This pdf is a digital offprint of your contribution in E. Alram-Stern, F. Blakolmer, S. Deger-Jalkotzy, R. Laffineur & J. Weilhartner (eds), Metaphysis. Ritual, Myth and Symbolism in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 39), ISBN 978-90-429-3366-8. The copyright on this publication belongs to Peeters Publishers. As author you are licensed to make printed copies of the pdf or to send the unaltered pdf file to up to 50 relations. You may not publish this pdf on the World Wide Web – including websites such as academia.edu and open-access repositories – until three years after publication. Please ensure that anyone receiving an offprint from you observes these rules as well. If you wish to publish your article immediately on openaccess sites, please contact the publisher with regard to the payment of the article processing fee. For queries about offprints, copyright and republication of your article, please contact the publisher via peeters@peeters-leuven.be AEGAEUM 39 Annales liégeoises et PASPiennes d’archéologie égéenne METAPHYSIS RITUAL, MYTH AND SYMBOLISM IN THE AEGEAN BRONZE AGE Proceedings of the 15th International Aegean Conference, Vienna, Institute for Oriental and European Archaeology, Aegean and Anatolia Department, Austrian Academy of Sciences and Institute of Classical Archaeology, University of Vienna, 22-25 April 2014 Edited by Eva ALRAM-STERN, Fritz BLAKOLMER, Sigrid DEGER-JALKOTZY, Robert LAFFINEUR and Jörg WEILHARTNER PEETERS LEUVEN - LIEGE 2016 CONTENTS Obituaries Preface Abbreviations ix xiii xv KEYNOTE LECTURE Nanno MARINATOS Myth, Ritual, Symbolism and the Solar Goddess in Thera 3 A. FIGURINES Eva ALRAM-STERN Men with Caps: Chalcolithic Figurines from Aegina-Kolonna and their Ritual Use 15 Florence GAIGNEROT-DRIESSEN The Lady of the House: Trying to Define the Meaning and Role of Ritual Figures with Upraised Arms in Late Minoan III Crete 21 Reinhard JUNG and Marco PACCIARELLI A Minoan Statuette from Punta di Zambrone in Southern Calabria (Italy) 29 Melissa VETTERS All the Same yet not Identical? Mycenaean Terracotta Figurines in Context 37 Eleni KONSOLAKI-YANNOPOULOU The Symbolic Significance of the Terracottas from the Mycenaean Sanctuary at Ayios Konstantinos, Methana 49 B. HYBRID AND MYTHICAL CREATURES Fritz BLAKOLMER Hierarchy and Symbolism of Animals and Mythical Creatures in the Aegean Bronze Age: A Statistical and Contextual Approach 61 Karen Polinger FOSTER Animal Hybrids, Masks, and Masques in Aegean Ritual 69 Maria ANASTASIADOU Wings, Heads, Tails: Small Puzzles at LM I Zakros 77 C. SYMBOLISM Janice L. CROWLEY In the Air Here or from the World Beyond? Enigmatic Symbols of the Late Bronze Age Aegean 89 Marianna NIKOLAIDOU Materialised Myth and Ritualised Realities: Religious Symbolism on Minoan Pottery 97 Helène WHITTAKER Horns and Axes 109 iv CONTENTS Olga KRZYSZKOWSKA Warding off Evil: Apotropaic Practice and Imagery in Minoan Crete 115 Emilia BANOU and Brent DAVIS The Symbolism of the Scorpion in Minoan Religion: A Cosmological Approach on the Basis of Votive Offerings from the Peak Sanctuary at Ayios Yeoryios Sto Vouno, Kythera 123 Nancy R. THOMAS “Hair Stars” and “Sun Disks” on Bulls and Lions. A Reality Check on Movements of Aegean Symbolic Motifs to Egypt, with Special Reference to the Palace at Malkata 129 Malcolm H. WIENER Aegean Warfare at the Opening of the Late Bronze Age in Image and Reality 139 D. SPACE / LANDSCAPE Santo PRIVITERA The Tomb, the House, and the Double Axes: Late Minoan IIIA2 Hagia Triada as a Ritual and ‘Mythical’ Place 149 Sam CROOKS, Caroline J. TULLY and Louise A. HITCHCOCK Numinous Tree and Stone: Re-Animating the Minoan Landscape 157 Barbara MONTECCHI The Labyrinth: Building, Myth, and Symbol 165 Birgitta EDER Ideology in Space: Mycenaean Symbols in Action 175 Lyvia MORGAN The Transformative Power of Mural Art: Ritual Space, Symbolism, and the Mythic Imagination 187 E. FUNERALS Luca GIRELLA Aspects of Ritual and Changes in Funerary Practices Between MM II and LM I on Crete 201 Anna Lucia D’AGATA and Sara DE ANGELIS Funerals of Late Minoan III Crete: Ritual Acts, Special Vessels and Political Affiliations in the 14th and 13th Centuries BC 213 Ann-Louise SCHALLIN The Liminal Zone – The Evidence from the Late Bronze Age Dendra Cemetery 223 Mary K. DABNEY Mycenaean Funerary Processions as Shared Ritual Experiences 229 Michael LINDBLOM and Gunnel EKROTH Heroes, Ancestors or Just any Old Bones? Contextualizing the Consecration of Human Remains from the Mycenaean Shaft Graves at Lerna in the Argolid 235 F. RELIGION / DEITIES Jeffrey S. SOLES Hero, Goddess, Priestess: New Evidence for Minoan Religion and Social Organization 247 CONTENTS v Ute GÜNKEL-MASCHEK Establishing the Minoan ‘Enthroned Goddess’ in the Neopalatial Period: Images, Architecture, and Elitist Ambition 255 Veronika DUBCOVÁ Divine Power from Abroad. Some New Thoughts about the Foreign Influences on the Aegean Bronze Age Religious Iconography 263 Cynthia W. SHELMERDINE Poseidon, pa-ki-ja-na and Horse-Taming Nestor 275 Irene SERRANO LAGUNA di-u-ja 285 G. SANCTUARIES Mercourios GEORGIADIS Metaphysical Beliefs and Leska 295 Wolf-Dietrich NIEMEIER Ritual in the Mycenaean Sanctuary at Abai (Kalapodi) 303 Olga PSYCHOYOS and Yannis KARATZIKOS The Mycenaean Sanctuary at Prophitis Ilias on Mount Arachnaio within the Religious Context of the 2nd Millennium B.C. 311 H. RITUALS / OFFERINGS Barbara HOREJS and Alfred GALIK Hunting the Beast. A Reconstructed Ritual in an EBA Metal Production Centre in Western Anatolia 323 Philip P. BETANCOURT, Thomas M. BROGAN and Vili APOSTOLAKOU Rituals at Pefka 329 Alessandro SANAVIA and Judith WEINGARTEN The Transformation of Tritons: Some Decorated Middle Minoan Triton Shells and an Anatolian Counterpart 335 Artemis KARNAVA On Sacred Vocabulary and Religious Dedications: The Minoan ‘Libation Formula’ 345 Monica NILSSON Minoan Stairs as Ritual Scenes. The Monumental Staircases of Phaistos “66” and Knossos “Theatral Area” under the Magnifying Glass 357 Bernice R. JONES A New Reading of the Fresco Program and the Ritual in Xeste 3, Thera 365 Andreas G. VLACHOPOULOS Images of Physis or Perceptions of Metaphysis? Some Thoughts on the Iconography of the Xeste 3 Building at Akrotiri, Thera 375 Fanouria DAKORONIA Sacrifice on Board 387 vi CONTENTS Jörg WEILHARTNER Textual Evidence for Burnt Animal Sacrifice and Other Rituals Involving the Use of Fire in Mycenaean Greece 393 Chrysanthi GALLOU Mycenaean Skulls: “ἀμενηνά κάρηνα” or Social Actors in Late Helladic Metaphysics and Society? 405 Assaf YASUR-LANDAU The Baetyl and the Stele: Contact and Tradition in Levantine and Aegean Cult 415 I. MYTH / HEROES / ANCESTORS Magda PIENIĄŻEK and Carolyn C. ASLAN Heroic Past, Memory and Ritual at Troy 423 John G. YOUNGER Identifying Myth in Minoan Art 433 Joanne M.A. MURPHY The Power of the Ancestors at Pylos 439 Elisabetta BORGNA and Andreas G. VORDOS Construction of Memory and the Making of a Ritual Landscape: the Role of Gods and Ancestors at the Trapeza of Aigion, Achaea, at the LBA-EIA Transition 447 Anne P. CHAPIN Mycenaean Mythologies in the Making: the Frescoes of Pylos Hall 64 and the Mycenae Megaron 459 J. METAPHYSIS Robert B. KOEHL The Ambiguity of the Minoan Mind 469 Thomas G. PALAIMA The Metaphysical Mind in Mycenaean Times and in Homer 479 Alan PEATFIELD A Metaphysical History of Minoan Religion 485 POSTERS Eva ALRAM-STERN A New Mycenaean Female Figure from Kynos, Locris 497 Katrin BERNHARDT Absent Mycenaeans? On Mycenaean Figurines and their Imitations on Crete in LM IIIA–IIIB 501 Tina BOLOTI A “Knot”-Bearing (?) Minoan Genius from Pylos. Contribution to the Cloth/Clothing Offering Imagery of the Aegean Late Bronze Age 505 Dora CONSTANTINIDIS Proximity Analysis of Metaphysical Aegean Ritual Spaces During the Bronze Age 511 CONTENTS vii Stefanos GIMATZIDIS The Tree of Life: The Materiality of a Ritual Symbol in Space and Time 515 Louise A. HITCHCOCK, Aren M. MAEIR and Amit DAGAN Entangling Aegean Ritual in Philistine Culture 519 Petros KOUNOUKLAS Griffin at Kynos. How, Why, and When? 527 Tobias KRAPF Symbolic Value and Magical Power: Examples of Prehistoric Objects Reused in Later Contexts in Euboea 531 Susan LUPACK pu-ro, pa-ki-ja-ne, and the Worship of an Ancestral Wanax 537 Madelaine MILLER The Boat – A Sacred Border-Crosser in Between Land and the Sea 543 Sylvie MÜLLER CELKA Caring for the Dead in Minoan Crete: a Reassessment of the Evidence from Anemospilia 547 Marcia NUGENT Portals to the Other: Stepping through a Botanic Door 557 Marco PIETROVITO Beyond the Earthly Shell: the Minoan Pitcher Bearers. Anthropomorphic Rhyta of the Pre- and Protopalatial Periods (Differentiating the Sacred from the Divine) 563 Jörg RAMBACH Early Helladic Romanos/Messenia: Filling a Well 567 Caroline THURSTON New Approaches to Mycenaean Figurines in LH IIIC 571 Michaela ZAVADIL Souvenirs from Afar – Star Disk Pendants Reconsidered 575 ENDNOTE Joseph MARAN Towards an Anthropology of Religion in Minoan and Mycenaean Greece 581 TO CONCLUDE … Thomas G. PALAIMA WI Fc 2014: When is an Inscribed Cigar Just a Cigar? 595 CARING FOR THE DEAD IN MINOAN CRETE: A REASSESSMENT OF THE EVIDENCE FROM ANEMOSPILIA* Minoan burial customs show that response to death in Bronze Age Crete involved elaborate rituals, including the handling of the corpse for both primary and secondary deposition. The corpse was dressed and adorned (with jewels, seals, weapons) and in some cases the lower limbs were strongly bent and tied; but other rituals or sanitary acts may have taken place without leaving specific traces, such as washing the body or draining physical fluids, let alone confiding the soul to afterlife divinities. One could therefore ask whether particular places other than cemeteries were reserved, or used occasionally, for activities related to death management, and whether such places might be traced in archaeological records. Cases where human bones were found outside cemeteries are obvious candidates to be examined, and the west room of the Anemospilia building provides one of the rare (and most famous) occurrences of human skeletons in a non-funerary context (Pl. CLIV a-b). The excavators’s interpretation of the evidence as a human sacrifice1 has raised much scepticism but nevertheless remains part of the common knowledge conveyed by handbooks on Minoan civilisation.2 Only a few authors did not subscribe to it or explicitly questioned it3 but no alternative explanation has been proposed so far. In view of the proposed approach, I would like to suggest that the archaeological context of the west room in the Anemospilia building offers tangible evidence of the preparation of a corpse for primary inhumation. In this paper, I shall briefly discuss some of the arguments put forward in favour of the theory of a human sacrifice and pin point a few details which, in my opinion, show a connection of the west room evidence with MM II-III burial practices of central Crete. In the following I take for granted that the reader is familiar with the published data or has become aware of it prior to following my arguments (cf. references in n. 1). To begin with, it must be remembered that the Anemospilia data testify that the activity in question was interrupted abruptly (whatever the cause, earthquake or human attack4). By definition, * 1 2 3 4 CNRS, Archéorient-UMR 5133 (Lyon, France). I am very grateful to the editors for allowing me a number of pages normally granted for oral communications rather than poster presentations. I also thank my colleague and friend Kristine Gex for revising my English text. Y. SAKELLARAKIS, E. SAPOUNA-SAKELLARAKI, “ ”, PAE 1979 (1981) 347-392, esp. 388-389; EID., Archanes (1991) 154 (hereafter Guide); EID., Archanes. Minoan Crete in a New Light (1997) 269-311, esp. 306-311 (hereafter Archanes); Y. SAKELLARAKIS, “Drama of Death in a Minoan Temple”, National Geographic 159 (1981) 218-220 (hereafter Drama); ID., “O ! # % ”, 53 (1994) 22-28, esp. 26-28. G. RACHET, Civilisations et archéologie de la Grèce préhellénique (1993) 297-298, 513; O. DICKINSON, The Aegean Bronze Age (1994) 201, 266. R. TREUIL et al., Les civilisations égéennes du Néolithique et de l’Âge du Bronze (2008) 244; E.H. CLINE (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Bronze Age Aegean (2010) 258-259; J.C. MCENROE, Architecture of Minoan Crete (2010) 67; J.B. RUTTER, Lessons in Aegean Prehistoric Archaeology 15/6, http://www.dartmouth.edu/~prehistory/aegean/?page_id=720#l156 (last access 12/02/2015). D.D. HUGHES, Human sacrifice in Ancient Greece (1991) 13-17; P. REHAK, J.G. YOUNGER, “Review of Aegean Prehistory VII: Neopalatial, Final Palatial, and Postpalatial”, in T. CULLEN (ed.), Aegean Prehistory. A Review (2001) 434 (hereafter Review); J.G. YOUNGER, P. REHAK, “Minoan Culture: Religion, Burial Customs, and Administration”, in C. SHELMERDINE (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Aegean Bronze Age (2008) 170; V. KATSIADRAMIS, “ ”, 164-165 (Aug.-Sept. 1995) 9851-9864. Note that the very idea of human sacrifice in Minoan Crete was sometimes rejected on a priori or nationalistic grounds, as testified by the inappropriate comments on Sakellarakis's interpretation from the editor of the notoriously reactionary periodical Davlos, ibidem 9851-9854. Although most scholars agree that three of the four individuals found in the Anemospilia building were accidentally killed by falling blocks during a violent earthquake, one cannot rule out the possibility that they were murdered by an unexpected attack from people who then set fire to the building 548 Sylvie MÜLLER CELKA such “snapshot” deposits are infrequent in archaeological records. According to the law of averages, they are much more likely to correspond with recurrent acts rather than exceptional ones. Now mortuary rituals must have been frequent, especially if we take into account the low average life expectancy of 35 for men and 28 for women in Crete in MM IIIA.5 On the other hand, human sacrifices must have been very rare,6 if they were part of Minoan religious practices at all, since only two highly controversial cases have been reported so far, Anemospilia and the LM IB House at Knossos, to which I shall return later. A comparison between the skeleton of the young man found on a low rectangular platform in the west room of the Anemospilia building (Pl. CLIVb) and those in the SW corner of the same room and in the “antechamber” shows that the former, unlike the other three, was already dead by the time the building collapsed. He was lying on his right side with the left leg bent backward so that the heel was adjacent to the thigh.7 If the man had been bound in order to be sacrified, why were his hands and his right leg free? In fact, his position is not reminiscent of a trussed sacrificial victim but rather of the crouched right side decubitus, which was standard practice in that time for primary inhumations. It is also attested in the nearby Archanes-Phourni cemetery, especially in the Protopalatial Burial Building 18, where primary inhumations were deposited in foetal posture either directly on the floor or in a receptacle (larnax and pithos).8 The northern rooms of Building 18 were in use until the end of MM II and may be contemporary with the Anemospilia building, or at least with the earlier part of its lifespan.9 The MM IIB-IIIA burial customs of the Knossos area also include primary inhumations in 5 6 7 8 9 (KATSIADRAMIS [supra n. 3] 9858-9859) as the resulting picture would have been the same. However, the fact that the building had not been looted speaks against such a scenario (Archanes [supra n. 1] 272). S. TRIANTAPHYLLOU, “The Human Remains”, in Y. PAPADATOS, Tholos Tomb Gamma. A Prepalatial Tholos Tomb at Phourni, Archanes (2005) 67-76. RACHET (supra n. 2); TREUIL et al. (supra n. 2); CLINE (ed.) (supra n. 2). Archanes 304, fig. 267. Archanes 246-249. Guide 122-123. E. SAKELLARAKI, Y. SAKELLARAKIS, “" $ " ' 1986-1988”, AE 130 (1991) [1993] 192-204. MM IIB and MM IIIA burial customs cannot be differentiated, at least in the Knossos area, cf. L. ALBERTI, “Middle Minoan III burial customs at Knossos: a pianissimo intermezzo?”, in C.F. MACDONALD, C. KNAPPETT (eds), Intermezzo. Intermediacy and Regeneration in Middle Minoan III Palatial Crete (2013) [hereafter Intermezzo] 47-55, esp. 48. Assessing synchronism between the lifespan of the Anemospilia building and cemeteries of the wider area, including Archanes-Phourni, is problematic because terminology varies from one author to the other. The Anemospilia building was in use during MM IIIA and it was destroyed at the end of this phase in Knossian terms (cf. KARETSOU in Intermezzo 71-72) but the “Anemospilia phase” is labelled MM IIB-IIIA by the excavators (Archanes 415-426) who date its foundation to MM IIB (ibidem 271) and consider its destruction as contemporaneous with the violent earthquake that destroyed the Old Palace at Knossos and Malia in MM IIB (ibidem 425). Their phasing and chronology in the chapter on pottery actually betrays some overlapping between “MM II (1800-1700)” and “MM IIB-IIIA (1750-1650)” (ibidem 411-426). Inconsistencies also appear in the archaeological literature about synchronizing the destructions at Anemospilia and Knossos: the former is alternately said to coincide with the end of Protopalatial or with the beginning of Neopalatial, which corresponds either with the end of MM II or the end of MM III; Consensus about MM III phasing and terminology recently became effective for Knossos and Phaistos (cf. C. KNAPPETT, I. MATHIOUDAKI, C.F. MACDONALD, “Stratigraphy and ceramic typology in the Middle Minoan III palace at Knossos”, in Intermezzo 9-19; L. GIRELLA, “Toward a Definition of the Middle Minoan III Ceramic Sequence in South-Central Crete: Returning to the Traditional MM IIIA and IIIB Division?”, in F. FELTEN, W. GAUSS, R. SMETANA [eds], Middle Helladic Pottery and Synchronism. Proceedings of the International Workshop held at Salzburg, October 31st-November 2nd, 2004 [2007] 233-255), but the relation of Knossian MM III to final Protopalatial and early Neopalatial in other regions of Crete is still under discussion (cf. J.A. MACGILLIVRAY, “Absolute Middle Minoan III – the bigger picture: early Neopalatial Crete’s relations with the ancient Orient in the mid-second millenium BC”, in Intermezzo 221224; J.-C. POURSAT, “La fin des premiers palais et la phase finale du Minoen Moyen”, in TREUIL et al. [supra n. 2] 163-164). CARING FOR THE DEAD IN MINOAN CRETE 549 foetal position as well as isolated clay receptacles (pithos and larnax burials). The low archaeological visibility of the latter could account for their relative scarcity in comparison with the rock-cut chamber tombs which appear in the Knossos area in MM IIB.10 Only one leg of the skeleton was strongly bent and most probably fastened, which means that the preparation of the body was in progress. Furthermore, it seems that the lower jaw bone had been tied to the skull, 11 which is also a well-attested practice in post mortem treatment from Antiquity onwards.12 This hypothesis provides an obvious answer to the excavator’s question as to how such a strong youth had been taken to the “altar” without resistance:13 he was already dead when he entered the building. If this interpretation is correct, the people who were busy in the west room and the “antechamber” at the time of the disaster must have been preparing the deceased for his final deposition, whatever their professional affiliation ( the tall man next to the platform and the young woman in the south-west corner were called “priest” and “priestess” by the excavators.14 It does look as if the female individual lying face-down in the south-west corner of the west room and the unspecified individual walking out of the “antechamber” had been interrupted during their activity, but it is unclear from the skeletal remains whether the tall man by the platform was killed while officiating or whether he was a second corpse awaiting funerary care. It has been underlined that the low stone and clay platform, 0.63 x 0.76 cm,15 was very different in size and type from the sacrificial tables depicted on the Ayia Triada Sarcophagus and on sealstones. These were movable footed tables, most probably made of wood and large enough to accommodate a bull.16 In the light of my interpretation of the Anemospilia context, the platform may have served as a template corresponding to average clay larnax or burial pithos dimensions. The dimensions of the MM larnakes from Building 18 at Phourni are not specified except for child burials (65 x 40 cm in Room 4)17 but the larnakes from Tholos Gamma (Prepalatial period) range from 44 x 82 cm to 50 x 100 cm.18 Pithoi are said to be no higher than 0.80-0.85 cm.19 The size of the burial containers therefore seems to be consistent with that of the platform. According to the excavators sarcophagi may have been reserved for high-status individuals, which must be the case of the young man on the platform in view of the impressive decorated bronze spearhead found on his body (cf. infra). It is worth noting that the clay “fixed offering table” in the east room of the MM II Sanctuary at Malia has comparable dimensions (0.66-0.74 x 0.92 cm), since the lay-out of this tripartite complex is not unrelated to that of Anemospilia and also belongs to the small group of free-standing buildings known as “public shrines”.20 Interestingly, it is said to show affinities with funeral cult.21 A jar with 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 L. PRESTON, “The Middle Minoan III funerary landscape at Knossos”, in Intermezzo 57-70, partic. 63. Archanes 305. Although the excavators argued that in tomb burials jaws were always slack (Drama 222), there are good examples of tightened jaw bones among MM II burials in the Phourni cemetery, cf. Archanes 246, fig. 190. Counter-examples may be due to dislocation of anatomical connections in open space burials after disintegration of organic ties. Drama 222. PAE 1979 [1981] 389; Guide 151; Archanes 306; J.H. MUSGRAVE, R.A.H. NEAVE, A.J.N.W. PRAG, E. SAKELLARAKI, J.A. SAKELLARAKIS, “The Priest and Priestess from Archanes-Anemospilia: Reconstructing Minoan Faces”, BSA 89 (1994) 89-100. PAE 1981 386. The platform is said to be “rectangular” in Archanes 296 and “trapezoidal” in Guide 154. It is not clear from photographs whether the row of stones on the east side of the platform was part of it, cf. Archanes 297, fig. 256 and 271, fig. 67 for ground plan. HUGHES (supra n. 3) 16. Archanes 473-477 (without measurement); AE 130 (1991) [1993] 194; larnakes from Building 19 are very small child burials, cf. PAE 1976 [1979] 354-356. PAPADATOS (supra n. 5) 27-29. Archanes 466. MCENROE (supra n. 2) 65-66. J.-C. POURSAT, “Un sanctuaire du Minoen Moyen II à Malia”, BCH 90/2 (1966) 514-551; G. 550 Sylvie MÜLLER CELKA intentionally broken bottom was half buried next to the door along the west wall to allow liquids to soak into the earth.22 It recalls the channel carved into the rock around the base of the west doorjamb of the Anemospilia west room and leading to a small pit in the south-west corner of the “antechamber”.23 In both cases such equipment is meant to drain fluids out of the room, either after performing cultic activities such as blood sacrifices or libations, as suggested by the excavators of Anemospilia and Malia respectively, or after washing or anointing a deceased, as could be argued just as convincingly. We obviously have no access to the detailed protocol of the funeral care/ritual performed at Anemospilia but the exceptionally good state of preservation of the MM II skeletons in Building 18 (especially in room 6)24 might have some connection with it. The right-side bones of the young man on the platform were heavily blackened by fire while those of his left (upper) side were white, which has been interpreted as evidence that the “victim” had been drained of enough blood to kill him during the alleged sacrificial rite and that “his heart stopped pumping, leaving blood still in the body's lower side”.25 It has already been argued that this conclusion was groundless, as colour variations are due to differences in temperature and firing conditions and not to the presence or absence of blood.26 But the main objection is that blood in the human body does not behave like wine in a goatskin. Even if the man had lost much blood (for whatever reason), the rest would remain evenly distributed in the venous vasculature.27 Charred wood fragments were found on the platform: they probably account for the darkening of the lower part of the skeleton. They could belong to a wooden bier on which the corpse was lying. It is noticeable that biers, as well as built platforms, appear in tombs from MM IIB onwards in central Crete.28 Let us now turn to the finds associated with the young man on the platform and the tall man lying on his back next to it. The spearhead found on the body of the former,29 originally thought to be a sacrificial knife, could be interpreted as a possession of the dead, to be placed with him in the grave. It is of an unusual Cretan type thought to be ceremonial because it is engraved on both sides, which seems to speak against the hypothesis that the man died in a hunting accident,30 and the only close parallels are grave offerings found in later tombs of the New Hospital and Ayios Ioannis cemeteries at Knossos.31 The incised motif, a frontal boar’s head, is rare in Crete where the animal has not been found in Minoan wild fauna assemblages.32 However, boars and boar depictions are common in Bronze Age mainland Greece, where they are associated with an elite warrior/hunter ideology and with funerary contexts.33 Furthermore, frontal face depictions have been linked with death symbolism 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 GESELL, Town, Palace and House Cult in Minoan Crete (1985) 9-10, 107. POURSAT (supra n. 21) 521 and 520, fig. 8; GESELL (supra n. 21) 9. Archanes 278-279; Guide 148. As underscored by the excavators, cf. Archanes 217, 246, fig. 190; Guide 122. Drama 219; Archanes 305-306. HUGHES (supra n. 3) 17. I am very grateful to Henri Duday and Françoise Le Mort for offering their expertise about this matter. See also HUGHES (supra n. 3) 17. YOUNGER and REHAK (supra n. 3) 172. PRESTON (supra n. 10) 67. Archanes (supra n. 1) 596-599. YOUNGER and REHAK (supra n. 2) 170. Review 417. O. HÖCKMANN, “Lanze und Speer im spätminoischen und mykenischen Griechenland”, JRGZM 27 (1980) 13-158. R.A.J. AVILA, Bronzene Lanzen- und Pfeilspitzen der griechischen Spätbronzezeit (1983) 132, pl. 31, no. 856, with references. B. WILKENS, “Hunting and Breeding in Ancient Greece”, in E. KOTJABOPOULOU et al. (eds), Zooarchaeology in Greece. Recent Advances (2003) 85-90. M. MASSETI, “Holocene endemic and nonendemic mammals of the Aegean islands”, ibidem 53-63. I thank Daniel Helmer for confirming that no boar has been found in Minoan Crete so far and for suggesting that if isolated boar bones appear in the future in Bronze Age contexts in Crete they could well belong to pigs that returned to the wild (pers. comm.). Chr. MORRIS, “In Pursuit of the White Tusked Boar”, in R. HÄGG, G. NORDQUIST (eds), Celebrations of Death and Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid. Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium at the CARING FOR THE DEAD IN MINOAN CRETE 551 and sacrified animals in both Minoan and Mycenaean iconography.34 This means that both the thematic and the stylistic choices of the craftsman bear reference to funerary iconography, and possibly to a specific repertoire characterized by borrowed features.35 Was the ritual performed at Anemospilia reserved for high-status individuals, perhaps sharing symbols with Mycenaean elites? The problem will remain unsolved, unless chemical analysis of bones and teeth provide further clues to his identity. The tall man lying by the platform was wearing an iron and gold signet ring on the little finger of his left hand and a seal on his left wrist.36 The motif on the signet-ring is no longer discernible but this type of ring mainly illustrates ritual action and is usually found in high-status graves, mostly in the Neopalatial and Postpalatial periods. The use of iron clearly increases its value and it comes as no surprise that the only other occurrences of rings with iron in the Bronze Age Aegean have been recovered from graves.37 The cushion-shaped seal is made of black and white agate and it is engraved with a unique scene of a muscular man rowing a boat, or more likely moving it with a pole. The right end is adorned with a bird’s head, as on the famous Ring of Minos and on further LM depictions of “cultic boat”.38 The craftsman skilfully placed the boat on the black vein in the middle of the seal, giving the impression that it is crossing a dark river between light banks. Although the scene almost inevitably evokes the crossing of the Acheron river, there is no need to hypothesize a Minoan origin for this episode of Greek mythology, first attested in Homer’s Odyssey,39 in order to recognize the funerary connotation of this composition, for boats and birds are frequently depicted on larnakes (including on the Ayia Triada Sarcophagus) and are associated with funerary contexts and afterlife symbolism in the Aegean Late Bronze Age.40 Furthermore, Aegean seals primarily come from graves and must have been buried with their owners on a regular basis. A number of them have been found in the Protopalatial burial chambers of the Archanes-Phourni cemetery, where they are considered indicative of high social ranking.41 All these arguments add support to the hypothesis that the tall man was a second deceased to be looked after by the attendants rather than an officiating priest. This brief survey shows that connexions with the field of burial practices are evidenced by various aspects of the Anemospilia west room’s archaeological data set, including human remains, fixed installations, and moveable finds. Even if the Anemospilia building was definitely not a funerary structure, as claimed by the excavators,42 at least not in the usual meaning of a final deposition place, the west room could well be considered a funerary-related context in the sense that it was devoted to death management. There is little doubt that funerary cares included funerary rituals (or conversely), 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 Swedish Institute at Athens, 11-13 June, 1988 (1990) 149-156. L. MORGAN, “Frontal Face and the Symbolism of Death in Aegean Glyptic”, in W. MÜLLER (ed.), Sceaux minoens et mycéniens, IVe symposium international, 10-12 septembre 1992, Clermont-Ferrand (1995) 135-149. A stylised frontal boar's head depiction similar to that of the Anemospilia spearhead appears on a Zakros sealing (CMS II.7 201), cf. J. CROWLEY, The Iconography of Aegean Seals (2013) 242, E 226a. Archanes 294-295, 650-651, 692-694; PAE 1979 [1981] 388; Drama 222; Guide 150-151. CMS I 91 and CMS II.3 113, cf. W. MÜLLER, “Concepts of value in the Aegean Bronze Age: some remarks on the use of precious materials for seals and finger rings”, in KOSMOS, 463-469 and pl. CXVCXVI, esp. 467. N. DIMOPOULOU-RETHEMIOTAKI, G. RETHEMIOTAKIS, The Ring of Minos and Gold Minoan Rings: The Epiphany Cycle (2004); CMS II.3 252; M. WEDDE, Towards a Hermeneutics of Aegean Bronze Age Ship Imagery (2000) 68-69, 173-194, esp. 177, 191. Od. X, 513. R. LAFFINEUR, “La mer et l'au-delà dans l'Egée préhistorique”, in R. LAFFINEUR and L. BASCH (eds), Thalassa. L’Egée préhistorique et la mer. Actes de la troisième rencontre égéenne internationale de l’Université de Liège, Calvi, Corse, 23-25 avril 1990 (1991) 231-238 and pl. LXI; WEDDE (supra n. 38) 194-199 Archanes 253; PAE 1976 [1979] 344-390; Chr. MAGGIDIS, “From Polis to Necropolis: Social Ranking from Architectural and Mortuary Evidence in the Minoan Cemetery at Phourni, Archanes”, in K. BRANIGAN (ed.), Cemetery and Society in the Aegean Bronze Age (1998) 93. Archanes 301. 552 Sylvie MÜLLER CELKA which allows us to call the Anemospilia building a shrine or a sanctuary, whatever further role it may have played. The present interpretation of the Anemospilia evidence, if accepted, raises further issues with far-reaching implications. Due to lack of space, only four points will be briefly made in the following. 1. Funerary connotations in the whole Anemospilia assemblage? Looking at the wider Anemospilia context through a deliberately “funerary-biased” filter provides new perspectives on the possible funerary meaning of the whole assemblage. Pottery from cemeteries is increasingly considered to have served for collective food and drink consumption at the grave during funerals or secondary burial ceremonies rather than as grave offerings, and scholars agree that it does not differ from that of everyday household life.43 But storerooms did not come to light in cemeteries, so that this pottery must have been kept somewhere else, and not necessarily in plain dwelling places. Were the many cooking pots, jugs, cups, basins, mortars, pestles and storage facilities from the Anemospilia building dedicated to funerary purposes, or more generally to communal gatherings related to special events? Was the final destination of some of the pithoi uncovered in the central room, and to a lesser extent in the east room and the “antechamber”, 44 that of burial containers? These do not differ from the burial pithoi of that time, in particular those from the Archanes-Phourni cemetery which are said to become more common towards the end of MM II.45 It goes without saying that a complete examination of all the finds from Anemospilia is beyond the scope of this paper. Suffice it to say that many of them have good counterparts in funerary contexts, sometimes exclusively so, as is the case for instance with two small bronze boxes from the east room. 46 Two special vessels should be mentioned here: the famous “bull vase” from the “antechamber” 47 has a convincing, although fragmentary, comparandum in the necropolis area at Malia,48 and the “libation jug” from the east room, a rare clay example of a shape better known through religious and funerary Neopalatial iconography, was recently given a fine ware decorated parallel in a grave of Troy VI.49 2. Function and significance of the Anemospilia building? This question arises as a corollary of the preceding paragraph. Was the building dedicated to death management or was it multipurpose? Did the individuals officiating in the building belong to priesthood, or else were they professional “morticians”, or merely relatives? The hypothesis that the west room served for post mortem treatment of the deceased does not necessarily precludes other cultic or secular uses. Regarding the claim that the building was a Tripartite Shrine,50 it must be emphasized that its lay out does not match the definition drawn from architectural remains and iconography.51 Careful 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 PRESTON (supra n. 10) 65-66; ALBERTI (supra n. 9) 51-53. Archanes 282-293, 282, drawing 74 for location of pithoi. Note that at Ailias larnakes on the contrary replace pithoi in MM III, cf. S. HOOD, “The Middle Minoan cemetery on Ailias at Knossos”, in O. KRZYSZKOWSKA (ed.), Cretan Offerings. Studies in Honour of Peter Warren (2010) 161. Archanes 248, 466-467. Archanes 603, fig. 632. Archanes 548-562. P. DEMARGNE, Fouilles exécutées à Malia. Exploration des nécropoles (1921-1933), fasc. I (1945) 62, no. 9119 and pl. LXIX, 3 and XXIV. L. GIRELLA, “The MM IIIA juglet and the cist tomb from Square A7 of Troia VI”, in P. PAVÚK, Troia VI Früh und Mitte. Keramik, Stratigraphie und Chronologie (2013) 476-494. Archanes 273; Guide 139. J.W. SHAW, “Evidence for the Minoan Tripartite Shrine”, AJA 82 (1978) 429-448; ID., “New Evidence for the Minoan Tripartite Shrine”, in Acts of the Fourth International Cretological Congress, Iraklion, 29 August-3 September 1976, vol. 1 (1980) 559-562. T. ALUÍK, “Tripartite shrine in the Minoan architecture and CARING FOR THE DEAD IN MINOAN CRETE 553 examination of the preserved walls have shown that they did not form a strictly tripartite structure but were part of a larger building.52 This apparently included a corridor separating a south wing with three service and storage rooms and a north wing with three or more rooms. A stairway was preserved at the west end of the “antechamber” and gave access to a second floor or a roof terrace, possibly restricted to the west side of the building. Erosion unfortunately has destroyed the northern part of the building. An enclosure wall to the north and east is said to date back to the Minoan period53 and possibly delimited an open air area which may have been used for performing rituals such as animal sacrifices or mourning ceremonies.54 The presence of pig, caprid, and bovid bones in the western part of the “antechamber” may result from animal sacrifice55 but it should be underlined that similarities in sacrificial and funerary rituals have long been established by anthropologists and historians of Ancient World religion.56 Furthermore, sacrified animals are common in funerary contexts, as illustrated on the Ayia Triada sarcophagus, at least for prestige funerals, possibly because meat was needed to prepare meals for the mourners or as offerings to the dead.57 It is noticeable that the only MM II Burial Building at Phourni (Building 18) is one of the few places in the cemetery which did not yield animal bones, excepted one bull(?) tooth,58 which may signify that rituals implying animal sacrifice were not performed at the grave but at some other place during the preliminary phases of the burial ritual. The Anemospilia building was not reconstructed after its collapse, and this should lead us to wonder whether Building 4 in the Phourni cemetery, mutatis mutandis, took over in LM IA as “a building of the living to serve the needs of the dead”.59 Building 4 was made of two wings dedicated respectively to religious and craft-industry activities. As the excavators noted, “the fact that it was erected amongst funerary buildings can only mean that it was intended for the manufacture of goods to be used in the burial of the dead”. 60 It would be interesting to further investigate whether Anemospilia also was a non-funerary building in a funerary area. A close confrontation of Building 4 with the Anemospilia data set would be necessary to bring further arguments in support of this hypothesis. Meanwhile, the conspicuous development of activities dedicated to death management, if indeed such is the function of Building 4, should perhaps be correlated with the concomitant disappearance of visible burials in LM IA. In this regard, Anemospilia could be viewed as a forerunner of this development at a time when isolated pithos and larnax burials tended to replace built graves or to colonize ancient built structures. 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 iconography”, Eirene 39 (2003) 56-118. Archanes 271-272; HUGHES (supra n. 3) 15 and n. 11. MCENROE (supra n. 2) 66. J. SHAW, Elite Minoan Architecture: Its Development at Knossos, Phaistos, and Malia (2015) 32-33, 81-82. Archanes 272-273. HUGHES (supra n. 3) 16 and n. 13. Recent research on the MM II ossuary-cave at Ayios Charalambos led to the conclusion that open-air ceremonies including only small groups of mourners took place in front of the cave, as demonstrated by the fact that conical cups did not outnumber the skeletons, cf. P.P BETANCOURT, D.S. REESE, L.L. VERSTEGEN, S.C. FERRENCE, “Feasts for the Dead: Evidence from the Ossuary at Hagios Charalambos”, in DAIS, 161-165. PAE 1979 [1981] 354; Archanes 277. W. BURKERT (transl. from German by H. Feydy), Homo Necans. Rites sacrificiels et mythes de la Grèce ancienne (2005) 54-62, esp. 57. Drama 207. For the relation of food to funerals and of animal sacrifice to meat, cf. Y. HAMILAKIS, “Eating the Dead: Mortuary Feasting and the Politics of Memory in the Aegean Bronze Age Societies”, in BRANIGAN (ed.) (supra n. 41) 115-132; ID., “From Feasting to an Archaeology of Eating and Drinking”, in DAIS, 3-18. PAE 1976 [1979] 345. Archanes 223-229; Guide 86-88. Guide 88. 554 Sylvie MÜLLER CELKA 3. Relation of Anemospilia to the Psili Korphi and Alonaki sanctuaries and the nearby cemetery at Phourni (Pl. CLIVc) Anemospilia was located on a road leading to Psili Korphi and Alonaki on Mount Iouktas, and all three buildings seemingly were part of a common ritual landscape in MM IIIA (in Knossian terminology).61 However, the nature of their relationship is unknown and the hypothesis of functional interdependence cannot be established. As to the Archanes cemetery, the lifespan of the Anemospilia building probably overlaps with Building 18 at Phourni. However, the latter is assigned to (EM III)MM II, and not to MM IIB-IIIA, by the excavators62 and it is admittedly uncertain, at present, whether any burial of the Phourni cemetery dates back to the “Anemospilia Phase”.63 Interdependence is also rendered questionable by the distance (about 1700m as the crow flies) and the fact that Anemospilia overlooks the Knossian region rather than the Archanes valley. On the other hand, funerary processions possibly took place, as illustrated at a later period by the Ayia Triada sarcophagus. If Anemospilia and Phourni were indeed functionally related, the hypothesis that the Anemospilia building played the same role as the later Building 4 at Phourni in LM IA would gain credibility. However, the displacement of such a structure from the north slope of Mount Iouktas to the lower east slope would call for an explanation. Could it be connected with political changes in the relationship between Knossos and Archanes? The fact that the Old Palace period at Phourni was illustrated by individual burials and small ossuaries, in sharp contrast with the large Messara and beehive type structures of the pre- and postpalatial periods, has been pinpointed long ago and may reflect fluctuations in the regional political landscape.64 4. Explanation of the alleged human sacrifice in the LM IB House at Knossos? Children’s bones with cut marks from a basement of the LM IB North House at Knossos were first explained as remains of a human sacrifice with cannibalism.65 The present proposal concerning the Anemospilia skeletons indirectly adds support to an interpretation of the Knossos children’s bones 61 62 63 64 65 A. KARETSOU, “The Middle Minoan III building at Alonaki, Juktas”, in Intermezzo 71-91, esp. 72. Archanes 215. E. KYRIAKIDIS, Ritual in the Bronze Age Aegean. The Minoan Peak Sanctuaries (2005) 54-56. Concerning the problem of synchronism, cf. supra n. 9. The fact that the pottery of Building 18 is not fully published adds to the difficulty of comparing assemblages. According to the phasing proposed by the excavators it would not be later than Knossian MM IIB and therefore earlier than the “Anemospilia phase”, or contemporary with the earlier part of it. The excavators mention MM III pottery at Phourni only once, in connection with the Pillar Room of Tholos B, cf. Archanes 177: “The deposits in this room were fortunately undisturbed and the later structures of the MM II, MM III, and LM IA phases were dated on the basis of the sherds...”) and this should mean MM IIIB in their pottery phasing. A date in MM IIB-IIIA (“Anemospilia Phase”) is suggested for a cup from Tholos Gamma which probably postdates the collapse of the burial structure, cf. PAPADATOS (supra n. 5) 50 and fig. 15, V1, and the cup may well be assigned to MM IIIA. My warmest thanks go to Colin Macdonald and Yannis Papadatos for their assistance about the terminology issue. K. BRANIGAN, “Review of E. Sakellaraki and Y. Sakellarakis 1997, Archanes: Minoan Crete in a new light”, AJA 104/2 (2000) 385-386; P. WARREN, “% " & $ $ ”, 53 (1994) 57-62. P.M. WARREN, “Knossos. Stratigraphical Museum Excavations, 1978-80. Part I”, AR (1980-81) 79-92. ID., “Minoan Crete and Ecstatic Religion. Preliminary Observations on the 1979 Excavations at Knossos and Postscript on the 1980 Excavations at Knossos”, in R. HÄGG, N. MARINATOS (eds), Sanctuaries and Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the First International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 12-13 May 1980 (1981) 155-166. For a detailed analysis of the bones and their context, see S.M. WALL, J.H. MUSGRAVE, P.M. WARREN, “Human Bones from a Late Minoan IB House at Knossos”, BSA 81 (1986) 386-387. CARING FOR THE DEAD IN MINOAN CRETE 555 as part of a secondary burial ritual, as has already been argued in detail by others.66 This interpretation takes better account of the archaeological evidence. In particular, cut-marks are not as systematic as butchery marks and therefore not indicative of cannibalism. Some of them were weak, as if bones were covered with partly decomposed flesh. That the Minoans were not reluctant to handle human remains is consistent with the anthropological analysis that was conducted on the human bones from Tholos Gamma in Archanes-Phourni.67 In conclusion, this paper offers an alternative interpretation of the skeletons recovered from the west room of the Anemospilia building for the first time since the evidence was published as a human sacrifice. It gives a positive answer to thet introductory question as to whether places and objects related to death management can be traced in archaeological contexts other than tombs and cemeteries. By suggesting that Anemospilia was a place dedicated to the care of the dead before final deposition (and possibly also for secondary burial rituals), I also provides an answer to the question K. Branigan asked in his review of the Archanes publication: “If Anemospilia is neither a peak sanctuary nor a household shrine, where does it fit into the Minoan hierarchy of ritual places?”.68 This creates new perspectives for investigating the interconnections of funerary and domestic spaces (both public and private) by reconstructing the chaîne opératoire of rituals taking place in the time bracket between death and funerals. Sylvie MÜLLER CELKA 66 67 68 HUGHES (supra n. 3) 18-24. TRIANTAPHYLLOU (supra n. 5) 71: “Clearance of the primary burials initially placed in larnakes, at least in some cases, possibly occurred at an intermediary period when the corpse was not completely decomposed. Archaeological evidence suggests that the articulated corpse and the odor of the decayed body did not deter relatives from sweeping away earlier burials in order to deposit a new body and from performing ritual activity in memory of their ancestors”. BRANIGAN (supra n. 64) 386. 556 Sylvie MÜLLER CELKA LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Pl. CLIVa Pl. CLIVb Pl. CLIVc Aerial photograph of the Anemospilia building, after W.J. MYERS, E.M. MYERS, G. CADOGAN (eds), An Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete (1992) 52, fig. 2.1. West room of the Anemospilia building with the three skeletons in situ (the skeleton on the right was lying on a low clay platform, cf. Pl. CLVIa), after Archanes (supra n. 1) 307, drawing 78. Infography G. Devilder. Aerial view of the Iouktas-Archanes area (Google earth image © 2015 DigitalGlobe). CLIV a b c
