill. Geological Society, London, Special
2009. “The Economy.” In A Companion Publications 296, edited by
to Archaic Greece, edited by K. Gallagher, S. J. Jones and
K. Raaflaub and H. van Wees. J. Wainwright, 105–116. Bath, UK:
445–467. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. The Geological Society.
2013. Ships and Silver, Taxes and Tribute. Vives-Ferrándiz, J. 2008. “Negotiating
A Fiscal History of Archaic Athens. colonial encounters: hybrid practices
London: I.B. Tauris. and consumption in Eastern Iberia
van Wees, H. and Fisher, N. 2015. (8th–6th centuries BC).” Journal of
“Introduction: the trouble with ‘aris- Mediterranean Archaeology 21(2):
tocracy.’” In ‘Aristocracy’ in Antiquity. 241–272.
Redefining Greek and Roman Elites, Vlachopoulos, A. 2003. “The Late
edited by H. van Wees and Helladic IIIC ‘Grotta Phase’ of
N. Fisher, 1–57. Swansea: The Naxos. Its synchronisms in the
Classical Press of Wales. Aegean and its non-synchronisms in
van Wijngaarden, G. J. 2002. Use and the Cyclades.” In LH III
Appreciation of Mycenaean Pottery in the C Chronology and Synchronisms.
Levant, Cyprus, and Italy Proceedings of the International
(1600–1200 BC). Amsterdam: Workshop Held at the Austrian
Amsterdam University Press. Academy of Sciences at Vienna May 7th
Varias, C. 2006. “The Mycenaean fiscal and 8th, 2001, edited by S. Deger-
vocabulary.” In Fiscality in Mycenaean Jalkotzy and M. Zavadil, 217–234.
and Near Eastern Archives, edited by Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen
M. Perna, 241–254. Paris: De Akademie der Wissenschaften,
Boccard. Österreichische Akademie der
Ventris, M. and J. Chadwick. 1973. Wissenschaften philosophisch-
Documents in Mycenaean Greek. 2nd historische Klasse Denkscriften.
ed. Cambridge: Cambridge Vlachvei, A., O. Notta and T. Efterpi.
University Press. 2012. Branding strategies in Greek
Verdan, S. 2013. Le sanctuaire d’Apollon wine firms. Procedia Economics and
Daphnéphoros à l’époque géometrique. Finance 1: 421–430.
Eretria XXII. Bern: Francke. Vogeikoff-Brogan, N., J. S. Soles and
2015. “Geometric Eretria: some thoughts K. Davaras. 2014. Mochlos III: The
on old data.” In Zagora in Context: Late Hellenistic settlement: The beam-
Settlements and Intercommunal Links in press complex (Prehistory monographs
the Geometric Period (900–700 BC), edited 48). Philadelphia, Pennsylvania:
by J.-P. Descœudres and S. Paspalas, INSTAP Academic Press.
181–190. Mediterranean Archaeology Vokotopoulos, L., G. Plath and
25. Sydney: University of Sydney. F. W. McCoy. 2014. “The yield of
Vetta, M. 1983. “Poesia simposiale nella the land: soil conservation and the
Grecia arcaica e classica.” In Poesia exploitation of arable land at
e simposio nella Grecia antica: Guida Choiromandres, Zakros in the
392 BIBLIOGR APHY

New Palace Period.” In Physis. Walberg, G. 1995. “The Midea megaron

L’Environnement naturel et al relation and changes in Mycenaean ideology.”
homme-milieu dan s le monde Égéen Aegean Archaeology 2: 87–91.
protohistorique. Actes de la 14e 2007. Midea: the Megaron Complex and
Rencontre égéenne international, Paris, Shrine Area. Excavations on the Lower
Institut National d’Histoire de l’Art Terraces 1994–1997. Philadelphia:
(INHA), 11–14 décembre 2012, edited INSTAP Academic Press.
by G. Touchais, R. Laffineur and Walberg, G. and D. S. Reese. 2008.
F. Rougemont, 251–264. Leuven: “Feasting at Midea.” In Dais: The
Peeters. Aegean Feast [Aegaeum 29], edited
Vokotopoulou, I. 1990. “Mende—Poseidi by L. A. Hitchcock, R. Laffineur
1990.” AEMTh 4: 399–410. and J. Crowley, 239–246. Liège:
Vokotopoulou, I. and A.-P. Christidis. Université de Liège.
1995. “A Cypriot graffito on an SOS Wallace, S. 2000. “Case studies of settle-
amphora from Mende, Chalcidice.” ment change in Early Iron Age
Kadmos 34: 5–12. Crete.” AeA 4: 61–99.
von Reden, S. 1995. Exchange in Ancient 2006. “The gilded cage? Settlement and
Greece. London: Duckworth. socioeconomic change after 1200 B.
Vossen, P. 2013. “Growing olives for oil.” C.: a comparison of Crete and other
In Handbook of Olive Oil. Analysis and Aegean regions.” In Ancient Greece:
Properties, edited by R. Aparicio and J. From the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age
Harwood, 19–56. New York: of Homer, edited by S. Deger-Jalkotzy
Springer. and I. Lemos, 619–664. Edinburgh
Voutsaki, S. and S. M. Valamoti, eds. Leventis Series 3. Edinburgh:
2013. Diet, Economy and Society in Edinburgh University Press.
the Ancient Greek World: Towards 2010. Ancient Crete: From Successful
a Better Integration of Archaeology Collapse to Democracy’s Alternatives,
and Science: Proceedings of the Twelfth to Fifth Centuries BC.
International Conference held at the Cambridge: Cambridge University
Netherlands Institute at Athens on Press.
22–24 March 2010 (Pharos supple- Walsh, J. St. P. 2014. Consumerism in the
ment 1). Leuven: Peeters. Ancient World. New York:
Wace, A. J. B. 1921– Routledge.
1923a. “Excavations at Mycenae Wanner, H., J. Beer, J. Bütikofer,
VII: The Lion Gate and Grave T. J. Crowley, U. Cubasch,
Circle Area.” Annual of the British J. Flückiger, H. Goosse, M. Grosjean,
School at Athens 25: 9–126. F. Joos, J. O. Kaplan, M. Küttel,
1921–1923b. “Excavations at Mycenae S. A. Müller, I. C. Prentice,
IX: the Tholos Tombs.” Annual of O. Solomina, T. F. Stocker,
the British School at Athens 25: P. Tarasov, M. Wagner and
283–402. M. Widmann. 2008. “Mid- to late
1932. “Chamber Tombs at Mycenae.” Holocene climate change: an
Archaeologia 82. Oxford: J. Johnson for overview.” Quaternary Science Review
the Society of Antiquaries. 27: 1791–1828.
Wachsmann, S. 1998. Seagoing Ships and Warburton, D. A. ed. 2009. Time’s Up!
Seamanship in the Bronze Age Levant. Dating the Minoan Eruption of
College Station: Texas A&M Santorini. Acts of the Minoan Eruption
University Press. Chronology Workshop, Sandbjerg
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 393

November 2007. Athens: Danish 2006. “Pictorial evidence for partial sur-
Institute at Athens. vival in the Greek Bronze to Iron
Warren, P. 1972. Myrtos. An Early Bronze transition.” In Pictorial pursuits.
Age Settlement in Crete. BSA Suppl. 7. Figurative painting on Mycenaean and
London: British School at Athens Geometric pottery. Papers from two
Warren, P. M. 1989. “The destruction of seminars at the Swedish Institute at
the palace of Knossos.” In Proceedings Athens in 1999 and 2001, edited by
of an International Symposium “The E. Rystedt and B. Wells, 255–269.
Civilizations of the Aegean and Their Stockholm: Svenska Institutet
Diffusion in Cyprus and the Eastern i Athen.
Mediterranean, 2000–600 B.C.,” Weiberg, E., I. Unkel, K. Kouli,
18–24 September 1989, edited by K. Holmgren, P. Avramidis,
V. Karageorghis, 33–7. Larnaca, A. Bonnier, F. Dibble, et al. 2016.
Cyprus: Pierides Foundation. “The Socio- Environmental History
Wasserman, S. and K. Faust. 1994. Social of the Peloponnese during the
Network Analysis: Methods and Holocene: towards an integrated
Applications. Structural Analysis in the understanding of the past.”
Social Sciences no. 8. Cambridge: Quaternary Science Reviews 136
Cambridge University Press. (March): 40–65.
Watkins, C. 1976. “Observations on the Weiberg, E. and Finné, M. 2018.
‘Nestor’s Cup’ inscription.” Harvard “Resilience and persistence of ancient
Studies in Classical Philology 80: 25–40. societies in the face of climate change:
Watrous, L. V. 1992. Kommos 3: An a case study from Late Bronze Age
Excavation on the South Coast of Crete. Peloponnese.” World Archaeology:
The Late Bronze Age Pottery. (Joseph Vulnerability, Risk and Resilience,
W. Shaw and Maria C. Shaw, eds.). 50(4): 584–602.
Princeton: Princeton University Press. Weiss, H. 2016. “Global megadrought,
1996. “The Cave Sanctuary of Zeus at societal collapse and resilience at
Psychro. A study of Extra-Urban 4.2–3.9 ka BP across the
Sanctuaries in Minoan and Early Mediterranean and the west Asia.”
Iron Age Crete.” Aegaeum 15. Liege: PAGES Magazine 24(2): 62–63.
Université de Liège. Weiss, H., M.-A. Courty, W. Wetterstrom,
Wecowski, M. 2014. The Rise of the Greek F. Guichard, L. Senior, R. Meadow
Aristocratic Banquet. 172. Corby: and A. Curnow. 1993. “The genesis
Oxford University Press. and collapse of third millennium north
Wedde, M. 2000. Towards a Hermeneutics of Mesopotamian civilization.” Science
Aegean Bronze Age Ship Imagery. 261: 995–1004.
Mannheim & Möhnesee: Bibliopolis. Wells, B. 1983. Asine II: Results of the
2005. “The Mycenaean galley in context: Excavations East of the Acropolis
from fact to idée fixe.” In Emporia. 1970–1974. Fasc. 4, The Protogeometric
Aegeans in the central and eastern period, Pt. 2: An Analysis of the
Mediterranean. Proceedings of the 10th inter- Settlement. Stockholm: Svenska
national Aegean conference, Athens, Italian Institutet i Athen.
School of archaeology, 14–18 April 2004, Wengrow, D. 2008. “Prehistories of com-
edited by R. Laffineur and E. Greco, modity branding.” Current
29–37. Liège: Univ. de Liège, Histoire Anthropology 49(1): 7–34
de l’Art et Archéologie de la Grèce Weninger, B., L. Clare, E. Rohling,
Antique. O. Bar-Yosef, U. Boehner,
394 BIBLIOGR APHY

M. Budja, M. Bundschuh, 2002. “Objects with attitude: biogra-

A. Feurdean, H. G. Gebe, O. Joeris, phical facts and fallacies in the study
J. Lindstaedter, P. Mayewski, of Late Bronze Age and Early Iron
T. Muehlenbruch, A. Reingruber, Age warrior graves.” CAJ 12(2):
G. Rollefson, D. Schyle, L. Thissen, 217–232.
H. Todorova and C. Zielhofer. 2009. Whittaker, H. 2008. “The role of drinking
“The impact of rapid climate change in religious ritual in the Mycenaean
on prehistoric societies during the period.” In Dais: the Aegean Feast
Holocene in the Eastern [Aegaeum 29], edited by
Mediterranean.” Documenta Praehi- L. A. Hitchcock, R. Laffineur and
storica 36: 7–59. J. Crowley, 89–96. Liège: Université
West, M. L. 1974. Studies in Greek Elegy and de Liège.
Iambus. Berlin-New York: De Wilson, D. E., P. M. Day and
Gruyter. N. Dimopoulou-Rethemiotaki.
1978. Hesiod: Works and Days. Oxford: 2004. “The pottery from Early
Oxford University Press. Minoan I–IIB Knossos and its rela-
2012. “Towards a chronology of early tions with the harbour site of Poros-
Greek epic.” In Relative Chronology in Katsambas.” In Knossos: Palace, City,
Early Greek Epic Poetry, edited by State. Proceedings of the Conference in
Ø. Andersen and D. T. T. Haug, Herakleion Organised by the British
224–241. Cambridge: Cambridge School at Athens and the 23rd Ephoreia
University Press. of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities of
West, S. 1994. “Nestor’s bewitching cup.” Herakleion, in November 2000, for the
Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik Centenary of Sir Arthur Evans’s
101: 9–15. Excavations at Knossos, edited by
Whitbread, I. K. 1995. Greek Transport G. Cadogan, E. Hatzaki and
Amphorae: A Petrological and A. Vasilakis, 67–74. BSA Studies 12.
Archaeological Study. Fitch Laboratory London: British School at Athens.
Occasional Paper, Book 4. Exeter, 2008. “The gateway port of Poros-
Athens: British school at Athens. Katsambas: trade and exchange
Whitelaw, T. 2001. “Reading between the between north-central Crete and the
tablets: assessing Mycenaean palatial Cyclades in EB I–II.” In Horizon/
involvement in ceramic production Ορίζων: A Colloquium on the
and consumption.” In Economy and Prehistory of the Cyclades, edited by
Politics in the Mycenaean Palace States, N. Brodie, J. Doole, G. Gavalas and
edited by S. Voutsaki and J. Killen, C. Renfrew, 261–270. McDonald
51–79. Cambridge: Cambridge Institute Monographs. Cambridge:
Philological Society. McDonald Institute for
Whitley, J. 1994. “The monuments that Archaeological Research.
stood before Marathon: tomb cult and Wilson, J. 2008. “What were the women
hero cult in Archaic Attica.” American doing while the men were eating and
Journal of Archaeology 98(2): 213–230. drinking? The evidence of the fres-
1995. “Tomb cult and hero cult: the uses coes.” In DAIS: The Aegean Feast.
of the past in Archaic Greece.” In Aegaeum 20, edited by
Time, Tradition and Society in Greek L. A. Hitchcock, R. Laffineaur and
Archaeology: Bridging the “Great J. Crowley, 23–27. Liège, Belgium
Divide,” edited by N. Spencer, and Austin: Université de Liège and
43–63. London: Routledge. University of Texas at Austin.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 395

Winter, I. J. 1998. “Homer’s Phoenicians: Young, R.S. 1938. “Pottery from a seventh
history, ethnography, or literary century well.” Hesperia 7: 412–428.
trope?” In The Ages of Homer: Zanchetta, G., A. Van Welden,
a Tribute to Emily Townsend Vermeule, I. Baneschi, R. Drysdale,
edited by Jane B. Carter and Sarah L. Sadori, N. Roberts,
P. Morris, 247–271. Austin: M. Giardini, C. Beck, V. Pascucci
University of Texas Press. and R. Sulpizio. 2012.
Wright, J. C. 2004. “A survey of evidence for “Multiproxy record from the last
feasting in Mycenaean society.” In The 4500 years from Lake Shkodra
Mycenaean Feast, edited by J. Wright, (Albania/Montenegro).” Journal of
13–58. Princeton: The American Quaternary Science 27(8): 780–789.
School of Classical Studies at Athens. Zapheiropoulou, P. 1997. “La relation
2009. “The social production of space entre l’Heraion et al ville de
and the architectural reproduction of Samos.” In Héra. Images, Espaces,
society in the Bronze Age Aegean Cultes, edited by J. de La Genière,
during the 2nd Millennium B.C.E.” 151–162. Naples: Centre Jean
In Constructing Power: Architecture, Bérard.
Ideology and Social Practice. Zikakou, I. 2016. “Greek wine exports to
Konstruktion der Macht: Architektur, the U.S. increase significantly.” Greek
Ideologie und soziales Handeln, edited USA Reporter. http://usa.greekrepor
by J. Maran, C. Juwig, H. Schwengel ter.com/2016/01/04/greek-wine-exp
and U. Thaler, 49–74. 2 ed., orts-to-the-u-s-increase-significantly/
Geschichte Forschung und Wisse- Zohary, D. and P. Spiegel-Roy. 1975.
nschaft 19. Berlin-Münster: Lit “Beginnings of fruit growing in the
Verlag. old world.” Science 31: 319–327.
 INDEX

4.2-event, 29 transport stirrup jars, 84, 86

Alcaeus, 265
à la brosse amphora, 280 Alcman, 265
Academy, Athens Alonaki
sacred house, 211 oval-mouthed amphoras, 81
Achaia, 131 alphabet, 256
connection to Italy, 179 Amnisos
use of kylix, EIA, 214 feasting at, 65
adaptation amphora, 77, 182, 185, 317, 321
climate change, 22, 310, 311 as fluid technology, 21
Aeolis, 199 as funerary gift, 223
Aetolia amphoriskoi, 40, 175, 176
use of kylix, EIA, 214 abundance of, 177
Agarak, 158 trade in, 190
press beds, bedrock, 52 amphoriskos, 220
agency andreion, 249
indigenous, 306 andron, 264
of plants, 70 Andros, 200, 204
things, 10, 16 Anemospelia
vines and olive trees, 10 gift exchange at, 75
Agnanti, 156 Angelochori, 202
North Aegean amphoras, 233 Aphrodite’s Kephali, 319
Agora Aphytis
feasting in, 268 North Aegean amphoras, 237
funerary feasting, 219 apoikia, 284, 331, See colonization
SOS amphoras, 282 Apollo at Abai, 210
agriculture Apollo Daphnephoros, 261
increase in quality, Postpalatial, 163 feasting at, 211
Mediterranean (modern), 309 apsidal building, 198
stability, EIA, 199 Sanctuary of Poseidon Pontios, 326
Agrosykia Arcadia, 272
North Aegean amphoras, 237 archaeobotanical remains, 319
Aigeira, 156 as evidence for production, 7
agriculture, 159 climate change, 62
destruction of, 157 Early Iron Age, 3
feasting at, 167 EIA, 201
kraters, 170 grape pips, 51
storage, 162 in funerary contexts, 76
Akanthos oil-producing plants, 202
North Aegean amphoras, 237 olive, EIA, 201
Akrotiri Postpalatial, 159
Minoan imports, 83 publication of, 4
olive stones, 54 wine making, 203, 237
press installation, 49, 51, 98 archaeological survey, 6, 248

396
 IN D EX 397

Archanes Axiochori
feasting at, 65, 67 North Aegean amphoras, 237
Archilochus, 265 Ayia Irini
Archondiko, 202 oval-mouthed amphoras, 83
grape cultivation, 202 transport stirrup jars, 84
lallemantia, 202 Ayios Konstantinos, Methana
North Aegean amphoras, 237 cooking, 123
Areni cave, 5, 49 libation, 125
Argilos Ayios Mamas
North Aegean amphoras, 237 grape cultivation, 203
Argolid lallemantia, 202
amphoriskoi, 221 Azokeramos, 54, 56
depopulation, 164 Azoria, 7, 249, 250
exports from, 121 oil processing, 250
olive cultivation, EIA, 202 olive pressing installation, 249
speleothems, 23
transport stirrup jar production, 144 balance weights, 224
Argos, 203 basileus, 328
Postpalatial occupation, 156 Berbati
wealthy burials, 328 gift exchange at, 129
Arkadikos, 202 libation, 125
Arkalochori, 68 Biblis
Arkhanes wine from, 247
gift exchange at, 75 bio-indicators
Linear A, 58 olive trees and grapevines as, 32
Armenoi Black Sea, 287, 297
grave offerings, 130 branding, 313, See also transport stirrup jar
aryballos modern Greece, 313
Corinthian, 285
Asine cabotage, 288
altar, 218 calculative agencies, 15, 73
apsidal building, 209 Camarina
feasting at, EIA, 207 Corinthian A amphoras, 280, 285
feasting in cemetery, 267, 268 SOS amphoras, 285
gift exchange at, 129 Canaanite jar
libation, 125 funerary offerings, 131
storage, 210 reciprocal trade, 141
Aspros canals, 205
North Aegean amphoras, 237 Carthage
Assiros SOS amphoras, 288
grape cultivation, 202 cash crop, 9
lallemantia, 202 Caulonia
North Aegean amphoras, 233, 237 Corinthian A amphoras, 284
oil-producing plants, 202 Cavallino
Atalanti Corinthian A amphoras, 284
North Aegean amphoras, 233 Cerveteri
Athenaeus, 263, 329 SOS amphoras, 284
Athens Chalcis, 200
EIA population, 198 amphora types, 275
kraters, 256 Chalcolithic era, 5
polis, 245 Chalinomouri
production of perfumed oil, 222 terracing at, 60
Atlit Yam, 5 Chalkidike
Attica, 156 Euboean colonization, 200
Bronze Age funerary equipment, 131 North Aegean amphora production, 229
lekythoi, 220 Chamalevri, 329
olive cultivation, EIA, 202 champagne cup, 120
round-mouthed amphoras, 183 chieftain, 246
398 I ND E X

Choiromandres, 54 leaders’ dwellings, 207

dams at, 60 Midea, 123
chora, 328 Postpalatial, 166, 167, 168
cist tombs, 198 residue analysis, 125
cisterns, 59 Corinth
Classical era, 3, 32, 75, 202 colonization, 200
amphoras, 282 pithoi, 203
colonization, 328 polis, 245
communal dining, 259, 261 Corinthian A amphora, 276
drinking equipment, 169 characteristics of, 280
first fruits offering, 272 distribution, Italy, 284
funeral feast, 218 distribution, Sicily, 284
hydrias, 186 imports to Athens, 282
lekythoi, 220 Corinthian isthmus, 287
presses, 7 cremation, 157, 220, 272
private feasting, 263 Crete, 8, 42, 53, 127, 189, 316, 318, 320, 321, 348,
regional amphora styles, 230 366, 382
surplus trade, 283 Crotone
Symposia, 263 Corinthian A amphoras, 284
transport amphoras, 242 cultural commodities, 1, 4, 9, 16, 45, 96, 147, 153,
climate change 155, 196, 197, 298
aridity, 163 definition, 9, 305
as a process, 21 identity, 9, 245
bio-indicators, 32 modern Greece, 308
Crete, 30 cultural economy paradigm, 15, 39, 64
Holocene, 21 Cumae
Homeric Low, 31, 253, 254, 324 SOS amphoras, 284
modern, 309 Cup of Nestor, 266
perception of, 25, 63 curvilinear buildings, 198, See apsidal buildings
proxy data, 23 Cyclades
proxy, definition, 27 stirrup jar production, 147
rapid climate change event, 30, 205 Cypro-Minoan, 142
shift to bi-modal climate, 61 on amphoras, 185
surplus production, 254 Cyprus
time scales, 24 Archaic Greek influence, 288
vulnerability, 24 import of kraters, 170
collapse, 201 imports from, 72
affect on entanglement, 11 location of amphoras, 20
climate change, 205 merchants, 179
Mycenaean palatial, 155 pithoi, 185
collective individuation, 66 transport stirrup jars, 141
colonies
foundation of, 199 dais, 265
colonization, 245 dams, 59, 60, 102, 156, 163, 205
Athens, 331 Dattalla, 291
characteristics of, Greek, 246 deep bowl, 171, 213
north Aegean, 200 deep-sea sediment cores, 28
production of oil and wine, 292 Deiras, 129
consumption, 13, 18 Delos, 246, 294
containers, 5 Delphi, 201, 246
drinking, 5, 40 grape cultivation, 203
elite control, 300 Delphinos
elite participation, 303 sediment core, 62
non-elite access, 303 demographic shift
non-elite participation, 304 climate change, 164
of meat, 324 Demosthenes, 283
of wine, 72 Dendra, 129
cooking, 40, 50, 68, 69, 71 dependence, 14
 IN D EX 399

dependency, 12, 88, 93, 147, 149, 293 dependency, 9

and climate change, 61 directionality, 11
and elite competition, 94 influence of elites, 300
decrease in scale, 194 long-term, 12
Mycenaean palaces, 152 Mycenaean palatial era, 13
negative connotations, 154 regional, 243
transition from dependence, 90, 304 scale, 12
Diaskari, 81 thing theory, 10, 12
diet, 3 Ephesos
Diktili Tash, 30 North Aegean amphoras, 234
grape cultivation, 203 Epidauros
Dimitra Apollo Maleatas, 123
grape cultivation, 203 equipment, 6, 118, 129
Dioscorides, 116 drinking equipment, 319
directional trade, 138, 140 Eretria, 200
domestication, 5, 10 feasting at, 261
domesticated plants, 5, 27 North Aegean amphoras, 236
olives and grapes, first, 5 wealthy burials, 328
olives and grapes, Italy, 330 Etruscan amphoras, 285
Drapinias Euboea
feasting at, 65, 69 colonization, 200
Dreros exports, 243
law code, 328 Euripos Strait, 156, 260
drinking equipment Eusebius, 328
cemeteries, 76 exchange, viii, 15, 107, 303, 317
decoration, Postpalatial, 171 distribution patterns, 20
drinking set, 72 Ezbet Rushdi, 84
as export, 142
funerary, 221 farmsteads, 5, 6, 48, 56
drought, 163, 196 feasting, 118, 317, 322, 324
affect on olive trees, 36 and wine presses, 65
dynamic stability, 298 as response to distress, 94
and collapse, 302 as surplus exchange, 17
at Neopalatial palaces, 68
Early Iron Age, 42, 159 at peak sanctuaries, 67
regional sanctuaries, 199 at villas, 72
Edessa Bronze Age, 5
North Aegean amphoras, 237 categories of, 18, 256
Eion communal dining halls, 69, 260, 290
North Aegean amphoras, 237 competition, 73, 258
El Niño, 30 diacritical, 118, 148, 172
Elateia, 156 Dietler, Michael, 18
feasting at, 174, 204 diversity of, 255
grave goods, 177 drinking sets, 66, 117
imported amphoras, 189 empowering, 71
imported amphoriskoi, 190 images of, 121, 264
imported objects, 190 in cemeteries, 65, 88, 123, 150, 174,
North Aegean amphoras, 223, 233 219, 267
Elis, 131, 294 in sanctuaries, 65, 122, 123, 168
use of kylix, EIA, 214 inside tombs, 67, 268
emporoi, 297 large-scale communal, 65
Enkomi patron-role, 71
Mycenaean imports, 153 religion, 255
transport stirrup jars, Postpalatial, 191 state-sponsored, 150
entanglement wedding, 266
centrality, 12 women, 291
centralized, 150 flavored wine, 115
definition, 10 Foxhall, Lin, 202
dependence, 10, 12 François vase, 279
400 I ND E X

Galatas North Aegean amphoras, 237

feasting at, 68, 72 hekatompedon, 261
gift exchange at, 129 Hellenistic, 3, 6, 7, 47
oval-mouthed amphoras, 81 colonization, 328
transport stirrup jars, 86 communal dining, 259
Gallikos Hermes, 271
North Aegean amphoras, 237 Herodotus, 286, 287, 288, 305
Gavdos, 158 Hesiod
Linear A, 53 harvesting wine, 252
press beds, bedrock, 52 land ownership, 247
Gibala-Tell Tweini, 30 location of presses, 252
gift-giving pressing techniques, 252
amphoras as funerary gift, 131, 222 surplus, 253
Bronze Age, 5 sweet wine, 115
drinking set, 130 trade, 331
first fruits, 272 Works and Days, 247, 252
hydrias as funerary gift, 222 hestiatoria, 258
Linear A, 74 Hipponax, 265
Mauss, Marcel, 19 historical ecology, 22, 24, 298, 308
meals for gods, 127 Hodder, Ian, xiii, 10, 299, 316
non-commensal, 74 Holocene, 27
perfumed oil, 173, 177 Homeric Low. See climate change
unguent vessels, 130 Homeric poems
Gla, 163 aged wine, 116
global warming, 309 estate ownership, 247
Golemi, 156 feasting in, 255, 259
Gona flavored wine, 115
North Aegean amphoras, 237 gift-exchange, 270, 274
Gonies identity, 306
gift exchange at, 75 libation, 271
Gournia, 54 pithoi, 204
oval-mouthed amphoras, 81 trade, 225, 331
terracing at, 60 honey, 115
transport stirrup jars, 86 Huelva
grape varieties Athenian imports, 274
evidence for, 32 hydria, 12
grapevine as funerary offering, 222
temperature limits, 34 as transport container, 186
Greece (modern) Postpalatial use, 183
olive oil consumption, 308 production, Postpalatial, 187
olive oil production, 310 hydromel, 293
viticulture, 308 Hymettos
water resources, 309, 312 feasting at, 211

Haghia Triada, 138 Ialysos, 177

feasting at, 65 identity, 65
Linear A, 58, 70, 74, 89 and drinking, 307
oval-mouthed amphoras, 81 and feasting, 71
transport stirrup jars, 86 and the Minoan palaces, 93
Haghia Triada sarcophagus, 130 collective, 18
Haghia Triada, Argolid, 123 connection to drinking equipment, 216
Hala Sultan Tekke definition of, 305
transport stirrup jars, Postpalatial, 191 during communal activities, 66
Halasmenos Greekness, 305
amphora imports, 188 indigenous, 306
round-mouthed amphora, 183 modern Greece, 308
transport stirrup jars, imported, 188 oil and wine as markers of, 3, 297
Halos Postpalatial era, 164
 IN D EX 401

religion, 294 lallemantia, 202

Incoronata North Aegean amphoras, 229, 233
Corinthian A amphoras, 284 oil-producing plants, 202
SOS amphoras, 284 pot marks, 231
Iolkos Kato Syme, 68
grape cultivation, 203 feasting at, 68
North Aegean amphoras, 231, 233, 234, 237 gift exchange at, 75
Ionia, 199 Kato Zakros, 82
Iouktas, 68 Kavala
Iria North Aegean amphoras, 237
drinking equipment, 258 Kavousi
feasting at, 258 round-mouthed amphora, 183
irrigation, 34, 36, 59, 62, 102 terracing at, 60
Isthmia, 210 transport stirrup jars, imported, 188
drinking equipment, 258 Kea
feasting at, 210, 258 Linear A, 59
Sanctuary of Poseidon, 210 keimelia, 157, 225
Istria Keos
SOS amphoras, 287 funerary law, 273
Italy oval-mouthed amphoras, 84
merchants, 179 SOS amphoras, 283
trade in EIA, 226 Kerameikos, 174
Itanos feasting at, 268
terracing at, 60 funerary offerings, 272
Ithaca types of offerings, 273
use of kylix, EIA, 214 kernoi, 127
Khania, 139, 183
Jordan Valley, 5 as regional administrative center, 141
jug feasting at, 68
Postpalatial use, 183 Linear A, 58
Juktas transport stirrup jars, 86, 140, 141, 181
gift exchange at, 75 transport stirrup jars, imported, 188
Klazomenai, 7, 200, 249, 251
Kalapodi, 156, 199 North Aegean amphora production, 229
feasting at, 168, 204, 210, 303 North Aegean amphoras, 234
grape cultivation, 203 olive pressing installation, 250
North Aegean amphoras, 233 Klimataria, 81
Kamares Knossos, 81
feasting at, 65 as dominant influence, 93, 94, 96
Kamilari Athenian imports, 274
wine press models, 65 Cypro-Minoan, 142
kantharos, 268 feasting at, 68
Kapakli, 222 inscribed stirrup jars, 135
kapeleia. See taverns Linear A, 58
Karabournaki oval-mouthed amphoras, 81, 92
grape cultivation, 203 polis, 245
North Aegean amphoras, 237 press installations, olive oil, 54, 98
wine production, 237 transport stirrup jars, 86, 138
Karoumes Unexplored Mansion, 320
oval-mouthed amphoras, 81 Kochei at Neos Marmaras
Karphi North Aegean amphoras, 237
gift exchange at, 75 koine, 195, 240, 303
round-mouthed amphora, 183 as shared value system, 186, 240, 300
transport stirrup jars, 182, 187, 188 East Mainland-Aegean, 183, 186, 239
Kastanas, 198 Euboean, 300
agriculture, 202 north-west Aegean, 197, 239, 325
feasting at, 207 Kokla, 129
grape cultivation, 202 Kolaios, the Samian, 286
402 I ND E X

Kommos, 138, 139, 160 Lallemantia, 202

Cypro-Minoan, 142 Lavrion
feasting at, 71, 72, 91 EIA, 225
oval-mouthed amphoras, 80, 81 leaders’ dwelling, 199, 206, 261, 303
press installations, 56 feasting at, 207, 218, 241
press installations, olive oil, 53, 99 ritual features, 218
terracing at, 60 storage, 241
trade with Levant, 141 Lebet Table
transport stirrup jars, 86, 141 North Aegean amphoras, 237
Kopais basin, 163 Lefkandi, 156
Korakou, 156 decline of, 195
feasting at, 166 EIA population, 198
olive pits, 159 feasting at, 219
pressing installation, 158 grave gifts, 222
storage, 162 leadership, 157
use of kylikes, 171 North Aegean amphoras, 223, 233, 236
Kos pithoi, 203
oval-mouthed amphoras, 84 pot marks, 231
Kotihi lagoon, 202 storage, 162
Kranie at Platamon Toumba building, 207, 209, 213
North Aegean amphoras, 237 Toumba cemetery, 221, 223
krater, 207 Xeropolis. See Xeropolis
Archaic era, 273 Leivithra
as export, 142 North Aegean amphoras, 237
as gift, 274 lekythos
Cesnola, 274 Attica, 295
decoration, Postpalatial, 171 invention of, 220
in situ, 210 libation, 271
introduction of, 120 Lelantine Plain, 225
oversize, 213 Lemnos
pictorial, 121 North Aegean amphoras, 234
Postpalatial, 170 Lesbos
Postpalatial era, 169 modern olive cultivation, 308
use in EIA feasting, 213 North Aegean amphoras, 235
Kritsana Leukopetra
North Aegean amphoras, 237 North Aegean amphoras, 237
kylix, 120, 148, 150, 167 libation, 124, 242, 267, 270, 304
abandonment of, 171, 213 EIA, 220
drinking rituals, 123 funerary context, 129
in ritual context, 124 images of, 271
miniature, 125, 129 inside tomb, 129
residue analysis, 123 literary references, 271
Kynos, 156 quantity of, 273
decline of, 195 libation table, 50
destruction of, 157 Linear A
drinking equipment, 171 agricultural production, 56
harbor, 225 and the palaces, 92
kraters, 170 feasting, 67, 69
North Aegean amphoras, 233 feasting records, 58
pictorial pottery, 172, 179 inscriptions on vases, 58
pithoi, 204 oil and wine ideograms, 57
stirrup jars, decorated, 190 olive oil, 54
storage, 162 on pithos, 51
wine, 53
Laconia Linear B, 96, 299
imported Cretan stirrup jars, 190 cadastral survey, 99
Lake Kournas characteristics, 99
sediment core, 62 feasting, 122
 IN D EX 403

grapevines, 100 Melidoni cave

inventory tablets, 110 feasting at, 68
Knossos, 100, 106 Melos
land used for olive and grape cultivation, 100 oval-mouthed amphoras, 84
liquid measurement, 106 memory
Mycenae, 101 of palatial past, 157
oil and wine ideograms, 102 Menander, 266, 329
oil ideogram variations, 116 Mende
painted on pots, 135 foundation of, 200
perfumed oil, 110, 116 North Aegean amphora production, 229
Pylos, 101, 106, 119, 122, 126 North Aegean amphoras, 223, 233, 237
religious festivals, 127 Sanctuary of Poseidon, 326
religious offerings, 126 Sanctuary of Poseidon Pontios, 200
taxation, 106, 126 SOS amphora, 288
Thebes, 127 SOS amphoras, 282
transport stirrup jars, 137 wine production, 200
wine ideogram variations, 115 Menelaion
wine used for payment, 132 transport stirrup jars, 140
linseed merchant, 296
oil, 202 Aegina, 287
Little Ice Age, 35, 36, 61, 312 Corinthian, 287
Livari Cypriots, 288
offerings in tomb, 76 Greek, 286
Locrian Maidens, 240 Phoenicians, 287
Lokris, 156 Samians, 287
increase in storage, 203 Mesara
North Aegean amphora, 229 and the production of oval-mouthed
long-distance trade amphoras, 80
Postpalatial era, 179, 190 oval-mouthed amphoras, 92
long-term perspective, 4, 22, 26, 308 transport stirrup jars, 135
Mesimeriani Toumba, 203
Maa Palaikastro Messenia, 23
transport stirrup jars, Postpalatial, 191 olive cultivation, EIA, 202
Macedonia use of kylix, EIA, 214
apsidal buildings, 198 Messinia
climate, 206 pollen cores, 201
North Aegean amphora, 226 metal
population movement, 200 bronze, access to, 160
settlement structure, EIA, 199 demand for, EIA, 225
Makriyalos, 202 production of, Postpalatial, 159
Makrygialos, 81 standards of value, 238
Malia Metaponto
inscribed stirrup jars, 135 SOS amphoras, 284
oval-mouthed amphoras, 80, 92 Metauros
press installations, 54 Corinthian A amphoras, 284
production of amphoras, 80 Methana
transport stirrup jars, 86 archaeobotanical remains, 159
Mandalo, 202 Methone
lallemantia, 202 foundation of, 200
Marmariani North Aegean amphora production, 229
North Aegean amphoras, 223, 234, 237 North Aegean amphoras, 226, 237
Mavri Tripa, 102 SOS amphoras, 282
Medieval Climate Anomaly, 34, 37 microclimates, 62, 163
Megara Hyblaea middle ground, 239, 243
Corinthian A amphoras, 285 Midea
SOS amphoras, 285 drinking equipment, 171
megaron, 157 feasting at, 123, 165
change to, Postpalatial, 165 gift exchange at, 128
404 I ND E X

Midea (cont.) naukleroi, 297

imported stirrup jar, 145 Naxos
kraters, 170 Corinthian A amphoras, 284
megaron reuse, 165 imported Cretan stirrup jars, 190
postpalatial occupation, 156 pithoi, 204
transport stirrup jars, 140 Nea Kallikrateia
Milazzo North Aegean amphoras, 237
Corinthian A amphoras, 284 Nea Nikomideia
Miletos North Aegean amphoras, 237
pottery production, 146 Nea Philadelphia
Miletus North Aegean amphoras, 237
Minoan imports, 83 Neochori
oval-mouthed amphoras, 83 North Aegean amphoras, 237
stirrup jar production, 145 Nichoria
Minoan Halls, 71, 73 agriculture, 201
Mitrou, 156 archaeobotanical remains, 159
Building A, 209 circular platform, 218
feasting at, 207 feasting at, 207
harbor, 225 grape cultivation, 203
kraters, 170 storage, 209
megaron reuse, 166 Nopigeia
North Aegean amphoras, 233 feasting at, 70
pithoi, 203 North Aegean amphora, 197,
survey, 203 247, 303
mobilization, 110 brand, 238
Mochlos chronology of, 227
dams, 60 Group II, 229
feasting at, 69, 72, 91 Group II, pot marks, 232
olive remains, 329 in Near East, 226
oval-mouthed amphoras, 81 in tombs, 223
perfumed oil, 54 Lefkandi Toumba, 223
press beds, 50 pot marks, 230
press installations, 56 production, early, 227, 237
terracing at, 60 production, late, 229, 238
transport stirrup jars, 86 purpose of, 226
Motya regionalism, 275
SOS amphoras, 288 standardization, 242
Murray, Sarah, 159, 178 typology, 227
must, 5, 158, 291, see also wine value of, 223, 240
production
Mycenae oikos, 157, 194, 260
decline of, 195 EIA, 219
feasting at, 123, 166 oil production
gift exchange at, 128, 129 first evidence in Greece, 6
House of the Oil Merchant, 132 olive cultivation
House of the Wine Merchant, first evidence in Greece, 6
139 olive oil
kraters, 170 as semi-luxury commodity, 202
libation, 125 northern Greece, 202
megaron reuse, 165 olive tree
oil and wine storage, 113 temperature limits, 34
oval-mouthed amphoras, 84 Olympia, 210, 246, 294
Postpalatial occupation, 156 feasting at, 211, 303
Postpalatial storage, 161 Olynthos
transport stirrup jars, 113, 140, 187 North Aegean amphoras, 237
Myrtos, 92 press installation, 251
feasting at, 65 Oropos
press beds, 50 feasting at, 260
 IN D EX 405

Otranto Perivolaki
SOS amphoras, 284 North Aegean amphoras, 237
oval-mouthed amphora Petras, 54
at palatial sites, 81 feasting at, 68, 70, 72
characteristics, 79 offerings in tomb, 76
disuse, 181 oval-mouthed amphoras,
initial creation, 77 81, 92
localized production strategy, 82 production of amphoras, 80
production, 80 Phaistos
trade routes, 81 dams, 60
feasting at, 68, 72, 119
Pakijana, 122, 127 gift exchange at, 75
palaeoclimatic data, 22 Linear A, 58, 70
palaeoenvironmental analyses, 4 oval-mouthed amphoras, 80, 81
Palaikastro, 82 press installations, 54, 98
feasting at, 91 transport stirrup jars, 86
oval-mouthed amphoras, 80, 81, 82 Pherai
press installation, 53 North Aegean amphoras, 234
press installations, 54, 56, 98 Phocis, 156
terracing at, 60 Phoenician-Punic amphoras, 285
transport stirrup jars, 86, 141 Phoenicians, 243
wells at, 60 amphoras, 288
Palaikastro Kastri Iberia, 285
round-mouthed amphora, 183 in Homeric poems, 225
Pale search for metals, 225
Corinthian A amphoras, 284 Phokis
Palestine, 5 increase in storage, 203
Panathenaic amphora, 280 Phourni, 82
Papadiokampos gift exchange at, 75
oval-mouthed amphoras, 81 Phylakopi, 128
Paros, 200 Pieria
Pausanias, 272 climate, 206
Peloponnese Euboean colonization, 200
climate, 23 Pindar, 265, 271
pollen cores, 27 Pisa, 294
Perati, 40, 174 Pithekoussai, 292, 303
access to metals, 225 Archaic trade, 284
Attic copper mines, 179 Corinthian A amphoras, 284
stirrup jars, 176 North Aegean amphora, 226
vessel use, 177 North Aegean amphoras, 235
perfumed oil, 110, 148 SOS amphoras, 284
as export, 153 pithos, 203
as gift, 126 applied-relief, 204
decorated stirrup jar, 176 conspicuous storage, 204
elite control, 302 Pitsidia, 81
feasting, 119 Plato, 263
in funerary context, 130, 221, Pliny, 1, 2, 316
273, 304 Plutarch, 329
Knossos, 110 Polichni
Mochlos, 50 grape cultivation, 203
Mycenae, 110 North Aegean amphoras, 237
Pylos, 110, 113 Policoro
surplus of, 194 Cypriot graffito, 288
value, 141 SOS amphoras, 284
perfumed oil workshop, 54 polis, 243, 245, 328
Pergamon communal dining, 259
North Aegean amphora production, 229 production of surplus, 289
North Aegean amphoras, 234 pollen cores, 27
406 I ND E X

Pontecagnano Pseira
Corinthian A amphoras, 284 oval-mouthed amphoras, 81
poppy water managment features, 60
oil, 202 Psychro
Poros-Katsambas, 141, 160 feasting at, 65
Poseidi. See Sanctuary of Poseidon Pontios Pylos, 140
Poseidon, 127, 128 agriculture, 102
sanctuary of, 326 display of elite status, 302
Postpalatial era, 131 feasting at, 118, 166
pot marks, 224 frescoes, 121
EIA, 231 funerary equipment, 124
incised, 231 libation, 125
interpretation, 232 mainland stirrup jars, 140, 144
painted, 231 oval-mouthed amphoras, 84
Potnia, 126 Postpalatial occupation, 156
Aswiya, 126 Postpalatial storage, 161
pottery Wine Magazine, 111, 115
production of, Postpalatial, 159 Pyrasos
Pottery Neolithic period, 5 North Aegean amphoras, 234
Preclassical global crisis, 31, 253 Pyrgos
prekteres, 297 Linear A, 58
presses, 5 pyxis, 273
Archaic, 248
as proxies for scale of production, 6 rain-fed agriculture, 36, 310
bedrock, early modern, 52 Ramesses III
Classical, 6, 98, 248, 251 tomb of, 191
Early Iron Age, 7 Reggio
Hellenistic, 248 Corinthian A amphoras, 284
hexiplex shells, 53 Rema Pharmaki, 156
lever and beam, 7, 249, 250 reservoirs, 59
location, 6 residue analysis, 4, 5, 53, 68, 319
location of, Minoan, 54 cooking pots, 4
location of, Mycenaean, 98, 150 grave offerings, 130
Medieval, 7 honey, 115
Minoan, 47 Mycenae, 123
mortars, 6, 158 North Aegean amphora, 226
multiple types, 6 olive oil press, 250
Mycenaean, 97 press beds, 50
olive oil, 53 resinated wine, 130
Postpalatial, 158 retsina, 125
Postpalatial era, 7 stirrup jars, 176
reuse, 6 Thebes, 114
Roman, 6, 248 wine, 50
trapetum, 7, 249 resiliency, 4, 22, 304
Type I, 48, 49 adaptive cycle, 254
types of, 7 climate change, 22, 24
with amphoras, 56 ecological, 254
production, 6, 13, 15, 32, 53, 110, 315, 319, 321 resinated wine, 142
elite control, 301, 302 Rhodes
localized, 182 pithoi, 204
oil and wine, initial, 5 SOS amphoras, 283
oil and wine, modern Greece, 9 stirrup jar production, 145, 146
oil, introduction of, 3 rhyton, 125, 129
regional, 242 Riza, 81
Profitis Ilias cave, 123 Roman, 3, 6, 32, 315, 316
propagation, 10 colonization, 328
Prosymna, 268 Romania, 29
gift exchange at, 129 round-mouthed amphora, 182
 IN D EX 407

as transport container, 183 concentric circles, 300

regional trade, 188 grape pressing image, 250
twisted handles, 183 pendant semicircle, 200
preferred vessel, EIA, 215
Salamis, 274 use in feasting, EIA, 213
Cypro-Minoan, 142 Skyros, 177
SOS amphoras, 289 grave gifts, 222
Samaria North Aegean amphoras, 234
Athenian imports, 274 Solon, 265, 329
Samos SOS amphora, 276
North Aegean amphoras, 235 characteristics of, 277
sanctuaries contents of, 279
feasting at, 258 Cypriot graffito, 288
Sane distribution, early, 281
North Aegean amphoras, 233 distribution, Iberia, 285
Sane Pallinis distribution in Greece, 282
North Aegean amphoras, 237 distribution, Italy, 284
Sardinia, 292 distribution, Sicily, 284
Sariomer markings on, 282
North Aegean amphoras, 237 names engraved, 296
Seal stone, 140 production of, 277
Servia, 202 southern Italy
Sfendami olive cultivation in, 36
North Aegean amphoras, 237 Sparta
ship imagery communal dining, 259
Postpalatial era, 179 Spartia, 156
shipwreck, 5, 190, 337 speleothems, 23, 28, 102, 205
Cape Gelidonya, 142, 143 Spensitheos decree, 291
Dokos, 143 state
Kosta-Hermionid, 143 emergence of, 246
Modi, 186 stirrup jar, decorated, 175
oval-mouthed amphoras, 84 characteristics, 176
Point Iria, 142, 143, 184 disuse, 176, 220
Pseira island, 80 in funerary context, 131
Tanit and Elissa, 288 production, 176
transport stirrup jars, 141 trade in, 190
Uluburun, 142, 145, 178, 187, 299, 325 storage containers, 5
Yagana, 325 at sanctuaries, 75
short-necked amphora, 139 Postpalatial houses, 160
shrines, 125, 126 storage facilities
domestic, 68 Postpalatial houses, 159, 160
Siberian High, 205 Strabo, 285, 328
Sicily surplus, 13
colonization of, 247 affect of climate change, 28
SOS amphoras, 284 amphora production, 275
Sindos and dependency, 90
North Aegean amphora production, 229 and feasting, 70
North Aegean amphoras, 233, 234, 237 and Minoan palaces, 87
Siris competition, 162
Corinthian A amphoras, 284 elite production, 267
Sitagroi export of, 247
grape cultivation, 203 feasting, 8
Skala Sotiros, 203 gift-giving, 8
Skinias, 86 household, 168
Skotino in modes of exchange, 17
feasting at, 65 in sanctuaries, 75
skyphos of oil and wine, generally, 8
Attica, 295 oil-producing plants, 202
408 I ND E X

surplus (cont.) feasting at, 207, 215

olive oil, 63 grape cultivation, 203
Postpalatial era, 159 lack of kraters, 217
production of, 8 Mycenaean pottery, 216, 217
religion, 204 North Aegean amphoras, 233, 237
trade of, 20 Thessaly, 197
Sventza, 156 grave gifts, 222
Sybaris North Aegean amphora, 226
Corinthian A amphoras, 284 North Aegean amphora production, 229
Symposion, 169, 295 North Aegean amphoras, 234
definition of, 263 olive cultivation, 36
equipment, 256 population movement, 199
libation, 271 Thronos Kephala
Syracuse amphora imports, 188
connection to Corinth, 286 round-mouthed amphoras, 183
Corinthian A amphoras, 284 transport stirrup jars, 181
syssita, 259, 265 transport stirrup jars, imported, 188
Thucydides, 1, 2, 3, 285, 307, 325, 328
tavern tin
Classical, 282 import of, 225
taxation, 152, 263 Tiryns
Tel el-Amarna, 142 agriculture, 159
Teleilat Ghassoul, 5 Building T, 160, 165
Tell Abu Hawam decline of, 195
transport stirrup jars, 141 feasting at, 168
temple hoard, 157
development of, 199 imported Cretan stirrup jars, 190
feasting at, 218 imports from Crete, 188
Terpander, 265 inscribed stirrup jars, 135
terraces, 60 kraters, 170
textiles Megaron W, 168
production of, Postpalatial, 159 pithoi, 203
Thasos, 29 Postpalatial occupation, 156
North Aegean amphoras, 235 Postpalatial trade, 178
SOS amphoras, 282 transport stirrup jars, 140, 147
speleothems, 29 water management, 163
wine trade, 282 toasting, 121, 124, 148
Thebes in front of tomb, 129
inscribed stirrup jars, 135 tomb cult, 268, 295
North Aegean amphoras, 237 Torone, 220, 325, 326
oil and wine storage, 114 Mendaian wine, 242
stirrup jar production, 144 North Aegean amphoras, 223, 233, 234
transport stirrup jars, 140 Toscanos
Thera SOS amphoras, 285
SOS amphoras, 283 Tourtouloi, 54, 55
Thermaic Gulf, 197, 226, 238, 241, 303 traditional olive cultivation, 32
North Aegean amphora production, 229 transport containers, 5, 317, 319, See amphoras
Thermaic Gulf amphora. See North Aegean as proxies for contents, 79
amphora transport stirrup jar
Therme and elites, 89
North Aegean amphoras, 237 as brand, 89, 147, 153
Thermon as diplomatic gift, 142
bothroi, 218 as funerary offerings, 131
feasting at, 207 Cypro-Minoan script, 142
Megaron B, 208 distribution, Postpalatial era, 188
Thermos, 294 disuse, 181
Thessaloniki Toumba early characteristics, 85
EIA population, 198 elite control, 302
 IN D EX 409

imitation of, 86 vinegar, 115

initial creation, 78 Volimidia, 129
initial production, 84 Volos
inscribed stirrup jars, 135 North Aegean amphoras, 233,
later characteristics, 132 237
long-distance exchange, 84 Vrokastro
Mainland version, 141, 144 terracing at, 60
Postpalatial, 168
Postpalatial Crete, 181 wanax, 122, 128
production on Anatolian coast, 145 inscribed stirrup jars, 136, 138
production regions, 133 water management features, 102
production techniques, 85 and climate change, 61
Ramesses III tomb, 192 and the need for land, 60
seal impressions, 140 disuse, 163, 205
simplification of, 187 eastern Crete, 62
symbolic value, 147 Minoan, 59
Tripiti water resources
Cypro-Minoan, 142 modern Greece, 309
tripod, 211 wells, 60, 102
Troy wheat, 326
climate change, 30 wild grapevine, 5, 62
North Aegean amphora, 226 wild olives, 5, 116
North Aegean amphora production, 229 wine
North Aegean amphoras, 197, 234 aged, 115
Postpalatial import, 187 production in Italy, 329
pot marks, 231 wine production
stirrup jar production, 145 earliest evidence, 5
Tylissos, 138 earliest evidence, Greece, 6
Tyre, 225 must, 50, 51
Athenian imports, 274 pithoi, 50
Tyrtaeus, 265
xenia, 265
Ugarit Xenophon, 263, 272
Mycenaean imports, 153 Xeropolis
transport stirrup jars, 141 agriculture, 159
destruction of, 157
Vagia, 156 feasting at, 167
value, 14, 15 feasting at, EIA, 207
and feasting, 70, 291 harbor, 225
as a component of exchange, 15 kraters, 170
construction of, 15, 239 North Aegean amphoras, 233
history of scholarship, 14 storage, 210
objects, 16
of oil and wine, 40, 88, 90 Zagora
of surplus oil and wine, 77 export of wine, 204
of transport stirrup jar, 85 feasting at, 264
of wine, 65 wine consumption, 203
regimes of, 20, 245, 292 Zakros, 54, 94
value-added, 4, 8, 188, 195, 238 Epano, 55, 59
within exchange contexts, 149 feasting at, 68
Vaste Linear A, 58
Corinthian A amphoras, 284 olive offering in tomb, 76
Vathypetro, 54, 56, 82 oval-mouthed amphoras, 92
press installations, 54 press installation, 50, 53
transport stirrup jars, 86 transport stirrup jars, 86
véraison, 33 Zawiyet Umm el-Rakham, 142
Viglatouri Zeus, 271
feasting at, 260 Zou
villas press installation,
production of wine and oil, 56, 91 Minoan, 56